Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/28/1987 TENTATIVE AGENDA - ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 28,_ 1987 Mayor Reinke presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:00 p.m. 2. Public Hearing to determine whether or not the Scott County Historical Society has complied with certain conditions contained in quit claim deeds. a. Introduction by Mayor Reinke b. Report from staff C. Response by Scott County Historical Society d. Comments by members of the audience e. Instructions by the Assistant City Attorney f. Council discussion g. Council action 3. Other business: a. Shakopee Jaycees Temporary On Sale 3.2 Beer License tabled July 21 - memo on table b. C. 4. Adjourn. John K. Anderson City Administrator e� STATEMENT 7-28-87 Ordinances 290 and 300, adopted by the City Council on December 17, 1968 and July 8, 1969 provided for the conveyance of certain lands to the Scott County Historical Society with certain conditions and instructions. Minnesota Valley Restoration Project (MVRP) was incorporated under the laws of the State of Minnesota as a non-profit corporation on February 5, 1972 to administer Murphy' s Landing. The Board Members for the Scott County Historical Society were also Board Members for the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project (MVRP) . Board Members served a dual role from 1972 to 1982. In 1982, upon the resignation of Margaret Mac Farland as Full- time Director of the Scott County Historical Society andthe Minnesota Valley Restoration Project (MVRP) , the Scott County Historical Society established a new Board of Directors for the Scott County Historical Society. A few Board Members initially servedon both Boards. From 1982 forward there have been two separate Boards. z MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY FOUNDED IN 1849 - 690 Cedar 511".51. NO,M.IIC a 55101 (612)296-6126 JUN 21987 June 19, 1987 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Mr. John Anderson, City Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 Fast 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson: It has r® to my attention that discussions are being held regarding the future of Murphy's Landing. - The Minnesota Historical Society is keenly interested in encouraging accurate and exciting presentations of the state's story at the many important historic sites throughout the state. "History Where It Happened" can be a rich educational experience for school groups and visitors if carefully planned and well managed. The story of the Minnesota River Valley is a fascinating and important one. Ft. Snelling, a site operated by the Minnesota Historical Society, tells the story of a pre-settlement United States military outpost at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers. The interpretive programmin�o at Murphy's Landing can extend this experience by exploring early settlement patternsinthe valley. As you continue discussions, we urge that you plan with the utmost care for solid historical interpretation. Experience has shown that a quality interpretive program will result in substantial educational and economic benefits for the local community. Any caumnfty that has a desire to communicate its heritage in a meaningful way can afford no less. Sincerely, -1.,(,t.CA. GA Nina M. Archabal Director Mwsl 8250 Old Hwy 169 Blvd. KECEIYED Jordan, Yinnesb" 55352 July 25, 1967 Jilt 2 7J Deal Sirs, OrY OF ShAKIPpa There are points in the controversy between the MVHB and the llisborical Society that I feel should be considered. How come there is no museum for 6cott County? Does Scott Cty history only happen between 1840-1900? Anyone who is interested in Scott Sty. finds only I-BuThy's lending for information. Where does the Society function? I have never seen a membership drive or a booth at the County fair? Who are they? I never find information about them in the Jordan paper until recentlyl. When does one county count another's artifacts as their own? The building at Murphy's are from another county( at least some of them). In their present setting they are correct for the A1innesota Valley at least to Hendersen, so they give the vistior a sense of continuity. If you want to become a society for the city of Shakopee you will have to go throughthe county society also. Just look to your nieghbor of Chask-a. As for money. I dont mindgivingto a-working organization. To give money to just a post office box is rediclious. To really run a site takes a lotofmoney, and for pointers just look to the zoos of today. They have to hold dinner parties in the animals area. MurphySs landing has forsomereasonbeen holding on and doing well - even with shrit tail budget. Page 2 Scott County Historical Society should fire thier newsletter editor. The v01.1 no 2 was not a newsletter it was a ill written piece of pro- paganda hate mail. Only one piece of good news. I believe that you have to really look a the county society and find them at fault. They never really knew thier function as a society and a disperser of historical information. They are not comunication with the public and getting all of Scott ety involved with the rich heritage of the the past. At least Murphy's is growing and is active. In closing from what I see, with such little information. We in Acott - county need a new society. One who will put old wrongs in the enlightened knowledge of what other counties, other organizations, and other sites inthe country are doing. So, leave the site alone for now or give it to the state. Sincerely y s, Anne M a r _ . Page 2 Scott County Historical =ociety should fire thier newsletter editor. The v01.1 no 2 was not a newsletter it was a ill written piece of pro- paganda hate mail. Only one piece of good news. I believe that youhave to really look a the county society and find them at fault. They never really knew thier function as a society and a disperser of historical information. They are not comunication with the public and getting all of Scott cty involved with the rich heritage of the the past. At least Murphy's is growing and is active. In closing from what 2 see, with such little information. We in Scott county need a new society. One who will put old wrongs in the enlightened knowledge of what other counties, other organizations, and other sites inthe country are doing. So, leave the site alone for now or give it to the state. Sincerely y • s, Anne M a r -" SCOTT COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY PUBLIC HEARING JULY 28, 1987 INTRODUCTION On February 3 , 1969 and on July 8 , 1969 the City of Shakopee conveyed property to the Scott- County Historical Society . Within the quit claim . deeds , the City retained reversionary rights if certain terms of the conveyance were not complied with. It now appears that sufficient cause exists to suggest that various terms of those quit claim deeds have not been complied with. A public hearing has been set by the Shakopee City Council for July 28 , 1987 at 7 :00 p.m. to determine whether or not the Scott County Historical Society has complied with the terms and conditions of the February 3, 1969, and July 8 , 1969 , quit claim deeds. TABLE OF CONTENTS Pace 1 ) Ord. No. 290 and Ord. No. 300 authorizing conveyance of 1 land to Scott County Historical Society listing limitations an reservations on conveyance. 2) Quit Claim Deed dated February 3, 1969. 8 3) Resolutions adopted by MN Valley Restoration Project, 13 Inc. dated April 27 , 1987 and May 4 , 1987 requesting support of the continued management of Murphy ' s Landing by the MVRP. 4) Resolution adopted by Scott County Board of 15 Commissioners dated May 5 , 1987 encouraging the City of Shakopee to retake lands transferred under certain conditions and restrictions to the Scott County Historical Society. 5) May 5 , 1987 correspondence from Maurice H. Stans, the 17 Stans Foundation, regarding continued support for the Murphy' s Landing Project. 6) Resolution No. 2741 adopted by City Council on June 16, 18 1987 setting a Public Hearing. 7) Affidavit of Publication of Public Hearing in the 20 Shakopee Valley News on July 1 , 1987. 8) Copy of Published Public Hearing Notice. 21 9) Copy of letter to Linda. Gode, Secretary, Scott County 22 Historical Society advising of Public Hearing. 10) Copy of letter to Jacqueline Joslyn, President, Scott 23 County Historical Society advising of public hearing. 11 ) Copy of letter to Marge Henderson, President, MN Valley 24 Restoration Project advising of public hearing. 12) Letter from City Attorney regarding transfer/mortgage of25 property. 13) Insurance 27 14) Financial Reports 29 15) Minutes - 31 16) Memo from Asst City Attorney dated June 12, 1987 listing32 City alternatives if ownership is reobtained. -290 CAAPT_ER 9.08 An Ordinance 'Providing for the Conveyance of Certain Lads to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc., and Attaching Certain Conditions Thereto and Placing Certain Restrictions Thereon ir=—RE S, The Scott County Historical Society, Inc., hereinafter referred to as the Society, is a duly incorporated non-profit society under and pursuant to the laws of the State of Kinnesota, and _ IMFEAS, Said society has made a serious study for the development of an historical site and park to be located on certain property hereinafter described and has discussed the plans evolved as a result of such study with the City Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee and the Common Council of the City of Shakopee, and the Society has secured funds for further study and development and is in the process of securing other and additional fonds for said purpose, and 1-MREAS, The Society has alleged and demonstrated that a prime condition . prerequisite to the securing of additional private and other funds for the further development of said historical site and park is the acquisition of legal title to said land, and 1;�F,P&S, The Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee has on June 1.8, 1968 by a unanimous vote of all of its members duly determined that the City property hereinafter described would serve a superior public use and purpose if in fact developed and used as contemplated by the Society, and that it is not desirable for public purposes in its present state and use, and has recommended the conveyance of said land to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. for such purpose. TIMREFORE, THE CONMON- COUNCIL OF Tis. CITY OF SHLKOME DOES ORDAIN- SECTIO_! I Ad ntin^ and Approvinc the Findings of the Planning Commission The Common Council here's,; adopts and approves the findings of the Planning Cowes ssion that the property hereinafter described is no longer needed by the City of Shakopee for its present use and purposes and it is not desirable for ..._public purpose in its present state, and the Council has no plan for the further use and development, but that the property hereinafter descried would serve the highest foreseeable public use and purpose if conveyed under certain conditions to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. for the development of an historical site and complex. (1) SCTIO' II: Directing, Conveyance The Com on Council of the City of Saakopee hereby authorize and approves the conveyance and transfer of title to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. for the nominal consideration of One and ro/100----___________________Dollar the following described tract of land, to-reit: The following part of the City property, which City property is described as follows, to-wit: Government Lots 1 and 2, Section 32, Township 116 North, Range 22 Hest; that part of Governnent Lots 1 and 2, the Northwest 'Quarter of the northeast Quarter, and the northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 115 north, Range 22 Hest lying North of the North line of State Trunk Highway iF101, being Route $187, which said property to be conveyed by this deed is more particularly described as follows: lying East of the following line: Beginning at a point on the centerline of the Hest bound lane of Trunk Highway ¢101, distant 1671.07 feet (as measured along the centerline of said lane) East of the Hest line of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22; thence North at right angles a distance �. of 202 feet; thence deflecting to the Hest at an angle of 87=48' a distance of 67.75 feet; thence deflecting to the North at an angle of 23°10' a distance of 251.4 feet; thence deflecting to the North at an angle of 23=38' a distance of 403.1 feet; thence North a distance of 130 feet more or less to a point 30 feet North of the North bank of the Mill Creek; thence Easterly and parallel to said North bank to the Hinnesota River and there terminating. Excepting therefram the following described tracts: 1. The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Lluarter, Section 5, Township 115 north, Range 22 Hest, lying north of the North line of State Trunk Highway $101, and Reserving, however, unto the City of Shakopee all right, title and interest in all structures and improvements in and on and the right to possess for a period not to exceed ten years from and after Januanr 1, 1969 the following tract, to-wit: The South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Northwest 'Quarter of NortheastQuarter of Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 Hest lying ?iorth of the north line of State Trunk Highway =101, and r: Reserving further, as a roadway, a strip of land 50-feet in width, the center- line of which coincides with the centerline of the existing traveled roadway as presently located and traveled; said strip of land being located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 ?lest and running in a general northerly - southerly direction between State Truk Highway =101 and 30 feet north of the Hill Creek, but granting to said grantee, its licensees and invitees, the full right to use said road for passage in common with others, all the above land lying and being in the County of Scott and State of :iinnesota. (2) 7ireetinr Conve-:ance The Comon Council. of the City o: Snaropee hereby authorizm and approves the conveyance and transfer of title to the Scott County _stor_cal Society, Inc. for the novnal consideration of One and the following described tract of land, to-ttit: The following part of the City property, which C y property is described as follows, to=.wit: Goverment Lots 1 and 2, Section 32, Township 116 North, Range 22 ?lest; that part of Government Lots 1 and 2, the northwest :quarter of the northeast Quarter, and the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 3.15 north, Range 22 West lying idorth of the north line of State Trunk Fighway =101, being Route -187, which said property to be conveyed Dy this deed is more particularly described as follows; lying East of the following line: Beginning at a point on the centerline of the West bound lane of Trunk Highway ;"101, distant 1671.07 feet (as measured along the centerline of said lane) East of the West line of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22; thence Worth at right angles a distance of 202 feet; thence deflecting to the Vest at an angle of 87°48' a distance of 67.75 feet; thence deflecting to the Horth at an angle of 23°10' a distance of 251.4 feet; thence deflecting to the North at an angle of 23°38' a distance of 403.1 feet; thence Forth a distance of 130 feet more or less to a point 30 feet North of the Borth bank of the Mll Creek; thence Easterly and parallel to said Forth bank to the nannesota River and there terminating. Excepting therefrom the foll0"wing described tracts: 1. The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast quarter, Section 5, Township ll5 north, Range Z West, lying North of the North line of State Trunk _gaway =101, and Reserving, however, unto the City of Shakopee all right, title and interest in all structures and improvements in and on and the right to possess for a period not to exceed ten years from and after Januar- 1, 1969 the following tract, to-writ: The South naw= of the Southeast ,Iuarter of Northwest Zuarter of - ,. r heast .luarter of northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West lying :forth or the 'forth line of State Trunk Hi mwa,, =101, and - Reserving further, as a roadway, a strip of land 5r-feet in width, the center- line of which coincides with the centerline of the easting traveled roadway as presently located and traveled; said strip or land being located in the Northwest carter of Section 5, Town=_:tip 115 North, Range 22 pies. and running in a general northerly southerly direction between State Tnrr : ighway ;101 and 30 feet :forth of the frill Creel:, but granting to said grantee, its licensees and invitees, the full right to use said road for passage in cocmon zrith others, all the above land ly,_ng and bein_ ir- County of Scot`.. and 3iat> of :-nnesota. (2) S_C"IC'% III: Limitations and peservations on Conveyance Said transfer ana conveyance above authorized and directed shall be upon the following conditions, l dtations, restrictions and further reservations, to-crit: A. The site is to be developed for and used as an Historical Society Park and Ease= at the sole expense of the Scott County 3isto^cal Society, Inc. and the said development shall be commenced within twelve (12) months from the adoption of this ordinance and shall continue thereafter under the direction of said Scott County Historical Society, Inc. for the benefit, use and education of the general public, and upon such reasonable non-exclusive restrictions and lim2ations as may be adopted by said society. H. That the site and said improvements and betterments placed thereon shall not be sold, encumbered, mortgaged or hypothecated, and that the Society shall keep said property free of any and all liens and other dtachments at all times. C. That the Society shall hold the City free and harmless from ar>yv and all claims arising out of the use and development of said site as aforementioned and will defend the City against any and all claims of whatever kind, nature or descrip- tion, and before opening to the public shall file with the City of Shakopee a public liability policy kith the City of Shakopee and Scott CountyHistorical Society, Inc. named as assureds thereunder. - L, That the Society maintain at all times, a mininum active, paid-uo membership rester of one hundred loo Scott County residents. 7. That the Society file complete annual financial statements with the City of Shakopee, indicating all monies directed to, and received for, the Shakopee project to be developed on the hereinbefore described land; and verifying that at least a substantial amount of all said monies be committed for the physical development and artifacts to be placed on and for the i.mintenance of said project on said land above described. F. That the Society hold at least two. general meetings per year and an annual election of officers, and prcotly file the names of said officers so elected with the City of Shakopee. G. That the City of Shakopee reserves the right to negotiate with the State of Kinnesota for the location and construction of a bridge, highway and interc'nanSe over and across said tract as not; being studied by the City, the State of Isinaesota, ( 3) its agents, deear mentz and commissions, without incurring any liability camaCes or indemnity whatsoever to said Society. ... That, should the Society fail 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 terms 01' this ordinance, title to said site together with all improvements and betterments thereon shall revert - to and become vested in the City of Shakopee free and clear of any claims of any person, firm, corporation or association; and any dispute or question as to the Society's perfon. ce here:.nder shall be in the first instance determined by the Common Council of the City of Shakopee at a public hearing to be held after thirty days' written notice to said society specifying the grounds for said hearing, with the right of the Society to appeal to the District Court of proper jurisdiction within thirty days after said hearing and detervration by the Council. I. That the Society by accepting this conveyance waives any and all claims that it now has or may hereinafter have for its own benefit or the general public or for its invitees and licensees against the City of Shakopee for any reason or cause that arose, arises or might arise or result from the operation of the present sewage disposal facilities operated by the City of Shakopee in the vicinity of the sewage above described property of any futurel disposal operations carried on in the vicinity of the above described land. SFCTI05 T4• Seuarability Each and every section, provision and part of this ordinance is separable from any other section, provision or part, and, should any section, provision or part be held unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect any other section, provision or part hereof-. SECIIQ-i 7: Acceptance by the Society and ;,,nen in norce This ordinance shall became effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption and publication as provided by the amended Charter of the City- of Shakopee; Provided that the Society shall file a duly notarized acceptance of all terms h ereof, upon authorization given by a vote of the general membership of said Society duly assemhled. (4) agents, aeuar:rerte a= con_-issions, without incurring an.. wi- c`1"g canoes or incer..ity whatsoever to said Society. z. That, should the Society fail to attract the anticipated financial suppert and to develop and use andprope.rly maintain said site as proposed and hereinbefore set out, or fail to comply with any of the rerns of this ordinance, title to said site together with all i:_orovenents and betterments thereon shall revert to and become vested in the City of Shakopee free and clear a£ any claims of any person, firm, corporation or association; and any dispute or question as to the Society's nerfon. nce hem%nder shall be in the first instance deterained by the Comnon Council of the _ty of Shakopee at a public hearing to be held after thirty days' written notice to said society specifying the grounds for said hearing, with the right of the Society to appeal to the District Court of proper jurisdiction w:-thin thirty days after said hearing and detenination by the Council. 1. That the Society by accenting this conveyance waives any and all clains that it now has or may hereinafter have for its own benefit or the general public or for its invitees and licensees against the City of Shakopee for any reason or cause that arose, arises or dight arise or result from the operation of the present sewage disposal facilities operated by the City of Shakopee in the vicinity of the sewage above described property of any futurel disposal operation carried on in the vicinity of the above described land. SECTi F IV: Ssnara4ili�-• lack and every section, provision and part of this ordinance is separable from any other section, provisior. or part, and, should any,, section, provision or part be held unconstitutional by a Court of ccrpetent jurisdiction., it shall not affect any other section, prouzsion or parr hereof. 53CT10ii 'i: acce�tance by the Societ^ and ?::nen in Sorce This ordinance shall become effective thirty (90) days from and after its adoption and publication as provided by the amended Charter of the Civ of Shakopee; Provided that the Society shall file a duly notaazed acceptance of all teras h ereof, upon authorization given by a vote of the general nembsrrship of said Societe duly assemhled. ( 4) Passed in Ar!i.Rez. session of the Comon Council of the City of Shakopee held this 17 day of December 196_8_. Presiders'.: the Comon Council /Z/ r'�n i �A 'TiUJ City Recorder App d this 1 Y, 'of Pecembe; 1968 . i:ayor-oft City of Shakopee Prepared and approved as to form - this 13th day of December, 1966. City Attorney (5) C'?DrZ.Sj ' u 300 An Ordiance Providing for the Conve ance of Certain lands to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. and Attaching Conditions Thereto and Placing Certain Restrictions Thereon W.�REAS, The Scott County Historical Society, Inc., hereinafter referred to as the'Society' is a duly incorporated, non-profit society under and pusuant to the laws of the State of Minnesota, and IiERP.AS, Said Society has made a serious study for the development of an historical park and site to be located on certain property, including the property hereinafter described, and has discussed plans evolved as the result of such study with the City Planning Comoaasion of the City of Shakopee and the Common Council of the City of Shakopee, and that the Society has secured . funds for the further study and development and is in the process of securing other and additional funds for said purpose, and WIMEAS, The Societl has alleged and demonstrated that a prime condition prerequisite to securing of additional private and other funds for the further development of said Historical Society and park is the acquisition of legal title to said lands, and h i'�ER. A.S, The Planning¢ Commission of the City of Shakopee did on June 18, 1968 by a unanimous vote of all of its members duly determine that the property belonging to the City of Shakopee, including the propertyhereinafter described, would serve a superior public use and purpose if in fact developed as contemplated by the Society, and that/ 1 not desirable for public purpose in its present state and use, and has recommended the conveyance of the land hereinafter described to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc, for such purpose, and WHERE=, A conveyance was duly authorized by Ordinance {-90 duly passed by the Common Council of the City of Sha'-o?ee on December 17,1962, but that said Ordinance excepted fro_: the conveyance the following described tract, to-wit: The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, lying North of the North line of State Trunk Highway "101, and -- V=&S, The reason for excepting said tract from said conveyance no longer exists, (6) MEREFOES THE COMON COUNCIL OF TEE CITY OF S7LKOPM DOES ORDAM: SECTIO;: I: Directine Convevance That the Common Council of the City of Shakopee hereby authorizes and approves the conveyance and transfer of title to the Scott County Fistorieal Society, Inc. for the nominal sum of One and no/100.----------------------------Dollar the above described tract. SECTION II: Limintations and Reservations on Conveyance That all the provisions of Ordinance MO of the City of Shakopee arehereby incorporated herein and made a part hereof save and except insofar as said conditions or provisions would be clearly inconsistent herewith. SECTION II: Separability Each and every section, provision and part of this ordinance is separable from any other section, provision or part; and should any section, provision or part be held unconstitutional by a Court of competent jurisdiction it shall not affect any other section, provision or part. Passed iniior session of the Common Council of the City of Shakopee held this _ day of , 1969. President of the Common Council !—"'TEST: A. ty Recorder Appr d as _ this qday of iCv;lg69 � � 1(/"7 Mayor'o: tl{e City-of Shakopee Prepared and approved as to form this 3=q day of June, 1,069 City 9tto (7) 'i'=--OFC = CCP2SO:T CGTr'=I OFOF S=L1709EE DOES 0?.0_^_:: S2=!C:- I: Directinr Convevance -hat the Common Council of the City o£ Shakopee hereby authorizes and approves the conveyance and transfer of title to the Scott County Fistorical Society, Inc. for the nominal sum of Cne and no/100.-----------,_____—_________Dollar the above described tract. S=ION II: Lim=ntations and Reservations on Conveyance That all the provisions of Ordinam a 0290 of the City of Shakopee are bereby incorporated herein and made a part hereof save and except insofar as said conditions or provisions would be clearly inconsistent herewith. SECTIOA II: Separability Each and every section, provision and part of this ordinance is separable from any other section, provision or part; and should any section, provision or part be held unconstitutional by a Court of competent ,jurisdiction it shall not affect any other section, provision or part. Passed in �aiiini session of the Common Council of the City of Shakopee held this -�-das of -6' ,d 1969. i President of the Common Council •iyc P e City R corder v Appro d as _ this �jA" �d�av of tLv,2,V69 hjayor'of tk[e City'of Shakopee Prepared and approved as to form / this 3=4 day of June, 1959 Citp 9tto , (7) Y®¢Ur taa Cowan Conrail of tea Cm of ibamo.a, W NCinenee /290 only paaksd W prb2lt as rsNlxd by the Yspdad fLp•CaT of ta[ City of Snatapae, - tM Caaam Conrail of also city of Slr.kc ee adopuad and appre ad tat fitdtnda of . tb Plamtln{ Calsalm that ,da peeparty WxipafMr daaardbad L no, kcryar aaadad by tbs City of Sboa>sa for it. prasnt w and pmpeees mad It L not daaLmao far public paepeeas in Ste prasent Rate W the Council W.N 'loos 1, 1. fnrtpar daaala aa�t, bot ttat the prepsrty nasanad te, 4aeribd av d sarae the a ,bast forawble public cee ted p rposa if asnae,ad ander certain ascditdms nn toe Scott County Masarleal Ssa &Vj for ton osvaloppaet of N biatarloal 812e an. 7na,u.. and aald Coon eomtil of toe atid, a: Soakapaa dautbofiae aCJteee itis eon.eyame am tranefer of title N eexlmher at fort`.. IOX, lY2PBtC]t£, .:.25 DQ®yi9RL Mede tons I d day of .�.<•....-•.. , l:.rc o! and haw ons toe Cit, of Smtopaa, a aadicl.al oerpnratfN tder�and p+rsuan: to U. lass of toe 9Hta of pinna..U, part.,- of toe first Dart• and T. Scott Caudt., tiistomeal Society, Inc., a eorpaKtiar, onset and poramnt to taa Las of tae state of Mfonasota, Arty of tia saaood tart• L'STti_'41.:.I, Tmt Ue party of toe filet µrt, in eamideratSc Of tEe ememet` ave apraemnta aerator., p,assotad b1, toe Scott Cod¢, Cisoriaal Seclety, Ion. a... the noaiml w of one Della. ---___ ___poi:ar: t0 it in !av paid W sa_tl part, of W. eaeaM par., toe xeevpt vmxef 17 Erxc: �emw'ladSW, d«s neray yrwt. normaln. vnitoLly am Camey onto said part, of ton awond part, fC16' , all or tot [rat V, or pw.la a' lac' i,lriS and nolo£ if toe Casty of Scott and Sta4 of M sn'.sta, daaar"zd as Is". • to—%t: :be folio part of tM city praperty, .sic: Cdsr poverty is waarload .., tp3lea, to-rii: .carat+ lata 1 rr 2, xcc>et - 32. ,coma-p llu NortL. .:ande Yl bast, imt sart of Oveexsmt Leta 1 and 2, ton Marcv.at Warts of ton MrrtE . Qaarrar, and tee Mertx.et Warta, of tae Wrtnwst QOO.'r of Saoasn Stamm' L5 Stmt, Mange 22 Wat lrins Ms1 - of toe Merta lira o: State T- Bidmry #10'11 bel% !,u Oldi, aae.: acid 'cowry to be .—O,ed b, ansa deed is rex par.ieula:l, dee.rle.d v - f-unaines, lying Us- of . f.u.,in, liner Baglealon at a point N tba emNrlize of tse Mast boons larn of aa, #101, distant 15'/1.:! feet (aa saasorad along toe y- BLs aontarlima of Bald late) r"tt of the Wat Lae of Sects® 5. Tamedlp 115• Ban < 22t thspa. Sartb at right anSlae a diatsx.. -. et 202 fwtt tome dtflsetLrp to tha Wet at an Nal. of 8 .4p F- 1 �s9 (8) Of 67.75 f—t, tem.o de:1-o ea H tee noise at or !Hila of r!`30' a dLtas. of 251.4 feet: tomacm oeflwctlac to f•—' - tae Marta at u a.ile of 23.38' • aiataaaa Of 003.1 feet: Irma �'J"� M a CfOtmva or_3o feat mea or loos to a point 70 fee: Mrta of tae MnYd -o el of w Bill Croak, thah.o sastarl, are .T'.-7stallsl L maid Marta Ewe[ to tw Mirme.oea Meer ame there .�1J-._Esa�vstlV. as tW rafrae are felleohe NwridH aeroar _•a l._.sa irteesat Quarter ip tae North, ha a 22 eat the, nertort" _ - of the rth4eaiahIla 5, Tmt61D 115 Forte. NaMe 2.".ew:. 111M brz:. Of ttr Yash Sfr .f State SSwa Hlgraa, 7301. am Yly"^- : Basrtlya &&Dean, ttrte tN CSt7 of SWsoPa all -Spt, ilii- , moi v-:eeea: la all &':nava! W lam awdte is W m tat toeor rip: te mawaa a per:— het so sammoul to Tarr frm W after Jamar, 1, 1969 C-w fol:- tree.. to-sees M- - -- Rea Manta 9alf Ofthedtcromrt o rtor Of Rrtmo..t amr,-r of mafiosos: Quarter of marthoosc (ewHr of SCYm 5, ^w: e1p 115 North, ➢aoye 22 Wot 171os I of the Par..-, llm or :i to Sawk HSsama, Wo.t'.'1r ftn+.Esr. ma • rmmmJ. • stn" or tau: Sy(w: to N__:t, toe eao.v..1.e :of emi.a moimidm. with the ..nterllrr at toe aZlstieN travolel rweaY p-ee.::1, 1aa,sW W t ataledi maid Rilp of land Oate, laeatea to the Tvrmraat .wrtor of Section 5. Sao.+91V 115 Hahsv 22 wo.t ab rosin; lr, s ben-n: x to-:lY- f - lwtearl7 diraatlm hati.wa state ^.itID(H:p,e, Nle, ah_ SJ feet b of Lhe k.1: Croaky tat "..tire tp mold grantee. iH a.... W im' ., tl.. aoe said road for Daaea,, in atet aith othere, .1_ tae amore :,-I 10 the Caaatf of soett aa; s'sH c! Yimuaa�. 191. oeaeafr oed oo,a,Lhe. 1a :ant the !o_ae:i}i, cch_1t,u', 1�SLsi11^ retort.. aa1 further resera.t3.ee. to—ai, A. The tite 1. to be develop..'. Noor W uoed as w hi,tarim: ie:_ sees W Maeam at tx sole e:toeme e. the Seat cc=-y _a.e,_v_ bei _c, are i aEoll wlW 'solve 1 _ Ia6 omM1l'metftime-taedeaftlf liar tae di+aatioO Of Vv mold seo-; T - '�ffiaEaYrl iwto6{•�3m, for W la+ant, ce am omasum OS the_ a--rel 'T"P�'aam) ♦m'>♦t AEIYllmlll m-rtlViw T.teiaU® W 1]Et e,i. u �� �l Jm adoVtadbv said:wOLt). �x s" 31st tle W 134- acid ]q.evwnu W utHtaen4 t;aOefiz— fEsaao:. .va__ stet. V >74% .+mva.tad. vahi aid or 1ppetatmateC. W -'.t tee sOoiat, ahanl - -aaaD 1ald paprtTltoa Of .OT W aha 1L. W O`d.r i%'Oh to at all '.imam. (9) --_ - a d1OYaa0 .f 67.75 f—tt %00000 d IOOtiaa to te. .t a{30 of r-w. O � Of 251.4 Ieet: tum. 00:1.9'_109 to _ - tOa arta .t u Oe.le of 27.78' . diOtam. Of m )-1 Saes: s0em. T��ti��M--'::.lerfa O 61/tanOO o:_30 f-.- tan Or 100. b . Oolot 30 f.e: Of W m i8 0f W wtt t1Nkt them.. SOs 1, W �.rrO11O1 t. bfd 008x'[9 abk b tam Mt1a..ota mwr am Loren � '8f •.•.still{. l '^ HmOaeioa ta0nfra to f.ucm dmso lmed t.Oete, 00 lrttaeart para[ ae tao A:beOee WOrar of tee aertu,it paetar. tmnti® S, SOmOkte 115 beta, SOme V w.t, 1ri brio _ Of toe E ,%& UOO Of EtOH Yrwt 81.—Y 0301. and SO ..Ito., M . tate to Cit) of S FO. "I t::le w ittene_ isa "io .11 asrvasaxa. W SliV� Lo OM m 001 tae riglt to m.0e0s for • Rram ... -bt b east tam Toro frm am after lmmw r 1, 1969 L fo::rvlze •a__, Sa BORe BO11 of tae lmtaWt 01{:Ar of R. ..t 1aa , Of •• (mart.[ Of fiertt.J._at_ OYr,Ir of Seth. 51 T. .I4 115 both. Nage V Wrt lriOS I Of to mnr_t lis Of :irate _ Zr+mt aia>•v i10:, ted _ Nserrim ftatemr, u • n yl • +trip a. 1.0, 5Ffu: io Kd.:. te. Of t .Jft mimi4. itlta tN O.vrOrL' r. of tae Oilt'im( tnr.lt! tcu,aY ort O".a.a:1J c•�:'leamt.d ane � Odt OOldetrip of L teia. lsated In tm %a-¢an... .aartar Of -_ S.dtim 5. 7v.a.91i• =5 a ', Nome 22 wn 000 xttun5 'sm-tnerlf- _ bvWrly dL .Um bO.. Sat. 'ttmi HUE #'101 Ov 30 feet m of c.e Yom_'. CrOek. mot gx of r tO .Old gx+nte.. lu a... Ood. iorla.t. tre Oet mid xwd for ata.emr in ago Ht. stun. O.1 me 000.0 ie.`_i 1SLtw av Jeil.� im W Cent) of Soot[ L S`Atr of MOOO.a'.a. 1930 txv.T., mL .ma,OoO 1. umm tae f9_aa:,.y, evtoUt :t. natiyOLlw am ft-,OO, nmxTatle-r., to—vl:r A. T .ata 1. to ae .,.low iOr Yrd YOId f. m n'ter . JO . au l Oim at t:a .ole e.meme of the Soo-.t CO_-9 �Sooro00: :e_i<_-, .t. Ori vv- � _ t mW13 A .SOS EtAlt . Ix i+il 0—.0. _t _a: -aad OIa11O0meaLV tamamftOL1YT<a. 61fOOC1W Of L`u 0016 SM.t r � Y. bent, c 000 .axatim OS tm R nl '� mOR'SOal-betii/:'Alm. ty �..ptOuO).W Oa.UJOkTW®Lla m-021Oa1.O naVMtlm W lianutlw at �T" OtV 20 YODtO6_l+f OL:O_wOLV. t1M-ort Oatd 1OF.®nm aC wtMaven4 F-anal tmtac 0001- -'� ie6 808014+Omt�a+tOd. a OgOd s arpatbeatOC. Out ._.:.vx Society m.:l iii dysi•jt.-�_'�1..:. ._ ._- - :,ti=v-.-.keq ash)emparp-ir.a Of mip ma mL` JiOv Om ch.r at�tt ,c ... _arro. ( 9 ) - - .� l.iiriY`AE.'�II W.ad.d.eA�i'QJtid.)im.a. +r.:F:f5..• taass.. `" ^43'd'itrs �-. �.ice, _as- '--�'»6' ,d Ku��•-ya—+�"a:� tit s.uv..na"tr ""1'='�aEl�lstiaty - ...r.II all":fl...l��lefr+ntb. feU�. l..itbud a.tll..lr -�.;.u••.—. s•'-- -cer. ` -��� - L-lYt'er 1..L$321i«i�!m ®.1 SJdwai sYsrO.�tS the OSb p�A.14y.,�fl(yy�C W. 011'M{.4-m" JOQ l...4\M-S�P114.�.�M... i•+n ..fc#, �te.J�et tot 'iidasG a't�i l�s.fYriwi l..erlbA.laa01-W..Aflfy - at.lsrt� aat.tut/al smt'a[all �r !L. yeSaleal .r^ 0..le0owt ad aTtM.WM b be Plud a..ed zar tee of Sale-vmjwkx 1. "'cert w a.amb Lele .i l...e i.e peelal rY*IP.W'l.Q as „ t .. .ssl.eLstlm K.Sisx.. .d weitu.n', sd awe d�.ale KLe.er s _ - alee.a.im tm tib K 9ako➢w. a. is.ete.ab Kame.e w...w. tee rJ&£msp!lm.�m m.emm S ..... .f Itlm..em f< tm baagm.d evsk.v.tim K. eru" of b V ed 1M+wm{. 4IM u .e.eel.t a%." t! the City. 'm 8mm d IlSmeaoL .- iL ats4. OeV..'muta .d ..slslee.r dLs.t >searJs np •..w1 tr 6 . _ ^<Sal�6V leatrvee m.atQ le.l.y _� F - '^�' Z 'bat: .m.]d tm-Mlab Sail m Mt." tmAbiftlp .SlsmLl aypmt _- - Abd ..Up aaa w.ad y,.Vor3y ainlafe.iiG aim u p.De.d asa eewlnM2<� 1 _Mart <tdi e...atr.na.v 're 1.s a ut.-aWooe.. tttl.'sa_ - ilfe`LePSri lxvmi� Mafart. fbnm ieall rw.eT m_eui ::....- ar �$- TrS.®ee ludr aril�M•L tedL+c lams.44:.wf.d i0"m ms -.. - - ��-Kar a$d fe.tvys at•s.ell.aQls ti a eelt - "':.ra..-m aas�aa.y+P4bi�sm C.�3.e • *�•a _•wm .Z1Af �-.ar.abse>.4'w•fie.r:seiwarceeat- •G -� ��^^6'�eu+-^�-' +-4n4yaea +moi y1F ��.v-�.�yz (10) r � M aw7-arLr f�6irL!l�-f� rot fhf>ws4 ° vi..r.uwaL w..rit`=a.�q.r: wmwarYe - f'2�S4G+SS.��'nrw.+�flMwt �; �sr.,..�':IY�C.m.'A HSL�I����i6K:�1YWb['dlf�r4iel •tom""`•. »•k.. WAI"p 'sw WOW lr �, dafG��9Y.it♦ tir '�i i� YY 4-tk f' t0"2��r s63b R �lp farswM �. ' �11� YN�wF'arfr v.+dae+�Hii:awlQfa':i st]lf�well --'-•r-�""'_'�4. n->:,.r,..Y,s-.tea-.:e+.-:k-_ .c.,. ....,...Ta,.",.,..t.,.r..�_ - •cs�l.�.u_+�.�tss..ozw.�..�.t�.=a.�q.� :wama+rr•+� - -- f�JriVa54'tlw+�,.r+R{y.+lwwlUe• n.rr�l ar a.Llb.rfY.l:�+arf...• _.. �.s,:+�-�" ,,. .air ._1,.�:n.." � SYaz¢�m3n san sR acs.._b'rmr rirf afi Hr a.[.dier:b .ea - �a Yurli:WagftK-�L--rd"y wftlwb . aaf4 "w"Arima"Alar a- �aw>®eer m. va i.*b .r trn..e sus,se.�.l's.•w-�o:" .`"'�'. - _ 77 .rr�'F�-.a-c � .�A�cc��. sr.�"b`-r^y�x�iFE•"� �'.i 'k ''a y�y „r, -r irlieJlo�m"tti'64tR1a1a1foYZ++�ab apvrCi 'MydMsm � - A., t j1 t 0 .vim -_ )R,.d k"ate M� 6�f mel b sail �u'as._ tLtt Lr) v� fY-lgoe � n�b l,w�,.Y.r sT..vr�+w ur w �erwe�we era sn w-tm�d�tf.iivm+._-r - .00 y+�..��3� f"^C4'K•a ! M-'' � ..Yid" �" ��i 4 F Y.LI' `• k Y.�� �-� a�^3` "` �"✓.� 1 _25ex � im •.y.� ,� +�' 9-. .�'�i' �f_�� tk�,..iT��y1'�d�i'''�.�... y0.f Ae�kd.. lit j 7 War it LIE M v r, E y- I :S0L'J'I-ION ' WHEREAS, the Scott County Historical Society has served notice by a letter of intent-on -the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. , .. the County of Scott, and the City of Shakopee, of termination of the tenancy at will under which the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. has been in possession of Murphy's Landing, and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. ,. a non-profit corporation established under the laws of the State of Minnesota, February, 1972, is charged to preserving and conserving facts of the Minnesota River Valley and other history about the conditions of the early settlors of the valley, the preservation of records, artifacts, buildings and educational centers, conducting meetings and generally to do any and all acts andthings for the preservation and advance- - - - ment of and in the furtherance and in the aid of any and all educational, historical and presentation of early history of the Minnesota Valley Settlors and other educational purposes related to life along the ;3innesota Valley, and WHEREAS, the approximately eigbty-seven (87) acres of land occupied by Murphy's Landing was deeded by the City of Shakopee to the Scott County Historical Society with certain limitations and reservations, and WHEREAS, the County of Scott leased said land for twenty (20) years in 1972 for specific purposes, and has been a major annual contributor to the Scott County Historical Society and the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. , and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. , desires to continue in the promoting, programing, managing, and all other areas as charged by the Articles of Incorporation. NOW THEREFORE HE IT RESOLVED, that the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. requests the City of Shakopee and the County of Scott respond to the aforesaid letter stating the extent of theirrespective interests, and to support the continued management of Murphy's.Land- ing by the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. Motion by Trustees Malkersor./Weiler: Approved at the Regularmeetingof the Hoard of Trustees, MVRP, Inc., Monday, April 27, 1987. l Mz�o�ie.R. AendRrson,F President / (i3) RESOLUTION WHEREAS, The Scott County Historical Society (The Society) has served the attached notice on the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. (MVRP) , which states that the Society is terminat- ing the "tenancy at will' under which the MVRP has been in possession of Murphy's Landing, and WHEREAS, MVRP was and is charged with preserving and conserving facts of the Minnesota River Valley and other history about the conditions of the early settlors of the valley, the preservation of records, artifacts, buildings and educational centers, conduct- ing meetings and generally to do any and all acts and things for the preservations and advancement of and in the furtherance and in the aid of any and all educational, historical and presentation of early history of the Minnesota Valley Settlors and other educational purposes related to life along the Minne- sota Valley, and WHEREAS, the approximately eighty-seven (87) acres of land occupied by MvRP was deeded by the City of Shakopee to the Society with certain limitations and reservations as set forth in two quit claim seeds dated February 3, 1969, and July 8, 1969, (the Deeds) , and WHEREAS, in this crucial period of development the possibility of long term litigation could seriously impair the efficient functioning of Murphy's Landing. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that MVRP requests that the City of Shakopee investigate any and all rights it may have to retake title to the land pursuant to the Deeds, and will support the continued management of Murphy's Landing by MVRP. Motion by Trustees John Manahan/John Lynch Approved at the Special Meeting of the Board of Trustees, MVRP, Monday, May 4, 1987. John Lynch YES Gloria vierling YES John Manahan YES Geri Nelson YES A - Ron Weiler YES Marge Henderson YES Acknowledged m4^ris R/Henderson, President BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SCOTT COUNTY,MINNESOTA - Date Mav 5, 1987 Resolution No. 87035 Motion by Commissioner Mertz Seconded by Commissioner Stromwall RESOLUTION NO. 87035 ; RECOMMENDING AND ENCOURAGING THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE TO REACQUIRE THE EIGHTY—SEVEN ACRE SITE UPON WHICH THE MINNESOTA VALLEY RESTORATION PROJECT IS SITUATED. WHEREAS, the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. , through a letter from its attorney Loren Gross dated April 22, 1987, served upon the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. by certified mail, a notice to quit the premises situated on the eighty—seven (87) acre plot previously transferred to the Scott County Histori— cal Society, Inc . by the City of Shakopee; and WHEREAS, Scott County has a continuing interest in the opera— tions and vitality of the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project (MVRP) ; and WHEREAS, Scott County has determined that the historical integrity of the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project can best be preserved by the City of Shakopee retaking the approximately eighty—seven (87) acres which the City of Shakopee transferred to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. for the purpose of estab— lishing a historical museum and village; and - WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee transferred this property to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc . upon a, number of conditions and restrictions which appear not to have been fully satisfied by the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. ; and WHEREAS, Scott County desires to maintain its financial and other support for the MVRP within its ability and as provided by law. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners in and for the County of Scott, Minnesota, that: (15) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS = - -- SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA Date May 5, 1987 Resolution No. 87035 Motion by Commissioner Mertz Seconded by Commissioner Stromwall 1. Scott County recommends and encourages the City of Shakopee to retake all of the lands which it transferred under certain conditions and restrictions to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc . for the establishment of a historical museum and village in that Scott County understands that not all those conditions and restrictions have been fulfilled; 2. Scott County intends to maintain its financial and other support towards the continuation of the historical museum and village upon the aforesaid property within its ability and lawful authority; 3 . Scott .County further encourages the City of Shakopee to enter into an agreement with the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. for the continued operation of the MVRP and Murphy' s Landing; 4 . Scott County further gives notice to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. that any and all funds appropriated by Scott County to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. for the benefit and use of the MVRP which it may recover from the MVRP, shall be returned forthwith to Scott County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be furnished the Shakopee City Council, the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. Board of Trustees and the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. Board of Trustees by the County Admin— istrator. YES NO Koniarski x _ Koniarski Bohnsack x _ Bohnsack Mertz X Mertz Stromwall y Stromwall 1_..... v (16 ) _ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA Date Hav 5, 198% Resolution No. 87035 Motion by Commissioner Mertz Seconded by Commissioner Stromwall 1 . Scott County recommends and encourages the City of Shakopee to retake all of the lands which it transferred under certain conditions and restrictions to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc . for the establishment of a historical museum and village in that Scott County understands that not all those conditions and restrictions have been fulfilled; 2. Scott County intends to maintain its financial and other support towards the continuation of the historical museum and village upon the aforesaid property within its ability and lawful authority; 3 . Scott .County further encourages the City of Shakopee to enter into an agreement with the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. for the continued operation of the MVRP and Murphy ' s Landing; 4. Scott County further gives notice to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. that any and all funds appropriated by Scott County to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. for the benefit and use of the MVRP which it may recover from the MVRP, shall be returned forthwith to Scott County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that conies of this resolution be furnished the Shakopee City Council , the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. Board of Trustees and the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. Board of Trustees by the County Admin— istrator. YES NO Konlarski x Koniarskl Bohnsack v Bohnsack Merz x Mer._ Stromwall IStromwall r,.._..,. v ( 16 ) THE STANS FOUNDATION ]SD wEST GOLOB ADO BOVLEVA9D BV�TC 31b PP S.L OEN NC�LIFOPNu 91105 RECEIVED May 5, 1987 MAY 1 11987 The Honorable Eldon Reinke CITY OF SHAKOPEE Mayor City Council of the City of Shakopee City Hall 129 First Avenue East. Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Council Members: This Foundation has been the major private source of financial support for the Murphy's Landing project since its inception. We understand that, because of jurisdictional disputes, the City is commencing action to reclaim title and control of the site on which the Murphy's Landing development is located, and then to contract directly with Minnesota Valley Restoration Project to manage and operate it in the future, eliminating any middle agency in the funding and decision process. We are as desirous as ever of seeing Murphy's Landing completed and Operated as a quality. educational facility and assure you of our continu- ing support in the future so long as: 1. Our contributions will be limited to capital purposes and not to finance operations. 2. Murphy's Landing continues to be developed and operated under a long- range master plan consistent with the original concept under which it was started and under appropriate historical standards. 3. We remain satisfied that the quality of the Board of Directors and management is such to insure continued progress toward the completion of the capital plan and the effective use of the project by the public. Of necessity this must be considered a letter of intent, and not a fixed contractual obligation because we are unable to consider all of the financial developments that might in the future affect our ability to meet our own desires_ to help the project or the needs of the project as they might occur. Sincerely, -/ Maure H. Stans Chairman MBS:me (17 ) 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 28th 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 t eo (the site) have been sold, encumbered, mortgaged or hypoth ca 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 - mn 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 (18) (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 _L��day of�I/s/ , 1987, at the adjourned regular session of the City Council of the C of Shakopee. o 0 Elaon Reinke, Mayor ' gGGtra 1� JudiCx, City Clerk Drafted by: P. R. Kress 327 So. Marschall Road Shakopee, MN 55379 (19) (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 Scans 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 'nearing 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 , U,,,o/ , 1987, at the adjourned regular session of the City Council of the Ci/,:}j of Shakopee. E18on Reinke, Mayor ' W. 1i 2. / Judith Cox, City Clerk Drafted by ?. R. 1"sass 32i So. Marschall Road Shakopee, MN 55379 (19) Noticed Public Hearing TO WHOM ITMAY CONCERN: Notice is bem given that the City Council of the City of Shakopee will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, July 78, 1987, at 7:00 Pm.or as soon thereafter as possible in the Council Chambers of City Hall at In East First Avenue,to determine whether or ret the Scott County Historical Society has compiled with the following terms and conditions of lie February 3,1969,and July 8,1969,quit claim deeds between the Ciy,tof Shakopee and thScott rtt Comte oradithe Affidavit of Publication Society and to particular whether mad the - witttComtyowing cal proves Societyhasthese We Southwest Suburban Publishing Inc. with the following preybviore d those two quit)Thadeeds,nmely: e t That the Property transferred order Ne terms d the two aformvetients quit claim deeds mtl t e can (t meats and betterments placed thereon (the site) have been sold, encumbered, -foreign ged m ` hypothecated or not kept fm from knee or State Of Minnesota J other attachments all contrary to Paragraph _ B of the quitelairo deeds; )SS. (b) That the .Scott County Historical (Fount of Scott Society has failed to obtain and file with the y City of Shakopee a public liability policy. naming the City of Shakopee as an insured with respect W claims arLdng out of the use Smn aohaud,being ddy sawn,on oath ern that he is the publisher or the authmiaM agent of the publisher of the anddevelopmentafthesite; newspapers laown asthe Shakopee Valley Ness,Jordan Independent,and Prior lake American,and has full knowledge (c). That the Scott County Historical of the b.herein stated o follows: Society has failed W maintain amhdmm (A)These nesseepas have coalition MW are requhmtmta comituting quatifivam as a legal newspaper,as proviMN 8C[IVG paid up membership rooter of 100 by Minessom Statute 191A.@,33U.Pl,and other applicable laws,as amended. _ p Scott County residents; (B)Meprinted pubic notice that uaNachad is taet and Was Affl vidmfitied be No.S5/was published on the dale es Af. So iet➢ has the dgtoo Ede north the City of orvlt s�d botim weee cwi Wenn t`th,ent iW the re of the ched w�arepeW ave u ei.Prineedd below is a��of we beer case Shakopee complete &must financial alphabet hpm A a Z,boor mclutive,and u hereby agkvmleaged as being We tiod bad etre of type used m the compaboon siaterenta indicating all monies directed or and pubboamn of We Notice: verifying that at abcdecrelghlmnopgrstuv z least substantial use m the alta v abctlefghijklmnopgrs least a substantial am of all morin have beenromfoitta be for the physical develop- an evelop- mmtandninstoplaced andforthe e,d maintenance din project oo thea site; (e) That the Sett County Historical 8Ym Pabuaeu Society has failed to hold at least two generel foecers, Per earthe and es f aid election of elected filing the rumen of sold officers an Suhacdbed aM morn before me m el(f) That the CitySued aunty and ci That the Scott County Historical Society has felled to attract anticipated ffoancial support to develop. .use and mu myon — —Wrom the site to that the County of Scott and the Stan. Foundation have indicated - that both groups intend W withdraw sub- gECI{ye atential financial support W the but if tD7AmpWatrer�n counted hercof to returned to the Seo m= 6"Y3Tf COUNTY Haft mdceIBrciaty. WlLtW64tYlEOPE9 atm AB tvtareated parties desiring to give 41 evidence relative to the Issues of cempGaace with OMinaoces No.990 and 300 as set forth above will be beard at this meeting. - RATE INFORMATION Dated this fifth day of June,196/. - - -- BYORDEROFTHECITY COIJNCR. Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space-47.00 per column inch Judith S.CoxCity Clerk Maximum rata allowed by law for the above matter._:.:.-..::.:::.: ....$7.0o per column inch City of Shakopee,Minnesota Rate actually charged for the above matter............. per column inch (Published in the Shakopee valley News Wednesday.July 1,1967;No.5597) (20) Notice of Public Hearing TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Shakopee will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, July 28, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 129 East First Avenue, 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 between the City of Shakopee and the Scott County Historical Society 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 lines or other attachments all contrary to Paragraph B of the quit claim deeds; W 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 filed 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 (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 hereof is returned to the Scott County Historical Society. All interested parties desiring to give evidence relative to the issues of compliance with Ordinances No. 290 and 300 as fet forth above will be heard at this meeting. Dated this 16th day of June, 1997. - - BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Judith S. Cox, City Clerk City of Shakopee, N.innesota (21 ) CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 IIB FAST FIRST AVENUE,SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 5577&1776 1612)MS36W i rw� t•. June 23, 1987 ] Linda Gods, Secy. ' P.O. Box 354 Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Ms. Gode: Pursuant to Ordinance No. 290 and 300 notice is hereby given that the City Council will hold a public hearing on July 28, 1987 at 7: 00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 129 East First Avenue to determine whether or not the Scott County Historical -Society has complied with the terms and conditions of said ordinances and in particular with the provisions set forth in Resolution No. 2741 enclosed. All interested parties desiring to give evidence relative to the issues of compliance with Ordinances 290 and 300 as set forth in Resolution No. 2741 will be heard at this meeting. Respectfully, " �SENOR: CamNF¢iwnf 1.3.m9 3. I •d��y,m.ds,®mwe-RrruRR To-m.=e ep Judith S. Cox 3 n. Y Cit Clerk 1. The h ❑ ShewwwmR ana mle .......... City of Shakopee ❑ show to atma,a,a apa:aaaa.e(aelrom----e ❑ AES7RICTED DELIVERY w Sbow matom and dart d.G d............_C ❑ RESTRtCEEODELNERY. 9 to wham.dmq and.ddma of Mm,.5— (CONSULT POSTMASTER FOR FEES) 2 MTC MO r/ . 10 CPAX _�1t�i iF�MN 55319 a. Rnc�E OFsflI lox: T pEGISfFREO NO. I�CEfl�FI��I IHEVREO RO. c IAlwryi mvm uZ2033a.,y11 w of.atlna..e,.pena _--- - _m 1 have mrrived the utile uncribed G E DAOWmozE 4ml _ y c < OF a EflV FOSIMPRK g � of Progress Valley C 6 FOORES41CempNm mlYRMuwotll n ---T27')............ CITY OF SHAKOPEE a INCORPORATED 1870 1 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SMAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 5537911376 (612)453650 !1 June 23 , 1987 Jacuueline Joslyn, Pres. Scott County Historical Society 21760 Delmar Avenue Jordan, MN 55352 Dear Ms. Joslyn: Pursuant to Ordinance No. 290 and 300 notice is hereby given that the City Council will hold a public hearing on July 28, 3987 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council .Chambers, 129 East First Avenue to determine whether or not the Scott County Historical Society has complied with the terms and conditions of said ordinances and in particular with the provisions set forth in Resolution No. 2741 enclosed. All interested parties desiring to give evidence relative to the issues of compliance with Ordinances 290 and 300 as set forth in Resolution No. 2741 will be heard at this meeting. Respectfully, Juth S. Cox CittClerk City of Shakopee Encl. Res. 2741 i i I (23) The Heart of Progress Valley f T CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1970 128 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 553794376 (612)4,15-3650 ,1 r June 23, 1987 Marge Henderson, Pres. MN. Valley Restoration Project 905 S. Holmes Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Ms. Henderson: Pursuant to Ordinance No. 290 and 300 notice is hereby given that the City Council will hold a public hearing on July 28, 1987 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 129 East First Avenue to determine whether or not the Scott County Historical Society has complied with the terms and conditions of said ordinances and in particular with the provisions set forth in Resolution No. 2741 enclosed. All interested Darties desiring to give evidence relative to the issues of compliancewithOrdinances 290 and 300 as set forth in Resolution No. 2741 will be heard at this meeting. M.V.R.P. may be entitled to the property and therefore you may wish to attend the meeting. Respectfully, -J " 6 J ith S. Cox City Clerk City of Shakopee Encl. Res . 2741 (24) The Heart of Progress Valley MEMO TO: Rod 2. 4 yyl FROM: Shelly RE: Murphy's Landing Site of SHAKOPF Shakopee File No. 1-1373-201 DATE: July 22, 1987 Rod, I reviewed the Scott County tract index for the Murphy's Landing pro- perty (legal description attached) on July 21, 1987, and found the following: 1. Parcels 1 and 2 are owned in fee by the Scott County Historical Society, by quit claim deed from the City of Shakopee, dated February 3, 1969, filed on April 16, 1969 as Document No. 120021. This property is subject to a Lease given by the Scott County Historical Society to the County of Scott, dated June 5, 1972, filed on July 31, 1972, as Doc. No. 132051. The term of the Lease is 20 years, through June 6, 1992. The County of Scott then leased back certain buildings located on the property to the Scott County Historical Society by lease dated June 9, 1972, filed on July 25, 1972, as Doc. No. 131986. The term of the Lease is 99 years, through June 6, 2071. There are no mortgages or other encumbrances affecting this property, and the deeds which we have copies of in our file are not recorded, i.e. : a) Two Quit Claim Deeds from the Scott County Historical Society to The Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. , dated July, 1975, and January 1978, covering parcels I and 2. b) Quit Claim Deed from the City of Shakopee to the Scott County Historical Society dated July 8, 1969, covering the 10 acre parcel that was excepted from the deed conveying Parcels 1 and 2 to the Historical Society on February 3, 1969. 2. Parcel 3 is owned in fee by the County of Scott, as evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 11347. This property is subject to a Stipulation with the State of Minnesota, and to an Unimproved Land Sales Agreement between Owens-Illinois, Inc. , and Scott County, dated September 30, 1977, filed on October 27, 1977, as Doc. No. 17033. The description of the property includes an easement reserved over the East 100 feet of the property for access to the Minnesota River. There are no other memorials appearing on the Certificate. Please let me know if you need anything else on this. RF/jmb (25 ) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF MURPHY' S LANDING The following part of the City property, which City property is described as follow, to-wit: Government Lots 1 and 2, Section 32, Township 116 North, Range 22 West; that part of Government Lots 1 and 2, the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West lying North of the North line of state Trunk Highway #101, being Route 5187, which said property to be conveyed by this deed is more particularly described as followings, lying East of the following line: Beginning at a point on the centerline of the West bound lane of Trunk Highway #101, distant 1671. 07 feet (as measured along the centerline of said lane) East of the west line of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22; thence North at right angles a distance of 202 feet; thence deflecting to the West at an angle of 87°48' a distance of 67.75 feet; thence deflecting to the North at an angle of 23010' a distance of 251.4 feet; thence - deflecting to the North at an angle of 23038 '. a distance of 403. 1 feet; thence North a distance of 130 feet more or less to a point 30 feet North of the North bank of the Mill Creek; thence Easterly and parallel to said North bank to the Minnesota River and there terminating. Excepting therefrom the following described tracts: 1 . The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, lying North of the North line of State Trunk Highway #101, yl� A 3 AND Ca That part of Section 4, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: That part of Government Lot 3 lying North of the right-of-way of Trunk Highway No. 101 and West of a line drawn parallel with the West line of said Government Lot 3 and one thousand (1,000) feet East therefrom; Except that Grantor reserves unto itself and its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement over the East One Hundred (100) feet of the aforedescribed property for the purpose of access to and from the Minnesota River, including the right to construct and maintain a barge unloading facility, a conveyor system, and a roadway on said easement area. (26) GVC:ABIS x. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF MURPHY'S LANDING The following part of the City property, which City property is described as follow, to-wit: Government Lots 1 and 2, Section 32, Township 116 North, Range 22 West; that part of Government Lots 1 and 2, the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West lying North of the North line of State Trunk Highway #101, being Route #187, which said property to be conveyed by this deed is more particularly described as followings, lying East of the following line: Beginning at a point on the centerline of the West bound lane of Trunk Highway #101 , distant 1671 .07 feet (as measured along the centerline of said lane) East of the West line of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22; thence North at right angles a distance of 202 feet; thence deflecting to the west at an angle of 87048 ' a distance of 67.75 feet; thence deflecting to the North at an angle of 23010' a distance of 251 .4 feet; thence - deflecting to the North at an angle of 23038 ' a distance of 403. 1 feet; thence North a distance of 130 feet more or less to a point 30 feet North of the North bank of the Mill Creek; thence Easterly and parallel to said North bank to the Minnesota River and there terminating. Excepting therefrom the following described tracts: 1 . The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, lying North of the North line of State Trunk Highway #101 , �lciC 3 AND That part of Section 4, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows : That part of Government Lot 3 lying North of the right-of-way of Trunk Highway No. 101 and West of a line drawn parallel with the West line of said Government Lot 3 and one thousand (1,000) feet East therefrom; Except that Grantor reserves unto itself and its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement over the East One Hundred (100) feet of the aforedescribed property for the purpose of access to and from the Minnesota River, including the right to construct and maintain a barge unloading facility, a conveyor system, and a roadway on said easement area. (26) GVC:ABIS y_ _ INSURANCE There is no insurance policy or certificate of insurance from the Scott County Historical Society on file with the City showing public liability and naming the City of Shakopee as an insured with respect to claims arising out of the use and development of the site. Dated this y� Day of July, 1987 . Jud�tlh S. Cox Cit Clerk Note: See letter dated May 19 , 1987 from Marjorie R. Henderson on the reverse. (27 ) R`CcIVcD Murphy's LandingB7 na"".."�"v.n.y a..r...a"e mo waa.e""tieao-ieeo MAY 2 0 2187 E. Highway 101 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379c (612) 4156900 CITY OF gHAKO�` May 19 , 1987 Mr. John K. Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear John: This will acknowledge our .telephone conversation of Monday, May 18 , 1987, regarding our insurance coverage at Murphy' s Landing. As you are aware, we currently have co-insured the Scott County Historical Society and Scott County. The latter due to the fact that the County held a twenty year recorded lease on the site. However, in reviewing Ordinance 0290, I noted that Section III, Paragraph C. states that "the Society shall file with the City of Shakopee a public liability policy with the City of Shakopee and Scott County Historical Society named as assureds thereunder" . Therefore, I contacted Gene Schmid, our insur- ance agent, and directed him to name the City of Shakopee as a co-insured. Mr. Schmid called our carrier and they advised that they could not name the City of Shakopee as a co-insured unless we could Drove an interest by the City in the property. Please advise what direction you would like our Board to take. Regards, I:ar orie R. Henderson President MRA/re (28) RECEWED Murphy's Landing Mivoeeeu VJlry lWbe[Yon lnc A[III[[a e[1Bf0-1880 MAY ; p1987 2167 E. Highway 101 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 ^� (612, a5 6900 OiTY OF gHAYO'` May 19 , 1987 Mr. John R. Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East lst Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear John: This will acknowledge our .telephone conversation of Monday, May 18 , 1987 , regarding our insurance coverage at Murphy' s Landing. As you are aware, we currently have co-insured the Scott County Historical Society and Scott County. The latter Scott - County to the fact that the County held a twenty year recorded lease on the site. However, in reviewing Ordinance :290, I noted that Section III, Paragraph C. states that "the Society shall file with the City of Shakopee ,a public liability _policy with the City of Shakonee and Soott County Historical Society named as assureds thereunder" . "_'herefore, I contacted Gene Schmid, our insur- ance anent, and directed 'nim to name the City of Shakopee as a pp-insured. Mr. Schmid called our carrier and they advised that thev could not name the City of Shakopee as a co-insured unless we could prove an interest by the City in the property. Please advise what direction you would like our Board to take. R`eega/ards//, `Mar3cri e _.. Henderson President MRH/re I (28) FINANCIAL REPkRTS The Financial Reports on file with the City of Shakopee are as follows: )budget Year Discriotion Organization 1987 March - February 1988 (Budget) MVRP 1986 May - December (Income) (Gate - Gift Shop - General Store - combined income) MVRP 10-22-86 Balance on Hand (submitted 5-26-87) SCHS 2-28-86 Charitable Organizations - Annual report for 12 months ending 2-28-86 MVRP 1-31-86 January 31 , 1986 Balance Sheet and Operating Statement 1-31-86 - 1-31-85 MVRP 10-31-85 October 31 , 1985 Balance Sheet and Operating Statement 10-31-85 - 10-31-84 MVRP 7-17-81 Final Report Economic Potential of Murphy ' s Landing MVRP 2-28-82 and Financial Statements MVRP 2-28-81 W/Comparison 2-28-81 and Financial Statements MVRP 2-28-80 W/Comparison 2-29-80 Financial Statements and Auditors Report MVRP 1979 Financial Statement Murphy ' s February 28, 1979 and 1978 W/Comparison Landing 1978 Financial Statement Murphy' s February 28, 1978 and 1977 Landing 1977 Annual Report Murphy' s February 28, 1977 and February 29 , 1976 Landing 2-28-75 Financial Statement MVRP (29) FINANCIAL REPORTS ( Cont) 1972 Balance Sheet SCHS 1970 Financial Review SCHS 1-1-69 Financial Statement SCHS to 12-9-69 Dated this a,y Day of July, 1987 . Juth S. Cox Ci 0Clerk (30) FINANCIAL REPORTS ( Cont) 1972 Balance Sheet SCHS 1970 Financial Review SCHS 1-1-69 Financial Statement SCHS to 12-9-69 Dated this �+ / � Day of July, 1987• Jupith S. Cox City Clerk ( 30) MINUTES The minutes of the Scott County Historical Society on file with the City of Shakopee are as follows: 12-1-49 First meeting of SCHS 1-16-69 Letter from Secretary accepting terms and conditions in Ord. No. 290. 2-16-84 Annual Meeting of SCHS (No election of Officers) 10-17-85 Annual Meeting of SCHS (No election of Officers) 10-23-86 Annual Meeting of SCHS (No election of Officers) Dated this Day of July, 1987 . Judi k S. Cox City Jerk (31) 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 grass 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 8 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 ( 32) 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 somerecommendations 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: (33) 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 shave 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: ( 33) Mayor and Council Members 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 Stan$ Foundation that both bodies will cut off support to .the site if the Historical Society isin 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. (34) 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 (35) 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:mla Enclosure ( 35) 3a, MEMO TO: John R. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Application for Temporary 3.2 Beer License by Shakopee Jaycees DATE: July 28, 1987 Introduction - The Shakopee Jaycees have made application for a temporary 3.2 beer license for August 2, 1987 at the Tahpah Park Ball Fields. Background The City Attorney has reviewed the surety bond and insurance exemption and they are in order. Alternatives 1. Approve application. 2. Deny application. Recommendation Alternative No. 1, approve application. Recommended Action Approve the application and grant an On-Sale 3. 2 Beer License to the Shakopee Jaycees at Tahpah Park Ball Fields for August 2, 1987. JSC/jms 3$ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: U.S. West Site Proposal DATE: July 28, 1987 Introduction: Earlier this year, U.S. West Corporation announced that they intended to locate a 1500 person research and development facility within their 14 state territory. U.S. West is currently in the process of finalizing their site selection process. It is not known whether or not Minnesota is the leading contender for U.S. West' s proposed facility. On May 28, 1987, City staff attended a briefing session regarding U.S. West' s selection criteria. At that time, staff received a copy of U.S. West' s request for proposal that was sent to each of the fourteen states in U.S. West' s territory. At that meeting DEED had said individual proposals were not appropriate. However, it has come to the attention of City staff that many communities in the Metropolitan area are submitting individual proposals to U.S. West' s site selection committee even though DEED had tried to avoid this by coordinating the proposals. Scottland Inc. has approached City staff indicating an interest in submitting a proposal to U.S. West. Recognizing the competitive nature in which communities will be approaching U.S. West's proposal, City staff and Scottland officials agree that the City of Shakopee may want to consider making a development incentive offer to U.S. West in an effort to lure them to our community. Background: U.S. West is committed to expanding their research and development division in order to serve existing customers well and attract new customers. Their immediate goal is to find a location for a core research facility for their advance technologies division. The advance technologies core research facility will house up to 1500 scientific and technical personnel and support staff. They will be primarily engaged in the research and development of new products and services- for U.S. West's Companies. U.S. West' s site selection criteria is based on the following five factors: 1. A State' s commitment to excellence in education; 2. Quality of life; 3. High quality convenient transportation; � 3B 4. Access to technical communities (those educational, State and business institutions which support the work of a major research facility) ; 5. A business climate which will welcome U.S. West as a partner for the long term. U.S. West intends on constructing a building that is approximately 500,000 square feet. The minimum land requirement for this facility is initially 45 acres with an adjacent 55 acres for future expansion. The estimated construction cost for the core facility is between $50 and $55 million dollars. Environmentally speaking, this facility will not have any adverse effects on the surrounding area. U.S. west officials emphasize that the facility will be "clean" lab area. U.S. West plans on selecting their final site in September. They also intend to begin construction this December with completion of the facility in January of 1990. - Staff and representative from Scottland Developers believe that it is imperative for the City to submit a development proposal to U.S. West by the end of this week if we are to be considered by U.S. West in their site selection process. We could solidify our position as a contender if the City Council were to make a commitment in terms of a financial incentive for the location of this facility in our community. At this time, City staff is not aware of any State incentive that is going to be offered to U.S. West should they decide to locate in Minnesota. In terms of a City commitment, there are several alternatives that may be appropriate for this type of development. 1. The City could create a new tax increment district for a site and use the captured increment to write down land costs and/or provide utility services to the site. 2. In a July correspondence from Springstead Incorporated they estimated the K-Mart and Canterbury Downs Projects, will have surplus increment available. The City may want to consider allocating $1 million dollars from the surplus tax increment to be used for public utility improvements to the U.S. West site. 3. The City may want to consider offering long term operational incentives to U.S. West in the form of reduced City utility service costs. If - this course of action is pursued by the __- _ -- City it would of course have to be approved. by Shakopee Public.Utilities Commission. 4. Industrial Development Revenue Bonds have a small issue limit of ,$10,000,000 and are therefore an unlikely source of M I , 4. Access to technical communities (those educational, State and business institutions which support the work of a major research facility) ; 5. A business climate which will welcome U.S. West as a partner for the long term. U.S. West intends on constructing a building that is approximately 500,000 square feet. The minimum land requirement for this facility is initially 45 acres with an adjacent 55 acres for future expansion. The estimated construction cost for the core facility is between $50 and $55 million dollars. Environmentally speaking, this facility will not have any adverse effects on the surrounding area. U.S. West officials emphasize that the facility will be "clean" lab area. U.S. West plans on selecting their final site in September. They also intend to begin construction this December with completion of the facility in January of 1990. . Staff and representative from Scottland Developers believe that it is imperative for the City to submit a development proposal to U.S. West by the end of this week if we are to be considered by U.S. West in their site selection process. We could solidify our position as a contender if the City Council were to make a commitment in terms of a financial incentive for the location of this facility in our community. At this time, City staff is not aware of any State incentive that is going to be offered to U.S. West should they decide to locate in Minnesota. In terms of a City commitment, there are several alternatives that may be appropriate for this type of development. 1. The City could create a new tax increment district for a site and use the captured increment to write down land costs and/or provide utility services to the site. 2. In a July correspondence from Springstead Incorporated they estimated the K-Mart and Canterbury Downs Projects, will have surplus increment available. The City may want to consider allocating $1 million dollars from the surplus tax increment to be used for public utility improvements to the U.S. West site. 3. The City may want to consider offering long term operational incentives to U.S. West in the form of reduced City utility service costs. If this course of action is pursued by the City it would of course have to be approved by Shakopee public.Utilities Commission. 4. Industrial Development Revenue Bonds have a small issue limit of $10,000,000 and are therefore an unlikely source of 3 3 ,a financing for this large of a facility. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 also places severe restrictions on the use of IDRB' s, thereby reducing the likelihood of IDRB' s as a viable financing mechanism. Staff would recommend that the City Council discuss possible development incentives that they may want to offer U.S. West. If - - - the Council wishes to make some kind of commitment at this time, it would be appropriate to do so in a motion so that it can be incorporated in to the U.S. West proposal. In conclusion, staff would like to add that should the City be so fortunate to attract the U.S. West facility it would be safe to say that Shakopee would-be an attractive location forsupportindustries that would cater to U.S. West' s production needs. Alternatives: 1. Support the concept of creating a new tax increment district for the U.S. West site using the tax increment proceeds generated from the development for public improvements to U.S. West's site. 2. Support the concept of a $1 dollar land purchase offer to U.S. West. Funding to be supplied from surplus tax increment proceeds. 3. Support the concept of utilizing $1 million dollars of existing tax increment surplus to support the provision of public utility improvementsto the U.S. West site. 9. Support the concept of a long term reduction in the cost of public utility costs for the U.S. West facility. 5. Do not make any firm economic development incentive commitment in the U.S. West proposal. 6. Support an economic development incentive in the form of a combination of the aforementioned alternatives. Staff Recommendation: _ Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to work - - with Scottland Companies in the development of a site proposal for the U.S. West Advanced Technologies Facility and support the City' s use of tax increment financing in the form of a $1 dollar land write down for the U.S. West site located in Shakopee. d �- - — - THE Or,V SCO- TLAND COMPANIES July 23, 1987 Chairwoman Jane Van Maldeghem and Members of the Planning Commission City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Starwood Music Center Dear Chairwoman Van Maldeghem and Members of the Planning Commission: I. Overview As you know we gave a detailed presentation to the Planning Commission on June 18, 1987 concerning Starwood Music Center. Several questions were asked by Planning Commission members and we said we would respond to them in writing before or at the continuation of the public hearing on July 30, 1987. This letter will answer those questions and provide some additional information on other aspects of the project. II. Ouestions Asked By Planning Commission Members On June 18 , 1987 A. How does the project meet the criteria for a Conditional Use Permit in the City's zoning code? Ordinance: "A. Criteria for Granting Use Permits. In granting a conditional use permit, the Planning commission shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the occupants of surrounding lands. Among other things, the Planning Commission shall make the following findings where applicable: " Response: The word "surrounding "or surround" is defined in Webster's Dictionary as follows: "to cause to be encircled on all or nearly all sides; enclose. " We or other industrial users own all of the land surrounding the project for at least 3/4 mile. There has been no testimony that there is any adverse effect on the occupants of these surrounding lands. In fact, we have numerous letters of support from the owners and occupants of the land within 3/4 mile of the project which are attached as Exhibits Al-6. P.O. Box 509 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 [612]445-3242 Ordinance: "1. That the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the immediate vicinity. " Response: The word "immediate" is defined in Webster's Dictionary as "not separated in space; in direct contact; closest; nearest adjoining. " The word "vicinity" is defined as "being near or close by. " The word substantial as "considerable, ample, large. " In this case we are surrounded by industrial, recreational and commercial uses for at least 3/4 mile. There are numerous letters in the record of property owners in that area in support of the project. There is no testimony to the contrary. In fact, the City's Industrial Commerce Commission has endorsed the project unanimously. There is no testimony of adverse effect on present, future uses or property values. In fact several owner's have stated in writing that the existence of Canterbury Downs in the industrial district has been helpful to their businesses and Starwoods likewise would be helpful. There has been a suggestion that the project may have an adverse effect on the ability to sell a home 3/4 mile away or that a specific potential buyer Gout of hundreds of potential buyers looking in the market) may have stated that he/she would not want to buy a home if the project is approved. That may be true. Similar statements are made when a school, church, hospital, or other homes are planned to be built by an existing home for sale. That doesn't mean the use can or should be denied. Nor does it mean that property values are Substantially reduced. We do not believe that the analysis of property values 3/4 mile away is relevant under the zoning code. Even if it were relevant, there is no appraisal testimony and analysis to that effect and in fact, there has never been any similar argument in regard to the impact of the racetrack which is closer to homes. I have heard similar statements raised by opponents to projects in my 14 years as a land use attorney, but I have never seen a professional unbiased analysis to support such a statement. Quite frankly, it is usually possible to convince some realtor to say something on the subject, pro or con - but an independent appraiser who is trained to do such an analysis rarely can conclude there is a substantial adverse effect. 2 In this case, I think everyone agrees that the adverse effect of noise from the Bypass which will be 55 dBA inside the homes may have an adverse effect on property values, but our projected sound is dramatically less at all times. ordinance: 1-2. That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property for uses predominant in the area. " Response: There are letters of support from the owners of vacant and developed property in Canterbury Park. (Exhibit Al-6) . There is a letter from John Shardlow, an independent expert planner, stating that there is no adverse impact and the use is compatible. (Exhibit C) . Moreover, as owners of 1,000 acres of vacant land and 400 acres of developed land around the project, we would not allow a use which was adverse to its present or future development. The compatability of our project with present and future business and industrial uses can also be seen by the decision of Curt Carlson to establish a 3, 000 seat anphitheater at his world headquarters building in the midst of his new 300 acre, 600 million dollar business park in the city of Minnetonka. (See Exhibit D) . ordinance: 113 . That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. " Response: The EAW, reviewing state agencies and city staff have found that the project will be serviced adequately in all these areas. In fact, the project will discharge less sewer than the typical industrial users. The roads will be used in non-peak hours. ordinance: "4 . That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide sufficient off-street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. " Response: All reviewing agencies and city staff have not objected to our plans in this regard. 3 Ordinance: "5. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration, so that none of these will constitute a nuisance, and to control lighted signs and other lights in such a manner that no disturbance to neighboring properties will result. -- Response: esult. "Response: All reviewing agencies and city staff have not objected to the project in this regard. The only question raised by some people concerns the possibility of sound being heard by people who live in the city. Two independent sound experts have analyzed the off site sound in great detail and have concluded that the sound off site would be limited and when the loudest performers were performing (which is at a limited number of events each year) the sound level for a limited period of time may reach 35 dBA outside homes at Dean's Lake in comparison with: a) 50-52 dBA outside from the auto racetrack - b) 60-65 dBA outside from airplane overflights c) 55 dBA inside home from the Bypass d) 40-45 dBA normal background sound before the construction of the Bypass. Our project will always be well within state and city guidelines which are the guidelines which must be applied in the analysis of our application. Ordinance: "6. The use, in the opinion of the Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. " Response: This condition relates by its terms only to council action, however our project easily meets this test. The City Council and Planning Commission have repeatedly over the years found appropriate and approved an ordinance which allows this use as a permitted, and recently a permitted or conditional use. So there should be no debate about the appropriateness generally of this use in this district. Moreover, there are numerous benefits to the City from this use which are stated elsewhere in this letter. 4 Ordinance: 117. The use is consistent with the purposes of the zoning code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. " Response: As stated previously, the City Council and Planning Commission have repeatedly over the years found and approved commercial recreation uses as a permitted, and now a permitted or conditional use in this zoning district. Ordinance: 118. The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. '- Response: ity. "Response: Commercial recreational uses have been a permitted use under the zoning code for this district for years before, during and after the review and adoption of the City's comprehensive plan by the City and as part of the review of the City's Comprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Council in 1981. Commercial recreation uses were also reviewed again by the City as part of the rereview of the Comprehensive Plan after the racetrack was approved and during the racetrack district study. The planner for the Metropolitan Council has expressed a desire for an amendment from their perspective which is not required by law but perhaps should be considered further if the City approves the Conditional Use Permit. Ordinance: 1-9. The use will not cause traffic hazard or congestion." Response: The EAW analysis shows that the project will meet all City, State and Federal guidelines in regards to traffic. Moreover, we still must obtain an Indirect Sorce Permit (ISP) from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ( MPCA) and must abide by any conditions related to traffic. In addition, we have provided a traffic management plan to the City and if necessary, we will modify it from time to time as the City may request. MN DOT has stated there will be no traffic problems. (See Exhibits 1 and 2) 5 Ordinance: "10. Existing businesses nearby will not be adversely affected because of curtailment of customer trade brought about by intrusion of noise, glare or general unsightliness. " Response: There is no testimony of an adverse effect on existing businesses nearby and there is ample testimony in letters from businesses and the ICC endorsement in support of the project. Ordinance: "11. The developer shall submit a time schedule for completion of the project." Response: We have submitted a time schedule. We hope that the Planning Commission will approve the Conditional Use Permit on July 30, 1987, subject to approval of the EAW by the City Council, that the Council will approve the EAW in August, that the MPCA will approve the ISP in late August, so we can commence grading in September, construction in October through May, with an opening in June, 1988. Ordinance: 1112 . The developer shall provide proof of ownership of the property to the Administrator.'- Response: dministrator."Response: We have done so. Miscellaneous: In addition to the quick summary of facts in support of each of the above, we incorporate by reference all of the detailed studies, memoranda and letters of support on file with the City. We believe we meet the criteria of the ordinance in all respects. If there is some criteria which the Planning Commission believes we do not address, we would appreciate learning specifically what it is and what is required from us to meet that criteria so we can see if it is possible. We have mentioned before that if this use were on a 150 acre site instead of an 86 acre site, it would be a permitted use where no criteria are applied so it is hard to see how we can not meet these criteria since we see no reason why an 86 acre project in this case does not have all of the same characteristics as a 150 acre site which is a permitted use. 6 In addition, as City Staff has pointed out before, a conditional use is a permitted use except that compliance with reasonable and necessary conditions may be required from the applicant before the project may be built. III. Questions Asked By Planning Commission members Ouestion• How do you support the findings for a conditional use permit? Response: See II and III above. Ouestion• How will off-site problems be handled? Response- (1) Within 12 hours of every performance we will pick up litter, if any, along the roads in Canterbury Park. (2) We will have off-site traffic personnel as needed. (3) If there is any off-site disturbance or trespassing reported to us, we will immediately inform the Police or do whatever else the Chief of Police requires of us. (4) If there is any other program you want us to consider, please inform us. Question: What sort of beverages will you serve? Response: Beer, wine, soft drinks. Ouestion• How will airplane noise affect their performances? 7 Response• Based on our discussions with others who have similar overflights, we do not believe there will be an adverse effect. Ouestion• Are there enough off duty police officers available to provide the security suggested? Response• Yes. There is a large pool of off duty police officers in the region available. We will implement whatever program the City Chief of Police requests in this regard. (See Exhibit H) . Ouestion• Will the lighting cause problems? Response• We stated in our conditional use permit application that we would have 1 foot candle within the enclosed area and 1/2 foot candle in the parking lot and all lights would focus to the ground similar to those at Canterbury Inn. The site is surrounded on two sides by forest. The light will not be seen off site. Ouestion: Will residential property values be affected? Response• No. For all of the reasons stated above. In addition, the site is separated from residential areas by 3/4 mile, industrial zoned areas, and a Bypass highway. Traffic to and from the project does not pass through residential areas. The City has recently approved the platting and development of hundreds of residential lots so it is clear that recreational activities are not adversely affecting residential values or development otherwise property owners would not spend the money to develop their land for residential purposes. Ouestion• Can the conditional use permit be revoked if the user violates the terms of the permit? 8 Response- Yes. The ordinance clearly so provides. The Indirect Source Permit to be issued by the State will also so provide. The City's nuisance and noise level ordinances also allow the City to enjoin the use if not operated properly. ouestion• Will the construction activity cause problems? Response: No. Construction will involve grading by several earth movers, construction of several small buildings similar to Canterbury Retail Center and the Pavillion. The magnitude of construction is less than the Canterbury Inn with far fewer construction workers needed. All soil needed is on site. Ouestion• What will the future use be for the 10 acres to the southeast portion of the site? Response: That property is zoned industrial and can only be developed in conformance with the zoning code. We have no present plans for that site. (A question was raised if that 10 acre site was adequately delineated as not being part of the project. The property line shown in the exhibits submitted does exclude it although it may be hard to read on the reduced copies. ) Ouestion• Will the project adversely affect the development of the remainder of Canterbury Park? Response: No. We previously stated the reasons why we did not believe there would be an adverse effect (See Exhibit I) . Subsequently, we reviewed this question with a well known land use planner who represents numerous cities and he agreed with us (See Exhibit C) . Recently, Curt Carlson announced the ground breaking and construction of a 3,000 seat amphitheater in the middle of a 300 acre, 600 million dollar development (See Exhibit D) . 9 our industrial neighbors agree there is no adverse effect and some feel it is beneficial (See Exhibits Al-6) . The City's Industrial Commerce Commission has endorsed the project. (See Exhibit G) . Ouestion• The Metropolitan Council has control over the MUSA line so not all of the presently industrial zoned land can be serviced by municipal sewer. Response: That is true. However, there are approximately 1,000 acres of vacant industrial land presently with the MUSA line. The Metropolitan Council has historically extended the MUSA line prior to the depletion of the supply of available served area. This occurred last year in Canterbury Park and in Shakopee residential areas. Moreover, many dry industries are allowed to develop in large lots without municipal sewer. Ouestion• Are there examples of amphitheaters, or similar uses in the middle of Industrial Parks? Response: Yes. We have given similar examples previously. No fact situation is exactly the same. other examples recently learned of include Curt Carlson's development and the new Music Center proposed for the middle of an industrial area in Indianapolis (See Exhibits J) . Ouestion• How will a 25 cents per patron admission tax raising $100, 000 each year beneficially impact the funding of County Road 18 Bridge? Response: Our $100,000 a year allows the County, if it so chooses, to sell a bond of a much greater amount, fund the bridge and pay off that bond from further admission tax revenues. The same is true for admission tax from Canterbury Downs, Renaissance Festival and Valley Fair. Moreover, although the cost of the bridge is $40 million, 2 .4 million dollars must be funded by Scott County. 10 IV. Benefits To Community We think it is important to repeat a portion of our letter to you of June 1, 1987. These benefits to the City are real, substantial and not controverted. A question has been asked "what benefit is this facility to the City of Shakopee". If this were a 150 acre site, the project would be a permitted use and there would be no review by the City. We have reduced the project size to 86 acres so it would be a conditional use permit. Neither the City Ordinance, Minnesota Statutes, or the courts require such a statement of benefit. However, we are prepared to respond to any inquiry about the project. We believe the project has numerous benefits to the City which include the following. We realize that not everyone will agree as to the amount of the benefit for each factor and some may believe that a specific factor is not a benefit. 1. The project will create additional real estate taxes in each year on a facility which will cost $6 to $8 million to construct. The project is not in a tax increment financing district so all of the new taxes are allocated to the City, County and School District each year. We will pay for any off-site police traffic personnel, as needed, just as Canterbury Downs does presently. So there is little or no cost to the City. 2. Assuming the County Board passes the $.25 per patron admission tax, the county will collect approximately $100,000 each year to be used solely for the construction of the Highway 18 Bridge to improve access to the City, especially needed during rush hour. 3. Upon development of the site, the project will pay to the City deferred assessments on roads previously built and paid for by the City. 4. The facility will result in increased awareness of the location of the industrial park, leading to additional commercial and industrial tax base and jobs. 11 5. The patrons coming and going to and from the facility will purchase retail goods and services, meals and lodging within the City, similar to the increased sales from other attractions. 6. There will be up to 20 full-time jobs and 300 seasonal jobs. A high percent of the Racetrack seasonal workers live in Shakopee; a higher percentage live in Scott County. The same will be true with Starwood. The seasonal jobs are a boon to all ages of those unemployed or underemployed in the area. Many of the jobs are second jobs for those underemployed and are summer jobs for high school and college students. The wage rates will vary from $4.00 to $10. 00 per hour. 7. The facility may be used by others in the City for: a) special events b) town meetings c) cultural events d) fairs e) religious services f) other uses where you need a stage and pavilion. 8. The facility will offer a variety of musical entertainment for the citizens and ability to raise money for local charities. 9. The facility and its employees will purchase goods and services from local merchants. V. Summary We announced last November that we would chart a slow and deliberative course of development. We have done so over the last nine months (in fact the racetrack development was reviewed and approved by the City in approximately 4 months) . We have hired the best independent experts in the state to analyze all aspects of the project. You have received their studies and conclusions. The reviewing agencies of the state have essentially agreed with them. We believe we have met or exceeded all ordinance requirements of the City. (See letters previously provided and Exhibit K1-4. ) But, most importantly, we and many leading citizens, companies, and groups in Shakopee have endorsed the project and agree that it will be beneficial to the City. We hope we have answered all of your questions and that you will 12 vote to approve the conditional use permit on July 30, 1987 so we can proceed to the City Council and through the final state permitting procedures. If you have any questions or desire any additional information prior to the July 30th meeting, please call. Very truly yours, THE SCOTTLAND COMZES Q� v Bruce D. Malkerson Executive Vice President Jeffge � Project Manager DBM:jhl cc: Mayor and city Council John Anderson Dennis Kraft Doug Wise 13 NONE EXHIBIT A-1 I 1 � VALUI TL a SNAP ,MINNEWTAYnWH � POWER6121445-2020 C O FS P O R A T 1 G PJ 8001328.6441 June 26, 1987 SCOTTLAND, INC P 0 Box 50, 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, MN 55379 _ ATTENTION:.. Mr. . Jeff Siegel Dear Jeff : ' Inrespon se `toyour - inquiry-as to`what . impact, if• any, Canterbury -•" �_,Downs.-- has- had,on.-our..industria L,�.o perations, comment that the impacts we -have experienced are-. favorable...: . --The hours of operation at Canterbury-- havemade traffic. problems ,. le. ,We., have had no instances -of any other type of __ . r ''unnoticabproblems. In contrast, the_: influx of entertainment _.industry has -had the following positive impact. - - Created motel accomodations sorely needed for our out-of-town guests . The ownership of Club House season tickets has provided us with an excellent sales promotion; wherein, we offer the use of our tickets to ourcustomersprovided they stop at our facilities to pick-up the pass. You also inquired as to what impact the proposed open air theater might have on us. As the intended useage is evening and weekends, we do not feel there would be any more negative impact than we have experienced by Canterbury Downs, Valley Fair, or the .. Canterbury . Inn , -which has been nil . . We would view the entertainment' provided by such a -'complex "as an -additional sales and marketing tool that would likely be used by our company. - I hoped this satisfactorily answers your questions. rely, ick Nolan, _ President RJN:gh A-2 The Toro Company W Valley Industrial Blvd,Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 612/937-3300 July 8, 1987 Mr. Jeff Siegel The Scotland Companies 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Jeff: What effect did having an entertainment facility such as Canterbury Downs have in making our decision to prove to the Industrial Park here in Shakopee? The decision to move the metal components manufacturing facility to the Industrial Park in Shakopee was based largely on two factors; the first was due to the fact that we already owned property and had an unused building here in the Park and, therefore, was the most preferable from a cost standpoint. Secondly, the demographics of the existing employment population showed this to be the best location for the most employees if we, in fact, had to make a move from the Bloomington location. The traffic issue was discussed as a potential negative but discussions with other Park residents led us to believe that such problems were minimal and, in fact, did riot then serve as any kind of potential deterrent. We prefer being part of a community who strives for ways to keep the area fiscally strong. We feel that the integration of recreational facilities such as Valley Fair, Canterbury Downs and the proposed Music Center with equally clean and attractive industrial facilities such as Toro and others, provides no basis for conflict so long as all of the businesses are managed prudently and .with respect for each other. Sincerely, a,",el H rey4 Personnel Ma ager 2009sr, A-3 4700 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL BLVD . SO . , S H A K O P E E, MN . 5 5 3 7 9 PHONE : 612 - 445 - 8600 CABLE : PDESIGN TELEX : 29 - 0839 pwilot'deAgni June 25, 1987 Mr. Jeffrey L. Siegel The Scottland Companies P. 0. Box 509 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Siegel: - Pouliot Designs is very satisfied with our location in Canterbury Park. We are in favor of all of the attractions which have developed in the Shakopee area and are particularly thrilled to hear about the new Starwood project. An entertainment complex such as Starwood will be an added feature for our employees, as well as add to the local tax base. This is particularly important, in that one of our major needs in this area is for the new bridge to cross the Minnesota River. Any project which will help in that development will be a great asset to this community. Very truly yours, POULIOT DESIGNS CORPORATION Ted Poulidt TAP/mjs nvm.aor - r7H04S A-4 June 10, 1987 ffif lon—EM5 M I Mr. Douglas K. Wise Shakopee City Planner 129 B First Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Starwood Music Center Dear Mr. Wise, We had the distinct pleasure today of meeting with Jeff Siegel, Project Manager for Scottland on the Starwood Development. It is quite obvious that everyone associated with this undertaking is keenly aware of its impact on the area and is committed to making Starwood a genuine asset to the community. Having had the opportunity to review our concerns over security with Mr. Siegel, we welcome the project and look forward enthusiastically to opening night. Please accept our thanks for providing a forum at which to express our feelings and our assurance of continued support. Best Regards, Al Schafer Manager Production and Facilities Conklin Company.Inc. Manulacturing Feciliry and DisnibNion Center 5S1Ya1ley ParkDme cc: ,lames D. Leonard P.D.Box 155 S'akoDm.61/155379 Jeffrey Siegel, Scottland Companies 6:z 645-6010 _ Ag Chemicals Alcohgland FmdPI8m Cleanersand Home Care I.,A)"enfs and Cond'Vonen; Roofing Systems Spec:airy Coatings A-5 K.W. "O'B"O'BRIEN President Denny's CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Bus:612345.4143 3549 Eagle Creek Blvd.- P.O. Box 11 Shakopee. Minn.55379 July 20, 1987 Mr. Jeffrey Siegel Starwood Project Manager The Scottland Companies P. 0. Box 509 Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Starwood Music Center Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Mr. Siegel : Danny's Construction Company is very interested in being a part of the construction of another major facility in the Shakopee area. We are a steel erection contractor founded in Shakopee in 1970 and are interested in the promotion of this area. Enclosed please find a brochure that depicts some of the construction projects we have been involved in. Please contact us when bid - drawings and documents are available. Very truly yours, DANNY'S CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. BY / A. Wilson Vice President Enclosure 1 .3.27 LAW/cfs A-6 Murphy's Landing }Alevpap V�lby Mvbretivv lvu ANIs{e vt 18{0-1880 2187 E. Highway 105 aa5opee, Minnesota 55379 61 July 17, 1987 Mr. Jeffrey Siegel P.O. Box 509 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Siegel: We have followed the proposed Starwood Music Center project with great interest. Shakopee has a wide spectrum of outdoor recreational attractions that cannot be equaled in the Midwest. The addition of this fine facility offering a wide range of musical and theatrical events would complete the overall needs of all those visiting our community. Looking at the concern you have shown regarding the environmental issues; aesthetic design; employment opportunities; vement of traffic, I feel you have addressed all the major issues surrounding any new development. Best yet, the tax revenues generated to the City Of Shakopee without any city investment is a real plus. Murphy's Landing prides itself on being a rich educational interpretation of the Minnesota River valley, which nourishes the mind and provides fun and relaxation for the visitor. I see Starwood Music Center providing fine musical events that will impact all our lives in a positive manner. Regards, Mar 3jz(rie R.)Henderson President/Director - MRH:rae EXHIBIT B i _, s I r I NORMAL BE ' BAC L 40-4S � B�A$�Np �5d °srs S CBA) l WORST CASE —.. i • MUSIC�CENTER �'� �.. z f35 tl6A) o odrsoe iav y j � /�•• . � ..ego FN 9pr. a EXHIBIT C RECENVED ti F ((\RPT kk AV JUL 2 31987 AN tI RAIN The Scottland Companies CONSUCTINC. PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MITE 210 I'INNEA.r O'_'.,.. ?',' -. 1D! ,11 331) 3300 22 July 1987 Bruce D. Malkerson Executive Vice President leffwy c'ng-I Project Manager, Starwood Music Center Scottland Companies P.O. Box 509 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Discussion of the Issue of the Compatibility of Large Scale Recreational Facilities With Industrial Parks Dear Bruce and Jeff: I am writing in response to your request for my comments regarding the issue of the relative compatibility of large scale recreational and cultural facilities with industrial parks. I understand that you are not only interested in my general opinions on this topic, but also my expectations regarding the compatibility of the proposed Starwood Music Center and the existing Canterbury Park. It is somewhat ironic that you should ask me this question now. Over the past several weeks I have been preparing a review of the Urban Land Institutes' Mixed-Use Development Handbook for publication in the fall issue of Common Ground, the National Journal of the Community Associates Institute. As a result, I have nearly completed a rather intensive analysis, both of the general concept of mixed use development and several particular mixed use developments throughout the country. Without launching into a jargon filled, esoteric history of mixed use development, suffice it to say that the practice of combining different land uses in a single place is virtually as old as the history of human settlement. It was really just with the wide spread acceptance of the concept of zoning (the separation of land uses into districts) that the development patterns in our cities moved away from mixed uses. The logic behind the concept of zoning is that the best way to achieve compatibility between different uses is through physical separation. Today there is a wide and growing acceptance of the fact that different uses can exist in close proximity to each other. Successful mixed use development begins with a sophisticated and complete analysis of the ways in which the Malkerson/Siegel, 22 July 1987 Page 2 proposed uses will actually function and, therefore, the actual off-site impacts associated with these uses. The regulations to govern these developments must also be flexible enough to include specific performance standards related to actual impacts as opposed to any arbitrarily established standards. One of the principal advantages in mixed use developments is the fact that different uses experience their most intensive use periods (peak periods) at different times. Traffic and parking are two of the most frequent areas in which this fact can be used to its greatest advantage. By combining uses with different peak periods in the same development, it provides the opportunity to intensify the overall use of the area without making it necessary to add substantially to the size and capacity of streets and parking areas. From the material that I have reviewed regarding this proposal it is clear that the peak use periods for this facility will not correspond with those associated with the vast majority of the businesses in the park. I also know enough from my research and experience to conclude that there are some very good reasons to locate recreational and cultural facilities in industrial areas, as opposed to residential, or even general commercial areas. These facilities are most actively used at times when the surrounding industrial businesses are either not using the area roadways, or are using them to a very limited extent. I might also add that I have always felt that the opening of the T.H. 169 bypass is the key to the future success of this portion of Shakopee. I am very encouraged by the progress that is being made toward that end. In conclusion, it is my opinion that large and small scaled recreational and cultural facilities have and will continue to be successfully integrated into industrial areas. There is no logical basis for a conclusion that there is anything fundamentally incompatible about these uses. I have reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet covering this proposal, as well as numerous letters from industrial business owners within Canterbury Park. There is nothing in this material that would lead me to conclude that the proposed Starwood Music Center could not be successfully integrated into Canterbury Park. The City of Shakopee should be able to adequately address any remaining concerns through its conditional use permitting process. Sincerely, DAHLGREN, SHSAAARRDLOW, AN�D�UUBB�ANN, INC. John Shardlow, AICP Vi resident SELECTED CLIENT AND REFERENCE LIST City of Burnsville Minnesota Racetrack Inc. Minnesota Shakopee, Minnesota Linda Barton, City Director Bruce Malkerson, Attorney City of Mendota Heights New Horizon Homes, Inc. Minnesota Plymouth, Minnesota Orvil Johnson, City Administrator Robert..Burger, President City of Monticello Northland Development Co. Minnesota Brooklyn Park, Minnesota Gary Wieber, City Administrator James Stuebner, President City of Roseville Order of St. Benedict Minnesota St. Joseph, Minnesota Frank Rog, Parks Director Sister Kathleen Kalinowski Dodge Nature Center United Properties West St. Paul, Minnesota Bloomington, Minnesota James M. Malkowski Ken Stensby, President Executive Director Fine Associates, Inc. Amoco Oil Company Minneapolis, Minnesota Mandan, North Dakota Bill Fine, President W. A. Burns, Manager Freshwater- Foundation- First Bank System Navarre, Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota Joe Rosillon (St. Anthony Falls) Scott Hutton, Vice President Good Value Homes Franklin National Bank Blaine, Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota Don Hardie, President Thomas Allen, President General Mills American National Bank St. Paul, Minnesota and Trust Company John Schevenius St. Paul, Minnesota David M. Hyduke, Sr. Vice Pres. Hiner Properties, Inc. Briggs and Morgan Arden Hills, Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota Gary Hiner, President Michael Galvin, Attorney Jesco, Inc. Grossman Karlin, Seigel & Brill Edina, Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota Chet Sazenski, President Josiah Brill, Jr., Attorney Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Health Central Corp. Lindgren Ltd. Golden Valley, Minnesota Bloomington, Minnesota Peter Van Hauer, General Counsel Robert Hoffman, Attorney MEPC American Properties, Inc. BWBR Architects Minneapolis, Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota John Graham, Regional Manager Fritz Rohkohl, President Metram Properties Company Robins Zelle, Larson & Kaplan Edina, Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota Vasco Bernardi, President Solly Robins, Attorney Korsunsky, Krank Erickson Architects Strgar--Roscoe, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota Wayzata, Minnesota - Ron Krank, President Frank Strgar, President Pope Associates, Inc. Suburban Engineering, Inc. St. Paul, Minnesota Fridley, Minnesota Robert L. Pope, President William Jensen, President BonestrooRosene Anderlik & Assoc. Wooddale Church Roseville, Minnesota Eden Prairie, Minnesota Otto Bonestroo, President Gordy Pearson, Ground Supervisor Page 10,Skyway News,Tuesday,July 14,1987 Today's Business w Business Updates EXHIBIT D S nmrpl.11l��'ll ((�`��/�d�trnux u o mu�iiiiii iin 1 1�1/ '/ •.wr o '� wi.uunuu 11 d1�. 1/ • 1 wn _ Fancy dig Carlson breaks Soil for center-`A* By Patrick Boulay No one can deny that local business :mogul Curt Carlson has vision and patience.' Cast. Saturday's ground breaking at the mammoth. .300-acre Carlson Center may:not seem like much. It was :'.onlya ground-breaking ceremony,,although fancier than most (700 had accepted invitations at press time). But. Carlson haswaitedsince f959 for the chance to lift a shovelful of dirt.. to 'mark the beginning of construction for Carlson Cos.'.new - world headquarters. - As development projects go. this is ` - one of the more ambitious in the Twin Cities,, according to industry ob- servers.Scheduled in phases over the next decade at acost estimated at near $600 million, constructions calls for 4 million square feet of space in a mix of buildings that include office, residential, retail, office/warehouse, and hotel. All these buildings will be surrounded by landscaping that includes a 22-acre ` man-made lake, a,3,000-seat outdoor ' amphitheater, jogging and walking — paths,and otheramenities yet to be 11Pflderl EXHIBIT E-1 �`NNE�Tq jlj 1 �. v Minnesota Department of Transportation Cj l 5j9BJ , Transportation Building, St. Paul,MN 55d5S,, �OF� Kpp OF TPP July 13, 1987 vhore 296-1652 Dennis Kraft - Community Development Director City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 He: Starwood Music Center Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) District 5 (Shakopee, Scott Co. ) Dear Mr. Kraft: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has completed a review of the above-referenced SAW. 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 Hoffstedt, Transportation Analysis Engineer at our District office in Golden Valley, phone number (612) 593-8540. Sincerely, in `� Cheryl Heide, Environmental Coordinator Environmental Services Section An E4ual Opponuniry EmPlova E-2 SFCWG6J5.41ff) DEPARTMENT : Mn/DOT — Operations Division STATE OF MINNESOTA Golden Valley — District 5 Office Memorandum DATE : July 6, 1987 To : Leonard W. Levine Commissioner i FROM : W.M. Crawford.' District Engineer/ y, , PRONE : 593-8403 SUBJECT : Scott County Transportation Coalition I am sending you copies of letters from the Scott County Transportation Coalition endorsing highway improvements in the northern Scott County area. I believe you have already received one of the attached letters from the Coalition in support of three important projects to the area as follows: 1. T.H. 101 Shakopee Bypass 2. T.H. 169 Bridge Replacement 3. CSAH 18 Bloomington Ferry Bridge Replacement I support the above projects in the order stated and the trunk highway projects should be retained in Mn/DOT's work program for continued project development and implementation as currently scheduled. The coalition has been very active in pursuing funding for transportation and specific projects in the area and I am sure they will continue to cooperate with Mn/DOT in achieving mutual goals. Attachments: (2) Scott County Transportation Coalition letters cc: Mark Stromwell/Scott Co. Commissioner D.H. Differt R.D. Borsoa L.F. McNamara D.E. Durgin S.T. Povich C.S. Hoffstedt Central File File (2) WMC:jj (CJH) EXHIBIT F JUL 8 1987 Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 612-332-0421 ME140gANDUM TO: The Scottland Companies FROM: Bart: n Asctman Associates, Inc. DATE: July 8, 1987 SUBJECT' SPAIZ-MD TRAFFIC NASZhSEM= PIAN As requested, Barton-Aschman has prepared a traffic management plan for the Starwood Music Center to be located in the City of Shakopee. As you review this plan, please be advised that actual field conditions may vary and undoubtedly, adjustments will be necessary or advisable as the Starwood Music Center becomes more established and fans as well as staff become more aware of the roadway network and site operations. our analysis was based on the assumption that during a peak year of operation, a total of 51 events will be held. The expected attendance will be as follow: : Project Events Expected Number of Total Attendance Annual Events Attendance 17,000 5 85,000 9,000 8 72,000 7,000 11 77,000 5,000 _ 7 35,000 3,500 20 70,000 TOTAL 51 339,000 Except for the five largest events (17,000 attendance), minimal congestion will occur. For those 46 events, traffic control personnel may be required during a terirg and exiting haus at the intersection of County Road 83 and Twelfth Aveme. The only other assistance required will be directly related to the site. The remainder of this memorandum deals with those five major annual events which are anticipated to attract an audience of 17,000 people. When there is a major audience of 17,000, peak hour arrivals will occur between 7:30 and 8:30 P.M. off-duty patrolmen may be required at the intersection of CR 18 and TM 101 if the inbound Starwood traffic encounters the tail end of Canterbury Downs exiting traffic Otherwise, traffic will not pose a serious problem to the regional roadway network. O Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. July 8, 1987 Page 2 patrolmen will be required at the CR 83 inte-.+ecticn with Twelfth Avenue for a major performance. Traffic control personnel will also be required to direct traffic into the facilities at the fair entrances (two off of Valley. Park Drive and two off of Twelfth Avenue). As traffic enters the site, sufficient storage distance (a minimum of 600 feet for a major audience) has to be provided to prevent backup onto Twelfth Aver or Valley Park Drive. To assist with dispersions of any potential backup problems, additional parking lot ticket salespersons (i.e. seanit;" personnel) will be activated to ower surges for incoming attendees. Additional steps to be considered to assist with handling of inbound attendees will include: o Parking tickets will be presold to group ticket buyers, box seat holders, star card holders, etc. o The use of parking coupon books will be investigated for frequent repeat attendees. o Buses arriving at the site will be allowed free parking. Figure 1, attached, indicates measures to be employed for controlling in- bound traffic at the site. Items to be used will include temporary barriers similar to those currently being used at Canterbury to assure sufficient storage for arriving traffic, traffic control personnel at all gates, and on-site personnel as needed to direct parkers to their respective parking spots. Exiting traffic will require traffic control personnel at all exits from the site. Th�- rx,*th exit to Valley Industrial BOulevaxd South will be opened if needed to assist with exiting traffic However, traffic exiting from this northern exit will be required to turn west at Valley industrial Boulevard South. As indicated in Figure 2, cones will be used to delineate traffic lanes during peak events. In addition, signs will be provided as traffic approaches CR 83 indicating that left lane traffic must turn left and right lane traffic must turn riot. Traffic control personnel will be provided as needed at the following intersections: o CR 83 and Twelfth Avenue o CR 83 aril TH 101 o Valley Park Drive and TH 101 0 CR 18 and TH.101 Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. July 8, 1987 , Page 3 It is anticipated that the parking lot will be clearer] within one hour after a peak weekend event However, should congestion occur it is the intention of Starwood operators to meter traffic out of the site so as to alleviate any congestion on regional roadways. 7kc o " a i S � • � D gra t ¢� a _ a x a t y % � I OO q O r69 3 I 9 of Mo € D c O f t � VIII o 0 ' � I 0 O a ' - 1-10 ; . i - rrr . �� � II ' � � it •D � I \� i D 9 - Fi - SII m it i U -------=- �vg ---�-'- ° <i EXHIBIT G RESOLUTION SHAKOPEE INDUSTRIAL COMMERCE COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Shakopee Industrial Commerce Commission does encourage and support the development of commercial, industrial and recreational industries in the Shakopee area; WHEREAS, the Shakopee Industrial Commerce Commission recognizes the emergence of tourism as a growth industry for the City of Shakopee; WHEREAS, the proposed Starwood Music Center will enhance the community and create additional tax base and employment opportunities for the City and citizens of Shakopee. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Shakopee Industrial Commerce Commission does hereby support and endorse the proposed Starwood Music Center. Dated this Z-L- day of July, 1987 by im Keane its Chair by Al Furrie its Vice Chair etr . EXHIBIT H "` City of Shakopee POLICE DEPARTMENT �r 476 South Comm Street - "j SBAKOPEE, MDiNESOTA 55379 Tel. 445-6666 July 9, 1987 Mr. Jeffrey Siegel Project Manager Starwood Music Center 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Siegel: I have reviewed the Production and Security Manual, and as you know consulted with Starwood Management regarding security procedures at the proposed facility. I believe a safe environment will be provided for those persons attending the various events. You can be assured that all local ordinances and State laws will be strictly enforced on-site and within the City of Shakopee. As we discussed, officers from several jurisdictions are employed by the various entertainment centers to provide traffic control and security duties, so that manpower resources are not solely the responsibility of the Shakopee Police Department. I will not permit a lesser number of officers to be employed by the facilities than I feel are required to maintain a safe environment for a specific event. I appreciate Starwood managements willingness to respond to our mutual security concerns and assurance that a cooperative spirit will prevail in the future should the Center become a reality. Sincerely, Thomas Brownell Chief of Police TB:cah r7u cSc:ce �e Jn-:otcct lTHE EXHIBIT I VSCOTT LAND COMPANIES June 18, 1997 Chairwoman Jane Van Maldeghem and Members of the Planning Commission City of Shakopee 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Starwood Music Center Dear Chairwoman Van Maldeghem and Planning Commission Members: Based upon the Planning Commission's desire to further understand how an outdoor music center works in relationship to various commercial and industrial developments within Canterbury Park, we reviewed several outdoor music centers and found that many of them were in or near to comparable industrial, office and commercial development. Fiddler' s Green, Inglewood, Colorado: Fiddler' s Green was built to be part of the Greenwood Plaza Business Park. It was developed to be an amenity of the business park by the park developer. It has been an attraction to bring interest to the business park to help further the future development of that property. There is a multi-family residential development 1, 000 feet from Fiddler's Green. Light industrial is within one-half mile. It was County Property Zoned-planned unit development and developed as part of the park. Poplar Creek, Hoffman Estates, Illinois: The property for this outdoor theatre was planned to be a business district by the County, rezoned to 0-2 (office/Research) . Although they have not seen a significant amount of industrial development under current market conditions, there is some 67 acres of industrial development near the music center. Southern Star Amphitheatre, Houston, Texas: Houston has no zoning. The property that Southern Star occupies is surrounded by a combination of other recreational developments such as an amusement park and a sports stadium, also industrial use, commercial use such as auto dealerships, and some open land. There is a small residential area approximately one mile away. P.O. Box 509 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (6123445-3242 city of Shakopee June 18, 1987 Page 2 Starwood Amphitheatre, Antioch, Tennessee: The property was originally zoned agricultural, with a long-term plan that would eventually be developed as commercial. It is on the fringe of what they refer to as a transport/warehouse development area. Shoreline Amphitheatre, Mountainview, California: Shoreline Amphitheatre was built on two parcels of land; one of which was zoned residential surrounded by a major park, the other was unzoned being a former landfill. Other uses in the vicinity are approximately 30% business uses within a half mile. Merriweather Post Pavilion, Columbia, Maryland: This was developed under a concept called New Town Zoning, one of the HUD new towns developed in the 1970's. It consisted of phased plans and the Merriweather Post Pavilion was built near the center of the community as a cultural showpiece for Columbia. Nearby uses are commercial and residential. The nearest industrial is two to three miles from the music center. Mud Island Amphitheatre, Memphis, Tennessee: The property is actually a city-owned facility/park. The land was created and acquired by the City through siltation of the Mississippi River. The land was unused with the exception of a small airport and an industrial plant on the north end. The zoning was part agricultural/industrial. The park was built on the agricultural property and a portion of the site has been rezoned PUD residential/office mixed use. other outdoor music centers such as the Saratoga Performing Arts Center., the Blossom Music Center, Ravinia, and the Garden State Center for the Arts are located in or adjacent to public parks and typically have industrial use in the vicinity of one to four miles of the project. 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. City of Shakopee June 18, 1987 Page 3 The St. Pau} 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 the stadiums across the country, you will find many of them to be similarly situated. We hope that this information is helpful to your overview of how the Starwood .Music Center does fit and compliment the industrial park. Very truly yours, THE SCOTTLAND COMPANIES �- �). �� Bruce D. Malkerson Executive Vice Presiden rey Sie el Project Manager `J BDM:ap C.C. Shakopee city Council John Anderson Dennis Kraft Doug Wise Ken Ashfeld I. 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 beat 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 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 apark 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, # 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. j 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. S. 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. A PPE wD(,Y A 1. Zoninq 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 (Scotland and PACE) by Valley Industrial Development Company (a partnership of The Scottland Companies and North Amerigen 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 Citv'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 traf`_ic 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 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. S . 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 IS 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 Fu*u a Industrial Development. It is estimated that to date approximately 1, 025 acres of Canterbury Park has been developed for commercial, recreationalandindustrial 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 man. ) 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. l Page 3 C) The tax reform act has eliminated the incentives for businesses to build and own buildings. d) The Twin City area has notdevelopedas 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 nark or areas within the nark. 1 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 Parkina 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) Oben 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) Snin 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) Emplovmen` 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 Unicue 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 wasbuilt 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. a. 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 muse 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. oma, ..{ _ 1 it i' b -Pu 1 1 � ' lTHE SCOTTLAND COMPANIES June 18 , 1987 Mr. Paul Sieber County Planner Arapahoe County 334 South Price Littleton, Colorado 80120 Dear Mr. Sieber: I appreciated the opportunity to hear about the 18, 000 seat Fiddler's Green outdoor amphitheatre located in the Greenwood Plaza Business Park in Arapahoe County. My understanding is that the Greenwood Plaza Business Park is a planned unit development including office, commercial, and residential. Additionally, you have some industrial property one-half ,mile away. It was particularly interesting to hear about the County's experience with the development of Fiddler's Green. You expressed that you have _ residents approximately 1, 000 feet from the site and that they raised concern with the potential for sound and traffic problems during discussion of the development proposal. It was reassuring to hear that now having three years of operation of the facility you have never had a complaint filed. As I explained to you, we are working on a proposal for an outdoor music center of 17, 000 seats to be built in a planned, mixed use business park in Shakopee, Minnesota. In our research, we have discovered that many outdoor music centers have been built with proximity to adjacent residential areas such as yours. We feel most fortunate that our facility has many advantages due to its location in our business park, one of which being that it is surrounded by industrial, commercial, and road system use with no residential properties adjacent. Therefore, we do not anticipate an impact similar to those facilities which we studied that have residential areas directly adjacent. I very much appreciated the time you took to tell me about Fiddler' s Green and would appreciate hearing any more information about the County's experience with their acceptance of the project. Sincerely, Je rgel Project Manager JS:ap P.O. Box 509 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 [612)445-3242 EXHIBIT J M E M O R A N D U M TO: Dennis Kraft, Douglas Wise, City of Shakopee FROM: Jeffrey Siegel RE: Deer Creek Center - Indianapolis DATE: July 21, 1987 Based upon questions raised at the June 18th public hearing with reference to a proposed outdoor music center in the Indianapolis suburb of Westfield (Deer Creek Center) we contacted the developer to further understand the circumstances of that facility. Steve Sybesma, Vice-President of Sunshine Promotions, Inc. , expressed to me that the Westfield Planning Commission - indicated that they would be unfavorable to a zoning change. However the metro community did not reject the opportunity. Sunshine Promotions has found a new site for the outdoor music center in the middle of an industrial park and is receiving tremendous support in the Indianapolis community. The State of Indiana is building a $200 million, 250 acre State Park which will be located in downtown Indianapolis across the street from the Indiana Convention Center and the Hoosier Dome (Sports Arena) . The site currently houses industrial and small business. The park will include a new zoo (64 acres) , sports practice fields, and the outdoor amphitheater. Therefore the statement that the community of Indianapolis is opposed to an outdoor music center, as a generality, is incorrect. The source of the original rejection had to do with a request for rezoning and the producers have since moved to an industrial area that is in the heart of the City of Indianapolis. JS:jhl EXHIBIT K-t Minnesota Becky Kelso - House of District and Carver Counties Scott Representatives Scott � l: Education committeel �i^h Fretl C. Norton. SpeaMer Health and Human Services,Vice Chair Economic Development and Housing Business Finance Subcommittee, Vice Chair Future and Technology Long Term Health Care Commission July 13, 1987 Jeffrey Segal Starwood Productions Scottland companies 1244 Canterbury Rd. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Segal, In response to your question regarding the effect of the proposed Starwood amphitheater on our community's tax base, it is my belief that it will make a very substantial contribution. Although it is not possible for me to have exact figures at this time, it is my understanding that the proposed project will pay approximately $300,000 a year in local property taxes. In a community our size that is definately a significant figure. Because the theater will undoubtedly sell more than ten thousand admission tickets a day it will also be required to pay a 250 per ticket admissions tax. The theater's projected contribution to this particular fund will be approximately $100,000 a year. The Scott county admissions tax will be used only for the construction of the Bloomington Perry Bridge and will sunset after the bridge is completed. The addition of the Starwood theater to the list of attractions to which this tax will apply will obviously hasten the greatly needed road improvements and will offset the local property tax burden for the construction of the bridge. I look forward to the day when the Scott county admissions tax will no longer be in effect, but in the meantime this tax revenue will assure the local match for the federal dollars needed to finance this project. Reply to: ❑ 329 state 011ie Building,St.Paul,Minnesota 55155 Office:(612)2961072 71 151 S.Shannon Drive.Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 Home;(612)4456656 Page 2 The patrons of the Starwood amphitheater will clearly add to the community' s ability to finance local improvement projects and the fact that tax increment financing is not a part of this particular development the revenues will be realized immediately. I hope I have sufficiently answered your question. If not, please don' t hesitate to call again. Sincerely, tom— Becky Kelso State Representative BK/ph I K-2 July 21 , 1987 Chairwoman Jane Van Maldeghem Shakopee Planning Commission City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Chairwoman Van Maldeghem: I am writing to express my wholehearted support of the Starwood Music Center! The Scottland Companies, developer of this project, have made various pertinent documents available for the perusal of interested parties. These materials address all of the major items of concern surrounding Starwood. Following a careful review, I'm thoroughly convinced that the concept of the Starwood Music Center is an expertly organized and researched undertaking well-deserving of our total support. Were 1 to begin listing the countless reasons favoring Starwood. I would only be reiterating already well-known facts. For fear of being redundant, let it suffice to say that our only criticism should be that it didn't happen sooner! The Starwood Music Center is an exciting opportunity whose time has come. Give our community something to take pride in. Please support the Starwood Music Center! Sincerely, Peggy A. Kohl 714 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 cc: Jeffrey Siegel, The Scottland Companies K-3 Letter to Editor July 22 , 1987 Well , here we go again. When ValleyFair was coming to town reports were that all that trash that used to hang around the Excelsior 'fS park would come to Shakopee. There is no way any resident of Shakopee could be prouder of ValleyFair. My granddaughter, who is now thirteen, has for the last three year, gone to ValleyFair at 10:00 a.m. and stayed with her friends until 8:00 or 10:00 p.m. without concern on the part of her parents. c• 8� Then came the Renaissance Festival . Yes, those people are all on drugs was the report. Have you been there? Who goes there? Respectable people from Iowa, North and South Dakota, Wisconsin and Canada. I 'm sorry I did not get a lot of flack on the Bingo Palace. Of course, that wasn't coming into Shakopee. Then the Race Track. Yes, all the big gamtlers will move in and the Mafia and such. Crime will increase and the people who attend we don't want in Shakopee. I guess the crime rate is up and the track gets the blame. It's up all over the state. Let's blame the Dome in Minneapolis, the Zoo and a few other respectable places for part of it. It makes just about as much sense. Yes, here we go again! Starwood Amphitheater. We're going- to have thousands of drug pushers and users at the concerts. All this rock trash will be here. I 'm sure that many Rock Concerts have been put on throughout the U.S. in the amphitheater' that have never attracted any publicity but one does and this is what some of our local residents pick up to try to eliminate Starwood from Shakopee. This edifice is so far out of the Shakopee residential area that I can't see what the big complaint is. Friends, I love music and I just don't like going into Minneapolis at night to go to concerts. Because of this amphitheater and the seating capacity it will have, many, many high class entertaining groups and national stars will be presenting concerts that you and I will love. The traffic problem, if any, will all be cleared up in the future. - The permit that the city council will be issuing them will be a conditional use permit so the council can control who does come to the theater. I have lived in Shakopee for thirty six years. Many times different undesirable businesses have moved in but they have been moved out by the City because of the nature of the business. I do have confidence that this Starwood will be controlled. Of course, there are those who want Shakopee to be a small , relaxing, country town. Folks, it's just too late for that and I trust I have been one of the driving forces that has helped change it. When I arrived in town it was a community of beer parlors. Shakopee must be doing things right to have all these good things happen. Dr. W. Adair Muralt yP� The K-a �"' Minnesota Minnesota Orchestral OfCheStra Association Mu DrWW 1111 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis,MN 55403 Phone:(612)3715600 Catbe:MINNORCH Telex.29-0233 July 20, 1987 _ Mr. Jeffrey Seigel The Scotland Company P.O. Box 509 Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Jeffrey: Congratulations to you, Starwood Music Center, and Canterbury Downs, for a suc- cessful concert at the track. For many people, a Symphony for the Cities con- cert is their introduction to the Minnesota Orchestra. Now that they've met, let's bring them back together next summer at Starwood. As I mentioned at the concert, we enjoyed the media campaign. I have written Pat Dawson in that regard. Thank you for your help and advance work to insure that the concert was a success. Thanks again for your generous support and help. Here's to next summer! Sincerely, Julie Haight Marketing Assistant JH:dw Mmneaaolis SymmmW0rtl esFa Foumeb 1903 Mum Direme, Emd ObeTotler 190.31922 Henri Verbrugbhen 19231931 Eugene Ormancy 1931-1936 Dimon Mkopo 19314949-Antal Doren19x94950 Staruma sxr waceesk,1956198 Su Neville Marone,19]91988 George H.Dixon Richard M.Cisek David M.Watt Chanmanm Pennoem vice PresiOem Ile eoa,d and Gene,al Manaoer 1ot`� �i11116 - - 915C CENTPAL AVENI E N E_SLn-NE.M-NNE6OTA 55a3..1611198a.6700 Jc!y 27, 1987 AIL z 198)_: Dear Resident: On Tuesday, July 28, 1987, the City Of Blaine and Northstar Financial Corporation will jointly announce the planned devel- opment of a 15 million dollar Amphitheater on approximately 96 acres in Blaine, bordered by Lexington Avenue, 109th Avenue and I-35W (reference map on back) . To share information with residents in the area, the City and developer will host a Public Information Meet ' Wednes- day, July 29, 1987 at p m in the Centennial High School cafeteria You are cordially invited to attend and hear a presentation on the project and public improvements which will accompany the development, including a widening of the Lexington Avenue bridge over 35W and signalization of the expanded ramp inter- sections. The proposed complex is designed to have little impact on the vicinity and to be one of the most attractive Amphitheaters in the country. The architect for the project was the principal designer of the Minnesota Zoo. Together with the announced soccer stadium complex, the Amphitheater will become a major landmark in the Twin City area. The presentation will address all facets of the project and is being held to fully inform residents in the vicinity. There will be a question and answer session following the presentation. Sincerely, Richard John City Manager RH:jmz TZRH:AMPHI pNR §^ 1131. All. n AT p, nzi. ..vE x r c l { 111T. AVE. n . Oi. All. n mT. AVE. ou _ ac I.T. AVE. M Y`N 1 Oliy AVE. n // /% _ n. 6_ �. _ '• I.lT. AVE. n 0 L� Ic3uo AVE. x \ 1 ✓.-�"' ST A,, S`! ,=Et F`y •- -'pin If�' . A I . . , z[.o ' Iozxo AVE. xi pubiic (ntormation7Y o• meeting site SSL AVE. . AVE. n - y, THE SCDTTLAND COMPANIES July 27, 1987 Chairwoman Jane Van Maldeghem and Members of the Planning Commission City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Chairwoman Van Maldeghem and Members of the Planning Commision Please find attached some additional information with regard to the Blossom Music Center for incorporation into your Starwood Music Center file. Enclosed is the following: a xerox of the front cover of the telephone book for Cuyahoga Falls, et al with two of the three pictures featuring activities at the Blossum Music Center. Also attached is the same phone book cover for the adjacent community of Canton. a xerox copy of the cover of the "Homes Guide". This is a free publication which is distributed with listings of over 2,000 home for sale in Summit and surrounding counties, Ohio. On the cover a picture of the Blossom Music Center is featured. a xerox of a section of a brochure from Akron and Summit County which has the Blossom Music Center illustrated in (in the lower right corner) along with all the major attractions of the area. a xerox of the cover of the Cleveland Visitors Guide with a picture of the Blossom Music Center featured along with other amenities of the greater Cleveland area. (These are four color graphics therefore the xeroxs are of poor quality. The original brochures will be available for your review at the Public Hearing on July 30th) . we hope this information is helpful in your understanding of the tremendous community pride that has been achieved by the Blossum and other outdoor music centers in their respective communities. Sincerely, Jeffrey Siegel Project Manager Starwood Music Center JS:jhl P.O. Box 509 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 [612)445-3242 cc: Mayor and City Council John Anderson Dennis Kraft Doug Wise G � AL �� v ¢fir•"" .. • ' � t-J7L,-���•s-,e-J.=, lAt-.L"' �v,ry,.f4- �Ifl��"' '�`OQ'0� PG�9 I • G� l ii t• oe w4z� " J sr ei .49! " � w �G,t>,n5..w..:�:ac'miTid _'u-� .=• K.: *flt�"i=�+i'•357' ,rae urveffi,�S*:dWa.L�. F.- 4 M ;Y Serving Summit and Surrounding Counties i a� r 7 77 r� A Pty VAug 21-Sept. 4, 1485 Volume Vlll, Issue 34 OVER 2000 LISTINGS IN THIS ISSUE! FOR YOUR `-MOVjHC.Itc?— Call 1 -goa-652-HOME FREE HOMES GUIDE URPORTURIR - may. G I �. I a ate. �yyy x. _I li J P Jl e E + ' 4 I \ r Cleveland. i Em R�U OF GREATER CLEVELAND REPORT ON S TARWOOD ENV=RONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Table of Contents Page Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Findings of Fact. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Project Site and Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Proposed Construction Timetable. . . . . . . . .2 Proposed Operating Season. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Project Location. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Nature of Site Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Type, Extent and Reversibility of Environmental Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Topography, Soils and Geology. . . . . . . . . . .3 r Physical Effects on Waters. . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Water Quality Effects: Waste Water, - Storm Water and Erosion. . . . : . . . . . . .3 Air Quality and Noise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .4 Solid and Hazardous Wastes. . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Fish. Wildlife and Plants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Archaeological and Historical Resources. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Parks and Recreation Resources. . . . . . . . . .6 OtherResources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Community Resources, Transportation and Energy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Accumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Extent to which the Environmental Affects are are subject to Mitigation by on—going Public Regulatory Authority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Conclusions. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Alternatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Recommendation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Action Requested. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE : Report on Starwood Environmental Assessment Worksheet DATE: July 23, 1987 Introduction• The Scottland Companies and PACE Productions have proposed the construction of an 86 acre facility known as the Starwood Music Center . The magnitude of the project requires that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be prepared for this project in accordance with Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1500 B (Environmental Rules Program) . The City of Shakopee has been designated as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for this EAW, and the City Council of Shakopee has the responsibility to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for this proposed project. In making this Determination the City Council should consider the completeness and accuracy of the information contained in the EAW. The City Council should also consider any potential impacts of the project which may warrant further investigation and/or the need for the preparation of an EIS . The written comments received from various governmental entities and individuals should also be considered as a part of this process. A copy of the EAW and all comments received in response to the distribution of this document are on file in the office of the Director of Community Development and may be reviewed if desired. Background, EAW REVIEW TIME TABLE An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Starwood Music Center was prepared in June , 1987 • This EAW was distributed to all governmental agencies as required by law and was published in the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Monitor on June 15 , 1987 . The opportunity for comments on this EAW extended from June 15, 1987 to July 15. 1987. Subsequent to the close of the comment period, the Shakopee City Council, functioning as the RGU for this project, must render a decision on whether an EIS - needs to be prepared. This decision must be made not less than 10 days (July 25) nor more than 30 days (August 14) after the end of the comment period. FINDINGS OF FACT I. Project Site and Description A. Proposed Construction Timetable - If the project is approved, construction start for the Starwood Music Center would be in the Fall of 1987 and project completion is anticipated by the Spring of 1988. At this time the center is proposed to open in June of 1988. B. Proposed Op ra ing Season - Performances at the Music Center are scheduled to be for the Summer season and will - occur over a 90 - 130 day period. It is anticipated that performances will be scheduled on 51 occasions between May 15 and September 15 . The Music Center will accommodate many diverse styles of music including classical, pop, country western, contemporary , religious, jazz and off-broadway musicals. The music center will also be available for graduations, town meetings and theater presentations. C. Proiect Location - The project area is generally located immediately West of Valley Park Drive and North of 12th Avenue in the Canterbury Industrial Park in East Shakopee. The proposed site is located approximately 2,000 feet South of U.S. Highway 101. A more specific project location is that part of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10, Township 115, Range 22, lying North of 12th Avenue , South of Valley Park 6th Addition and West of Valley Park Drive, except theEast530 feet of the South 1,200 feet thereof ;. and that part of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9, Township 115, Range 22. lying North of 12th Avenue , South of Valley Park 2nd Addition, South of Valley Park 6th Addition and East of Valley Park 3rd Addition in the County of Scott, State of Minnesota. The proposed site is designated as an urban service area in the Metropolitan Council ' s Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework Chapter of the Metropolitan Development Guide, as amended. D . Nature of Site Development ( Seating and Parking Capacity ) - Site development for the project will primarily involve construction of an outdoor amphitheater and parking ,,. facilities to accommodate a maximum attendance of 17 ,000 persons and 6 , 679 vehicles. The music center will consist of a stage (facing north toward the Minnesota River) with covered seating for 50000 persons and a grass-covered earth berm for the remaining 12,000 attendees. The earth berm will be approximately 38 feet high and semi-circular in shape. The top of the berm will be approximately 360 feet from the stage and will span an arch of approximately 130 degrees. Support facilities for the music center area will include service drives , truck and bus parking lots, loading docks, reserved parking for performers and employees, rest rooms and outdoor concession facilities. 2 A. Proposed Construction Tim able - If the project is approved, construction start for the Starwood Music Center would be in the Fall of 1987 and project completion is anticipated by the Spring of 1988 . At this time the center is proposed to open in June of 1988 . B. Proposed Operating Season - Performances at the Music Center are scheduled to be for the Summer season and will occur over a 90 - 130 day period. It is anticipated that performances will be scheduled on 51 occasions between May 15 and September 15 . The Music Center will accommodate many diverse styles of music including classical, pop, country western, contemporary , religious, jazz and off-broadway musicals. The music center will also be available for graduations, town meetings and theater presentations. C. Proiect Location - The project area is generally located immediately West of Valley Park Drive and North of 12th Avenue in the Canterbury Industrial Park in East Shakopee. The proposed site is located approximately 2,000 feet South of U.S. Highway 101 . A more specific project location is that part -of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10 , Township 115 , Range 22, lying North of 12th Avenue , South of Valley Park 6th Addition and West of Valley Park Drive, except the East 530 feet of the South 1 ,200 feet thereof ; and that part of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9 , Township 115, Range 22. lying North of 12th Avenue, South of Valley Park 2nd Addition, South of Valley Park 6th Addition and East of Valley Park 3rd Addition in the County of Scott, State of Minnesota. The proposed site is designated as an urban service area in the Metropolitan Council ' s Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework Chapter of the Metropolitan Development Guide , as amended. D . Nature of Site Development ( Seating and Parking Capacity ) - Site development for the project will primarily involve construction of an outdoor amphitheater and parking facilities to accommodate a maximum attendance of 17 ,000 persons and 6 , 679 vehicles. The music center will consist of a stage (facing north toward the Minnesota River) with covered seating for 5 , 000 persons and a grass-covered earth berm for the remaining 12,000 attendees. The earth berm will be approximately 38 feet high and semi-circular in shape. The top of the berm will be approximately 360 feet from the stage and will span an arch of approximately 130 degrees. Support facilities for the music center area will include service drives , truck and bus parking lots, loading docks, reserved parking for performers and employees, rest rooms and outdoor concession facilities. 2 II. TYPE, EXTENT .AND REVERSIBILITY. OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS A. Topography . Soils and Geology T000eraphv - The site is essentially flat, with a slight slope. Soils - The predominate existing soils on the site are predominately loams and fine sands. With few limitations all ofthese soils are suitable for development. The predominant soil types in this area, as classified by the Soil Conservation Service, are Dakota sandy loam, Dopes silt loam and Hubbard fine sand. The soils tend to be sandy and Hubbard soils are subject to wind erosion if not protected by vegetation. The Dakota soil is a dark sandy soil which is well to excessively well drained. The Dopes soils are also well drained, dark, sandy soils. All the soils provide fair to good suitability for building foundations and road pavement base. Geology - The minimum depth to ground water on the site is 25 feet, with no determination made as to the average depth to ground water. This will not present a problem on this site. The minimum depth to bedrock is 30 feet and the average depth of bedrock is unknown. B. Physical Effects on Waters _ The construction of the proposed project will not result in the physical alteration of a drainage system. lake, stream or wetland. There is a drainage swale on the western edge of the project site which extends south to off-site locations. This drainage swale will not be altered by construction of the project and will accommodate surface water moving off of the project site. The project will not require an appropriation of ground or surface water as it will be served by the City of Shakopee ' s existing water system. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources made no comments on the project and indicated that they did not have any concerns regarding this project (see DNR letter dated July 14 , 1967) . C. Water Ouality Effects, Waste Water Storm Water and Erosion During Construction - Erosion and sedimentation control for the project will be guided by the principles contained in Urban Runoff, Erosion. and Sediment Control Handbook, prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture , Soil Conservation Service, St. Paul , Minnesota. The disturbed areas will be kept as small as possible and they will be stabilized as soon as possible in order to minimize the amount of erosion. The storm water runoff velocities.-will be -kept-low -in order- to - protect the - disturbed areas and to control , reduce and delay stormwater runoff. Sediment will be contained within a corridor or specific 3 site area. The specific control devices to be used will include temporary sediment ponds, hay bale diversions placed around storm sewer inlets, and geo-textile filter fabric fencing. Skimmers will be used to contain sediment on site and prevent it from entering the storm sewer system during construction, and retaining walls will be used . There is an existing sedimentation/retention pond on the west side of the project site which extends off-site which will be used. After Construction - The completed project will generate surface and storm water runoff. A preliminary drainage plan has been prepared for the project and is included as exhibit G of the EnvironmentalAssessment Worksheet. More detailed site-sensitive drainage, grading and erosion control plans will be formulated prior to the start of construction on the project. Surface water will flow from the project site into a pond, the location of which has not been determined. The rate of discharge of stormwater runoff into the pond will be approximately 82 cubic feet per second. The existing pond on the site has capacity to ' handle twice the volume of stormwater runoff from the project - site from a 100-year frequency storm: - - - Sanitary Sewer - There will be no discharge directly into the groundwaters from this project. Stormwater will be conveyed to an existing stormwater sedimentation/retention pond prior to reaching downstream watercourses . This will allow for evaporation and some permeation into the existing sandy soils. Because of the use of the existing sedimentation/retention pond, the stormwater discharged into the downstream watercourses will not contain any significant amounts of silt. The site will also generate sanitary wastewater. The projected amount of effluent in gallons per day will be directly correlated with the number of patrons in attendance at any particular event. The peak gallons per event is 85 , 000 and the minimum gallonage for an event of 3 ,500 patrons is 17 ,500 gallons. This calculation is based upon a per capita generation of 5 gallons per day per patron and 13 gallons per day per employee on non-event days. The sanitary sewer system will be connected to the City of Shakopee' s sanitary sewer system. The existing city sewer system has the capacity to handle peak daily flows. ,,. D. Air Ouali v and Noise Air Quality During Construction - During construction the project will generate some particulate matter in to the atmosphere . Fugitive or wind-blown dust generated by construction activities will constitute a short term adverse air quality impact of theproposed project. There will, however, be only minimal disturbance of existing vegetation and watering, if required, will be employed to reduce the amount of dust generated by construction activities. 4 site area. The specific control devices to be used will include temporary sediment ponds, hay bale diversions placed around storm sewer inlets, and geo-textile filter fabric fencing. Skimmers will be used to contain sediment on site and prevent it from entering the storm sewer system during construction , and retaining walls will be used . There is an existing sedimentation/retention pond on the west side of the project site which extends off-site which will be used. After Construction - The completed project will generate surface and storm water runoff. A preliminary drainage plan has been prepared for the project and is included as exhibit G of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. More detailed site-sensitive drainage, grading and erosion control plans will be formulated prior to the start of construction on the project. Surface water will flow from the project site into a pond, the location of which has not been determined. The rate of discharge of stormwater runoff into the pond will be approximately 82 cubic feet per second. The existing pond on the site has capacity to. handle twice the volume of stormwater runoff from the project . site from a 100-year frequency storm: Sanitary Sewer Sewer - There will be no discharge directly into the groundwaters from this project. Stormwater will be conveyed to an existing stormwater sedimentation/retention pond prior to reaching downstream watercourses . This will allow for evaporation and some permeation into the existing sandy soils . Because of the use of the existing sedimentation/retention pond, the stormwater discharged into the downstream watercourses will not contain any significant amounts of silt. The site will also generate sanitary wastewater. The projected amount of effluent in gallons per day will be directly correlated with the number of patrons in attendance at any particular event. The peak gallons per event is 85 , 000 and the minimum gallonage for an event of 3 ,500 patrons is 17 ,500 gallons. This calculation is based upon a per capita generation of 5 gallons per day per patron and 13 gallons per day per employee on non-event days. The sanitary sewer system will be connected to the City of Shakopee' s sanitary sewer system. The existing city sewer system has the capacity to handle peak daily flows. D. Air Oualitv and Noise Air Ouality During Construction - During construction the project will generate some particulate matter in to the atmosphere . Fugitive or wind-blown dust generated by construction activities will constitute a short term adverse air quality impact of the proposed project. There will, however, be only minimal disturbance of existing vegetation and watering, if required, will be employed to reduce the amount of dust generated - by construction activities. 4 Air Ouality After Construction - The air quality impact of the vehicles generated by the proposed project has been analyzed using MOBILE III emission factors and the CALINE 3 dispersion computer model from the California Department of Transportation. The MOBILE III factors are those currently approved by EPA. (See EAW pp 12-18) . Carbon Monoxide ( CO) modeling is necessary so that any adverse air quality impacts may be identified. The modeling used in the EAW concentrates exclusively on mobile sources, including cars and trucks. These are the major sources of this pollutant. The CO modeling methodology is that found in Guidelines for Air Ouality Maintenance Planning and Analysis Volume ( Revised ) : Evaluating Indirect Sources . As published by the U . S . Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air , Noise . and Radiation. (This is EPA publication-450/4-78-001 .) This is a standard manual for air quality analysis. which is accepted by Federal and State regulatory agencies. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) indicates that this project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects; however, - there is some difference of opinion at this time on whether there is a need to conduct additional background CO monitoring forair - quality analysis. The PCA is of the opinion that the CO monitoring from the Canterbury Downs Environmental Impact Statement may not be current enough. The consultant employed by the developer (Barton-Aschmann and Associates) is of the opinion that the updating of the CO model is valid for purposes of the EAW. The subject is presently being discussed and evaluated by the MPCA and Barton-Aschman and Associates. If it is determined that there is a need for additional CO background monitoring, this will be required at the time of approval of the projects ' Indirect Source Permit (ISP) . (An ISP is a regulatory device which must be obtained for, among other things. facilities which generate large amounts of vehicular traffic. ) Noise generated by heavy equipment employed on the project site for grading and construction will constitute a short term adverse impact. This equipment will be muffled in accordance to applicable State regulations. A study of the impact of noise caused by traffic generated by the project, along with background traffic, was prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. That analysis indicated that no MPCA noise level standard would be exceeded ( see EAW p 18) . Performance Nosie - A detailed study of the impact of amplified performance sound on the residential areas adjacent to the project site was prepared by the developer ' s sound consultant, Jaffe Acoustics, Inc. ( Copy of study on file) . The sound study concluded that the intensity of sound generated by the project was within state and local noise standards. The MPCA indicated that they thought the project would not violate state standards but that if problems were to arise as a result of 5 amplified performances the noise levels could be controlled at the stage mix (see MPCA letter dated July 8 , 1987 ) . In this particular case, that condition would be included in the ISP for the project. The MPCA also noted that the nearest residence was located 4,400 feet (in excess of 3/4 mile) away from the project at the Canterbury Inn Hotel. E. Solid and Hazardous Wastes The project will not generate any hazardous waste. The project will generate approximately 22 cubic yards per week of conventional solid waste during that time of the year when the Music Center is in operation. There are adequate disposal sites available for this solid waste. F. Fish. Wildlife and Plants The project site does have one small existing wetland which will be preserved. The site is of limited value for wildlife in that it is located in the middle of an industrial park. The entire project area is of limited value for wildlife and it does not harbor any species which have been identified as rare, endangered, threatened or of special concern. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife proposed Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge Areas are all located north of the Minnesota River and will not be impacted by this project. . The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources indicated after reviewing the EAW that they have no comments or concerns regarding this project (see DNR letter dated July 14 , 1987) . G. Archaeoloeicat and Historical Resources The proposed project does not contain any known sites of historic, architectural , cultural, archaeological , or engineering significance. There are also no sites in the vicinity of the project site which are on the National Register of Historic Places or which are eligible for inclusion on the National Register. This conclusion is shared by the Minnesota Historical Society, the State agency responsible for commenting on this part of the EAW .( see MHS letter dated June 30, 1987) . i H. Parks and Recreational Resources The project area will not result in the impairment or destruction of any designated park or recreation area. I. Other Resources - The project area does not contain any prime or unique farmlands, nor does it contain any ecologically sensitive areas, scenic views or vistas or other unique natural resources. 6 be controlled at e mix (see MPGA letter dated July 8 , 1987 ) • In this amplified performances the noise levels cool ISP for the stag that condition would be included in the particular case, from the project the project. The MPCA also noted mile) awayest residence was located 4 ,400 feet lnnnHoteexcess at the Canterbury E d H- arao +s Wasts.5. The project will not generate any hazardous waste. The roximately 22 cubic yards per week of waste during that time of the year when the project will generate app adequate disposal sites conventional solid operation. There are Music Center is in available for this so solid waste. F s dlif and P1anY.;£ wetland which The project site does have one small existing The ark. will be preserved. The site is of limited value for wildlife in that it is located in the middle of an industrial P does entire project area is of limited val ubeehr dentif iedn as trare, not harbor any species ofisp have threatened or special concern.. The U.S. Fish and endangered, National Wldlife Refuwill not Areas be Wildlife proposed Minnesota Valley so aartment of Natural are all located north ec the The Minnesota 1Dep and have no impacted by this prof the EAW that they Resources indicated after revs thi gproject (see DNR letter dated comments or concerns regarding July 14 , 1987) • G. of o¢i cap and u; toric a urce_s contain any known sites of The proposed project does not or engineering historic, architectural , sites in the cultural , archaeological , of the significance. There are n the Nations Regi terl of vicinity project site which are on the National Places or which are eligible for inclusion on the Minnesota Historiacy agency responsible for commenting on this p Register . This conclusion is shared by 1987) • Society , the State of the EAW (see MHS letter dated June 30, H. p s and Aecrea" ^ impairment or The project area will not result ethe destruction of any designated park or recreation area. a t Other ReZQ1Yrce9 contain any rime or unique The project area does not sensitive areas, w farmlands, nor does it contain any ecologically s or vistas or other unique natural resources. scenic vie 6 J. Community Services, Transportation and Energy Transportation - A traffic impact analysis for the project area was prepared by the developers engineering consultant, Barton-Aschman Associates , Inc . The conclusions of the developers consultant ( Barton-Aschman) were that a level of service D will occur once during the 6 :30 - 7 :30 P . M. peak weekday time period ( time of concert arrival ) at the major intersection for the project area, which is Valley Park Drive and T.H. 101 ( see EAW p 26) . (The concept of a traffic level of service is a qualitature measure of the ability of a transportation facility to accomodate traffic. Six levels of service have been established and are designated by the letters A through F, providing for best to worse service in terms of driver satisfaction. Level of Service C is a condition of stable traffic flow with vehicle speed an maneuverability being controlled by traffic volumns. Level of Service D is a condition whereby the flow of traffic approaches a state of instability. Tolerable operating speeds can usually be maintained although they are affected by changes in operating conditions which result in substantial drops in operating speeds. Levels of Service D can be tolerated for short periods of time. ) - This is the result of the concurrence of a high level of existing Canterbury traffic with high levels of traffic which generally utilize T.H. 101. The weekend traffic analysis indicates that a level of service D will also occur at the intersection of Valley Park Drive and T.H. 101 as well as at the intersection of T.H. 101 and County Road 18 and at the intersection of County Road 83 and T.H. 101 (see EAW p 18) . The developer will stagger the starting times of various events, most notably the Canterbury Racetrack and Starwood Music Center, in order to minimize the amount of traffic congestion in the area . The Minnesota Department of Transportation, after reviewing the project, indicated that they anticipated little adverse impact on transportation facilities in the area. The Metropolitan Council did indicate some concern relative to traffic impacts in the area (see Mn DOT letter dated July 13, 1987) . The Metropolitan Council stated that the EAW did not identify any mitigating measures to alleviate area traffic impacts. They further stated that the EAW should be revised to include appropriate traffic mitigation measures ( see Metro Council letter dated July 14, 1987) . This information has been prepared and will be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council staff prior to the time of City Council action on the proposed EAW. The traffic congestion in the area can be minimized by the use of proper mitigating procedures. Water and Sewer - Existing water and -sanitary sewer lines are available for extension into the project site to service the project and the existing systems are adequate to accommodate this project. 7 Fire Service - The City of Shakopee Fire Department can provide adequate fire protection for the project area. Police Service - Police protection for the project will be provided by either the City of Shakopee Police Department and/or other law enforcement agencies. The project proposer will negotiate any necessary contracts for police protection to service the project. The cost of police protection will be borne by Starwood. III. ACCUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR ANTICIPATED FUTURE PROJECTS The project does not involve related or phased actions which will cause accumulative impact on the environment. The project will not induce future development which will result in accumulative impact on the environment. IV. EXTENT TO WHICH THE ENVIRONMENTAL. AFFECTS ARE SUBJECT TO MITIGATTDN BY ON-GOING PUBLIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY A. The City of Shakopee will have to approve -a- Conditional Use Permit ( CUP) for the project prior to the beginning of construction. B. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) will have to issue an Indirect Source Permit (ISP) for the project prior to the operation of the Music Center. If it is determined that there is a need for monitoring of background carbon monoxide for air quality analysis purposes this requirement will be contained in the ISP. If it is determined that the adjusted model which was used in the EAW is sufficient then it will not be necessary for this requirement to be contained in the ISP . In either instance , the Carbon Monoxide ( CO) level in the atmosphere will be controlled by the ISP if necessary . C. The control of amplified noise levels from the stage of the project area can be controlled by an appropriate stage mix and will be regulated as a condition of the ISP if this is found to be necessary. D. If it is found that there is a need for the identification of mitigating measures to alleviate traffic impact, this can be included in the Conditional Use Permit issued by the City of Shakopee and/or it will be addressed by the MPCA in the ISP. 8 Fire Service - The City of Shakopee Fire Department can provide adequate fire protection for the project area. Police Service - Police protection for the project will be provided by either the City of Shakopee Police Department and/or other law enforcement agencies. The project proposer will negotiate any necessary contracts for police protection to service the project. The cost of police protection will be borne by Starwood. III. ACCUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR ANTICIPATED FUTURE PROJECTS The project does not involve related or phased actions which will cause accumulative impact on the environment. The project will not induce future development which will result in accumulative impact on the environment. IV. EXTENT TO WHICH THF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFECTS ARF SU13JECT TO MITIGATION BY ON-GOING PUBLIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY A. The City of Shakopee- will have to approve -aConditional Use Permit ( CUP) for the project prior to the beginning of construction. B. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) will have to issue an Indirect Source Permit (ISP) for the project prior to the operation of the Music Center. If it is determined that there is a need for monitoring of background carbon monoxide for air quality analysis purposes this requirement will be contained in the ISP. If it is determined that the adjusted model which was used in the EAW is sufficient then it will not be necessary for this requirement to be contained in the ISP. In either instance , the Carbon Monoxide (CO) level in the atmosphere will be controlled by the ISP if necessary. C. The control of amplified noise levels from the stage of the project area can be controlled by an appropriate stage mix and will be regulated as a condition of the ISP if this is found to be necessary. D. If it is found that there is a need for the identification of mitigating measures to alleviate traffic impact, this can be included in the Conditional Use Permit issued by the City of Shakopee and/or it will be addressed by the MPCA in the ISP. 8 CONCLUSIONS Based upon the findings of fact, four issues possibly having an effect on the environment emerged as a result of the environmental review process. These are: 1. The possible need to monitor background CO. There is a divergence of options on this issue between the MPCA and the developers engineering consultant. If it is determined that additional monitoring must occur this will a conditions of the ISP. 2. The possible need to control noise levels can be accomplished by appropriate stage mixes and this can be made a condition of the ISP, if necessary. 3. The possible need to identify mitigating measures to alleviate traffic impacts. If this is determined to be a problem then this can be included as one of the requirements of the Conditional Use Permit for the project. Subsequent to the, preparation of the EAW the developers engineering consultant has prepared plan for the mitigation of traffic impacts in the area surrounding the project ( copy on file in Community Development Department ) . The developer will be required to adhere to the recommendations contained in this report , as of the date of this memo the Metropolitan Council has not commented on this item. 4 . The Metropolitan Councils comments on the need to update the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan do not relate directly to the EAW. The Metropolitan Council has indicated that the proposed Amphitheater is inconsistent with the industrial uses designated in the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan. They further indicate that the EAW should be revised to indicate the project will require a Comprehensive Plan amendment. It is the opinion of both the City staff and the developer that the Starwood Music Center is consistent with the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan and the Shakopee Zoning Ordinance. A minor commercial recreational facility , as defined by the Shakopee Zoning Ordinance , is a conditionally permitted use in the I-2 zone. When the Canterbury Downs Racetrack was constructed it was a permitted use in the I-2 zone. It is the City staff' s opinion that if the Canterbury Downs Racetrack was consistent with the industrial land use classification of the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan in 1984 , then the Starwood Amphitheater is also consistent with the industrial land use classification of the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan in 1987. The staff 9 is also of the opinion that both the racetrack and the proposed amphitheater are compatible with the other uses in the Canterbury Industrial Park. The work program of the Department of Community Development of the City of Shakopee envisions that the entire Shakopee Comprehensive Plan will be reviewed and amended as necessary within the next year. At that time, the location of commercial recreational uses in the industrial land use area will be further evaluated. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt Resolution A 2765. 2. Do not adopt Resolution S 2765. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions contained within this report, the City staff recommends the adoption of Resolution 9 2765 Making a Negative Declaration on the Need for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Starwood Music Center. ACTION REQUESTED Move to adopt Resolution 6 2765 Making a Negative Declaration on the Need for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Starwood Music Center. 10 is also of the opinion that both the racetrack and the proposed amphitheater are compatible with the other uses in the Canterbury Industrial Park. The work program of the Department of Community Development of the City of Shakopee envisions that the entire Shakopee Comprehensive Plan will be reviewed and amended as necessary within the next year. At that time, the location of commercial recreational uses in the industrial land use area will be further evaluated. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt Resolution P 2765. 2 . Do not adopt Resolution 0 2765. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions contained within this report, the City staff recommends the adoption of Resolution S 2765 Making a Negative Declaration on the Need for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Starwood Music Center. ACTION REOUESTED Move to adopt Resolution 9 2765 Making a Negative Declaration on the Need for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Starwood Music Center. 10 /3zz, RESOLUTION N0. 2765 A RESOLUTION MAKING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR THE STARWOOD MUSIC CENTER WHEREAS, the Starwood Music Center proposal located 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 EAW 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 Starwood Music Centet EAW. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City Council that a negative declaration is hereby, made on the Starwood Music Center EAW. 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