Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/16/1987 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: June 9, 1987 1. The City has received its copy of Riva Ridge' s filing for compliance with the requirement that they rent 20% of their units to low and moderate income individuals. Dennis Kraft has reviewed the material and he found that more than 20% of the residents comply with the requirement established when the City sold the Mortgage Revenue Bonds for the Riva Ridge project. 2. Attached is a very nice thank you letter from Mary Sullivan regarding our assistance in helping them move to their new location. The original letter and picture have been given to Public Works to post on their bulletin board. 3 . Attached is a memo from Tom Brownell regarding our withdrawal from the Dakota County Training System. 4. Attached is a copy of a notice from Richard Hazard, Claims Examiner for Western World Insurance our law enforcement liability carrier, regarding Charles Meyer vs. Shakopee Police Department. I have reviewed the letter with Rod Krass who stated that there is no action for the City to take because you cannot purchase insurance for punitive damages. We will keep you posted on the results of the case. 5. Attached is a copy of the comparable worth appeal decision by the Comparable Worth Review Panel on Steven Hurley' s appeal. 6. Attached is a letter from Terese Koenig, an Attorney of the Legal and Legislative Affairs Division of the Department of Revenue, regarding our tax on campgrounds. Based upon this j letter we will continue to attempt to collect lodging taxes from campgrounds. 7. The City has been served a summons regarding the accident on May 12, 1987 involving a vehicle owned by SPUC. Proper . parties have received a copy. 8. We have decided against adopting a resolution of appreciation for the Building Committee. We will be sending letters to committee members from the Mayor thanking them for their time and efforts after Tuesday's meeting. 9. Attached is the monthly Building Activity Report for the month ending May 31, 1987. 10. Attached are the minutes of the May 6, 1987 meeting of the Industrial Commercial Commission. 11. Attached are the minutes of the Cloy 13, 1987 meeting of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. 12. Attached are the Ye of th May 4, 1987 meeting of the Shakopee Public U Co ission. 13. Attached are thes o the May 7, 1987 meetings of the Board of Adjustmenp als and Planning Commission. 14. Attached are the mf the May 21, 1987 meeting of the Planning Commissio 15. Attached is the aor the June 18, 1987 meeting of the Planning Commissio16. Attached is a memfrom Dennis Kraft regarding an article on Locvernmental/Land Developer working Relationship. `17. Attached is a memofrom LeRoy Houser regarding the Schesso boat build 18. Attached is a letter from Mary Sullivan regarding improvements totheEagle Creek Thrift Shop. 19. Attached is the revenue and expenditure report as of May 31, 1987 JKA/jms I 9. Attached is the monthly Building Activity Report for the month ending May 31, 1987. 10. Attached are the minutes of the May 6, 1987 meeting of the Industrial Commercial Commission. 11. Attached are the minutes of the May 13 , 1987 meeting of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. 12. Attached are the minutes of the May 4, 1987 meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. 13 . Attached are the minutes of the May 7 , 1987 meetings of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission. 14. Attached are the minutes of the May 21, 1987 meeting of the Planning Commission. 15. Attached is the agenda for the June 18, 1987 meeting of the Planning Commission. 16. Attached is a memorandum from Dennis Kraft regarding an article on Local Governmental/Land Developer Working Relationship. 17. Attached is a memorandum from LeRoy Houser regarding the Schesso boat building. 18. Attached is a letter from Mary Sullivan regarding improvements to the Eagle Creek Thrift Shop. 19. Attached is the revenue and expenditure report as of May 31, 1987 JKA/jms Scott-Carver-Dakota Community Action Agency, inc. 420 Oak Street North Corporate Officers: CARVER,MINN. 55315 CAP Harold Trends Chairman Phone: 448-2302 Richard Graham.Vice Chairperson Denise Parrish-Secretary/Treasurer May 27, 1987 Ms. Mary F.Sullivan- ......„ Executive Director Mayor Eldon Reinke City of Shakopee 500 Gorman Street Shakopee, Minnesota . 55379 Dear Mayor Reinke: Please accept my sincere appreciation to the City of. Shakopee and, most especially, to the fine crew of men who moved our office furniture and equipment. The men were deligent, careful, and kept their sense of humor through those two days. That the move went very smoothly and on schedule is a credit to your hard working men. The Community Action Agency Board of Directors and staff certainly appreciate the many ways the City �of. Shakopee has supported us in our efforts to provide services in this area. We look forward to continued cooperation and coordination. Thank you. Sincerely, Mary P. _ Su { _. Executive Director MFS:cr F � — 3 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell RE: Police Training Information Only DATE: June 8, 1987 INTRODUCTION During March of 1983 , Council authorized the Police Department to participate in the Dakota County Police Training System. BACKGROUND Our participation in the Dakota County Training System is based upon a flat fee per licensed officer which in 1983 was $200. The rate per officer in 1988 will be $300. , a department total of $5,100. The Dakota County Training System has been very responsive to our training needs, however I find that our employes are not taking full advantage of the courses which are available, therefore the flat fee is not cost effective. The department has also been using the Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Training System which is based upon afee per course. Our records indicate the officers prefer the Hennepin County System due to the high quality of instruction. DEPARTMENT ACTION The department will no longer obtain training based on a flat fee or annual rate effective January 1988. k Ay WESTERN WORLD INSURANCE COMPANY. INC. 4B South FrBN Irh Tun ke. Ranlaey. N.J. 0744 OSOA Teleomone[Area COde 2011 825-3300 Terex: 130-324 / Gable Adoreee: Weetworkf FAX: [2011 825-1052/12011934-0492 CERTIFIED MAIL P 403 709 704 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED May 26, 1987 City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Attention: John Anderson, City Administrator RE: Charles Meyer vs. Shakopee Police Department File No. : 35090 Date of Loss: August 27, 1985 Dear John: As you are aware, Western World Insurance is the Law Enforcement Liability carrier for the Shakopee Police Department and is defending a lawsuit being made against them by Charles Meyer (a minor) which is currently pending in the U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Fourth Division. Your defense is being handled by the law firm of Meagher, Geer, Markham, Anderson, Adamson, Flaskamp and Brennan of 4200 Multifoods Tower, 33 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. Treir telephone number is 338-0661. The Attorney of Record is Bill Flaskamp. Please give him your utmost cooperation in the defense of this lawsuit. This lawsuit seeks relief for punitive damages as well as compensatory damages. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that your policy of insurance does not provide coverage for punitive damages. Should a judgment or verdict be awarded against you for punitive damages, Western World Insurance disclaims responsibility of a verdict or a judgment against you. Western World Insurance will continue to defend and indemnify you with respect to all other aspects of this action. You may, if you deem necessary and at your own expense, employ counsel of your own to represent you. We will be pleased to extend our full cooperation to any counsel chosen by you. Should you have any further questions regarding this, please contact me at the above number. RECEIVED zRich t ruly, Jt1N— a 1g8� CITY OF SHA Claims Examiner RH/lel KOPcE cc: Meagher, Geer, Markham, Anderson, Adamson, Flaskamp and Brennan Attention: William Flaskamp, Esq. Your File No. : 46199 - 5 Memo To: Stephen Hurley, Engineering Tech III/MIS From: Comparable Worth Review Panel Re: Comparable Worth Appeal Decision Date: June 3, 1987 Your Comparable Worth Appeal request of 12/29/87 requested the inclusion of the salary range of the St. Louis Park MIS position in the market portion of the 1987 Comparable Worth Pay Plan. Appeal procedure steps 1 - 2 6 3 were not applicable, the Review Committee as listed reviewed the information and have denied the appeal for the following reason: Although the job title is the same and job description are similar, the actual work done as measured by T.S.P. is significantly different (82 vs 99 points), therefore St. Louis Park should not be used to determine market value. Recommend: That this situation be reviewed at beginning of 1988 for broader market data and the possibility of separate T.S.P. be taken/set-up for MIS and Tech III. /mmr C.C. John K. Anderson .µ � 6 5 w6�Jes_ STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Legal and Legislative Affairs Division Centennial Building P.O. Box 64446 St. Paul, Minnesota 55164 May 21, 1987 Al Brodie Minnesota Association of Campground Operators , Inc . 1000 East 146th Street Suite 121 Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 Dear Mr. Brodie: I have looked into your question about the city of Shakopee imposing a lodging tax on campgrounds. It appears that Shakopee is taxing campground receipts under the term •tourist court' found in Minn. Stat. S477A.018, subd. 1 . However , since the statute specifically gives cities authority to tax 'municipal campgrounds" , it is unlikely that "tourist court' was also meant to include campgrounds. "Tourist court' is an archaic term that more likely means motel rather than campground . This is a local lodging tax and in this case , the Department of Revenue is not responsible for administering or collecting the tax. Your recourse is to pursue any dispute over the imposition of the tax, with the city of Shakopee, rather than the Department of Revenue or State of Minnesota. The Department 's interpretation of the statute is merely advisory. If you have any further questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Terese Koenig , y k T%:lm AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER JENSEN, HICKEN, GEDDE 8 SOUCIE, P. A. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW ROCK.EDWARD A..JR. OF COUNSEL M LUCHAN. JOHN T. 300 ANOKA OFFICE CENTER RICHARD L.LUiNER GEDDE.THOMAS A. 2150 THIRD AVENUE CHARLES S. HADLEY HICKEN,JEFFREY P. HOWARD.ROEERT A. ANOKA,MINNESOIw 65305-2896 JENSEN,DAVID L. NATTKE.PAUL E. TELEPHONE(612)421-4110 MULVAHILL,JAMES P. June 5, 1987 SCOTT.MICHAEL J. SOUCIE,FRED M. CERTIFIED MAIL NOTICE OF CLAIM City of Shakopee ATTENTION: John Anderson, City Administrator 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Our Clients: Kathleen Marie and Neil Ess Date of Injury: May 12, 1987 Dear Mr. Anderson: Pursuant to M.S.A. 466.05 notice of claim is given to the municipality of Shakopee on behalf of our client, Kathleen Ess, for injuries she suffered at 749 Canterbury Road (County Road 83) , Shakopee, Minnesota, on May 12, 1987. Kathleen Ess, while operating her vehicle northbound on County Road 83, was injured when a pole being transported by a vehicle and trailer owned by the Shakopee Public Utilities Department was in her lane of travel. Kathleen Ess received severe injury to her brain and has been hospitalized since May 12, 1987 for these injuries. Neil Ess, husband of Kathleen Ess, has incurred medical expenses for the care and treatment given to his wife, Kathleen Ess, and will incur further medical expenses in the future. Notice is given that a Clair may be made of the municipality in an amount in excess of $50,000.00. Yours very truly, JENSEN, HICKEN, GEDDE & SOUCIE, P.A. John T. Buchman RECEIVED JTB/rp JUN - a Nair cc: Craig Corah C,!TY OF SHAKOi .�` EE GAB Adjusting ya1�1 ) CG eLXKIil . le-,�R.G"•.[t✓J Sf UC, CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT PERMITS ISSUED May, 1987 Yr. to Date Previous Year Number Number Valuation Number Valuation Mo. Ytd. Single Fam-Sewered 4 9 728, 300 3 15 1, 157, 874 Single Fam-Septic 3 7 807,300 5 7 646,500 Multiple Dwellings - 7 645,500 - 3 2, 640,000 ($ Units) (YTD Units) (-) (16) - (-) (96) - Dwelling Additions 13 28 164,545 4 19 113, 860 Other 1 8 65,600 - - - Comm New Bldgs 1 3 975, 000 - 4 8,500,000 Comm Bldg. Addns - 2 145, 000 - 3 887,267 Industrial-Sewered - 1 600, 000 - - - Ind-Sewered Addns - - - - 1 3,600,000 Industrial-Septic - - - - - - Ind-Septic Addns - 1 160,000 - - - Accessory/Garages 3 12 73,328 4 10 57, 500 Signs & Fences 9 24 50,360 13 33 45, 944 Fireplaces/Wood Stove 1 5 11, 600 - 1 1,500 Grading/Foundation - 3 5, 900 4 9 321,700 Remodeling (Res) 1 12 82,655 1 8 26,000 Remodeling (Inst) - - - - - - Remodeling (Comm/Ind) 2 19 175, 950 3 22 3,734,540 TOTAL TAXABLE 38 141 4,691,038 37 135 21, 732, 685 TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - - - - - - GRAND TOTAL 38 141 4, 691, 038 37 135 21,732,685 No. Ytd. No. Ytd. Variances 1 6 - 6 Conditional Use 4 11 12 18 Rezoning 1 1 - - Moving - - Electric 17 68 23 107 Plbg & Htg 29 98 30 135 Razing Permits Residential - - - - Commercial - - - - Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date. . . . . . .4,027 Cora Hullander Bldg. Dept. Secretary CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN MAY, 1987 7439 Pace Development 232 Marschall Rd. Retail Bldg $ 429,000 7440 MGM Liquor 471 Marschall Rd. Sign 100 7441 Steven Airhart 654 Monroe St. Garage 7,560 7442 Signs of Quality 212 E. lst Ave. Sign 226 7443 Steve Walden 1078 Tyler St. Addn 4, 800 7444 Joseph Jenny 1043 Apgar St. Addn 4,200 7445 Richard Dellwo 814 E. 7th Ave. Garage 6,500 7446 Wayne Olson 420 W. 2nd Ave. Addn 2,000 7447 Alcuin Pauly 711 Menke. Circle Addn 1, 188 7448 Valleyfair One Valleyfair Dr. Fence 16, 000 7449 Richard Logeais 3364 Marschall Rd. House 177, 000 --fD //S 1Y 7450 Lon Carnahan 2133 Hillside Dr. House 152,000 0(3 Bt r 7451 Stan Pint 1282 Limest ne Dr.`House 70,000 7452 Chateau Brick 917 Minnesota Fireplace 3, 200 7453 Void 7454 Terrence Hennen 101 S. Lewis St. Sign 250 7455 Neisen Const. 315-325 Shawnee Tr. Addn 7, 800 7456 Eagle Creek Plaza 471 Marschall Rd. Sign 50 7457 Lawrence Sign Co. 1155 E. lst Ave. Sign 14,000 7458 Gorco Const. 1099 Madison St. Garage 7, 500 7459 Robert Baur 2207 Foothi}l Tr. House 70, 000 B6 �b.w.d,� 7460 Joseph Link 1921 Davis C rt ouse 65, 000 7461 Rick Sames 1400 Wood iu&TrailmAddn 20, 000 7462 Mark Notermann 612 Monroe St. Addn 2, 500 7463 Harvey Tesch - 610 W. 5th Ave. Fence 100 7464 Jasper Homes 1182 Limestone Dr. House 92,000 7465 Dan Pecha 584 Marschall Rd. Alt. 5,000 7466 Edward Schmitt 1755 Montecito Drive Addn 1,000 7467 Acme Awning 114 East 1st Ave. Alt 1, 100 7468 Randall Boom 2077 stin Circle 1,500 7469 Dale Thoen 1187 adison St. Addn 3, 700 7470 Donald Hart 1199 H rison Pence 400 7471 Michael Beard 8434 Hor' zon Drive Addn 700 7472 Quality Pools 2009 Norto Drive Pool 12,000 7973 Lloyd Peterson 200 W. 1st A Sign 139 7474 Kyle Oestreich 842 Minnesota S Addn 800 7475 Void 7476 Simons Brothers 814 Spencer Alt 2, 815 7477 Ronald Gratz 335 E. 7th ve. Addn 900 7478 Clete Link 1232 Mo � Rouse 120, 000 7464 Jasper Homes 1182 Limestone Dr. House 92,000 ,Y/ B.2, /�ecwl.✓ 7465 Dan Pecha 584 Marschall Rd. Alt. 5,000 7466 Edward Schmitt 1755 Montecito Drive Addn 1,000 7467 Acme Awning 114 East 1st Ave. Alt 1, 100 7468 Randall Boom 2077 Austin Circle Addn 1,500 7469 Dale Thoen 1187 Madison St. Addn 3,700 7470 Donald Hart 1199 Harrison Fence 400 7471 Michael Beard 8434 Horizon Drive Addn 700 7472 Quality Pools 2004 Norton Drive Pool 12, 000 7473 Lloyd Peterson 200 W. 1st Ave. Sign 139 7474 Kyle Oestreich 842 Minnesota St. Addn 800 7475 Void 7476 Simons Brothers 814 Spencer Alt 2, 815 7477 Ronald Gratz 335 E. 7th Ave. Addn 900 7476 Clete Link 1232 Monroe n House 120, 000 Minutes Industrial Commercial Commission Shakopee, Minnesota May 6, 1987 MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Keane Don Koopman James Plekkenpol Al Furrie Jane DuBois MEMBERS ABSENT: Todd Schwartz Bud Berens STAFF PRESENT: Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director John Anderson, City Administrator Jeff Siegel, Starwood Project Manager Chairman Keane called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. Plekkenpol/DuBois moved to approve the minutes of the March 11, 1987 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Starwood Presentation - Chairman Keane introduced Jeff Siegel, Starwood Project Manager. Mr. Siegel then proceeded to give a presentation on the proposed Starwood Music Center. Mr. Siegel stated that Scottland Companies have been doing studies for the last two years on what type of entertainment projects would compliment and promote existing entertainment attractions in this area. Analysis of their studies reveal that an outdoor music center would promote existing and future development in this area. Scottland was proceeding with PACE Management Corporation as the principle producer and developer for the music center. Mr. Siegel then explained that the proposed project would sit on an 80 acre site north of the by-pass and west of Valley Park Drive. The proposed site is presently served with sanitary sewer, water and adequate transportation facilities. The developers are not requesting any public financing for the proposed project. The site will have parking capacity for 6,000 cars and a covered pavilion for 5,000 seats and 12,000 open air lawn seats. The Starwood season would run from May 15th to September 15th. In a full season, 40-60 events averaging 8,200 per event and 2,500 vehicles per event would be common. The largest events would be 17,000 people 4 to 5 times each .year. Performances would -commence at 7:30 P.M. and run until -- approximately 11:00 - P.M. The proposed performance starting times would miss rush hour traffic and leave at 11:00 P.M. when there is little background traffic. Noise from the facility would be controlled by the pavilion, hillside, sound wall and directed speakers. All sound would meet local, state and federal guidelines. /D >)lay 6 /78, The facility would primarily cater to orchestras and popular music. The facility could also be used for civic events such as graduations and large town meetings. In the off season the developers are investigating the possibility of enclosing the pavilion for spring, fall or winter convection meeting space. The proposed music enter would solidif the position of Scott County as a state . e outdoor recrea 'onal area. Over 300 seasonal jobs and 20 annual jobs w ld be created by the facility. The six o eight million do lar facility will yield over $300,000 each y ar in taxes. Dev lopers are requesting no city, county or other ublic investment n the project. Commissioner Koopman estioned whet er there would be an internal security force for the music enter. Mr. Siegel stated that the music center w uld employ it's own security force. However, when large crowds are expect , they will be contracting with the Shakopee Police Fo a for ad itional security. Mr. Siegel then went through a br of slide presentation that showed examples of other mu is centers in the United States. Commissioner DuBois questioned w t the exterior of the facility would look like. Mr. Siegel s ed that the roof covering the 5,000 seats would be made out of a teel material. The facility would be open on three sides an t e back of the stage would be closed in. Commissioner Koopman tat d that the majority of the facilities in the slide show we in he South and he questioned what impact the weather would h eon t is type of facility. Mr. Siegel stated that in the even of rain the facility would have covered seating capacity for 5, 00. In t rms of hot weather, Mr. Siegel stated that the majorit of the eve is would begin at 7: 30 in the evening when the tempe atures begin o cool down. Commissioner Furrie question d how this propo al compared to the plan currently being propo d in Savage. Mr. iegel stated that the plan in Savage was a 1 ger facility and wa located in more of an urban setting. Th Savage proposal was also requesting _City tax increment financ assistance and would r ire rezoning of the proposed site. / The Savage site would so need some highway modifications. ommissioner Furrie questione whether or not two facilities of this variety could survive in uch close -proximity to each othe . Mr. Siegel stated that he wa not sure if two facilities co ld survive but that he was confi ent that PACE Productions would provide a variety of events whi h could compete with the Savage facility if it proceeds. Mr. Siegel also stated that regardless of what happens in Savage, Scottland will proceed with the Starwood Music Center. JG The facility would primarily cater to orchestras and popular music. The facility could also be used for civic events such as graduations and large town meetings. In the off season the developers are investigating the possibility of enclosing the pavilion for spring, fall or winter convention meeting space. The proposed music center would solidify the position of Scott County as a state wide outdoor recreational area. Over 300 seasonal jobs and 20 annual jobs would be created by the facility. The six to eight million dollar facility will yield over $300,000 each year in taxes. Developers are requesting no city, county or other public investment in the project. Commissioner Koopman questioned whether there would be an internal security force for the music center. Mr. Siegel stated that the music center would employ it' s own security force. However, when large crowds are expected, they will be contracting with the Shakopee Police Force for additional security. Mr. Siegel then went through a brief slide presentation that showed examples of other music centers in the United States. Commissioner DuBois questioned what the exterior of the facility would look like. Mr. Siegel stated that the roof covering the 5,000 seats would be made out of a steel material. The facility would be open on three sides and the back of the stage would be closed in. commissioner Koopman stated that the majority of the facilities in the slide show were in the South and he questioned what impact the weather would have on this type of facility. Mr. Siegel stated that in the event of rain, the facility would have covered seating capacity for 5,000. In terms of hot weather, Mr. Siegel stated that the majority of the events would begin at 7: 30 in the evening when the temperatures begin to cool down. Commissioner Furrie questioned how this proposal compared to the plan currently being proposed in Savage. Mr. Siegel stated that the plan in Savage was a larger facility and was located in more of an urban setting. The Savage proposal was also requesting . City tax increment finance assistance and would require rezoning of the proposed site. The Savage site would also need some highway modifications. Commissioner Furrie questioned whether or not two facilities of this variety could survive in such close -proximity to each other. Mr. Siegel stated that he was not sure if two facilities could survive but that he was confident that PACE Productions would provide a variety of events which could compete with the Savage facility if it proceeds. Mr. Siegel also stated that regardless of what happens in Savage, Scottland will proceed with the Starwood Music Center. / 8 yG / 987 Shakopee Media Day Mr. Stock reviewed the events of the Media Day schedule for June 12, 1987 with the Committee. He stated that the purpose of the Media Day was to attract news writers from throughout the Midwest to Shakopee in the hopes that they would generate a story on both Shakopee's entertainment attractions and commercial and industrial development possibilities in the community. The event will begin at 10:00 A.M. with participants arriving at Murphy' s Landing and being given bus tours of the Shakopee area. At approximately 12:00 noon participants will proceed to Canterbury Inn for a luncheon and presentation. In the afternoon, interview sessions and photo sessions will be made available to the participants. They will then be able to tour the various recreational facilities in the area. In the afternoon, tickets will be given to the participants for their use at Valleyfair, Canterbury Downs and Little Six Bingo. In the evening, the participants will be given tickets to the Chanhassen Dinner Theater, the Old Log Theater or Little Six Bingo. Since the Chamber of Commerce has received a grant for this event from the State Department of Tourism, staff is projecting that the ICC's share of the cost in this event should not exceed $1,000. Star City Application Mr. Stock stated that the Star City application had been mailed and that Mr. Harry Rosefelt from DEED has requested to meet with the members of the ICC later this month. Following our meeting with Mr. Rosefelt, DEED will be setting up a meeting with our Development Team to go through the final stage of the application process. Mr. Stock stated that a small portion of the Star City application was not complete and that it would have to be completed prior to Star City approval. The section that was missing was a preface to the five year work plan that discussed the assets and constraints that presently exist in our community. Mr. Stock stated that he has developed a draft of this section and that he could send it to each of the committee members for their review and comment. If there are no adverse comments to staff's draft, it could then be sent directly to DEED for inclusion into our Star City Report. The committee agreed with staff' s suggestion and that the assets and constraints section of the report be mailed to them as soon as possible. The committee also suggested that they meet with Mr. Rosefelt on May 13th at 5:00 P.M. to speed up the approval process. ICC Open House - Critique and Analysis Chairman Keane stated that in his opinion the ICC Day Open House was a huge success. He commended Mr. Plekkenpol and staff on the job that they had done in organizing the event. The committee suggested that this be an annual event of the ICC and that if at all possible it should be coordinated with Canterbury's Trial Run. It was suggested however that the planning process begin a little sooner and that a plastic bag be printed and handed out to all attendees at the event. It was also suggested that the signs be improved and that a banner indicating the ICC's sponsorship of the event be made. other suggestions were that each booth have prizes or handouts or perhaps a drawing for some types of prizes. Chairman Keane suggested that at the n/Mr. eting a portion of the time be set aside for a general brrming session. The commission members present concurred witKeane's suggestion. Chairman Keane also suggested that thelook at what other communities in the area are offering opers in terms of economic incentives. He stated thaore we can work on attracting potential industries to our cty we have to know what our competition is doing. Heteered to prepare a analysis of what other communities are ng in our area for our next meeting. Chairman Keane thend that the property taxes in Minnesota were ofgreatconcernim. Minnesota has the highest commercial and industrial taxes in the nation. He stated that we need tom a property t reform a high priority for this committee and th State. Commissioner DuBois questi ed how the committee could get more involved in it's review of opose residential, commercial and industrial development in S ko ee. Chairman Keane suggested that this could be a topic for brainstorming session at our next meeting. Mr. Anderson su ested that a development update section could be added to the a en on a regular basis. Mr. Anderson then gave a brie revie of what the City's position was on the proposed $ .2 admis s'ion tax for recreational facilities in Shakopee. a stated ' - that the Council's main concern was that they wan ed some ass rance that the $.25 was going to be spent on roads hat were being used by patrons to the recreational facilities. It was the con§�ensus of the committee to go on record stating at the commission , supported Shakopee' s position as far as the expenditures of the $. 25 admission tax on roads specifically uti ized by the recreational facilities in Northern Scott County Furrie/Koopman mov to adjourn the meeting at 7:00 P.M. Motion carried unanim Y. Barry Stock Recording Secretary i all possible it should be coordinated with Canterbury' s Trial Run. It was suggested however that the planning process begin a little sooner and that a plastic bag be printed and handed out to all attendees at the event. It was also suggested that the signs be improved and that a banner indicating the ICC' s sponsorship of the event be made. Other suggestions were that each booth have prizes or handouts or perhaps a drawing for some types of prizes. chairman Keane suggested that at the next meeting a portion of the time be set aside for a general brainstorming session. The commission members present concurred with Mr. Keane's suggestion. Chairman Keane also suggested that the ICC look at what other communities in the area are offering developers in terms of economic incentives. He stated that before we can work on attracting potential industries to our community we have to know what our competition is doing. He volunteered to prepare a analysis of what other communities are offering in our area for our next meeting. Chairman Keane then stated that the property taxes in Minnesota were of great concern to him. Minnesota has the highest commercial and industrial taxes in the nation. He stated that we need to make property tax reform a high priority for this committee and the State. Commissioner DuBois questioned how the committee could get more involved in it' s review of proposed residential, commercial and industrial development in Shakopee. Chairman Keane suggested that this could be a topic for our brainstorming session at our next meeting. Mr. Anderson suggested that a development update section could be added to the agenda on a regular basis. Mr. Anderson then gave a brief review of what the City' s position was on the proposed $.25 admission tax for recreational facilities in Shakopee. He stated that the Council's main concern was that they wanted some assurance that the $.25 was going to be spent on roads that were being used by patrons to the recreational facilities. It was the consensus of the committee to go on record stating that the commission supported Shakopee's position as far as the expenditures of the $ .25 admission tax on roads specifically utilized by the recreational facilities in Northern Scott County. Furrie/Koopman moved to adjourn the meeting at 7: 00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock Recording Secretary PROCEEDINGS OF THE DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MAY 13, 1987 Chairman Laurent called the meeting to order at 7: 90 a.m. with the following members present: Gary Laurent, Harry Kohler, Jim Stillman, Joe Topic, Bill Wermerskirchen and Melanie Kahlek. Members absent: Terry Forbord, Pete Sames, Tim Keane and Liaison Jerry Wampach. Also present were Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director and Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer. Jim Stillman/Melanie Kahleck moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried. Jim Stillman/Joe Topic moved to approve the minutes of the April 15, 1987 meeting as kept. Motion carried. Barry Stock presented a set of design standards for downtown buildings with the recommendation that they be incorporated into either the zoning ordinance or all city incentive programs proposed for the downtown. The .- guidelines would be used to encourage the improvement and renovation of building exteriors. The City Administrator suggested using the design standards just for the buildings built before 1920. A discussion was held on design standards for present buildings and the feasibility of setting up a review committee or having an architect make suggestions for exterior improvements. Members were asked to review the design standards for the next meeting and try to visualize their implementation in the downtown area. A set of downtown sign standards has also been developed by the Administrative Assistant in an effort to improve the appearance of the downtown area. Since the Planning Commission is in the process of overhauling the present sign ordinance this seems to be the appropriate time to give input. Barry Stock showed a slide presentation from the Minnesota State Planning Agency which showed guidelines for a sign ordinance. Melanie Kahleck also showed slides of various types of signs which showed the importance of using the proper colors, materials and designs. Ms. Kahleck believes the sign ordinance should be developed in a qualitative fashion rather than a quantative fashion. At the present time the current sign ordinance is not enforced. She pointed out the portions of the proposed sign ordinance that impede creativity. Action on this was tabled to the next meeting toallow staff to work up some guidelines and recommendations for -- _- - - a new ordinance. The height of lower level lighting in the downtown area was discussed. Downtown Committee May 13 , 1987 _ Page -2- Bill Wermerskirchen/Jim Stillman moved to decrease the lower level lighting to twelve feet. Motion carried unanim sly. Gary Laurent, Dennis Kra Ken Ashfeld, John derson, Barry Stock and Westwood Planning will meet every eek to discuss design concepts for down wn rehab cons uction which is scheduled to begin July 27 on Sommerville S et. Block meetings will be held with the busines men prior o construction. There will be temporary street ligh 'ng at ntersections and alleys during construction. Jim Stillman/Melanie Kahleck ed to adjourn at 8:55 a.m. Motion carried. Darle Schesso Records g Secretary r Downtown Committee May 13 , 1987 _ Page -2- Bill Wermerskirchen/Jim Stillman moved to decrease the lower level lighting to twelve feet. Motion carried unanimously. Gary Laurent, Dennis Kraft, Ken Ashfeld, John Anderson, Barry Stock and Westwood Planning will meet every week to discuss design concepts for downtown rehab construction which is scheduled to begin July 27 on Sommerville Street. Block meetings will be held with the business men prior to construction. There will be temporary street lighting at intersections and alleys during construction. Jim Stillman/Melanie Kahleck moved to adjourn at 8:55 a.m. Motion carried. Darleen Schesso Recording Secretary MINUTES OF THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular session on May 4, 1987 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room. MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Kirchmeier, Cook and Kephart. Also Manager Van Bout, Liaison Wampach and Secretary Menden. Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the minutes of the April 6, 1987 regular meeting be approved as kept. Motion carried. BILLS READ: City of Shakopee 20,032.00 ABM Equipment 157.50 American Casting and Mfg Corp. 648.02 Associated Mechanical Contractors, Inc. 2,865.74 Auto Central Supply 3.98 BIlls Toggery 320.41 Burmeister Electric Co. 840.48 Carlson Hardware Co. 102.04 City of Shakopee 12,073.00 City of Shakopee 329.52 City of Shakopee 122.37 City of Shakopee 30,655.30 Clay's Printing Service, Inc. 219.05 Davies Water Equipment Co. 504.35 Dressen Oil Co. 67.18 Excel Office Products 68.14 Feed Rite Controls, Inc. 1,338.26 Fresco 139.37 Freund Can Company 190.02 Graybar Electric Co. , Inc. 767.39 B 5 C Electric Supply 295.37 Harmons Hardware 96.08 Lathrop Paint Supply Co. 2.26 Leef Bros. , Inc. 20.00 Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association. 405.00 Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories, Inc. 41.22 Motor Parts Service Co. , Inc. 52.03 North Star Waterworks Products 275.00 Northern States Power Co. 669.00 Northern States Power Co. 229,849.75 Otter Tail Power Company 5§8.44 Rockwell International 113.97 Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 257.79 Shakopee Services 22.00 Starks Cleaning 53.40 Square D Company 506.38 Suel Business Equipment 338.00 Total Tool 76.39 Triangle Engineering, Inc. 120.00 I� United Compucred Collections, Inc. 158.40 Uniforms Unlimited 299.60 Valley Industrial Propane 11.53 Valley Paving, Inc. 2,075.00 Lou Van Bout 38.73 Water Products Co. 2,376.16 Westinghouse Electric Supply Co. 3,449.00 Wild Iris, Inc. 25.00 Wheeler Lumber Operations 210.00 Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. 180.00 Northern States Power Co. 332.32 Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart that the bills be allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried. Mr. Jeff Siegel, Project Director for Starwood Music Center was present to give the Commission a slide presentation on the Proposed Starwood Music Center and answer any questions. Liaison Wampach reported to the Commission on a proposed tax increase in admissions for Valleyfair' , Canterbury Dawns and Starwood Music center. Ken Adolf, Schoell and Madson was present to present the bid tabulations on the painting of the 250,000 gallon elevated tank improvement project. Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart that the painting of the 250,000 gallon elevated tank be awarded to Midwest Protective Coatings, Curry, Minn. in the amount of $46,324.00. Motion carried. The bid tabulations for the landscaping for several Shakopee Public Utilities Commission facilities was presented by Mr. Adolf. Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to award the landscaping to Noble Nursery in the amount of $33,206.00. Motion carried. A status report was given on the downtown fire protection committee. A meeting has been set for May 7, 1987 for the downtown fire protection committee and Mr. Arnie Olson of the State Building Code Department. The Minnesota Department of Health Report on the City water supply was presented. It was noted that the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission received an excellent rating from the State Dept. of Health. Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart to accept the Minnesota Department of Health report and place it on file and suggest that the Manager respond to the state regarding those items that have already been corrected. Motion carried. Manager Van Bout gave a progress report on Well # 2. Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook to accept the job descriptions as presented. Motion carried. Manager Van Bout reported on future oversizing on 13th Avenue and also on Co. Rd. 17 South of 11th Avenue for an apartment complex being proposed. a The American Public Power week is Oct. 4th - 10th. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will place ads in the newspaper during that time to note the occasion. A request was received from the Fire Dept. to use our bills to stuff a notice of a fundraiser. A discussion followed. It was the concensus of the Commission that bill stuffers be limited to informational items by City, school, or county for the public good only. A meeting will be held with Northern States Power Company on May 7, 1987. Hauers 4th Addition was the only new plat presented for April, 1987. There were 10 fire calls for a total of 16 hours and 55 minutes for the month of April, 1987. There were no lost time accidents for April, 1987. The next regular meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will be held on June 1, 1987 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room. ;n by Kephart, seconded by Cook that the meeting be adjourned. Motion � IL Barbara Menden, Cmssion Secretary I PROC=)TNGS OF TRE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS RMULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 7. 1987 Vice Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with Comm. Johnson, Pomerenke. Foudray, and Rockne present. Comm. Schmitt and Chairwoman VanMaldeghem were absent. Also present were Douglas Wise, City Planner and Cncl. Clay. Pomerenke/Rockne moved to approve the agenda as written. Motion carried unanimously. Pomerenke/Johnson moved to approve the minutes of March 26, 1987. Motion carried unanimously. Pomerenke/Johnson moved to approve the minutes of April 9, 1987• Motim carried with Comm. Rockne abstaining. -- PUBLIC HEARING — Variance Resolution No. 488. Wayne Ek Foudray/Pomerenkemoved to open the public hearing for a 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. Motion carried unanimously. Comm. Rockne asked about the other setbacks in the neighborhood and the City Planner replied that this is actually setback further than other buildings on neighboring property and due to the trees the building will not be seen. Vice Chairman Czaja asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no response. Foudray/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously Foudray/pomerenke moved to approve the variance resolution A88 for the following reasons: 1. The topography of the site is unique. The area behind the house is low and marshy. I 2. The garage will be set back further than other structures in the area. Motion carried unanimously. Foudray/Johnson moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Douglas Wise City Planner Carol Schultz Recording Secretary }.3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 7, 1987 Vice Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. with Comm. Rockne , Pomerenke , Johnson and Foudray present . Also present were Douglas Wise , City Planner ; and Cncl . Clay . Chairwoman VanMaldeghem arrived at 9 :00 p.m. and Comm. Schmitt arrived at 8 :15 p.m. Pomerenke/Johnson moved to approve the agenda as written. Motion carried unanimously. Rockne/Johnson moved to approve the minutes of March 5 , 1987. Motion carried unanimously. Foudray/Pomerenke moved to approve the minutes of March 26, 1987 . Motion carried unanimously. Pomerenke/Johnson moved to approve the minutes of April 9, 1987 . Motion carried with Cool . Rockne abstaining. Johnson/Rockne moved to approve the minutes of April 16, 1987 . Motion carried with Pomerenke abstaining. PUBLIC HEARING Walt Muhlenhardt ..preliminary 7 t of Horizon Heights 4th Addition. Foudray/Pomerenke moved to reopen the public hearing to consider the preliminary plat of Horizon Heights 4th Addition lying on the Muhlenhardtproperty located North of CR-42 , East of south of R Road and Westof Hwy 13. � Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the preliminary plat submitted by Mr. Muhlenhardt for 48 lots located in southeast Shakopee . Comm. Pomerenke expressed concern about more trees being lost if the 5% maximum grade for streets was followed, there are some areas along the development that is now proposed at 6 1/2% grade. Vice Chairman Czaja asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. Greg Strut, representative from Suburban Engineering, addressed the 5% grade that is required. He said some modification could theprobably est be the near areathe allstop fellsign below 6%the butend of te rad but to minimize the disturbance to the lots his client feels that these grades should be allowed. Chuck Bakken, 2650 Muhlenhardt, had a concern on the intersection at Muhlenhardt Road and County Road 21 . 13 Planning Commission May 7, 1987 Page -2- Joyce Good, Bloomington, had a question on where the access was going to be on her property. Wayne Cronkhite, 2560 Muhlenhardt Rd. , asked what would happen to the triangle piece of land at the corner of Muhlenhardt ' s property which is Lot 1 , Block 4. The City Planner indicated it would be retained by Mr. Muhlenhardt. Discussion ensued--on-,whether lot 10, block 1 , and lot 10, block 3 are buildable and Com Schmitt said the applicant should certify whether those 1 is are build le and the plat contain a notification that the developer was made aware of the circumstances regarding th gas main and that no variances would be issued on those lots. Vice Chairman Czaja asked if there as anyone else who wished to address this issue. There wa no sponse. Pomerenke/Johnson moved to c o e the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Pomerenke/Johnson moved to a rove the preliminary plan of Horizon Heights 4th Addition su j ct to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall be gra ted a variance as outlined in Section 12.13 of the Ci y Co a to allow street grades as shown on preliminary pla . 2. Muhlenhardt Road must a ther be upgraded to meet City street design criteria and sta dard sp cifications or be vacated. 3. Only six accesses on o County oad #21 will be allowed. Four will be street a cesses, tw will be joint accesses serving individual to s. County entrance permits will be required for each secs s. 4. Lot 11 , Block 2 shal be dedicate to the City for park purposes, payment in lei eu of land de cation will also be required. 5. Street cross sections and profiles must be submitted with the final plat. 6. A soils analysis confirming the suitability of each site for on site sewage treatment systems must be submitted with the final plat. 7. Street lights shall be provided on all intersections with County Roads 21 and 16 . 13 Planning Commission May 7, 1987 Page -2- Joyce Good, Bloomington, had a question on where the access was going to be on her property. Wayne Cronkhite, 2560 Muhlenhardt Rd. , asked what would happen to the triangle piece of land at the corner of Muhlenhardt ' s property which is Lot 1 , Block 4. The City Planner indicated it would be retained by Mr. Muhlenhardt. Discussion ensued on whether lot 10, block 1, and lot 10, block 3 are buildable and Comm. Schmitt said that the applicant should certify whether those lots are buildable and the plat contain a notification that the developer was made aware of the circumstances regarding the gas main and that no variances would be issued on those lots. Vice Chairman Czaja asked if there was anyone else who wished to address this issue. There was no response. Pomerenke/Johnson moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Pomerenke/Johnson moved to approve the preliminary plan of Horizon Heights 4th Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall be granted a variance as outlined in Section 12.13 of the City Code to allow street grades as shown on preliminary plat. 2. Muhlenhardt Road must either be upgraded to meet City street design criteria and standard specifications or be vacated. 3. Only six accesses onto County Road 921 will be allowed. Four will be street accesses, two will be joint accesses serving individual lots. County entrance permits will be required for each access. 4. Lot 11 , Block 2 shall be dedicated to the City for park purposes, payment in lieu of land dedication will also be required. 5. Street cross sections and profiles must be submitted with the final plat. 6 . A soils analysis confirming the suitability of each site for on site sewage treatment systems must be submitted with the final plat. 7. Street lights shall be provided on all intersections with County Roads 21 and 16 . / 3 Planning Commission May 7 , 1987 Page -3- 8 . Lot boundaries must be adjusted to allow all lots to meet the minimum 2 1/2 acre requirement. 9. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of required improvements: A. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. B. Local streets and street signs shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. 10. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney. Comm. Schmitt raised a concern on the grade changes be downgrades going onto a thoroughfare road. { i Schmitt/Rockne moved to table the preliminary plat of Horizon Heights 4th Addition due to the insufficient information on the variance issue and the memos placed before the Commission tonight and not enough time to review them, until the next regularly scheduled meeting of June 4, 1987. Roll Call : Ayes: Comm. Czaja, Johnson, Rockne and Schmitt Noes: Comm. Pomerenke and Foudray Motion carried. Rockne/Pomerenke moved for a 5 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Comm. Pomerenke left at 9 :05 p.m. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem arrived at 9:10 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 9: 11 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING Rezonin¢ 85 acres of land Meritor Development Corporation Foudray/Schmitt moved to open the public hearing to consider the rezoning request to rezone approximately 85 acres of land located East of County Road 79 and South of 11th Avenue from Ag to R-2 and R-3. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner said the north half of the area is already zoned R-2 and the developer is now requesting the southern half be rezoned to R-2 and R-3 in the corner. Comm. Czaja said the comprehensive plan does reflect that this area is proposed R-2 but he has a concern with the R-3 because that is not part of the comprehensive plan. J3 Planning Commission May 7, 1987 Page -4- Chairwoman Vanmaldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue . There was no response. Schmitt/Rockne moved to close the pub is hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Comm. Schmitt said he really had a concern with the R-3 corner that would have 80 or so reside ia1 sites to concur in the corner of a development with no outlet except through the residential neighborhood. He asked if the City Planner knew if there were plans to have a frontage road along the bypass area. The City Planner replied that at/ this time he did not know if there were plans for a frontage road. Comm. Schmitt said he feels it should be dealt with / as an outlot for now. Comm. M Schmitt felt that it should be 1 ft as Ag. Schmitt/Czaja moved to recomme d to the City Council rezoning of the Meritor development parcel as presented but excluding the R-3 application. Motion carried animously. PUBLIC I - P r�"—hwrx Estates Meritor v lopm d Schmitt/Czaja moved to ope a public hearing to consider the preliminary plat of Canter ur Estates lying on the property located East of County Road 79 a d South of 11th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewe the pro sal as only being the area south of 13. He said sta f is recom ending compliance with the cul de sac length requirem nts in the de and would like to have the two cul de sacs tied t gether. Larry Frank, Meritor De elopment, said there is one situation where the slope does exc d 5% . It mainl occurs because there is a gas line located the e. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there w s anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue . There was no response. , Schmitt/Czaja moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Rockne moved favorable recommendation on the preliminary plat of Meritor Development south of 13th Avenue subject to the following conditions: / 3 Planning Commission May 7 , 1987 Page -4- Chairwoman Vanmaldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue . There was no response. Schmitt/Rcckne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Comm. Schmitt said he really had a concern with the R-3 corner that would have 80 or so residential sites to concur in the corner of a development with no outlet except through the residential neighborhood. He asked if the City Planner knew if there were plans to have a frontage road along the bypass area. The City Planner replied that at this time he did not know if there were plans for a frontage road. Comm. Schmitt said he feels it should be dealt with as an outlot for now. Comm. Schmitt felt that it should be left as Ag. Schmitt/Czaja moved to recommend to the City Council rezoning of the Meritor development parcel as presented but excluding the R-3 application. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING Preliminary Plat of Canterbury Estates Meritor Development, Schmitt/Czaja moved to open the public hearing to consider the preliminary plat of Canterbury Estates lying on the property located East of County Road 79 and South of 11th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the proposal as only being the area south of 13. He said staff is recommending compliance with the cul de sac length requirements in the code and would like to have the two cul de sacs tied together. Larry Frank, Meritor Development, said there is one situation where the slope does exceed 5%. It mainly occurs because there is a gas line located there. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue . There was no response. Schmitt/Czaja moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Rockne moved favorable recommendation on the preliminary plat of Meritor Development south of 13th Avenue subject to the following conditions: Planning Commission May 7, 1987 Page -5- 1 . Streets must be named, side and rear setbacks must be shown and utility easements shown. 2. Land dedication for park purposes is required. 3. Either dedication or easements of 120 ' in width must be provided for the drainageway or an alternative design must be approved by the City Engineer. 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 5E . 6. The watermain along Co. Rd. 79 must extend to the southwest corner of the plat. 7. Sanitary sewer must be provided for Lot 8, Block 18. 8. A 20 ' drainage and utility easement shall be provided between Lots 7 & 8, of Block 17 and between Lots 12 & 13, of Bloc 15 . 9. The storm sewer must be extended to the northeast corner of Lot 12, Block 13. 10. The storm sewer must be extended to some point along the south line of Block 12 , and the south line of Block 12 graded to the storm sewer. 11 . Execution of a developers agreement for construction of required improvements: A. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. B. Hater system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. C. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the of the City of Shakopee. D. Local streets and street signs within the plat shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. / 3 . Planning Commission May 7, 1987 Page -6- E. The developer agrees to reimburse the City for costs on 13th Avenue equivalent to the costs for a 36 ' residential street. Cost sharing to be determined by the City Enginee . 12. The old well located i the ponding area between lock $5, 6 and 16 must be "abando d" in conformance with a Mn Dept. of Health Regulations, a d certified as such. 13. Approval of a title opi nio by the City Attor ey. 14. The cul-de-sac between B1 ck 16 and 17 hall either be extended to provide street a cess to the property to the south or connected to the cul- a-sac betwe n Blocks 15 & 17. 15 . The developer shall provide a ecordabl agreement stating that not more than 10% of the pl t with' n the R-2 zone will be developed into twin homes. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - Preliminary snd Finnl P1 . of Rphringer' s First ADDITION. Foudray/Czaja moved to o /sit e publi hea ing to consider the preliminary and final platehringe ' s Fi at Addition, 10 .033 acres lying west of Counad 83 , East o the racetrack and south of the Valley Rtball Club . Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewedreq st saying t e owner is just proposing to split one 10 sit in half and s not proposing any further development at e. Comm. Schm tt asked about the structures that are an the property nd what will happen to them. Diane Carlson, Attorney ocant, said the stru ures are on the north end of the propeChairwoman VanMaldeghem if therewas anyone from the audience who wished to ss this issue . Ther was no response. Czaja/Johnson moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Foudray/Schmitt moved to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat subject to the following conditions: 1 .3 Planning Commission May 7, 1987 Page -6- E. The developer agrees to reimburse the City for costs on 13th Avenue equivalent to the costs for a 36 ' residential street. Cost sharing to be determined by the City Engineer. 12. The old well located in the ponding area between Block #5, 6 and 16 must be "abandoned" in conformance with the Mn Dept. of Health Regulations, and certified as such. 13 . Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney. 14 . The cul-de-sac between Block 16 and 17 shall either be extended to provide street access to the property to the south or connected to the cul-de-sac between Blocks 15 & 17 . 15 . 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. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING. - Preliminary and Final Plat of Behrineer' s First ADDITION. Foudray/Czaja moved to open the 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 . Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the request saying the owner is just proposing to split one 10 acre site in half and is not proposing any further development at this time. Comm. Schmitt asked about the structures that are already on the property and what will happen to them. - Diane Carlson, Attorney of applicant, said the structures are on the north end of the property. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue . There was no response. , Czaja/Johnson moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Foudray/Schmitt moved to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat subject to the following conditions: /3 Planning Commission May 7 , 1987 Page -7- 1 . Further development of either lot will require approval of a PUD. 2. Only one access onto County Road 83 will be allowed. The existing access must be relocated to serve both lots prior to submission of a PUD. Relocation of the access requires approval of a entrance permit from Scott County. 3. Execution of a developers agreement containing the following provisions: A. Payment in lieu of park dedication shall be required as provided in City Code Section 12.07, Subd. 5 B (1) . B. A drainage plan must be submitted with any application for a PUD. C. The cost of extending the sewer under County Road 83 and providing service to this plat shall be borne by the developer . It is recommended that one line be constructed with a man hole on the west end to serve both lots. D. Present water service is not available beyond a distance of 150 feet west of County Road 83 . The developer may be assessed for construction of water lines serving the area west of the plat, beyond the 150 feet service area. 4 . The street identified as 40th Street on the plat must be changed to County Road 83 or Canterbury Road. 5. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney . Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - Preliminary Plat of Heritage Place. Heritage Development Czaja/Johnson moved to open the 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. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the request for a preliminary plat approval of 24 .77 acres. Access to the property is from Onyx Drive in hauer' s 4th Addition. The plat contains 73 lots and is currently zoned R-2. Discussion ensued on the drainageway in the development , as being either easement or dedication of land. Comm. Czaja said he has a concern in lots of this size where the /-3 Planning Commission May 7 , 1987 Page -8- drainageway is located. There would be no variances allowed on these lots. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. Sheila Mitchell had a concern on population density within the plat. The lots proposed are small and close together and what will happen to the parking problem within the development. Comm. Schmitt replied that as far as the lot size goes the developer is in conformance wit he standards and that is the only way the Planning Commissioncan deal with it. Gene Hauer, had a co ern on the drainageway going right into his property and he does t want it to run onto his property. Gilbert Lebens, had Xn oncern on the proposal as far as the traffic exits. The CiPlanner replied that the main exit will be down 13th Avenue. Mike Felix, Heritagev opmenty said they are planning on having some signage ine ont of the development and they are planning on using a dlop s a0eement. They hope to build houses that more peopin of ord. Ellie Bl umquist, 1144 y Cour said she has a concern because this proposal is diffet than a original proposal and asked if there would be aner pub i hearing later. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem answeredat if th public hearing was closed tonight then there woule no ther ubl is hearing. Zack Johnson, 1244 Canbury Road, V ce President of Scottland Co. , had a concern on tLaTor proper located to the south of the plat. He said thhad greed to ovide one unspecified access from 13th Aven th to this parcel through their properties and the wern most street hown on the plat is reasonably acceptable the .Mary Ellingson had a ' on on busing of he children to the Jr. High and who would eying for this. Cc m. Schmitt replied that that would be aool district decisio not one of this body. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyonie else from the audience who wished to address this issue . 'There was no response. Concerns raised by the Commission were road accesses , drainageways, and easement vs . dedication of land for the drainageway. 13 Planning Commission May 7 , 1987 Page -8- drainageway is located. There would be no variances allowed on these lots. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. Sheila Mitchell had a concern on population density within the plat. The lots proposed are small and close together and what will happen to the parking problem within the development. Comm. Schmitt replied that as far as the lot size goes the developer is in conformance with the standards and that is the only way the Planning Commission can deal with it. Gene Hauer, had a concern on the drainageway going right into his property and he does not want it to run onto his property. Gilbert Lebens, had a concern on the proposal as far as the traffic exits. The City Planner replied that the main exit will be down 13th Avenue . Mike Felix , Heritage Development, said they are planning on having some signage in the front of the development and they are planning on using a developers agreement. They hope to build houses that more people can afford. Ellie Blumquist, 1144 Merry Court, said she has a concern because this proposal is different than the original proposal and asked if there would be another public hearing later . Chairwoman VanMaldeghem answered that if the public hearing was closed tonight then there would be no other public hearing. Zack Johnson, 1244 Canterbury Road, Vice President of Scottland Co. , had a concern on the LaTour property located to the south of the plat. He said they had agreed to provide one unspecified access from 13th Avenue north to this parcel through their properties and the western most street shown on the plat is reasonably acceptable to them. Mary Ellingson had a question on busing of the children to the Jr. High and who would be paying for this. Comm. Schmitt replied that that would be a school district decision not one of this body. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone else from the audience who wished to address this issue . There was no response. Concerns raised by the Commission were road accesses , drainageways , and easement vs. dedication of land for the drainageway. 13 Planning Commission May 7, 1987 Page -9- Czaja/Foudray moved to continue the public hearing to the next regularly scheduled meeting on June 2 , 1987 , pending the questions raised about the easement issue and the drainage issue, the access issue on the southern properties and the whole access issue. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Rockne moved that staff give complete update on the watershed planning at the Planning Commission ' s May 21 , 1987 , meeting. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING=Conditional Use Permit for home occupation,_ Theodore and Sharon Hinck Czaja/Foudray moved to open the 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. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the request for a dance school in a barn located behind the house . The code does allow for home occupation in an accessory building and the code also allows a school in an Ag zone. Ted Hinck, the applicant, said there will be one full time employee and approximately 3 or 4 part time employees. The Company has been formed as a Corporation. Comm. Schmitt asked if the house on the property has been brought up to code . He feels that the house should be required to be brought up to code before they grant any more conditional use permits. The applicant said he is planning on bringing the house up to code if this conditional use permit is granted. Comm. Czaja had a concern on more than one employee in a home occupation. The City Planner said he does believe their is a limit on more than one employee in a home occupation. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked what the age of the students would be . The applicant answered that they would be young adult and up. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. Renee Gillespie , 107 W. 1st Avenue , feels it would be unfair competition as far as insurance, safety wise for people to be in a building such as a barn, and also if Marschall road could handle any more large flows of traffic. / 3 Planning Commission May 7, 1987 P e -10- Dan Swanson, 1834 Marschall Road, said it s uld get to be a very busy place with students coming and going o school with classes being back to back. Bob Schaefer, Realto handling this p operty, said that this is not a very highly pop lated area an there is ample places to park behind the barn. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem ad a ncern on the City being liable for any injuries that may ccu . Czaja/Schmitt moved to c tinue the public hearing to June 4, 1987 and review by legal cc Oil on whether this qualifies as a school. Motion carried nani ously. Foudray/Rockne move to approve the annual review of conditional use permit 0448 459 , 366 , 77 and 455 . Motion carried unanimously. Foudray/Roc a moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adj-ourned at 12:00 a.m. ouglas Wise ' ty Planner Car 1 Schultz Reno ding Secretary 13 Planning Commission May 7 , 1987 Page -10- Dan Swanson, 1834 Marschall Road, said it should get to be a very busy place with students coming and going to school with classes being back to back. Bob Schaefer, Realtor handling this property, said that this is not a very highly populated area and there is ample places to park behind the barn. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem had a concern on the City being liable for any injuries that may occur. Czaja/Schmitt moved to continue the public hearing to June 4 , 1987 and review by legal council on whether this qualifies as a school . Motion carried unanimously. Foudray/Rockne moved to approve the annual review of conditional use permit 4448 , 459 , 366 , 477 and 455 . Motion carried unanimously. Foudray/Rockne moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 12:00 a .m. Douglas Wise City Planner Carol Schultz Recording Secretary PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 21, 1987 Chairwoman VanMaledghem called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with Comm. Schmitt, Czaja, and Rockne present. Comm. Pomerenke was absent. Comm. Foudray arrived at 7: 55 P.M. Also present were Douglas Wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; Kenneth Ashfeld, City Engineer; and Cncl. Clay. Czaja/Rockne moved to approve the agenda as written. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer gave a brief update on the upper Valley Drainage way Project. He said they will be using closed conduit pipe. They will construct an open channel drainage way through the higher density use areas. Right now the consultant is working on obtaining easements along the drainageway. The time frame they are hoping for is this fall for sending outbidsfor construction. They are also trying to obtain an agreement with MnDOT for help in funding because some of the drainage from the bypass will be going down to this system. Comm. Czaja expressed concern for Mr. Hauer' s property because the drainage is running onto his property. The City Engineer said they could require the developer to put in a temporary retention pond. He explained that a retention pond captures the storm water runoff and actually holds it on site and does no allow it to leave. A retention pond is not really the best system to use for this kind of drainageway. Comm. Schmitt raised a concern on the heritage Place lots with the drainageway easement going through them. Schmitt/Czaja moved to recommend that the easement approach be taken for initial construction but the platting of property over that drain way should require dedication of the land through the platting process. Motion carried unanimously. Foudray/Schmitt moved that a time table be proposed for initial construction. Motion carried unanimously. The Community Development Director reviewed the proposal for redevelopment of former prison site. He said Siteline, Inc. formerly know as Tom Massey's firm, has proposed a development for this property. The property is currently zoned R-3 and they proposed to have it rezoned to R-4. Mr. Larry Smith reviewed what their proposal consists of, he said he believes the buildings represent Shakopee' s heritage and are worth the consideration of saving. The are proposing office spaces in the currently building and townhomes located behind. Comm. Schmitt asked how an R-4 would benefit this property development. Comm Czaja expressed concern over the worth of saving those buildings as far as the maintenance and actual reconstruction. Discussion ensued on allowing office structures within a residential environment, and would it create spot zoning. l� Planning Commission May 21, 1987 Page -2- The consensus of the Commission was to not allow commercial industrial use in a residential neighborhood. Discussion ensued on the 1988-1992 Capital Improvement Program. Comm. Schmitt raised a concern over the City pursuing another motel downtown. Schmitt/Rockne moved t have Apgar and Market Stre is go from 1st to 10th in both cases Motion carried unanimously Comm. Czaja had a co cern with Prior Lake overfl structure, No. 61. The City Admini trator reviewed the status f that item. Czaja/Schmitt moved o have City Council re ok at item No. 61 and probably put t higher on the lis Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Czaja moved t t sidewalk constru ion on 4th Ave. from Fillmore Street East b added. Motion ca ied unanimously. Schmitt/Czaja moved th t the Capital P an be submitted to City Council with the changes recommended by the planning Commission. Motion carried unanimous) . Schmitt/Czaja moved for a 10 mi to recess. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting was called back to or er t 9: 30 p.m. Discussion ensued on the si ordinance. The City Planner reviewed the Purpose and Int n with no changes except to read general public instead of pub is ight-of-way. Discussion ensued on the definitions of sign A definition for name plates was defined and a definition for no conforming signs was added. Comm. Czaja asked a ques ion of a ee standing sign and a wall sign. The City Planner s d that it es not mean it is a wall of a building, it is a f e standing w 1 that a sign may go on. Comm. Czaja said he w uld like to see indow sign added to the definition. There was some discu sion on temporary sign The City Planner reviewed some mino changes that were made. It was consensus that temporary dir ctional signs have a limited eriod of time to a certain numbe of days and limit the size so (garage sale signs, auctions, etc. ) . It was consensus of Cc ission to have staff redefine (D) Canopies and Marquees. Comm. Schmitt suggested deleting No. 3 - shielded light source in a commercial use, or additional limitations on the glare of the light, shielded source may be required. Planning Commission May 21, 1987 Page -2- The consensus of the Commission was to not allow commercial industrial use in a residential neighborhood. Discussion ensued on the 1988-1992 Capital Improvement Program. Comm. Schmitt raised a concern over the City pursuing another motel downtown. . Schmitt/Rockne moved to have Apgar and Market Streets go from 1st to 10th in both cases. Motion carried unanimously. Comm. Czaja had a concern with Prior Lake overflow structure, No. 61. The City Administrator reviewed the status of that item. Czaja/Schmitt moved to have City Council relook at item No. 61 and probably put it higher on the list. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Czaja moved that sidewalk construction on 4th Ave. from Fillmore Street East be added. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Czaja moved that the Capital Plan be submitted to City Council with the changes recommended by the planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Czaja moved for a 10 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting was called back to order at 9:30 p.m. Discussion ensued on the sign ordinance. The City Planner reviewed the Purpose and Intent with no changes except to read general public instead of public right-of-way. Discussion ensued on the definitions of signs. A definition for name plates was defined and a definition for nonconforming signs was added. Comm. Czaja asked a question of a free standing sign and a wall i sign. The City Planner said that it does not mean it is a wall of a building, it is a free standing wall that a sign may go on. Comm. Czaja said he would like to see window sign added to the definition. There was some discussion on temporary signs. The City Planner reviewed some minor changes that were made. It was consensus that temporary directional signs have a limited period of time to a certain number of days and limit the size also (garage sale signs, auctions, etc. ) . It was consensus of Commission to have staff redefine (D) Canopies and Marquees. Comm. Schmitt suggested deleting No. 3 - shielded light source in a commercial use, or additional limitations on the glare of the light, shielded source may be required. Planning Commission May 21, 1987 Page -3- The City Planner said that there should be more definition done on item H) - Signs shall not be painted, attached - should read and/or affixed. Discussion ensued revolving beacons and whether they constitute a flood light. Discussion ensued on roof signs, and it was the consensus that staff look further into whether roof sign shall be permitted or not. It was consensus of the Commission that signs and their structures which identify, advertise, provide direction to a use, business, industry or service which has ceased existence or moved from the premises shall be removed within 60 days instead of 30 days. Valley Fair was present and stated that they would like to see a recreational category using language now in the ordinance addressed. Valley Fair, Renaissance, and racetrack are exceptional and require a separate category as deals with signage required. Czaja/Foudray moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Douglas K. Wise City Planner Carol Schultz Recording Secretary TENTATIVE AGENDA _ . PLANNING COMMISSION Special Session Shakopee, MN June 18, 1987 Chairwoman VanMaldeghem Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7: 30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of May 7, 1987 and May 21, 1987 Meeting Minutes 4. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider the application for a Conditional Use Permit to operate an outdoor music center as a minor commercial recreational facility upon 86 acres located N. of 12th Ave. , W. of Valley Park Drive, S. of Valley Industrial Blvd. S. and E. of the K-Mart Distribution Center on County Road 83. Applicant: Scottland Companies Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution $492 5. Request for Final P.U.D. Approval for Stonebrooke Action: Recommendation to City Council 6. Sign Ordinance Amendments - 7. Other Business 8. Adjourn Douglas Wise - City Planner MEMO TO: Shakopee City Council and (�(� Shakopee Planning Commission K� FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Publication Article on Local Governmental/ Land Developer Working Relationship DATE: June 9, 1987 The attached article was published recently by the Larkin, Hoffman, Daly and Lindgren, Ltd. Law Firm. The article generally indicates that local governmental officials are confronted with dramatically increasing levels of liability and that some Minnesota Courts have held that building officials and other governmental officials can be held responsible for negligence if they participate in the design of real estate projects. The article also describes a recent Minnesota Court of Appeals decision which held that a local governmental unit was obliged to pay an applicants attorneys fees because the zoning administrator refused to issue a special use permit and released other information to project opponents utilizing a procedure that was not allowed by State Law. This information should be of interest to both the City Council and the Planning Commission in that both are heavily involved in land development issues. WORKING WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS: A LAND DEVELOPER'S GUIDE �6 Gregory E. Korstad "If you'd just show me what you will approve, I'll build it that way!" exclaims the frustrated land developer: ti • • • • 2 'Td like to help you,"Uzegovernmentofficial _ r replies, "but I can get into trouble zf I get too y involved here." e This sort of exchange is occurring with increasing - frequency throughout Minnesotawdillustrates every important - concept in working with local government decision-makers.lb - obtain favorable results with local government officials, an = applicant must understand all the competing factors involved in - .. each decision, including the changing legal climate, and _ ' - increased citizen participation. - Hands Off By Government Officials - In the early years of building code enforcement,especially in smaller cities and rural counties, the local building official was a former builder who took an active role in working with the - ""— developers on the projects he inspected. The early building inspector was easy to work with and ready to assist the project at every stage.The inspector would frequently sketch out plans about giving free advice regarding design matters. However, or designs or suggest changes in construction methods. government policy makers do not yet seem to be similarly Modern building and other government officials bring a deterred from an active role in planning and development much more cautious attitude to the task,and may even appear functions. to have some degree of animosity, due,in part,to the changing Hands On B9 Policy Makers legal environment in which they act. The building inspection process was originally seen as a"public duty"and the building The Minnesota legislature has given local governments an inspectorwas not liable to injured third parties if code violations opportunity to cooperate with developers by authorizing local caused their injury governments to act through development corporations or Today,local government officials are faced with increased housing and redevelopment agencies and by creating industrial liabilities. Some Minnesota courts have held building officials development revenue bonds and tax increment financing and other local government officials responsible for negligence mechanisms. in the design of particular real estate projects. When faced with an actively involved city council,planning A building official knows that the city council or county commission, or county board, a land developer frequently is board may want that official to assist land developers,but will forced to risk offending that body by demanding independence be most unhappy if liability to the council or board results from on planning and design issues,while urging that body to focus such assistanm exclusively on public policy issues. Local government officials can also be liable for improper However, county board, planning commission, and city treatment of an applicant. In a recent Minnesota Court of council members are naturally interested in more than just Appeals decision,the local government unitwas obligated to pay where the development will go and what the general design will the applicant's attorneys'fees because the zoning administrator be. Marty such members have training or experience in refused to issue a special use permitwhichwas in orderand gave development, as well as strong opinions regarding certain opponents to the project information regarding an appeal theories of planning, methods of development, and types of procedure that state law did not authorize,but thatwas arguably projects. permitted by county regulations. The Minnesota Court of The developer seeking approval of a real estate project that Appeals called the zoning administrator's action "a flagrant is within the available legal alternatives but not the alternative abuse of process." most preferred by government policy makers or staff members Thus, government officials may be increasingly cautious faces a complex challenge,because the planning process must Tawe Two include not only design and implementation, but also AIA CONTRACTS ARE / 6 persuasion. RISKY TO UNWARY OWNER Citizen Participation OR LENDER contlnned from page one Individual interests also affect the planning commissions, county boards, and city councils. Expanding populations and growing emphasis on controlled, long-range development plans disputes is not in its best interest because: have caused mounting development pressures to run hand-in- o The arbitrator will usually reach a decision that is a hand with increased governmental requirements and compromise. The parties are in arbitration because they opportunities for citizen involvement and protest. Citizen could not agree to a compromise,so it is unlikely that the involvement can he creative and productive, but it can also arbitrator's decision will be satisfactory to the owner. be reactionary. a The owner may need the broader discovery procedures For example, the "NIMBYs" (those who think develop- available in litigation to get key information for its case. ment—no matter what type or quality—should be "Not In My o Arbitrators must be knowledgeable in construction Back-Yard"),must be dealt with.City council members or county matters so they tend to be more industry-oriented and commissioners are very accessible,particularly if there is a low biased than ajudge orjury may be. constituent-to-representative ratio, and must be responsive to o Arbitration proceedings are not inexpensive, especially questions such as "Why that dumb development that is going since the AIA Conditions specifically exclude the architect to ruin my property value got approved." from any arbitration between the owner and contractor Citizen objectors deserve attention as they are constituents (unless the architect consents to be included).This means of the local elected officials and usually are residents who have the owner may be involved in two separate proceedings, a stake in the area's development. They also may be better - even when it is more economical and more logical to involve known to the local officials and policy makers than the land all the parties in the same proceeding. developer and, therefore, may have more influence with them. Protective Measures It is also imperative that their objections be dealt with so that a positive resolution of political, as well as development, Although the AIA construction agreements can and should problems can occur. In the long run, prompt and responsive be used for many construction projects, an owner and/or its attention to such objections facilitates initial approval decisions lender should be aware of the issues these documents raise and eases the many post-approval decisions upon which the land between the owner and architect. developer depends for a successfully completed project. TheAIAArchitect's Contract and AIA Conditions should be revised to clearly state that the Architect is liable for errors in, Strategies - and omissions from, the plans and specifications. The AIA Local government officials are often criticized for objecting Conditions and AIA Ar Mmot's Contract must be amended so to a particular development on the basis that the local that the architect's liability is commensurate with his authority. government's aim is to prohibit any development in the Finally,an owner should not agree to arbitrate disputes with the jurisdiction.While this exclusivity approach may occur in some architect and contractor, unless such arbitration is under jurisdictions, the environment within which local government conditions satisfactory to the owner. must conduct its affairs usually encourages its promotion of Although not discussed in this article, AIA construction development to increase the real property tax base, cluster contracts also raise a number of issues between the owner and service consumers, and otherwise promote economic the contractor.Therefore, an owner should always review, with development in the community. A thorough and accurate its legal counsel, all AIA construction contracts to be used in analysis and presentation of these positive factors is an a construction project.■ invaluable tool in the initial phase of an approval process. The approach for securing such approvals must be carefully _.- tailored to the type of approval sought and the nature of the land Tyr �'t - - we involved.For example,it is often equally difficult to convince , LHD&L BRMFS - a governmental unit to make an amendment to its zoning - - -- - ordinance or to issue a permit for a conditional use. However, We are pleased toamounce that John Landgalst and it is significantly more difficult to successfully challenge the Gerald Seek have become shareholders of the firm.John denial of a zoning amendment in court than the denial of an `-:joined the fore's Heal Estate.Law Department in 1985, to issuance of a conditional use permit.Therefore, one of the key practice in theareasof commercial real estate and - factors a land developer must consider when seeking my finance. Jerry,has been with the firm-since 1984 and governmental approval is the developer's ability to challenge the Practices in the areas of legislative lobbying and related denial of that approval. governmental affairs. 1 - s Understanding the context within which the regulations Allan `Pat' Mulligan was rated-one of the best are made and administered presents a guide through the lawyers in Minnesota by his peers in the legal community regulatory system and provides a key to making an application - -m the second"edition of 7k Bestlaury/erslnArnerica.Pat likely to be approved by a governing body. If oneis to present was cited for Ids work in the area of real estate law.Gene- "an offer they can't refuse; one must know how and why their ' Fuller also received this distinction for his work in the decision will be made, and do a great deal of preparation - .areas of tax and employee benefits law.■ - and negotiation.■ _.. __. . . .. -.. Pave Thee 1� MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator III FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official RE: Schesso Boat Building DATE: June 12, 1987 To clarify one issue on the boat building project, Mr. Schesso _ called one year ago and asked if he could build a boat in his backyard (not an ocean going ship) . I assumed it would be a small boat not in excess of typical fishing boat size and certainly not the Queen Mary. At no time did he mention or get approval to build the temporary j shelter. As soon as I was notified of the shelter we gave him a stop work order on the structure project. I see he was on television stating he had my prior approval. He did not have it then and he does not have it now. Council knows my work history record. It is not in my character for me or a department policy to selectively enforce the building permit requirement. I£ I would have had prior knowledge of the structure, I most certainly would have required him to go through the permit process. I personally don't care if he builds a boat, ship or structure, however, I do think he should be required to follow through with the permit process and not influence Council with a smoke screen by inferring Judi Simac or I gave him approval for this project without benefit of permit LH:cah Scott-Carver-Dakota Community Action Agency, Inc. IV 1257 Marschall Road CAP Corporate Officers: SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 Harold Trende-Chairman Phone: 612-496-2125 Richard Graham-Vice Chairperson Denise Parrish-Secretary/Treasurer June 8, 1987 Ms. Mary F.Sullivan- "".""`. Executive Director John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear John, Please accept my sincere appreciation to you, and the Shakopee City Council for your continued support of the Thrift Shop sponsored by Community Action. We are eager to have the parking lot completed and the carpeting installed. Those improvements will certainly be an asset to the Thrift Shop which, as you know, provides a valuable community service with a multitude of benefits. The cooperation between the City of Shakopee and Community Action has been vital to the success of the Thrift Shop. Thank You. Sincerely, Mary F. SullivsH�- J Executive Director MFS:mk RECF}V�D SUN 12 1981 CITY OF SHAKOPFcE m'ci am >w�o�c'a; i '�s�s 'oma-mi�ni`nm�c8�_m�"a 'Nip _ MAS 2�aia amm�K ocw mzf zmya :`ii . mei r"ammazmzAm MOiAmm"" - RA m."m zm mm"ism���mzx smmne`m r ' myi sm mmm c m.+ "Z4 192 M c eoe00000eeeooe a WHOM 0 oeee0000meoo ooee o ooe z ram en rot a a a z e00000eee000ee o eee000000e o oee0000ee000eeoo a eoo � e00000memomooe o oeee0000ee o oeeoomeaooeeoome u .reo cm " m000eH 000uemo 0 00000ee000 e o o uom�mm.ee000uo f m FF ii 6 son N V - >9 All W W ;o=oPo __= Ir / W N N� i _ 9 ; a y W eN 0 Am _Nyeeoo e e ee ooee e e e .......eeee 011-1 ro ~ r N N, mm `i ¢ N N ♦ N� ♦ m n M u= j m O"Ouf � O n O N2 LL w - I,w miooD _ 2 9 m Y m m m q 9 W W m Sn c m PmY Jw A W NN m UNmmweuma-U mWeNP u...YNNNOeewe.NwoY N o e e e e e e ee e o meeeee eeeeeeee eeeeem a emoomoeom w m m b e e P ew - emmN1P m -Pablo ' NWee Y eeuumaubM U rew e NNaPWeYmwWWw _ mNe4msYlnNenw aNmaequwmNa- S I Itf ; [ f I ss ; o: N C~ u n e N - <T y TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 16, 1987 Mayor Reinke presiding 11 Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 21 Recess for H.R.A. Meeting and Board of Review 3] Continuation of Board of Review: a] Clete Link b] Clarence Lebens - tabled 6/2 c] Steve Benedict - tabled 6/2 d] Bev Koehnen - tabled 6/2 e] Charles Campbell - tabled 6/2 £] Donald Tech - tabled 6/2 g] Harold Marschall - tabled 6/2 - h] Leroy Houser - i] J ] k] Close Board of Review as of June 22, 1987 41 Move that the findings of the Board of Review be approved and sent to the County Auditor for certification, as of June 22, 1987 51 Re-convene 6] Liaison ReportsfromCouncilmembers 71 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 8] 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. ) "9] Approval of Minutes of May 19, 1987 10] Communications: (Items noted for consent will be received and filed) a] b] 11] Public Hearings: None 12] Boards and Commissions: Planning Commission: a] O'Dowd Estates and Golf Club Environmental Assessment Worksheet Declaration - Res. No. 2740 b] Preliminary Plat of Horizon Heights 4th Add'n. - located S of CR-16, N or CR-42, E of Nuhlenhardt Rd. , and W of Hwy 13 c] Preliminary Plat of Heritage Place - Located W of Hauer' s 3rd and S of J .E.J. 2nd Add-n. and Hauer' s 2nd Add-n. d] Starwood Music Center TENTATIVE AGENDA June 16, 1987 Page -2- 13] -Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9:001 a] 1986 Annual Report - Jim Streefland of Jaspers Streefland & Co. b] Proposed City Hall - Building Committee "c] 2nd Avenue Parking Lot Restrictions d] MinnesotaValleyRestoration Project e] 1987-2 Downtcwp Streetscape Projs'ct - Res. No. 2739 Approve Plans and Specs and Ad for Bids *f] Marschall Road improvements - Res. No. 2738, Ordering Improvement and Preparation, of Plans and Specs g] 1987 Pavement Preservation h] Railroad Crossing Improvements delete i] 1985-2 Eaglewood Street Rehabilitation - Semi Final Estimate +j] 1986-11 Valley Park Dive No - Partial Estimate No. 2 *k] 1986-1 Holmes St. Basiaterals - Partial Estimate No. 9 *1] City Clean-up Report/Fu ding Request *m] Temporary Clerical Posit 'on *n] Hiring Police Patrol Offi e *o] Architectural Services for City Hall Proposal PI Nominations to Planning Com ission q] 1987 Liquor Licenses r] 1987 Wine Licenses s] 1987 3.2 Beer Licenses t] 1987 Set-Up Licenses u] Approval of Bills in Amount of $302,342.97 v] Property Liability Insurance Renewal - memo on table *w] 1986 Annual Reports *x] Boards and Commissions Picnic/Employee Picnic 141 Resolutions and Ordinances: a] Res. No. 2737, Appreciation to Gary Hartmann b] Ord. No. 218, Regarding Refuse Collection 15] Other Business: a] b] c] 16] Adjourn . . . John K. Anderson City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA June 16, 1987 Page -2- 13] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 :00] a] 1986 Annual Report - Jim Streefland of Jaspers Streefland & Co. b] Proposed City Hall - Building Committee *c] 2nd Avenue Parking Lot Restrictions d] Minnesota Valley Restoration Project e] 1987-2 Downtown Streetscape Project - Res. No. 2739 Approve Plans and Specs and Ad for Bids *f] Marschall Road Improvements - Res. No. 2738, Ordering Improvement and Preparation of Plans and Specs g] 1987 Pavement Preservation h] Railroad Crossing Improvements delete i] 1985-2 Eaglewood Street Rehabilitation - Semi Final Estimate *j ] 1986-11 Valley Park Drive No - Partial Estimate No. 2 *k] 1986-1 Holmes St. Basin Laterals - Partial Estimate No. 9 *1] City Clean-up Report/Funding Request *m] Temporary Clerical Position *n] Hiring Police Patrol Officer *o] Architectural Services for City Hall Proposal PI Nominations to Planning Commission q] 1987 Liquor Licenses r] 1987 Wine Licenses s] 1987 3.2 Beer Licenses t] 1987 Set-Up Licenses u] Approval of Bills in Amount of $302,342.97 v] Property Liability Insurance Renewal - memo on table *w] 1986 Annual Reports *x] Boards and Commissions Picnic/Employee Picnic 141 Resolutions and Ordinances: a] Res. No. 2737, Appreciation to Gary Hartmann b] Ord. No. 218, Regarding Refuse Collection 15] Other Business: a] b] c] 161 Adjourn . . . John K. Anderson City Administrator 3 � DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext.115 MEMORANDUM: Date : May 29, 1987 & June 16, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review Fran: Robert N. Schmitt, Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : Cletus J. Link Property Address: W. 3rd Ave. Parcel #: 27 911 018 1 1 . Type h Description Of Property: This property is a vacant lot in a B 1 zone. The lot has an area of approximately 1 . 17 acres. The access for this property is on Harrison Street. Mr. Link owns Outlot C of Husman' s Addition which supplies the access to this property. Therefore, the lot is buildable at present. The power line easement affects only the westerly 140' + of the property. This would leave Mr. Link with rough- ly 500' of width which are not located under the power line. (Per the Scott Co. Recorder' s Office) . 2. Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description: 4. Other: 5. Total Structural Value: 6. Lot Size: 1 . 17 acres 7. Lot Value: $12, 700 or . 25 per sq. ft. or $10,855/ac. S. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $12, 700 9. Other Information on Assessment: See memo from Shakopee Planning Office. 9/82 Sale of vacant land to Riffe(owner of Friendship Manor) in Outlot A for $45,000 for . 50 acre. ( $90,000/acre) 4/79 sale of vacant land adjacent to Northern Culvert Co. for $80,000 for 4. 78 acres in Outlot D. ( $16, 736/acre) 2/86 sale UU of land in Outlot D to Hentges for $15, 000 for 1 . 43 acres. All the$ab'ove0 asrles) were made to increase the size of the land where the buyer's business is located. ?4 0 ^ 9` 3 "- 4 0 e Zgy�m EAT - . . �147EQ LIf1E 9 �/ o F o � o 'h ro N nn � o rota 5 s O H ^ 0 O n ° yo e F H [J O 4[ O O oro z 2 H H Fi _ K 13 at to ,o •� _ II, '_ -� 1 0 J J 1 LIN A W J � 7 I _ O • � �[I[n50• - N > I tso - V, • N • W 30-) C2 � DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext .115 MEMORANDUM: Date: May 29, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From Robert N. Schmitt , Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : Cletus Link Property Address: W. 3rd Ave. Parcel #: 27 015 014 0 1 . Type 6 Description Of Property: This property is used for Link Building Supply. It is commercial property with lumber storage, a metal building which houses a shop, storage, and an office area for the business. The main building was built in 1984-1985. The main building has 7556 sq. ft. of storage, 672 sq. ft. of shop area, and 576 sq. ft. of office area. The entire build- ing has concrete floors and an eave height of 14' . The shop area has a concrete floor, sheet rock walls and ceiling and is heated. The office area is heated with forced-air, is sheet rocked, has a tile floor and a 2 fixture restroom. A lumber storage building was constructed in 1986 and is 20' x 96' for a total area of 1920 sq. ft. 2. Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description: 4. Other: 5. Total Structural Value: Steel B1dg.1180,500, Shop area $7400, Office area415, 800, Lumber Storage +14,400, Brick 6. Lot Size: Trim#700, Paved areae1000, Total 2. 98 Acres $119, 865 7. Lot Value: $41 ,300 or $13,859 per acre Described as Part of Outlot C Husman Addition B. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $161 ,200 9. Other Information on Assessment J owuuxo pwWM 19E4-85 Ol.f`"✓'� `� K nARCCI NO. 14 � e,IS SHAK_ Q11�24ss 3 � owcuwn r..ewn 1984-85 C'� LINK cMcu�. 141.... X15 SHRK i mmaass A _ - - - DON D. MARTIN - - - - SCOTT COLNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1361 (612)-445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : May 29, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From; Robert N. Schmitt , Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : Clarence Lebens Property Address: 548 E. 3rd Ave. Parcel #: 27 001 829 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: 1 story home of 807 souar feet built in 1920. Partial basement of 508 , soace heat , asbetos shakes on esterior . The home has a living room, kitchen, 1 bedroom, and 1 full bath. 2. Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description: Detached 181 x 24 built in 1940 ' s . 4. Other : 5. Total Structural Value: $26 , 000 6. Lot Size : 70 x 142 7. Lot Value : 17 , 500 8. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: 43 , 500 F. Other Information on Assessment: New aluminum siding. 3b rARML No. DWELLING Tev built �4 a v fsM'WSW sm. baths m. betlruams - t, rti ' xa .a a brick I.. - mrih W Si GARAGE � '? aX+cheJ Yes_m OBSERVED CONDITION: SuuL Dly Ruur DAiE SOLD GRADE 3b DWELLING PARCEL NO. •,39_.,.c-p nary Fe:(M m. Faros I no. b drvmms wumnm mucro �_`°• Faument in, Inepia<e CeK .al a bcY mm pnrcF W Sive GARAGE I� at.. a Yn_m y/ OBSERVED CONDITION: 10 _- . . . fair Pi"", DATE SOLD GRADE �G DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612>-445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : May 29, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From: Robert N. Schmitt , Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : Steven Benedict Property Address: 404 E. 3rd Ave. Parcel N: 27 001 384 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: 1} story home of 912 square feet. Built in 1950 - s with a full basement. The home has aluminum siding which has been added in the past few years. The structure has a living rotm, kitchen, full bath, and 3 bedrooms. 2. Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description: 20 x 22 bpilt in 1970 with an addition of 120 sq, feet added in 1974. Detached. 4. Other: 5. Total Structural Value : 47, 500 6. Lot Size: 7320 sq. ft. irregular shape . 7. Lot Value : 13, 500 S. Total Estimated Market Value of Property. 61,000 9. Other Information on Assessment : Purchased in 1983 for 47, 500. Value in 1986 was $50, 500. STF-Vc IBJ EN F�DfcT nY. j DwEL4NL ttar buiN I`1 c:—O-% PARCEL NO. _x_w. N. ila. �NdK uorr height I �2 no. "Nons no, baths no. bedrmrns _ burn., nal. - - Gumenl fin. — � fireplace ralYout dal Sentral air brih Irmo _ Vn¢h ON She i0 a .y L ia.N .Sr}y GARAGE xa-a anaehed yei-- OBSERVED CONDITION: - good her Pear DATE SOLD GRADE SI F-=dc IBJ�N F, I 1 3� 4 . Y D.ELLINO . .,Will �'^`00 PARCEL NO. nen nuLnl ' %a ro. bednwms 'a Wumem Im. — •:� I—PVa �'alLoul � - eaL nl av - pertA W Sue .O • a GARAGE xa H OBSERVED CONDITION: Wr � 7-OE�t3�-0 L"E solo Ct ALE 3d DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date: June 5, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From Robert N. Schmitt, Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : Beverly J. Koehnen - Property Address: 600 Block of E. 2nd Ave. Shakopee, MN. 55379 Parcel N: 27 004 011 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: The S 1/2 0£ Block 2 Ex. RR Right of Way, Plat of East Shakopee. This is a vacant lot which is located south of the Aamco Shop in Shakopee. The property is 300' x 150' or 45,000 sq. ft. in size. After checking with the Scott County Recorder' s Office, I have found that the Right of Way listed in the legal description does not exist. The Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis, & Omaha Railroad Company does have mineral rights to any mineral found beneath the property. The opinion of Matheal Schneider, who was in the past the deputy Scott County Recorder, is that the railroad company would in all likelihood, relinquish their rights to the property with a Quit Claim Deed. 2. Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description : 4. Other : 5. Total Structural Value: 6. Lot Size: 300 ' x 150' 7. Lot Value: $55,500 or $1 . 23 per square foot S. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $55,500 9. Other Information on Assessment : The property is zoned as an Urban Development District or URD Under these uses the property may receive a building permit for all but the used in which an abutment on a State Highway is needed, such as auto ser- vice stations, hotels, motels, or class I restaurants. The value on this property is 208 less than that placed on similar vacant land fronting 2nd Ave. with better side street access, $1 . 50. There is no sour track presently located on the property. The pro- perty is mostly level with a slight slope from south to north. On the assessment date, 1/2,87, this property was zoned B1 . _ CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 j 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE,SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) NS3650 1 :AST •. . June 3, 1987 Mr. Robert N. Schmitt Scott County Assessor' s Office Scott County Courthouse 428 South Holmes Shakopee, MN 55379-1381 Dear Bob: Attached please find a copy of Ordinance No. 215 which adds a new zoning district which is entitled the URD, Urban Redevelopment District. Please note on the last Pace of the ordinance that it was adopted by the City Cnun ; l On March 1 1987. In reference to the comments made by Beverly Koehnen as to the detrimental impact that this zoning would have on her property, if in fact the impact is detrimental it will not be detrimental until next year because the assessed value now under discussion is for the property as of January 2, 1987 . If you have further questions on this please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Dennis R. Kraft Community Development Director Attachment DRK:trw The Heart of Progress Valley DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE. MJ 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750 , Ezt . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 12. 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From: Robert N. Schmitt , Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : Charles T. Campbell Property Address: 734 Minnesota St. Parcel #: 27 008 024 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: The property is described as Lot 5 Block 310 Wermerskirchen' s Addition. The home is a 1 story structure built in 1955 with 1152 sq. ft. The home also has a basement only area of 384 sq. ft. The basement is 908 finished with a finished area of about 800 sq. ft. The home has 7 rooms and 1 3/4 baths, central air, a 498 sq. ft. deck, and a rear walkout. The family room is the original garage which was converted in 1968. 2. Deck or Patio: 498 sq. ft. 3. Garage Description : 22 x 34 heated and detached, built in 1968. 4. Other : 5. Total Structural Value: $57, 500 6. Lot Size: 61 x 144 7. Lot Value : $15, 400 S. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $72, 900 9. Other Information on Assessment : I have written Mr. Campbell a letter explaining the valuation process . I have not heard from him after he received the letter and therefore I am assuming that his questions have been answered. 3 -4-- DWELLING 15.r built I RANGELAND. Z7 CA8 0 2N' G slwy MipM 1 _• nu. In. - — oo.b.a.oame b.-nWn,v..WA y, - b.s.m.a fin. iVj` k lnpl.w a� wasoa pu. gnlrel elr ' bnQ Inm �1 porta GARAGE % .R.[ME I- A. OIIOb1n55 DWELLING y«r Euro • .. �. . -?r, PARCELno. 21 LCi G24 G - norynas�+ 1 ns.E.er«m. r E...mWm rm. rn.y+.c. Y ..wom brt[Inm Soren GARAGE eX.<MEyw no O++W N.55 AM DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN. 553731381 (612}4457750, Ext.ns Deputy: LEROY ARNOLDI June 4, 1987 Mr. & Mrs. Charles Campbell 734 Minnesota St. Shakopee, Mn. 55379 PID 27 008 024 0 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Campbell; I was unable to reach you as promised by phone yesterday to discuss the 1987 valuation of your property. Therefore, I will detail here the steps used to arrive at the new value which will be used for taxes payable in 1988. Your lot, which is 61 ' x 144. 2' was increased in value from $12,700 to $15,400 which brings it up to the rates which are used for similar size lots in the Plat of Shakopee. Your structures were increased in value from $52, 600 to $57, 500. This increase is the result of the new square footage rates which are now being used for homes, garages, and such things as finished basements, decks, extra baths, etc. Your home is a 1 story rambler which was constructed in 1955. It has 888 square feet. The home also has a family room which was added onto the original house. This room is 264 sq. ft. There is also a basement portion which is 12 x 32. The garage was built in 1968 and measures 22 x 34 and is heated. The basement is 908 finished in an average grade of finish and has a 3/4 bath. The home also has a walkout, central air conditioning, and a deck over the additional basement area. I inspected the interior of the house on August 21 , 1986. If you have any questions on the above items, please call me at the County Assessor' s Office, extension 126. - - . An Eque(Opportunity Employer DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 12, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From: Robert N. Schmitt . Scott County Assessor' s. Office Property Owner : Donald & Shirley Tech Property Address: 919 E. 7th Ave. Shakopee, MN. 55379 Parcel #: 27 008 066 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: The property is described as Lot 3 Block 317 wermerskirchen' s Addition. This is a single family home of 1 story which was built in 1957. An additional basement area of 300 sq. ft. was added in 1974. The home has a living room, kitchen, 3 bedrooms on the main floor, and 1 full bath . The basement has roughly 600 sq. ft. finished with i bedroom, a family room, and a 3/4 bath. Also, there is 1 fireplace located in the basement. 2. Deck or Patio: 12 x 25 above basement addition. 3. Garage Description: Tuck under garage 14 x 39 4. Other : 5. Total Structural Value : $44, 600 6. Lot Size : 8493 sq. ft. 7. Lot Value : $15, 000 8. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $59, 600 9. Other Information on Assessment : There was an error in the original measurement of the home from when the addition was added in 1974. This error was in the description of what was- added, namely, the area was called a 1 story addition when in fact it is a basement addition. After rechecking the property on 6/3/87, I have reworked the value to that listed above. I believe Mr. Tech is in agreement with this value. The original value was $61 , 900. 3� i DWELLING year Wilt / PARCEL M10. - smq h.ilh, no. WIM1sa nn. neamnm. basement w cent _ baxmem (n �- v- a b.nplaa J . - walioul eecL nm.al a .'�... brill wmh Lot Sin GARAGE % alcacFed OBSERVED CONDITION: Roc lair ton. Z9 - eedOGG -6 GPADE 1 II PARCEL No. - OwELLIrvG rear huiN ^.i[ w hA,h, o. baFe ee. bee.aoms ��._ v Wssmml peram _ � f, _ - l-0— _ b,.k mm t•i GARAGE .11-INNJ res_ea OBSERVED CONDITION: xeed lav GRADE t 3 i - DUN D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE. MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 12. 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From: Robert N. Schmitt , Scott County Assessor' s Office Property Owner : Harold & Marie Marschall Property Address: 550 Dakota Street Parcel #: 27 032 014 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: This property is described as Lot 4 Block 1 Macey Plat. It is a 4-flex which was constructed in 1978 and has 1872 sq.ft. with a split-entry type design. 2. Deck or Patio: 2 5 x 8 decks 3. Garaoe Description: Attached, 2- 26 x 24, built in 1978. 4. Other : 5. Total Structural Value : $112,800 6. Lot Size : 125 x 171 7. Lot Value : $28,300 8. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $141 , 100. 9. Other Information on Assessment : I received a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Marschall' s accounting service (which see) describing the tax situation for this property. I replied with an answering letter requesting more information on the rentals and expenses. As of this date I have not received a reply. 1 3� CWELLING cea. bulb - ( J" " .o—np LL. PARCEL 10. /y ^ dory Feifhl m. b+IFSS o. bedrooms basemen ce—, basemen) fin. fireplace val4ouf antro)air I Mico trim I.A. Si- GARAGE an+shed res m OBSERVED CONDITION: good fair / s. LATE 111LE LWELLWG vea.Willi, ��_�n LL - - � PARCEL n0. � t ilo.v F<iRM no. ba, s Fi Wumem o .enl baumenl iin. li.ePlse .a14au a«4 is bnc4 nm PortF - LW Si.. GARAGE aM1acFed res_.w OBSERVED CONDITION: (yI ev T� BooE Poo. D>[E iOLD GRADE M. JAMES DALY TAX 8 ACCOUNTING SERVICES 3p DALY OFFICE BLDG. JORDAN TAX SERVICE, INC. 119 W.MAIN 207 E. FIRST STREET BELLE PLANE, MN. 56011 JORDAN. MN, 55352 (612)873-2213 (612)4922808 May 29, 1987 Don Martin Scott County Assesser 428 So. Holmes Shakopee, MN 55329 -and- Bob Schmitz 426 7th Ave West Shakopee, MN 55379: Re: Harold & Marie Marschall 2240 Marschall Road Shakopee, MN 55379 Real Estate Taxes Property Tax No. 27-032014 Dear Gentlemen, The Marschalls' have asked that I write you concerning their very large increase,of real estate taxes on their 4-plex apartment, located at 550 Dakota, Shakopee. The tax on this property has increased by 75% from 1984 to 1987. The tax payable in 1984 was $3,809.02 and in 1987 is $6,666.96. Gross income on this property increased by 19%. The gross rent collected in 1984 was $17,880.00 and in 1987 will be $21,240.00 considering, however, full occupancy this entire year. The occupants of this property are mostly elderly with low incomes or limited retirement incomes. Because of this the Marschalls are limited to rent increases to maintain full occupancy. The cost of maintance, supplies and services are high and the real estate taxes represent 32% of his total gross income and that, we feel , is enormously high. I have been the Marschalls' accountant for twenty-four years and can understand their concern and frustration on this matter. It is my hope that the above will be fully considered and that Harold and Marie Marschalls' property tax will be lowered to a reasonable and workable figure. 3 If there is any additional in rmation you would from my office, please advise. Very Truly Yours`, ,7J �ames Daly !' / cc: Harold & Mar' Marschall ill 3 If there is any additional information you would want from my office, please advise. Very Truly Yours, 14M. s Daly l; cc: Harold & Marie Marschall DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR 3 COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN.553731381 (612}4457750, Ext.115 Deputy: LEROY ARNOLDI June 5, 1987 M. James Daly Tax & Accounting Services Daly Office Bldg. 119 W. Main Belle Plaine, Mn. 56011 Dear Mr. Daly; I appreciate your letter concerning the real estate taxes on Mr. & Mrs. Harold Marschall' s 4-Plex located in Shakopee. I don n deal with property taxes, rather, our office is strictly concerned with the market value upon which those taxes are based. The mar- ket value is determined by what this type of property is selling for in the City of Shakopee, and our rates reflect these sale prices. If you would care to send me a statement of the 1986 rents which the Marschall' s received from the property in question as well as the vacancy, if any, e,.prienced during 1986, I will be happy to take a look at the value based on the income generated for the 1987 assessment for taxes payable in 1988. I would appreciate it if you would break the income down to amount charged for each unit plus garage per month. x- If you have any questions, please contact me at the above office, extension 126. Refer to parcel number 27 032 014 0. Sincerely, Robert N. Schmitt Property Appraiser An Eq"l Opportunity Employer 3 Id DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext .115 MEMORANDUM: 01cp Date: May 29, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From: Robert N. Schmitt , Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner: Mensing & Houser Property Address: 1211 Taylor Street Parcel p: 27 104 008 0 to 27 104 008 3 1 . Type k Description Of Property: This property is a 4 unit complex which was built in 1982. The property is described as Lot 5 Block 2 Minnesota Valley 5th Addition. The lot is 17,396 square feet. For the 1987 assessment the property was divided into 4 single units for sale as townhomes. Each unit is 555 square feet in size and is 2 story -with no basement. Their are no garages for the units. The values are based on a square footage rate of $64. 10 for the living area, which is our normal rate for a 555 square foot struc- ture with no basement. Each unit has 1� baths. 2. Deck or Patio: i 3. Garage Description: 4. Other: 5. Total Structural Value: $36,400 lig 6. Lot Size: 2204 for 008, 7598 for 008 1 , 5390 for 008 2, 2204 for 008 3. 7. Lot Value: $ 3000 for 2204 sq. ft. & $5000 for the remaining two lots. S. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $ 3 $ 41 ,400, $41 ,400, & $ 39,400. Grand Total 161,600. 9. Other Information on Assessment: This prope t has trouble locating institutions which will finance loans for the sale of the property. This is due to the lack of an adequate street or cul-de-sac . MHFA was the only institution which I contacted which was willing to provide loans on this type of property as of 1/2/87. Mr. Houser has informed me that because of the State ' s financial troubles. 3a ° Id DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 5, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From: Robert N. Schmitt , Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : willaim J. Scheurer Property Address: 708 Madison St. Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Parcel K: 27 017 048 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: This property con- sists of a 1 story home which was built in 1962. The home has 1068 square feet, a living room, kitchen, dining room, 3 bedrooms, and 1 bath on the main floor. The basement is 608 finished with a bedroom, family room, 1/4 bath and utility room. The home also has central air-conditioning. 2. Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description : Built in 1962, 22 x 24, attached. 4. Other : 5. Total Structural Value : $49, 600 6. Lot Size : 80' x 120' 7. Lot Value: $16, 200 B. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $65,800 9. Other Information on Assessment : I have talked to Mrs. Scheurer on this matter and she is in agree- ment with the value which we have placed on their property. The request to attend the Board of Review was returned to our office in error. 3a DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR "-` COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750 , Ezt . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 5, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From: Robert N. Schmitt , Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : Murray Williamson Property Address: 581 So. Marschall Road Parcel 11: 27 120 004 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: This property is described as Lot 4 Block 1 Century Plaza Square 3rd Addition. The property is the location of the Shakopee Super 8 Motel which was constructed in 1985 - 1986. The motel has 70 units and is 14, 745 square feet. The motel also has a 20' x 30' indoor pool. The market value for 1987 is $1 ,053,000. This value is based on cost, income, and the average estimated market value per unit for similar motels from a survey supplied by the State of Minn- esota Department of Revenue. 2. Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description: 4. Other: 5. Total Structural Value : $848,900 6. Lot Size : 70,364 sq. ft. 7. Lot Value: $ 2. 90/sq. ft. or $204, 100 8. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $1 ,053, 000 9. Other Information on Assessment: Mr. Williamson states in his letter that the Bloomington Super 8 has an estimated market value for the 1987 assessment of $697,615. According to information supplied to me by the Bloomington Assessor' s Office on June 9, 1987, the 1987 Assessor' s Estimated Market Value for this property is $2,462,000 or $24 ,620 per unit. This compares with the Shakopee motel' s $15,043 per unit. The Bloomington land is valued at $5. 00 per sq. ft. compared to Shakopee Super 8' s $2. 90 per sq. ft. L 3-1 DWELLING...10.111 ` SHH eO�_E S 2 p PARCEL NO. 27 IP.O OOy O Glory M1p111 .o.birth. .on.uloom. nn.m.m R.mm1 e.amm.m Im IIny1.cs walkout mox [omni W / Gbx trim aYCX x GARAGE .11...... n. Oi 1.]`55 3 � DWELLING year 0,111 J,NRER p ONRCELNG. 21 IZC OC`, O Star,AalEnt - no.nacos mo.neDtooms easement RarCmt easement R.. .I..Rlece .auom Dios omtnl.It DryCY trim GARAGE X eXa CaeD yO no On O U55 A SUPER8 MOTEL - SHAKOPEE 581 S Merechall Road•Shakopee. MM 553]9 a 6124454221 June 8, 1487 Shakopee Board of Review Shakopee City Hall Shakopee, M11 '5379 re: Shai!opee Super 8 parcel #271200040 We would like to request a review, of our property taxes_ assessed and payable in 1982. It is our feeling the assessed values are somewhat in line rela-- tive to the ether hotels/motels in the County. However- , we believe there are two very maior discrepancies in the asses meat Procedure. Fir=.t , the other income producing Properties in Shakopee are not in line with the motels in the area. The values of most of the major restaurants are drastically understated as they relate to the value and profitability of the Super 8 property. 'Ta:e pri;ne examples are the McDonalds and Perkins restaurants this particular particular comparison is detailed below: Est . Mkt. Assessed Gross Revs. Prop . Tax % of Rev ------------------------------------------------------- Super ----------------------------------------------------Super S 1 ,053,000 443,740 978,000 59,000 12% Perkins 435,70.0 178,351 1 ,SO^.x,000 24,450 27. McDonald== 331 ,400 142,502 1 ,000,000 12,600 2% This comparison can be extended to ether crnnmercial properties including Burner Ving , Super-Amer icaz RocF SPrines and The Shak- opee House and they remain consistently and substantially under- valued ill compari=or; tO Super 8. Secondly, the proposed property taxes assessed on _.,.,.r'- motel would place the S^.akopee Super 8 ai; a tremerido,ur disadvantage In a vel'-y comp_titi� ma;-4:e* :�utsi.de -:he Shakope :�'r c=c<. lliffi gc{eTy B IMBpeMeMy mere I aW cWrffiG W,aaa.b e 1-1—eeixmeM wM SUMR 8 MOIEM INC. f 3 - t:Oh%PF.F,1 Sdi.Ic SUpeY 8 rroperty ln>.t=. E.fl.V. Est. Taxes _.._._ Shakopee Super S `101 ,053,000 59,ODO_.___. Bloomington Super 8 147+ 97=615 72;000 Bemidji Super 8 70 4.72 ,9'J0 26,000 Wilma, Super 60 4Cr4. :QO 25,000 Winona Super 8 6i-, 24,000 Prim.z nate (BlueEarth; 65 =.,•��,.:: 'T'hrifty Scott (Winona; 60 5lie,600 Best Westere. (Wadena) 62 254,900 Prime Rate (Mankato) 65 522,400 The above compa: -- son of t --..qr„t.eti`.iv h..t-.is in OU lying area= ladicate cur- 70 unit motel i tcr:e 0,-ubl - the nr.rmal prop ., tau rates in the ec"nuffly lodging rt .::et . :hah:npee Super 8 final has he-n assessed 40y, hist 1.'n .r cr:e o' the biggest and hr economy lodging pr'=psrties- i.-: the skate. Th : F120am.tngten Sire .._. do!:.ble our size, is located on one of the most expensive pieces of property on the Bloomington strip, and does four time'- the imesthe volume of business, yet their- property tax iss just slightly higher than our Shakopee Property. The entire 450 hotel Super 8 ch-=.in had aver ace property tares of $1 .00 per rented unit in 1985. This would eq,.,al to ~12,800 on the Shakopee property if an equitable as sment was made u=.i r.g a na- tional basis_. In s:_rmmarv, it is our feel .,r:g that: the property taxes proposed for 1985 ( in addition to the 3% ].org ing 'tax ) ieopar dizes the future of the Super G motel in Shakopee. -,xparnsion cons i derat,_ons. have already been canceled a'nd the adjoining lot initially ac- quire,,* for future expansion has been forfeited back tc: th:e seller . We Tes,-.,P.ctfully request that our 1.987 taxable assessed value he reduced by 551 to sfOl•,000. Ti,c eniv alternative in kr_eping with fair ar ,:-uiAP v tar. 1 1:Se tr:r al , Shc�,opee c6n er cial prep- e-ties +oo 1d b._ tc.: t-, F e tr . aed market value=_. f th ,r- .rcome pre arsn'- pr o.ar'ties aimmediate area. We hap, rd t:ust. th-.e forme'. regi =_st Se. the m .st. =c nal.,le course of ac'kion for the boe:rr.. 0001- DON D. MARTIN 1 SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 5, 1987 To: 1987 Shakopee Board of Review From: Robert N. Schmitt, Scott County Assessor's Office Property Owner : Shakopee Associates Property Address: 450 W. 1st Avenue Parcel #: 27 001 127 0 1 . Type & Description Of Property: Lots 9 & 10 Blk. 19 Plat of Shakopee This property is a commercial building used for the Radio Shack and Crown Auto stores in Shakopee. The building was constructed in 1972 and has 7680 sq. ft. The building is currently valued at $26. 30 for the retail space, $12. 85 for the shop/storage area, and $12. 70 for the garage area. 2. Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description: 4. Other. 5. Total Structural Value: $149, 000 6. Lot Size: 120' x 142' = 17, 042 sq. ft. 7. Lot Value: $41 ,800 or $2. 45 per sq. ft. 8. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $190,800 9. Other Information on Assessment: I have received a letter from Mr. John Bohan in regard to the 1987 estimated market value as it relates to the income the property has produced. I have requested more thourough information on the income and if and when I receive this information I will calculate the 1987 value on that basis assuming reasonable income and expenses. 3K DWELLINGy.a,p,IX 1" Hf �.0�. = - –n . P4PCEL 2100112') O X p.K •<O low— glory eal9el na.soca n o.0.e,00mn e...m.m yom.m – - "A".c. walkout e.cL nm,a.o Pe,m ✓ GARAGE A au<beyn na Ol1.,k5s 3 K. DWELLINGY..r Eu1N 1`I � H/ �.J.. _ ._ �._ `'2-1 'Z7O R�PCEL MO. no.rmms nary MIpPI noc.m. no.e.m— eu.mam p.mml C e...m.m nn. ..aow [.mra m erne mm [orm GARAGE S .rl.[MCYa no DnM]a55 DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 2 K 1 SHAKOPEE, MN.55379-1381 (612)-4457750, E.t.115 Deputy. LEROY ARNOLD] June 11 , 1987 Shakopee Associates 4820 Fremont Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN. 55409 Attention John Bohan Re: 27 001 127 0 Dear Mr. Bohan; Thank you for your letter regarding the 1987 Estimated Market Value of the retail stores owned by you and located at 450 W. 1st Avenue in Shakopee. The value was increased for the 1987 assess- ment because of the improvements which were added to accomadate the Radio Shack store which was added in 1986. I£ you would like to submit a more detailed operating statement to our office for the 1986 year' s finances, I will be happy to use the income as one source of my value estimate. I cannot re- duce the value to $142,200 which you requested solely on the in- formation which you listed in your letter of May 26, 1987. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Robert N. Schmitt Property Appraiser An Equal Opportunity Employer 3K ' w " ' Shakopee Associates 4820 Fremont Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55409 May 26, 1987 County Board of Equalization c/o Scott County Assessor Courthouse Shakopee, MN 55379 Reference: Parce f27-001127-0 Dear Madam or Sir Your action in ag in increasing the estimated mark value of the foregoing property is totally unwarranted. Over the last five ears the assessed value of his property has increased 52% (taxes have incr aced 52% over the last f years). Assessed Taxe (Dollars) Value E cluding Dollars Increase S c al Assessments % Increase 1983 125,300 6,045.30 1984 152,000 21% 6,610.14 9% 1985 152,000 - 6,755.42 2 1986 174,800 1 7,602.80 13 1987 163,500 9,159.34 20 1988 190,600 4 7 v Total Increase: 52% (5 Ye ) 52% (4 Years!) Annualized: 9% 11% Yet our base rents have n incre ed for the last eight years. We have had a number of vacanci over thi period so we are quite in touch with the market rental valu . Based on our 1986 i me (before fin cing and depreciation costs) of $15,647 and an 11 capitalization rat , we estimate the market value of this building a $142,200 or 25% less ban the $190,800 sssessed value. We respectf y request that the assess d value be reduced to the fair market v e of $142,200. If further information is required, pleas advise. Yours very truly, Jo ,B. Bohan, Partner JEB:mp J SRAEOPEB/2 ACE DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR 3 COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE,MN.553731381 (612)4457750,Ext.115 Deputy'. LEROY ARNOLDI June 11 , 1987 Shakopee Associates 4820 Fremont Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN. 55409 Attention John Bohan Re: 27 001 127 0 Dear Mr. Bohan; Thank you for your lyhichyou re rding the 1987 timated Market Value of the retail owne by you and ocated at 450 W. 1st Avenue in Shakopee. alue we increa d for the 1987 assess- ment because of the ements wh h ere added to accomadate the Radio Shack storh was adde 'n 1986. If you would like tot a more eta ed operating statement to our office for th6 year' finance , I will be happy to use the income as once f my value a timate. I cannot re- duce the value to $ 0 hich you reques d solely on the in- formation which youd in your letter of ay 26, 1987. I look forward to hfrom you. Sincerely, .t 1J. - Robert N. Schmitt Property Appraiser " An Equef Opportunity Employer THE Or, SCOTTLAND COMPANIES K June 16, 1987 Ms. Judith Cox City Clerk City of Shakopee 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Ms. Cox: We have just met with the County Assessor Bob Schmitt to review the estimated market values for our properties which we recently received. We had several questions which we asked Mr. Schmitt to review and respond to us concerning two of our projects: Canterbury Inn and Riva Ridge Apartments. Because he has not had adequate time to respond to those questions, we need to file an objection to those valuations to allow the County Assessor and us an opportunity to review those questions further. We (and the County Assessor) are not asking the Board of Review to act upon our objection, but in order to preserve our opportunity for further review with the assessor, we need to file this objection. I am sure our questions will be adequately answered so we need not then proceed further in the process. The parcel numbers are as follows: 27 124 001 0 27 123 003 0 27 123 004 0 Thank you. Very truly yours, Bruce D. Malkerson Executive Vice President BDM:ap C.C. Bob Schmitt P.O. Box 509 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612)445-3242 TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Special Session June 16, 1987 Chairperson Leroux presiding 1. Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M. 2. Approve Special Call 3. Approval of Minutes of June 2, 1987 4. Potential Purchase of the Former Women's Prison Site 5. Other Business 6. Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director PRO=E TRGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOP?MT AUTHORITY REGULAR MEETING SHAKOPEE, MINNFSOTA JUNE 2, 1987 Vice Chairwoman Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m, with - Comm. Vierling, Wampach and Clay present. Comm. Leroux was absent. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; Douglas Wise, City Planner; Kenneth Ashfeld, City Engineer; Judith Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A. Coller� II, City Attorney. Wampach/Clay moved to approve the minutes of May 19, 1987. Motion carried unanimously. C1ay/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:03 p.m. Dennis Kraft Executive Director Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive Director RE: Potential Purchase of the Former Women's Prison Site DATE: June 11, 1987 Introduction• The City of Shakopee recently acquired an option to purchase the site of the former women' s prison in Shakopee. The prospective developer for the property discussed a concept for site redevelopment with the Shakopee Planning Commission on May 21, 1987. Background• In 1986 the State of Minnesota completed the construction of a new women's prison in Shakopee. As a result of that action, the site of the old prison was declared to be surplus property. The property was made available to the City of Shakopee, Scott County and the Shakopee School District. Only the City of Shakopee expressed an interest in purchasing the site. After a number of months of negotiation the City entered into an option to purchase with the State of Minnesota. This option to purchase will expire during the fall of 1987. As a part of this process the City submitted request for proposals to a large number of developers during the fall of 1986. Ultimately, only one developer, Mr. Tom Massey dba Kenford Development, indicated an interest in redeveloping the former prison site. Kenford's proposal was for the rehabilitation of some or all of the structures on the site and for a mixed residential/office commercial redevelopment scheme. The property is presently zoned R-3 . The R-3 zone does not allow offices as a mixed use with residential property. From a performance perspective the previous use of the property had certain characteristics of an office use along with certain residential characteristics. Of course the residents tended to stay for long periods of time without leaving the facility, and the office workers, guards and custodians, operated on the 24-hour per day basis. When the property was used as a prison the level of activity, in terms of visitors, was greater on the weekends than during the week. A typical office use has most of it' s activity from 8 to 5 during week days with very little or no activity on weekends. Attached is a - letter and a concept proposal from Kenford Development relative to their proposed reuse of the project along with certain considerations and conclusions. The Planning Commission discussed this concept at some length and subsequently indicated their opposition to the concept and to the rezoning that would have to occur in order to allow for a mixed use residential office project to be carried out. Kenford Development has indicated that if they cannot pursue the concept they have presented they are not interested in redeveloping the site. If the City Council and Housing and Redevelopment Authority are in agreement with the position taken by the Planning Commission it would appear that there are three options which could be followed. In each case the assumption is that Ken£ord would not be a redeveloper of the parcel. Alternatives: 1. The HRA could take no action on the opti n at this point and once again attempt to determine if of r persons would be interested in redeveloping the site. t 2. The HRA could info the State of Min esota Department of Administration that the City wishes t terminate the option to purchase at this oint. If that happened most likely, the Department of Adm istrat. n would then put the property on the open market. I this were to appen the City could also bid on the market. 3. The HRA could exercise th option o purchase the property and then later seek a redeve per f r the property. Recommendation: It is recommended that the HRA the State of Minnesota Department of Administration tha th wish to terminate the option to purchase the old prison ite at this time. The site represents a liability to th City i that the City is responsible for all the mainten ce of the roperty. Also, it appears that the market for th property i weak at this time. In that the property is zoned R-3 , and in hat the Planning Commission is not willing to c ns ider rezoning t property for a mixed office/residential deve opment, it would ap ar that multi- family residential would be the use which could a made of the property. The market fo this type of develo ent is not particularly strong and th re are other parcels of la which are more desirable than this ne for that type of developme The acquisitionof he property by the HRA or City without having identified a development represents a considerable financial risk. The cost of demolition, including asbestos removal, of the property could be appreciably higher thanthe $100,000.00 estimate that was made by the State of Minnesota Department of Administration. If the City were to purchase the property for the $145,000 asking price, and if the cost of demolition were to be $150,000 or $200,000, then the City would have $300,000 to $350,000 invested in a site with -a questionable "kj-- /- The Planning Commission discussed this concept at some length and subsequently indicated their opposition to the concept and to the rezoning that would have to occur in order to allow for a mixed use residential office project to be carried out. Kenford Development has indicated that if they cannot pursue the concept they have presented they are not interested in redeveloping the site. If the City Council and Housing and Redevelopment Authority are in agreement with the position taken by the Planning Commission it would appear that there are three options which could be followed. In each case the assumption is that Kenford would not be a redeveloper of the parcel. Alternatives: 1. The HRA could take no action on the option at this point and once again attempt to determine if other persons would be interested in redeveloping the site. 2. The HRA could inform the State of Minnesota Department of Administration that the City wishes to terminate the option to purchase at this point. If that happened most likely, the Department of Administration would then put the property on the open market. If this were to happen the City could also bid on the market. 3. The HRA could exercise the option to purchase the property and then later seek a redeveloper for the property. Recommendation: It is recommended that the HRA inform the State of Minnesota Department of Administration that they wish to terminate the option to purchase the old prison site at this time. The site represents a liability to the City in that the City is responsible for all the maintenance of the property. Also, it appears that the market for the property is weak at this time. In that the property is zoned R-3, and in that the Planning Commission is not willing to consider rezoning the property for a mixed office/residential development, it would appear that multi- family residential would be the use which could be made of the property. The market for this type of development is not particularly strong and there are other parcels of land which are more desirable than this one for that type of development. The acquisition of the property by the HRA or City without having identified a development represents a considerable financial risk. The cost of demolition, including asbestos removal, of the property could be appreciably higher than the $100,000.00 estimate that was made by the State of Minnesota Department of Administration. If the City were to purchase the property for the $145,000 asking price, and if the Cost of demolition were to be $150,000 or $200,000, then the City would have $300,000 to $350,000 invested in a site with a questionable market value. Of course, if the City does not purchase the property the reuse of the property will be guided by the limitations of the zoning ordinance and, possibly the subdivision regulations and PUD ordinance if a redeveloper would choose to either plat the property or utilize the PUD process. Attached is an article on mixed use developments which appeared in the Minneapolis Star and Tribune on Saturday, May 23rd. The essence of this article is that the combining of residential and office uses is an emerging concept in suburban development in the Twin Cities. For the aforementioned reasons it is recommended that the HRA terminate it' s option to purchase the property at this time by adopting the attached resolution. To: Shakopee Planning Commission From: Kenford Development & Sitelines, Inc. Larry L. Smith Exec. Vice President Re: Former Shakopee Womens Prison & Site Date: May 18, 1987 _ Considerations: • The buildings represent Shakopee's he 'tage. • The buildings are structurally sound. • The site is bounded by industrial zoni on the north and the new prison on the south. • Poor views toward north and north ea t of the site. • Public use as office and re 'dental fo about 60 years. • The site is a difficult and high k proj ct to develop, evidenced by the poor response to the RFP issued by t ci Conclusions: • Adaptive reuse, similar to previous use wi aintain status quo. • Many desirable new single family housi g sites i hakopee (approx. 500) make this site less desirable for single f mily homes. • Existing buildings act as a buffer for pro osed single fam 'ty attached housing designed for the north end of the site. ( ews would be orie ted toward the northwest) Proposal The existing zoning on the site is R3 and will n t permit the proposed mixed residential and business use_ We propose the site be rezoned to R4 with a P.U.D. designation will accommodate the proposed 35 to 45 townhomes on the north and renovated office space in the existing buildings on the south. To: Shakopee Planning Commission From: Kenford Development & Sitelines, Inc. Larry L. Smith Exec. Vice President Re: Former Shakopee Womens Prison & Site Date: May 18, 1987 Considerations: • The buildings represent Shakopee's heritage. • The buildings are structurally sound. • The site is bounded by industrial zoning on the north and the new prison on the south. • floor views toward north and north east of the site. • Public use as office and residential for about 60 years. • The site is a difficult and high risk project to develop, evidenced by the poor response to the RFP issued by the city. Conclusions: • Adaptive reuse, similar to previous use, will maintain status quo. • Many desirable new single family housing sites in Shakopee (approx. 500) make this site less desirable for single family homes. • Existing buildings act as a buffer for proposed single famility attached housing designed for the north end of the site. (Views would be oriented toward the northwest) Proposal The existing zoning on the site is R3 and will not permit the proposed mixed residential and business use. We propose the site be rezoned to R4 with a P.I1.D. designation will accommodate the proposed 35 to 45 townhomes on the north and renovated office space in the existing buildings on the south. May 29, 1987 Mr. John Anderson City Manager City of Shakopee Shakopee, MN 55379-1376 Dear John, We have spent considerable time in evaluating the former Shakopee Womens Prison site since our proposal last October. An investigation of the site from top to bottom, inside and out, along with the study of several redevelopment concepts has convinced us that we can not proceed without an advanced committment from the city for assistance for the reasons outlined below. We are baffled by the lack of interest demonstrated by the planning commission to examine alternative uses for the buildings that will permit them to be renovated. They are correct in assuming that it will be expensive to renovate these buildings for an adaptive reuse. However, it is expensive and unfortunate for the community if they remain empty or are destroyed. Without major city assistance to develop the site, the city of Shakopee runs the risk that the buildings will remain closed and empty creating an eyesore and health risk to the communtiy. Deterioration from weather will eventually force the cost of demolition and the city will lose taxes in the interim. It is also possible that the state or county could find another use for the buildings that would be much less desirable than retrofiting them with small offices. We are not inexperienced developers. We have tackled some of the most difficult projects in the city of Minneapolis. It is unlikely that others will find the site more attractive. Unfortunately for the city and the buildings, it may take time before the problem is recognized. Many of the projects we encounter have lost money or value due to the inactivity of the property. We hope that can be prevented. We remain advocates of your community and we appreciate the time you have spent with us. Obviously, we do not want to lose the cost of the time we have have put into this project. If the city decides to encourage development on this site we would like to continue our discussions with you. Please consider the enclosed outline of our concerns. Very truly yours, Larry Bmith SitelinesInc., 1204Hannon Place,Minneapolis,Minnesota 55403 (612)375-1230 Considerations: • The buildings are a landmark and represent Shakopee's heritage. • The buildings are structurally sound with architectural character. • The site is bounded by industrial zoning on the north and the new prison on the south. • Views are poor toward the north and northeast of the site. • The site has served a public use as office and residential for about 60 years. • The large trees on the north must be saved Pda major site amenity. • Location of large trees makes the site diff' ult to develop a density that will offset land acquisition costs street cons coon and demolition. • Site slope on the north make develo ment north of the large trees difficult to access and offers very poor v ws. • The Shakopee Planning Comm si n is unwilling to consider an adaptive reuse that will permit small office n the existing buildings. • Many attractive new housing site a available to compete with this site. • The townhouse market is very sky in day's market. • The site is inappropriate and to expensive for single familily home sites. • A market study would be required before developing small office space or residential in this location. • New street, sewer and water must be installed to access the center of the site. • No soil tests are available -the soil conditions and water table are unknown. • Asbestos removal is necessary during renovation or demolition. • Interest rates for new mortgages have been rising. • The site is a difficult and high risk project to develop, evidenced by the poor response to the RFP issued by the city. Considerations: • The buildings are a landmark and represent Shakopee's heritage. • The buildings are structurally sound with architectural character. • The site is bounded by industrial zoning on the north and the new prison on the south. • Views are poortoward the north and northeast of the site. • The site has served a public use as office and residential for about 60 years. • The large trees on the north must be saved as a major site amenity. • Location of large trees makes the site difficult to develop a density that will offset land acquisition costs, street construction and demolition. • Site slope on the north makes development north of the large trees difficult to access and offers very poor views. • The Shakopee Planning Commission is unwilling to consider an adaptive reuse that will permit small offices in the existing buildings. • Many attractive new housing sites are available to compete with this site. • The townhouse market is very risky in today's market. • The site is inappropriate and too expensive for single familily home sites. • A market study would be required before developing small office space or residential in this location. • New street, sewer and water must be installed to access the center of the site. • No soil tests are available -the soil conditions and water table are unknown. • Asbestos removal is necessary during renovation or demolition. • Interest rates for new mortgages have been rising. • The site is a difficult and high risk project to develop, evidenced by the poor response to the RFP issued by the city. RESOLUTION NO. 87-3 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DECLINATION OF AN OFFER TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA BE IT RESOLVED by The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, as follows: WHEREAS, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, has entered into an option to purchase agreement with the State of Minnesota dated April 7, 1987 for real property located in the County of Scott, more particularly described in exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee desires to terminate the Option to Purchase Agreement at this time; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Housing and Redevelopment Authority declines to exercise the option to purchase agreement, and 2. That the Housing and Redevelopment Authority agrees to release the State of Minnesota from their obligations under this agreement, and 3. That the Housing and Redevelopment Authority authorizes it' s Chairman and Executive Director to sign this resolution. Adopted this 16th day of June,' 1987 in special session of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA. John Leroux, It' s Chairman ATTESTED TO: Dennis R. Kraft, It's Executive Director MIBIT "A" / That part of Lots 1 thru 10, Block 172; that part of Lots 1 thru 10, Block 173; that part of alley in Block 172; that part of alley in Block 173 and that part of Fifth Avenue which lies between Block 172 and Block 173, all being in Shakopee City, and that part of Block 5; that part of Block 6; that fart of alley in Block 5; that part of alley in Block 6 and that part of Fifth Street which lies between said Block 5 and Block 6, all being in Roeper's Addition to Shakopee City, Minnesota according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of Scott County, Minnesota and that part of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 1, Tawnship 115, Range 23, and that part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 23, and that part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 115, Range 23, Scott County, Minnesota described as fellows: Beginning at the Southeast corner f said Block 172; thence westerly along the southerly line of said Block 172 and is westerly extension, a distance of 679.76 feet to its intersection with the southerly extension of the westerly line of Blocks 5 and 6, said Roeper's Addi n to the City of Shakopee; thence northerly, along said westerly line, 678.76 feet to the northwest corner of said Block 5; thence easterly along the rthe y line of said Block Sr a distance of 122.44 feet to the west line of th said Southwest Quarter; thence northerly along said west line, a distance of 8 .10 feet to the southerly line-of Block 4, said Koeper's Addition; thence easte ly along said southerly line, a distance of 224.82 feet to the southwest corner o Block 174, said Shakopee City thence southerly along the northerly extension the westerly line of Block 173, said Shakopee City, a distance of 80.00 feet the northwest corner of said Block 173; thence easterly, along the northerly li said Block 173, a distance of 300.00 feet to the northeast corner of said B1 k 3; thence southerly along the easterly lines of Blocks 173 and 174 to the min of inning. NJTB: According to the County Record is records, that part of Fifth Street which lies between Blocks 172 and 173, pee City and Blocks 5 and 6 Rpeper's Addition to City of Shakopee bas not been vaca ell and is still of public record. The alleys in Blocks 172 and 173,Shakopee City and in Blocks 5 and 6, Hoeper's Addition to the City of Shakopee also has not been vacated and is still of public record. The triangular portion of property wini.ch lies in Section 2 and 12, Township 115, Range 23 are not mentioned by description, but is physically being used in the field. EXHIBIT "A' / That part of Los 1 thru 10, Block 172; that Dart of Los 1 thru 10, Block 173; that Fart of alley in Block 172; that part of alley in Block 173 and that part of Fifth Avenue which lies between Block 172 and Block 173, all being in Shakopee City, and that part of Block 5; that part of Block 6; that part of alley in Block 5; that part of alley in Block 6 and that part of Fifth Street which lies between said Block 5 and Block 6, all being in Roarer's Addition to Shakopee City, Minnesota according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of Scott County, Minnesota and that part of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 1, Township 115, Range 23, and that part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 23, and that Fart of the Northeast Quarter of Section 2, Township ll5, Range 23, Scott County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Block 172; thence westerly along the southerly line of said Block 172 and is westerly extension, a distance of 679.76 feet to is intersection with the southerly extension of the westerly line of Blocks 5 and 6, said Roeper's Addition to the City of Shakooee; thence northerly, along said westerly line, 678.76 feet to the northwest corner of said Block 5; thence easterly along the northerly line of said Block 5, a distance of 122.44 feet to the west line of the said Southwest Quarter; thence northerly along said west line, a distance of 81.10 feet to the southerly line-of Block 4, said KoeDer's Addition, thence easterly along said southerly line, a distance of 224.82 feet to the southwest corner of Block 174, said ShakoDee City thence southerly along the northerly extension of the westerly line o: Block 173, said Shakooee City, a distance of 80.00 feet to the northwest corner of said Block 173; thence easterly, along the northerly line of said Block 173, a distance of 300.00 feet to the northeast corner of said Block 173; thence southerly along the easterly lines of Blocks 173 and 174 to the mint of beginning. NDTE: According to the County Recorder's records, that part of Fifth Street which lies between Blocks 172 and 173, Shakooee City and Blocks 5 and 6 Roeper's Addition to City of Shakopee kas not been vacated and is still of public record. The alleys in Blocks 172 and 173, Shakopee City and in Blocks 5 and 6, ROeDer's Addition to the City of Shakopee also has not been vacated and is s`111 of public record. The triangular portion of property which lies in Section 2 and 12, Township 115, Range 23 are not mentioned by descript-ion, but is pbvsically being used in the field. OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 19, 1987 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with Cncl. Leroux, Vierling, Lebens, Wampach and Clay present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Douglas Wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; Kenneth Ashfeld, City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney. Wampach/Clay moved to recess for HRA. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to reconvene at 8:13 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. There were no liaison reports 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/Vierling moved to receive and place on file the letter from Dennis Hron referencing the 4th and CR-17 Stop Light. (Motion approved under consent business). Leroux/Lebens moved to accept .the . letter of resignation from Robert Johnson from the Planning Commission effective immediately and direct staff to advertise the position in the paper. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on allowing local merchants to display merchandise on the sidewalks in front of their buildings. The City Code does not allow this. Duane and Catherine Lerenz have applied for a permit to display some of their goods on the sidewalk in front of their building located at 115 East First Avenue. Vierling/Wampach moved to enforce the code and not allow display r of merchandise on sidewalks. Motion carried unanimously. The City Administrator reviewed the plans that Scott-Carver- Dakota Community Action Inc. has in upgrading the property known as Eagle Creek Thrift Shop. The improvement would include blacktopping a portion of the parking lot. They are asking the City to allocate $1,000 currently in the budget to go towards the blacktopping. Discussion ensued on installing bumpers vs curbing. Leroux/Vierling moved to approve Scott-Carver-Dakota Community Action Agency, Inc. request in their letter dated May 11, 1987, City Council May 19, 1987 Page -2- to improve the site of Eagle Creek Town Hall and carpet the interior and blacktop the parking lot and the City contribute up to $1,000 for the curbing to be determined by the staff. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Leroux/Wampach moved to have the curbing at the Eagle Creek Town Hall site handled out of other funds' to be determined by staff. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. wampac4, Leroux, Vierling, Lebens and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Clay Motion carried. j The City Planner reviewed /e Meritor Development Rezoning request for property E of CR- 9 and S of 11th Avenue. He stated that the Planning Commissionrecommended not rezoning the 13 . 24 acres from Ag to R-3 at t s time. The Developer agreed with keeping the 13.24 cres zone Ag until further information on the proposed by-pass and acc s to the property can be clarified. The northern 78 acres is zo ed R-2 and the southern 85 acres is zoned Ag. The developer s requesting to zone the southern 85 acres to R-2. There was a concern raised on the number of twin homes to be permitted nd the possibility of devaluing the surrounding property. a developer stated that he has not thought of twin homes in hat area. Clay/Leroux moved to app ove the rezoning of Ag to R-2 and direct City Attorney to draw th appropriate ordinances. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner review d the Cant bury Estates Preliminary Plat proposal located E of R-79 and 5 Estates Avenue. Discussion ensued on the cul de ac that exceeds the limit. The cul-de-sac is approximately 850 f et. It was suggested to stub both streets off at the proper leng h or to connect them. Leroux/Wampach moved to approve the Preliminary Plat for the portion of Canterbury Estates lying south of 13th Avenue, subject to the conditions lis ed in the City Planner' s memo dated May 15, 1987, with an amendm t to condition #14 to read "The- cul-de-sac between Block 16 nd 17 shall be extended to provide street access to the pro erty to the south." Motion carried unanimously. (Doc. N . CC-138) The City Planner reviewed the request of Behringer' s 1st Addition Preliminary and Final Plat. They are proposing to divide 10 acres on County Road 83 into two equal lots of 5 acres each. The plat is located in the RTD zonejust north of Canterbury Downs. No further development is proposed at this time. City Council May 19, 1987 Page -2- to improve the site of Eagle Creek Town Hall and carpet the interior and blacktop the parking lot and the City contribute up to $1,000 for the curbing to be determined by the staff. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Leroux/Wampach moved to have the curbing at the Eagle Creek Town Hall site handled out of other funds to be determined by staff. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Leroux, Vierling, Lebens and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Clay Motion carried. The City Planner reviewed the Meritor Development Rezoning request for property E of CR-79 and S of 11th Avenue. He stated that the Planning Commission recommended not rezoning the 13 .24 acres from Ag to R-3 at this time. The Developer agreed with keeping the 13.24 acres zoned Ag until further information on the proposed by-pass and access to the property can be clarified. The northern 78 acres is zoned R-2 and the southern 85 acres is zoned Ag. The developer is requesting to zone the southern 85 acres to R-2. There was a concern raised on the number of twin homes to be permitted and the possibility of devaluing the surrounding property. The developer stated that he has not thought of twin homes in that area. Clay/Leroux moved to approve the rezoning of Ag to R-2 and direct City Attorney to draw up the appropriate ordinances. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the Canterbury Estates Preliminary Plat proposal located E of CR-79 and S of 11th Avenue. Discussion ensued on the cul de sac that exceeds the limit. The cul-de-sac is approximately 850 feet. It was suggested to stub both streets off at the proper length or toconnectthem. Leroux/Wampach moved to approve the Preliminary Plat for the portion of Canterbury Estates lying south of 13th Avenue, subject to the conditions listed in the City Planner's memo dated May -15, 1987, with an amendment to condition #14 to read "The cul-de-sac between Block 16 and 17 shall be extended to provide street access to the property to the south. " Motion carried unanimously. (Doc. No. CC-138) The City Planner reviewed the request of Behringer's 1st Addition Preliminary and Final Plat. They are proposing to divide 10 acres on County Road 83 into two equal lots of 5 acres each. The plat is located in the RTD zone just north of Canterbury Downs. No further development is proposed at this time. City Council May 19, 1987 Page -3- Clay/Lebens offered Resolution No. 2732, A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Behringer' s 1st Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize the proper City officials to advertise for bids for the refurbishing of the 1973 Mack fire pumper. (Approved under consent business) . Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize the Public Works Department to purchase a Jacobsen HR-15 rotary gangmower as advertised for the purchase price of $23,950.00, from R.L. Gould Co. (Approved under consent business) . Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize the Public Works Department to purchase an ACCUTTURN 8922 brake lathe from Motor Parts Service for $4,000.00 from the capital equipment fund. (Approved under consent business) . The Community Development Director reviewed the request for reimbursement by Mr. Van Heel for expenses incurred relating to the construction of a utility building. He said Mr. Van Heel was granted a building permit to construct a storage shed upon the property located at 1109 Quincy Street. He requested a second permit to move the location of the building because of a gas easement and he was given a verbal approval. Soon after the slab was poured the city issued a stop work order. Mr. Van Heel decided to return all his materials and submitted a claim to the city for damages in the amount of $1,992.08. Wampach/Leroux moved to have the City attempt to negotiate with Mr. Van heel to an amount somewhat less than $1,992.08. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale 3.2 beer license to the Shakopee Jaycees at Murphy' s Landing for May 30th and May 31st, 1987. (Motion approved under consent business) . Leroux/Vierling moved to table the application from Town Taxi Co. Inc. of 2812 University Avenue S.E. , Minneapolis for a taxicab license. (Approved under consent business) . wampach/Vierling moved to direct staff to prepare an ordinance requiring that all residents in an outlying neighborhood must receive City refuse collection services if City collection is implemented in outlying neighborhood. Motion carried unanimously. City Council May 19, 1987 Page -4- The Community Development Director gave an update on the Wiley Housing Proposal "The Cottages". He said the developer has not given up on Shakopee but is now working with another community in hopes of obtaining tax increment financing to help defray some of the interest and thereby reduce the rent. Clay/Wampach moved that staff prepare a general information document for Council elineating options as far as applications for housing develo ent as well as general census of questionable land types and va es and the appropriate o ' inappropriate uses for tax incremen financing to fund utilit'es for those areas. Motion carried wi h Cncl. Lebens and Vierling opposed. Leroux/Wampach mov d to authorize the adverti ing for and hiring of a graduate stu nt intern in the amount of $5.50 - $6.00 per hour for 26 weeks a d the hiring of an and rgraduate intern in the amount of $4.00 er hour for a period o 12-26 weeks. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Clay moved t authorize the advertising for and interviewing of consu tants to revi w the City Ordinances regulating on site sewage treatment sys ems and to prepare amendments to the applicab a ordinanc s. City staff will then make a recommendation on the hi ng of a consultant. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to autho ' z payment of Partial Estimate No. 6 for 4th Avenue Reconstruc ' n, Project 1986-3 in the amount of $10,268.78 to S.M. Hentges & ns, Inc. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Ler ierling, Clay, wampach and Mayor Reinke. Noes: Cncl. Lebens. Motion carried., wampach/Leroux moved o authoriz John Anderson, City Administrator, to exec a the April 7, 1987 "Memorandum of Understanding" wit the Minn ota Department of Transportation. (Doc. o. CC-140) Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Leroux, Vierli Clay, Wampach and Mayor Reinke. Noe Cnc 1. Lebens. Mo on carried. Vierling/lebens moved to authorize proper city officials to enter into an agreement for participation in urban Corps Program between the City of Minneapolis and the City of Shakopee for the period of July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. City Council May 19, 1987 Page -4- The Community Development Director gave an update on the Wiley Housing Proposal "The Cottages". He said the developer has not given up on Shakopee but is now working with another community in hopes of obtaining tax increment financing to help defray some of the interest and thereby reduce the rent. Clay/Wampach moved that staff prepare a general information document for Council delineating options as far as applications for housing development as well as general census of questionable land types and values and the appropriate or inappropriate uses for tax increment financing to fund utilities for those areas. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens and Vierling opposed. Leroux/Wampach moved to authorize the advertising for and hiring of a graduate student intern in the amount of $5.50 - $6.00 per hour for 26 weeks and the hiring of an undergraduate intern in the amount of $4.00 per hour for a period of 12-26 weeks. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Clay moved to authorize the advertising for and interviewing of consultants to review the City Ordinances regulating on site sewage treatment systems and to prepare amendments to the applicable ordinances. City staff will then make a recommendation on the hiring of a consultant. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize payment of Partial Estimate No. 6 for 4th Avenue Reconstruction, Project 1986-3 in the amount of $10,268.78 to S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Leroux/Vierling, Clay, Wampach and Mayor Reinke. Noes: Cncl. Lebens. Motion carried. Wampach/Leroux moved to authorize John Anderson, City Administrator, to execute the April 27, 1987 "Memorandum of Understanding" with the Minnesota Department of Transportation. (Doc. No. CC-140) Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Leroux, Vierling, Clay, Wampach and Mayor Reinke. Noes: Cncl. Lebens. Motion carried. Vierling/lebens moved to authorize proper city officials to enter into an agreement for participation in urban Corps Program between the City of Minneapolis and the City of Shakopee for the period of July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. City Council May 19, 1987 Page -5- Leroux/Vierling moved to approve the bills in the amount of $208,922.33. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Discussion ensued on the vacation of Austin Street south of Davis Court. Mr. DuBois and Mr. Hauer will split ownership of the property to an acceptable amount. They are roughly splitting the cost of vacating the old street with the City. In the letter from Platto & Associates they are outlining the actual costs of items 1-10. Total estimated cost is $8,327.00. Mr. Hauer will perform the work himself. They are proposing that city pay for items 1,2,5,6 and 8. (Doc. No. CC-139) Clay/Leroux moved for a 5 minute recess for further discussion with Mr. Hauer and Dubois. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Lebens moved to reconvene. at 10:26 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Lebens moved that City will pay for items 1,2,5,6, and 8 that are located in the street. City Engineer will work on design that may lower the estimate and bring it back to Council. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling offered Ordinance No. 217, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 9 entitled "Parking Regulations" by Changing Parking Hours on Streets between November 15 and April 1 of each year and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 9.99 which among other things contain penalty provisions, and moved its adoption. Motion carried with Cncl. Clay opposed. Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2731, A Resolution Authorizing Execution of an Agreement between the City and School District for the Operation of a Jointly Sponsored Recreation Program, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . - Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2727, A Resolution Granting a Variance Request to Permit a Street Width of 64 feet with Parking on Both Sides Instead of the Required Street Width of 66 feet with Parking on Both Sides and an Agreement to Indemnify, and -moved--its -adoption. _(Approved---under consent -. business) . _,-..::_,- Lebens/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2730, A Resolution Declaring Adequacy of Petition and Ordering Preparation of a Report for the Extension of the VIP Sanitary Sewer from County Road 17 to County Road 79 and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. City Council May 19, 1987 Page -6- Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2728, A Resolution Vacating Certain Public Ways, Drives, Parkways and Streets within the Plat of Killarney Hills Addition, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2729, A Resolution Authorizing the Granting of an Easement within Killarney Hills Addition and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Vierling/Leroux moved to make fund available for the VFW and the Legion for Memorial Day, if neede or requested. Motion carried unanimously. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Jack Boarman, from Boarman and As ciates, reviewed the plans for the new City Hall. It is propo ed to have an entryway area and each department will have its ow supply area. There will be plenty of closet space. The Coun it Chambers will have rooms off to the side which c also be separated to make other meeting rooms. Leroux/Wampach moved t agree with the plan as stated with recommendations made th' s evening regarding storage space, additional closet space, lass Enclosure between the lobby and the council chambers and sl ing floor for the council chambers. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Lebens moved to authoriz proper city officials to amend the contract for architectural se ices with Boarman krc:=cct increasing the total contract amo nt $1,997. 50 for additional illustrations showing the structur on ea of the two proposed sites. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Cncl. Clay said he would like t have public wo ks investigate the possibility of coming up with some other kind of piece of equipment that would help simpli y the task of lifting the big refuse drums in Memorial Park. Mayor Reinke said he would also like to have staff report back where we are at with public works as far as personnel, numbers in each area and what is in the budget.. .. Leroux/Lebens moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:45 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary City Council May 19, 1987 Page -6- Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2728, A Resolution Vacating Certain Public Ways, Drives, Parkways and Streets Within the Plat of Killarney Hills Addition, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2729, A Resolution Authorizing the Granting of an Easement within Killarney Hills Addition and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Vierling/Leroux moved to make funds available for the VFW and the Legion for Memorial Day, if needed or requested. Motion carried unanimously. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Jack Boarman, from Boarman and Associates, reviewed the plans for the new City Hall. It is proposed to have an entryway area and each department will have its own supply area. There will be plenty of closet space. The Council Chambers will have rooms off to the side which can also be separated to make other meeting rooms. Leroux/Wampach moved to agree with the plan as stated with recommendations made this evening regarding storage space, additional closet space, glass enclosure between the lobby and the council chambers and sloping floor for the council chambers. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Lebens moved to authorize proper city officials to amend the contract for architectural services with Boarman Trc:i__Ct increasing the total contract amount by $1,997.50 for additional illustrations showing the structure on each of the two proposed sites. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Cncl. Clay said he would like to have public works investigate the possibility of coming up with some other kind of piece of equipment that would help simplify the task of lifting the big refuse drums in Memorial Park. Mayor Reinke said he would also like to have staff report back where we are at with public works as far as personnel, numbers in each area and what is in the budget. Leroux/Lebens moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:45 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary 410 /c� CANTMURYINN Tr, H.W of C roorbury Park .lune 2, 1987 Darlene Schesso CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 129 let Avenue East ... . ... Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Darlene: This letter is a request for the City Council to consider granting approval of a provision that will allow Sunday liquor licenses holders to serve liquor starting at 10:00 am Sundays. Presently we are not permitted to serve liquor on Sundays until 12 Noon. The reason for the request stems from customer demand. We receive numerous request from groups (corporate and association) for Sunday morning champagne brunches. The inability to fulfill the customers request has prompted some of them to go to other hotels, where this is available. This is a concern 12 months of the year. Our inability to offer this service could affect our room occupancy as well; due to a convention or meeting booking into another hotel. Lost room revenue means lost room tax, which means less money for the area to market itself. We also have many of our present Sunday brunch customers ask for champagne, bloody marys or mimosas with their brunch. These request are due to our competition being able to offer this service. I am sure that the average individual customer probably does not want drink before noon; however when that service is available in one area and not - another, it can affect one's decision where to dine. Respectfully, _ n Ockwig - GENERAL MANAGER I'1�(/Ci arL f� SO/bk JUN 1 51987 CKY OF SHAKOFEE 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 612-445-3644 Discussion continued in regards to setbacks and the Planning Commission' s interpretations. The issue of the covenents for this particular piece of property was discussed as to whether or not it allows for a 3rd garage to be built'.somewhere else on the i property. Vierling/Leroux moved to reconsider the original motion for the i variance request of 12 feet. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Lebens moved to table this variance request and have staff research the covenents as recorded and bring to our attention at the next meeting on September 9, 1986 at 8:00 p.m. Motion carried , unanimously. b Leroux/Wampach moved open thepublic he ring on whether or not j to permit sales of int xicating liquor for consumption on premises between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 midnight on ndays. Motion carried unanimously. I i E Discussion ensued on the actual enefit o allowing liquor to be sold at 10:00 a.m. on Sundays. M . Stan Ockwig, Canterbury Inn, e stated that he was unaware that th hour could be extended to 10:00 a.m. Council received a lett r f om Anthony Strupeck, Shakopee House, stating that it woul b helpful if the ordinance was changed to allow for the sale of "quor beginning at 10:00 a.m. on Sundays. He stated also that he to ks upon it as a service to his customers. It was the consens of the Council that the need is not demonstrated in the City of S k ee at this time. Vierling/Wampach moved to closethe ubli hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Lebens moved not to permit sales of ntoxicating liquor on Sundays between hours of 10:00 .m. and 12 00 Noon in the City of Shakopee. Motion carried un an' ously. Leroux/Vierling moved to open th public hearing,.on the General _ Revenue Sharing Budget and 1987 udget. Motion carried unanimously. The City Administrator reviewe the Budget Hearing on General Revenue Sharing. Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. There is no response. Leroux/Wampach moved to close Public Hearing. Motion carried un- animously. Vierling/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2608, A Resolution Adopting the Racetrack District Land Use Study as prepared by Hoisington Group Inc. and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried Discussion continued in regards to setbacks and the Planning Commission's interpretations. The issue of the covenents for this particular piece of property was discussed as to whether or not it allows for a 3rd garage to be built r somewhere else on the property. Vierling/Leroux moved to reconsider the original motion for the variance request of 12 feet. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Lebens moved to table this variance request and have staff research the covenents as recorded and bring to our attention at the next meeting on September 9, 1986 at 8:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. f b Leroux/Wampach moved to open the public hearing on whether or not to permit sales of intoxicating liquor for consumption on premises between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 midnight on Sundays. Motion carried unanimously. I r i Discussion ensued on the actual benefit of allowing liquor to be j sold at 10:00 a.m. on Sundays. Mr. Stan Ockwig, Canterbury Inn, stated that he was unaware that the hours could be extended to 10:00 a.m. Council received a letter from Anthony Strupeck, Shakopee House, stating that it would be helpful if the ordinance was changed to allow for the sale of liquor beginning at 10:00 a.m. on Sundays. He stated also that he looks upon it as a service to his customers. It was the consensus of the Council that the need is not demonstrated in the City of Shakopee at this time. Vierling/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Lebens moved not to permit sales of intoxicating liquor on Sundays between hours of 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 Noon in the City of Shakopee. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on the General Revenue Sharing Budget and' 1987 Budget. Motion carried unanimously. The City Administrator reviewed the Budget Hearing on General Revenue Sharing. Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. There is no response. Leroux/Wampach moved to close Public Hearing. Motion carried un- animously. Vierling/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2608, A Resolution Adopting the Racetrack District Land Use Study as prepared by Hoisington Group Inc. and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes : Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried rut: - 1981 To the recipients of the O'Dowd Lake EAW: ;;r- ^.^ ^H 1'•'•;-„" 4' I have reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and attached a list of the obvious errors and a major ommission. OMISSION: Nothing refers to the Louisville Sanitary Dump. Is this a hazard? Will ninety-six homes, a golf course and the restaurant and bar spread the pollution? No one KNOWS where this pollution is headed. The County and MPCA are studying it. Shouldn' t we wait for their report and be sure. Because of the size of the project and because the current environmental assessment worksheet is deficient and inaccurate, we urge that the developers be required to provide an accurate environmental assessment worksheet. An accurate environmental assessment worksheet may suggest that an environmental impact study is required. The proposal was originally for 109 units. The number of units was reduced to avoid the requirement of an environmental impact statement but ninety-six units (residences) and a restaurant and bar (the equivalent of six additional units) is still over the one hundred unit threshold. Your good judgment argues for caution. Thank you for your consideration. Don McKush ' MCKUSH. / MISC 3 - 6-2-87 COMMENTS BY DON MCKUSH CONCERNING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET UNDER THE PROJECT NAME 0•DOWD LAKE ESTATES AND GOLF COURSE 5) STATEMENT: "The proposal includes approximately eighty-seven single family lots configured around the golf course and twelve units of attached single family ( in the clubhouse area)" FACT: There are eighteen units of attached housing not wholly concentrated in the clubhouse area. e) STATEMENT: "The total project area (acres ) - two hundred plus acres. - FACT: There are less than 195 acre in the project area. 9) STATEMENT: "Number of residen ial unit - ninety nine" FACT: Ninety-six residential uni s 12) STATEMENT: " Is the proposed project i onsistent with locally adopted comprehensive planned use p n or any other plans?" Answer: "no. " FACT: Locally adopted comprehensive land use plan calls for A) preservation of wetland B) preservation of good far land C) growth from the center o, the city outward D) prior to amendments to accomodate this development, local statutes require that developments of this size be connected to a municipal sewer system. While the current development is now legal , it remains imprudent. 4) STATEMENT: "Wetland (types 3 to 8) acres before thirteen, after fifteen. " FACT: A significant amount of wetland is being converted from natural wildlife habitat to watering ponds for the golf course. Because they are subject to a chemical and pesticide runoff . such onndi ,..s i .,,.a .,_ _ 0L_ COMMENTS BY DON MCKUSH CONCERNING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET UNDER THE PROJECT NAME O' DOWD LAKE ESTATES AND GOLF COURSE 5) STATEMENT: "The proposal includes approximately eighty-seven single family lots configured around the golf course and twelve units of attached single family (in the clubhouse area) ff FACT: There are eighteen units of attached housing not wholly concentrated in the clubhouse area. 8) STATEMENT: "The total project area (acres) - two hundred plus acres. - FACT: There are less than 195 acres in the project area. 9) STATEMENT: -Number of residential units - ninety nine" FACT: Ninety-six residential units 12) STATEMENT: " Is the proposed project inconsistent with locally adopted comprehensive planned use plan or any other plans?" Answer : -no. . FACT: Locally adopted comprehensive land use plan calls for A) preservation of wetlands B) preservation of good farm land C) growth from the center of the city outward D) prior to amendments to accomodate this development, local statutes require that developments of this size be connected to a municipal sewer system. While the current development is now legal , it remains imprudent. 4) STATEMENT: -Wetland (types 3 to 8) acres before thirteen, after fifteen. - FACT: A significant amount of wetland is being converted from natural wildlife habitat to watering ponds for the golf course. Because they are subject to a chemical and pesticide runoff . such rnnHV ...: i ..... ... .... . O. 1s> STATEMENT: "Does the site contain peat soils, etc. ? If yes show on site map and explain. " Response: "yes. " FACT: A site map is attached but no explanation is provided. This omission is critical because it requires that the individual reader make technical judgments. It defeats the purpose of the environmental assessment worksheet, which is to identify the hazards of the particular development being assessed. 17) STATEMENT: "What is the approximate depth in feet to ground water?" Answer: "three feet minimum. " FACT: Much of the property is marshy and has standing water on the surface. Particular attention is drawn to the area on the proposed Cambridge Way near Lakeview Drive, now covered by two to three feet of water. 18) STATEMENT: "The lake shore lots involve the replanning of undeveloped small lots of record into a lesser number of larger lots. " FACT: Under existing applicable shoreline regulations, a smaller number of lots is permitted than proposed by this development. 19) STATEMENT: '- "Describe any physical alteration of any drainage system, etc. " Response: "Some wetland areas will be filled, others expanded and some drainage channels with control surface structures will be constructed. " FACT: This development proposes a massive reorientation of the current topography. Our estimate is in excess of 150, 000 cubic yards must be moved. The assessment worksheet fails to reasonably identify the changes which are proposed. 0 22) STATEMENT: "Several of the borings included in this reports are outside the areas currently planned for sewage treatment. " FACT: This development has large areas of ow- lying and poor drainage soil . The current response is inadequate to determine the potential problems. NOTE: A significant portion of the ils encompassed within this development are not acceptable for sewer systems. Formally, ordinances required that developments of this size be connected to the city sewage sy tem. An exception was made for this development, but that do s lessen the potential problems caused by the soil . NOTE: City of Shako ee Zoning Cc a Section 1135 Shoreline Zoning District, Sub ivision 11 uthorizes a planned unit development only if : entral se age facilities shall be installed which meet ap Iica6le standards for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency r the PUD is connected to the municipal sanitary sewer. 27) STATEMENT: 'Does this development imp ct a signated park or recreation area?" Answer : "No. ^ FACT: The proposed golf course ill interfere w h the recreational use of a po tion of O' Dowd Lake. The land use comprehensive plan calls for the city to purchase a 300 foot wide abutting the north nd of O'Dowd Lake. This would be inconsistent with the a ection of housing in that area. CKUSH. / MISC 3 --2-87 ck� 22) STATEMENT: "Several of the borings included in this reports are outside the areas currently planned for sewage treatment. " FACT: This development has large areas of low- lying and poor drainage soil . The current response is inadequate to determine the potential problems. NOTE: A significant portion of the soils encompassed within this development are not acceptable for sewer systems. Formally, ordinances required that developments of this size be connected to the city sewage system. An exception was made for this development, but that does lessen the potential problems caused by the soil . NOTE: City of Shakopee Zoning Code Section 1135 Shoreline Zoning District, Subdivision 11 authorizes a planned unit development only if : "central sewage facilities shall be installed which meet applicable standards for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency or the PUD is connected to the municipal sanitary sewer. " 27) STATEMENT: "Does this development impact a designated park or recreation area?" Answer: "No. " FACT: The proposed golf course will interfere with the recreational use of a portion of O'Dowd Lake. The land use comprehensive plan calls for the city to purchase a 300 foot wide abutting the north end of O'Dowd Lake. This would be inconsistent with the erection of housing in that area. .CKUSH. / MISC 3 -2-87 SCOTT COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COURT HOUSE A102 i- SHAKOPEE, MN.55379-1393 (612}4457750. Ext.177 June 15, 1987 John Anderson, Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minn. 55379 Dear John: This letter serves as a follow-up to my earlier letters regarding the Planned unit development proposed in Shakopee (O'Dowd Lake Estates & Golf Course). As you probably know, I have provided some comments regarding this proposal in response to an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) that had been completed. My comments and concerns related to three different issues: the potential for ground water contamination from on-site sewage systems, ground water contamination being "pulled" from Louisville Landfill and whether or not an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be completed. Since my original comments, I have been provided more information about the development. As a result, the concern that I had about on-site sewage systems having any affect on the ground water has been alleviated. It seems the layout of the development is such that there will not be any area with a concentration of sewage systems. The soil testing that I have seen also indicates that there probably would not be rapid infiltration of sewage effluent to the regional aquifer in this area. Although there are some troublesome soil conditions on this site in terms of designing sewage systems (ie, mound and other alternative type systems), I am confident that LeRoy Hauser and his assistants will do an excellent job arriving at the best sewage treatment systems possible for each lot. Shakopee has one of the best en-site sewage treatment system programs in the state of Minnesota. Your inspectors are all state certified through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and are very knowledgeable of proper sewage system design and installation. On this note, I understand that there has been some discussion about creating an on-site sewage system annual inspection and maintenance program. I was strongly opposed to this approach seven years ago when the Metropolitan Council first proposed it and I remain firmly convinced that such a program would cause more problems than it would solve. Certainly more can always be - accomplished through public education. - However, judging from the number of calls we have received over the past eight years (very few) regarding failing sewage systems in Shakopee, I can say that LeRoy must already have this area well covered. An Equal Opportunity Emplover - — -- - _-- _ - Page 2 Mr. John Anderson 6L- June 15, 1987 My other major concern involved the potential for ground water flow reversal from Louisville Landfill toward high capacity pumping wells. I must note that this issue appears to have been blown well out of proportion to my concern. The proposed development is three and one half miles from the landfill and although the potential for some impact is worthy of more study, it is hardly cause for the alarm that has been spreading. We have started drilling the test wells and hope to have our study (at least the crucial Pumping test) completed by July i of this year. As I noted in my letter of response to the RAW, there are a number of options available to the developer even in the event that our study indicates that such a flow reversal is possible. Therefore, this concern should not pose a "fatal flaw" to this project. The decision on how deep and where to drill a well or wells might best be delayed until our study is complete, but that does not appear to be a problem in terms of timing at this point anyway. Finally, my third point was that an Environmental Impact Statement could be considered a reasonable approach considering the size of the development. The RAW had indicated that 99 lots would be developed for single family residential and some for multiple unit dwellings. I now understand that the number of residential lots is only 87. The concerns that I had expressed about sewage systems have been resolved and the ground water concern involving flow reversal is being addressed by Scott County. Therefore, I do not think that an EIS would accomplish much more than delay the project at this time. Please distribute this letter to your staff as necessary to follow—up on my RAW comments. I will also keep you advised of the outcome of our ground water study. Sincerely, l T Allen Frechette, Environmental Health Manager cc: Richard Mertz, Commissioner r Joe Ries, Co. Administrator Gary Laurent, Proposer Greg Downing, EQB Jim Theis, Clerk of Louisville Twp. Roselyn Menke, Clerk of Jackson Twp. RESOLUTION NO. 2740 -- --- - A RESOLUTION MAKING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR O'DOWD LAKE ESTATES AND GOLF CLUB WHEREAS, the O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club proposal in the City of Shakopee required the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) ; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) ; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has prepared an RAW which was published, distributed and commented on in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 116D and Minnesota Rules 1985; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has reviewed all comments received regarding the EAW and has prepared a report containing Findings of Fact, Conclusions and a Recommendation regarding the O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club EAW. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City Council that a negative declaration is hereby made on the O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club RAW. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1987. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this _ day of 1987. City Attorney i OL- MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official RE: Stonebrooke Subdivision DATE: June 8, 1987 City staff met with Gary Laurent and Michael Rutten on the Stonebrooke subdivision to discuss their detailed "on site septic plan" (copies on file in Building Official' s office) . Summarized is the consensus of staff: 1. The primary sewer system for each lot will be within the lot lines of that lot or immediately adjacent to the lot and within that lots sewer easement. (See attached detail for Lot 2, septic site Al and A2) 2. Because the probability of using the auxiliary site location is remote, it would be acceptable to designate off site areas for these systems within the sewer easement area designated for that lot. (See attached detail for Lot 1, septic site B1 and B2) 3. Each system will be handled on an individual basis with a new on site perc and soil test. 4. If we have any concerns about soil, drainage, etc. and we feel an outside consultant would be better equipped to review the design problems, we will hire one and backcharge Gary Laurent for it. 5. Mr. Laurent will form a homeowners association and include in the rules of same a mechanism for monitoring all sewage systems and maintaining them on a yearly basis. 6. Because the County does full time on site sewage review and inspection, and ours is incidental to the permit process, we may as a matter of professional courtesy, ask them if they would like to review our analysis, opinions and conclusions on this project. 7. We are going to adhere to the 10 ' side yard setbacks for the on site systems. 8. It will be the developers decision as to whether or not any lot is buildable or not buildable. It will be an economic decision he has to make based on our recommendation regarding the type of system we feel the lot will require. If they don't want to spend the money on an on lot system, then they will have to abandon the use of the lot in question as the alternate off site will not be acceptable o staff. We will be meeting with the Count this week to see if we can avoid any problems like this in t e Future. Fulton, LeRoy Heitz, Jon Westlake, Al Frechette and I ill be at the meeting. It is our intent to impres Pon Mr. Frechette . that in the future, it will be in our be t interest to share any concerns with each other before they a aired in the media. We intend to tell him that the City B lding and Planning Departments and County Building and Planning epartments should compliment each other. As a side issue, I think t e ounty Attorney and City Attorney should sit down and decide wh i the authority where City and County Ordinances overlap, esp ially in the area of health related issues such as solid aste, water quality, food service, etc. LH:cah abandon the use of the lot in question as the alternate off site will not be acceptable to staff. We will be meeting with the County this week to see if we can avoid any problems like this in the future. Fulton, LeRoy Heitz, Jon Westlake, Al Frechette and I will be at the meeting. It is our intent to impress upon Mr. Frechette that in the future, it will be in our best interest to share any concerns with each other before they are aired in the media. We intend to tell him that the City Building and Planning Departments and County Building and Planning Departments should compliment each other. As a side issue, I think the County Attorney and City Attorney should sit down and decide who is the authority where City and County Ordinances overlap, especially in the area of health related issues such as solid waste, water quality, food service, etc. LH:cah a72 TYPICAL ( IB'� t PRIMARY SETI WER NS SYSTEM LOCA \. 2 r v \ i O / ED TYPICAL AUXILIARY SEWER N \ \\\ YSTEM LOCATION 4 /.,)- CL_ I. Other Resources. The project will not cause the impairment or destruction of prime or unique farmland areas, ecologically sensitive areas, or areas with scenic views and vistas. J. Communit Services Transportation and Ener The project will affect the average daily traffic on county roads and local roads near the project. The project will generate approximately 1,105 trip-ends per day. The site is not served by City sewer and water services. On site individual sewage treatment systems will be required for each home and the golf course club house. A centralized water system will be constructed to serve the development. The system will be constructed to the standards of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission and have fire flow ratings. The water system will either be owned and operated by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission or by a homeowner' s association. K. Other Effects and Issues. The project has a density of approximately one unit per two acres. This exceeds the recommended density of the Metropolitan Council for areas outside the urban service area. This development does comply with the City of Shakopee' s Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. III. Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects The project does not involve related or phased actions which will cause cumulative impact on the environment. The project will not induce future development that will result in cumulative impact on the environment. IV. Extent to Which the . Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation By On-going Public Regulatory Authority A. The Alterations of Wetlands. Alteration of wetlands will require a Nation wide permit for placing a fill in wetlands from the U.S. Army corps of Engineers. The altering of wetlands will also require a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. B. Shoreland Areas. Regulation of the shoreland area will be by the City of Shakopee in compliance with the City' s Shoreland Management Ordinance. The shoreland area will also be regulated by the Department of Natural Resources. Both units of Government require permits for alteration of the shoreland and the Department of Natural Resources will stipulate restrictions regarding the use of fertilizer and chemicals on the golf course area. C. Central Water Svstem. The central well will require a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The operation of the central water system will be under the control of the Minnesota Department of Health. D. On-site Sewage Treatment Systems. Installation and maintenance of on-site sewage treatment systems will be controlled by the City of Shakopee and annual inspections by the home owners association will be required. Also 2 septic sites per lot will be required by the City. E. Planned Unit Development AOproval. The Planned Unit Development for this pr0�ect will require approval by both the City of Shakopee and the Department of Natural Resources. Both the City of Shakopee and the Department of Natural Resources will put conditions on the approval of the Planned Unit Development which mitigate potential environmental problems. These conditions will be enforced by the City of Shakopee and the Department of Natural Resources. V. Extent to Which Environmental Effects Can Be Anticipated and Controlled As A Result of Other Environmental Studies or Previous EISs No other studies or previous EISs have been completed at this time which indicate how this project could prevent environmental effects. CONCLUSIONS Based upon the findings of fact, four issues possibly having an effect on the environment emerged during the environmental review process. These are as follows: I. Alteration of Wetlands. The EAW indicates that some alteration of wetlands will occur. This will also have an affect on wildlife habitat. Proposed alterations of wetlands does require a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. These departments with their regulatory authority will mitigate potential environmental effects. II. Run-off From the Golf Course Into Lake O'Dowd. Some run-off from the golf course into Lake O'Dowd will Occur. The golf course will be required to provide erosion control structures during construction. After construction turf and vegetation will be required to control run-off. The use of fertilizer and chemicals on the golf course area will be controlled by the Department of Natural Resources. Any alternation of the shoreland area requires approval by the City of Shakopee and the Department of Natural Resources. /,? `L_ III. The Central Water System The central water system will Utilize ground water from the Jordan Aquifer. Questions were raised during the environmental review process regarding the cone of depression within the aquifer and the possible reversal of water flow within the aquifer. Based upon the information provided in the environmental assessment worksheet the City has concluded that the amount of water to be drawn from the aquifer will be so minute in relation to the total flow of water within the aquifer that its environmental effects will be negligible in these areas. The drilling of the well requires a permit from the Department of Natural Resources. The DNR will regulate allocation of ground water from the aquifer and maintain the authority to restrict its use. IV. On-Site Sewa a Tre tment S stems. Soils analysis contained in the environmen a1 assessment worksheet indicated some potential problems w'th th construction of on-site sewage treatment systems wi hin he development. Construction of - on-site sewage trea me is must comply with Minnesota Regulations 7080 gover g construction of sewage treatment systems. TheCity of Shakopee will enforce these regulations and require propriate alternative systems when necessary to elevate an p tential problems. They will also require on-going m 'nte ance of the systems by the homeowner's associatio . ThN City feels that it has put sufficient controls the onstruction and maintenance of on-site sewage treatm nt syste to mitigate any potential environmental affects RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the Findings Of Fact and Conclusions contained within this report, the City staff recommends adoption of Resolution #2740 Making a Negative Declaration. (Resolution will be on table) . �z `L III. The Central water System. The central water system will utili2e ground water from the Jordan Aquifer. Questions were raised during the environmental review process regarding the cone of depression within the aquifer and the possible reversal of water flow within the aquifer. Based upon the information provided in the environmental assessment worksheet the City has concluded that the amount of water to be drawn from the aquifer will be so minute in relation to the total flow of water within the aquifer that its environmental effects will be negligible in these areas. The drilling of the well requires a permit from the Department of Natural Resources. The DNR will regulate allocation of ground water from the aquifer and maintain the authority to restrict its use. Iv. On-Site Sewage Treatment Systems. Soils analysis contained in the environmental assessment worksheet indicated some potential problems with the construction of on-site sewage treatment systems within the development. Construction of on-site sewage treatments must comply with Minnesota Regulations 7080 governing construction of sewage treatment systems. The City of Shakopee will enforce these regulations and require appropriate alternative systems when necessary to elevate any potential problems. They will also require on-going maintenance of the systems by the homeowner's association. The City feels that it has put sufficient controls on the construction and maintenance of on-site sewage treatment systems to mitigate any potential environmental affects. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the Findings Of Fact and Conclusions contained within this report, the City staff recommends adoption of Resolution #2740 Making a Negative Declaration. (Resolution will be on table) . 7 Metropolitan Council Meeting of May 28, 1987 EXHIBIT E M E T R O P O L I T A N C 0 U N C I L Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 612-291-6359 REPORT OF THE METROPOLITAN AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Referral Report No. 87-43 DATE: May 21 , 1987 TO: Metropolitan Council SUBJECT: O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club Environmental Assessment Worksheet Metropolitan Council Referral No. 14189-1, District 14 BACKGROUND At its meeting on May 28, 1987, the Metropolitan and Community Development Committee discussed a staff report and recommendations dealing with O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club EAW. ISSUES AND CONCERNS Paul Smith, ext. 408, presented a report and answered questions from the Committee. Barry Stock from the Shakopee city staff addressed the Committee, indicating that the city is in general disagreement with the Council regarding the MDIF general rural use policy of one per 10. Mr. Stock provided additional information regarding on-site septic system management, indicating that the developer will have two septic sites for each housing unit and that the septic system will be inspected annually. Tom Haugen, representing the developer, provided additional information regarding runoff, indicating there will be sufficient water to irrigate the golf course. - Be also described the impact of the well pumping, indicating that the drawdown would have little impact. The Committee suggested that the developer apparently has much of the additional information staff requested and asked if that would have an affect on the report recommendations. Paul Smith indicated that timing was a problem, in that the Council needs to submit its comments to have them considered by the city. RECOMMENDATION That the Metropolitan Council adopt this report and the following conclusions as its comments on the O'Dowd Lake Estates EAW. 1. The EAW is adequate from a transportation perspective. 2. Council housing policy does not encourage residential development in the rural service area. 3. There is no indication that Shakopee has an adequate on-site system management program. Steep slopes, high groundwater table, the use of mound drainfields all point to early failure of drainfields. It is essential that a very well managed on-site system regulation be in effect where drainfields are located in marginal lands. This development could cause an impact to the metropolitan sewerage system if service to them is provided, because the Blue Lake wastewater treatment plant is nearing overload and expansion will not be provided for several years. The SAW should include more information regarding changes that can be made to the development to make its on-site septic systems trouble free. Y. The EAW is incomplete regarding analysis of the water supply for irrigation of the golf course. A more serious analysis should be included in the EAW of runoff and a pond water balance to identify the extent to Which the ponds will be sufficient to irrigate the golf course. An analysis of groundwater pumpage should be presented, including the cone of depression resulting. 5. The project proposes a gross density of approximately one unit per two acres with an average residential lot size of about one-half acre. The EAW in question 12 should indicate that the project is inconsistent with the Council's policy supporting one unit per ten acres for the general rural use rural use area. 6. The project is located in the city's rural residential area. The city's comprehensive plan designates a density of one unit per 2.5 acres for the rural residential area. The city is urged to amend its comprehensive plan to bring it into conformance with the MDIF one per ten density policy for the general rural use area. Respectfully submitted, Joan Campbell, Chair I I METROPOLITAN COOK CIL Suite 300 Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612-291-6359 DATE: May 18, 1987 TO: Metropolitan and Community Development Committee FROM: Paul Smith, Research and Long-Range Planning SUBJECT: O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), City of Shakopee, Metropolitan Council Referral File 14189-1, Metropolitan Council District 14 INTRODUCTION O'Dowd Lake Estates is a planned unit development for housing and an 18-hole golf course on 200 acres adjacent to (and north of) O'Dowd Lake within the City of Shakopee. The property abuts County Roads 77 and 79, respectively, to the north and west (see Figure 1 ). The project consists of 87 single family lots configured around the golf course and 12 units of attached single family homes in the clubhouse area. The residential development will occupy 51.5 acres and the golf course 148.5 acres. The project will be served by a central water system and individual on-site septic systems. The golf course is scheduled for grading and seeding this summer, and the first phase housing is scheduled to be built next spring. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW An EAW prepared under the Minnesota Environmental Review Program must be submitted to the Metropolitan Council and other agencies for review. Any recipient of an EAW or member of the public may make comments and recommendations to the responsible governmental unit (RGU). The City of Shakopee is the ROD for this project. Comments are to address the accuracy and completeness of the EAW information, and potential impacts that may warrant investigation and/or the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS). ANALYSIS TRANSPORTATION Traffic generated by the development will not have impacts on the metro highway system. It appears that the existing county roads that will receive the new traffic have the capacity to handle them. This EAW is adequate from a transportation perspective. HOUSING The project includes 87 single family lots around the golf course and 12 units of attached single family homes in the clubhouse area. The development is proposed in the rural service area of Shakopee. Council Housing Policy 23 E. 1 states: "Council policy does not encourage residential development in the rural service area." z I � � I I I I I _ ,F SHAXCf —14 --- - --_—_ —•4 ----lg— _ — . ., 7 i ••• I ICO.RnD.o.�. I I I I I I .,� ' O'Dowd 8 I Lake i . I Estates _ i fli _ I I 4 s - ` .•,may re Figure 1 I z 1 , c" I _ Y • , I 77 I I q I o.xc.re e I I ; 1 I 1 e I O'Dowd S �1 S I Lake i. 1 Estates I / ' ... �p.~hyo, 1 i"• �• i I I I Figure 1 3 WATER RESOURCES On-site Sewage Systems The project area is 1n the rural service area about one mile or more south of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) in Shakopee. The project is planned to be served with individual on-site sewage systems for each dwelling and a central water system which will serve all dwellings, the golf clubhouse and golf course. The EAW provides a layout of the development which shows what areas will be golf course and what areas will be residential development areas. The EAW also provides a soils map which lists the kinds of soils and provides an interpre- tation of these soils for on-site system use. In addition, a number of soil borings are provided where on-site systems might possibly be located. The EAW states that Minnesota rules 7080 will be used as the standard for on-site system installation. The Council's review of the Shakopee comprehensive plan in April 1981 states that the plan is not in conformance with the Water Resources Management Development Guide/ Policy Plan regarding on-site sewer system management. The city's plan proposed 2.5 acre rural area development, but did not adopt all of the procedures recommended for managing on-site systems where the proposed rural area density exceeds the density of one dwelling per 10 acres. Shakopee has had a number of comprehensive plan amendments adopted by the city which principally enlarged the urban service area where urban services such as sanitary sewer, water, streets and drainage are to be provided. However, the city has not amended its plan for the rural service area to one dwelling per 10 acres or has not amended its comprehensive plan to provide for adequate on-site system maintenance. Adequate on-site system maintenance is essential, especially where density is high so that premature central sanitary sewer installation and service is not necessary for large areas of their rural service region. Premature central sanitary sewer service to large rural area developments will negatively impact the metropolitan sewer system. The plan shows that most of the dwelling sites will be one-half acre lots and many of the lots will have soils that cannot be used for adequate on-site system use. Soils which require that mound drainfields be used are shown in a map. Six of seven soil borings from possible drainfield locations shows that mottled soil is encountered from 1.5 to Y feet below the soil surface. Mottled soils is visual evidence that a high groundwater table is present at that elevation on a regular basis. A drainfield would not work at these locations. Regulation 7080 requires mottled soil be at least 6 feet below the ground surface so there is at least 4 feet of dry soil for filtering effect. There is no indication that Shakopee has an adequate on-site system management program. Steep slopes, high groundwater table, the use of mound drainfields all point to early failure of drainfields. Therefore, it is essential that a very well managed on-site system regulation be in effect where drainfields are located in marginal lands. 4 / .2i 0i This development could cause an impact to the metropoltian sewerage system if service to them is provided, because the Blue Lake wastewater treatment plant is nearing overload and expansion will not be provided for several years. The EAW should be expanded to provide information regarding changes that can be made to the development to make its on-site septic systems trouble free. Water Supply The EAW states that rainfall will provide over 180 million galloiss of water. While this is correct, only a fraction (probably about one-fifth) of this will runoff to the irrigation ponds for the gol course. The EAW should include a more s rious a ysis of runoff and a pond water balance to identify the extent t which he ponds will be sufficient to irrigate the golf course. An am ysis of groundwater pumpage should be presented, including the cone of d pr ssion resulting. METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVES T FRAMEWORK The project is located within the t o 'Ji Development and Investment Framework's (MDIF) general rural se ^ea. This project proposes a gross development density of appro ely o @@ unit per two acres with an average residential lot size of about a-half $ re. This density and average lot size is considered urban level deve pment anc�exceeds the lIDIF density for fhe general rural use area. MDIF olicy 18 says: "The Metropolitan Council supports long-term preservation of agricultural land in the general rura use area. However, the Council will also support residential deve opment at densities of no more than one unit Per ten acres computed o a four units per forty acre basis (a maximum of four units per forty acres). The Council will not extend metropolitan systems to serve urban-density residential development in the general rural use area. Where urban-density development already exists, a local government should address service issues in its plan, particularly on-site sewer system operation and maintenance." The EAW in question 12 should indicate that the project is inconsistent with the Council's MDIF density policy for the general rural use area. According to Shakopee's comprehensive plan the project is in a rural residential and shoreland area. The Council's review of Shakopee's comprehensive plan in 1981 states that the plan is not in full conformity with the Metropolitan Development Framework, because of the 2.5 acre lot size planned for the rural residential area. There have been no amendments since then to bring the plan into compliance with the one per ten density policy for the general rural use area. The city should be urged to amend its plan for conformity with this policy. a lye This development could cause an impact to the metropoltian sewerage system if service to them is provided, because the Blue Lake wastewater treatment plant is nearing overload and expansion will not be provided for several years. The EAW should be expanded to provide information regarding changes that can be made to the development to make its on-site septic systems trouble free. Water Supply The EAW states that rainfall will provide over 180 million gallons of water. While this is correct, only a fraction (probably about one-fifth) of this will runoff to the irrigation ponds for the golf course. The EAW should include a more serious analysis of runoff and a pond water balance to identify the extent to which the ponds will be sufficient to irrigate the golf course. An analysis of groundwater pumpage should be presented, including the cone of depression resulting. METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK The project is located within the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework's (MDIF) general rural use area. This project proposes a gross development density of approximately one unit per two acres with an average residential lot size of about one-half acre. This density and average lot size is considered urban level development and exceeds the MDIF density .o. general rural use area. MDIF Policy 18 says: -The Metropolitan Council supports long-term preservation of agricultural land in the general rural use area. However, the Council will also support residential development at densities of no more than one unit per ten acres computed on a four units per forty acre basis (a maximum of four units per forty acres). The Council will not extend metropolitan systems to serve urban-density residential development in the general rural use area. Where urban-density development already exists, a local government should address service issues in its plan, particularly on-site sewer system operation and maintenance." The EAW in question 12 should indicate that the project is inecnsistent with the Council's MOTE density policy for the general rural use area. According to Shakopee's comprehensive plan the project is in a rural residential and shoreland area. The Council's review of Shakopee's comprehensive plan in 1981 states that the plan is not in full conformity with the Metropolitan Development Framework, because of the 2.5 acre lot size planned for the rural residential area. There have been no amendments since then to bring the plan into compliance with the one per ten density policy for the general rural use area. The city should be urged to amend its plan for conformity with this policy. s RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION;? That the Metropolitan Council adopt this report and the following conclusions as its comments on the O'Dowd Lake Estates EAW. 1. The EAW is adequate from a transportation perspective. 2. Council housing policy does not encourage residential development in the rural service area. 3. There is no indication that Spakopee has an adequate on-site system management program. Steep slop`•s, high groundwater table, the use of mound drainfields all point to early fai-'_r` c-r A,minfield . it is essential that a very well managed on-site system regulation be in effect where drainfields are located in marginal lands. This development could cause an impact to the metropolitan sewerage system if service to them is provided, because the Slue Lake wastewater treatment plant is nearing overload and expansion will not be provided for several years. The EAW should include more information regarding changes that can be made to the development to make its on-site septic systems trouble free. 4. The EAW is incomplete regarding analysis of the water supply for irrigation of the golf course. A more serious analysis should be included in the EAW of runoff and a pond water balance to identify the extent to which the ponds will be sufficient to irrigate the golf course. An analysis of groundwater pumpage should be presented, including the cone of depression resulting. The project proposes a gross density of approximately one unit per two acres with an average residential lot size of about one-half acre. The EAW in ouestion 12 should indicate that the project is inconsistent with the Council's policy supporting one unit per ten acres for the general rural use area. 6. The project is located in the city's rural residential area. The city's comprehensive plan designates a density of one unit per 2.5 acres for the rural residential area. The city is urged to amend its comprehensive plan to bring it into conformance with the MDIF one per ten density policy for the general rural use area. PS001A �\NNE�rq 9ry � Minnesota Department of Transportation 3F rg Transportation Building, St. Paul, MN 55155 OF TPPt� March 28, 1987 296-1652 Phone Doug Wise City Planner City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: O'Dowd Lake Estates an Gol Course Environmental Assessme t W ksheet (EAW) District 5 (Shakopee, co Co. ) Dear Mr. Wise: The Minnesota Department of ansportation (Mn/DOT) has completed a review of the above-referen a EAW. We anticipate that the proposed project will cause little v as impact to our transportation facilities. If you reouire additional information from Mn/DOT, please contact Carl Boffstedt, Transportation Analsyis Engineer at our District office in Golden Valley, phone nu er (612) 593-8540. Sincerely, 136A/XC Cheryl Heide, Environmental Coordinator Environmental Services Section RECEIVEd JUN - 4 1981 CITY OF SHAKOPEE An Epual oppormnip'Emplo ver O y ° Minnesota Department of Transportation ie Transportation Building, St. Paul, MN 55155 tir OF TFP�� March 28, 1987 296-1652 Phone Doug Wise City Planner City of Shakopee 129 East lst Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Course Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) District 5 (Shakopee, Scott Co. ) Dear Mr. Wise: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has completed a review of the above-referenced EAW. We anticipate that the proposed project will cause little adverse impact to our transportation facilities. If you require additional information from Mn/DOT, please contact Carl Boffstedt, Transportation Analsyis Engineer at our District Office in Golden Valley, phone number ( 612) 593-8540. Sincerely, Cheryl Environmental Coordinator Environmental Services Section i RECEIVEb JUN - 41981 CITY OF SHAKOPEE An EgW1 Opppnunl"Employer � y " 16) STATEMENT: "Does the site contain peat soils, etc. ? If yes show on site map and explain. " Response: "Yes. " FACT: A site map is attached but no explanation is provided. This omission is critical because it requires that the individual reader make technical judgments. It defeats the purpose of the environmental assess ent work hee t, which is to identify the hazards of the partic lar de elopment being assessed. 17) STATEMENT: "What is the approximate de h in feet to ground water?" Answer : "three feet minimum, FACT: Much of the property is marshy and has standing water on the surface. Particular attention i drawn to the area on the proposed Cambridge Way near Lake law Drive, now covered by two to three feet of water. 18) STATEMENT: "The lake shore lots involve the replanning of undeveloped small lots of record into a lesser number of larger lots. " FACT: Under existing applicable shoreline regulations, a smaller number of lots is permitted than proposed by this development. 19) STATEMENT: "Describe any physical alteration of any drainage system, etc. " Response : "Some wetland areas will be filled, others expanded and some drainage channels with control surface structures will be constructed. " FACT: This development proposes a massive reorientation of the current topography. Our estimate is in excess of 150, 000 cubic yards must be moved. The assessment worksheet fails to reasonably identify the changes which are proposed. a, Ca i z -AIL WO JUN- =. 1987 To the recipients of the O'Dowd Lake EAW; S' I have reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet attached a list of the obvious and errors and a major ommission. OMISSION: Nothing refers to the Louisville Sanitary Dump. Is this a hazard? bar Will ninety-six homes, a golf on7course and the restaurant No' and bar spread the ne i is headed. The County l and l MPGA are ostudy Ong itWS . Shouldn' t we wait for their report and be sure. e this P°Ilutic 6) iBecause of the size of the project and because the current ' environmental assessment worksheet is deficient and urge that the developers be required inaccurate, we to provide an accurate environmental assessment worksheet. i An accurate environmental assessment worksheet may su I environmental impact study is required. ggest that an 9)� The proposal was originally for 109 units. The number of units was reduced to avoid the requirement of an environmental its impact - - statement but ninet I bar (the equivalent yOf 1 sixnadditiona(resilunt ) eisand restaurant the and one j hundred unit threshold. Your good is still judgment argues for caution. Thank you for your consideration. 12) ^ ' Don McKush I MCKUSH. / MISC 3 6-2-67 a) ' y CL, 16) STATEMENT: "Does the site contain peat soils, etc. ? If yes show on site map and explain. " Response : "Yes. " FACT: A site map is attached but no explanation is provided. This omission is critical because it requires that the individual reader make technical judgments. It defeats the purpose of the environmental assessment worksheet, which is to identify the hazards of the particular development being assessed. 17) STATEMENT: "What is the approximate depth in feet to ground water?" Answer : "three feet minimum. " FACT: Much of the property is marshy and has standing water on the surface. Particular attention is drawn to the area on the proposed Cambridge Way near Lakeview Drive, now covered by two to three feet of water. 18) STATEMENT: "The lake shore lots involve the replanning of undeveloped small lots of record into a lesser number of larger lots. " FACT: Under existing applicable shoreline regulations, a smaller number of lots is permitted than proposed by this development. 19) STATEMENT: "Describe any physical alteration of any drainage system, etc. " Response : "Some wetland areas will be filled, others expanded and some drainage channels with control surface structures will be constructed. " FACT: This development proposes a massive reorientation of the current topography. Our estimate is in excess of 150, 000 cubic yards must be moved. The assessment worksheet fails to reasonably identify the changes which are proposed. ^^rS(�rTAATEE OF uV UV L�2J� l1 L=.1 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BOX SOO LAFAYETTE ROAD 5T. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55146 DNR INFORMATION (61 2) 79"157 '9;,SG,0SV June 4, 1987 101 glggl Or Mr. Doug Wise City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Course Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Dear Mr. Wise: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the above-referenced document and we offer the following comments for your consideration. As you are probably aware, there has already been some coordination between the project's developer and our Department. Our concerns all relate to the project's potential impacts on water resources and the associated use by wildlife and people. The site plan indicates that golf course hole #4 would involve some encroachment or alteration of a protected wetland. This type of encroachment would probably not be permitted by us. Also, we would like the design changed to avoid filling in the wetland next to hole #1. Hitting golf balls across the lake at hole #8 could interfere with public use of this part of the lake and should be reconsidered. Because of several factors occurring at this site, there will probably be a problem with too many geese. Canada goose populations have been increasing in the metropolitan area in the last several years. Geese are particularly attracted to golf courses because the grass provides an excellent food source for the birds. The city should anticipate this problem of overpopulation of geese and may want to consider some appropriate control method, such as a limited hunt. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER We-do not recommend th t an environmental impact atement be prepared for this project. However, we do suggest that certain sign modifications be made as described above. Thankyoufor the opportun it to review it. If you have any questions regarding ou comments, please co act Don Buckhout of my staff at (612) 296-8212. eph M. urcinka, Supervisor Environmental and Management Analysis Section cc: Kathleen Wallace Jon Parker - Mike Mueller Tom Keefe Gregg Down ' g - EQB Gary Laur nt - Laurent Builders 206 We-do not recommend that an environmental impact statement be prepared for this project. However, we do suggest that certain design modifications be made as described above. Thankyoufor the opportunity to review it. 1f you have any questions regarding our comments, please contact Don Buckhout of my staff at (612) 296-8212. eph M. urc inka, Supervisor Environmental and Management Analysis Section cc: Kathleen Wallace Jon Parker Mike Mueller Tom Keefe Gregg Downing - EQB Gary Laurent - Laurent Builders 206 SCOTT COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH _ COURT HOUSE A102 SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379.1393 (612)-445-7750. Ern.m May 29, 1987 Mr. Douglas K. Wise Administrative Assistant City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minn. 55379 Dear Mr. Wise: This letter serves as a response to the request for review and comments on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet on the O'Dowd Lake Estates & Golf Course project in Shakopee. I have reviewed the EAW and have concluded that there was insufficient information provided to answer the concerns that I had identified in my April 10 letter to Barry Stock. In that letter I identified two major concerns regarding this project. They were the potential for ground water contamination from a high concentration of on-site sewage systems and the possibility of ground water flow reversal under heavy pumping pressure possible with a golf course and residential water supply system. The ground water reversal was an issue due to the known ground water contamination that exists approximately 3 1/2 miles west of the project site. Contaminated ground water could be drawn toward this area and impact wells between this site and the contamination source. After reviewing the EAW and in consideration of my previously noted concerns I have the following consents: Although some soil testing had been completed, not enough data was available in the EAW to adequately evaluate the suitability of this area for the proposed number of on-site sewage systems. More information should be provided especially for the larger townhouse and club house systems. When reviewing proposed new residential subdivisions we (Scott County) require sufficient soil information to determine if each individual lot can support a standard on-site sewage system. This information should be provided before final lot locations are approved. Good judgement appears to have already been used in laying out the locations of lots. The fact that the lots are spread out and not concentrated in one area greatly mitigates my concern about contamination of ground water from on-site sewage systems. Although nitrates may still reach the ground water their effects are not as likely to be noticed as a concentrated plume downstream on the water table. The additional soil information is not necessarily needed as part of an EAW. I understand the developer is already collecting more data on soils for sewage system construction. The concern I had noted of the potential for ground water flow reversal has been diminished with the clarification of the source of water for the golf course. I should note however, that the calculations presented to determine the amount of capturable precipitation available for An Equal Opponuniry Employer Page 2 Mr. Wise t L-a� May 29, 1987 use on the golf course seemed overly optimistic. It is not very likely that all of the average yearly precipitation of 25" over the project watershed area of 270 acres could be captured, stored and available for use on the golf course. These calculations should be checked and corrected when determining the water demands for this project. Also, since we have not yet completed our study of the hydrogeology around Louisville Landfill, I am still uncertain as to the impact this project might have on the ground water in the area. The project developer has indicated to me that there are several options for water supply for this project (although they were not noted in this EAW). If the possibility of bringing water out to the project from Shakopee is realistic and acceptable to the City in the event that Scott County's study indicates that it may be necessary, then this issue should not delay the project. However, the determination of which route to go for a water supply shoo not be finalized until more is known about the hydrogeology in this ars My concern about the impact on the ground water has not been adequate y addressed by the cursory information provided in the RAW. I would like to see this issue explored further or as indicated by the develo r a back p water supply option made available in the event that our study 'dentifi s a valid concern. I had indicated in my previo ly entioned letter that this project was only one residential unit below th imit for a mandatory Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) . If one considers t e relative impact of adding one more residential home versus that of a go course and club house plus substituting some of the homes for townhouses, I i they would also conclude that an EIS is a very reasonable requirement. Al o, if there is any possibility that more units could eventually be added to th s d elopment an EIS before it got started would be the best approach. here e, I still would recommend that an EIS be completed. However, the conce s the I have could be adequately addressed by simply providing specific informs ion relative to the soils and hydrology. The Scott County hydrogeol ical st y has been unfortunately delayed, but should be completed by mi summer. I would be glad to work with you f her resolving the concerns I have identified if the Shakopee City Council agrees that they would like to see some more information before proceeding. Thank you for this opportunity to respond and provide comments on this project. Sincerely, 1A^. Ly24 Allen Frechette Environmental Health Manager cc: Richard Mertz, Commissioner Joe Ries, Co. Administrator Gary Laurent, Proposer Greg Downing, EQB Jim Theis, Clerk of Louisville Twp. Roselyn Menke, Clerk of Jackson Two. Page 2 Mr. Wise .a May 29, 1987 use on the co-If course seemed overly optimistic. It is not very likely that all of the average yearly precipitation of 25" over the project watershed area of 270 acres could be captured, stored and available for use on the Golf course. These calculations should be checked and corrected when determining the water demands for this project. Also, since we have not yet completed our study of the hydrogeology around Louisville Landfill, I am still uncertain as to the impact this project might have on the ground water in the area. The project developer has indicated to me that there are several options for water supply for this project (although they were not noted in this EAW) . If the possibility of bringing water out to the project from Shakopee is realistic and acceptable to the City in the event that Scott County's study indicates that it may be necessary, then this issue should not delay the project. However, the determination of which route to go for a water supply should not be finalized until more is known about the hydrogeology in this area. My concern about the impact on the ground water has not been adequately addressed by the cursory information provided in the SAW. I would like to see this issue explored further or as indicated by the developer a back up water supply option made available in the event that our study identifies a valid concern. I had indicated in my previously mentioned letter that this project was only one residential unit below the limit for a mandatory Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). If one considers the relative impact of adding one more residential home versus that of a golf course and club house plus substituting some of the homes for townhouses, I think they would also conclude that an EIS is a very reasonable requirement. Also, if there is any possibility that more units could eventually be added to this development an EIS before it got started would be the best approach. Therefore, I still would recommend that an EIS be completed. However, the concerns that I have could be adequately addressed by simply providing specific information relative to the soils and hydrology. The Scott County hydrogeological study has been unfortunately delayed, but should be completed by mid summer. I would be glad to work with you further resolving the concerns I have identified if the Shakopee City Council agrees that they would like to see some more information before proceeding. Thank you for this opportunity to respond and provide comments on this project. Sincerely, Allen Frechette°t���✓�"� Environmental Health Manager cc: Richard Mertz, Commissioner Joe Ries, Co. Administrator Gary Laurent, Proposer Greg Downing, EQB Jim Theis, Clerk of Louisville Twp. Roselyn Menke, Clerk of Jackson Two. 6 CIF O Metropolitan Council O { �Q 300 Metro Square Building Seventh and Robert Streets o St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Hix r it Telephone(612)291-6359 1mO� June 2, 1987 Douglas K. Wise, Planner City of Shakopee 129 - 1st Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Environmental Assessment Worksheet O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club City of Shakopee Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14189-1 Dear Mr. Wise: At its meeting on May 28, 1987, the Metropolitan Council considered the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club. This consideration was based on a report of the Metropolitan and Community Development Committee, Referral Report No. 87-43• A copy of this report is attached. The Council adopted the following recommendations contained in the above report: 1. The SAW is adequate from a transportation perspective. 2. Council housing policy does not encourage residential development in the rural service area. 3• _ There is no indication that Shakopee has an adequate on-site system management program. Steep slopes, high groundwater table, the use of mound drainfields all point to early failure of drainfields. it is essential that a very well managed on-site system regulation be in effect where drainfields are located in marginal lands. This development could cause an impact to the metropolitan sewerage system if service to them is provided, because the Blue Lake wastewater treatment plant is nearing overload and expansion will not be provided for several years. The SAW should include more information regarding changes that can be made to the development to make its on-site septic systems trouble free. M Equal Oppawnity Employer CL� Page 2 Douglas K. Wise 4. The EAW is incomplete regarding analysis of the water supply for irrigation of the golf course. A more serious analysis should be included in the EAW of runoff and a pond water balance to identify the extent to which the ponds will be sufficient to irrigate the golf course. An analysis of groundwater pumpage should be presented, including the cone of depression resulting. 5. The project proposes a gross density of approximately one unit per two acres with an average esidential lot size of about one-half acre. The EAW in euestio 12 should indicate that the project is inconsistent with the Co oil's policy supporting one unit per ten acres for the general ru al use area. 6. The project is 1 Gated n the city's rural residential area. The city's comprehens ve pl designates a density of one unit per 2.5 acres for the rura res dentla.I area. The city is urged to amend its comprehensive of o bring it into conformance with the MDIF one per ten density polio or the general rural use area. The Metropolitan Council is not esting that an Environmental ImDact Statement (EIS) be done. Attached is a copy of a letter fr m the pit Soil and Water Conservation District. Sincerely, Steve Keefe Chair SK:11 Attachments cc: Greg Downing, Environmental Review Coordinator, Environ. Rev. Sec.,EQB John Anderson, City of Shakopee Gary Laurent and Tom Haugen, Laurent Builders Paul Smith, Metropolitan Council Staff Page 2 Douglas K. Wise A. The EAW is incomplete regarding analysis of the water supply for irrigation of the golf course. A more serious analysis should be included in the EAW of runoff and a pond water balance to identify the extent to which the ponds will be sufficient to irrigate the golf course. An analysis of groundwater pumpage should be presented, including the cone of depression resulting. 5• The project proposes a gross density of approximately one unit per two acres with an average residential lot size of about one-half acre. The EAW in question 12 should indicate that the project is inconsistent with the Council's policy supporting one unit per ten acres for the general rural use area. 6. The project is located in the city's rural residential area. The city's comprehensive plan designates a density of one unit per 2.5 acres for the rural residential area. The city is urged to amend its comprehensive plan to bring it into conformance with the MDL° one per ten density policy for the general rural use area. The Metropolitan Council is not requesting that an Environmental impact Statement (EIS) be done. Attached is a copy of a letter from the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District. Sincerely, jt[�_i_( l Steve Keefe Chair SK:ll Attachments cc: Greg Downing, Environmental Review Coordinator, Environ. Rev. Sec.,ECB John Anderson, City of Shakopee Gary Laurent and Tom Haugen, Laurent Builders Paul Smith, Metropolitan Council Staff SCOTT SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Ia-a-- 10)worvArwi lwtlon.N.iwrwre 5S8t LbpOem 1641 1OtO6l6 May 28, 1987 MINNESOTA SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS Metropolitan Council 300 Metro Square Bldg. 7th & Robert Streets St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Re : Metro Council Referral File 14189-1 To Whom It May Concern: O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Course If all erosion and sediment control measures are carried out accord- ing to the proposals set forth in the EAW there should be a decrease in sediment leaving the site. Nutrients leaving the site may in- crease due to the use of fertilizers to establish and maintain a good turf on the golf course. Inspections of the erosion control practices should be completed periodically during. construction by the regulating unit of govern- ment� or their representative. Wilmer Gruetzmacher �7 Scott SWCD A" EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER �ia1 .411-@ RECEIVED JUN - 11987 CITY OF SHAK,OPEE Minnesota Pollution Control Agency May 27, 1987 Mr. Doug Wise City Planner City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Wise: Re: O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Cours EAW, City of Shakopee/Scott County The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ) staff has reviewed the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW f the O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Course in the City of Shakopee and has ete 'ned that the project does not have the potential for significant env'ronme tal effects. The staff does, however, have comments to offer in the ter lity area. The nutrient content of the runoff fro the go f course area is likely to be high. Therefore, it is recommended t wateri g programs emphasize storage pond drawdown in the months of the s r and fall in order to maximize storage of water from snowmelt and ra' fall during the spring. Thank you for the opportunity to c nt On this project. if you have any questions regarding these comments, p ease contact Marlene Voita of my staff at 612-296-7275. Sincerely, CY` ford T. Anderson Director Office of Planning and Review CTA:mfl cc: Mr. Gregg Downing, Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Phone' 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Regional Offices • Duluth/Brainerd/Detroit Lakes/Marshall/Rochester Equal Opponunity Employer RECEIVED � �ct. JUN - 11987 CITY Or SHAY,OPcE Minnesota Pollution Control Agency May 27, 1987 Mr. Doug wise City Planner City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Wise: Re: O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Course EAW, City of Shakopee/Scott County The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has reviewed the environmental assessment worksheet (EW) for the O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Course in the City of Shakopee and has determined that the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. The staff does, however, have comments to offer in the water quality area. The nutrient content of the runoff from the golf course area is likely to be high. Therefore, it is recommended that watering programs emphasize storage nand drawdown in the months of the summer and fall in order to maximize storage of water from snowmelt and rainfall during the spring. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions regarding these convents, please contact Marlene Voita of my staff at 612-296-7275. Sincerely, Cy' ford T. Ande_son Director Office of Planning and Review CTA! lfl cc: Mr. Gregg Downing, Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Phone 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Regional Offices • Duluth/Brainerd/Detroit Lakes/Marshall/P.ochester Equal Opponunity Employer MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Horizon Heights 4th Addition Preliminary Plat DATE: June 11, 1987 Introduction• At their meeting on June 4, 1987 the Planning Commission passed a motion recommending approval of the preliminary plat for Horizon Heights 4th Addition subject to conditions. Background: The City has received a preliminary plat for Horizon Heights 4th Addition from Mr. Muhlenhardt for 48 lots located in the southeast end of Shakopee. (Plan enclosed) . The area is zoned R-1 and does not have City water and sewer service available. The proposed lots are 2 1/2 acres or more. The developer has proposed dedicating Lot 11, Block 2 to the City for park purposes. The City staff has recommended not accepting the land because it has limited development potential for a park and does not meet future park needs for this part of the City. The Planning Commission has discussed the future of Muhlenhardt Road and based on staff recommendation would require the developer to petition for its upgrading. This will initiate a feasibility study recommending a future course of action regarding the road. The developer requested a variance to the City' s requirement for street grades not to exceed 5%. The Planning Commission has recommended denying this variance based on a recommendation from the City Engineer indicating he did not see a hardship regarding the developers ability to meet the City requirements. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Horizon Heights 4th Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. All street grades must conform to the 5% maximum allowed by City Code. 2. The developer must petition for the upgrading of Muhlenhardt Road. The intersection of Muhlenhardt Road and County Road 121 must be changed to provide a 90 degree intersection and direct alignment with Sunrise Lane. 3. A variance from City policy is hereby approved to allow six accesses onto County Road #21. Four will be street accesses, two will be joint accesses serving individual lots. County entrance permits will be required for each access. 4. Payment in lieu of land dedication for park purposes is required. 5. Street cross sections and profiles must be submitted with the final plat. 6. A soils analysis confirmi the suitability of each site for on site sewage treatment ystems must be submitted with the final plat. 7. Street lights shall be provided on all intersections and cul-de-sac ends. 8. Execution of a de lopers agreement for construction of required improvemen s A. Street lighting t be installed in accordance with the requirements of REA B. Local streets a d st et signs shall be constructed in accordance with the re uirements of the design criteria and standard sp cifica ions of the City of Shakopee. 9. Approval of a title o inion by the City Attorney. Action Requested: Offer and approve a motion approving the preliminary plat for Horizon Heights 4th Addition subject to the conditions listed in the Planning Commission minutes for June 4, 1987. .I- JX'e 3. A variance from City policy is hereby approved to allow six accesses onto County Road #21. Four will be street accesses, two will be joint accesses serving individual lots. County entrance permits will be required for each access. 4. Payment in lieu of land dedication for park purposes is required. 3. Street cross sections and profiles must be submitted with the final plat. 6. A soils analysis confirming the suitability of each site for on site sewage treatment systems must be submitted with the final plat. 7. Street lights shall be provided on all intersections and cul-de-sac ends. 8. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of required improvements: A. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of REA. B. Local streets and street signs shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. 9. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney. Action Requested: Offer and approve a motion approving the preliminary plat for Horizon Heights 4th Addition subject to the conditions listed in the Planning Commission minutes for June 4, 1987. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Heritage Place Preliminary Plat DATE: June 10, 1987 introduction• At their meeting on June 4, 1987 the Planning Commission passed a motion recommending approval of the preliminary plat for Heritage Place subject to conditions. Background• The City has received a preliminary plat for Heritage Place from Heritage Development Corporation for 71 lots located south of JEJ 2nd Addition and west of Hauer' s 4th Addition. The property is zoned R-2. Access to the property is from Onyx Drive in Hauer' s 4th Addition or across the undeveloped land to the south to the future Vierling Drive. The proposed drainage way and trail system runs along the north end of the property. JEJ Park is located west of the site. Water and sewer is adjacent to the property. Oversized water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer lines must cross the site to serve the area to the south. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission - recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Heritage Place subject to the following conditions: 1. The 12" water main in Austin Street must be extended through the plat on an alignment approved by SPUC. 2. Additional depth and oversizing of the sanitary sewer will be required to serve the Scottland property to the south. 3. An oversized storm sewer will be required to handle additional drainage from the south. The design of this through drainage must be coordinated with the Developer' s Engineer and the City Engineer. Cost of the storm drainage facilities beyond that necessary for the plat should be borne by the property owners to the south. 4. Street lighting should be provided at both ends of 12th Avenue and two intermediate points on the north part of the plat. 5. Outlot A & B, and drainageway/trail (Outlot C) will be dedicated to the City for park purposes. This area will count towards park dedication requirements, payment in lieu will also be required. .�I- /.I- Q- 6. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of required improvements: A. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. H. Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. The developer will be reimbursed for the cost of oversizing of the water main. C. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. The developer will be reimbursed for the cost of oversizing of the sanitary sewer and storm sewer. D. Local stree and street signs shall be constructed in accordance wit the re irements of the design criteria and standard sp ifica ions of the City of Shakopee. 7. Approval of a title op i io by the City Attorney. 8. The developer must acqui all land to be dedicated as Onyx Drive or have the other operty owner sign the plat or pay land acquisition costs ' f t e property must be acquired by the City. 9. The developer shall p ovide a recordable agreement stating that not more than 108 of the p t will be developed into twin homes. Twin omes will require separate utility connections and sites must , be identified before the installation of utilities. 10. Temporary drainage containment facilities must be provided on site adequate to handle drainage from the site until construction of the Upper Valley Drainageway is complete to the subdivision. A plan for the temporary drainage system must be submitted with the final plat. Action Requested: Offer and pass a motion approving the preliminary plat for Heritage Place subject to the conditions listed in the Planning Commission minutes for June 4, 1987. c- 6. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of required improvements: A. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. B. water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. The developer will be reimbursed for the cost of oversizing of the water main. C. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. The developer will be reimbursed for the cost of oversizing of the sanitary sewer and storm sewer. D. Local streets and street signs shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. 7. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney. 8. The developer must acquire all land to be dedicated as Onyx Drive or have the other property owner sign the plat or pay land acquisition costs if the property must be acquired by the City. 9. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating that not more than 10% of the plat will be developed into twin homes. Twin homes will require separate utility connections and sites must , be identified before the installation of utilities. 10. Temporary drainage containment facilities must be provided on site adequate to handle drainage from the site until construction of the Upper Valley Drainageway is complete to the subdivision. A plan for the temporary drainage system must be submitted with the final plat. Action Recuested: Offer and pass a motion approving the preliminary plat for Heritage Place subject to the conditions listed in the Planning Commission minutes for June 4, 1987. A& MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Planning Commission Request to Impose a Moratorium on the Development of the Starwood Music Center and to Conduct a Study on the Impact of the Proposed Starwood Music Center Upon the Future Industrial Development of Shakopee. DATE: June 11, 1987 Introduction- At the Planning Commission meeting on June 4, 1987 a motion was passed by unanimous vote which requested that the Shakopee City Council authorize the hiring of a consultant to conduct a study on the proposed impact of the Starwood Music Center upon the future industrial growth of the City of Shakopee. The essence of this motion would result in a moratorium on the development of the Starwood Music Center, at least, until the completion of the study. The future of the center would then be partially contingent upon the out come of the study. Background: On August 9, 1984 the Planning Commission, by unanimous vote recommended that the study entitled Shakopee Racetrack Area Planning and Zoning Study be approved. At that time the Planning Commission also recommended, by unanimous vote, that Section 11. 33, Subd. 2 and 3 (Zoning Ordinance) be amended by changing the commercial recreation use from a permitted use to a conditionally permitted use in the I-2 zone. On January 31, 1985 Ordinance #158, 4th Series became effective. This ordinance amended the Shakopee City Code ( Zoning Ordinance) by providing that minor commercial recreation facilities were to be allowed as a conditionally permitted use in the I-2 zone. "A minor commercial recreation facility is defined as a building, structure or open space designed, constructed and operated by private enterprise for recreational purposes and open to the general public. The facility must meet the minimum lot size of the zoning district. Minor commercial recreational facilities shall be all commercial recreation facilities which do not meet the standards of a major commercial recreation facility. Such facilities may include bowling alleys, tennis courts and similar use." (A major recreation facility requires a minimum area of 150 acres. Therefore the proposed Starwood Music Center, which has an area of 86 acres, would be defined as a Minor Commercial Recreation Facility. ) In October, 1986 the Scottland Companies and PACE Productions, Inc. (the developers) announced their intention to construct an outdoor music center in the Canterbury Park Industrial Area. This industrial park is zoned I-2. In reliance upon the Shakopee zoning ordinance the developers have expended a considerable amount of time and money pursuing the development of y � vd the Starwood Music Center. Appendix A, attached, which was prepared by representatives of the Scottland Companies, makes a strong statement in favor of locating the Starwood Music Center where it is proposed to be located. Legal Implications: There is a considerable body of Minnesota case law which relates to the granting of permits for either permitted or conditionally permitted uses when ordinance conditions have been met. In essence, it then becomes the burden of the zoning authority to show why a permit should then not be issued or use then not permitted. This is contrasted with a variance where the burden falls upon the applicant to demonstrate that the variance will not negatively effect the health, safety and welfare of the community. There is also a very recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on a zoning case which relates to a taking occurring when a zoning authority down graded and then subsequently upgraded zoning for a particular parcel of land. As of the writing of this memo copies of that opinion have not yet been obtained however it is believed that it could be material to the subject at hand. The legal implications of a moratorium on the Starwood Music Center at this time is of serious concern to the staff. This area should be thoroughly evaluated prior to any moratorium-type action taken by the City Council. The Assistant City Attorney is presently preparing a legal opinion on this subject and it is anticipated that that opinion will be on the table for the June 16 City Council meeting. The legal opinion will also address the planning study and moratorium issue. Policy Implications: If the action requested by the Planning Commission is implemented there are serious policy implications which must be evaluated. At this time the City is attempting to promote sound industrial development and various groups such as the Industrial Commercial Commission, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Downtown Committee have been working for years on ways upgrading the economic and physical state of the community. The imposition of a moratorium on a development eight months after it has been announced could have a very dramatic impact on not only the Starwood Project but also upon other potential economic development activities of a major magnitude in the community. one of the concerns discussed during the City Council strategic planning session was that of the development environment in the city of Shakopee. The initiation of a moratorium would clearly relate to that issue. Alternatives• 1. Initiate actions which would result in the hiring of a consultant as recommended by the Planning Commission and the imposition of a moratorium on the development of any commercial recreational facilities in any 1-2 zone in the 2- City City of Shakopee. 2. Inform the Planning Commission that the City Council will not take any action relative to the imposition of any moratorium which would interfere with the Starwood Music Center being completed in a timely manner. 3. Decide to hire a consultant and conduct a study of the impact of commercial recreation facilities in I-2 zones as requested by the Planning Commission but exclude the Starwood Music Center from a moratorium if, in fact a moratorium is to be imposed. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council inform the Planning Commission that a study will not be initiated at this time on the impact of the proposed Starwood Music Center on the future industrial development of the City of Shakopee and that a moratorium will not be imposed on the Starwood Music Center at this time. Action Requested: It is requested that the City Council inform the Planning Commission that a moratorum and study of the impact of the Starwood Music Center on the future industrial development of the City will not be initiated at this time. APPCn4 (x A % J e 1. Zoning The City has previously determined that minor and major recreational facilities are a conditional and permitted use for property zoned industrial. That determination made sense before, now and in the future for many reasons discussed hereinafter. In reliance upon that prior determination, the music facility has been planned, the property was sold to the developer (Scottland and PACE) by Valley Industrial Development Company (a partnership of The Scottland Companies and North American Life and Casualty Company) , the company that previously owned it. 2 . Utilities a) Sewer The Music Center will operate on average 51 days each year and will discharge 1, 695, 000 gallons of sewer each year. If the 86 acres were developed for a typical industrial use which is wet, the discharge could be at least 1, 000 gallons per acres per day (g.p.d. ) x 365 x 86 acres = 3,139, 000 gallons per year. Thus there is a savings of 1,444,000 gallons to be used elsewhere for wetter industrial or other uses. A wet industrial use could discharge up to .2, 000 g.p.d. and would likely be prohibited in the Park since the City's guidelines suggest a 1,000 g.p.d. discharge. However, by having less wet industries develop such as the Music Center, there is the possibility that someday a wetter use would be allowed. This situation has proven to be true in regard to the racetrack. b) Water Similarly, the Music center will use far less water than a wet use. 3. Roads The road system is already in place. No additional road improvements are required to accommodate this use. The Music Center would enable the payment of a major portion of the deferred special assessments for those roads. The roads would be used only 51 times each year, and then in the evening hours when there is minimal or no traffic in the industrial park now, or in the future. Few industries create truck traffic in those evening hours. If this 86 acres were developed for industrial uses, it would add traffic during the morning and afternoon rush hours and much of that traffic would be trucks which have a much greater adverse impact on City roads. In addition, a statewide facility such as Starwood in Shakopee would lend Cyd Page 2 support to the need to ensure better roads in the future for this area, for the benefit of everyone in the State visiting the facility. 4. Taxes The project will cost $6 to $7 million to build and could contribute up to $300,000 each year in taxes which is equivalent to the taxes from 150 to 200 homes. This tax base would be added without creating additional demand on - the school system. At such a tax level, the Music Center would be one of the highest paying uses in the Park. (The racetrack is by far the highest taxpayer over all other uses. ) The Music Center would also be subject to a $.25 per patron admission tax ($100,000 per year approximately) which would be used for the Highway 18 Bridge. This tax would be unique to this type of industry and would promote not only industrial development in the Park, but also commercial and residential development in the entire City. 5. There is Ample Land Available for Future Industrial Development. It is estimated that to date approximately 1, 025 acres of Canterbury Park has been developed for commercial, recreational and industrial uses. There remains in excess of 1, 000 acres still owned by VIDCO (a partnership of The Scottland Companies and North American Life and Casualty Company) . In addition to this land are hundreds of acres more of vacant industrial property in and adjacent to Canterbury Park owned by, among others, the Koskovich's, Standard Development Company, Kawasaki, Shiely Company. (See attached map. ) On the eastern edge of the City is an additional 530 vacant acres owned by Wickes and is zoned industrial. In the past five years, in Canterbury Park, few new traditional industrial uses have been developed because of several reasons: a) There are numerous other industrial parks with vacant land. b) Because of fiscal disparities, the real estate taxes are very high in Shakopee. Page 3 C) The tax reform act has eliminated the incentives for businesses to build and own buildings. d) The Twin City area has not developed as a manufacturing/industrial area. e) Labor rates are too high in the Twin City area for many industrial uses. Even if you assume higher absorption rates than the City has ever experienced, at 20 acres per year, the City has at least 40 years of industrial zoned land available in Canterbury Park; at 40 acres per year, the City has at least 20 years of land available in Canterbury Park. In addition there is approximately another 1,200 acres of vacant industrial property owned by others which could extend the supply for another 20 to 40 years. Additionally, when you look at a zoning map of the City, one sees in fact several different industrial park areas, all of which can and will develop separate from each other. Each of the following industrial areas are distinctly different from the other areas because of road access, present uses, etc. : a) Area west of County Road 83. b) Area east of County Road 83 and north of the Bypass. C) Area south of the Bypass and east of County Road 83. d) Area south/west of the Bypass and intersection of County Road 89 (Wickes property) . e) Area north/west of the Bypass and intersection of County Road 89. Normally, industrial parks are sized from 20 to 60 acres. Rarely are there parks larger. In this case, each of the above areas represent 300 to 400 acres. Even within each future park, there will be sub-areas in each area. Again, if you look at stadiums and other recreational facilities across the country, you will frequently find them located in, adjacent or near to such a park or areas within the park. Page 4 6. Other Potential Benefits to the Park from Starwood a) Name Recognition Without doubt, the racetrack (like Valleyfair) has attracted and will attract millions of potential buyers of land to the area for the first time. Starwood will do likewise. b) Joint Use of Parking Lot. At some future time, it may be possible to attract industrial users who could use the Starwood parking lot during the day all year, when it will not be used by Starwood, thus saving millions of dollars of future expense, thus attracting industrial users that otherwise could not afford to develop here. C) Open Space Starwood will be hidden behind trees from the rest of the Park development so it will not appear to be part of the Park. It will provide needed open space years from now when the rest of the Park is developed around it. d) Spin Off Development Without doubt, the racetrack, Murphy's Landing and valleyfair have had a tremendous beneficial impact on the retail service businesses throughout the City, thus increasing jobs and tax base. Starwood will do likewise. A major industrial park needs commercial facilities such as restaurants and hotels to attract industrial users to the area and provide services to them. Starwood will promote the commercial growth and stability and thus industrial development. e) Employment Starwood will employ up to 300 people seasonally. Approximately 41% of the racetrack's employees live in Scott County (410) and 25% live in Shakopee (246) . Employment at Starwood should be similar resulting in 123 jobs in Scott County, and 75 jobs in the City of Shakopee. Although most of these jobs are seasonal, they provide needed jobs for the unemployed and underemployed young adults and adults in the area. In Page 5 addition, jobs are created in the spin-off retail businesses. 7. It is not Unique to Find Recreational Uses in and Adiacent to a Commercial/Industrial Park. For the reasons noted herein, it is not unique to find recreational uses in and adjacent to a commercial/industrial park. This Park has always been planned and zoned for such uses. In the Twin Cities, the Met Center and the former Twins and Vikings old stadium in Bloomington were developed in an office, commercial, recreational and light industrial park. The Metrodome in downtown Minneapolis is located in an area developed for office, commercial and industrial uses. The St. Paul Civic Center has industrial uses nearby. Valleyfair developed across the street from heavy industrial uses and is adjacent to grain terminals. The State Fairgrounds are adjacent to industrial, commercial and residential uses. The Racetrack was built in the middle of an industrial, commercial and recreational park. If you look at stadiums across the country, you will find many of them to be similarly situated. 8. Conclusion Finally, the developers of Canterbury Park (VIDCO, a partnership of The Scottland Companies and North American Life and Casualty Company) still have 900 acres of commercial (140 acres) and industrial (760 acres) in the Park to develop and would never introduce a use into the Park which would adversely affect that future development. They have reviewed that conclusion that Starwood would be . beneficial to the Park with industrial brokers and planners who concur with that analysis. They believe that Starwood would be a desirable tenant for the Park and would help develop this Park into a more successful park in the future. / J ry /. Ir y 1 ID cn N amma_ ae., LAW OFFICES / KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED Phillip R. Kress Dennis L.Monroe Marschall Road Business Center Barry K. Meyer 327 Marschall Road Trevor R. Walden Elizabeth B.McLaughlin P.O.Box 216 Susan L. Estill Shakopee.Minnesota 55379 Diane M.Cad. Telephone 4455080 Lyndon A.Nelson MEMORANDUM Kent A.Carlson.CPA TO: City Council City of Shakopee FROM: Phillip R. Kress DATED: June 16, 1987 RE: Conditional Use Permits Our File No. 1-1373- Question: May the City of Shakopee suspend issuing conditional use permits while studying the potential effects of permitting recreational use in a subdivision zoned industrial? Answer: Under Minnesota Statute and case law, the City may place a moratorium on conditional use permits provided the moratorium is enacted with good faith in a nonarbitrary and nondiscriminatory fashion. However, because of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding land use controls, the City may be exposed to liability for inverse condemnation due to temporary taking of the property's use through regulatory control. Minnesota Statue 5462.355, Subd. 4 provides the requirements for establishing a moratorium or interim ordinance: "If a municipality is conducting studies . for the purpose of considering adoption or amendment of a comprehensive plan the governing body of the municipality may adopt an interim ordinance applicable to all or part of its jurisdiction for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of its citizens. The interim ordinance may regulate, restrict or prohibit any use, development, or subdivision within the jurisdiction or a portion thereof for a period not to exceed one year . . . and may be extended for such additional periods . not exceeding a total additional period of 18 months." Moratoriums are valid if enacted in good faith and without discrimination. Almquist v. Town of Marshan, 308 Minn. 52, 245 N.W.2d 819 (1976). In Almquist, the court ruled that a moratorium on all development ' Ir � Council Members Page -2- June 16, 1987 in a township pending implementation of a comprehensive zoning plan was justified. The court stated that: "Where a municipality enacts in good faith and without discrimination, a moratorium or development which is limited in duration, it is valid if upon enactment, the study (of the comprehensive plan) proceeds promptly and appropriate zoning ordinances are expeditiously adopted when it is completed." Id., at 827. To support the validity of an interim land use control ordinance if challenged in court, the League of Minnesota Cities recommends the following suggestions be considered when drafting the ordinance. 1. The more nearly the procedure complies with requirments for a permanent zoning ordinacne, the more likely will an interim ordinance be considered valid. This means making use of available land use information, using the planning commission, following notice and hearing procedure, and adopting the ordinance by a two-thirds vote of all council members. 2. In a preamble or elsewhere, the ordinance should set out the circumstances requiring the interim procedure and showing that it is part of a continuing planning effort that will result as soon as possible in a permanent ordinance. 3. The more inclusive the interim ordinance is of the provisions necessary in a permanent ordinance, the more likely it is to be sustained. This means that the ordinance should establish at least a minimum number of use districts and provide the regulations that are to apply to each. Handbook for Minnesota Cities 252 (4th Ed. 1981). In TPW, Inc. v. City of New Hope, 388 N.W.2d 890 (Minn. App. 1986), the court found a council resolution adequate where it provided the present comprehensive plan may be: "[l]acking in safeguards to protect the planning process. The resolution also indicated that the city needed time to conduct a study and to do so it prohibited any further new use or construction until the study was accomplished." Id., at 394. Furthermore, the court has held a property owner has no vested right in a zoning classification. Property Research and Development Co. v. City of Eagan, 289 N.W.2d 157 (Minn. 1980). In Property Research, the plaintiff brought a mandamus action to compel the city's approval of a preliminary plat. The plaintiff owned a 40-acre tract zoned for apartment Council Members a" d Page -3- June 16, 1987 use. The plaintiff sought approval of a preliminary plat involving 15 acres of the tract, permitting construction of single family dwellings. Such construction was permitted when the property owner brought the action. The city council denied the plat and prior to trial amended its zoning ordinance to prohibit construction of single family dwellings. The court held that because a property owner has no vested right in zoning, the plaintiff lost whatever right it may have had to approval of the plat when the zoning ordinance was amended. Because the city could not issue single family permits under the newly amended ordinance, a mandamus action was inappropriate. Rather, the court said that if the plaintiff was wrongfully denied approval, the proper remedy would be an injunction enjoining the amendment and ordering issue of the permits. Subsequently, the court held that a denial of a building permit is valid and not arbitrary or illegal providing the city explains the reason for denial and does not act in a discriminatory manner. Carl Bolander & Sons, Inc. v. Minneapolis, 378 N.W.2d 826 (Minn. App. 1985). Bolander involved a moratorium on building permits while the city considered a plan creating a municipal park on land owned by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's permit application was in compliance with the building code and zoning ordinances. Nevertheless, to preserve the status quo while it studied the plans for the proposed park, the city denied the application. Bolander alleged the city: (1) unconstitutionally denied him the full and lawful possession, enjoyment, and value of his property without just compensation, and (2) acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of his due process rights. The court concluded, however, that denial of the permit was not arbitrary and. capricious as a matter of law because the moratorium complied with the Almquist standard. Moreover, the court held that: (1) because the city gave an explanation for the denial and did not act in a discrimi- natory manner, the denial was not arbitrary and capricious, and (2) because the plaintiff could not show the moratorium deprived him of all reasonable use of the land, the moratorium did not constitute a taking of property without just compensation. Thus, under Minnesota law, a moratorium or interim ordinance regulating land use: 1. Is valid providing the ordinance is enacted in good faith and without discrimination; 2. Does not arbitrarily and capriciously deny a property owner's due process rights if an explanation for permit denial is provided; and Council Members Page -4- June 16, 1987 3. Does not constitute a compensable taking unless the ordinance deprives the owner of all reasonable use of the land. (emphasis added) However, in First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles, California, No. 85-1199 (U.S. June 9, 1987), the Supreme Court held a landowner is entitled to bring an action in inverse condemnation proceedings to compel compensation where a land use ordinance, even though temporary, deprives the owner all reasonable beneficial uses of the land. In First English Evangelical, the appellant church owned land operated as a campground for handicapped children located in a canyon along a creek. The land is a natural watershed drainage channel. In 1978, a flood destroyed the buildings on the property and in response, Los Angeles County adopted an interim ordinance prohibiting construction or reconstruction of any building located in an interim flood protection area, including the church owned land. The church filed suit alleging the ordinance denied it all use of the property and sought damages in inverse condemnation for such loss of use. Because the church alleged a taking and sought only damages, both the trial court and the California Court of Appeals denied relief on the grounds that under prior California law a landowner may not bring an inverse condemnation suit based on a regulatory taking. The court reversed the decision and held that temporary regulatory takings denying a landowner all use of his property are no different from permanent takings requiring compensation. The court's decision provided compensation for the period following enactment of the ordinance through its invalidation. Thus, under the holding, compensation is due for the interim period even though there has been no final determination the regulation in fact constitutes a taking. This broadly expands City exposure to inverse condemnation actions by landowners subject to temporary land use control regulations. However, the decision involves an interim ordinance prohibiting any use of the subject property. Whether a partial restriction on use resulting from a moratorium constitutes a taking requiring compensation is as yet unknown. Very truly yours, RRASS 6 O TEED r Phil 'i R. rass PRE:dw:mlw RECEIVED JUN - 11987. HOARMA E BOO RMATES CITY OF SHAKOPEE PCxll [ < PE . Ex 61 E xl[P1011 D[514x " MEMORANDUM TO: Shakopee Citizens Advisory Committee FR: Jack Boarman, Boarman d Assocociates DT: May 29, 1987 RE: Joint Council Committee Meeting The City Council after having their initial input on May 19th has selected June 8th or June 16th as a tentative meeting date for the Joint meeting. The final date will be selected after June 2nd. Our apologies for the confusion over the May 26th tentative meeting date. The Council did not want to meet on the 26th pursuant to the anticipated meeting date of June 8th or June 16th. They did wish to have some initial input such that the Joint meeting would allow the Architect to have accommodated any suggested revisions for presentation at the Joint meeting. Attached are the following: A. Building Floor Plan B. Final Cost Protection C. Future Schedule of Events D. Tax Impact (to be presented at the meeting) For the meeting we will present the exterior image concepts for joint council and committee review. The council was very excited and complimentary of the Citizen Advisory Committee's efforts and community usage potential of our City Hall, as well as the overall building efficiency. The council is looking forward to the community's presentation, attitude and feelings with regards to the plan and. the cost impact. This is our most important meeting. It is an opportunity to receive your well deserved compliments that are forthcoming for the Council. ]40 H44Ix IIB 51 11 B I I qlx xfRV-0115 , uIN NE501P 15x01 012�339"] ]52 r ; m i r a i I 4 ) t c ! E® t c I o i i a � - ip a x o o m i r ° F r O 5 D � F c � 1 a m i m I 1 1 ! ® I! ai ®_ Vy oil N o 1 0 ax - All llr� � ` I 10 20 • . ! ^ 9 D D 9 , Za C) - BOARMAN& - ASSOCIATES - . . [ xGlx [ ERING - - INTERIOR DESIGN - . . -1. SITE PURCHASE" _ ... .. $350,000.00 $350,000 —2. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION $1,345,000.00 First Level 17,220 @ $70 = $1,205,000 _ - Basement Level 4,000 @ $35 $140,000 - - - ."3. - BUILDING EQUIPMENT - $120,000.00 4.. SUBTOTAL: - - $1,465,000.00 S. CONTINGENCY - - $60,000.00 _- 6. -CONSULTANT FEE $121,000.00 -- - - 7. BOND 8 LEGAL $40,000.00 - - 8. - SUBTOTAL: - - $221,000.00 9. TOTAL COST: $2,036,000.00 10. LESS BUILDING FUND - ($500,000.00) -ii. BOND REFERENDUM AMOUNT $1,536,000.00 - 12. TAX IMPACT ., • To be presented by BOND COUNSEL at meeting. - - - 200 NORTH I.R1E 11 TI x.1 x RE AY 0111. NI.NI1OTA 11a Dl 012 ]]e"0] 12 - NINE � =Ci --- �, . -- iii_=iliiiiliillii=li�i . - iilii-ii=-iiiiii-iiLCil NINE 111111111101 MINES OCCIIMMIINNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII _Ci�i WEEK �C-�i ---- ---------1 1 - ---����- -ilii=liliiill .l lul=il iili,� -__C_____C__�1 --- ---------1 ililiiillliil�ll -----NINE- -----1�.1 IW---- --� NINE NINE �iil Iii1N1 IDI��I=iiiiii i= i_il li.-IWI 1.�1_i iiia- ---- 1-__i=_i- -----a�a---W.�11 SEEN�-_ - iiiiiiiiiiiNll ill ii® =SEENi NINE INNIMIN iiiiiiii iiNINE ii�_ iiiiiii-ii__i- . : -----�aiiaii_i IMINIIIIII _i_ IIII iiia==l, i_iiiii -- iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii-= =�C�' •• MINE11110111111 m �i���lii iail NINE MMi il MINER iii i-liiviaiii _.Gi _��I - SPRINGSTIM INCORPORATED ( RECEIVED Public Finance Ad�wm JUN - 2 S87 85 East Sa�anh Race,Su4e 100 Saint Paul,Minnewta 55101.2143 CITYC 812.2233000 HA K 0 PE June I, 1987 Mr. John Anderson, Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Municipal Building Cost Estimates Dear Mr. Anderson: We are enclosing two schedules and four supporting tax impact calculations for your consideration. In preparing the budget for the bond issue, we have used the following costs: Site Purchase $ 350,000 Construction and Equipment 1 ,465,000 Contingency 60,000 Architect-Consultant 121 ,000 Bond Issuance Costs 20,000 City Attorney Fees 5,000 Bond Discount 30,000 Subtotal $2,051 ,000 Less: City Contribution (500,000) Investment Earnings ( 1 ,000) Net Bond Issue $1 ,550,000 We then prepared two debt service repayment schedules for your consideration. Schedule A is a ten-year repayment and Schedule B a 15-year repayment. From these, we have also prepared tax impact data for various parcels of property for each of the schedules. Schedules A-1 and A-2 are the tax impacts for the ten-year repayment for both residential and commercial properties. Schedules B-I and B-2 are for the some properties using a 15-year amortization of the debt. In preparing these we had to make some very important assumptions. These assumptions include: A. The 1986/87 taxable assessed valuation used in these projections was computed as follows: Total Assessed Valuation $118,884,261 Distribution from Fiscal Disparities 6,725,651 Contribution to Fiscal Disparities (20,798,322) Tax Increment District Value (25,489,446) Net Taxable Assessed Valuation $ 79,322, 144 Mr. John Anderson, Administrator June I, 1986 Page 2 B. The election will be held in early November, 1987 and the City will make the first tax levy for this issue in 1987, for collection in 1988. This can be accomplished by the City requesting from the Auditor permission to file the tax later than the October 10 date. We have not had problems in this area with auditors in the past and will assume this can be accomplished with your project also. C. The City's last debt service levy on existing indebtedness was made in 1986 for collection in 1987 in the amount of $61,000. Any new debt service levy can take that $61,000 into consideration by reducing the impact to the property owners by that amount. Our schedules make this assumption. D. The interest rates used in our projections are based upon the market as it is reflected today. No guarantees can be made as to what interest rates will be like when the bonds are actually sold. We are assuming the bonds will be sold and dated February I, 1988. If you have any questions or if we can provide you any additional information regarding these schedules or new schedules, please do not hesitate to give us a call. Respectfully, Ronald W. Langness Senior Vice President /mgh Enclosures cc: Jack Borman I Mr. John Anderson, Administrator June I, 1986 Page 2 I B. The election will be held in early November, 1987 and the City will make the first tax levy for this issue in 1987, for collection in 1988. This can be accomplished by the City requesting from the Auditor permission to file the tax later than the October 10 date. We have not had problems in this area with auditors in the past and will assume this can be accomplished with your project also. C. The City's last debt service levy on existing indebtedness was made in 1986 for collection in 1987 in the amount of $61,000. Any new debt service levy can take that $61,000 into consideration by reducing the impact to the property owners by that amount. Our schedules make this assumption. i D. The interest rates used in our projections are based upon the market as it is reflected today. No guarantees can be made as to what interest rates will be like when the bonds are actually sold. We are assuming the bonds will be sold and dated February I, 1988. If you have any questions or if we can provide you any additional information regarding these schedules or new schedules, please do not hesitate to give us a call. Respectfully, e� ulga--6— Ronald W. Langness Senior Vice President /mgh I Enclosures cc: Jack Borman i SCHEDULE A (REVISED) cl a 3 V a L ' U N N L � Y d w, m o L N 1� O 3E��. MMNNNNN@b0 O� C Ol i OY� ^y.Ny m1�NNMQbO M p n ^ w n w w w y U F {pNMbmQ@QI�Q 10 _C NNNNNNNNNN Ncl N N N L N O N N N N N N N N N N d O N bOb M O M £££ N £ N Q Y U' r Y� MMOOOOOOOO to m mOm m1�0 C a� Y O.d� OOQOf@QMI�NO M O�MN N L2' O � L @@mtD IO lOOQOO O Ip tp N N U NO. F U d N__Q NIn n__M QMtp Q_ m W 6N C Y ^ 2 S T in-� NNNNNNNNNN c . N dNmbb0 O N OOQ O\@@MI�NO c N •• NIn -nQ O � @@lpO@OfdY •• NNtp tp N� L CY MN 2 d a)Of Ntp l�mOlm tD@ m pf dow TT U Y Olm ml�\Ob@MN.-� Y O d Ot c �Y 0 L aQ Ocp O rpOOOOOO Cr� a NY Yv ONLp ICON@bm0 QO.Z L C 'O N U � C' bY')LL')btO btObbn a O mm 0000000000 o a >dw a � O^ nv 0000000000 O A^A^ iJ`+ Y'O N m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Om Mi N r a N E N d 6 U L0OOO10 LL')tnOO O o •Q1� QU•r C � C NNMQN�O b1� 0)O b t �[] art Y L a s W OfO�NMQ�p bl�m Y Y 3 d O.O E O Y N m 01 01 0f Of O1 p1 Of pf Of 1p fp— a m N y R O. Q � a f0 C tp N fp .COa NN a NLNY -i CLr Q W MQ• a ie �F � i W T^ nmO�O�NMQY')b d 'O C� a d~ U NY 00 N •• d O >� mmmOf Of mO� o mm a a-+ . 0N Y Y a is a O N N d O O > > N > a a C L SCHEDULE A-1 Ad o oror o000o n ONgrN ONO�m ... N Oqm V OPr V O! O@ ry poP Donor oonon oonory oNgrry oNorn m NNN N Nm N r! mom oonon ONgrN ONOnn 10 ON! @ ONN ! O O n O n O ONO N P OOmOm 00@O@ ONpnN ONOnn m O O@ O@ O O p O p N 61 !r•i ..N r4Nm F rom oonon oorvory o daw v rC O'N'E Orm�P O �mnP N +O. V •JYW Y m0 udq-. a m'O mp p'1 u > OCo DO .U U d L U . ddY F OONON O NON IWpmaW ii mW m� YmU U OONON O NON ddL O✓ U+ 2 p W m '� W •y U O U tiCL d G Tdm Ud OL R OOOm O�yPd7t C m 9 Y O M m O.ni 1 O N O n T9 Y W y CT Ed F Off•. .. „ r.. m0-ci x�L '00 Nd a3 Lq 3 3 Y ?.aiYYd WT mC F OOpOP F OONOry C9 Sld Y m✓ W m OmNrm m OmNrm + bm UO Wb oa o. a dYm2d un 9 Y u v Y 9 � E E rvVN F OOrvmN "• � ✓D dO E F F w3m .,] m fU.l OOmnn (U.l OO.y..O r Er, amLO and 000lm O OONN m U m O ONON! O ONON@ + Wx �.1 and O wmE04u✓•� FF •� b •'� d m ^ d ^ W u Z `l 2 4 T d .• m T d .. U L a d a 9 a d •. Om Z U.. Z Uti •� mdO0 00 Oa £ O d •• •. O a .. .. Z aL U= O✓ WC �4Z F up 9 F u0 O d 4 p ✓ d ^ m W . uhl U E.. dx U E.. ax F gwtd 0 Ydbl m Sm ✓ m 41E Yq m .. a+ iim YL . Zm LZ.] da m D .• mf N TegF nF L '�•�^ 00 w 00 9 X d •O X d m U U m 0— ^ Y m Y U O u Y a'O m E T y y N E T m W d✓ O q 0 •� 4 C .. d4 ✓ aF0✓ of 0✓ .� O C O E S O d S m 5 Y m 0 2 Y O d..'O'^W+ 0 4 a W m a W W 41 W O >9✓ 0 3 a.. fu .L cNIY umo0 mmOm0 E a 900 mud u 4 O m Y E c NU 9m 416 U `l6 W4U' .] G £ F d 9^ E > EN.. . dT � dY dmd9 m F -2 m E F F m L d m d ✓ •yon@N : L Umi KSU 4 44444 m0mmwo a m m0 3'OLU 61F Hm np aL3 • Om Ua�um �aWun �n..OR Cry N m g n n S m ^ u3 aamgRq Hx 'O^ �wrm q �nam Kma ��K < m O m m O a m m q a ^ O R R o 0 m. ooa m c o H omrt puam �q � ion E � na< o am amwm o mm cd S qm < ^ a0 N 3 q ww3 Nd+ COON r a.-q � .. noHnm �oHmm av°• s a q 3q n . n m m N •c 3 m m m K 3 x d m Yc n c n fc S3 -Omn nm qfe d q a 00 ^m0 n ..O S HJ HT•• G N HT•• < N N'O C2 'O Oq wK R 'S'na •• H mq ^d n mq .-m n mn � Am n mr q C Y w Cn H m Cn H ZY• n < CJrt X 06 q Od qx Y• NCx m z mm amen m >• n "o. a a ~m a r m T qT0 P NNN ry RnrnS m N m a r•S j .{ Z m ✓JO q ^JO S % qip mmamey �A Non+O p -0000 O m p Jmo W ..... c ^ ..... n n o m C q3 d^ d m NmJ00 .3 JaN00 H m a SE m• n % ^.� m 00 a NOO a n qS anpgn (1 Jmm00 % VNm00 % � � nS do S_mwN ^• b rT 9 x ^ m CO S`< q w 00000 m mJNmO m r nn m �•• WOWoo z �0000 z m m m ^d0 V NONOO H OVOO H GA � m dSnggR £ M r m9 K A y u0 H qd m < qm m N NONOO q VOO Y00 C Td = A o'd, ^cme �a J momom a ^ oo H >• s zo c� nnnmq o ,m� � n A n n ^ •3 L �r OONJRv �• NNo n NNo ` q LLmn me O w > >K S< q N J N m 0 H J N N O m O Z - n N ONO O N ONO O n n q R T S a q p ^P 'nm K q m u NONOO NONOO H •• •• •• Zr m9 R O• �.� 30 =04 �• Nmo r Nmo T O m p ONOO YOO WOO .•NV PJ ry q q q Lm V N o O O u O O m o J H No No oom a a J s N O O O O O N �momoa >o+oo m N q -0000 NJVNO m NONOO WOVOO NNO NO a a N O W >Oa00 I'O x'•00 i J qNN 0000 uOV00 m JOJOO VO�p00 N a0 WQ P b0 N N JONO JV00 W NONOO f•O n•00 _ 00000 JOJOO pal I-V 3-ln43HJ5 SCHEDULE A-2 molO� r om�oP O N n O N P y N P'1 ti O P'I N O O O O O 00 00 S O P N OOr OOP P m Oro � Or0 � oomom 00000 ooN oor rm ONr ONm m onr r onr r NN O r N NYN m NOm m 00'10.4 OONON �"� O O ooN ^ O O m m m r 0 oovoi c lon oo�ON e on.. onry m one ! one ! p o0o Pry Pry f4 rom GCVOP 00000 K OY y I'm o!N o!m z 1. ..m mN^ om 1NVP >o �o •u y a �£.. WWI F oOPOp ooNON 1'1 W N4 m Y0d 4U] Or'iP P OOP P N d > a.. F �m z' ap z �1tirvn ry m oily ry um e nH ^ � Nca a T r a 'o cc £oma � ooe0al a oomory 'n day °•a 4L YT = Ome•1 2 Om1'1 N % O^ >? Lm u m.4N N F ^ry N Wy d3 ¢Y Ey •f 3 y T T ' hm yWNO 0 mm z ooe+o la i 000 mOlf ry ..°.gym wY £ OOP m W G w O � Y Ol.+ •4 Y My~ W a L � Nn y duo UO. MVd ^ a F y F O N N m F 0 N m ry O� W 3 y d WvO u U j m lUil OOPo! 4Ul 00�10� E^ 0 w � O 00H O O!•1 m Y•+ and 6 r dao dT z F r m yl u i0 E L.4 O N ^ wo 04 > O m SyC m 4Iw0 W 9 1 W 0 m O 'J d F m F mC.Zi C m � SW YW � £ W YW F •• d^Y d d SZ.p.I O d m i •• mF m > •. NH rF L Y 00 xa uV mET mm mwu m-a. qmm d 4 yNf OT O W m 2 m 0 G fpl W O >M d ti 0 w d E 06 y0 � m0 41 L U W d 0 w y g O y O 4 O W u W Y > 0NU d O m4U`a16 d4 U' .Od SF dY0 Em UN£ U U 4444a mmmmm m0 E3 mF SCHEDULE B as a a L u N N L Y •O a 0 y O R Y N r O x^^ 10NMNN NOf^^QOf MIOrm Q C m O. l0 Nr MrIOml0br M11)O^rNMtO 10 O .rna O OYO� M^LLYQb m10OM^bOQQr M •� Y U ^H rOf O --� tD�D�O^O�hOf^�O t0O O R O^ f££ R £N lnrm Y C'3 r Y� 001000 OO OOOOO1011fO � NON NrQ c 'OZ RRNb 01Q 10QQQh^'+hh1[iNMb OMM R dr Y 6d•� mbO�m NQ.--iQmt001Q OOrn r O O N .y U R 6 H u d m 0^N m m m N O m O N m m N N re ^ V 6N .CY lOhrrbtO tOrhbhrtpbr 10 as Q000 N R �rnoo1 > bob a Y^. OONOOOOOOOOO10 Yf0 N Y N O NLLS 01Qb QQQr^^rh4ANM10 N Nm^r �JN d� m400fmNQ^@mb01@00^ r dy Nrb^ R^ U R .. . . . .. . . . . .. .. .. . d M O b N m M m N 10 m O N M M N N d J N Y OOOf OfmmrrblONQMN^ O Y O d Ol TT V N d E E 0 ^ Y m ieprC+ da o N rna � a N•". xx$Exx�`x xxxxxxao.`x c �Y c c aQ o1n .no 0o Oo oleo o c� a RY Y� ONInr ONQtOm-o O^ NQ10b 6dZ L c R u � C IOmN1O tObtO tD 40rrrrrr d O - u Rm ^•� 0000000 00000000 O d d N a � Y R M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O x x Y J^ Y C O.- 6— 000000000000000 O Ob'+M -sE R N R O ^b h d N N d0. U 1n O10OOufOO10OOO1010O O 0f•ON C•� C brrmmm01OO^NMMQtD �[] Od•�L Y i Y N Y d Y £ O m 1 ^ @ G >N Y d L f Y m ^ •• O d Y 3 d • d ^ W010^NMQIObrmOf Or'nNM Y YJa R a O.O E OYN m01010101010101010101OOOO R Rr dp N� R n m ^ a N c b N R NOn' NN } LOUR �QOfd YR p R Y C 1' C •+ L Y 7 0 nR L .. >0rmOfO�+NM Q10 tOhm01O^ .. d R C N d U Ny O •• d O >'+ mmmm010101010101010101O0 N }£ Q 01 L aU N a � Y dv O1^010101�m�01��m01O0 J U R r+ Y R Tb } dO LJ ^^ NN Q NLN a Y Y Y R H C d d �+ d Y Y d ^u] R R d O O > > N > d d ^L Uw SCHEDULE B 1 1a cp a v d L U N L Y C w a o Y q N L t ^ O �^��+ {ON MNNNO�•-� +<01M�01�W 'C O W6 �O qty M�bW10b1�MW O'+I�NMb LLY .^ OCL OyO� M.'+�O<<O WLL'90M�IOO C<t� M y � V H A Of O.••�b b b.�O�1�O�.•+t0 b O O N N N i qH W fir^ n _ £� '- Y^ OO�OOO OOOOOOOb�00 .b•� NON N1�< c ggNlO OfVbV V<t�r•�.nn1�bNMb OMM A Y 6d� WbO� WNR•-�RWbO�C00.•� n O O N ••+ V 00100 > •-�bOb N N Y� OOWOO OOOOOOOu1N0 b y NW•"�r � dv WbOlW NO�"�OWtO O�C00 --� I� dy .. NI�tO�"� q� Y 000� O1W Wf�t� b �Ob CMN•-� O YOd 01 qm � O .C. N N ^ E E O q W O N CL iS dEiPKT^d.`2E A° dE eEA^S.•e.• b� C 'SY AY p av o 111 Ot00 000000u+000 C� a LC yv ON1[f I�ONObWO'+NO bb GnZ UO C IO 10�0bbbbbtO l�l�l�l�nn TN V AW qM 000000000000000 O iL ems' iJ�-+ v N q U X00 H100�000b0001LIb0 O •ON O'U'^ '^ L 3 ^£ y W a J y d A S d 60 E OYN WO1P0�010�0\ O�Of 0)010000 •• A q� dC N9 O T q...i ------ --rW+--NNNN YC •• O "Jp a `. AO6 ^� q£ NiAY > CWA NOL' NN Y qy CC aQM L y W i .. W T.-• r W Ol O.--�N M C h t0 n W Ol O .-� •• d A C N O ti a U 00 q d O >^ W W WO� O+O�O�O�O�O� O�O�O+OO N Y£6 Y A �Od SL av ^O� O�Of O\ O�� Of Of Of O�OI OfNN Q V •U NLN d .nW Aq d � WQGZ QQJZ ^� SCHEDULE B-1 SS�o� ooaoa ONPrN GNPrN m o moo m oelo n ry! N oOPOP OONON n ONPrN ONOrn m N NNm N OOry Or"I OOnOn N ooloom oo^lo-� oNPrry oNorn �+ Nn OOnOn OONON OOmOm OONON ! ONPrN ONOrn 0 0010! OOmOm 00000 ONnOn n oNorn orn m ry N p 000 �Nn ONn 0 F r!ry OOnOn 00'10."1 'J daa b rO m~w OrVrP OOm�P m OU ]Ym Y • N P�N N P�ry w WTuuE .n,� � O > Ouds 4m adY E OONON OONON gaaG OY Uw % r YWU Um OPNrN OPNrN m a >L L p. OFTC ] y m 7 N C V O C O% .nU d 7 T r aw U '1 YC C' AamYUd NL mr £ L f OO.iO'1 m OOOOO O.LI� d ]L y. y. qy 7 OOnOn W OONON m � ;9 40. y.I ioc Mon ao b' % A C;n•.: .. F o�.. .. my na as mr Ea 3 3 u 'jyLN m >. am w u YS F OOPOP F OONON L'O LqA u amy mS 00000 2 OONON m " d TL U ] and m OmNr% = OmNrm ymAUa, AOS >. �O�Y 4 X0.-1 mUOsuT LO '. q U a u'O f d 4 oO% OOmPP %4 goo- N m OC % Y Nrr rmm m y'•' m y 6 E E oON10N E OONmN dyo yo E _ Y 4p1 N P ` m u Y �•• J % fUil OOVnn % OorPm w"'1 U i pONON! O ON~N! m Y� �'1 and 4 r d N r T9.>li L.Ti 2 E m ugEY u FF ^1 .bj y d a+ 6 mEU O'Ny .miq 04 1 1 .n m 3YCO mW % O 4 > y „ m j d .. U LauLaq da im0 Om Y Uy Uy dL UL UY qL oz 45 O L L2upl y6 % > % 0F % O> % aF rF W Y U '1L4 ydFOy Ymf Oy r-1 ') y.-1'O.w iY.w 04 uA a and dW WW O. % Oi O >OYC3 y^1 •L CyY YmWO 0aO YmmOyu 4_ O AygCOy > NU qm0 % 4U`14. 414 p`14� F dY am NO wW NL E1 Um£ C ^U 46444 p% % %m 410 'OL U mF SCHEDULE B-2 o oPoe 00000 /�1 o rt+� � ouoim o� oma•+ oma•+ m ' 00000 OOeOP oob oor oor oom N O r O O r O O N N p OONOb OOmOm ONr N ONr r r NN oonoN ~0000 r oNN N oNn r b OrN N Or�•1 b NPb m NPb V O O ti O'I O O'I O'1 O OON N 000 oor r oom m oeP oeP . .o.N 0000„ ooP e O O N O O q q Orti Or^� N O q a ! O q p O O O q N q N e m F W 4 OOgoq Or O 0 ra q.y.� OOP O m Oy d m O O P N O P m + U .ya ONN n ON m'n O mry m > O 00 •U 4 w daY F OOgOq Oo m WW mr mU U OOP 00 d 4+. 2p Amd m O•yq O.. d > O F u 0 O O'I N ry U ro L L u C m r U u a r ry cl n p2 O A am py m .. £ rL F oOmOm a 00 dLq a m r4 y '..f O O P L O •i 9'O a 6 a •. O O m�•1 % 0 y dm - y3 2 2 aIC I > O 41 F O b ry ry F ry �•. q O a >� E d b�+ •+ m d 3 mm 3 3 ydd OH mT m6 F 00b0m F OOrOr Cqy ay m Y O O N N 2 O O r m W Y 4] O O q m O q m d T an d £ £ d m A A OI h h a u 0 V O F N % OONON % OONOn 4CX Ld U 4 OOV b a OOm L•. A 3L 4 A f O N N f b O� E ~ dy Ey •� m ooPOP m oObob E-+ d mo. n oor n oom m o OP.� o oe.n m tin ma a a mEY AL O f L y~ L ti 6 � m m mE NUN I I 0 0 1 w0 m r p m 0 m ip a O 0 d 0 Z .]Z Om z y U•� Z .Zn > c £ ou0C > maw d m U Yti a % U A•, d F qWL O S m Y W •• d^. y 0 L OmM O G m > •• F m > .. wF rF L Y U 7 L Y y�p A E T W g A E T m 6Ul U ? y u 0 4 m 4 ydFOy .O 2 w SY ggF2y ~ O d.+'O Ea V O m q 0 . . 0 . 2 . . O , o p1 G O 0 >'aN m O O•+ u O 0 m a m m NU a m6 U.]L 41a U .l6 LE AdA E > E dsd m F_ •Z u y .. Um£ u u aaa`aa mmmmm mo E3 mF SCHEDULES B-2 oolo! o000o N �� p oom a Oo. ONr ONIli O m n N .y ti N P•� N 00000 OOPO! OOm N OOr OOr or O O .10 O rol 0nn 001 N ONr r ONr r NN oOnon ooOoo r S,V! N Onn N !N N N!N N OONO•1 OOtiO.y O O O N O O O O oor r oOm m N 00000 0010! OON OOP P on.. or•+ N m o00 PN PN m !pN F r W a ooPOP oorom m D �D rm m^'^' oe�n Devi N m D u b .0 oNn y W byy f POPOP 00000 •'� W W YW4 U 00< ! OOm n d U + m O•"� P P O•'�P P N y0 dP m .. u � z rN m R R -• U tiCh L n qbm 0d m y £ ^L F O O m O m 6 O O N m N 6L y Cm SOY � 00! L OOr N u Nq i O y > ] m W u m•+N N u m•iN N WY d3 im ei 3 3 - Y �.diWT YC f OOVON F O.'o, EVM 0Y m 2 OON 2 OOn N ' = OOP P = OOPdd d W R W d N.4~ ~ Wd6 _ O y Nti~ ~ y d W UG ub F b % O ONO x00-0- n 4 C % 20 U a OONN 4 OOm N D�+ R 3u 4 u F ONN F ONN N N ^ bY E .,] m 001Oe fUd OONON 2- 0 W6 m � oari � oar •^ mEu m. '. x o. mm� •� a mm.. � b au a o.. a m m YWE Y y u 6 Eu W0 C z 'oo a > d •• m >" � � u sd o "4 .. om dy4 > c £ .�u +T+ sa am rw vm m6 , d m U Wy d % U •]i y F S�•• L yD m 41 0 d m m £ Y m £ W O •• d+ u d C 2U YU7 6 % u•O RET d'O WET PN bdu F+• G m 4 dFOY dEOy '-�'� d•Di'D Eb 06 d W 'Y O d0mL m6 0 >'D dti 00 O m4U .d] L m4UJd £ E dYb EW �ti7 O 41 • yd WL UNS U V .44.4 mOmoG m E3 mf MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Parking Restrictions in Second Ave. Parking Lot DATE: June 12, 1987 Introduction• A local business person has contacted the Department of Community Development on a couple of different occasions and registered a complaint regarding the lack of available parking for his business which is located adjacent to and immediately south of the Second Ave. parking lot. Background• Further comments from this business person indicated that it was his opinion that many commuters were utilizing many of the spaces in this parking lot. The center two isles are posted for 8 hour parking. (Attached is a diagram of the Second Ave. parking lot with parking restrictions. ) The staff then conducted a cursory investigation of parking usage in this lot. The concerns which were expressed by the local business person appeared to be substantiated based upon a series of parking counts made during the month of May. The parking spaces located adjacent to the small shopping center located on the southeast corner of the parking lot were virtually always filled during the time around the noon hour. Likewise there were a limited number of spaces available in the two hour zone located along the northern edge of the parking lot. A more detailed count was made on May 15, 19, 26 and 29 relative to vacancies existing in the two center isles. The counts made around the noon hour on these four different occasions indicated an average of 3 vacant spaces. On May 19, 26 and 29, counts were made at 7:45 am, 12:30 pm, and 4:00 pm. These counts indicated that an average of seven to eight cars were parking in the 8 hour zone for a time in excess of the posted regulations. This substantiates the observation made by the business person that commuters are probably parking in this area in excess of the posted limits. This parking lot should not be used to accommodate long term parking to the detriment of adjacent businesses. It is reasonable that the number of eight hour spaces be either reduced in number or completely eliminated from this lot. The City parking lots located north of First Ave. could readily accommodate the long term commuter parking and not function to the detriment of downtown businesses. It it also possible that a limited number of spaces in the parking lot could be devoted for eight hour parking for nearby businesses but in any case persons commuting to areas across the river should not be parking in this lot. As the downtown streetscape project is implemented there will be even fewer parking spaces available in the downtown area for businesses because of the lack of on-street parking during ther period of construction. (Once completed, there will be more on-street parking spaces available. ) At this time it is of even greater significance to local businesses to provide adequate off- street parking. Because of the increase in business volume during the spring, summer and early autumn in the City of Shakopee it is important to provide adequate parking for businesses during this peak season. It is suggested that a meeting be held with businesses adjacent to the Second Ave. parking lot in order to elicit their concerns about parking in this area and obtain a broader cross section from this group. It is also suggested that the Downtown Committee sponsor this meeting. Alternatives• 1. Hold a meeting with 1 al businesses and then make a recommendation to the Ci y Council on parking restrictions in the Second Ave. lot. 2. Leave the situation s i . Recommendation: It is recommended that he staff be instructed to hold a meeting with businesses in close proximity to the Second Ave. parking lot and determine if t ey precede a problem relative to lack of adequate nearby parkin nd that a report then be made to the City Council on the result this meeting. Action Requested: It is requested that theCity Council instruct the staff and the Downtown Committee to hold a meeting with the businesses located in close proximity to the Second Avenue parking lot and determine if changes need to be in the parking regulations. 13 c As the downtown streetscape project is implemented there will be even fewer parking spaces available in the downtown area for businesses because of the lack of on-street parking during then period of construction. (Once completed, there will be more on-street parking spaces available. ) At this time it is of even greater significance to local businesses to provide adequate off- street parking. Because of the increase in business volume during the spring, summer and early autumn in the City of Shakopee it is important to provide adequate parking for businesses during this peak season. It is suggested that a meeting be held with businesses adjacent to the Second Ave. parking lot in order to elicit their concerns about parking in this area and obtain a broader cross section from this group. It is also suggested that the Downtown Committee sponsor this meeting. Alternatives• 1. Bold a meeting with local businesses and then make a recommendation to the City Council on parking restrictions in the Second Ave. lot. 2. Leave the situation as is. Recommendation: It is recommended that the staff be instructed to hold a meeting with businesses in close proximity to the Second Ave. parking lot and determine if they precede a problem relative to lack of adequate nearby parking and that a report then be made to the City Council on the results of this meeting. Action Requested: It is requested that the City Council instruct the staff and the Downtown Committee to hold a meeting with the businesses located in close proximity to the Second Avenue parking lot and determine if changes need to be in the parking regulations. - �3G `rte,_^r rx- . ' _ ' -b LF I L� Lm I�I ` N � /3d MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 FROM: Review Committee - Delores Lebens, Gloria Vierling, John Anderson and Rod Kress DATED: June 12, 1987 RE: Murphy's Landing INTRODUCTION Please refer to the May 8, 1987, John Anderson memorandum for background. At the time of Mr. Anderson's May B memorandum, the Scott County Historical Society had given notice to the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. that the Historical Society was going to take legal action to remove the Restoration Project, Inc. from Murphy's Landing. Since that time, the Historical Society has in fact served the Restoration Project, Inc. with a Eviction Summons and Unlawful Detainer, returnable on the 17th day of June. Both the Restoration Project Board of Directors, and the Scott County Board of Commissioners have formally requested the City of Shakopee to take such action as is necessary or convenient under Ordinance 290 to obtain total control of that portion of Murphy's Landing governed by Ordinance 290. (You will recall that the City transferred the original 87- acre site to the Historical Society under Ordinance 290 and the Historical Society has since acquired an additional 11 acres on the east end of the original site.) BACKGROUND The transfer from the City pursuant to Ordinance 290 occurred in the early 1970s. The transfer from Owen-Illinois of the additional 11 acres occurred in the fall of 1977. The Minnesota Valley Restoration Project was created in the early 1970s apparently at the time as the corporate entity to run Murphy's Landing. In July of 1975, in January of 1978, and in August of 1980, deeds were prepared at the request of the Historical Society to transfer the site to the Restoration Project, Inc. At least one of those deeds was signed by the Historical Society, but never recorded and only copies can be found now, no original. There were several transfers back and forth between the Historical Society and the County of Scott to facilitate the County of Scott obtaining for the Murphy's Landing site certain state and federal funds. At the present time, it appears that the original 87-acre site, while in the name Mayor and Council Members Page -2- June 12, 1987 of the Historical Society, has been leased to Scott County through 1992. Apparently, once a deed was prepared to transfer the lease interest back to the Historical Society, but that deed was apparently never signed or filed. The actual fee title to the 11 acres added on the east end of the site is in the County of Scott, but the agreement apparently was that Scott County would transfer it back to the Historical Society on request. Under these circumstances whether the Historical Society is going to be able to claim good title for the purpose of evicting the Restoration Project from Murphy's Landing remair to be seen. In an effort to obtain th balanced view of what is occurring, the Committee on the 1st day of Jun met with the Board and attorney of the Scott County Historical Society, and met on the 8th day of June with the Board and attorney for the M. to Valley the Project, Inc. Both sides gave presentation and opi ions relative to their respective views of the circumstances which ave 1 to the eviction notice. The Historical Society Board apparently els at the Board of the Restoration Project is not handling Murphy's Land g n a historically correct manner protecting the integrity of the site a feels that some of the operation has been mismanaged. The Restoration oject Board feels that the site is in the best shape it has ever been b historically and financially. Specifi- cally, three long-time member f the Restoration Project Board (Lea Malkerson, Ron Weiler, and Geri Nal n) all indicated that in their ten or more years of involvement each t e sit has never been in better shape. AL RNATIVES The City has several alte natives it can consider. Alternative No. 1 - Stay neutral. Let the Historical Society and Restoration Project Boards battle out this ptVblem, determine who is the rightful owner of the project and allow the winner to continue to manage the project in the manner it sees fit. Alternative No. 2 - Attempt to mediate between the two Boards; try and obtain agreement to have a joint board and make some recommendations as to how that joint board might better operate the site. This alternative has essentially already been tried, as the site for six months or so was run by a joint board of six members from the Historical Society, six from the Restoration Project, Inc. , counselwoman Vierling from the City and Commissioner Mertz from the County. The six members from the Historical Society apparently all resigned in mass about December 2. Alternative No. 3 - Proceed to exercise our reversionary rights - under Ordinance 290. This option, if successful, has several alternative suboptions for the City after reobtaining ownership and possession of the site and these include: ff lad Mayor and Council Members Page -2- June 12, 1987 of the Historical Society, has been leased to Scott County through 1992. Apparently, once a deed was prepared to transfer the lease interest back to the Historical Society, but that deed was apparently never signed or filed. The actual fee title to the 11 acres added on the east end of the site is in the County of Scott, but the agreement apparently was that Scott County would transfer it back to the Historical Society on request. Under these circumstances whether the Historical Society is going to be able to claim good title for the purpose of evicting the Restoration Project from Murphy's Landing remains to be seen. In an effort to obtain the balanced view of what is occurring, the Committee on the 1st day of June met with the Board and attorney of the Scott County Historical Society, and met on the 8th day of June with the Board and attorney for the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. Both sides gave presentations and opinions relative to their respective views of the circumstances which have led to the eviction notice. The Historical Society Board apparently feels that the Board of the Restoration Project is not handling Murphy's Landing in a historically correct manner protecting the integrity of the site and feels that some of the operation has been mismanaged. The Restoration Project Board feels that the site is in the best shape it has ever been both historically and financially. Specifi- cally, three long-time members of the Restoration Project Board (Les Malkerson, Ron Weiler, and Geri Nelson) all indicated that in their ten or more years of involvement each the site has never been in better shape. ALTERNATIVES The City has several alternatives it can consider. Alternative No. 1 - Stay neutral. Let the Historical Society and Restoration Project Boards battle out this problem, determine who is the rightful owner of the project and allow the winner to continue to manage the project in the manner it sees fit. Alternative No. 2 - Attempt to mediate between the two Boards; try and obtain agreement to have a joint board and make some recommendations as to how that joint board might better operate the site. This alternative has essentially already been tried, as the site for six months or so was run by a joint board of six members from the Historical Society, six from the Restoration Project, Inc. , counselwoman Vierling from the City and Commissioner Mertz from the County. The six members from the Historical Society apparently all resigned in mass about December 2. Alternative No. 3 - Proceed to exercise our reversionary rights under Ordinance 290. This option, if successful, has several alternative suboptions for the City after reobtaining ownership and possession of the site and these include: Mayor and Council Members 3 Page -3- June 12, 1987 (a) Lease the property to the Scott County Historical Society with conditions. (b) Lease the property to the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project with conditions. (c) Choose another entity to which to lease the site to be run. (d) Establish a city historical society to be in charge of the project. (e) Convey with restrictions as opposed to lease each of the entities in paragraphs (a) thru (d) above. RECOMMENDATION The Ordinance itself sets forth the method by which the City would exercise its reversionary rights. Specifically, Paragraph H of the Ordinance indicates that if the Historical Society fails to attract antici- pated financial support or fails to comply with the Ordinance, title to the site together with all improvements shall revert to the City free and clear. Paragraph H goes onto say that any dispute or question as to the Society's performance shall in the first instance be determined by the common council of the City of Shakopee at a public hearing to be held after 30 days written notice to the Society specifying grounds for the hearing. The Society has the right to appeal to the District Court within 30 days after any determination made by the Council. A copy of the Ordinance is attached, and you will see that conditions in the Ordinance are listed in Paragraphs A thru I. Possible violations of these paragraphs would include a violation of Paragraph B procluding any sale, encumbrance, mortgage or hypothecation of the property; a violation of Paragraph 3 requiring insurance during all times the project has been open to the public; possible violation of Paragraph D requiring 100 Scott County residents in the Society's active paid up membership roster; violation of Paragraph E, a requirement that the Society file complete annual financial statements with the City; possible violation of Paragraph F, a requirement the Society hold two general meetings per year and promptly file the names of the officers elected annually with the City; and possible violation of Paragraph H, a failure of the Society to attract anticipated financial support, due to the position taken by the County Board and by the Stans Foundation that both bodies will cut off support to the site if the Historical Society is in charge of the site. The Committee recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing required under Paragraph A of the Ordinance to determine whether or not the Historical Society has failed to comply with the requirements of the Ordinance, and if so, whether the City wishes to exercise its reversionary rights. The present managerial disputes and the questions raised as to whether or not the Ordinance has been complied with seems sufficiently serious to the Committee to warrant the public hearing. 13d Mayor and Council Members Page -4- June 12, 1987 RE ESED ACTION The Committee request hat the Council adopt the attached resolution calling for a public ear g under Paragraph H of Ordinance 290. prk:mlw Enclosure 13d Mayor and Council Members Page -4- June 12, 1987 REQUESTED ACTION The Committee requests that the Council adopt the attached resolution calling for a public hearing under Paragraph H of Ordinance 290. prk:mlw Enclosure it 3a • J .... Ordinance rraviding for the Conveyance o" Certain Hands to the Scott Count,- L•smoricai Society, Inc., anc 'ttachinr Certain Contrition Thereto and PlacinE Certain restrictions :hereon The Scott County Historical Society, Inc., hereinafter referred to as the Society, is a duly incorporated non-profit society under and pursuant to the lavas of the State of �Ynnesotz, and l:.--'v_.45, Said society has cads a serious study for the development of an historical site and pari: to be located on certain property hereinafter described and has discussed the plans evolved as a result of such study with the City Planning Coxcission of the City of Shakopee and the Comecon Council of the City of Shakopee, and the Society has secured lands for further study and develosent and is in the process of securing other and additionel funds for said purpose, and The Society has alleged and demonstrated that a price condition prerequisite to the securing of additional private and other funds for the further development of said historical site and nark is the acquisition of legal title to said land, and } The Planning Com:—:ssion of the City of Shakopee has on June 18, 1968 by a unanimous vote of all of its m. tfha s duly determned that the City property herei-:=ter described mould serve a superior public use and puroose if in £act developed and used as contecoiated by the Society, and that it is not desirable for pnc_c purposes in its present state and use, and has recommended the conveyance of said land to the Scott County ?istorical Society, lac. for such purpose. — CR•_:Oi. COU?= Q.' ^-_, C_T__' ff_SHLiRrr".:. DCr5 CFDA:F.: S=aT I: Adoctin_ and A^cror_nr the Pindinss of the P1anr_r-e Commission The Common Council hereby adopts and approves the findings of the Plannin5 Cos=ission that the property hereinafter described is no longer needed by the City of Sharopee for its present use and purposes and : is not Dew rable for public purnvse in its prese=t state, and the Council has no plan for the further use and leve.opment, but that the property herein<.fter descrad would serve the highest foreseeable vwDl c use and purpose if conveed under certain conditions to the Scott County _storical Society, Inc. for the development of an historical site and curplez. � 30( Z TI77 I- Directin: Conveyance The Corson Council of the City Of Shakopee hereby authorize and approves the conveyance and transfer of title to the Scott County Pistorical Society, Inc. for the nominal consideration of One and the foll=-ng described tract of lane,, to-n-it: The following part m the City property, which City property is described as follow$ to-wit: Government Lots 1 and 2, Section 32, Township 116 North, :ante 22 'viest; that part of Goverment Lots 1 and 2, the i7orthaest (;carter of the Northeast Quarter, and the iorthwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Tw,.mship 115 Ilorth, Pange 22 Hest I iio-th of the North line of State Trunk nigbwkv 101, being Ito a §187, which said property to be conveyed p Perty Dy this d d is more articularly described as follows: lying 'nest oft followl line: Beginning at a point on the cent line of the crest bound lane of Trunk 3Cgm:ay fl01, distant 07 feet (as measured along the centerline of said lane) East o the Hest line of Section $, Township 115, range 22; thence forth-at right angles a distance o: 202 feet; thence deflecti o the crest at an angle of 87^481 a distance of 67.75 feet; the ce 'efleeting to the ilorth at an angle of 23°10' a cstance o 2$1 feet; thence de£ieding to the Hersh at an angle of 23e 8' a sante of 403.1 feet; thence North x distance of 130 Seet more o less to a point 30 feet North of the North 'Dank o2 e I'd11 ek; thence Easterly and parallel to said north dank to the i.', soca River and there te.—nating. Mxcepting therefrom the fo owang descm d tracts: I. TrP I:ortheast CParter o the Northeast [waste.- of the Northeast ;tuarier, Section $, Trnmsbi 2-15 north, Range 22 best, lying North of the Forth line of State rank =Unway 701, and nesenring, however, unto the City of Shakopee all right, title and interest in all st_nctures and improvements in and on and the right to possess for a period not to exceed ten years fron and after January 1, 1969 the following tract, to-wit: The Sa_ nal.' of the Southeast Quarter of northwest Quarter of fiortheah st Iluarter of northwest Quaver o: Section 5, Township 115 No w':, Range 22 Hest lying '-.Orth of the north line Of State T_-unci n=shwa, =101, and - neservine further, as a roadway, a stria o.` land 50-feet in width, the center- line of which coiuci6es with the center--one of the existing traveled roadway as presently located and traveled; said strip of land being located in the locrthwest tuzxter of 5ecti0n $, Tmmahip 115 Eo.-h, Pangs 22 'vies', and running in a general northerly - southerly direction between State Truri. Highway '101 and 30 feet north of the -2UI Creek, but granting to said grantee, its licensees and invitees, the full right to use said road for passage in c®on with others, all the above land lying and being in tie County of Sec: and State of Minnesota. 3d ^_ire=tirr Conveyance The Caron Counii of the City of Shakopee hereby authorizes and approves the conveyance and transfer of title to the Scott Camay _stoical Society, int. for the nominal consideration of One and ro/lOC--- —__—_Dollar the follai::g described tract of land, to-kit: The following part of the City property, which City property is described as follows, to-kit: Goverment Lots 1 and Z. Section 32, Township 116 Dorth, Ranre Z hest; that part of Goverment Lots 1 and 2, the Northwest ;Ha=ter o: the Northeast Quarter, and the northwest '�aaaer of the northwest Quarter of Section 5, Tmuship 1-15 north, large 22 West lying North of the North line of State Trun:: :ig:na;v =101, being Route ?187, which said property to be conveyed by this deed is more particularly described as follows; lying 'East of the following line: Be&inring at a point on the cehtervine of the west bound lane of Trani-,ighway f,101, distant 1671.07 feet (as measured along the centerline of said lane) Bast of the West line of Section 5, Township 115, Range 2; thence North e. right angles a distance of 202 feet; thence deflecting to the "r'est at an angie of 87043' a distance of 67.75 feet; thence deflecting to the north at an angle or 23°101 a distance of 251.4 feet; thence deflecting to the 7.o—h at an angle of 23°38' a distance of 403.1 feet; thence Nor..h a distance of 2.30 feet more or less to a min'.. 30 feet North of the Borth bank of the ?!ill Creak; thenre Zasterly and parallel to said Ncrth bank to the i3nnesota River and there te=tna_ing. Excepting therefrom the folloking described tracts: _. The I:.-beast �zvarter of the northeast �Pa.-ter of the Northeast ;.matter, Section 5, Tmmship 215 «ort:., Range 2 Best, lying north of the Noah line of State Trunk -_;gm,ay =101, and Zese_^ting, however, unto the City of Shakopee all right, title and interest in all st_=tares and icorove Bents in and on and the right to possess for a period not to exceed ten years frog. and -fur pan Err 1, 2969 the following tract, The Sato Half of the Southeast ivatter of Northwest 'Qu,_-ter of Northeast quarter of Northwest Quamer of Section 5, Tcvm:�ip 2-25 io=:, Range 2 i?est ing ''orth of the North line of State Truax _g:.r. 70', and Besering further, as a roadway, a strip of land 50-fee, in width, the center- line of ehi-i coincides vn'_,h the center_ne of the em—sting traveled roam:ey as presently located and traveisd; said stip o_` land being located in the Northwest Quarter of 5e=on 5, -mm.snin 115 Norzh, Range 2 viest and running in a genera'_ northerly - so- berl`; direction betvmen State Terni: Highway =101 and 30 feet i:orth of the :ill Creer., 'out 6 anzing to said grantee, its licensees and invitees, the full right to use said road for passage in common with others, all the above Land 1^ns and being i.. the Co=ny of Scot: and State of 8nnesota. ^ * " bi.^ita`io^.s anC on �onve•-ance Said transfer and conveyance aoove autic_zed are directed shall be upon the SoLpsring conditions, L•,rations, rests. ctions and further reservations, to-':it: ,,. The site is to be developed for and used as an Pistomeal Society Part and huseum at the sole expense of the Scott County 3istor_cal Society, Inc. and the said development siu,ll be commenced chain twelve (») months fr— the adoption of this ordinance and shall continue thereafter under the direction of said Scott Count,,, ?istozdcal Society, Inc. for the benefit, use and education of the general public, and upon such reasonable non-exclusive restrictions and lindbtions as ma,- be aybe adopted by said society. B. That the site and said ipprovements and betterments placed thereon shall not 'oe sold, encumbered, mortgaged or hypothecated, and that the Society shall keep said property free of WW and all liens and other e'C.achments at all ti=es. ,,. :hat the Society shall hold the City free and harmless from any and all claims arising out of the use and development of said site as aforementioned and �_ll defend the Cay z�zinst any and all claims oz 17 never line, navire or desc=., tion, and 'oe£ore opening to tie pubic shall file urith the City o" Shakopee a public liaalit_% Policy s:tc the City of Shakopee and Scott Co.vnty :1stcr.cal Society, Inc. named as zs_areds Lnereunae.'. D. That the Soci=ty maintain at all times, a minims. actcw_, paid-OP membars`_p rester of one hundred 100 Scott County residents. Z. That the Society file complete annual financial statements eith the Ca-,- of Shakopee, indicatlh. all monies directed to, and received for, the Shakopee project to be developed on the her=_iaoe£oxe described land; and ven-yine that at '_east a substautdal mount of ail said monies be comdtted for the physi ca1 development and artifacts to be placed on and for the maintenance of said project on said land above described. , . Phar the Society hold at lent txo vaneral meetings per year and an a^.rna1 election of officers, and pre^o'?y =1e the n.+mes oS said officers so elected ieth the City of Shakopee. G. That the Cc.y of Shakopee reserves the right to negotiate itith the State of .-mesota Lr the location a:d construction of a bridge, higaray and interchange over and across said tract as nrn; being s udied by the City, the State o_` iinnesota, 4 / 3 C _cis agents, 6e-.aYaents and co=-Issions, without incu-ic:: ar7 liblit;- dananes or indermity whatsoever to said Society. That, should the Society Sail to attract the anticipated financial support and to develop and use andproperly maintain said site as proposed and 'hereinbefore set out, or fail to comply with any of the teras of this ordinance, title to said site together vmuh all irprovements and battements thereon shall revert :to and become vested in the City of Shakopee free and clear o_^ any claims of sky person, fir, corporation or association; and any dispute or Question as to the Society's performance here:mder shall be in the first instance determined by the Common Council of the :ity of Shakopee at a public hearing to be held after thirty days' written notice to said society speci ying the grounds for said heaping, oath the right of the Society to a_, al to t e ,District Court of Draper jurisdiction within thirty days after said hearin and detersation 0y the Council. 1. T:mat the Society by as a .ing this conveyance waives any and all claims that it now has or may hereirafte have for its own benefit or the general public or for its invitees and licensees R ainet the City of Shakopee for any reason or cause that arose, arises or nightL/eispos.l or result from the operation of the present sewage disposal facilities operate e City of Shakopee in the vicinity of the sewage above described property of any Seoperations carried on in the xacinity of the above described land. !E=101' ray SenarbAl �. Each and every section, provision and part of this o_rc nance is senarabie from any other section, provision or par', and, should any section, provision or part be held unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction, it small not affect, any other section., provision or part hersof. S'Ci'19V: Accentance by the Sociez- and *he, +r 'are- This ordinance shall became effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption and publication as provided by the amended Cha_^ter of the Cit,: of Sha:copee; 2rovdded that the Society shall fi ie a duly notarized acceptance of all ferns r. areal, upon authorization given chi a vote of the genera'_ mer.Dershin of said Society dull:/ assemhled. 13 d its agents, deauartments and co—issions, t thout incurrtnC an:, 1: ba' r can.a.es or indemnity ehatsoever to said Society. _. :!nat, should the Society fail to attract tae anticipated financial suppert and to develop ane use andproperl • maintain said site as proposed and 'hereinbefore set out, or fail to comp'_, tlth any of the terns oT this ordinance, title to said site together with all improvements and betterments thereon shall revert :to add become vested in the City of Shakopee free and clear of any claims of any person, __W, corporation or association; and any dispute or ouestion as to the Society's performance hera%nder shall be in the first instance determined by the Cornmmon Council of the _ty of Shakopee at a public hearing to be held after thirty days' +..ten notice to said society specifying the grounds for said hearing, mth the right of the Society to appeal to the District Court of proper jurisdiction sitnia thirty days after said hearinu and determnation by the Council. I. That the Society by acceptin; this conveyance waives any and all claims that it nos has or mry hereinafter have for its oxr_ benefit or the general public or for its invitees and licensees again_^t the City of Shakopee for am• reason or cause that arose, arises or right an a or result from the oneretion of the nresent sewage disposal facilities operated by the City of Shakopee in the vicinity of the sewage above described property Of any future/disposal operations carted or. in the vicinity of the above described land. S?C70C !V: Senarabi ii Bach anL every section, provision and part of this orcrice is separable from any other section, provision or part, and, should any section, pro:•. .sion or part be held nnCon$t'_LL']ibdai Cy' 2 CpL"i, of CC�peLent jurisdiction, it shall nom affect any other section, provision or part hereof. ".IO:' P: Acte-Lance b•_• the Soc+_ei•• ant , ++ rorce This ordinance sha'l'l become effective 'h4rzy (30) days frog: and after its adoption and plblicaLion as provided by the amended Charter o_ the v-- o.` Shamopee; Prcired that the Society siva_ file a duly nota_zed acceptance of 1r terms h erecf, upon authc^nation ven b.- a vote of tie genera_ ne=oem--ip of said Society duly assemhled. 13 a, (f) That the Scott County Historical Society has failed to attract anticipated financial support to develop, use and maintain the site in that the County of Scott and the Stans Foundation have indicated that both groups intend to withdraw substantial financial support to the project if control thereof is returned to the Scott County Historical Society. 2. That copies of this Resolution shall be forwarded to the Chairman and Secretary of the Scott County Historical Society as the same are indicated by documents filed with the City of Shakopee, and that a notice of the public hearing shall be published once prior to said hearing in the Shakopee Valley News and that all interested parties will be invited to attend and give evidence relative to the issues of compliance with Ordinances No. 290 and 300 as set forth above. 3. At the conclusion of said public hearing and upon the closing thereof, the City Council will determine whether or not grounds exist for the City of Shakopee to exercise its reversionary rights under the quit claim deeds issued pursuant to Ordinance No. 290 and 300 and to take such action as it deems appropriate in view of the findings made. Adopted this day of , 1987, at the adjourned regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee. Eldon Reinke, Mayor Judith Cox, City Clerk -2- 6 13 d Passed in AO. 1 Rez. session of the Con^.on Council of the City of Shak=ee held this i.1 day of Decembe- , 1968 YI'eslLieA" - the Co ion Council CLi<� %0 City Recorder Afir d thi� a .o y £ Becembe; 1968. LJ ayor-eo ti City of Shakopee Prepared and approved as to £ori this73th day of -,)ecmber, 1968. City Ltt rney RESOLUTION NO. 2741 A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING UNDER PARAGRAPH R OF SHAKOPEE ORDINANCE 290 AND PARAGRAPH H OF ORDINANCE 300 WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has been requested by the County of Scott and by the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. to assert the City's reversionary rights under the terms of the July 8, 1969, quit claim deed and the February 3, 1969, quit claim deed between the City of Shakopee and the Scott County Historical Society; and WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of Shakopee that sufficient cause exists to suggest that various terms of those quit claim deeds have not been complied with so that a public hearing under Paragraph H of those quit claim deeds would be in order to determine whether compliance has existed; NOW, THERFORE BE IT RESOL D by the City Council of the City of Shakopee as follows: 1. That a public hearin shall be held on the 28th day of July 1987, as 7:00 p.m. or as soon t ereafter as possible, to determine whether or not the Scott County His orical ocie[y has complied with the following terms and conditions of the Fe uary 3, 1969, and July 8, 1969, qui[ claim deeds referred to above and in tic lar whether or not the Scott County Historical Society has complied with he following provisions of those two quit claim deeds, namely; (a) That the proper transferred under the terms of the two aforementioned ui claim deeds and the improvements and betterments plac th eon (the site) have been sold, encumbered, mortgaged or hyp thecat or not kept free from liens or other attachments all ontrary to Paragraph B of the quit claim deeds; (b) That the Scott C unty Historical Society has failed to obtain and file with the Ci y of Shakopee a public liability policy naming the City of Shakopee as an insured with respect to claims arising out of the use and development of the site; (c) That the Scott County Historical Society has failed to maintain a f minimum active paid up membership roster of 100 Scott County residents; (d) That the Scott County Historical Society has failed to file with the City of Shakopee complete annual financial statements indicating all monies directed or received for use on the site, verifying that at least a substantial sum of all monies have been committed for the physical development and artifacts to be placed on and for the maintenance of the project on the site; (e) That the Scott County Historical Society has failed to hold at least two general meetings per year and the annual election of officers, filing the names of said officers so elected with the City of Shakopee; and -1- � 3d RESOLUTION NO. 2741 A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING UNDER PARAGRAPH H OF SHAKOPEE ORDINANCE 290 AND PARAGRAPH H OF ORDINANCE 300 WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has been requested by the County of Scott and by the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. to assert the City's reversionary rights under the terms of the July 8, 1969, quit claim deed and the February 3, 1969, quit claim deed between the City of Shakopee and the Scott County Historical Society; and WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of Shakopee that sufficient cause exists to suggest that various terms of those quit claim deeds have not been complied with so that a public hearing under Paragraph H of those quit claim deeds would be in order to determine whether compliance has existed; NOW, THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee as follows: 1. That a public hearing shall be held on the 26th day of July 1987, as 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, to determine whether or not the Scott County Historical Society has complied with the following terms and conditions of the February 3, 1969, and July 8, 1969, quit claim deeds referred to above and in particular whether or not the Scott County Historical Society has complied with the following provisions of those two quit claim deeds, namely; (a) That the property transferred under the terms of the two aforementioned quit claim deeds and the improvements and betterments placed thereon (the site) have been sold, encumbered, mortgaged or hypothecated or not kept free from liens or other attachments all contrary to Paragraph B of the quit claim deeds; (b) That the Scott County Historical Society has failed to obtain and file with the City of Shakopee a public liability policy naming the City of Shakopee as an insured with respect to claims arising out of the use and development of the site; (c) That the Scott County Historical Society has failed to maintain a minimum active paid up membership roster of 100 Scott County residents; (d) That the Scott County Historical Society has failed to file with the City of Shakopee complete annual financial statements indicating all monies directed or received for use on the site, verifying that at least a substantial sum of all monies have been committed for the physical development and artifacts to be placed on and for the maintenance of the project on the site; (e) That the Scott County Historical Society has failed to hold at least two general meetings per year and the annual election of officers, filing the names of said officers so elected with the City of Shakopee; and -1- � 3xf-, MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Downtown Streetscape Project DATE: June 10, 1987 INTRODUCTION: At their March 17 , 1987 meeting, Council adopted Resolution No. 2702 ordering the plans and specifications for the Downtown Streetscape Improvement Project. The attached Resolution No. 2739 provides for the approval of plans and specifications for the project and orders advertising for bids. BACKGROUND: To accommodate a portion of the construction in 1987 , . it was necessary to: 1 . Establish a workable phasing schedule for 1987 and 1988. 2. Schedule design efforts to facilitate the phasing. 3 . Establish a design review committee for the purpose of reviewing plans as they develop. 4 . Hold property owner meetings to identify individual design problems. 5 . Establish a downtown water system review committee to analyze the system for fire protection capabilities. The following is a summary of the events and tasks completed since Council ordered plans and specs. 1 . Phasing Schedule A phasing schedule was worked out and presented at the public hearings. 1987 Construction Season Sommerville ; 1st to 3rd Lewis; 1st to 3rd 2nd Avenue ; Sommerville to Holmes Downtown Streetscape 13 Jz, June 10, 1987 Page 2 1988 Construction Season Holmes; 1st to 3rd Fuller; 1st to 3rd Atwood; 1st to 3rd 2nd Avenue; Holmes to Atwood It was determined that 3rd Avenue would be handled as a rehabilitation project through the capital improvement program process, scheduled for 1988. 2. Design Efforts Based upon the pha ing schedule, it was imperative that staff and the pr ject consultant move quickly. All " design d tails ve been worked out for the 1987 phase with deta 'l cc struction plans. In an effort to take advantage the scope of the project and provide consistency ughout the redevelopment area , it has been deeme adv a to let one contract for the entire pr ject area. The contract documents would include i terim completion dates to accommodate a work suspensio over the winter months. The design prototype has been used to establish estimated quantities for the 1988 phase . Since the detail design for the 1988 phase has not been fully completed, this bidding process may result in some changed conditions as property owner meetings are held. 3. Design Review A design committee has worked very close with the project consultant to expedite the design process. The committee consisted of Gary Laurent, John Anderson, Dennis Kraft, Barry Stock, and myself. 4. Property Owner Meetings Group meetings were held with the property owners of those properties in the 1987 phase area . These meetings were very helpful in maximizing design flexibility, where possible, to accommodate the needs of the properties involved. 5. Water System Review During the public hearing process, concern was raised regarding the water system in the downtown area and its Downtown Streetscape 3 June 10, 1987 Page 2 1088 Construction Season Holmes; 1st to 3rd Fuller; 1st to 3rd Atwood; 1st to 3rd 2nd Avenue ; Holmes to Atwood It was determined that 3rd Avenue would be handled as a rehabilitation project through the capital improvement program process, scheduled for 1988. 2. Design Efforts Based upon the phasing schedule, it was imperative that staff and the project consultant move quickly . All design details have been worked out for the 1987 phase with detail construction plans. In an effort to take advantage of the scope of the project and provide consistency throughout the redevelopment area , it has been deemed advisable to let one contract for the entire project area . The contract documents would include interim completion dates to accommodate a work suspension over the winter months. The design prototype has been used to establish estimated quantities for the 1988 phase. Since the detail design for the 1988 phase has not been fully completed, this bidding process may result in some changed conditions as property owner meetings are held. 3 . Design Review A design committee has worked very close with the project consultant to expedite the design process. The committee consisted of Gary Laurent, John Anderson, Dennis Kraft, Barry Stock, and myself. 4. Property Owner Meetings Group meetings were held with the property owners of those properties in the 1987 phase area . These meetings were very helpful in maximizing design flexibility, where possible, to accommodate the needs of the properties involved. 5. Water System Review During the public hearing process, concern was raised regarding the water system in the downtown area and its Downtown Streetscape June 10, 1987 Page 3 capability of providing fire flow for new sprinkler systems. A committee was established to review the system to determine if additional watermains were needed. The committee consisted of Jerry Wampach, John Anderson, Lee Houser, Lou VanHout and myself. It was decided to obtain the assistance of someone who deals with fire suppression systems on a regular basis. Arnie Olson of the state building code department studied the water flow requirements for three different building types incorporated in a full block of development. Attached is the report from Arnie Olson. The report indicates the water demand requirements for a typical full block development of three different building types assuming a partial sprinklered building and a fully sprinklered building. Note from the report that "Building Block B" requires much more water than the other two examples because this is the worst case scenario for a fully sprinklered building. The following table is a summary of the water demands. Building Block Water Flow Requirements• Tyoe Sorinklered Partially Sorinklered A 1140 gpm 3290 gpm B 2890 gpm 3660 gpm C 1690 gpm 1990 gpm f All flows require 20 psi residual pressure. As with any public service to be provided, the level of service to be provided compared to the cost of that service is an issue. Olson recommends that the type C, 1690 gpm flow rate would satisfy the design needs for most any building that would locate in the downtown area . He stated that this flow rate would allow flexibility of design up to those needs of 1690 gpm providing for either fully or partially sprinklered buildings. Buildings of higher hazard or heights of 3 stories or more would need to be fully sprinklered. Also attached is the Hydrant Flow Data Summary produced by the Insurance Services Organization. I have marked those tests that are in and around the downtown area. The last column indicates the available flow rate with a 20 psi residual pressure. The available flow rates Downtown Streetscape June 10, 1987 Page 4 in the downtown area range from 2600 gpm to 6100 gpm. It is the opinion of Lou VanHout and myself that there is adequate fire flow in the downtown area to serve any need and that the level of service question is not an issue . Therefore , no improvements to the existing system relative to flows is recommended. There has been considerable discussion regarding water services. Due to the surface improvements in the sidewalk areas, Lou is of the posture that all services will need replacement. We have not fully worked out a position on services to vacant lots and/or increased size of services to buildings that may redevelop with fire suppression systems in the future. The issue of services were addressed at the property owner meetings. As one might expect, future needs is very difficult to predict. Engineeri know of three vacant parcels that either have no wa er rvice or possibly inadequate service . These site a e the vacant lot on Holmes across from the bank, Jer Wampach' s site, and the site of the old hotel . We p a to meet with the owners of these sites and attempt to p ide service that is acceptable to SPUC and t owner. At this point, Engi eering is prepared to request approval of the plans and specifi ations and set a bid letting date . The proposed date for id letting is July 9, 1987 and staff will be asking for a special meeting of the Council to consider those bids on July 14, 1987 • Alternatives: There are basically two alternatives available to Council if this project is to proceed. 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2739 in an ongoing effort to keep the project on schedule. 2. Do no adopt Resolution No . 2739 and schedule the project for a 1988 construction season. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 2739 . Downtown Streetscape June 10, 1987 Page 4 in the downtown area range from 2600 gpm to 6100 gpm. It is the opinion of Lou VanHout and myself that there is adequate fire flow in the downtown area to serve any need and that the level of service question is not an issue . Therefore , no improvements to the existing system relative to flows is recommended. There has been considerable discussion regarding water services. Due to the surface improvements in the sidewalk areas, Lou is of the posture that all services will need replacement. We have not fully worked out a position on services to vacant lots and/or increased size of services to buildings that may redevelop with fire suppression systems in the future. The issue of services were addressed at the property owner meetings. As one might expect, future needs is very difficult to predict. Engineering knows of three vacant parcels that either have no water service or possibly inadequate service . These sites are the vacant lot on Holmes across from the bank, Jerry Wampach' s site, and the site of the old hotel . We plan to meet with the owners of these sites and attempt to provide service that is acceptable to SPUC and the owner. At this point, Engineering is prepared to request approval of the plans and specifications and set a bid letting date . The proposed date for bid letting is July 91 1987 and staff will be asking for a special meeting of the Council to consider those bids on July 14, 1987 . Alternatives: There are basically two alternatives available to Council if this project is to proceed. 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2739 in an ongoing effort to keep the project on schedule. 2 . Do no adopt Resolution No. 2739 and schedule the project for a 1988 construction season. RECONNENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 2739 . Downtown Streetscape June 10, 1987 Page 5 REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2739, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for the Downtown Streetscape Improvement Project No. 1987-2 and move its adoption. KA/pmp MEM2739 RESOLUTION NO. 2739 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids for the Downtown Streetscape Improvement Project No. 1987-2 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2702 adopted by City Council on March 17 , 1987 , Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of the Downtown Streetscape Project and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF-SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: - - 1 . Such plans and specifi ations, a copy of wnich is on file and of record in the Office f the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall repare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and i the onstruction Bulletin an advertise= ment for bids upon the mak ng of' such improvements under such approved plans and speci ' c ions. TheAdvertisementfor Bids snall be published for thr weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bid will be received by the City Clerk until 2 : 00 P . M. , on July , 1987, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Cc n it Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, r heir designated party, will then be tabulated, and will be ons ' dered by the Council at 7 :00 P.M. , or thereafter on my 14 , 1987 , in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be cons dared unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and acc mpanied by a cash deposit, cashier' s check, bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of Shakopee for n t less than five ( 5% ) percent of the amount of the Bid. Adopted in session of the City Council 01the 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 RESOLUTION NO. 2739 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids for the Downtown Streetscape Improvement Project No. 1987-2 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2702 adopted by City Council on March 17 , 1987 , Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of the Downtown Streetscape Project and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF- SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . Such plans and specifications, a copy of wnich is on file and of record in the Office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertise- ment for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. TheAdvertisementfor Bids shall be published for three weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the City Clerk until 2 : 00 P . M. , on July 9 , 1987 , at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, or their designated party, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by the Council at 7 : 00 P .M. , or thereafter on July 14, 1987 , in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier' s check, bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of ShakoDee for not less than five (51A ) percent of the amount oftheBid. 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 May 21, 1987 To: City of Shakopee Subject: Maximum Water Demand for Fire Suppression if Any One City Block of the Cities Core Business Area was Reconstructed with a New City Block Building I have outlined and attached 3 different types of buildings that could be built on any one city block in the core business area of Shakopee, Minnesota. These are the most popular types of buildings and all could meet the city zoning for height limitations. Each of the 3 different buildings show 2 different types of fire suppression systems that the designer and owner are permitted to be installed to meet code. Refer to the attached 'Building Block A", if the designer and owner choose to install a partial sprinkler building as outlined, then the building would also require a 2500 gpm fire pump that mast pump and flow 3,750 gpm and could not draw the city mains pressure below 20 psi. Refer to attached "Bnildino Blmk B". If the designer and owner choose to install a partial sprinkler building as outlined, then the building would also require a 1500 gpm fire puap that must puuru and flow 2250 gpm and could not draw the city main below 20 psi pressure. This flow is less than the 3290 gpm water demand so a larger fire pmp would be required to pump and flow not less than 3290 gpm and could not draw the city main pressure below 20 psi. Refer to "Building Block C" if the designer and owner choose not to sprinkler the building mall throughout then a 1.000 gpm fire pimp would be required but this would mean that the building would have to he Type I construction instead of Type v N which would cost about 3 times more than if the building were sprinklered throughout so the water demand should be designed for the city mains of 1690 gpm. If there should be any questions please call 451-9371. Reseectfully submitted, Arnold G. Olson Professional Plan Reviewer 13 Eagle Circle Ismer Grove Heights, M 55075 13 Building Block A (Partial Sprinkler Buildingl 1. Full basement 90,000 , Type I ccntruction, parking garage. 2. Three stories of apartments, 'Type V 1 hour construction (wood frame) 3. Basement is sprinklered, 2 systems (ordinary hazard Group 1) 4. 5 enclosed stairs 6. Building will have 9 Class I standpipes 5 stairs + 4 fire Malls 7. Water Demand Requirements 2 sprinkler systems 2 cpm + 240 gpm = 540 gpm 9 class I standpipes ( 00 + 250 250 + 250 + 250 + 250) Sprinklers 54 gpm Standpipes 250 (at 65 psi residual) 'Total flow 3040 + 250 = 3290 gpm buildin 1. Items 1, 3, 4, 5 and asame as for partial sprinklered building. 2. This building is four s ins of apartments fully sprinklered, Type V 1 hour (wood "frame) oonstrincti 3. Water Demand Requirements 2 sprinkler systems basement 540 gpm 2 combined systems for 4 stories 350 qpm outside/inside hose 250 gpm Total water demand 1.140 gpm (sprinkler pressure only is required.) 13 Building Block A (Partial Sprinkler Building) 1. Full basement 90,000 , Type I contruction, parking garage. 2. Three stories of apartments, Type v 1 hour construction (wood frame) 3. Basement is sprinklered, 2 systems (ordinary hazard Group 1) 4. 5 enclosed stairs 6. Building will have 9 Class I standpipes 5 stairs + 4 fire walls 7. Water Demand Reauirements 2 sprinkler systems 240 gpm + 240 gpm = 540 gpm 9 class I standpipes (500 + 250 + 250 + 250 + 250 + 250) Sprinklers 540 gpm Standpipes 2500 gpm (at 65 psi residual) Total flow 3040 gpm + 250 = 3290 gpm Buildina Block A (Fully sprinklered building) 1. Items 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are the same as for partial sprinklered building. 2. This building is four stories of apartments fully sprinklered, Type V 1 hour (wood 'frame) construction. 3. Water Demand Requirements 2 sprinkler systems basement 540 gpm 2 m, ined systems for 4 stories 350 gpm outside/inside hose 250 gpm Total water demand 1140 gpm (sprinkler pressure only is required.) "lq z It E � � e ro �i .B � o - - o M U, „R 5 S 5 S S IS Pont BR MrNT p� iNG "tip RRMP A KfNG S 3 nA i S S .14 ' S /3 �- Building Block B (Partial Sprinkler Building) 1. !lull basment 90,000 Type I construction, parking garage. 2. First story 90,000 , 80,000 per story for 2nd, 3rd, 4th stories of Type I construction. 3. Fourth story is not sprinklered and not open to the atrium. 4. 4 stair enclosures. 5. 4 Class I standpipes 6. Water Demand Requiremen 4 standpipes 500 + 250 + + 250 = 12.50 gpm (65 psi residual) 9 ordinary hazard group I sy tems (240 ea.) 2160 gpm outside/inside hose 250 Total Water 3660 gpm 1250 gpm standpipes mi be 65 psi at top outlets) Building Block B (totally ,sprinklered building) 1. Items 1, 2; 3, 4 are the same as partial, item 5 for this building will be 2 combined systems and 2 class I standpipes 2. Water Demand Requirements ll combined sprinkler systems (240 gPn ea.) 2640 gpm outside/inside hose 250 gpm Total water demand 2890 gpm Building Block B (Partial Sprinkler Building) 1. Elnll basment 90,000 , Type I construction, parking garage. 2. First story 90,000 , 80,000 per story for 2nd, 3rd, 4th stories of Type I construction. 3. Fourth story is not sprinklered and not open to the atrium. 4. 4 stair enclosures. 5. 4 Class I standpipes 6. Water Demand Requirements 4 standpipes 500 + 250 + 250 + 250 = 12.50 gpm (65 psi residual) 9 ordinary hazard group I systems (240 ea.) 2160 gpm outside/inside hose 250 gpm Total Water 3660 gpm 1250 gpm standpipes mist be 65 psi at top outlets) Building Block B (totally sorinklered building) 1. Items 1, 2; 3, 4 are the same as partial, item 5 for this building will be 2 combined systems and 2 class I standpipes 2. Water Demand Requirements ll combined sprinkler systems (240 gpm ea.) 2640 gpm outside/inside hose 250 gpm Total water demand 2890 gpm , ` A 0 AL V / 10 " ge8�� 22�R 8L ' y$ OFFICE OFF/� E a� RE7A� 1w ftETAi1- j & RETAIL „ pt�u avo ftETAiJ /e RErPrII ft t 11, RE'fR�L EM ,M7 P rl GARAGE 1 �� Building Block C (Partial Sbrinklered) 1. Basement parking garage is sprinklered only. 2. Building is 2 stories in height, 90,000 first story + 80,000 for the second story for a total floor area of 17,000 sq.ft. must be Type I construction throughout. 3. Water Demand 2 sprinkler sytem basement 240 gpm h 540 gpm 12 Class II standpipes at 00 gpm 65 psi 1200 gpm outside/inside hose 250 : Total Water demand 1990 gpm 1. Basement area same as of Type construction. 2. 1st and 2nd floor area the sane ex t the first and secchd stories may not be Type V N (wood frame with no fire rating and/or construction) . 3. Water Demand 6 sprinkler systems (240 gpm each) 1400 gpm Outside/inside hose 250 gpm Total Water Demand 1690 gpm No Class II standpipes requied water pressure only for the sprinkler system remote demand. Buildino Block C (Partial Sbrinklered) 1. Basement parking garage is sprinklered only. 2. Building is 2 stories in height, 90,000 first story + 80,000 for the second story for a total floor area of 17,000 sq-ft- Must be Type I construction throughout. 3. Water Demand 2 sprinkler sytem basement 240 gpm each 540 gpm 12 Class II standpipes at 100 gpm at 65 psi 1200 gpm outside/inside hose 250 gpm Total Water demand 1990 gpm Building Block (fully scinkt ad) 1. Basement area same as above of Type I construction. 2. 1st and 2nd floor area is the same except the first and second stories may not be Type v N (wood frame with no fire rating and/or construction) . 3. Water Demand 6 sprinkler systems (240 gpm each) 1400 gpm Outside/inside hose 250 gpm Total Water Demand 1690 cpm No Class II standpipes requied water pressure only for the sprinkler system remote demand. � •ice �� i R � A a 0 D 190 3 oo ' RETAIL7B-.2 BASEMENT -PaRKING "8-/ 0 - 0 /3 -s s 1' IN y may` W N d d j Q N N < m �•t P V vt b v1 m t•f N pW r mN d u J W z 0 3 Y A V O w n V Q < 1"1 N N f1 � V Q Q' t•1 O Y Y w w m 0 t�o ;'� dV n [ O C rG 6 N w u U 00 0 0 0 0o O an d C. } T N } W d y JJ Z Ci u O ydj G vl M d O N y Y J W O< uu Q u 3 6y O< 0 < J G F a w vNi N+U1 p P } Iz r FO W O d N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a M W y wt N n 3 _ Y N f•1 ZOF m _ N G (J N > �=LLL"'W F ❑ C w z.5.• m fi L m Y G u9 O y � Iu1 vJiO .� cC E r C O 9 m SwF ym '� u Q U F y "9y 3<O W Y 4 d ...i N W O m 3 3 m a m 5d5 t�C H K O G y m > b d E W m p p b U N OWa d 0 OI Y O m V d W t'1 W M M ti W N 0mZ ¢ C m m m u m u WO< •dd t 01F uY W W K Y d L• � E N{WrW dEu mi o F 5 V J3� OmOI T [aIWG U W 'L N `m m P O N t1 V QZF � d m . F O m o d t a w C�xx+ UZ u¢ t N 1y i ap c _S 5 yJ y I Z y r Y y Z w O O c O O O O O O O O O O O F 7 L G O O d O O O O O O O O O O O O F Y j oc= O % d q J w LU OH N O N y N C N O J1 O N I y y F r d y uW O F W W (•j r=i V �O .O W O O n W N .a N O �D P W U 9"'I H n W W W W W W �a V v� n W O • N L+ G y u N F N O W W O O ^ O W N O Z W C Y T JW C < w d J W C 3 Y• > � IL t+2 W.1 M O F % Z IFOw O u N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vie`. N � _ P 2 2J1 n vpj O I W O 3 O N n N N � '•w w v I Y G O T F ^I > Y y a G nl r W N 9 a U N I O W C a O O w W d c w m a m m a p,C.CC % � a w n .i wo •-� d x O Y U U 8. O w aFiHw c .a^i mi 0. E _u 00❑ � an t F W C rX U Z u 6 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Marschall Road Watermain Project DATE: June 10, 1987 INTRODUCTION: A public hearing was held on March 3, 1987 to consider Watermain improvements along Marschall Road to serve the Ackerberg development site . At the time, Ackerberg was considering installing the Watermain privately, consequently, no further action was taken at the termination of the hearing (see attached minutes of the public hearing) . BACKGROUND: Ackerberg has not been successful in negotiating an agreement with the only other property owner that is receiving lateral benefit from the improvement (Joe Sand) . Since Ackerberg is now planning to begin construction soon, Ackerberg is now asking the City to construct the project to move the process along. The attached Resolution No. 2738 orders plans and specifications for the watermain extension. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 2738. REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2738, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Marschall Road Watermain Improvement, Project No. 1987.4 and move its adoption. KA/pmp MEM 2738 3 city council March 3, 1987 Page -2- M-. Monroe, Lesters inc. said his addition will be 40-x 481 , 1 story and is not a pole building. It is a permanent structure on a concrete foundation.. The consensus of the Council was that this request should go through the FJD process and go to the Planning Commission first before the City Council. Clay/Lebens moved to receive and place on file the letter from David Leivestad requesting an addition of 2000 square feet to a building he has purchased on 3401 Eagle Creek Road. Motion carried unanimously. Lebens/Vierling moved that the City Administrator contact our Legislators urging their defeat of a 6% sales tax on local government pruchases, urging defeat of leaving motor vehicle excise tax (over $200 million) in the General }laid, urging defeat of deleatin g $Sz million per year from the Regional transit Boards state appropriation request and adding it to the property tax, and urging them not to support a reduction of the already certified 1987 Local Government Aid by $5 million. Approved under consent business. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - Marschall Road Watermain i rovements - 11th Avenue going South 87-4 Clay/Vierling moved to open the ublic he ng on Marschall Road Watermain Improvements from 11th Avenue Sou Appro 'mately 1250 feet. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer said they are prop sig a trunk watermain that would run along CR-17 to serve various properties along tha outs. There are three properties shutting that route being the Ackerberg Develop ent, the Joe Sands property and the vacant Vierling property. Ackerberg has peri oned to provide water service to their particular development. They are propos' g to install the watermain system as a private venture of their own and wish to vestigate t'nat option further. Vice Chairman Leroux asked if there was any om the audience who wished to address this issue. Lawrence Vierling asked where the line was supposed to be going? The City Engineer said the proposed and recommended water line will be within the CR-17 right-of-way on the west side. Cncl. Vierling asked if the project was done privately would the council have the decision to charge the undeveloped land. The City Engineer replied that if the City did not do the project then they have no right to assess any undeveloped property. Vice Chairman Leroux asked if therewas anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no response. Clay/Lebens moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - Vacation of Right-Of-Way in Killarney wills Clay/Lebens moved to open the public hearing on Vacation of Right-Of-Way in Killarney Hills. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on vacating the right-of-way of Sharon Parkway and Tyrone Drive within Killarney Hills Addition. Cncl. Leroux asked that if it were vacated to the and of-that road than would Mr. Hauer get that vacated piece of property. The City Engineer replied that Mr. Hauer would get from the Center line of the street. 3 city Cq: r._ M.zr=:: , 1937 Me. Monroe, Lesters Inc. said his addition vi 1 be 40'x 48' , I story and is not a pole building. It is a permanent structure on a concrete foundation. The consensus or the Council was that this request should go through the FJD process and go to the Planning Commission first before the City Count'-. Clay/Lebens moved to receive and place on file the letter from David Leivestad requesting an addition of 2000 square feet to a building he has purchased on 3401 Eagle Creek Road. Motion carried unarimo_ly. Ir-bens/Vierling moved that the City Administrator contact our Legislators urging their defeat of a 6% sales tax on local government pruchases, urging defeat of leaving motor vehicle excise tax (over $200 million) in the General Fund, urging defeat of deleating $5# million per year from the Regional Taansit Boards State appropriation request and adding it to the property tax, and urging them not to support a reduction of the already certified 1987 Local Government Aid by $5 million. Approved under consent business. Roll Cal?: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - M,arschall Road Watermain improvements - 11th Avenue going South 87-4 Clay/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on Marschall Road Watermain Imnrovements from lith Avenue South Approximately 1250 feet. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer said they are proposing a trunk watermain that would run along CR-17 to serve various nronerties along that rouse. There are three properties abutting that route 'being the Ackerbe.-g Development, the joe Sands p7marty anal the vacant Vierling property. Ackarberg has petitioned to provide water service to their particular development. They are proposing to install the watermain system as a private venture of their own and wish to investigate that motion further. Vice Chairman Leroux asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. Iaw•rence Vierling asked where the line was supposed to be going? Tne City Engineer said the proposed and recommended water line will be within the CR-17 right-of-way on the west side. Cool. Vierliag asked if the project was doneprivatelywould the council have the decision to charge the undeveloped land. The City Engineer replied that if the City did not do the project then they have no right to assess any undeveloped property. Vice Chairman Leroux asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no response. Clay/Lebens moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - Vacation. of Rimat-Cf-Way in .✓.'liarnev Ells Clay/Lebens moved to open the public hearing on Vacation of Bien-.-0='-Way in Eiliarney Y'll. Motion car^ed unanimousiy. Discussion ensued on vacating the right-of-way of Sharon Parkway and Tyrone Drive witbin Fi larrey Hills Addition.. Cool. Leroux asked tnat if it were vacated to the end of.that road then would Mr. Hauer get that vacated piece of property. The City Engineer replied that Mr. Hauer would get from the Center 'line of the street. RESOLUTION N0. 2738 /31 A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For Marschall Road Yatermain Improvement Project No. 1987_4 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2684 , adopted on Feoruary 3 , 1987 , fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of Watermain improvements along Marschall Road; and WHEREAS, ten days published notice o:' the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held on the 3rd day of March 1987 , at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. HOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: - . . 1 . That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter described: Watermain Improvement along Marschall Road from 11th Avenue to the South Approximately 1250 Feet. 2. Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. Adopted in session o2' the City Council of the City o: Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day 0: 19_. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Cierk Approved as to form this day of, 19_. City Attorney MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: 1987 Pavement Preservation Program DATE: June 12, 1987 INTRODUCTION 6 BACKGROUND: The Engineering Department, in cooperation with Public Works, is finalizing the proposed 1987 Pavement Preservation Program. We are planning again this year to contract for sealcoating and thin lift overlays. Last year we received some complaints about the edge along the curb created by the overlay thickness. This year we are planning to mill away the inplace bituminous along the curb to eliminate this edge. Our program is not finalized at this time but should be by the June 16, 1987 meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Schedule for Council review the 1987 Pavement Preservation Program at their June 16 , 1987 meeting. REQUESTED ACTION: Move to direct the City Engineer to obtain bids for the 1987 Pavement Preservation Program. KA/pmp PAVEMENT i3h MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer,4m¢ SUBJECT: Railroad Corridor Improvement Project DATE: June 12, 1987 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: Last year staff attempted to incorporate rubberized crossing material into improvements to the railroad crossings in the downtown area. Bids for the material were received but rejected due to timing problems and the fact that such improvements would be preceeding possible corridor improvements. At this time, staff is working on coordinating a federally funded (90% federal , 10% local) corridor improvement project that would provide modern crossing protection. This modern equipment would eliminate the blighted overhead lines and poles. If we are successful in acquiring this project , the following actions should be taken. 1 . The railroad has agreed to install the rubberized crossing material at no cost to the City if the City purchases the material . Based upon the traffic volumes, Mn/DOT has indicated that the rubber would not be eligible for funding. The City should take action to obtain the rubber material. 2. Due to the lead time necessary to obtain materials for the signals, the corridor project cannot be done until 1988. Action should be taken to have conduit installed with the 1987 downtown project such that the intersections of Sommerville & Lewis can be served. The railroad is working on a proposed agreement for this. 3. The City should work with the railroad to obtain the necessary easements for signal control equipment so that aesthetics proposed for the downtown are enhanced. RECOMMENDATION: It is my recommendation that the City take action to obtain bids for the rubberized crossing material to be installed on Lewis Street and Sommerville Street in conjunctionwith the1987 downtown project. The - estimated -cost of this material is $30,000.00. _ -- REQUESTED ACTION: Move to direct the City Engineer to obtain bids for rubberized crossing material for the railroad crossings at Lewis Street and Sommerville Street. 131 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: John H. DeLacey, Engineering Technician es SUBJECT: Valley Park Drive North Improvement Pr ject No . 1986-11 DATE: June 12, 1987 INTRODUCTION: Partial Estimate Voucher No. 2 for the above referenced project requires Council approval . BACKGROUND: The work for this project is now complete. Staff is currently reviewing final quantities with the contractor and should be ready to final this project next month. ACTION REQUESTED: A motion to authorize payment of Partial Estimate No. 2 for Valley Park Drive North Improvement Project 1986-11 in the amount of 10,895 .97 to Valley Paving, Inc. PARTIAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER Contract No. 1986-11 Partial Estimate Voucher No. 2— Period Ending: May 31. 1987 TO: Contractor Valley Paying Inc Address 8800 13th Ave E /S Dee MN 55379 Project Description a aprovement Project I. Original Contract Amount i $ 54 057.06 2. Change Order No. No. ; -0- 3. Total Funds Encumbered ; 54.057.06 4. Value of York Completed b 8 Value of Work 5. Percent Retainag b . 700.00 Remaining 6. Previous Payments b 37.985.26 b 0 7. Deductions or Charges ; -0- Percent Complete 8. Total b 38,085.26 100 Payment Due (Line 4 - 8) b 10.895.97 CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT (I, We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work shown herein is a fair estimate of the work completed to date. CONTRACTOR Vallo,, BY �!_���� ,n TIII.E ares iC� emt APPROVED - CITY OF SH=pEE _— G 87 Proj Engineer Date City Adsirn9trator !Date j3i PARTIAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER Contract No. 1986-11 Partial Estimate Voucher No. 2 Period Ending: May 31 1987 TO: Contractor Valley Paving Inc Address 8800 13th Ave. E. Shakopee. MN 55379 Project Description Valley Park Drive North Improvement Project 1 . Original Contract Amount $ 54.057.06 2. Change Order No. lhru No. $ -0- 3. Total Funds Encumbered $ 54.057.06 4. Value of Work Completed $ 48.981 .23 Value of Work Remaining 5. Percent Retainage $ 100.00 $ 0 6. Previous Payments $ 37.985.26 Percent Complete 7. Deductions or Charges $ -0- 100 8. Total $ 38085. 26 Payment Due (Line 4 - 8) $ 10.895.97 CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT (I, We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work sham herein is a fair estimate of the work completed to date. CONTRACTOR V0.1I Bu) ��z J •rn n e- TI17.E �re5ic� 2r� APPROVED - CITY OF SHA PEE G 87 7 Pro r Date , / City Administrator 'Date l./ / 3J /3k MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: John DeLacey, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Holmes Street Basin Storm Sewer Laterals Project No. 1986-1 DATE: June 12, 1987 INTRODUCTION: Partial estimate voucher for the above referenced project requires council approval. BACKGROUND: The above referenced project is basically complete except for a couple of minor punch list items. There has been two claims on this project by property owners for damage done to their property. One claim has been settled with the property owner . The retainage amount for this estimate reflects the property owners damage claim that has not yet been settled plus an amount to cover punch list items. ACTION REQUESTED: A motion to authorize payment of Partial Estimate No. 9 for Holmes Street Basin Storm Sewer Laterals Project 1986-1 in the amount of $6,408.73 to S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. JHD/pmp EST9 � 3 K PARTIAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER Contract No. 1986-1 Partial Estimate Voucher No. 9 Period Ending: May 31, 1987 TO: Contractor S.M. Heyates 6 Sons Inc. Address P.O. Boz 212 Shakonee- 55379 Project Description Hglms Street &asin Storm Sewer Laterals 1. Original Contract Amo E 941.253.82 2. Change Order No. e— Thru N 6 $, -6,921 .16 3. Total Funds Encumbered $ 934 932.66 4. Value of Work Completed Value of Work Remaining 5. 1 .4 Percent Retainage 3.000.00 $ 500.00 6. Previous Payments $ Percent Complete 7. Deductions or Charges $ 99% B. Total 1 927 547.48 Payment Due (Line 4 - 8) L $ 6,408.73 CFmrn-r= OF PAYMENT '73. 4519. S." . `I (I, We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work sham herein is a fair estimate of the work completed to date. CONTRA R BY TmEI APPROVED - CITY OF SHAKOPEE tom? /L T Pro' t Engineer to City Administrator Date 13 rC PARTIAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER Contract No. 1986-1 Partial Estimate Voucher No. _9_ Period Ending: May 31 1987 TO: Contractor S.M. Heaetes h Sons Inc. Address P.O. Boz 212 Shakopee. MH 55379 Project Description Holmes Street Basin Storm Sewer Laterals 1. Original Contract Amount $ 941 .253.82 2. Change Order No. 1 Thru No. 6 $ -6 921 .16 3. Total Funds Encumbered $ 934,332.66 4. Value of Work Completed $ 933,956.21 Value of Work Remaining 5. 1 .4 Percent Retainage $ 13,000.00 $ 500.00 6. Previous Payments $ 914-547.48 Percent Complete 7. Deductions or Charges $ -0- 992 8. Total $ 927.547.48 Payment Due (Line 4 - 8) $ 6,408.73 CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT 73. 4515. Sia , y i (I, We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work sham herein is a fair estimate of the work completed to date. CONTRA R BYLY1A'Vl'f.0 l/.i-UJO�,fnPd� APPROVED - CITY OF SHAKOPEE n l Pro' t Engineer 3fate RVL� City Administrator Date / 3 K � 3K / 3 /� i,1 31 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell RE: City Clean-up Report/Funding Request DATE: June 5, 1987 INTRODUCTION The city clean-up program was conducted May 9 to May 17, 1987. BACKGROUND For the past three years the city has provided residents with an opportunity to dispose of litter in an effort to make the city more attractive. During the first two years the program was supervised by the Engineering Department. This year it was transferred to the Code Enforcement Officer within the Police Department. An effort has been made to maintain accurate data for council as to the cost of the program. The trash containers were placed on bid and BFI Corp. was the lav bidder. A part-time person was hired in an effort to reduce the amount of prohibited materials. We still received these materials due to the fact that persons dumped during the early morning hours (2 - 3 a.m. ) . The city paid $102.55 for the removal of 125 tires. Sixty two trash containers were used to remove 1900 cubic yards of debris. City trucks took ten loads of tree branches to the burning site. Public Words employes spent 148 hours loading the trash containers and restoring the dump site. We do not have a 'cost factor for loaders and trucks. The Code Enforcement Officer spent 50 hours managing and organizing the effort. Cost Factor 62 - Trash Containers 9,276.00 Public Works Employes Wages 1,844.00 Part-time Employee 250.00 Tire Removal 103.00 Code Enforcement Officer 300.00 $11,773.00 This was a non-budgeted activity charged to the Code Enforcement activity 319. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Authorize the transfer of contingency funds in the amount of $11,773. , to the Code Enforcement activity 319 for the city clean-up program. /3 /M_J TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell RE: Temporary Clerical Position DATE: June 3 , 1987 INTRODUCTION On January 28, 1987, the department requested additional clerical assistance based upon twelve areas of deficiencies relating to our increased workload. BACKGROUND Based upon information provided Council approved the hiring of one full-time temporary clerical person for ninety days using an agency at a cost of $7,380 , with the understanding we would continue to fall behind due to the work volume. The recommendation requested was to hire a permanent part-time clerical person at a cost of $11,746 . To-date we have had three full-time temporary employes due to the fact that they have found permanent employment. While temporary employes have the required skills, we must use our existing employes to train the person in our office procedures, which has resulted in our inability to reduce our backlog or keep up with our workload. We presently have a temporary person who is doing an excellent job and has become familiar with our office procedures. The individual would prefer to work on a part-time basis (20 hours per week) which time wise meets the requirements of our original recommendation. We currently have a balance of $4,380 of the original $7,380 authorized by Council for this temporary position. The funding balance will provide the department with a part-time clerical person for six months which will coincide with the closing of the entertainment facilities. RECOMMENDATION Continue to employ a clerical person hired through an employment agency on a part-time basis using the balance of previously approved funding not to exceed $4,380. ACTION REQUESTED Move to continue to employ a clerical person hired through an employment agency on a part-time basis using the balance of previously approved funding not to exceed $4,380. / 3m./ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell RE: Hiring Police Patrol Officer DATE: June 9 , 1987 INTRODUCTION The 1987 police budget authorizes the hiring of one additional patrol officer effective April 1, 1987. BACKGROUND The Shakopee Police Civil Service Commission has completed the required examination process. Gregory John Tucci is recommended for employment as police officer. RECOMMENDATION Appoint Gregory Tucci to the position of probationary police officer at a starting salary of $23,687 . , the first step of the 1987 contract effective July 1 , 1987. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Appoint Gregory Tucci to the position of probationary police officer at a starting salary of $23,687. , effective July 1, 1987. X30 C14Ij MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Architectural Services for City Hall Proposal DATE: June 11, 1987 Introduction The memo of May 12th regarding the additional cost for architectural services with Boarman Architect incorrectly identified the cost to be for additional illustrations showing the structure on each of the two proposed sites. The additional cost was actually for preparing a plan illustrating the potential of the existing City Hall to accommo- date the program requirements. Action Requested li 1. Reconsider the motion of May 19, 1987 authorizing proper city officials to amend the contract for architectual services with Boarman Architect increasing the total contract amount by $1,997.50 for additional illustrations showing the structure on each of the two proposed sites. 2. Amend the motion to authorizing proper city officials to amend the contract for architectural services with Boarman Architect increasing the total contract amount by $1,997.50 for preparing a plan illustrating the potential of the existing City Hall to accommodate the program requirements. JKA/jms 13P MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Nominations to Planning Commission DATE: June 12, 1987 Introduction Following the resignation of Robert Johnson from the Planning Commission, Council directed that the vacancy be place in the Shakopee Valley News. Background To date we have received no new resumes from individuals interested in the vacancy. Mr. Link did submit theattached letter reiterating his interest in serving on the Planning Commission. - As was indicated at the May 19th meeting, Lee Stoltzman and Todd Schwartz are also still interested in the position. Alternatives 1. Make nominations from the current interested parties. 2. Continue to advertise. 3. Reduce size of Planning Commission. Recommendation No. 1, nominate the three parties currently interested. JSC/jms r � fl 1043 South Main Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 • May 27, 1987 Shakopee City Council Dear CouncilMembers; I wish to express my interest in serving on the City of Shakopee's Planning Commission. Xove 4 Moving been a resident opee since 1970, with an extensive back- ground in Real Estate, resently self-employed full time as a Real Estate Appraiser, my p1 clients are financial institutions in Scott S Carver County, t feel there is any conflict of interest as the Rules of Professiondards and Ethics prohibit me from being involved in that situa I am a home owner, and wn rental property in our City, therefore my interest in the futuShakopee and its stages of development are genuine. I sincerely bey past experiences in real estate and the knowledge I've gainthe years would be an asset to the Com- mission, recently I resf m the Shakopee Fire Department and feel the time is available tthis commitment. Please consider my appointment to the Planning Commission, I feel I can make a valuable contribution to the City. Respectfully Jim L n � 496-1838 1043 South Main Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 May 27, 1987 Shakopee City Council Dear CouncilMembers; I wish to express my interest in serving on the City of Shakopee's Planning Commission. Having been a resident of Shakopee since 1970, with an extensive back- ground in Real Estate, I am presently self-employed full time as a Real Estate Appraiser, my principal clients are financial institutions in Scott 6 Carver County, I don't feel there is any conflict of interest as the Rules of Professional Standards and Ethics prohibit me from being involved in that situation. I am a home owner, and also own rental property in our City, therefore my interest in the future of Shakopee and its stages of development are genuine. I sincerely believe my past experiences in real estate and the knowledge I've gained over the years would be an asset to the Com- mission, recently I resigned from the Shakopee Fire Department and feel the time is available to make this commitment. Please consider my appointment to the Planning Commission, I feel I can make a valuable contribution to the City. ResYL �lk fully, � 496-1838 UPDATED MEMO MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator ON TABLE FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk /99 RE: 1987-88 Intoxicating Liquor Licenses DATE: June 12, 1987 Introduction The following applicants have applied for 1987-88 Liquor License(s). Staff has checked for delinquent property taxes and utility bills. The building inspector has advised me that all premises are in conformance with the City Code. The following applications are in order for Council consideration, except as noted. Recommended Action Approve the application(s) and grant a 1987-1988 Off Sale, On Sale, Sunday, and/or Club Intoxicating Liquor License(s) to: Action Applicant On Sale Sunday Off Sale Club Vebic�e Pullman Club Inc. X X X 124 W. 1st Avenue Approve XX Corp. & Wittles Inc. X X X 1561 E. 1st Avenue Approve Clair's Bar, Inc. X X X 124 South Holmes Approve C.R.E. Restaurant Co. X X 1583 E. 1st Avenue Table(1) R. Hanover, Inc. X X 911 East 1st Avenue Approve The Friendly Folks X X X Club, Inc. 122 E. 1st Avenue Approve Scottland Hotels Inc. X X 1244 Canterbury Road Approve Minnesota Concessions, X X X Inc. 1100 Canterbury Road On Sale Sunday Off Sale Club Approve Family Dining X 6268 Hwy 101 Approve Riverside Liquors, Inc. X 507 E. 1st Avenue Approve Valley Liquor, Inc. X 1104 Minn. Valley Mall Approve Spirits of Shakopee, Inc. X 471 Marschall Road Approve The American Legion X X Post No. 2 1266 East 1st Avenue Approve Veterans of Foreign Wars X X Post No. 4046 132 East 1st Avenue Approve Shakopee Council 1685 X Home Assn., Inc. 1760 East 4th Avenue (1) The application for Mr. Hanover is not in order. Mr. Hanover has advised me that he will be unable to pay his taxes prior to June 16th and has requested that the Council approve his license conditioned upon payment - assuming he has his application in order by Tuesday night's Council meeting. (See attached) 1 JSC/jms oy r 3 �- o IN SHAKOPEE A11 EAST Fl RST AVEN U E • 445-3820 R�Ccl4'E.; JUN - 81987 C TY OF S jAKOPEE MEMO TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Pullman Club Gambling Violations DATE: June 15, 1987 INTRODUCTION: On December 2, 1986, Daniel Colich, Pullman Club, was charged with three gross misdemeanor and one misdemeanor violation of the Minnesota Statutes relating to gambling violations. BACKGROUND• On June 11, 1987, Daniel Colich appeared before the Scott County District Court and pled guilty to two gross misdemeanor and one misdemeanor violation. The Court has ordered a presentence investigation and will reappear for sentencing. On June 16, 1987, the Council will consider the renewal of liquor licenses. RECOMMENDATION: Renew the liquor license issued to Daniel Colich, Pullman Club. After court sentencing, schedule a Council hearing to consider action relative to a license suspension when all information will be available including Court action. TB:cah 131- MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of On Sale Wine License DATE: June 12, 1987 INTRODUCTION The following applicants have applied for a 1987-88 On Sale Wine License. The applications are in order. Please approve. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the applications and grant an 1987-88 On Sale Wine License to: Cedar Fair Limited Partnership, One Valleyfair Drive Damile, Inc. , 2400 East Fourth Avenue JSC/jms UPDATED MEMO ON TABLE /� c MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator J FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses DATE: June 12, 1987 INTRODUCTION The following applicants have applied for a 1987-88 On and/or Off Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License. There are thirteen applications in order at this time. Please approve those thirteen and table the other three applications that are not in order. The Building Inspector has advised me that all premises are in conformance with the City Code. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the applications(s) and grant a . . . license to: Approve/ Table Applicant On Sale Off Sale Approve Jim & Lucy' s Inc. X X 210 West lst Avenue Approve Judy A. Berg X 222 East let Avenue Approve Richard E. Cleveland X 828 East lst Avenue Approve Art Berens & Sons, Inc. X 123 West 2nd Avenue Approve Superamerica Stations Inc. X 1155 East lst Avenue Approve Cedar Fair Limited Partnership X One Valleyfair Drive Approve J.B.F. Inc. X 823 East lst Avenue Approve Holiday Stationstores X 444 East lst Avenue Approve Pizza Huts of the Northwest X 257 Marschall Road Approve Brooks Superette, Inc. X 615 Marschall Road On Sale Off Sale Table Speedway concessions, Inc. X 6528 T.H. 101 Table Damile, Inc. % 2400 East 4th Avenue Table Tom Thumb Food Markets % 590 So. Marschall Road Not Aires I Daniel J. Pecha R Renewing 584 So. Marschall Road Approve Fraternal Order of Eagles X 220 West 2nd Avenue Approve Brooks Superette, Inc. #42 X 1147 Canterbury Road Approve Paul E. Schwaesball X 230 Lewis Street JSC/jms UPDATED MEMO- MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses DATE: June 12, 1987 INTRODUCTION The following applicants have applied for a 1987-88 On and/or Off Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License. There are thirteen applications in order at this time. Please approve those thirteen and table the other three applications that are not in order. The Building Inspector has advised me that all premises are in conformance with the City Code. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the applications(s) and grant a . . . license to: Approve/ Table Applicant On Sale Off Sale Approve Jim & Lucy' s Inc. X X 210 West 1st Avenue Approve Judy A. Berg X 222 East lst Avenue Approve Richard E. Cleveland X 828 East lst Avenue Approve Art Berens & Sons, Inc. X 123 West 2nd Avenue Approve Superamerica Stations Inc. X 1155 East lst Avenue Approve Cedar Fair Limited Partnership X one Valleyfair Drive Approve J.B.F. Inc. X 823 East lst Avenue Approve Holiday Stationstores X 444 East lst Avenue Approve Pizza Huts of the Northwest X 257 Marschall Road Approve Brooks Superette, Inc. X 615 Marschall Road /3S On Sale Off Sale eSpeedway Concessions, Inc. X 6528 T.H. 101 -A § Damile, Inc. g 2400 East 4th Avenue •tea-71! Tom Thumb F od Markets g 590 So. Mar chall Road Not Aire I D iel J. Pecha X Renewing 584 S M rschall Road Approve Fraterna Order of Eagles X 220 West Avenue Approve Brooks uperette, Inc. #42 g 1147 C terbury Road Approve Paul E. Schwaesball X 230 Lewis Street JSC/jms / 3S On Sale Off Sale 0 Taksl" Speedway Concessions, Inc. X , 6528 T.A. 101 p ; -TabTeDamile, Inc. R 2400 East 4th Avenue -:+rable , Tom Thumb Food Markets 590 So. Marschall Road Not Aires I Daniel J. Pecha x Renewing 584 So. Marschall Road Approve Fraternal Order of Eagles X 220 West 2nd Avenue Approve Brooks Superette, Inc. #42 % 1147 Canterbury Road Approve Paul E. Schwaesball % 230 Lewis Street JSC/jms /3f MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of 1987-88 License to Only Allow Consumption and Display of Intoxicating Liquor (Set-ups) DATE: June 12, 1987 INTRODUCTION The following applicants have applied for a 1987-88 Set-up License. The applications are in order at time time. Please approve. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the applications and grant a 1987-88 License to Only Allow Consumption and Display of Intoxicating Liquor to: Approve Jim & Lucy's Inc. 201 West 1st Avenue Approve Knights of Columbus Home Association, Inc. 1760 East 4th Avenue Approve Damile, Inc. 2400 East 4th Avenue Approve Fraternal Order of Eagles 220 West 2nd Avenue JSC/jms J Y u v u Y Y w i 1 1 i i w s s W 6 W F i 0 O O ¢ P eee0000 `• O ♦ P - _ nbnunbb b h 2 000_d_d NNP N 000�Nd d f dw a r ^nPbtl f P AAP � P �� P IIN If^ 111 illi � 111N 11 1 1 11 n o mmm_a_a iu av N `m mm-aa a r au1 a e000lle P e ' I oleeee l l eo l nnnnnn Yn n n dddadaN v NN NP "' vvvvvv o v vv v u PfPPPPf P 1111111 1 1 111111 1 11 1 6 OOOOOOe O 000 o 000000 O o eo O 2 F O W 6 W 0 6 2Z FhFFFF 0 Z ¢ �eZ.rY wr2i r2i < W OmWWWmO L b<6 W O WW ¢ W W=WWFWW W WLL ^ 6_66__66_6 L �= L O V J 6 6 JJJJJlJ 6 6=6 n W dd L 116LL¢11 LL VOUOOUYGOOYY > W 66161 0 1JJ 6 J 66 0 yjj7�7» 7 J00 7 JJJJJJ C O » mWWW0W0 0 WWW m 000000 W WW W 0 W F W VVVVVV �p TTT V rwrZi��� V J 666 W L OC W 6 616 6 KRmRCS 0000000 Z UU U S X77 FFFFFF 0 L uaVVuuu 1 WWW '• Q00000 K H o0 2 mWWWw¢Z < JJJ z UVVUVu W KK V WWWWWWW 666 O OJ 66 6 116 O K06 W U_____ _ Y J O 6666666 W FMY 6 UVVUV < LLLL ^ O 6616666 F ZZZ W WWWWWW Z 6 yWW O LLLLLL 6 00 0 > V VV 6 UVUVVV Y 0 YT UV O 000. w 000000 Z W ¢ W 6666666 W FFF LL OWWWWW S Y CK � 111 W J�J WWWWW O 6< «666« 6 6« W 6«666 h 6 00 W �OfONOOP wPNo 00 A00noFW ^- wwo ObPPb00 nM FOFY nA F^ff00A nn dNN bWNwNPwW Oe OAON tlb PAfmAO b - NN mP mW OwM1OP Yof AA _dOP NN _hNNPbP __ p O L W W FM1M1FhhF F FFF F hFFhM1h 10 M1 00000m0 0 00 0 000 000 0 0 00 0 O \eoo00e 000 0 000000 0 0 W F 0000000 O OOe o eo000o O O oe O LL 0 O T O F Z ti W H WwA V V o 000 O 000000 o O 00 em em em n i - ♦ Y P r o ♦ N a - e tltl i N f m a V t - + S O 2 y O K O O 9 D W a 0 0 0 00 0 m0 9 J J Y J Y y Y YY J J J yy T m a 3 NN O u-ro c mm tl PP uP as ee a ee �O NN My m0 m0 NJy Jy NNW 00 " NP Nb oo roN NN tl 00 OOo as NN P NN NN aNtl WV YY oe D C O r D x S2 D O O AA r + 4 K 0 9 j'Dj r D KK xx <m y 00 O J r D Z A DD D p O \ r , n O i m 00 L N 99 m r y W x D a s bo n 9 K WW 9 O A K / O 00 T N LC F Q Z/ A m 00 A A mT Ky T bW O K 9 m m 9 m 9 9 mo m 9 = m W r c c n a .A. / Y .A. �v v o m mm S P 3 T �l m_ 9 9 y y 9 K 9r r T 0 DD c T Ib11 10ilOp j Oj < 9 2 l m m 9 m < Zx m -moi D D .A. 1-1 9 O 2 _ i T T i i i i i i T i i n W - N N W N yN N bl 0 NN C_ N N N O No O o O u I 1 1 11 1 1 I NN = V N' N O roN Z y W N m NN i N � N y NN P O o 0 i y T 9 D i i i i i m T N T x N FW N F W W b W b N N u Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y V U V V V V V V W I 1 I 1 V n w L O 6 P NN F N o i m n N In ul N W Pm i NN d -d n N P a a�O i li i li i i i i O NN N -d N P 1 I I N 1 �II 1 II I I I I I J ad 0 = d dd n d n N n N N O PP n P P P P P P P O V 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 V < oo O N O 00 O O o O O o O O F _ W W W W W W L V L b W L L O m % LL n F m u mm ww u o m uv m oou o Y oo a a Fmm z w 00 i O 6 S m V n J W O W 66 m S OD m = m J \ f V 66 f 6 6 JJ J 0 F J U m\ d 6 YY 6_ 66 m 6 Z 6 J O 00 J + 2Z 6 F m Z < m ~ 2 6C O Z Z W 2 Z > ZZ m L b 66 b m WZ J m % 66 J LZ 6 m Y J fY 0 < m 6_<_ <_ 6 < Z J 6 ¢m O O t U J ' < mm m 0 U UV V U V V FOF bN 00 Ooo WN dN Nm nn NYI ♦ ♦ nPP oe FO 00 FFH m0 00 bN tlb NN f nm0 nn mN Nd - - PP dN NN � - nn Z J d_n NN 6 60 0m 0 ; 0 00 O O O 0 m % e Q o0 o O o oe o O o 0 0 0 O O a O r 2 U U N OP m o _ W _ _ 13 C1 J n m m m m m m b w i 1 I V W 6 u a • s a a • • a < m 6 W_ r i 0 O O I d - nnnM nOn APN�a- -MM A M t II 1 111 II Iql 1 1 ^ I 1 O -NNN -aa N -Ntl0 P h-- N f N - Z ARAM MVn - -Mn n M f - o IIII 0O1 Ae �ol I Oeo I e O z nnn- 3 NaNN NNN NNNNN N Nan a n N nP n O PPPP PPP f PPP fPf P P • P V 1111 III IP 111 I 1 1 VO o O 6 OOeo 000 ooeoo o Oeo O e Z M1 Y m d m FN F r2ir�0 r Z < rZi n sssW mb< mmmm.. w mme s a < c zxxa w_w_z wwww<_ w mYwm x J = N 6� JJ6 4466 6J d > 4 E gid- 66� O d0 7 < 3 O N 000a >Do mm» J »¢ o F w www. ... mmm m mmd w 4 = w F m u W WW ' tyl ¢¢mm LLL > w ¢ 73J WWWWW 2 S 0000 JJJ 33333 VVO ¢ U =ham} O_O_O_O_O V JJ3 W z ¢ n = ¢¢ b V O 0000 d66 000 O 3333 ¢¢6' 0bmmm • W W Z t666 666 V._V_U_U_ < __ _ J > W VVU y LxL F 4 = M .2 ZZ F F.. V J¢ J y L£LL 22 22222 m mmm W 3 O VYVO 3J033 7 666 J Q V S U VVU 00000 0 WWW w W V ONON PF nONN-h 00 ON NN 00 00 00 -hPN rNPOaP NN -AP NN An 00 FN-Of 0VN0 ANA--P Yr r-NP P fP Na NN o0 _N0- OPN- - M1 O0 -NP NN NN M1r nM tlb - z ti ai 3 0 z s W Frrr Fhh rrFM1r h FFY M1 I' F 0 0 O o00e 000 00000 000 0 y OOe OOe e o - e � m o000 000 00000 0 o0e o e o o e IN 0 O < } O F 2 V u PO NNN ooeoo � rPF v n `a O MnnnA P M1 0 0 N ___- ___ • ----- • _ • __.. _ • - a - - • - s x m rvro luNro m rvNm rvm m mmlum ru ro m N _mmm m y m uuuW MMJYJ P NNN +a t a i 0000 i PP i + t p i - -_ F 2 Y O K O O T D m; IN I INN 11 1 1 P P PPPP P P 'NN, I "1 11 1 I'll 1 "1 o mmmmm m mmm mm m mmmm mm m m mm yyJyy J JJJ JJ J YYJJ yy J J JJy m m D_ _ _ O C _ Z m NN Ja�� O NN J NWO P a YY a0 PNW- Y NWNWVV NN NYW� yW 0oo0m m0 Nro + 0-VW U JOY 00 0ammy - oma 00 0000 NooNop NN WPNN mom NN NNo00 Wrro NN 00000 a xxx c zmzz iz n z mzmmz mmmmm a sas ww m mw m0 x w z xxxxx m aaa a 1Yy4 a y zzz mmmmm F JJJ ii O1 �� a mmm < zzzzz a a w KKKK xx c Nzz m wmmmm m c mmmm mo w I"O1 0 w OT 9 mw 00 m r_rn O yyymm mm a ,J„K.,J^ rr A non a < 000 n mm < oo00 0o x sasas ss r .' _ y� Z n AAaaa o0 c. fizz n s 000m0 cc m noon YJ A m NN n Oe m Y M mmmmm y mmm mm w x999 vv a m mmm - a 00000 _ CCC 99 C AAA C O 000 rrir�� V99 9 0000 w_ m C CCC m 99999 w rrr rr r TTTT yY m 9 999 x xxxxx .J. mmm mm m mmmm w w x xxx m ww m aAa w w «« 99 y222Z Cc 0 Y zz= A YYJJ mm w KKK A y O K 2 00000 ; yj0 00 O uPN yO 00 O o0o n 11111 i 111 11 1 a4eWVa2aaW uy0 roaroaro WNuN u lu Irory c .mm.. f1 000 0o O 0000 00 O N NNN 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 P 1 1 I I r I yP_ JW ro Pa p urv- 11111 I 11 11 P 1111 a� 1 ry Pro +uuu- yu_ uu aaaa - _u__ro i uro - Yu ro - iuro= z a 9 i 0 m i J m 9 mD n i i i i i i m w m m w m a W C J m f W b b b W W Y Y Y Y Y V V V V V I W I I I I V 6 b 6 W L F i 0 o O I 6 O i a Ah PPfP An nnM1 _ �nnAi Q. a-- p III ^ I o0 olee o NNNww dwN a e _ e r nnnAn NNN d n AA AnAn P PP PPY rPTTITII o v P f vv vvvP d If11 I I II IIII I II III ' V T T a Dee e e ee ....n• a ee ser - Deese z h o LL LL hhh h m mm hhhrh W zz.z. � � nn aac>m •••• b 6_6_< 6 N N Wb WWb W 6_66_6_6_ W pw HWIw/iN _ _w o o.1i F L p a J J6 666 .6n��uw 6 h_ M1 Y u ¢ 000 6 LL6 666 37703 ~ WWW W O 66 6666 N 30 303 M1 00000 WN WmW 3 WWWWW W F W V NN 00 W rM1 VVU W hh pOOpO 66Qa6 Y J 2 2 2 p_p w pp u�r� 6 WW 6666 Y 000 > hrri-h W uww W OO WWOm W 00 WWbWW W YWWW 0 YY m W_0U_W_W_WWm W FFr b QQ < yl Z2ZW.W3 UU WW W Nb hrh Z FrFF a K6¢ W > H. yrj u pp 00NW m =b 6a6 WWWWW r y^ ^^=2 3 LLS 6 00000 _ b YY YYY Y YYYYY • • PP ry _A oONN aN mem too! Pa ole DON N19 NN F0PP0 00 M1eF An _ tl Pv NN T" OnoOn NN AFO =AiF NN AAmPnO _ N mm FFm - 0 NN AA OPN v nA O_ a FM1 FrrM1 F rM1 M1rr s rFrM1F `o ��� m n me eeeo m me ems m seems W F O OOOe o Oe e00 O 00000 6 OOe e o 0 LL p O Y O_ u Y _ _ _ f mmmm P n.Wod Fr�.Fom r W wNN a NN NdNN N NN NNN NNNN PV ___ • _ • _ • _ _ J N U lYl U U U Y Y Y W 6 6 M d W_ F i p o O P I 6 N 0 o i M A M 00 o MAP N �� �' ON NPPN �MPPP O A� AA � PPPM 111111 1 I 111 I II II PI 1111 O .-N . ON NPPN 2 11MNN 1 1111 1 I^II 11 11 IIPA Z �0--�•��� A N NNS h A1N•1 MM AA ��AA JAAMAMM N MAA A NN AA AM NNNN O PPPPPP PPP P PP PP PP PPPP V 111111 1 1 111 1 11 11 11 111 < OOONbb o 0 00.- O 00 eo 00 ee00 o w ma mm J p 0m -- 6 00 00 Z 00 hh JJ JJ F ¢ O JJN Z2 PN NfY FZ U »»» Z 662 2w 0 ¢¢¢¢¢¢ Z O W t6 ab Ob 006 w wwwwww s J a xx ww<L O N00N00 L aF h JJ WW �L h Fh0 66 WW JJ JJ 6 £ 000000 ZZL J » » W 000000 6dVw o s . o 00 « <a ddpJ ¢¢¢¢¢¢ J W h 00 ¢¢ ¢¢ JJJO 6d666d 0 ¢ 666 J WW hh YF N00W W h pOOppp U J W ¢_¢¢_¢_¢_¢_ ¢ UUUVYY2 d s eN p V WWWWWW A 77 ¢ 2 W 0000¢00 h i < Fh y __¢¢__Z¢¢_ „ _ J O_O_ 0000 0_0_000_0_ 6 O _F h_h_ W _ _N 0_ FWFw o J S ¢¢¢¢ p Z J 00 66 666< 2 aatltlatl J ¢6¢ 00 LE 6666 W O 666 > ¢0 > WV0000 ¢ J WW 6d ¢¢¢¢ NMNN 2 6 YYY YY <6 0000 tMW666 F V 22ZMW p JJ LS WW FFhF YYYYYY J J JJJ J Ex x OPOOOOP AA NONo NeN 0PN PONA NOOOONO NN NN hoo0 oM NFo .NPO PNNNNPP NNM1 0¢ 0PN NNO NNPP PAN0b0 MA AQP bNP ��M ��A P F PNP N -P bb NSM �� NSP S J O L < W W FFM1FhF F FFF F FF FF FF F 000000 d 000 0 00 00 00 000 Y Q 0 H 6 000000 0 o eeo 0 oe o0 00 eeee otlbtlbb O b bba u Oa b.p a0 bbbb d p O Y O h Z V 0 AAA F Y NFFFFF o 000 o mm �� MM PPPP M1 W NNNNN N A AAA A AA AA AA AAMM • 6 Z pq q PPPPPPPPggPPPPP PP P P PP PPP = m dd W W W W w W W W V w w W W W W V PWp V w VW wWW ^ 0my00m00WW000m0 NN t O t YJJYYJYYJJJJ t nn i F N + 00 F PPP S � O K O m T s mm m mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mm m H yy mmm YJ J JYYJYYJJYYYJJJJ YJ JJJ m D 0 O ro as as c z w0 NN N--aP-WN-VroVow-W YNa dd aYN OOWV roP Nro NYJWOaaJW-PNPaO aN0 WV Ne NOPN Y 0W P-- aNU+o-N 000 00 -NN OJ- W0 NN PYJNOOaNeroJOPa a aao 4w o0 00ro OOOP 00 _Z_ zzz. X2 3 Z C ZZ m 2 TT 000 AA 0 D rr Kyy m mmmmmmm m mmmmm n Nm 000 NN .mmmmmmm mmmmm 00 n 999 < rrrrrrrr rrrrr zz r m rrrrrrrr rrrrr, cc r =1H Tv z ii c ss c as saa o xD A KK r AA AA9 0A m D K11 AA A TT A trtr WWW = K A9 K KK m o- mm m z as i m mm mm n A n m � o O K m a . m m .m.. K-IHKKKYY mm K AA nmm .mmmmmmm oc m aOO y rrrrrr, rrrrrrrr cT x r Tcc m r� m .mmmmm .mmmmmmm m zz x D 0 mm 000000 00000000 xmn O rxx m 3 2222222 22222222 D0 D 2 DD N « ....... ...m.mm z m 99mrw n z n cc Z. m o Y m mm cK < a a T K i o m z --geeeeeeeeeeee ee a ee ooe 11 I illllllllllllll II 1 a a 1 11 111 n as a aaaaaaaaaaaaaa a ae as o VU m uu V u u uV V V V U U U U w roN u uu NroN c rorororororororvrororororororo u- ro ro NN -uu z ee v _______________ roe p - oe -roro K 11 1 111111111111111 11 I 1 II 111 NN N ro-aauuuuw----- uu u apa z roro u aero-Nuro--mYNuro- rvro ro aua o 0 e Y- II I 11111111111111 11 I 1 11 11 as a ro-aawWuuu------ uu u iPa -- - unro-Nuro--mJNwro- NN e ro J aroa z NN VW 1 O O 0 i J m T m a an m n x s x x z s s P (q W m N W N m N C b b N b m m m Y U Y U U V V V \ W 1 I I I V 6 b n W_ F i m O O I 6 i NN M PNP -h N nN -NnNFm--Nnb-aPn --PP-a e P 111 11 I 1 / 1111111 III 1 II o enc -h W Nn -a ninrm--anm-aPn n Wa -nnnnnee -a b .b Z ��P e� ^ r 111111111111 11 w ee i nn- b1`n iu - A as aluaaaal�aNamaa - - � ca. nn n NN vnnnnnnnnnnnnnn . nn D Pe a PePPPePePePPeP P eP D Ili 11 1 111111111111111 1 II . - - c eeeeoeeeoeeeo�= w r^r^ 6 000 00 O m o0 O 2 r 6 u > r r 3 0 O W WWWWW__W W_Ww__W W_WW_W_ » V 66W Z V mQ 22ZZZ 2 Z WW O ZLQ py = ML 2.0002200m20 O__00_O_O bm L ndF =_ = 6y 666666666666666 ¢ d WWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W LLLL W 7�ry u_ J L 67 JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ F ¢Q YOpa ¢ ¢ F W 30 FWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWV d6 ¢ mW fl"f FrhFFf 1'Y FFF O d6 W b u � bm y. u J YY F W¢W Y mom Yro nLL N a_6_ O y« ¢r J 33 JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ 2 VV y2j dd bb J Z2 JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ w Nm OO WWWWWWW WWWW WWW. > 000 0b V UV 0000000mmm00000 J0 p ¢ 0Fh JJ Q _ 00_O_ _6_ 2_ _ 2_Z_ 33_33_3_3__33__3333333 O ¢ L 2 .1 ____Z 00 o' Nme nM P PPPberNebPetlpOe� NN mIn" 1(ib- mm emm -b-O_MNOo__ mm NNe. eb0 nn ee PNP PmPONN-nM1ePOmM1rb NN YN NnOb bhN An NNN n_nenan-bn-NP o NN oln�l � Pe O_ 6 W woo h r hM1 FhFFFrFrhrFM1M1rF mom m m mm mmm00mmDmmmm00m O \O o o \o \000000\o00eo0e m e ee OOe00eo0eo0eoo0 0 00 6 Ooo oc o LL O O Y O_ n y u nw m0 N P mN FM1hM1Fhhrrhh rhF NN W m0�0 mm0m00mmm0 W MAn An A M AA MMnM nnAnnMAMMn - PU __ i a a • t • ` • �_ r N 0 W N y N 0 m N N V Y V U V Y U V V Y V < i i • i W • i • f ♦ ♦ 6 m 6 W_ r s m 0 0 e a Fl P j 1 I b II 1 PI I 11 1 1 N P NN p 1 I I I o 0o O I 1 o Fl J Fl P P MI PN N NN pP P P P (0] P 1 1 Ip 1 pl 1 1 1 1 a a o o e oe o 0o ee v o e z o LL F3 z n i LL W Z- 6 1M1 LLLL u y �' W LL u V J O W � p OQ J JJ Vn W K O ry L Z W V m N W 6 J 6 W H 6 0m V s W � LLLL W YV K N JJ 6 �w V W y Z fY0 66 6 0 V u O FY m0 NN p K G y p rvZ. O V LL L WW JJ Y O J < O 33 J3 W W J 22 U SS Y Y p Y W O 0` NN VU U y W Z 2 e Z OG mm 6 y 00 Y Y Y Z K 6 6 W W 6 YY K6 O V 6 ¢ 6 L 6 66 O 6m VV W W W • • PP f 00 • ♦ o • N0N N yl y� �N NN 0 Oo ON Oe NN oe� NmN Fl NN m FF FlMI NN FlW NNN 0 PFlp 1'i0N P 2 P J N O L 6 W F F F m0 F 00 00 0 0 O m o N h o0 O eo 00 0 0 0 ¢ O e O o LL O O O I- Z p u p b O 0m o Pp F W P O P P p< P PP P S V i r a r • � r f ..� • r • �� i i N NN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N NNNNN.. NNNNNNNN m M N o f 00 JJJyJJJJJJJYJJMJ i - i b00ybbtl 00000000 i F Z K O K O O T D m ........ m mmmmmmm mmmmmmmm a J JY yyYyYJyYJMJYYyYY J yyyYJMY JyJyMMYY m D_ ro as m c N a WN -NUN rouuu me ro m- -zi V Wb - Ob-O- N a O ONNro Np 00roNroa�Jy P N POyPabNo++PPm NN P0pNro0NN N+YyYOPO Pop NOe+NpyNONY-bNNN! bN00-oo bo+ o a00y00VlPOV! P O oe o0000e00 .N.. J 0oa y OI ! ww%%%%%%%mmmw. w %w%%ww %%%ww 9999T9999999999w 2xx Zxxx 00000000 D CCCCCGCCCCCCCGC FDDDDDD yjyCGCCC a 99 nn00nOnn000nOnn Z FFFFFS yyKK4 m as m 9999mmm x:xxxxxx < s 999 ccccGGGG m zz o mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm z mmmmmmm mmmwmw%% o m mm m%%%mww yKKKKKIJ OA a P ammpmmm mwwWmw%N ` aA D AaA9AA CCCGCCCC 2 0n OOOm n On AaaaAAAA F 33 mmmmmmm 00000mmm 0o mmmmmma zzzzzzzz m % a m 9m GGccccccc.. ccm 9 yyycccc 99999979 a O 09 -1y�u iyr.n�ryi wei0 _ �rJirr A9AAAaAA K c o m...........m m n 17 3 N+ KYyryyyyyy'�=�9 m ��yyYyY yKyyyKYK O mm �PPPPPa.. m aw ym mmmmmmmmmrl`�mmms a mmmmmmm 0 y < aZmW%N%mmwwOwNw= C mmON%% % 29999992 A n y %CCCCCC% A 000000 ww y 0 2 O 00 00eee00000o0ooee P peoo000 +Oe00ooe VV + a I 11 rlllllr111111111 la 1111111 lalllllll Cc p Vp 00WWWWVVVWWWWWYN WWWWVY. WWVVWWWW C O + NuoyoYJ00000000V JJyMJYe ONNmNN+ 1 1e� IIg011 01111111gPro N Ilyulll I 011llel _y OlIWWV++ qNa _ 0 ++ OroNN+ppNro+00NNN N pNp-000 a NOYW- roN eOPprJ____p_PPl _ _aN_ 4pNP___V O VV 1NPPPa. PPm j 1111111 111 1111 0 - ................ - pNpV !!!++ r 000 arr�MW+J Z i o 9 � O 0 i y 3 m 9 D m S S W 0 " e m q q u y y u W V I 6 W i i y F-nM1� --P 000-NNN - NNN00-NWNN-NNNOO -- 0 -\ P\ nnPb Otlb--nnnPPVObbOe Fln illltllll 111 111 1 II1111111111 I 0 qNn -N\ - Pub.-N M1-NtlmoO dN - O M1-Flhemtl\ 00m-WNd m �NamO-dmdN-NNdoO -- 0 Z - OWV- ---nn\tl q --nnnPPbbutleo nn - pll0000l 1111111 O 111111111111 II 00 0 deeeoPOOeeeePe_a Z -WNmgmm- M1hhYYM1M1 - nWWYYFFM1hYYYYFnn -- n a Pnnnnnnn WWWWWWW n rvrannnnnnnnnnnmm rn v \\\\POP PPP\\\\ \ P ------\\\PPnn \ 1 - 111111\ 1111111 n 11111111 - IIIIFln oo O ¢ o0000ee� o0000ee b eoo00ee000000e00 O F n mom mom Vq ¢ OJJJJJJb ^ ZW h 26666662 00000gq > 0ggmm0W0gqb00Z1- > � M = O f^=yWWF^ m <WWWWWWWWWWWWWVW_ q¢ btltlYOtlw nr W Lr n n n n r w n nn WW Q F F „.Fi^F=F= q YFhFFFFYFf FFV q L OFFFY FFO n r =rnrnn nnnrwn nnCm J W LZZZ222L =JyJJ^^ 4 JJJJJJJJJJJJJWW LLL V Orrrrnn0 n nr O Jnnrrwnn nn rnw nwF O m 6666¢¢¢¢ FFhY FF 6 OhFFhY FFFF.YYD« J¢ J n 66666 J3JJJJJ 6 WJJJJJJJJJJJJDal 06 m W V w mWW0 p GQtQ6666 g00000q m00m0m00 Uutdi[di[WSWW V SS V Y ¢¢ ¢¢K¢¢¢ == O D .20 N W mm00000m »»»> 0 U NJJJJJJJ ¢K¢2C¢ 6 mm Z N0gg00q WWWWWWW < 0gggqqq b �� V p gg00mq.. WWWWWWW S U Z WWWWWWWW WWWWWWW OZ. j 33333333 66666 S CC y SS2222S2 OD00000 W FYFYFFF YYYYYY Z UVVUVVUVUUUVUVUV LLL JJJJJJJJ < 666«Q W JJJ JJJJJJ N DJJJJJ <Oq 0000D0 2g22SS22 S 6666666666666666 F gb00gq 000ggq m mmm0ggg00qqNqqO. 0q q i i R i o \neoFOeP o OIIINP PWWNPPYmOVhNW-OON Pq P - OPe- _m NN0NNN0u Om0 atltl--ONP4bF0tlPo0- -- m P M1hbPNNN00 NN NNNmo WO Z> FmFOF-M1ehhY-F 0 FFhYYM1F N mPY V\i hmF0F0WM10nYF0n-9 FPFnO.N-- .0000.-0.0FPd0FbPN0Fn00 0m\00o0o00 0000mm0 01 00 ....... h\h0nY0-m nh0 000000\ \oo00eo 0 N W e\\ \\ \\ \\\\\ \ \ \\\\\\e\\\\\\\ \ \\ \ < 0000:0:0 Oeeoo00 o e0o0e0eo0eeoo0eo Oo e bbutltluub tltluuuutl u tlbutltluuutltlutlutltlu bb u LL D O Y O F 2 V Y 00000000 FM1hYYFF FhhhFF 0m N gggqqWO WmgWWWq W WmVWWWWWgWmWWgmq WW N P V R - - --- i i - R 5 pr) a b w w w a a W "( P V U U U Y V V V U W 1 I 1 I I V W < t a • • t i t • • ♦ 6 d W_ F i m 0 O 1 6 - o i p o w a n mmn �nP � P MM n M n P F I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 N N 11 I eao 1 I o O 1 O - o I a I � Naa awa n v N NN n n N nY n O YPP YPP P Y PP Y V e O N e 6 000 000 O O O 00 0 2 f O W f a d F Q FFf w O 2 V wnrZi W C > Q_ Wmb a a m W W 6_6_6_ WAY y „J N Q w Y 6 a W 0 JJJ W J JF d W OOO 666 6 a 66 O O O ^ „ JJJ JJJ Q O J J6 W J 000 bWa f L W aU 6 6 ¢ W F b V 666 00 Q d WW 70� Q 000 V rF+� W Z W Z b W a b u J Z L 2 222 aWb J JJ Q < V V 666 WWW U W O ZZ d 1 d Z JJ a U W mmW 000 T Q O 00W W Q 3 W > YYY 1 =u J ^ W F FW Q¢¢ JJJ J 6 6 6 W W W Q • 6 _ J S U a FFF Jm7J 6 6 6 6 6 amb Wm 0 h b O> > > 3 7 3 i -N i i o0 oe vP \ oo ♦ ONAW PN NN oNN FF NN NN YP OmN n-n0 FF FP 0w mom P- FF NN NN oN0 wb NN nM nA O 6 W FFF FFF f- IF F hh h F F 60 m00 0wo wo W o 00 0 0 2 W \\\ \\ \ \ \\ \ 1" omm oee e o e oo O O e o e LL 0 O O F Z ^ Y NNN NNN n n hM P a n b m__m m m m_ m m m mm m mmmmmmmmmmm m m m m m m ww N - a b 0 J PP m ➢➢➢➢a➢a➢aaa W N _ O • F Z 4 O K O O T D K m a y0 0 Y 0 y 0 y m0 J yy Jmym0m0m0 y j 0 0 9 J J J J JJMJJJ J J m D_ O C mN YY aro- 00 Nryp pp y Ob KJ mm YY JJ eJN WW ------- P Omm ➢➢ �mmmmmmmmmm0 WW mm 00 bb ib :O i➢ =o `a :o : e iYYWWWWwWW4/M :O iw :o *O mm m v x x x x oo m nnnnnn z m � mm a m o c o m vv K sss>�'s sasaa o ii s a r i r r oo a $zzzzzzzzzz r - o K 4-(yJyKJK4J m D L Z K O - O O Z m Dammmmmm $ ^ m < nn m K a a a ii a a� mm s r K K KK mmmmmmmmm c T z � i o r c m e vaaaccccc m n 0 rr mn a x m xx o 9aA9a r s o m 2 2 T 2 D $$ O K-------- _ ____ D a O O Z. m c r O_O _z__ __Z__Z_ 4 F A n m mb m Z O O ZZ r n A Z y O m n F < Z Z i m n 9 n e z n m m n u m m mW 9 V K m m nm m Jy44KyyJJyK O -.. n n 9 CC A O 9 9 9C O 99999AAAaAA C 9 O 4 T9 D O D C D T C DDDDDDDDDDD m D Z 9 m < T < < 9 w ««« A m < 4 n x T m r 42 v mmmmmmmmmmm m - 4 mm r m r x r m am x rrrrrrrrrrr « r m mm « A « a « m m a o-««o-« x..... � « i m m c m m m Z m OZ mmmmmmmmmmm m m O A C C J C c 4 CCCCCCCCCCC m C K C m - m n mmmmmmmmmmmm w 9 m m ` 1 mmmmmmmmmm m T y m m mmmmmmmmmmm 9 y O - 1 4 K JyJ4444KJKY K Z D 1 1 la N la 1 1 1 11 1 1 la 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 la I 1 1 n as a a s a s aaaaaaaaa a tl a o roro u u_ u ro u io amro ro auwwuuuuWuuu u m c e `I in o e -e to eeeeeeoe ue`le 1' z 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 01 1 u u V p z - � ea s J T 1 O O m 9 s m F m � C �= b Y W 1 U W 6 u m � < a 6 W_ F i 0 O O I 6 O i P Y � dl'INVF R • .. 1'1 � � P - ON f Fl Fl I111111111 � 1 1 I � � 1 I � 1 � I � O - � d Fl ��NFlNtlF Fl d m m 1'1 d a d ON 2 P N P --��FlFlff eN Fl 1'1 tl fl � - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I 1 1 1 11 to�I 10 1 I 11 I d o N 00 Z - P R P PRR PI'1RFlPIR II II 1'1 �� �. YI P '1 � n -- J N Fl = fPPP•PFlFlFlFlFl d PP N O P Fl Fl PN O • • P P•PPP • • • • P V 1 1 1 1 11111111111 I 11 1 1 1 N I Ifl 6 o O O O ee e e o o o e o o0 O oo Z M1 h %hFFFhFFFhM h O a 6 mammNNamma N F 6 m r mbmmaaNUamm 1 a a m 6 r 0 V 00000000000 r 0 0 J bJ a NWJJJJJJJJJ O 0 bmmmbaNam 2 O m Z a V W W N a tletl.... 0<VY O 6 = J JJJJJJJJJJJ �< r J J a J - � WWWWWWWWWWW 6 Jh J j JJ h > m »»»»»> r 6r 6 > LL Q 66 F S 6 W 666Q6«6<66 J 66 � � Q O U O F J F¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢6¢ O J< J O K JJ r U 0 FhhFhFhFMF W mV m F W F 6 F ma ¢ W b Fl u u u m Z F > u r 2222zzzzzzz V o zz z w __ W. W 6 Y h Z 00 J b Y O W < U rrrrrrrrr O Z2 6 2 LL 2 2_ _ 00 ¢ 0 LL V }}}}}}}}}}} S <6 F u I JW O V U 0 JJJJJJJJJJJ 0 J J O Z W Z 6 n 00000000000 }} >•' } J } Y UU W J r ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢ < F2 < < < a m > W 2 2 WWWWWWWWWWW Z h ^ 0 Y S rr J a w hFhhhFF Oo - r - ¢ < az O r J 2ZZZ22ZZ222 W ¢¢ J J J ¢ ¢ V ¢ y U«« ««« 00 O O J W W < 0 0 UVVYVVUVVV W 00 2 5 2 2 'l 0 00 01 • oo • pFlF1'I MI 1'IFl Fl1'1 I'I I'1N • e eO •P Oe e ` me 00 •P NN t'I I'I 00 O0 .NNNNNHNNNN. •P NNo - - 00 PP FF tl 1'I I'I dM1e FF NN - - _ dd dN �� N 00 NP �� 1'I I'i FM1 NN V Ntl PP tltl < W h F F F FhF M1FM1M1M1FM1 FF h F F F M1 F FM1 6 0 0 0 0 0000000m000 00 o ee O 0 0 0 00 O o o e \eeo e o Z W \ \ \ \\\ \e\\\\\\ \ e\ \ \ M' o e o O eotltlPPooeoe o ee e e e e e o ee 0 6 e u u tl tltltltltltltltltltltl a tltl u tl tl O O M1 Z U Y N N F m 1'I 1'i F W 0 0 0 00000000 0 m 0 00 P V M Y V W 6 ♦ V m < b n w L F i 0 O O 1 6 e i - O_ e O o O 1 O 1 h o e N J P N P N M N P N M P O P O P O f O fP f f U 1 1 1 1 1 I � If 1 1 I U e o 6 o O o O o O oM1 � o OWh ) LLK2 F 6W FJL O J Wb0 LL h .t r Z J 2F J O n WW> LW W F Q OJW WZ VFh ¢ U > p ¢JG >W 6bm ¢ m n ¢ w n w Y6¢Z6FF b m m m ws w b < wzdLLLJ¢ OM ly Wm ly e w � W V ^ Z JF JW3<�„LLOJ) J 6 n 6 J n 6m WhOFM1O ¢LOn FW LL F 6 � W2 J�Y2WmM1W6¢J F n 6 O¢ 1 W 6 ZS O¢ Z J Z66066J00030Tti m n J J J OF' O J O W¢¢Q<SO<PPWF<h r• 6 m 0 m UO 6 V m W UhZUUmp¢��mbnJ W F b V F Ff L U U S Z h 6 p0 J J JJJJJJJJJJJJJJ W 2 ¢ 0 )> h W FFFFFFf FhYFYhF S N y Y J3 O S OOOOOOOOOOOOOe V m J_ 2 J W SS Z Ff FM1!'h hf hhhFF1' Z 6 W 4 O 0 i > J J FT S J �fNm�NmFdFl�M�Fl p LL •n W 6 Fh U > •• O O.-��NNd w�OmFh00 Z h J 2 Z > UU 0 = m W O_p0_O_O_0_p p_p_00000 J > W U W L m ¢ Fh J 6 Z 2 22222 6 3 ¢ N W Fh ¢ V p J JJJ7bJJJJJJJJJ F O O m Y ¢ > 00 ¢ ¢ S LLLLnnLLLLLLnLLLLLLLLLLLL � L V L ¢ 6 ¢ m m V > > N P /lo ♦ 00i ♦ ♦ 'O Nom- Oe nb f� FNFFM1ONooNNmFlO N fT M000POMOaPFmYle N MI 0m mm MFl PP FF 0P0 PP MM em o0 a M1FFNNmoThm�e F_ N NN � 00 MFl MM Ne FlI'1 fP ' Mo�ON�MNPfFNN dd M0N m0 � Dom N MO NFM �NF d- N f Fl O L 6 W F F M1 F F F F h F h h F Q e o 0 0 00 m O 10 6 e e m t O o e e o o Oo O o o e LL 0 O T O F 2 NN N N m N F W_ 0 m 0 0 m 00 0 m 0 m 0 0 0 0 M a 1 0 0 Y 0 mOO In m 0 0 0 N O O O H O •+ mti J N O N N n M N 1 04 i O 1 > NN ��pp CO I(� l'-' T r-I M ri .i OJ Ili 1I1 1 O N U Y v N N pEp m 0 > £ O X w n a x m d w m m -Yi o mm s e w rl w N Om0 U Smi W N > I Y E 0 1 0 O YN O w +a+ L O Om F m C N Z Z U O V 0 {{�� O Z M M 1 1I� [� W07 mJ OJm OJ a a a O 0 0 N M 1 as a a � a aaaaaa aaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N p Y W mI N E E a a en U CmJ E � U 0 F L Gam] N V O F F O Y M N 1 OF C a0 OD m FU •m F T w a W ro � t`.i tiN O M 00 H w Y C L m ro N U 0 6 0 G .Hi 5 E E E E E E E E m W W 0 O m > re a N F Z o� U MI O O UQ YQc9O p.pO1li����1NNNO mOOrl m 0 N4�fli� ON[M- maa OMa•V'Im11 mIaYMM YM.IN(�NLMYI-(���N.D-1 1MIMli 0 0Ir(�l m0 N H00103mm M N OO O 0 O O N > ON 'd N C b F M F O O 6 m m F F N F C 3 T U woo O o 0 0 000000 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOW0 m m ro m Q 00 0 0 0 0 000000 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 O g 1 I I I f• .-i .i .i U NN .i .iO W O O 007000 m m > m wOl�mm .i O t- O O NmmN 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 O OO O 0000 00 000 O v N o 0 0 NN � 666 0 0 0 0 0 0 O oO0NmmrNN0000000 000 O O O 000 0 0 0 00 0 O h U O N 0 000000 ONmrl N M N N Q NM M .1 M .-I NNN NNI- NNN N N M N N N M N Ym "1 N •-I N MMMMMM aaa a a a a 01 a a y .Yi 1M M .Y M Y SY11-Y1 11� 1 Y 1 Y 1 1 � 1 A 4 .i rl rl .i 4 ,i 4 NN m� O m 0 000000 mmm m m m m m m > m /3✓ TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Property Liability Insurance DATE: June 15, 1987 Introduction Attached is an outline of property/liability insurance coverages. Background The policies proposed are essentially the same as current coverages, with a couple of exceptions. 1.) Council did not budget for renewal of the umbrella policy. Premium is $37,379. SFUC had indicated that they would like to keep the coverage. Council has discussed the umbrella issue several times over the past few years. It appears that there is some movement of cities away from having umbrella policies. 2.) The League has expanded coverage for police type items that we had obtained a separate policy for in the past. It appears that the separate policy is no longer needed. The premium for the separate policy is $11,933 for $500,000 coverage, $1,000,000 coverage is not available. Last year the premium was $10,108 for the $1,000,000 coverage. 3.) The League has switched to a "claims made" policy. See attached League memo for explanation. One effect of a claims made policy form is that switching carriers is more expensive. The League program continues to grow with more cities joining the program. Staff recommendation is to stay in the League program. Alternatives 1. Drop umbrella policy. 2. Keep umbrella policy ($37,379) . 3. Drop police policy. 4. Keep police policy ($11,933) . Recommendation In view of Councils decision not to budget for the umbrella and the change in the League policy to expand coverages related to the items covered in the past by the police policy, alternatives #1 6 3 are recommended. Action Move to accept the property/liability insurance proposals of the League of Minnesota Cities, International Surplus Lines, Transamerica and Hartford as outlined by the Capesius Agency and to cancel the umbrella and police liability insurance policies for a total cost of approximately $144,095. l3 � pesius Agency, lne YOUR INDEPENDENT INSURANCE AGENTS P.O. &n 97. Fml Nallonal Banc Bldg.. Shakopee. MN 55779 Td. (613) 441923 INSURANCE COVERAGE OUTLINE INTRODUCTION The following pages ave been pr paired as a simplified resume of your Insurance Pro am. For our convenience, we have identified your present types of coverag However, it should be clearly understood that nothin in th s resume is intended to interpret or in anyway supersede th poli y conditions. From time to time in the cc rse of your business operations, you may sign leases, contrac and other agreements which transfer serious financial obligat ns to you. We suggest that you have your attorney and CPA revi w these so that you might let us know what changes are nec ary in your insurance program in order to properly treat t e e exposures. Although we will cooperat wi h you to keep this program up-to-date, changes will occur in your Ins rance Program. After it' s preparation, this resume cannot be considere current at any given time. It should never be used in the place of the policies to which it refers. Existing coverage should only be determined from the actual policy forms. Prepared by - Capesius Agency, Inc. 129 So. Holmes Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 l 3 6� pesins Agency, lne YOUR INDEPENDENT INSURANCE AGENTS P.O. &u 97. Flea) Nasional Bank Bldg., Shakopee. MN 55.779 Td, 161E 44S-IM INSURANCE COVERAGE OUTLINE INTRODUCTION The following pages have been prepaired as a simplified resume of your Insurance Program. For your convenience, we have identified your present types of coverage. However, it should be clearly understood that nothing in this resume is intended to interpret or in anyway supersede the policy conditions. From time to time in the course of your business operations, you may sign leases, contracts and other agreements which transfer serious financial obligations to you. We suggest that you have your attorney and CPA review these so that you might let us know what changes are necessary in your insurance program in order to properly treat these exposures. Although we will cooperate with you to keep this program up-to-date, changes will occur in your Insurance Program. After it' s preparation, this resume cannot be considered current at any given time. It should never be used in the place of the policies to which it refers. Existing coverage should only be determined from the actual policy forms. - Prepared by - Capesius Agency, Inc. 129 So. Holmes Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 13 k1 apesius Agency, Inc YOUR INDEPENDENT INSURANCE AGENTS P.O. Boz 97, First National Bank Bldg.,Shakopee,MN 55379 Tel.(612)445-1922 CITY OF SHAKOPEE 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSURANCE TRUST Policy Period: 6-30-87/88 PROPERTY LIMIT COVERAGE VALUATION DEDUCTIBLE Blanket Buildings & Replacement Contents *$9, 239, 270 All Risk Cost $1 ,000 Extra Expense — 40/80/100 City Hall $20,000 All Risk --- --- Police Department $20,000 - All Risk --- utility Office $30, 000 All Risk --- --- *Agreed Amount Coverage VALUABLE PAPERS LIMIT $570,000 Located: City Hall Police Department Utility Office All Risk — $250 Deductible TOTAL ANNUAL PROPERTY & VALUABLE PAPERS PREMIUM: $26,775 L8 Si' ,f BL'GJ CITY OF SHAKOPEE —2— CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT $235,600 Per schedule an file w/LMCIT $1 , 000 Deductible All Risk MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT LIMIT $ 3, 987 ( . $250 Deductibl AI Risk TOTAL ANNUAL EQUIP ENT REMIUM: $4,620 ,s� y-fry MONEY & SECURITIES CITY HALL UTILITY OFFICE Loss Inside Premise $5, 000 $7,000 Lass Outside Premi es $5, 000 $7, 000 $250 Deductible TOTAL ANNUAL NONE & SECURITIES PREMIUM: $270 i i i I i CITY OF SHAKOPEE ` I� CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT $235,600 Per schedule on file w/LMCIT 61 ,000 Deductible All Risk ' MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT LIMIT $453, 987 $250 Deductible All Risk TOTAL ANNUAL EQUIPMENT PREMIUM: $4,620 3 a1J Y.-iJ MONEY & SECURITIES CITY HALL UTILITY OFFICE Loss Inside Premises $5,000 $7, 000 Loss Outside Premises $5,000 $7,000 $250 Deductible TOTAL ANNUAL MONEY & SECURITIES PREMIUM: $270 13 ✓ CITY OF SHAKOPEE —3— COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL LIABILITY Limit of Liability: $ 600, 000 Bodily Injury & Property Damage — Combined Single Limit CLAIMS MADE COVERAGE See attached outline of Coverage dated 11-18-86 Including coverage for Police exposures see the 1-14-87 LMCIT letter EMPLOYEE BENEFIT LIABILITY Limit of Liability $600,000 Any One Occurrence $600,000 Aggregate TOTAL ANNUAL GENERAL LIABILITY LIABILITY PREMIUM: $67, 673 &z, isv ac-ev AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY & PHYSICAL DAMAGE Limit of Liability: $ 600,000 Bodily Injury & Property Damage — Combined Single Limit Coverages : — Personal Injury Protection — Basic — Uninsured Motorist — $600,000 — Underinsured Motorist — $600, 000 — Comprehensive — Per Schedule on File w/LMCIT* — Collision Per Schedule on File w/LMCIT* — Hired & Non—Owned Automobile Liability — "Fellow Employee" Coverage Vehicles — Per Schedule on File w/LMCIT *Comprehensive Deductible $250 *Collision Deductible $500 TOTAL ANNUAL AUTOMOBILE PREMIUM: $33,644 31, 7,3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE —4— PUBLIC OFFICIALS LIABILITY INTERNATIONAL SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY Policy Period 6-30-87/88 3' y� Limits of Liability: $1 ,000, 000 Each Loss and Aggregate for Each Policy Year Retention : S 2,500 Each Loss THIS PROPOSED INSURANCE COVERRGE IS EING QUOTED TO YOU UNDER THE MINNESOTA SURPLUS LINES INSURA E ACT. THE INSURER IS AN ELIGIBLE SURPLUS LINE INSURER, T IS NOT OTHERWISE LICENSED BY THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. IN CR OF INSOLVENCY OF THE INSURER AFTER YOU PURCHASE THE P POS INSURANCE COVERAGE, PAYMENT OF CLAIMS IS NOT GUARANTEED. ANNUAL PREMIUM: $5, 372 + $161. 6 S/L Tax e,;5..e iv, gvo LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICE S LIABILITY WES RN WORLD INSURAN COMPANY Policy Period 6-30-8 68 Limits of Liability : Bodily Injury & Personal Injury *$500, 000 Each Person *$500, 000 Each Incident *$500, 000 Aggregate Property Damage $ 50, 000 Each Incident $ 50, 000 Aggregate $500 Bodily Injury & Personal Injury Deductible $250 Property Damage Deductible *Reduced Limit from expiring Policy ( 1 , 000, 000/1 ,000,000/1 , 000, 000) THIS PROPOSED INSURANCE COVERAGE IS BEING QUOTED TO YOU UNDER THE MINNESOTA SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE ACT. THE INSURER IS AN ELIGIBLE SURPLUS LINES INSURER, BUT IS NOT OTHERWISE LICENSED BY THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. IN CASE OF INSOLVENCY OF THE INSURER AFTER YOU PURCHASE THE PROPOSED INSURANCE COVERAGE, PAYMENT OF CLAIMS IS NOT GUARENTEED. ANNUAL PREMIUM: $11 , 585 + 347. 55 SL Tax I 13 i/ CITY OF SHAKOPEE —4— PUBLIC OFFICIALS LIABILITY INTERNATIONAL SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY Policy Period 6-30-87/88 3 -1� Limits of Liability : $1 , 000,000 Each Loss and Aggregate for Each Policy Year Retention : $ 2,500 Each Loss THIS PROPOSED INSURANCE COVERAGE IS BEING QUOTED TO YOU UNDER THE MINNESOTA SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE ACT. THE INSURER IS AN ELIGIBLE SURPLUS LINES INSURER, BUT IS NOT OTHERWISE LICENSED BY THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. IN CASE OF INSOLVENCY OF THE INSURER AFTER YOU PURCHASE THE PROPOSED INSURANCE COVERAGE, PAYMENT OF CLAIMS IS NOT GUARANTEED. ANNUAL PREMIUM: $5, 372 + $161. 16 S/L Tax LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS LIABILITY I WESTERN WORLD INSURANCE COMPANY Policy Period 6-30-87/88 j Limits of Liability : Bodily Injury & Personal Injury *$500, 000 Each Person ISI *$500, 000 Each Incident *$500,000 Aggregate Property Damage $ 50, 000 Each Incident ' $ 50, 000 Aggregate , $500 Bodily Injury & Personal Injury Deductible $250 Property Damage Deductible *Reduced Limit from expiring Policy (1 , 000,000/1 ,000, 000/1 ,000, 000) i THIS PROPOSED INSURANCE COVERAGE IS BEING QUOTED TO YOU UNDER THE MINNESOTA SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE ACT. THE INSURER IS AN ELIGIBLE SURPLUS LINES INSURER, BUT IS NOT OTHERWISE LICENSED BY THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. IN CASE OF INSOLVENCY OF THE INSURER AFTER. YOU PURCHASE THE PROPOSED INSURANCE COVERAGE, PAYMENT OF CLAIMS IS NOT GUARENTEED. ANNUAL PREMIUM: $11 , 585 + 347. 55 SL Tax to ro$ PVE)f' r � 3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE —5— PUBLIC OFFICIALS BLANKET BOND TRANSAMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY Policy Period 6-30-87/88 Faithful Performance Blanket Position Bond: $50, 000 Including Depositors Forgery Excluding Treasurer or Tax Collector ANNUAL PREMIUM: $787 % 3% LMCIT ERRORS & OMMISSIONS — (OPTIONAL) Limit of Liability $600, 000 CLAIMS MADE $5,000 Deductible Prior Acts Coverage Subject to Additional Premium ANNUAL PREMIUM $16, 820 BOILER & MACHINERY HARTFORD STEAM BOILER Policy Period 6-30-87/88 Limit Per Accident $1 ,000,000 Comprehensive Coverage including Repair & Replacement Location & Objects Schedule Per Policy Deductible $500 except Transformers over 9000 KVA ANNUAL PREMIUM: $6, 723 o viz UMBRELLA Limit of Liability: $1 ,000,000 Each Occurrence $1 ,000, 000 Aggregate $ 10, 000 Retained Limit Excluding Coverage for Law Enforcement. Liability & Public . _._.. . _. _ Officials Liability & Child Molestation TOTAL ANNUAL PREMIUM: $37,379 Ll1� / 3 ✓ ,1) 1wrim U league of minnesota cities November 18, 1986 To: LMCIT agents From: Peter Tritz Re: New developments in LMCIT's property/casualty program The LMCIT Board of Trustees has approved a number of changes in LMCIT's property/casualty program. Most of these changes take _._ effect for coverage written or renewed after Nov. 15. In order to help keep you up-to-date on LMCIT, we are enclosing four memos which describe respect vely MCIT's property/casualty rate changes; new deductible opts s a ailable to cities; the switch to a claims-made liability f_ m; and the revised liability coverage form. Incidentally, we've also heard rumor that MSI may be entering the market municipal insuranc rket for smaller cities in Minnesota. So far, we haven' b en able to confirm this, but if it's correct, at least some itie would have available another source of coverage. If you have any questions o need additional information, please feel free to call me at the League office. Or contact LMCIT's program administrator, Nort Star Risk Services, 1401 W. 76th St. , Minneapolis, Mn. 55423 phone (612) 861-8600. RECEIVED DEC - 11986 C2ne5iUSAgency Inc 1 83 university avenue east, at. paul. minnesota 551 01 (E312) 227-5600 I �� 3 IIIID bUleague of minnesota cities November 18, 1986 To: LMCIT agents From: Peter Tritz Re: New developments in LMCIT's property/casualty program The LMCIT Board of Trustees has approved a number of changes in LMCIT's property/casualty program. Most of these changes take .... effect for coverage written or renewed after Nov. 15. In order to help keep you up-to-date on LMCIT, we are enclosing four memos which describe respectively LMCIT's property/casualty rate changes; new deductible options available to cities; the switch - to a claims-made liability form; and the revised liability coverage form. Incidentally, we' ve also heard a rumor that MSI may be entering the market municipal insurance market for smaller cities in Minnesota. So far, we haven' t been able to confirm this, but if it's correct, at least some cities would have available another source of coverage. If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to call me at the League office. Or contact LMCIT's program administrator , North Star Risk Services, 1401 W. 76th St. , Minneapolis, Mn. 55423; phone (612) 861-8600. RECEIVED DEC - 11986 Cauesfus Agency Inc ' 1 62 university avenue east. St. pawl, minnesOta 55101 (8121227-5600 ( kli 3 ✓ ill L league of minnesota cities LMCIT CHANGES IN COVERAGE LMCIT has made a number of changes in the liability coverage documents. The language has been simplified considerably, and most of the coverage provisions which were formerly handled by endorsements are now incorporated into the body of the document. There are also a number of substantive changes in the coverage. These changes eliminate many of the ambiguities and internal inconsistencies of the. old coverage forms, broaden the coverage in a number of areas, and conform the coverage much more closely to the city's statutory duties to defend and indemnify its employees. The format of the liability coverage document is as follows: I . COVERAGES A. General Liability B. Medical Payments _... C. Personal Injury D. Errors and Omissions E. Automotive Liability II . WHO IS COVERED III . LIMITS OF COVERAGE IV. DEFINITIONS V. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS VI . CONDITIONS , This memosummarizesthe major substantive changes in the coverage. (The change to a "claims-made" format is described in a separate accompanying memo. ) Keep in mind that this memo is just a summary. It will be important for cities and agents to read and understand the actual coverage document. 1 . Police Exposures The general liability coverage part has been broadened to provide the city and its employees coverage for the use of reasonable force to protect persons or property. Further, the personal injury coverage part has been broadened to cover the city and its employees for assault or battery committed for the purpose of protecting persons or property, or incidental to an arrest. 1 3d university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 1612) 227-5600 13 t/ 2. Civil rights coverage The errors and omissions coverage is revised to make it explicit that Sec. 1983 and similar civil rights claims are covered. (Note that LMCIT has consistently taken the position that most of these claims were already - covered under the old forms; thus, this is more a clarification than an expansion of coverage. ) 3• Defense coverage The statutes and court cases make it clear that a city's duty to pay for defense of its officers and employees is much broader than its duty or its authorization to indemnify them. The general liability, personal injury, and errors and omissions sections are revised to reflect this broad duty to defend employees. A provision in the "conditions" section brings the coverage of damages (asdistinguishedfrom defense) into conformance with the city's statutory duty and power to indemnify its employees. 4. Punitive damages LMCIT has consistently taken the position that puniti' ve damages will not be indemnified. This is now made explicit . Note though that LMCIT would still cover the defense -- - of suits for punitive damages, provided that the actions leading to the suit arose in the course of the employee's duties. 5. Errors and omissions exclusions Formerly LMCIT's errors and omissions coverage, like nearly every other errors and omissions form, excluded coverage for property damage, bodily injury, and personal injury. . This created a potential coverage gap for those claims which didn't arise out of an "occurrence" (i.e. , an accident) , but which resulted in property damage or bodily injury. (One example might be a claim for property damage arising out of a decision to abate an alleged nuisance, which a court later determined to be improper. ) The errors and omissions coverage has been broadened considerably to eliminate this possible gap. 6 . Professional services exclusion - ambulance and engineer exposures The "professional services" exclusion to the liability coverage part has been modified so that only the professional services provided by an attorney, architect, medical doctorp . dentist, nurse, or pharmacist. are excluded. Thus, other professional serivees, such as thoseofan ambulance attendant, paramedic, "First Responder, " etc. are not excluded. Similarly, the professional exposure of a professional engineer who is an employee of the city is no longer excluded. (Consulting engineers would continue to be excluded as independent - contractors . ) These changes eliminate the need for a separate "ambulance malpractice" or "engineer's malpractice" policy to protect city employees and volunteers. This revised "professional services" exclusion can also be endorsed on to the city's existing coverage, to provide the expanded coverage for the remainder of the existing policy's term. 7 . Aggregate limits All annual aggregate limits have been eliminated with two exceptions: products liability and medical payments. 1 . Fellow emDl oyee exclusion The "fellow employee" exclusion has been removed from the general liability and automobile coverages. Coverage is now provided for claims made against one employee of the city by another employee. 9 . Medical payments The "medical payments" coverage has been modified to apply only to bodily injury arising out of a condition on premises which the city owns or rents. This does not include streets, sidewalks or boulevards, except for those abutting city-owned buildings or city-o ed parking lots. 10. Employment-related claims Contr ctual obligations (not to be confused with contractually-as med tort liability) are generally not covered under the liab lity coverages. However, the errors and omissions coverage h s been modified to provide coverage for employment-r ated ob igations, except for wages and benefits owing. 11 . Firefighters liability he utomobile liability coverage now specifically provides cov a e to firefighters for the use of any automobile (including t e firefighter's own automobile) in the performance of his offic' al duties. Cities are required by statute to provide this inde nification. 12. Relief associations Local: 're or police relief associations and their officers, ployees, and members are now listed as covered parties under th . liability coverages. 13• Joint powers entities The coverage contract now specifically excludes coverage of any joint powers entity, and of any city liability arising out of the activities of a joint powers entity, unless specifically named in the declarations. This does not mean that LMCIT will not cover joint powers entities. Where coverage is needed for the activities of a joint powers entity, LMCIT will issue- a separate coverage document to the joint powers entity.' That coverage will also name each of the entity's constituent cities as additional covered parties. This approach has the advantage of putting all of the coverage relating to the joint entity's activities under a single coverage document, rather than involving the liability coverage of each of the constituent cities. Note also that the exclusion applies only to those joint powers agreements which actually create a separate joint entity. Joint powers contracts under which the city is merely providing services to or receiving services from another political subdivision don' t create any special problems under the city's LMCIT coverage. 7. Aggregate limits All annual aggregate limits have been eliminated with two exceptions: products liability and medical payments. _ 8. Fellow enrol ogee exclusion The "fellow employee" exclusion has been removed from the general liability and automobile coverages. Coverage is now provided for claims made against one employee of the city by another employee. 9 . Medical payments The "medical payments" coverage has been modified to apply only to bodily injury arising out of a condition on premises which the city owns or rents. This does not include streets , sidewalks or boulevards, except for those abutting city-owned buildings or city-owned parking lots. 10. Employment-related claims Contractual obligations (not to be confused with contractually-assumed tort liability) are generally not covered under the liability coverages. However, the errors and omissions coverage has been modified to provide coverage for employment-related obligations, except for wages and benefits owing. 11 . Firefighters liability The automobile liability coverage now specifically provides coverage to firefighters for the use of any automobile (including the firefighter's own automobile) in the performance of his official duties. Cities are required by statute to provide this indemnification. 12. Relief associations Local fire or police relief associations and their officers, employees, and members are now listed as covered parties under the liability coverages. 13• Joint powers entities The coverage contract now specifically excludes coverage of any joint powers entity, and of any city liability arising out of the activities of a joint powers entity, unless specifically named in the declarations. This does not mean that LMCIT will not cover joint powers entities . Where coverage is needed for the activities of a joint powers entity, LMCIT will issue a separate coverage document to the joint powers entity.' That coverage will also name each of the entity's constituent cities as additional covered parties. This approach has the advantage of putting all of the coverage relating to the joint entity's activities under a single coverage document, rather than involving the liability coverage of each of the constituent cities. Note also that the exclusion applies only to those joint powers agreements which actually create a separate joint entity. Joint powers contracts under which the city is merely providing services to or receiving services from another political subdivision don' t create any special problems under the city's LMCIT coverage. - [Lill unCUTI U league of minnesota cities LMCIT "CLAIMS-MADE" LIABILITY FORMS LMCIT will use a "claims-made" coverage form for general liability and public officials errors and omissions coverage written after Nov. 15. (Automotive liability coverage will continue to be written on an "occurrence" basis. ) This memo is intended to help explain to city officials what this change means, the problems "claims-made" coverage can create for the buyer, and how LMCIT has dealt with those problems. The primary reason for changing to "claims-made" coverage was _... that it would have been difficult or impossible for LMCIT to get reinsurance if an "occurrence" form were used. "Claims-made" - coverage also simplifies underwriting and rating to some extent, since the underwriter- doesnot have to try to predict and allow for possible future changes in the law governing liability for occurrences during the current year. What is "claims-made" coverage? The basic difference between "claims-made" and "occurrence" coverage is in which claims are payable under a particular policy. With "occurrence" coverage, the key question is when the incident happened. If the incident occurred during the policy period, it is covered regardless of when the claim is made. (This assumes, of course, that the incident is one which falls within the kinds of claims that the policy covers. ) With "claims-made" coverage, whether a claim is covered by a particular policy depends not only on when the idcident occurred but also on when the claim was first made. This can perhaps best be illustrated by an example. _ Consider a "claims-made" policy which runs for the calendar year. The 1987 policy will cover claims arising out of incidents which happened during 1987, provided the claim was also made during 1987 . When that policy is renewed for 1988, the 1988 policy will cover claims made during 1988 which arise out of incidents that happened during either 1987 or 1988. The 1989 renewal, then, will cover claims made during 1989 for incidents which happened during 1987, 1988, or 1989. Thus, each successive renewal of a "claims-made" policy covers a greater number of claims. This is the reason why "claims-made" coverage is cheaper during the first year, and why each successive renewal of a "claims-made" policy becomes more expensive. (The cost does level off after about five years. ) 1 B3 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 [6 1 21 227-5600 j3 ✓ Potential problems with "claims-made coverage The problem with. "claims-made" coverage really arises when you want to change carriers.- The new carrier typically won't want to accept risk for claims arising out of incidents which happened before the inception date of his policy. This can create a gap in coverage, for claims made after the date of the -Cr ---Change in ea -r_ters_ for incidents which happened before the change. Unless spec teps are taken, neither carrier will cover those claims. There are two ways to solve this problem; either will involve paying some additional premium to someone. One is to get the new carrier to agree to cover claims from those earlier incidents. However, most carriers are very reluctant to do this, although it is certainly worth inquiring about if you find yourself in this situation. The second way is to get the old carrier to agree to cover those claims, even though the claim happens after his policy has expired. (This agreement is called an "extended reporting period." ) Of course, the old carrier has no particular incentive to agree to give you that extension, or to charge a reasonable price if he does agree to do it. This is why is is extremely important in purchasing a "claims-made" policy to make sure that the policy gives you the right buy an extended reporting period. Unfortunately, many "claims-made" policies give the buyer that right only if the carrier cancels .or refuses to renew the coverage. Thus, if the buyer decides not to renew the coverage, the old carrier is under no obligation to offer an extended reporting period. If an extended reporting period is offered, it may be only for a limited time - sometimes as little as a year or two. An extended reporting period of limited duration certainly is better than nothing, but if there is any time limit at all, the potential gap still exists. A third problem is that even if the policy gives you the right to buy an unlimited extended reporting period, the cost to buy that extension probably won't be specified. You'll have to pay whatever the old carrier feels like charging. (The standard "claims-made" forms recommended by ISO, for example, state only _ that the cost of the extended reporting period can't exceed 200% of the last year' s premium. ) How LMCIT addresses those problems LMCIT's revised coverage document includes an automatic 60 day extended reporting period. It also gives the city the right to purchase an extended reporting period of unlimited duration. The city has this right regardless of whetherit is the city's or LMCIT's decision not to continue the coverage. The cost of purchasing the extended reporting period is specified in the coverage document itself. 1311 The cost depends on how long the city has been covered under the "claims-made" coverage. It ranges from 34.6% of premium if coverage has been for one year, up to 70.8% of premium if coverage has been for five years or more. By comparison, standard ISO "claims-made" forms all w a range of up to 200%. Other forms often sayKned g at a about the cost of extending coverage. - - � -' Because the LMCIT covocu ent offers an unlimited extended reporting period for n c at, the city really has available the equivalent of "oceel coverage. The city may wish to set _... aside each year the fa essary to purchase the extended reporting period; i.ely 35% of premium the first year, 18% the second year, third year, and so on. After five years, the cost of thed reporting period stops increasing, so that ne funds would need to be set aside. (The exact percentaged ould vary somewhat depending on changes in the city'sg ba a from year to year. ) I 13 V The cost depends on how long the city has been covered under the "claims-made" coverage. It ranges from 34 .6% of premium if coverage has been for one year, up to 70.8% of premium if coverage has been for five years or more. By comparison, standard ISO "claims-made" forms allow a range of up to 200"s. Other forms often say nothing at all about the cost of extending coverage. Because the LMCIT coverage document offers an unlimited extended reporting period for a known cost, the city really has available the equivalent of "occurrence" coverage. The city may wish to set _... aside each year the funds necessary to purchase the extended reporting period; i.e. , roughly 35% of premium the first year, 180 the second year, 8% the third year, and so on. After five years, the cost of the extended reporting period stops increasing, so that no further funds would need to be set aside. (The exact percentages needed would vary somewhat depending on changes in the city' s rating base from year to year. ) ILII I���1�,1 U league of minnesota cities LMCIT PROPERTY/CASUALTY RATES 1 . Overall For coverage written or renewed after Nov. 15, LMCIT' s property/casualty rates will be reduced somewhat. The largest reductions will be on the property, automotive physical damage, and inland marine coverages. These reductions reflect LMCIT 's consistently good loss experience in these areas. Rates for general liability coverage will also decrease slightly. This reduction is largely a function of the switch to a "claims-made" coverage form, as discussed in an accompanying memo. However, it also reflects projected savings attributable to LMCIT' s in-house defense capability, and to the 1986 amendments to the municipal tort liability statutes. The revised rates also reflect the broader coverage provided by the revised coverage forms. Of course, an individual city's premium will be affected by any changes in the city's exposures - e.g. , increased city expenditures , higher property values, etc. - as well as by the rate changes. Cities should also keep in mind that the 10% reserve assessment has been eliminated for all renewals after the June 1 , 1986. 2. Small cities rate credit As part of the overall review of •• rates , LMCIT looked at how premiums and losses have compared for various population classes of cities. This study showed that the experience has been somewhat better for smaller cities than for larger ones. Because of this loss experience, cities of under 500 population will receive a rate credit of 20%. Cities between 500 and 2500 population will receive a 10% rate credit. These rate credits will apply to coverage written or renewed after Nov. 15, 1986, and will be applied in addition to the overall rates changes described above. S3 _university avenue east, st. paul• minnesota 55101 (6121227-5600 Cry MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: 1986 Annual Reports DATE: June 12, 1987 Introduction Attached are the 1986 Annual Reports from various City departments. Action Reauested Move to receive the 1986 Annual Reports. i /3X MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator !�L"/Az� FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk C—K ll�i LL„�/AA RE: Boards & Commissions Picnic/Employee Picnic DATE: June 12, 1987 The picnic shelter at Lions Park :has been reserved for July 20th for the Boards and Commissions Picnic and for August 10th for the annual employees picnic. If it is Council desire to include the use of the pool and water slide for the evening, Mr. Muenchow is recommending that the Council take such action. Recommended Action Authorize the Community Recreation Director, upon proper reservation of the swimming pool under the Community Recreation Group Rental Policy, to include free use of the pool, water slide and picnic shelter for the 1987 Boards and Commissions Picnic and for the 1987 Annual Employees Picnic. JSC/jms MEMO TO: John R. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Resolution of Appreciation of Gary Hartmann DATE: June 12, 1987 Introduction and Background The attached resolution is a resolution of appreciation to Gary Hartmann for his year of service on the Community Recreation Board. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 2737, A Resolution of Appreciation to Gary Hartmann, and move its adoption. JSC/jms / ' c 0. RESOLUTION NO. 2737 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO GARY HARTMANN WHEREAS, Gary Hartmann served on the Shakopee Community Recreation Board from April, 1986 to May, 1987; and WHEREAS, Gary Hartmann served as Vice Chairman of the Shakopee Community Recreation Board from March, 1987 until his res- ignation; and WHEREAS, Gar Hartma has unselfishly contributed many hours of service t the C'ty of Shakopee during his tenure on the Shakopee Communi y Recr ation Board. NOW, THEREFORE, E IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City Council, on behalf of the esi nts of Shakopee and on behalf of the Shakopee Community ecr ation Board, that the Shakopee City Council does hereby a en to Gary Hartmann the deep appreciation of the City for civic i terest and dedicated service to the community. Adopted in Adj . R lar Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minne ta, held this 16th day of June, 1987. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1987. City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 2737 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO GARY HARTMANN WHEREAS, Gary Hartmann served on the Shakopee Community Recreation Board from April, 1986 to May, 1987; and WHEREAS, Gary Hartmann served as Vice Chairman of the Shakopee Community Recreation Board from March, 1987 until his res- ignation; and WHEREAS, Gary Hartmann has unselfishly contributed many hours of service to the City of Shakopee during his tenure on the Shakopee Community Recreation Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City Council, on behalf of the residents of Shakopee and on behalf of the Shakopee Community Recreation Board, that the Shakopee City Council does hereby extend to Gary Hartmann the deep appreciation of the City for civic interest and dedicated service to the community. Adopted in Adj . Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 16th day of June, 1987. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1987. City Attorney MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Ordinance No. 218, Regarding Refuse Collection DATE: June 12, 1987 Introduction The City Attorney has prepared the attached ordinance per Council direction. The ordinance requires that all individual householders in any outlying neighborhood must receive City refuse collection services if City collection is implemented in said outlying neighbor- hood. Action Requested Offer Ordinance No. 218, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending the City Code Chapter 3 Entitled "Municipal and Public Utilities Rules and Regulations, Franchises and Rates" By Adding a Certain Limitation and Requirement to Subdivision 4 of Sec. 3.15 and by Adopting By Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Adopting By Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Adopting By Reference Section 3.99 Which Among Other Things Contains Penalty Provisions, and move its adoption. JSC/jms b ORDINACNE NO. 218 An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending the City Code Chapter 3 Entitled "Municipal and Public Utlities Rules and Regulations, Franchises and Rates" By Adding a Certain Limitation and Requirement to Subdivision 4 of Sec. 3.15 and by Adopting By Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Adopting By Reference Section 3.99 Which Among Other Things Contains Penalty Provisions THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN: SECTION I: NEW PROVISION ADDED TO SURD. 4,-SEC. 3.15 Provided, however, that all individual house/�rJolders in any outlying neighborhood must receive City refuse collection services if Qity collection is implemented in said outlying neighborhood. �!! SECTION II: GENERAL PROVISIONS ADO TED Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 en itled "General Provisions and Definikionc ^-p lic-E1- to the entire City Code including pen ties Yor violation" and Section 3.99 entitled "Violation a misdemeanor" are hereby ad t d in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION III: WHEN IN FORCE AND EFFECT After the adoption, signing and a estation o his ordinance, it shall be pur- lished once in the official newspaper of the City of S opee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the da a following such publi tion. Adopted in session f the City Council of the City of Shakopee held this _ day of 1987. _ Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 29th day o y, 1987. City Attoknev.�H____ _..'' /7$ !b ORDINACNE NO. 218 An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending the City Code Chapter 3 Entitled "Municipal and Public Utlities Rules and Regulations, Franchises and Rates" By Adding a Certain Limitation and Requirement to Subdivision 4 of Sec. 3.15 and by Adopting By Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Adopting By Reference Section 3.99 Which Among Other Things Contains Penalty Provisions THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN: SECTION I: NEW PROVISION ADDED TO SURD. 4 'SEC: 3.15 Provided, however, that all individual householders in any outlying neighborhood must receive City refuse collection services if City collection is implemented in said outlying neighborhood. SECTION II: GENERAL PROVISIONS ADOPTED Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Dpfin4*9 nns to the entire City Code including penalties for violation" and Section 3.99 entitled "Violation a misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION III: WHEN IN FORCE AND EFFECT After the adoption, signing and attestation of this ordinance, it shall be pur— lished once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee held this _ day of 1987. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 29th day o y, 1987. City xttorn5y