HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/01/1987 7�u
' MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: August 27, 1987
1. Transportation issues are crucial for Shakopee so on Tuesday
I will be asking for a Council volunteer to serve on the Met
Council' s Transportation Advisory Board. Only elected
officials are eligible and the AMM is looking for a Scott or
Carver County representative to replace an Eden Prairie
official who just resigned. The Board meets in St. Paul at
the Metro Square Building on the 3rd Wednesday of the month
from 2 to 4 p.m.
2. Robert Vierling who owns the property at the intersection of
Fourth Avenue and Sommerville was sited by the City and
scheduled for Court to require him to clean up the junk on
his property and comply with our exterior storage ordinance.
Prior to the court date his attorney agreed to either clean
the material up or properly screen it by October 13th. We
will review his progress in mid-September.
3. 1 have instructed Howard Jones to begin stringent
enforcement of the portable sign ordinance with regard to
small metal signs placed out on the sidewalk or boulevard by
gas stations and convenience centers. This has been an
ongoing sore spot between the City and these facilities so
you may hear about our "inconsistant" enforcement.
4. Attached is a letter to Council in opposition to the
Starwood facility. As in the past, letters that have not
been signed have been included in the informational items.
5. Attached is a letter from the Chamber of Commerce thanking
the City for assisting them in their move.
6. Attached is a letter from Fred Corrigan to LeRoy Houser
regarding our follow-up in investigating the adequacy of
handicapped facilities at Canterbury Downs.
7. Attached is a letter from Dennis Kraft to Fred Corrigan
specifically siting page 32 of the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) regarding the Racetrack's use of the access
road on County Road #16. we will consider this issue
resolved unless we receive further notice from Canterbury
Downs.
8. Attached is a copy of the Report of Commissioners regarding
the valleyfair Condemnation. Our appraisal was set at
$112,000.00. To that must be added an additional $5,000.00
for legal services, $4,000.00 for City appraisal services
and testimony and $500.00 for Valleyfair' s appraisal. The
award for the permanent right-of-way taking was $163 ,480.00
and the temporary taking was $3,800.00. These amounts
include whatever value was attributed to the removal of
their marque. This amount is significantly less than
Valleyfair' s request and at the lower end of the estimates
Rod Krass had forecast for a settlement. These amounts are
acceptable to Bradford Development which will be absorbing
the bulk of costs through assessments to benefitted
properties. If the award is not appealed Council will be
receiving it for official action. If you have questions
please contact me.
9. Attached is a notice for a seminar in Minneapolis on
September 28, 1987 on Council-Manager Relations. Council-
members interested in attending should contact Jeanette for
reservations.
10. Attached is a memo from the League of Minnesota Cities
regarding Medicare for re-elected Mayors and Councilmembers.
11. Attached is an AMM activity report.
12. Tom Brownell spoke with the DNR about getting some publicity
on the new hunting available at the Wilkie Regional Park.
Articles appeared in the Shakopee Valley News and
Minneapolis Star and Tribune.
13. Attached is a copy of Joe Zak' s appeal of the Planning
Commission Conditional Use Permit (CUP) award for the
Starwood Amphitheather. We have attached to Mr. Zak' s
letter a copy of his traffic impact analysis and a copy of
his analysis on surrounding neighborhoods and communities.
Both of these items will go to Planning Commission with
their September 3rd agenda packets as an info item. This
will be coming before city Council in memo form from the
City Planner for Council action on the appeal. The appeal
of the CUP is scheduled for September 22, 1987 at 7:00 p.m.
at the Courthouse (third floor) .
Also attached is a copy of The scottland Companies appeal.
14. Attached is a letter from senator Durenberger responding to
our concerns about proposals to impose federal tax increases
on local governments.
15. Attached is the monthly calendar for September.
16. Attached are the agendas for the September 6, 1987 meetings
of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning
Commission.
X17. Attached is the agenda for the September 5, 1987 meeting of
the Industrial Commercial Commission and minutes from their
July 22, 1987 meeting.
18. Attached are the minutes of the August 6, 1987 meetings of
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission.
19. Attached are the minutes of the August 20, 1987 meeting of
the Planning Commission.
20. Attached are the minutes of the August 12, 1987 meeting of
the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee.
21. Attached is the Engineering Department' s August project
status report.
22. The ordinance being drafted which provides provisions for
the licensing of outdoor performance centers will be on the
September 15th agenda rather than the September 1st agenda.
JKA/jms
y
��
9
.�
l
7
��
�{�, ,
�- �
5
(;8pee
hako CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
iiECEIVEti
August 19, 1987 M2 611
CITY OF SHAKOPFE
The Honorable City Council:
I wish to express my personal, and the Chamber of Commerce Thanks
to the City Employees and City Council in their assistance in
moving us to our new Chamber building. I was appointed by the
Chamber of Commerce board of Directors to acquire someone to move
us. And once again you made my easy. Thanks again for your
consistant cooperation.
Very Sincerely,
Dr. W. Adair Muralt
1801 Trunk Hwy. 101 P.O.Box 203 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 612-445-1660
AgR
REVED
CANTUBURY AUG,81987
D O W N S
CI'rY OF SHAKOPEE
August 17, 1987
Mr. Leroy Hauser
City Building Inspector
City of Shakopee
129 First Ave. E.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Hauser:
RE: Handicapped Facilities at Canterbury Downs
I am in receipt of a letter from Bruce Malkerson informing
me of a complaint received by the City of Shakopee regarding
handicapped facilities at the racetrack.
Please be advised that we have the same amount of
facilities for wheelchair and handicapped patrons, both inside
the Grandstand and in the Parking lots, as we did in 1985 when
we were inspected by the State of Minnesota.
Please be advised that we have made changes in seating
arrangements and parking lot layout since that time, attempting
to improve our service to these patrons. These changes have
not reduced the total available facilities.
It is my intent to contact the Minnesota State Council for
the Handicapped and ask that they review our facilities for
compliance at this time.
Please be assured of our continuing efforts to maintain a
handicapped accessible facility.
Yours s' r2 ,
re J. Cor gan
�. Di ctor o Operations
cc: Bruce Malkerson
Mike Manning -
FJC/ljc
Canterbury Downs/1100 Canterbury Road/P.O. Box 508/Shakopee,Minnesota 55379/(612)445-7223
CITY OF SHAKOPEE •
INCORPORATED 1870
1:6 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 553781376 (612) 4463650 ,
August 19 , 1987
Mr. Fred Corrigan
Canterbury Downs
1100 Canterbury Road
P.O. Box 508
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Corrigan:
This will be regarding Canterbury Downs County Road #16
Driveway.
Mr. John Anderson has requested that I respond to your
letter of August 9, 1987 regarding the racetrack access road to
County Road #16. According to comments made in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the racetrack the access
road off of County Road #16 was described as the one which would
be least utilized. This gate, according the EIS, would remain
closed for all events, except occasionally when it would be used
for peak day time events to provide some relieve for the
remaining gates. If this gate is used in the manner described in
the EIS it is my opinion that it would also comply with the
conditions of both the Conditional Use Permit and the PCA
Indirect Source Permit.
Please let me know if you would like to discuss this subject
at greater length.
Very truly yours,�
/9-106
Dennis R. Kraft
Community Development Director
Attachment
cc: John Anderson, City Administrator
Tom Brownell, Police Chief
Bruce Malkerson, Scottland Companies
DRK:trw
The Heart of Progress Valley
AN EO Wt�7 EMI VER
Percent Direction of Approach
TH 41 Bridge 3
TH 169 Bridge - 10
CSAH 18 North 15
TH 101 East 59
CR 42 East - - 12
CR 83 South I
TH 169 South 6
Figure 4.2.4 indicates the direction of approach on the existing highway system
which would be used until future roadway improvements are completed. Direction
of approach for d-sign day events as well as for peak events are shown. Due to the.
magnitude of th.: crowd during peak events, approach directions were modified
somewhat. The majority of these modifications were minor except for traffic
approaching on County Road 42 from the east. During peak events, it is
anticipated that larger crowds would be attending from outside the metropolitan
area and that people living to the east (primarily Dakota County) would use this
route to reach the racetrack.
Figure 4.2.5 shows the direction of approach once the proposed future highway
system in the area is completed. Major differences between Figure 4.2.4 and
Figure 4.2.5 are due to the construction of the proposed Shakopee Bypass and the
reconstruction of County State Aid Highway 18.
Once inside the study area,-trips are distributed in a logical manner to access the
site. For arriving traffic, approximately one-half of the westbound site traffic on
TH 101 access the site at Valley Park Drive. Of the remaining half, two-thirds use
CR 83 and one-third uses the north-south collector street. For traffic leaving the
site, parking lot controls will be used to insure that eastbound traffic on TH 101 is
- as nearly as possible distributed equally among the three exits that lead to TH 101
(North-South collector street, CR 83 and Valley Park Drive). Eastbound traffic
arriving on TH 101 will use the North-South collector primarily. Likewise for
westbound traffic leaving the site via TH 101.
Five entrances to the racetrack site are assumed: two are off CR 83, one is off
4th Avenue, one is off the proposed North-South collector on the western boundary
of the site, and one is off CSAH 16. This last gate will be the least utilized. It will
remain closed for all events, except occasionally when it will be used during peak
daytime events to provide some relief for the remaining gates.
4.2.3.3 Non-Site Traffic
In order to determine background traffic in the vicinity of the site, traffic counts
were taken along Trunk Highway 101 at Valley Park Drive and County Road 83, on
Friday, August 26, and Saturday, August 27, 1983. During these periods, Valleyfair
as well as the Renaissance Festival and State Fair were operating. In addition,
traffic counts conducted on the above days for use in determining racetrack
background traffic were taken on days (Friday and Saturday) when the Little Six
Bingo Parlor was in session. . Consequently, it is felt that these counts represent
worst case background traffic conditions. To preserve this "worst case" quality, no
32
RF( EWrrf
LAW OFMCES As 2 0 1AB? lC .
KRASS & MONROE
CHARTERED CITY QF &HAKQPEE
Phillip R. Kann
Dennn L.Monroe - Marschall Road Busin Center'
Barry K.Meyer 327 M .lull Road
Trevor R.Walden P.O. Box 216
Elizabeth B. McLaughlin
Susan L.Estill Shakopee,Minnesota 55379
Diane M.Carlson Telephone 4455080
Lyndon P.rielson
Kent A.Carlson.CPA
August 19, 1987
Mr. G. Larry Griffith
Dorsey S Whitney
2200 First Bank Place East
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Re: Valleyfair Condemnation
Our File No. 1-1373-184
Dear Mr. Griffith:
Enclosed and served upon you by United States mail please find the
Report of Commissioner with regard to the above—referenced matter.
Very truly yours,
BRASS S MONROE CHARTERED
Phillip R. Brass
PRK:jar:mlw
Enclosure
cc: City of Shakopee
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COUNTY AND
COUNTY OF SCOTT DISTRICT COURTS
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
612 445-7750 EXT. 200 - MICE
ItLIUE MAT ER OF'
CASE NUMBER 86-00446
TO: KRASS, PHILLIP R PLAINTIFF - CITY OF SHAKOFEE
F'.0 BOX 216 VS.
SFAKOPEE MN 55379 DEFENDANT - CEDAR FAIR LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
BE ADVISED THAT WAN) REPORT OF COMMSSIONER
- SIGNED BY THE HONORABLE AND DATED AUGUST 14, 1987,
_ WAS FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR ON AUGUST 14, 1987, AND A COPY OF SAID
ORDER IS APPENDED HERETO.
HARK E. MAGGIO
COURT AL01NISTRATOR
I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS BY FIRST CLASS U.S. MAIL ON 87-08-15.
DEPUTY CLEFT(
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF SCOTT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
SUBJECT MATTER INDEX NO.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Shakopee, a
municipal corporation,
COURT FILE N0. ;86-00446
Petitioner,
VS.
Cedar Fair Limited Partnership,
a Minnesota limited partnership;
First Central Servcice Corp., an REPORT OF COMMISSIONER
Iowa corporation; State of
Minnesota; Chicago and Northwestern
Transportation Company, a Delaware CCJ_ IY J
corporation; Geo. Ben: 6 Sons, Inc., CC(i `9BJ
a Minnesota corporation; Curtis M.
Bradford; Hennepin County Park CCG
Reserve District, a public corporation; JS
Respondents.
-----------------_--------------------__----_-----------------------`-------
TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA:
The undersigned commissioners appointed by the District Court of Scott
County by Order dated February 28, 1986, to ascertain damages suffered by the
owners of real property described in the petition heretofore filed in the above-
entitled proceedings due hereby report that, having first duly qualified as
required by law, viewed the premises hereinafter described, and heard the testi-
mony offered on behalf of the interested parties, hereby assess and award dama-
ges for the taking herein to each person claiming any interest therein as follows:
Parcel A
That part of Section 3, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County,
Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the intersec-
tion of the northerly right-of-way line of State Trunk
Highway 00. 101 Ana Che North/004th quarter line of adN
Section 3; thence on and assumed bearing of North 73 degrees
15 minutes 41 seconds West, along said northerly right-of-
-1-
way line, 205.00 feet; thence North 16 degrees 44 minutes
19 seconds East, a distance of 150.00 feet; thence South 73
degrees 15 minutes 41 seconds East, parallel with said
northerly right-of-way line, 162.16 feet to its intersection
with the said North/South Quarter line; thence South 0
degrees 48 minutes 00 seconds West, along said Quarter
line, 156.00 feet to the point of beginning.
Said permanent easement contains 27,538 squar^ feet more or less.
Amount of award $ 1,1-'3 yW O, D v
Parcel "AA"
That part of Section 3, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County,
Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the intersec-
tion of the northerly right-of-way line of State Trunk
Highway No. 101 and the North/South Quarter line of said
Section 3; thence North 0 degrees 48 minutes 00 seconds
East, assumed bearing, along said North/South Quarter line
130.00 feet to the point of beginning of the easement to be
described; thence North 73 degrees 15 minutes 41 seconds
West, parallel with said northerly right-of-way line, 169.30
feet; thence North 16 degrees 44 minutes 19 seconds East, a
distance of 150.00 feet; thence South 73 degrees 15 minutes
41 seconds East a distance of 126.46 feet to its intersection
with said North/South Quarter line; thence South 0 degrees
48 minutes 00 seconds West along said North/South Quarter
line a distance of 156.00 feet to the point of beginning.
Said temporary easement contains 22,182 square feet more or less.
Amount of award $ 3 ,000 �00
We further report that the performance of our duties as commissioners
required the following for services and expenses:
1. Ray Joachim days / n/ mileage $ 1" 1-3. o
2. Owen Reebe days ko mileage $ $ /21 80
3. Majorie Henderson dl days 9' mileage $ 54 p/, 9'1,1
TOTAL $
Dated at Minnesota, this / L.{. day of August, 1987.
Ray
\J Ac m
0osin N1
Owen Reebe
ori ie. /Xom����
Major nderson
-2-
c�
COUNCIL MANAGER
RELA IONS
POLICY LEADER SEMINARS
September 24 ♦ Louisville, Kentucky September 28 ♦ Minneapolis, Minnesota
September 26 ♦ Alexandria, Virginia September 30 ♦ Denver, Colorado
SEMINAR OVERVIEW You should make your own hotel reservations at the site
The seminars will focus en the roles and responsibilities you selectTy calling or writing one ol—ifie hbtTs listed
here. Ask for the special rate for the NLCACMA
of mayors,council members,and managers and will Council-Manager Relations Seminar.
address the following issues:
• Major trends affecting and changing these dynamic The deadline for room reservations is August 23, 1987.
After that date, requests for lodging will be filled on
rola a space available basis.
• Methods to measure and evaluate effectiveness and
productivity If you plan to arrive arta 6 p.m.,you must guarantee
• Ways mayors,council members,and managers can your reservations by providing credit card information
work together to improve efficiency and productivity. or by sending a check for one night's lodging in advance.
FEATURED SPEAKERS
—Dr.James Svam,Associate Professor at the Univer- Sewember M ZE
sity of North Carolina,Greensboro,and author of many Loueviae,Kvmeky.The CA House Fact innapo
research articles on council-manager relations (soi)see-3300 and Pa et,and Sinleroom$59.50/ s
—BIH Evans,with Cnd int McCormick, a Double roam$69.50
consultant to local and international governments on seplemb<r 30
issues of management and productivity. sepiolite m Denver,Cmmado
Alevnad.,Virginia' Mardon City Center
—One elected and one appointed official from each Radivon Mark Plan Hotel (303)292-1300
(703)MS-1010 or(800)228-9590(loll free)
region. Singl<romn SM/Double mom SIM single or double room SM
WHO SHOULD ATTEND
Mayors,council members,and managers from cities of
all sizes are encouraged to attend.We also recommend •lbew sessions will proceed annual conventions ofthe Kentucky
t at participa-ts attend in pairs o=tea-s.— — — =mav eague=n trio Virginia Munl-1-pal i.eag=e. — —
I have enclosed a regmradon fee fo,:
City name - _ gpg_ NLC direct of ass«ige member or ICMA
Membership category mambo,(wounum 1)
❑ NLC Direct Member ❑ $CMA Member k 90'— _._additional NLC or ICMA members(dl otber
❑ NLC Associate Member ❑ Non-member leen members from moose,rnKs)
8125 A all other non-members of NLC or ICMA
Participants: TDTALS
1) Name _ - Mate checks payable to he National Lague of Cities and
Tille — noun in. Couna-Manager Rel.n.-Semina
National League of Cisin
2) Name _. — - — 1301 Pennsylvania Awo.a .N.W.
Tide - — — <aeaarnen, +d vanttreyara—Aswember<.1912
Aft'm IM1+I doe you mayull NLC a(=)6W 3115 m retia
Contact name — — [ellanonx in wririnB will be xcN1N M NLG um
swmn .I d.:<wm
Address _ %subieeno+sss m[M1UB.No rtwax walxm+ae aver
Sepembn u.Iw"/.
City/stale/zip ,oaorv2 u>F[mar _ (OMA
- Y
M--
Phooenumbert I ---- FC —_CC. ___ _ . OTHER_ .,C_
will Wead NNNWMMrr�•••-
uu
/b
U league of minnesota cities
To: Mayors, Managers and Clerks
From: Ann Higgins, Federal Liaison
Ann Houle, Research Assistant
Date: August 19, 1987
Re: Medicare for Re-elected Mayors and Council Members
Some city officials have recently attended meetings at which
representatives of the St. Paul office of the Internal Revenue
Service stated that contributions for Medicare tax must be
deducted from the wages of mayors and council members who have
been re-elected since March 31, 1986. However, according to
the Washington, D.C. Office of the U.S. Department of the
Treasury, this is not a correct interpretation. Medicare tax
contributions should not be deducted from the wages of
re-elected mayors and council members.
Janet Kohler, an attorney with the Treasury Department, has
stated that the "continuing employment exception" for the
Medicare tax applies to mayors and council members. (Elected
officials are classified as city employees under the Internal
Revenue Code. ) Under the IRS Revenue Ruling 86-88 of July 14,
1986, the continuing employment exception applies to employees
who were working for the city before April 1, 1986, and who
were not terminated after March 31, 1986. A mayor or council
member who is re-elected is not terminated, since the new term
follows immediately after the previous term.
If you have any further questions concerning Medicare coverage,
please contact Ann Houle at the League office.
eFr.
PUG 11981
C(Ty OF SHAKOPEE(
` � 1 63 university avenue east. st. paul. minnesota 55101 (B12) 227-5600
i .e MVET were channeled to Highway User instead of the General
Fund, most of the shortage and thus problem would be resolved.
The second major topic centered on levy limits. A majority of
officials would like to push for elimination but realize that
there is a very real problem in the intertwining of Levy Limits,
Local Government Aid and Homestead Credit which needs to be
resolved. Also, besides, the fact that the chairs of both House
and Senate Tax Committees are strong proponents of levy limits,
some .local officials fear that without them, the legislators would
shift many additional financial burdens into local government and
property tax payers. The answer may lie in achieving a rational
index with out artifical floor or ceiling. Finally, the
participants expressed concern about holding their legislators
accountable, developing a voting scorecard, or some other mechanism
that will help publicize the effeciveness of various legislators
where local issues are at stake.
All in all the breakfasts were productive and generated several
good issues to be taken to the policy committees. They achieved
the goal of fostering interactive communications with Board/Staff
and members.
3• SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY:
As noted in the summary of the "Outreach Meetings" , there was
stong support for a process to keep city officials better informed
as to how Legislators vote on major city issues. A number of
"Associations" at both the State and Federal level do have a
"scorecard" type procedure to track the votes of Legislators on
issues that are key to that particular association. There are
significant "pros and cons" involved with the concept and the AMM
Board has appointed a special committee to study this proposal and
report back to the Board. Larry Bakken, Golden Valley
Councilmember, AMM Board Director and Hamline University Law
Professor, will Chair this committee. Other members are Duke
Addicks, Minneapolis; Mark Bernhardson, Orono, Benno Salewki , St.
Paul, and Maria Vasiliou, Plymouth Councilmember. The committee is
very much interested in receiving input from member city officials
with respect to this idea and will hold its initial meeting on
August 26th.
2
CB 1J L L E TIN
association of
metropolitancIVE�
municipalities
August 14 , 1987 X1987
T0: AMM Member Cities COITY OF SH.4KOAEE
FROM: Vern Peterson, Executive Director
Roger Peterson, Director of Legislative Affairs
RE: METROPOLITAN AREA AND AMM MAJOR ACTIVITIES
1 . METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PROPOSED 1988 YORK PROGRAM AND BUDGET:
The Metropolitan Council has scheduled a Public Hearing at 5:00
P.M. on Thursday, September 10 to receive input on its' proposed
1988 Budget and Work Program. The AMM's Metropolitan Agencies
Committee, Chaired by Kevin Frazell, Mendota Heights Administrator,
will review and assess that proposal and prepare a report for the
AMM Board' s consideration prior to submittal at the Public
Hearing. The AMM Metro Agencies Committee will begin its review
at a noon meeting in our offices on Thursday, August 20th. and
Dave Renz, the Council' s Executive Director and other department
heads are expected to be present to brief the committee and answer
questions. Your input and or attendance at this meeting is
welcome. Since the AMM is usually the only group or organization
that annually reviews and offer comment to Council' s yearly budget
proposal, we feel it is important to do a very thorough review.
2. OUTREACH BREAKFASTS:
The AMM has just completed a round of breakfast meetings in the
region to discuss with member officials what the hot issues for
1988 are likely to be, to get input on those issus; and to seek
additional items for policy study by the standing committees.
Judging by the attendance and spirited discussion at each of the
four meetings, local officials are concerned about legislative
issues and eager to become involved.
Three major topics become the theme for discussion among the 65
participants from 43 of the 65 AMM member cities. The first had
to do with a Metropolitan Transportation Fund. Although there is
an agreed upon significant need for more highway dollars, there is
an even stronger fear that if the Metro Area begins funding area
projects that more of the metro share of state earned dollars will
be funneled into outstate projects. There did seem to be a clear
concensus that if currently raised transportation related dollars,
1
183 university avenue east, st. pan], minnesota 55101 (612) 227-5600
4. CRAIG MATTSON - NEW BOARD DIRECTOR:
We would like to extend our congratulations and welcome to Craig
Mattson, Oakdale City Administrator, who was appointed to the AMM
Board at the August 6th. Board Meeting. Craig replaces the late
James Lacina of Woodbury and has been the Oakdale Administrator
for about seven years. Oakdale, the third largest city
(population) in Washington County, has been a member of the the AMM
since 1978.
5. POLICY COMMITTEES:
Starting Tuesday August 18th. the AMM' s five standing policy
committees will commence meeting to revise organizational
legislative policy for 1988 in light of 1987 action. The
committees will consider suggestions made at the Outreach
Breakfasts, and requests from member officials, cities, staff and
the Board of Directors. This activity will continue through
October 1st. giving each committee an opportunity to meet at
least four times, more if necessary. The Board of Directors
will review policy recommendations November 5 and the full
membership will meet December 2nd. for final policy action.
Individuals having suggestions or requests for policy
consideration should contact a member of the appropriate policy
committee or Vern Peterson or Roger Peterson at the AMM Office
(227-5600) as soon as possible.
6. LEGISLATIVE TAX STUDY COMMISSION:
This recently reinstated commission to study property tax reform
met for the first time August 11th. Staff persons from the
Revenue and Finance Department made rather lengthly reports on
their computer analysis capabilities. Also, scheduled but delayed
due to lack of time were House and Senate Research staff people.
Nothing firm was accomplished. House Tax Committee Chair
Representative Gordon Voss, the author of enabling legislation
outlined his goals which are basically stated in the bill and
which are primarily the establishment of a data base that would
allow manipulation of property tax and income data in combination.
Rep. Voss indicated he would form a subcommittee to determine
future activity. No additional meetings have been scheduled.
7. CALENDAR OF MAJOR AMM EVENTS:
A. October 1 , 1987 - AMM Golf Outing, Dinner and Business Meeting:
A detailed announcement will be mailed in about ten ( 10) days
but please mark your calendar now. Golfing will start early in
the afternoon followed by a Dinner Business Meeting early in
the evening.
3
B. December 2, 1987 - The Annual AMM Legislative Policy Adoption
Meeting! will be held the evening of Wednesday, December 2nd.
Please mark your calendar now for this very important event
eventhough it is still several months away.
DISTRIBUTION NOTE:
This Bulletin has been mailed to Mayors and Managers/Administrators
only. Please distribute to other officials in your city as you deem
appropriate.
4
RECEIVa D
TO: CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AUG2 6LN17
VE2TY ADMINISTRATION,ATTN:JOHN ANDERSON,
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA CITY OF SHAKOPEE
FROM: JOSEPH F. ZAK
CITIZENS AGAINST STARWOOD
AMPHITHEATER
DATE: AUGUST 26, 1987
TIME: 3:00 P.M.
SUBJ: REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USAGE PERMIT
GRANTED TO SCOTTLAND CORPORATION FOR THE BUILDING
OF STARWOOD AMPHITHEATER, 8/20/87
THE CITIZENS AGAINST STARWOOD AMPHITHEATER (CASA) REPRESENTED BY JOSEPH F.
ZAK, WISHES TO FORMALLY APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE SHAKOPEE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF AUGUST 20-21, 1987. AS YOU ARE AWARE, THIS WAS THE DECISION
TO GRANT TO THE SCOTTLAND CORPORATION, A CONDITIONAL USAGE PERMIT TO BUILD
A MINOR COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL AMPHITHEATER IN AN I2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL
ZONED AREA.
WE DO BELIEVE THAT THE ISSUE OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION/HAZARD AS STATED IN
CONDITION #9 WAS NOT AT ALL SATISFIED.THE REBUTTAL OF THE CITIZEN'S STUDY WAS
WITHOUT MERIT IN DISPROVING THE CLAIMS OF TRAFFIC GLUT. A REWORKING OF THE
NUMBERS TO SUPPORT THE SLOT CAR SPEED AND PRECISION DEMANDED OF THE LESSER
TURN TIME REQUIRES A SUSPENSION OF BELIEF, SAFETY, AND COMMON SENSE. WE STAND
BY AND REAFFIRM THE VALIDITY OF THE CITIZENS TRAFFIC STUDY.
THE REAL ESTATE VALUATION WAS OF NO COMFORT OR BELIEVABILITY. COMPARING A
BANDSHELL IN THE RICHEST AREA OF THE STATE TO AN OPEN AMPHITHEATER SEATING
17000 PEOPLE IN THE MOST CONGESTED AREA IS NOT A STRONG ARGUMENT FOR PROPERTY
COMPARISON AND WOULD NOT HOLD UP IN AN APPRAISAL .EMPLOYEES AND ASSOCIATES
OF SCOTTLAND OBVIOUSLY MUST BE DISCOUNTED.
THERE ARE OTHER AREAS OF CONTENTION TO INCLUDE A TOUGHENING OF THE CONDITIONS
OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHICH WILL BE BROUGHT UP AT THIS APPEAL AND ALL
OTHER UPCOMING SESSIONS OR ACTIONS RELATING TO THIS DEVELOPEMENT.
WE DEFINITELY APPEAL THIS DECISION AND AWAIT FURTHER AND NECESSARY
DELIBERATION.
�3
PLEASE KEEP ME INFORMED OF ANY TIMES AND OTHER ACTIVITY RELATED TO THIS
ISSUE. THANK YOU.
COPIES:
EC :
MAYOR ELDON REINKE OS H F.
CHAIRPERSON JANE VANMELDEGHEM S AKOPEE
445-SS2S
/3
?0: THE PLANNING COMMISSION
THE CITY COUNCIL
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
-ROM: CITIZENS AGAINST STARWOOD
AMPHITHEATER (CASA)
3UBJ: THE IMPACT OF STARWOOD AMPHITHEATER IN SHAKOPEE
AND ON THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES
TATE: AUGUST 23, 1987
THE FOLLOWING IS THE WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE REBUTTAL OF THE
TRAFFIC STUDY OF THE CITIZENS AGAINST STARWOOD AMPHITHEATER. THE CRUX
OF THE ARGUMENT CENTERED AROUND AN ELAPSED TIME OF 4 SECONDS BEING
NECESSARY TO COMPLETE A LEFT TURN SAFELY (THIS WAS AN ASSUMED FIGURE
AND WAS STATED AS SUCH) THE REBUTTAL SAID THAT A MORE ACCURATE FIGURE
WOULD ALLOW 9 MORE CARS INTO THE TURN. THIS WAS RECALCULATED AND DOES
NOT AT ALL CHANGE THE SITUATION INTO ANY FAVORABLE LIGHT FOR THE
DEVELOPER.EVEN WITH THE REVISED FIGURES, THE TRAFFIC IS STILL IN
GRIDLOCK AND IS,OF COURSE, SUPPORTED BY THE DEVELOPER'S OWN TRAFFIC
STUDY NUMBERS.
SINCE THE ARGUMENT WOULD DEMAND PERFECT SYNCHRONIZATION, NOT EVEN THE
SLIGHTEST BRAKE TAP,TOTAL DISREGARD FOR SAFETY AND SLOT CAR PRECISION
AND STILL ENO UP AS AN UNSOLVABLE TRAFFIC PROBLEM, WE HAVE DISMISSED
THESE ARGUMENTS AND REMAIN WITH OUR OWN STUDY. THE ORIGINAL TRAFFIC
STUDY. AND VIDEOTAPES OF TRAFFIC AND NEW EVIDENCE HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED
TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WITH A REQUEST FOR A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STUDY OF SHAKOPEE AND ALL SURROUNDING AREAS.THE CITIZENS
AGAINST STARWOOD AMPHITHEATER FEEL THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA .
#9 AGAINST TRAFFIC HAZARD AND CONGESTION REMAINS AN UNRESOLVABLE AND
OPEN ISSUE.
VERBAL/WRITTEN RESPONSE OF CASA SPOKESMAN , J. ZAK ON AUGUST 20, 1987 AT
PUBLIC MEETING ON PROPOSED STARWOOD AMPHITHEATER, SHAKOPEE, MINN.
AT THIS TIME IN THIS MEETING, THE DEVELOPER HAS PROBABELY PRESENTED HIS
VIEW OF THE TRAFFIC SITUATION THE MAIN POINT OF WHICH WILL 60 LIKE THIS:
1. THIS TRAFFIC STUDY BY THE CITIZENS IS FULL OF MISINFORMATION. IT IS
ALL CONJECTURE AND ASSUMPTIONS.
TOP REASON WHY THE CITIZENS STUDY IS WRONG:
STARWOOD WILL NOT CONFLICT WITH CANTERBURY TRAFFIC, THE RENAISSANCE,
VALLEY FAIR, THE BINGO PALACE BECAUSE WE WILL START EARLIER(OR
LATER)CANTERBURY WILL START OR END EARLIER (OR LATER) . ALL THE
OTHER ENTERTAINMENT WILL START,END ETC ETC.
THE FACT- A CONCERT START TIME HAS TO BE ADVERTISED AND SOMEWHERE
IN THE COURSE OF THE DAY STARWOOD WILL. HAVE TO DECIDE TO
START THE CONCERT BUT PRIOR TO THAT MUST TAKE THE
THE MOST CONGESTED AREA OF SCOTT COUNTY (SHAKOPEE)
AND BRING IN WELL OVER 6300 CARS AND"SLIP" THEM
QUIETLY INTO THE CONFUSION AND MELEE OF THE ENTERTAINMENT
CORRIDOR';S PRIME HOURS.THE PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS OF THE
THE NORMAL CITIZENS COMMUTING, TRYING TO SHOP OR
JUST LIVE IN THIS TOWN IN THE MIDST OF THIS CHAOS.
THE IRREFUTABLE PROBLEMS HERE ARE AS FOLLOWS:
A. A SET START TIME (TIME LIMITATION)
CROWDS MUST BE IN PLACE BEFORE CONCERTS START.
B. PEOPLE CANNOT BE CONTROLLED AS TO WHEN THEY ARRIVE.
(THE REPUTATION OF SHAKOPEE WOULD INDICATE PROBLEMS SO
THERE MAY BE MANY EARLY ARRIVALS)
C. LIKE CANTERBURY, THE CROWD DISPERSES ALL AT THE SAME
TIME.THE CROWD CANNOT BE CONTROLLED AS TO WHEN THEY
LEAVE SHAKOPEE.
THE FACT- TRYING TO JUSTIFY THIS PROJECT ON THOSE INCREDIBLY
THIN SLIVERS OF TIME WHERE THE TRAFFIC HAS THINNED
OUT ENOUGH TO ALLOW" SOME CARS THROUGH IS A TRANSPARENT
PLOY.THIS QUITE HONESTLY SOUNDS LIKE THE CONCLUSION
WAS ARRIVED AT FIRST AND THE "HOW TO " ARRIVED AT LATER.
ALL THIS DOES IS IMPACT THE ALREADY PRESENT HEAVY
TRAFFIC AND EXTEND THE "TOTAL" TRAFFIC JAM FOR THE DAY.
(MORE HOURS OF TRAFFIC JAM)
THE FACT- THE THREE ROUTES ARRIVED AT IN THE STUDY, USED BY BOTH
DEVELOPER AND THE CITIZENS GROUP (.BASED ON THE
DEVELOPER'S ASSUMPTIONS AND FIGURES) CONCEALS THE OBVIOUS
FACT THAT TD JUSTIFY A PROFIT-MAKING ENDEAVOR STARWOOD WILL
SPILL THIS TRAFFIC PROBLEM ONTO THE ALREADY CONGESTED AND
DANGEROUS STREETS OF SHAKOPEE AND THE SURROUNDING
MUNICIPALITIES.
IT HAS NOW BECOME A PROBLEM FOR "EVERYONE".
THE FACT- CANTERBURY, IN A YEAR OF LOSING MONEY. "FREE ATTENDANCE",
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY. DWINDLING ATTENDANCE, WHY WOULD
THERE BE A REQUEST FOR (AND THE NEED OF) OPENING OF THE
EAGLECREEK GATE ON RT 16^ IS IT TO TAKE THE PRESSURE OFF
OF 83 AND THROW IT ONTO EAGLECREEK BLVD? AND ACT A
PRESSURE VALVE FOR STARWOOD'S IMMENSE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS?
NOTE: (MR. MALKERSON HAS SINCE CALLED THIS A MISTAKE AND THE
GATE HAS BEEN SHUT AGAIN)
SAFETY VALVES - INCOMING
EXAMPLE 1. CARS FROM THE SOUTH WILL TURN LEFT OFF OF 42, S. ON 21
AND LEFT ON RT 16 W. TO JOIN THE JAM UP ON 83 S.
EXAMPLE 2. CARS FROM THE SOUTH WILL TURN LEFT OFF OF 42, S. ON
21 AND LEFT THROUGH HORIZON TO RT 16 W TO JOIN
THE JAM UP ON 83 S.
EXAMPLE 3. CARS WILL GO S. ON 13 AND TURN LEFT ON 16 IN SAVAGE
AND 60 THROUGH RESIDENTIAL AREAS TO AVOID THE TRAFFIC.
13
.`HE SIDE STREET (THEY DO NOW) AND ON TO EAGLECREEY.. BLVD
dEST TO JOIN THE JAM UP ON 83 S.
2. OR THEY WILL EXTEND THE ALREADY JAMMED UP TRAFFIC ON
1ST ST.
EXAMPLE 1. THEY WILL TURN UP 89 TO 16 AND JOIN THE JAM UP ON
-ROM 83S.
HE
-AST 2. OR THEY WILL EXTEND THE ALREADY JAMMED UP TRAFFIC ON
101.
:OOCLUSION: THE NEW DEVELOPEMENT WILL EXTEND THE PROBLEMS OF TRAFFIC GENERATED
1Y STARWOOD TO ENCOMPASS THE REST OF THE TOWN, AND THE SURROUNDING
1UNICIPALITIES. (THESE WILL BE A NEW TRAFFIC IMPACT TO THEM)
"F THERE ARE ANY HIGHWAY/TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY BECAUSE OF THE
iPPROVAL OF STARWOOD ,THE DEVELOPER SHOULD BE MADE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
MPROVEMENTS.
-:ECOMMENDED: WHETHER THE DEVELOPER REFUTES THE CITIZENS TRAFFIC STUDY OR NOT
THERE HAVE BEEN ENOUGH POINTS RAISED TO REQUEST AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STUDY OR A MORE IN—DEPTH STUDY TO ENCOMPASS THE POINTS
RAISED. THERE HAS BEEN AND WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE
COMMUNITIES OF EDEN PRAIRIE, SAVAGE, PRIOR LAKE.AND MOST
SIGNIFICANTLY ON SHAKOPEE. PLAYING MIND GAMES ABOUT STAGGERED
START TIMES, AND OTHER AMUSEMENTS NOT CONFLICTING IS
PURE SMOKE AND MIRRORS.
THE SUPPORTERS AND NON—SUPPORTERS OF THE CITIZENS GROUP HAVE
BEEN AND WILL BE CAUGHT IN TRAFFIC IN SHAKOPEE. THE WORST IS YET
TO COME AND CLOSING OUR EYES TO THE REALITY OF OUR "CURRENT"
TRAFFIC /WITHOUT STARWOOD/ IS AN ENORMOUS MISTAKE. BEFORE THE
BRIDGE AND THE BYPASS, COMES 3-6 SUMMERS RUINED BY TRAFFIC AND
OR OTHER PROBLEMS. IS IT REALLY WORTH IT?
hSF. Z
CITIZENS AGAINST
STARWOOD AMPPHITHEATER
/3
%**REED"* IMPACT TRAFFIC STUDY STARW00D AMPHITHEATER ***REV8SE0***
V23/87
4-LNGMS&SS-" LIGHT OF THE ATTEMPT TO REFUTE THE ORIGINAL STUDY ON B/20/8''
ONDITIONAL USE MEETING. I HAVE RECALCULATED THE TURNING TIME TO REFLECT A 2
ARS (PER LANE) IN THE FIRST 4 SECONDS, AND 2 CARS EVERY 2.9 SECONDS
HEREAFTER TO THE END OF THE LIGHT.
HIS ADDS THE EXPECTED 9 ADDITIONAL CARS PER TURN AND DOES VIRTUALLY NOTHING
-O RELIEVE THE PROBLEM OF TURNING ON THE LEFT ON VALLEY FAIR/ 63 TO PROPOSED
7TARWOOD DEVELOPEMENT. IF A CAR WERE TO HESITATE AN INSTANT,THE SLIGHTEST
RAKE TAP.THE FRAGILITY AND INACCURACY OF THE NUMBERS BECOME OBVIOUS. IT WOULD
'EMAND PERFECT SYNCHRONIZATION. TOTAL DISREGARD FOR SAFETY AND S TCAR
'RErTSION AND 9TI) 11 ENT) IIR AR AW UbLRF 1 E HAVE NOE �
DISMISSED THE REBUTTAL AND SUBMIT THIS AS EVIDENCE OF THE FALLACY OF THE
-.RGUMENT. WE REMAIN CONFIDENT IN OUR OWN NUMBERS.THE 4 SECOND TURNING PERIOD
-.EMAINS AS THE MOST REASONABLE AND COMMON SENSE APPROACH TO THIS PROBLEM.
HE INFORMATION USED TO COMPILE TRAFFIC STATISTICS WAS OBTAINED FROM THE SCOTT
OUNTY HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT AND MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPDRTATION.ALL OF
HE NECESSARY DATA TO ESTABLISH TRAFFIC PERCENTAGE CRITERIA AND HOUSEHOLD
ISTRIBUTION HAS BEEN TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE BARTON-ASCHMAN TRAFFIC STUDY
N THE DEVELOPERS EAW AND OTHER ASSORTED MATERIALS.
"0 FURTHER SIMPLIFY THIS. STUDY WE HAVE INTERPRETED THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERS
-iATURATION COUNT AT KEY INTERSECTIONS AND CONVERTED IT TO A SIMPLER AND
:ORE EASILY UNDERSTOOD # OF CARS SCENARIO.
HE TIME NECESSARY TO TURN AT THESE INTERSECTIONS WAS TAKEN AT PEAK. WEEKEND
-RAVEL TIMING (NOONSATURDAY) TO PROVIDE THE FAIREST POSSIBLE TIME FOR ANY
:OMPUTEP.IZED TRAFFIC LIGHTS.
ALL CASES THE DEVELOPERS MATERIAL WAS USED AS THE LAST WORD.
3SUMPTIONS: 1. THAT THE AVERAGE AUTOMOBILE IS 16 FEET LONG
2. THAT THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF PASSENGERS IN EACH CAR WILL BE 2.7
PEOPLE
3. THAT THE AVERAGE TIME TO TURN ON A LIGHT OR STOP SIGN IS 4
SECONDS PER CAR.
IF A CAR WOULD HESITATE AN INSTANT
HE FRAGILITY OF THE NUMBERS WOULD APPEAR IMMEDIATELY. THE 4 SECOND PERIOD WAS
SED AND REMAINS THE MOST REASONABLE AND COMMON SENSE ASSUMPTION FOR THIS
JRNING PROBLEM.
TARWOOD 4. THAT THE PEAT: ATTENDANCE ON WEEKDAYS WILL BE 9000 PEOPLE
(FROM PAGE 22 OF THE STARWOOD MATERIAL EAW TRIP GENERATION
ASSUMPTIONS USED BY DEVELOPERS)
THIS WILL GENERATE 33333 CAPS.
THAT THE PEAR; ATTENDANCE ON WEEKENDS WILL BE 17000 PEOPLE
(FROM PAGE 22 OF STA.RWOOD MATERIAL EAW TRIP GENERATION
ASSUMPTIONS USED BY DEVELOPERS) ,
THIS WILL GENERATE' 6296 CARS.
THAT 22-=7 CARS WILL ARRIVE IN THE 7: 00 TO 8:00 P. M. PERIOD
(70%)ONWEEKDAYS.
THAT PEAK ARRIVAL WILL BE IN THE 7: 00 TO 8:00 P.M. PERIOD .
THAT 4407 CAPS WILL ARRIVE IN THE 7:00 TO 8:00 P. M. PERIOD
(70&%) ON WEEKENDS.
6. THAT ALL OTHER ARRIVALS WILL COME EARLY IN THE 6: 00 TO 7:00
TIME PERIOD (30% OR 3000 CARS ON WEEKDAYS)
THAT ALL OTHER ARRIVALS WILL COME EARLY IN THE 6:00 TO 7: 00
TIME PERIOD (30% OR 1889 CARS ON WEEKENDS. )
7. THAT THE AVERAGE START TIME AT STARWOOD WILL BE AT 8:00 P.M.
ON ALL DAYS.
-RACK S. THAT THE AVERAGE ATTENDANCE ON WEEKDAYS AT CANTERBURY DOWNS
WILL BE 10700 PEOPLE.
(FROM PAGE 25 OF THE STARWOOD MATERIAL EAW)
THIS WILL BE 3963 CARS.
9. THAT CANTERBURY WILL DEPART AT 7: 30 TO 8:30 P. M.
-YFAIR 10. THAT VALLEYFAIR TRAFFIC AT THIS TIME WILL BE TAKEN
FROM THE SCOTT COUNTY FIGURES. (ASSUME AVERAGE DAILY
ATTENDANCE OF 5000 PEOPLE (1850 CARS) SKEWED TO LEAVE FROM
9:00 TO 12:00 (ASSUME 70% LEAVE IN THESE HOURS)
MURPHY' S LDG WILL BE ASSUMED TO BE IN THE SCOTT COUNTY
TRAFFIC FIGURES.
AYS: THE ARRIVAL OF 1000 CARS IN THE .EARLY ARRIVAL TIME. (SEE Y5)
WILL BEGIN IN THE 6:00 P. M. PERIOD TO 7: 00 P. M. THE RACETRACK
DEPARTS BETWEEN 7:30 AND 8: 30 P. M. IN USING THE WORST CASE
SCENARIO AS USED BY THE DEVELOPER EAW. THE EARLY ARRIVALS
WILL COME IN ON THE BACK END OF THE COMMUTER RUSH OR AT
LEAST BE DELAYED BY IT.
TO 83 BASED ON THE BARTON-ASCHMAN HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION OF THESE
FIRST ARRIVAL VEHICLES APPROXIMATELY 29% (290 CARS) WILL BE
GOING W. ON RT 42 FROM SAVAGE JOINING ONLY 10 CARS FROM PRIOR
LAKES AND THEN PROCEEDING UP 83 TO STARWOOD.
THE TRAFFIC COUNT ON CR 42 AT THIS TIME AVERAGES 495 CARS
BETWEEN 6:00 AND 7:00 FER WEEKDAY ACCORDING TO SCOTT CTY
HIGHWAY FIGURES. SO THE ADDITIONAL 290 CARS WILL ADD A MINIMAL
IMPACT TO THIS AMOUNT (NOW 785) CARS. WE ASSUME THIS IS
BURNSVILLE OR LAKEVILLE TRAFFIC SINCE THE 29% ON TH101 IS
COMING OUT OF 35 W. AND IS PROBABELY MINNEAPOLIS -AND EAGAN
TRAFFIC AND IS FIGURED IN THE TOTALS FOR TH 101 W.
THE LIGHT IN PRIOR LAKE 42!13 AVERAGES 1 :30 MINUTES OF RED.
AND APPROXIMATELY 20 SECONDS OF GREEN.
ASSUMING A LIBERAL CAR PER SECOND (20 CARS) WILL GET THROUGH
ON THE LIGHT AND WAIT FOR 1: 30 MINUTES FOR THE RED IT WILL
TAKE APPROXIMATELY 39 GREEN LIGHTS TO RELEASE ALL CARS
HEADING FOR STARWDOD. ALSO THE WAIT TIME FOR 39 RED LIGHTS
WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL 51 MINUTES PLUS 13 MINUTES FOR THE
GREEN LIGHTS. WE CAN SAFELY ASSUME THAT IT WILL TAKE MOST OF
THIS TIME TO TRAVERSE THE AREA TO GET TO THE CR83 TURNOFF AT
3
H 101 & 169E BASED ON THE BARTON ASCHMAN STUDY OF HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION
OF THESE FIRST ARRIVAL VEHICLES, THERE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY
240 VEHICLES HEADING EAST ON 101 TO STARWOOD. THESE VEHICLES
WILL JOIN THE NORMAL TRAFFIC FLOW OF 1336 CARS AVERAGE
AT THIS TIME. BASED ON THE RIGHT TURN RATE OF I CAR EVERY 4
SECONDS THIS GROUP SHOULD BE CLEAR OF 101 IN ABOUT 20 MINUTES
UNLESS THERE IS OTHER OF THE TRAFFIC (1336 CARS) ALSO
TURNING. BASED ON THE DEVELOPERS STUDY AND BARTON ASCHMAN
APPROXIMATELY 30% OF THE TRAFFIC WILL BE TURNING UP 83
HEADING SOUTH. THIS SEEMS HIGH SO WE WILL ASSUME THAT ONLY
20% OF THIS TRAFFIC WILL TURN ON THIS ROAD HEADING SOUTH TO
OR 42. (267 CARS WILL MAKE THIS TURN) AT 4 SECONDS PER
TURN, THIS WILL TAKE AN ADDITIONAL 18 MINUTES.THERE ARE NO
STOP SIGNS UNTIL CR42 AND LITTLE TRAFFIC EXCEPT SOME RESIDUAL
TRAFFIC FROM RT 16. OR TRAFFIC TURNING SOUTH FROM THE
RACETRACK WHICH COULD SLOW THIS DOWN AND IMPEDE THE LEFT TURN
TO 13TH AVE.
—1 101 WEST BASED ON THE BARTON ASCHMAN STUDY OF HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION
OF THESE FIRST ARRIVAL VEHICLES,THERE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY
460 VEHICLES HEADING WEST ON 101 TO STARWOOD. THESE VEHICLES
WILL JOIN THE NORMAL TRAFFIC FLOW OF 841 VEHICLES HEADING
W.ON 101 .THIS WILL TOTAL 1341 VEHICLES. IF 10 % OF THIS
NORMAL TRAFFIC DECIDES TO TURN ON THE LEFT TO VALLEY
PARE: DRIVE (B4) CARS AND THE 460 VEHICLES GOING TO STARWOOD.
THIS LIGHT (LEFT ON GREEN) TAKES 40 SECONDS. ASSUME 2 CARS
*XREVISEUYXak EVERY 4 SECONDS, ALL ADDITIONAL CARS AT 2 EVERY 2. 9 SECONDS,
IT WOULD TAKE APPROXIMATELY 19 GREEN LIGHTS
TO PHYSICALLY MOVE THE TRAFFIC ONTO VALLEY PARK DRIVE
(AN ELAPSED TIME OF 12.5 MINUTES TO PHYSICALLY TURN) THE
ADDITION OF THE i MINUTE AND 35 SECOND WAIT PERIOD FOR EACH
RED LIGHT WOULD ADD AN RDDIT T ONAL 43 MINUTES TO THE ELAPSED
TTME AT THIS LIGHT
(APPROXIMATELY 55.5 MINUTES OF ELAPSED TIME TO CLEAR THIS
TRAFFIC) THIS IS UNREASONABLE SO SOME OF THIS TRAFFIC.
MAY MOVE ON TO 83 AND
TURN LEFT THERE. ASSUME 507. OF THESE VEHICLES (272) 60 ON
DOWN TO THE NEXT LIGHT AND TURN LEFT AND THE TIMING OF THE
LIGHT IS THE SAME THIS WOULD CUT IT DOWN TO ABOUT 2, .75 MINUTES
OF ELAPSED TIME AT EACH LIGHT.
-HER SINCE THESE ARE THE EARLY ARRIVALS AND ARE ON THE BACK END OF THE
'MMUTER TRAFFIC AND RIGHT BEFORE CANTERBURY LETS OUT. SHOULD THERE BE ANY
IRIATION IN THE SCHEDULING THESE VEHICLES COULD COME INTO THIS AREA AND MAY
NFLICT WITH THE CANTERBURY TRAFFIC OR BE AFFECTED BY VALLEYFAIROR OTHER
MMUTER ACTIVITY.
E BLOOMINGTON FERRY BRIDGE TRAFFIC IN THE 6:00 TO 7:00 TIME PERIOD HANDLES
PROXIMATELY 1051 CARS AND THIS MAY DELAY SOME OF THE TRAFFIC COMING IN.
IS MAY NECESSITATE OTHER ADJUSTMENTS TO GET THESE PATRONS IN.
CORDING TO THE CHICAGO AND NORTHWESTERN RAILROAD, THERE ARE NO SET SCHEDULES
TRAIN SWITCHING OR PREDICTABILITY FOR TRAINS PASSING THROUGH AS THEY WORE:
�4 HOUR PER DAY SCHEDULE. ANY TRAIN PASSING THROUGH WILL HOLD UP ANY LEFT
SNS ONTO VALLEY PARK DRIVE OR 83 AND PUSH THESE DELAY TIMES UP CONSIDERABLY.
U • .
WILL BEGIN AT 7:00 P. M. AND CEASE AT 8:00 P. M. WHEN ALL
BUT A FEW PEOPLE WILL HAVE NOT YET ARRIVED.
IN USING THE WORST CASE SCENARIO OF THE DEVELOPER EAW AND THE
PARTON ASCHMAN STUDY, THE PEAT: ARRIVALS WILL COME
IN AS THE INITIAL RUSH OF CANTERBURY TRAFFIC IS LETTING OUT.
TO 63 BASED ON THE BARTON-ASCHMAN HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION OF THESE
PEAK ARRIVAL VEHICLES APPROXIMATELY 2V%(677 CARS) WILL BE
GOING W ON RT 42 FROM SAVAGE JOINING ONLY 23. CAPS FROM PRIOR
LAKE AND THEN PROCEEDING UP 83 TO STARWOOD.
THE TRAFFIC COUNT ON CR 42 AT THIS TIME AVERAGES 441 CARS
BETWEEN 7:00 AND 8: 00 PER WEEKDAY ACCORDING TO SCOTT CTY
HIGHWAY FIGURES. SO THE ADDITIONAL 677 CARS WILL ADD UP TO
1118 CARS. WE ASSUME THIS IS BURNSVILLE OR LAKEVILLE TRAFFIC
SINCE THE 29% ON TH101 IS COMING OUT OF 35W AND IS PROBABELY
MINNEAPOLIS AND EAGAN TRAFFIC AND IS FIGURED IN THE TOTALS
FOR TH101 W. THE LIGHT IN PRIOR LAKE 42/13 AVERAGES 1:30
MINUTES OF RED AND APPROXIMATELY 20 SECONDS OF GREEN DURING
RUSH HOUR.
ASSUMING A LIBERAL CAR PER SECOND(20 CARS) WILL GET THROUGH
ON THE LIGHT AND WAIT FOR 1:30 MINUTES FOR THE RED IT WILL
TAKE APPROXIMATELY 56 GREEN LIGHTS TO REL-EASE ALL CARS
HEADING FOR STARWOOD. ALSO ,THE WAIT TIME FOR 56 RED LIGHTS
WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL 7-- MINUTES PLUS 1B. 6 MINUTES FOR THE
GREEN LIGHTS. WE CAN SAFELY ASSUME THAT IT WILL TAKE MOST OF
THIS TIME TO TRAVERSE THE AREA TO GET TO THE CRSS TURNOFF AT
PRIOR LAKE N. ON 63 TO STARWOOD. THE 23 CARS FROM PRIOR LAKE
SHOULD NOT ANTICIPATE ANY DELAY OR PROBLEMS.
OUR STUDY DID NOT PERMIT ANY DEVIATION TO THE N. TO 101 AND
THEN LEFT TO VALLEY PARE: DRIVE SO AS NOT TO TAINT
THE BARTON-ASCHMAN NUMBERS.
THE ARRIVAL OF THESE VEHICLES AT THE STARWOOD FACILITY SHOULD
BE IN THE MIDST OF OR PRIOR TO THE LETTING OUT OF CANTERBURY.
THESE CARS COULD BE HELD UP AT THE RIGHT TURN TO 12TH
AVENUE. SINCE THE CANTERBURY TRAFFIC. HAS THE RIGHT OF WAY.
IT MAY DELAY THE INCOMING STARWOOD TRAFFIC FROM THE RIGHT
TURN . AS THIS IS LIKELY TO BE 1116 CARS (NOT ALL AT THE SAME
TIME,OF COURSE! ) BUT IT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT ENOUGH
TO BACK UP 1/2 MILE TO 16 IF ONLY 165 CARS HAD TO WAIT TO
MAKE THE TURN.
THE NEARER TO CONCERT TIME(8:00) THE MORE LIKELIHOOD OF THIS
PROBLEM. AS TRAFFIC FROM CANTERBURY WILL BEGIN BACKING UP AS
BASED ON THE BARTON-ASCHMAN STUDY OF HOUSEHOLDS AND THE
AVERAGE CANTERBURY TRAFFIC HEADING TO A RIGHT TURN ONTO 101
E. WOULD NUMBER 1623 VEHICLES. SINCE 12TH STREET FROM
THE CANTERBURY ENTRANCE TO THE TH101 E. RIGHT TURN IS ABOUT
2.5 MILES THE CANTERBURY TRAFFIC COWERS 2.76 MILES (2
LANES) TO THE EXIT (A RIGHT TURN INTO TRAFFIC EVERY 4
SECONDS UTILIZING BOTH LANES/ RIGHT ON RED AND NORMAL RED
LIGHT) ONTO TH101 WOULD -EMPTY OUT THE LANES IN LESS THAN 1
HOUR. BUT THIS TRAFFIC WOULD HAVE TO MERGE INTO THE NORMAL
TRAFFIC FLOW COMING FROM TH101 EASTBOUND WHICH IS 1043
CARS. ALSO WOULD HAVE TO CONTEND WITH THE TRAFFIC COMING
WESTBOUND AND TURNING LEFT ONTO VALLEY PARK DRIVE. (AT THE
RATE C.= ? C,RS EVERT' 4 SECONDS (SEE TH' 01 W PARAGRAPH NEXT
.un
/3
OTHER LANES TO PUT 4 LANES OF TRAFFIC ONTO 12TH AVENUE TO
SPEED UP THE EGRESS OF CANTERBURY TRAFFIC.ALSO THE SINGLE
RIGHT TURN ON RED AND SPECIAL UTILIZATION OF THE RED LIGHT
KEEPS THIS A 2 CAR EVERY 4 SECONDS SITUATION. THE TRAFFIC
EGRESS FROM RT 87 COULD CAUSE SOME PROBLEMS ALSO IN THIS AREA.
H101 & 169E BASED ON THE BARTON ASCHMAN STUDY OF HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION
OF THESE PEAK ARRIVAL VEHICLES, THERE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY
29% OR 560 CARS GOING E. ON TH101 &169 E. TO STARWOOD.THESE
VEHICLES WILL JOIN THE NORMAL 1047 CARS OF THE NORMAL TRAFFIC
PATTERN. TURNING RIGHT ON ROUTE 8.3 TO STARWOOD.ASSUME ABOUT
20% OF THIS TRAFFIC WILL WANT TO TURN RIGHT (209 CARS) AND
THE 560 AUTOS HEADING TO STARWOOD A RIGHT TURN ONTO 23 AT 1
CAR EVERY 4 SECONDS WILL SHOULD TIE UP THIS AREA FOR 51
MINUTES. PEOPLE WILL DISCOVER OTHER WAYS IN,OF COURSE,MAINLY
THROUGH THE TOWN AND RT 16.
IN ANY EVENT THIS TRAFFIC WILL ENCOUNTER CANTERBURY TRAFFIC
GOING DIRECTLY INTO 12TH STREET AND WILL HAVE TO WAIT TO TURN
LEFT, ANY TRAFFIC TAKING ANOTHER ROUTE ( 16^) WILL ENCOUNTER
THE GROUP FROM RT 42 AND WAIT IN THAT LINE FOR A RIGHT TURN.
H 101 WEST BASED ON THE BARTON ASCHMAN STUDY OF HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION
OF THESE PEAK ARRIVAL VEHICLES,THERE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY
46% OR 1073 VEHICLES HEADING W. ON TH101 &169 TO STARWOOD.
THESE VEHICLES WILL JOIN THE NORMAL AVERAGE TRAFFIC FLOW OF 657
CARS COMING W. ON 101. THIS WILL TOTAL 1930
VEHICLES,THE MAJORITY OF WHICH ARE STARWOOD TRAFFIC. IF 10%
OF THIS NORMAL TRAFFICDECIDESTO TURN LEFT ON VALLEY PARK
(85 CARS) AND THE 1073 VEHICLES GOING TO STARWOOD, WE WOULD
HAVE 1156 VEHICLES TRYING TO TURN LEFT. NOW THEY WON'T ALL
- ------------ARRIVE AT THE SAME TIME BUT THE LEFT TURN LIGHT TAKES
k#REVISED***= 40 SECONDS.ASSUME THE FIRST 2 AUTOS TURN IN 4 SECONDS, AND
ALL ADDITIONAL AUTOS AT 2.9 SECONDS APPROXIMATELY 29 CARS
WILL CLEAR THE LIGHT EACH TIME. / IF ABSOLUTELY EVERY CAR
TURNS PERFECTLY WITH THE SPEED AND PRECISION OF A SLOT CAR.
IT WOULD NOW TAKE . . . . . . .
40 LIGHTS (OR 27 MINUTES OF THE HOUR) TO CLEAR ALL OF THIS
TRAFFIC THROUGH ONTO 'VALLEY. WAITING FOR THE RED LIGHT WILL
ADD 1:35 MINUTES WAIT TIME PER GREEN ARROW TO EITHER TURN.
(AN ADDITIONAL 1.5 HOURS OF WAIT TIME) TO CLEAR THIS TURN.
UNLESS THE EAST BOUND TRAFFIC IS HALTED (634 CARS OF NORMAL
TRAFFIC) THERE WILLBENO WAY TO MOVE THIS TRAFFIC INTO
STARWOOD( UNLESS IT STARTS EARLIER) BUT THEN YOU HAVE
THE COMMUTER TRAFFIC.
(SEE EARLIER ACTIVITIES IN NON-PEAK TIME)
THIS IS UNREASONABLE, SO SOME OF THIS TRAFFIC MAY MOVE DOWN
101 AND .DOWN TO THE NEXT LIGHT AND TURN LEFT. SINCE THE TIMING
OF THE LIGHT ON 83 IS THE SAME , THE 579 CARS WILL TURN LEFT
IN THE TIME OF 17.3 MINUTES ON EACH LIGHT. HOWEVER THE LIGHT
ITSELF TAKES 1 MINUTE AND 35 SECONDS SO THIS WOULD ALSO HAVE
TO BE AN ADDITIONAL 45 MINUTES OF WAIT TIME.THIS WOULD ALSO
BE UNREASONABLE AS A TRAFFIC SOLUTION.
IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THIS TRAFFIC WILL BE ABLE TO TURN AS
'RAPIDLY BECAUSE OF THE OUTGOING CANTERBURY TRAFFIC TURNING
RIGHT AND LEFT AT BOTH OF THESE LIGHTS.
RENAISSANCE FESTIVAL W. OF TOWN.
CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE WEEKEND. WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT
CROWDS OF 17000 PEOPLE WOULD OCCUR ONLY 4 TIMES PER YEAR BUT
THE TRAFFIC STUDY DID NOT SPECIFY ANY SPECIFIC WEEKENDS.
SO USING THE BARTON ASCHMAN STUDY, AND THE FEELING THAT WE DO
NOT WANT LESSER CROWDS LIKE CANTERBURY DOWNS IS EXPERIENCING,
WE ASSUMED THAT THE WORST CASE SCENARIO WOULD APPLY BECAUSE
THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES THAT A NEIL DIAMOND OR KENNY LOGGINS
WOULD WANT TO BE RESTRICTED TO A CERTAIN DAY OF THE WEEK,.WE
HAVE ASSUMED THAT STARWOOD WOULD WANT TO RUN TO CAPACITY AS
GOOD BUSINESSMEN WOULD. IF THIS IS WRONG THEN FIGURE IT WITH
THE 9000 WEEKDAY CROWD AND SEE IF IT GETS ANY BETTER.
SSANCE WEEKENDS ONLY FROM AUG 15 THRU SEPTEMBER 27 (9:00 A.M. TO
7:00 P. M. )
7 WEEK.ENDSat 300,000 visitors. .(Shakopee valley news)
15 DAYS OF SATURDAY, SUNDAYS, AND LABOR DAY.
ASSUME 20, 000 VISITORS DAILY DIVIDED BY 2.7 PEOPLE PER CAR IS
AN ADDITIONAL 7407 CARS PER WEEKEND DAY SKEWED TO LEAVE FROM
5: 00 P. M. TO 7: 00 P. M. (ASSUME 50% LEAVE IN THE 6: 00 TO 7:00
P.M. PERIOD.NEAR QUITTING TIME)ACCORDING TO THE BARTON ASCHMAN
HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION . WE CAN ASSUME THAT 5% OR 185 CARS
HEAD N. ON 41 AND 19% OR 704 CARS HEAD N. ON HWY 101/169
THE REMAINING CARS (2815) HEAD E. ON 101. FROM THIS 17% OR
(479) CARS HEAD ON TO THE BLOOMINGTONFERRYBRIDGE AND 29%
(Bib) CARS HEAD ON 101E TO 3-5 W ETC.
THE REMAINDER OF THE CARS (1520) ARE HEADING TO RT 42 VIA 17
AND CR S' OR VALLEY VIEW DRIVE. ASSUME 30% KNOW THE WAY OR
ARE FROM SHAKOPEE AND WE LOSE ANOTHER (456) CARS /CAN'T GET
MORE LIBERAL THAN THIS/ WE HAVE 1064 CARS WITH A DESIRE TO
TURN RIGHT ON VALLEY DRIVE.AT I CAR PER 4 SECOND PERIOD ON A
RIGHT TURN WITH RED THIS WOULD TAKE AN ELAPSED TIME OF 71
MINUTES.THIS WILL CONFLICT WITH THE STARWOOD TRAFFIC COMING
IN FOR THE CONCERT EARLY AND LATE. (AT 9000 THIS WOULD BE
AN ADDITIONAL 800 CARS WITH THE NEED TO TURN RIGHT ON VALLEY
DRIVE OR AN ADDITIONAL 53 MINUTES OF ELAPSED TIME TO MAKE THE
TURN. DEPENDING ON THE RACE TRACK TIME, THESE PEOPLE COULD
CONFLICT WITH CANTERBURY TRAFFIC OR IF THEY WENT UP 16 AND
BACK: ONTO 83 N. THEY WOULD MEET WITH THE 1000 CARS ENTERING
S.FROM 42.
IF THEY TRAVEL E. ON 101 THEY WOULD THEN ENCOUNTER THE NORMAL
WEEKEND TRAFFIC OF RESIDENTS, VALLEY FAIR, ETC.
'1DS: ASSUME THAT STARWOOD CONCERT ON A WEEKEND WITH 17000
ATTENDEES (CAPACITY CROWD)
HEADING TOWARD SHAKOPEE IN THE 6: 00 TO 8:00 P.M. PERIOD
WILL BE 6296 VEHICLES DISTRIBUTED THUSLY:
1889 COMING UP CR 83 N. TO STARWOOD FROM RT 42
OF THESE VEHICLES 567 WILL ARRIVE IN THE 6:00 - 7: 00 PM.
TIME PERIOD.
OF THE REMAINING VEHICLES, 1322 WILL ARRIVE IN THE PEAK: '
ARRIVAL TIME OF 7:00 TO 8:00 P.M.
VALLEY FAIR, ETC. THIS WOULD MAKE IT A BIT SLOWER TO
CLEAR.
2896 COMING UP TH101 W. TO STARWOOD
OF THESE VEHICLE 869 WILL ARRIVE IN THE 6: 00 - 7:00 PM.
TIME PERIOD.
OF THE REMAINING VEHICLES, 2027 WILL ARRIVE IN THE PEAK
ARRIVAL TIME OF 7: 00 TO B:00 P.M.
t THE FIGURES OF NORMAL TRAFFIC WERE NOT AVAILABLE BUT
THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDED IN TO THESE NUMBERS PLUS
VALLEY FAIR, ETC. THIS WOULD MAKE IT A BIT SLOWER TO
CLEAR.
1511 COMING UP TH101 E TO STARWOOD
OF THESE VEHICLES 453 WILL ARRIVE IN THE 6:00 - 7:00 PM.
TIME PERIOD.
OF THE REMAINING VEHICLES. 1058 WILL ARRIVE IN. THE PEAK
ARRIVAL TIME OF 7:00 TO 8: 00 P.M.
i THE FIGURES OF NORMAL TRAFFIC WERE NOT AVAILABLE BUT
THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDED IN TO THESE NUMBERS PLUS
VALLEY FAIR, ETC. THIS WOULD MAKE IT A BIT SLOWER TO
CLEAR.
42 TO 83 THE 567 VEHICLES COMING N. FROM 42 IN THE EARLY TIME WILL
HAVE TO CONTEND WITH THE SHAKOPEE RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC,
VALLEYFAIR, MURPHYS LANDING ETC. BUT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE TO
TURN RIGHT AGAINST THE OUTGOING TRAFFIC. PROBABELY
LESS OF A PROBLEM THAN THE LARGER CROWD COMING AT 7:00 -
1 8: 00. 1322 CARS WILL DEFINITELY CONTEND WITH THE RACETRACK
LETTING OUT AND A GREATPORTION OF RENAISSANCE TRAFFIC.
BUT IN THIS PERIOD DESPITE THE ACTIVITY 1889 CAPS WILL HAVE
TO MAKE THE RIGHT TURN ONTO 12TH AVENUE AND ONTO THE
STARWOOD GROUNDS.DURING THE RACE TRACK DEPARTURE THIS WILL
BACK UP TRAFFIC MILES UP 42. ALSO THE RENAISSANCE TRAFFIC
TURNING RIGHT ON 8Z AND HEADING SOUTH TO 42 WILL BE HELD UP
WHILE THE TRAFFIC MOVES OUT OF CANTERBURY.
THE REMAINING VEHICLES COMING N. FROM 42 IN THE PEAK ARRIVAL
GROUP WILL QUEUE IN LINE FOR A RIGHT TURN ONTO 12TH AVENUE.
1101 & 169 E. THE 458 VEHICLES COMING E. ON 101 FROM THE W. IN THE EARLY
TIME WILL HAVE TO CONTEND WITH THE SHAKOPEE RESIDENTIAL
TRAFFIC, VALLEYFAIR, MURPHYS LANDING ETC. AND THE 1064 CARS
TURNING ONTO RT 83 FROM 101. THE ELAPSED TIME FOR ALL OF
THESE TURNS AT i PER 4 SECOND PERIOD IS 1.7 HOURS SO SOME OF
THIS TRAFFIC MAY FIND AN ALTERNATE ROUTE. tWE ALREADY PUT 30%
AWAY BECAUSE OF THE LOCAL AND KNOWLEDGEABLE DRIVER.
THESE VEHICLES GOING 6.63 TO 42 WILL CONTEND WITH ONLY THE
MINOR. PORTION OF CANTERBURY TRAFFIC. HOWEVER THE LARGER CROWD
COMING AT THE PEAK. ARRIVAL TIME 1058 CARS WILL DEFINITELY
CONTEND WITH RACETRACK LETTING OUT AND A GREAT PORTION OF
8 '
WILL HAVE TO MAKE THE RIGHT TURN ONTO VALLEY.THE ELAPSED TIME
FOR THESE TURNS ALONE AT 1 PER 4 SECONDS IS ABOUT 70 MINUTES
OR 1. 18 HOURS. (000LD BE MORE BASED ON UNCOUNTED NORMAL
TRAFFIC. SINCE CANTERBURY WILL BE LETTING OUT, THESE CARS MAY
BE DELAYED EVEN MORE AS THE 3963 CARS LEAVE ON TO 12TH AVENUE
THE LEFT TURN NECESSARY TO GET ONTO 12TH AVENUE AND INTO
STARWOOD WOULD BEGIN BACKING UP.
WEST THE 869 VEHICLES COMING W. ON 101 IN THE EARLY TIME WILL HAVE
TO CONTEND WITH SHAKOPEE RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC, VALLEYFAIR,
MURPHYS LANDING, ETC. AND THE EASTBOUND TRAFFIC FROM
RENAISSANCE. TURNING LEFT AGAINST THE LIGHT WITH THE
LARGE FLOW OF TRAFFIC FROM RENAISSANCE (2815) CAPS
WOULD TAKE SOME TIME. THIS LIGHT (LEFT ON GREEN ARROW) TAKES
:VTSED*u 40 SECONDS.ASSUME THE FIRST 2 VEHICLES MAKE THE TURN IN 4
SECONDS AND THE FOLLOWING CARS IN 2.9 SECONDS EACH
IT WOULD NOW TAKE. . . . . .
APPROXIMATELY 20 MINUTES OF ELAPSED TIME TO TURN LEFT ONTO
VALLEY DRIVE PLUS THE RED LIGHTS AT 1.5 MINUTES PER STOP.
THIS INTERSECTION WOULD NOT CLEAR IN TIME TORELIEVETHE
ADDITIONAL 2027 VEHICLES COMING AT 7: 00 TO 8:00 WHICH WILL
TAKE UP BEHIND THEM THE EARLY TRAFFIC. IF BOTH LEFT TURNS WERE
UTILIZED THEN THE DELAY WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 32 MINUTES
OF ELAPSED TIME PER LIGHT. (VALLEY PARK AND 83)
ADDITIONALLY THIS TRAFFIC WOULD ALSO INTERSECT WITH THE
OUTGOING CANTERBURY TRAFFIC . THIS TRAFFIC WOULD CAUSE
PROBLEMS WITH THE EASTBOUND RENAISSANCE TRAFFIC BUT NOT
-
IMPEDE THE TURN.
THE 2027 VEHICLES COMING AS A RESULT OF THE BARTON-ASCHMAN
STUDY WILL TAKE 46.6 MINUTES ELAPSED TIME JUST TO PHYSICALLY
MAKE THE TURN ON THE LEFT. UTILIZING BOTH THE VALLEY PARK AND
83 TURN WOULD REDUCE THE PHYSICAL TIME FOR EACH LIGHT TO OVER
27.3 MINUTES OF ELAPSED TIME PER GREEN LIGHT WITHOUT INCLUDING
ELAPSED TIME OF THE RED LIGHTS (1.36 HOURS PER LIGHT TO MAKE
THESE TURNS FEASIBLE WITHOUT DISTURBING ALL OTHER TRAFFIC AND
GOING AGAINST CANTERBURY OUTGOING TRAFFIC.
BOTH LEFT TURNS WOULD BE UNABLE TO HANDLE THE TRAFFIC' '
BOTH LEFT TURNS AT 50% OF THE TRAFFIC WOULD BE TIED UP BEYOND
AN HOUR EACH' '
THIS WOULD BE A TRAFFIC GRIDLOCK.
DO NOT SEE THIS AS AN EASY THING TO SOLVE.
THIS IS EVEN A PROBLEM DURING THE WEEKDAYS.
NG THE IT IS ASSUMED THAT THE THEATER WILL START AT 8:00 AND LEAVE
THEATER ABOUT 11:00 TO 12:00
THERE ARE TWO EXITS PROPOSED FOR THE PROPOSED STARWCOD
THEATER. BOTH ARE DOUBLE LANES AND EXIT OUT ONTO 12TH AVENUE
VALLEY DRIVE RESPPECTIVELY.
/3
AT THE END OF 12TH AVE. IT IS APPROXIMATELY . 6 MILES TO THIS
STOP SIGN FROM THE 12TH AVE. EXIT. IT IS AN ADDITIONAL MILE
TO THE LIGHT AT 101. AT THE STOP SIGN, 30% OR 1889 CARS WILL
HEAD SOUTH TO RT 42 AND POINTS SOUTH. (ALL AT THE SAME TIME)
AT THE STOP SIGN. 24 % OR 1511 CAPS WILL BE WAVED ON TO THE
LIGHT FOR THE LEFT TURN TO HIGHWAY 101/169 AND POINTS WEST.
IF 30% OF THESE CARS KNOW A SHORT CUT THEN ONLY 1058 CARS
WILL NEED TO TURN LEFT AND ONTO 101 OR FIRST AVENUE
IN SHAKOPEE.
IT IS 1. 6 MILES TO THE LIGHT FROM THE 12TH AVENUE EXIT.
IF ALL THE TRAFFIC IS ABLE TO MAKE IT TO THE STOP SIGN AND
TURN RIGHT AND CONTINUE ON TO THE LIGHT, THERE WILL BE A
SOLID BLOCK. OF TRAFFIC BACKED UP TO THE EXIT OF STARWOOD.
THIS TRAFFIC WILL BE A DOUBLE LINE OF 1. 6 MILES IN LENGTH.
THE LIGHT WILL PERMIT APPROXIMATELY 20 CARS TO THE LEFT EACH
GREEN LIGHT SO IT WILL TAKE 52. 9 LIGHTS TO PASS THROUGH THIS
TRAFFIC.OR 1.5 MINUTES PER LIGHT AND 20 SECONDS PER GREEN.
APPROXIMATELY 1 HOUR OR MORE TO CLEAR THE TRAFFIC. IF TRAFFIC
IS RUSHED THROUGH ONTO 101 W. THESE 'VEHICLES WILL THEN JAM UP
IN TOWN AT THE FIRST LIGHT AT THE FORD DEALERSHIP.THIS COULD
WIND UP AS TWO LANES OF 1.6 MILES OF TRAFFIC PASSING THROUGH
DOWNTOWN AT 11:00 TO 12: 00 AT NIGHT.
IT IS . 5 MILES TO THE LIGHT AT VALLEY PARK DRIVE AND 101.
IF ALL TRAFFIC IS ABLE TO MAKE IT OUT TO THE LIGHT AND BEGIN
THE RIGHT ON RED SCENARIO AT 2 CARS EVERY 4 SECONDS. (REMEMBER
VALLEY FAIR TRAFFIC ETC. ) SINCE THERE WILL BE 46% OR 2896
CARS LEAVING FROM THIS EXIT (DOUBLE LANE) . WITH ONLY
.5 MILES TO THE LIGHT, A DOUBLE LANE WILL HOLD 165 CARS IN
THE LANE (AND 165 CARS IN THE SECOND LANE) THE ADDITIONAL
2566 CARS WILL REMAIN ON THE GROUNDS AWAITING EGRESS OUT
OF THE STARWOOD COMPLEX. AS THE TWO LANES EGRESS WE CAN
ASSUME THAT IT WILL PERMIT 2 CARS EVERY 4 SECONDS TO EMPTY
OUT (ON TWO LANES) ONTO 101 AND HEAD EAST.
(VALLEY FAIR GETS OUT ABOUT THIS TIME AND THERE COULD BE SOME
CONFLICT AND SLOWDOWN) IT WILL TAKE AT THE VERY LEAST. AN HOUR
/2896 VEHICLES INTO 2 RIGHT TURN LANES AT 4 SECONDS PER TURN
EQUALS 96 MINUTES IF ALL OTHER 101 EASTBOUND TRAFFIC IS
HALTED TO LET THESE VEHICLES THROUGH. )
MOVING THIS VALLEY PARK. DRIVE TRAFFIC IN THE OTHER DIRECTION
TO TURN OFF OF 63 ONTO 101 E. WOULD CAUSE MORE PROBLEMS AS IT
ADDS TO THE RT E3 DRIVE TRAFFIC LEAVING . THE PROBLEM IS
OBVIOUSLY CAUSED BY THE SHORT DISTANCE TO THE LIGHT-
FROM THE VALLEY PARK: DRIVE EXIT.
OTHER: THE TRAIN COULD MEASUREABLY SLOW DOWN THE EGRESS OF
TRAFFIC ONTO 101 E.
ANY BROKEN DOWN VEHICLES OR ACCIDENTS WOULD LENGTHEN THESE
NUMBERS AND STRETCH OUT THE TOTAL DISBURSEMENT OF ALL
TRAFFIC.
THE 1511 VEHICLES HEADING INTO TOWN AROUND MIDNIGHT WILL
PROBABLY CAUSE A DELAY IN THE LATE TRAFFIC COMBINED WITH
VALLEY FAIR CLOSING FOR THE NIGHTANDTHE NORMAL
RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC.
THE %
7 SCOTTLAND
COMPANIES
Rcc�tivE'�
p,UG 2 71961
August 27, 1987vixyOPEE
oil OF 3
Judy Cox
City Clerk
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
RE: Starwood Music Center
Dear Ms. Cox,
I understand that an appeal has been filed by some person(s)
who opposes the issuance of a conditional use permit for the
Starwood Music Center.
In order to preserve the rights of the applicant to discuss
the appropriateness of some of the conditions adopted by the
planning commission, the applicant appeals the action by the
Planning Commission pursuant to Section 11.04 of the Zoning
code.
Very truly yours,
Bruce D. Malkerson
Executive Vice President and General Counsel
THE SCOTTLAND COMPANIES
BDM:jhl
cc: John Anderson
Dennis Kraft
Doug wise
P.O. Box 509 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612)445-3242
DAVE DURENBERGER ?
MINNESOTA RECEIVED
'Nnifeb -siafez .Mena£¢ AUG
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510 1 71987
August lo, 1987 CITY OF SHAKOPEE
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee , Minnesota 55379
Dear John:
Thank you for your letter regarding recent proposals to
impcse Federal tax increases to state and local. governments.
This measure is one of many tax increases being debated by
the House Ways and Means Committee for inclusion in the
committee' s deficit reduction legislation . By proposing a
variety of tax increases, the Democrats in the House of
Representatives are once again demonstrating their refusal to
face the difficult spending cuts necessary to reduce the federal
deficit, and their reliance upon unfair tax increases. You can
be certain that when the Senate Finance Committee begins debate
over our version of "budget reconciliation" legislation , I will
oppose any attempt to raise your taxes.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. It is a
privilege to serve you in the United States Senate.
incerely,
4AW11-a-
DAve Durenberger
United States Senator
DD/ap
n
a
K
N N r
roroJn nnnr+ acro
.. w .. p rw7v •• r* G
oMOB Nk X00
bnb d5 b r* O tj
3 Imo m
T n r m K
N N r W
m r a J Y
J £ mn n J q {pn n Jnn Jn n Jn n
•• OGOY. D .. 10t 0F'. •• OH. •• OY. •• ON'
on 91 r oro NG r* oG � 0 rr oGrt H
Omma3K (D"0 K O � l< on
[ �G onK C
b fD fr r' 'd Y O F'• K1 P. 'U F•' 'U F" N
3m r 3 0r
0 a
0 DK
7
N N Y
l0 N ll� OJ r
J n
p 0 U H
•• 3 •• n m
037 on � r*
ago a � n
b
a r
O W Ol l� N j
J
13 ti Jnro
n .. 3Or
o � n o37 "3
Uri F' '
rorok romp
a a a
rt K
N Y r r
a O J o w
7
d
a
K
N Y r
a
H_
n
9
K
/6
TENTATIVE AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
Regular Session Shakopee, MN September 3, 1987
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M.
2. Approval of Agenda
3 . Approval of August 6, 1987 Meeting Minutes.
4. 7 :30 P.M. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an
application for variances to allow a 40 foot front yard
setback instead of the required 50 foot setback and a 5 foot
parking lot setback instead of the required 15 foot setback
for the proposed addition to the existing Aamco Transmission
Shop at 630 First Avenue East.
Applicant: Breckenridge Development
Action: Variance Resolution #504
5. 7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for
a variance to allow a 6 foot setback instead of the required
100 foot setback for an accessory farm building at 3374 S.
Marschall Road.
Applicant: Robert Novotny
Action: Variance Resolution #506
6. 7:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for
variances to allow a 75 foot setback from the lakeshore
(which exists on three sides of the property) instead of the
required 100 foot setback to construct a dwelling on Block
1, Lot 10, Weinandt 1st Addition.
Applicant: H.L. Weinandt
Action: Variance Resolution #507
7. Other Business
8. Adjourn
Douglas K. Wise
City Planner
NOTE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS: If you have any
questions or need additional information on any o£ the above
items, please call Doug Wise on the Monday or Tuesday prior to
the meeting.
/6
TENTATIVE AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Session Shakopee, MN September 3, 1987
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M.
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of July 30, August 6, and August 20, 1987 Meeting
Minutes
4. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for
a Conditional Use Permit for a home occupation to continue
auto body work upon the property located at 706 East 4th
Avenue.
Applicant: Donald R. Plekkenpol
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #505
5. 8:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an amendment to
Shakopee City Code, Section 11.25, Subd. 3; Section 11.26,
Subd. 3; Section 11.27, Subd. 3; Section 11.28 Subd. 3 and
by adopting by reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and
Section 11.99 to permit Temporary Sales Offices as a
Conditional Use in the R-1, R-2, R-3 or R-4 District.
Action: Recommendation to City Council
6. Final Plat of Eagle Creek Junction 2nd Addition
Applicant: Inca Development Company
Action: Recommendation to City Council
7. Discussion: Revised Sign Ordinance
8. Discussion: Amendments to Zoning & Subdivision Ordinance.
9. Other Business
10. Adjourn
Douglas Wise
City Planner
NOTE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS: If you have any
questions or need additional information on any of the above
items, please call Doug Wise on the Monday or Tuesday prior to
the meeting.
Note Meeting Time: 5:00 P.M.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Industrial Commercial Commission
City Hall Council Chambers
September 2, 1987
Chrmn. Keane Presiding
1. Call to order at 5:00 P.M.
2. New Member Introduction - Terry Joos
3. Approval of the minutes - July 22, 1987
4. Economic Development Incentive Report - Discussion
5. Results of August Roundtable Meeting - Discussion
6. Economic Development - Update
a. Starwood
b. Downtown Project
C.
7. Informational Items:
a. Star City Update
b. Transportation Coalition Update
C. Industrial Inquiries and Trends Update
8. other Business
a.
b.
9. Adjourn
Barry A. Stock
Administrative Assistant-
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
/7
INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL COMMISSION
Shakopee, PIN
July 22, 1987
Members present: Tim Keane
James Plekkenpol
Al Furrie
Don Koopmann
Jane DuBois
Members absent: Bud Berens
Staff Present: Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant
Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director
Chairman Keane called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m.
Plekkenpol/Furrie moved to approve the minutes of the July 1,
1987 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Chairman Keane suggested that the Economic Development Incentive
Report be tabled until later on in the meeting.
Mr. Stock then gave a report on the ICC Round Table meeting that
is scheduled for August 5, 1987. He informed the Commission that
30 invitations were mailed on Friday, July 17th and have already
received responses from 10 individuals representing 6 different
companies in the Industrial Park. The Commission then reviewed
the tentative agenda for the Round Table meeting. Chairman Keane
will be the mediator for the event. Mr. Stock requested all the
Committee members to be at the meeting at 5: 00 p.m. so that any
last minute details can be finalized before the Round Table
meeting starts at 5:30 p.m.
Mr. Stock gave the Commission an update on the Star City
Marketing presentation that was held on July 15, 1987. He stated
that in his opinion the marketing presentation went very well and
that the Department of Energy and Economic Development officials
indicated that we would be receiving Star City approval within
the next two weeks. Chairman Keane stated that the DEED
officials explained to the marketing team that the City of
Shakopee should make the Star City awards presentation a big
event. While it is not unique for a community to be designated a
Star City any more, any publicity that we can bring to the
Shakopee area will surely be a benefit. Mr. Stock stated that
upon receiving notification of Star City designation approval,
the ICC will be responsible for coordinating the awards
presentation.
Mr. Stock then gave a brief economic development update. He
stated that the Starwood public hearing was scheduled for July
30, 1987 at 8: 30 p.m. in the Citizens State Bank meeting room.
Discussion ensued on the Starwood proposal and the feelings of
some of the residents affected by the Starwood proposal.
Commissioner Plekkenpol stated that in his opinion the Starwood
proposal was an excellent one and that the developers had done
more than an adequate job in answering the questions that have
been raised by the City and the public. He felt Starwood would
be a great addition to our community. It was the consensus of
the Committee that Starwood would be an attractive addition to
our industrial park. Commissioner Furrie moved for the approval
of a resolution in support of the Starwood Development. Seconded
by Commissioner Plekkenpol. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock then gave a brief report on the Stonebrooke
Development. He stated that this project was a residential
development comprised of approximately 78 single family lots and
approximately 18 twin home units. The residential development
abuts an 18 hole golf course. He went on to state that the
developer has received final PUD approval for this project. He
went on to state that the developer would have to appear before
the City Council at a later date for final plat approval. Mr.
Stock then stated that the developer is proceeding with
excavation of the site at this time and plans on finishing in the
Spring of 1988. Mr. Stock thought it was highly unlikely that
the golf course would be open in 1988. However, he was under the
impression that the developer planned on building at least one
spec home for showing in 1987.
Commissioner DuBois stated that she would have liked to have the
ICC informed of this development when it was initially proposed.
She felt that it would have been appropriate for the ICC to
review this development and make a recommendation to the Planning
Commission. She went on to state that in her opinion the size of
the lots in this development were not adequate given the fact
that this project is in an unsewered area. Mr. Stock stated that
the Planning Commission and City Council addressed this issue in
great detail. The developer is being required by the City of
Shakopee to install a centralized water system. This will
eliminate the chances of ground water contamination of the wells
in the development. The developer is also being required to
identify two separate septic sites per lot. This was done to
ensure that if one septic system fails, the developer will have
an alternate site to dispose of the sewage. Finally, the
developer is being required through the homeowners association to
have each of the septic systems inspected on an annual basis and
the results of this inspection forwarded to the City Building
Inspector for review and approval. Mr. Stock went on to state
that the City of Shakopee is looking in to developing a policy
for the annual inspection of all septic systems within the City
area on an annual basis. Commissioner Plekkenpol questioned why
the Building Department wasn't inspecting septic systems on an
annual basis at this time. He thought it would be wise for the -
City to have a consultant perform the annual inspection of septic
systems in Shakopee. He felt that this should be done in house
by the City of Shakopee staff. Mr. Stock stated that this was an
alternative that was being looked in to at this time. At the
present time, the Shakopee Building Department staff does not
have enough man power to perform the annual inspections of all
the septic systems in Shakopee. Pending the results of the
City's investigation, different alternatives will be presented in
regard to the annual inspection of the septic systems.
Commissioner DuBois stated that she felt the ICC should be more
active in making recommendations to the Planning Commission in
regard to development proposals that are submitted to the City of
Shakopee. Commissioner Furrie stated that in his opinion this
was not the role of the ICC. He felt that if a developer came to
the ICC and requested assistance, then it would be appropriate
for the ICC to make a recommendation on the development merits of
the proposal as they relate to the goals of the ICC. Chairman
Keane stated that he liked the idea of having the ICC play a more
active role in commenting on development proposals, but that one
thing the ICC would not want to do is to add an additional review
step in the approval process for developers. The Commission did
not reach a consensus on this issue.
Chairman Keane stated that the Scottland Corporation has
completed aneconomic development incentive report survey of
several of the surrounding communities in our area. He stated
that the survey pointed out that communities in our area are
actively pursuing development through a variety of methods. He
did state that several communities such as Eagan and Burnsville
are not offering economic development incentives and are still
attracting development. Mr. Keane briefly reviewed some of the
incentives being offered in Chaska and Chanhassen. Mr. Keane
suggested that the Commission review this information and be
prepared to discuss this issue at one their future meetings.
Mr. Stock then informed the Commission that Todd Schwartz had
been appointed to the Planning Commission and has therefore had
to resign from the ICC. Mr. Stock then briefly presentedtwo
newspaper articles for the Commissions review.
Plekkenpol/DuBois moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
18"
Planning Commission
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota August 6, 1987
Vice Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 9:30 p.m. with
Comm. Rockne, Schwartz and Foudray present. Comm. Schmitt,
Pomerenke and VanMaldeghem were absent. Also present were
Douglas wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Community Development
Director; and Cncl. Clay.
Foudray/Schwartz moved to table the discussion on the sign
ordinance until the next regular scheduled meeting so absent
commissioners can partake in the discussion. Motion carried
unanimously.
Schwartz/Rockne moved to approve the agenda with ommission of
sign ordinance discussion. Motion carried unanimously.
Foudray/Rockne moved to aaprove the minutes of July 9, 1987, as
written. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit, Mark Gerry and Allen
Plaisted
Rockne/Schwartz moved to open the public hearing to consider an
application for a Conditional use Permit to permit a Class II
Resturant upon the property located on Lots 3 and 4, Block 12,
Shakopee City (the property just East of the Dairy Queen) .
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the request for a Conditional Use
Permit to construct a Taco Johns Resturant (Class II ) . The
district is zoned B-1. The development will be entered off
highway 169.
Questions were asked by Howard Schmitt, 2296 Eagle Crrek, and
Kevin O'Brien, 1024 South Fuller as to what kind of fencing will
be used for screening. The applicant replied that it would be
treated wood. There was also a concern as to the parking
problems that may arise. It was the concensus of the Commission
that the applicant should petition the City to put "No Parking"
signs along Highway 169.
Comm. Rockne said that the sewer line location should be brought
to the City Engineer's attention.
Foudray/Schwartz moved to close the public hearing. Motion
carried unanimously.
Schwartz/Foudray moved to approve Conditional Use Permit
Resolution No. 501 subject to the following conditions:
1. Only one access to Highway 169 shall be allowed. The
developer shall be required to obtain an access permit
from MNDOT. Location of the access must be approved by
MnDOT and the City Engineer.
Planning Commission
August 6, 1987
Page 2
2. The Parking Lot must comply with the City Codes
relating to setbacks, screening, landscape requirements
and condition number one.
3. The developer shall be required to petition the City
for public road improvements along Highway 169 to
control access and waive all rights to a hearing and
appeal to the assessments.
4. The developer shall be responsible for extension of
sanitary sewer to serve the site and all costs
associated with the extension. The sewer improvements
must conform to City Design Criteria and must be
approved by the City Engineer.
5. Construction and installation of water improvements
must conform to the requirements of the SPDC Manager.
6. The developer shall petition the City for "No Parking"
signs along Highway 169.
7. The screening fence along the rear property line must
beextended to the center of the building.
(Approximately another twenty feet) .
Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on the Registered Land Survey for City Property
- 3rd Avenue and Sommerville. The City Planner said the City has
purchased land in Block 29 of the original plat for the City and
has prepared a registered land survey to be recorded with the
County.
Schwartz/Rockne moved to approve the registered land survey.
Motion carried unanimously.
Foudray/Rockne moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Douglas Wise
City Planner
Carol Schultz
Recording Secretary
Is
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD
OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 6, 1987
Vice Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with
Comm. Rockne, Foudray and Schwartz present. Comm. Schmitt,
Pomerenke and VanMaldeghem were absent. Also present were
Douglas K. Wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Community
Development Director; and Cncl. Steve Clay.
Rockne/Schwartz moved to appprove the agenda as written. Motion
carried unanimously.
Foudray/Schwartz moved to approve the minutes of July 9, 1987.
Motion carried unanimously.
Foudray/Rockne moved to open the public hearing to consider an
application for a four foot variance from the average front yard
setback as required by Section 11.03, Subd. 7.F. for the property
located at 620 West 5th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the background of the request.
Vice Chairman Czaja asked for comments from the audience.
Rosemary Schmitt addressed the Commission stating that they would
like to build a 10 foot addition to the front of their house
because of their growing family. She said the cost would be
extremly high to build to the rear of the house, and that the
living room is located in the front of the house and would be
more practical to add on to the living area.
They were a number of concerns brought up by neighboring
residents regarding the view from their houses being blocked.
Mr. Delium, 504 5th avenue, said that four years ago he was
refused his request to build onto his front porch because it
would make the other houses uneven. Fred Lebens, 604 west 5th
Avenue, said he thought it would spoil the view of the whole
block if that house were uneven.
Foudray/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Foudray/Rockne moved to deny variance Resolution No. 504
requesting a four foot variance from the average front yard
setback as required by Section 11.03 , Subd. 7 (F) for the
property located at 620 West 5th Avenue for the reason that the
petitioner did not present a hardship. Motion carried
unanimously.
Board of Adjustment & Appeals
August 6, 1987
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARING - Variance Request William Nevin
Foudray/Rockne moved to open the public hearing to consider an
application for a five foot variance from the required ten foot
side yard setback to construct an addition to the existing
dwelling at 612 East 7th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the applicants request to build a
three-season porch upon a concrete slab already in existence.
the zoning is R-2.
There were no comments from the audience.
Foudray/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Rockne/Schwartz moved to approve the Variance Resolution No. 503
allowing a five foot variance from the required ten foot side
yard setback to construct an addition to the existing dwelling
located at 612 East 7th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - Variance request No 504 Breckenridge
Development
Foudray/Schwartz moved to open the public hearing to consider an
application for variances to allow a 40 foot front yard setback
instead of the required 50 foot setback and a 5 foot parking lot
setback instead of the required 15 foot setback for the proposed
addition to the existing Aamco Transmission Shop at 630 First
Avenue East. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the background of this request. He
said the setback requirement is 50 feet since it is located on an
arterial street.
Jim Bartlett, 100 SE10th Street, said that at the time it was
built the building was in compliance with the ordinances, since
then the ordinances have been changed.
Clete Link, Geln Ellyn Park, Shakopee, said the original permit
for the building was pulled in December of 1984 and at the time
it was in compliance with the ordinance. The hardships are that
the property is zoned B-1 but the setbacks are not the same as in
the downtown area and if all the setbacks were to be met then no
building could be built on this land at all.
Beverly Koehnen, 2036 Canterbury Road stated she has a number of
concerns regarding the setback variances on this property. Her
first concern regarding the six stall building and the parking
variance are mentioned in her memo dated June 26th, 1987 which
Board of Adjustments and Appeals
August 6, 1987
Page 3
she presented to the Board. Her second concern was whether this
---bud ding could be sold off in pieces. Third concern was that of
the al The -City must decide if this alley exists or not.
She had no personal Feelings either way but would like an answer
on whether it exists or not.
The City Planner read into the record a letter from Mr. LaTour
stating his opposition to this variance request.
Rockne/Schwartz moved to enter LaTours letter of opposition into
the records. Motion carried unanimously.
It was the concensus of the Commission to table this item until
opinion from the City Attorney could be obtained.
Foudray/Rockne moved to continue the public hearing to September
3rd meeting and direct Staff and City Attorney to investigate and
advise the Commissioners as to pertinence of the items raised.
Motion carried with Comm. Rockne opposed.
Foudray/Schwartz moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Douglas Wise
City Planner
Carol Schultz
Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 20, 1987
Chair VanMaldeghem called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. with
Comm. Schwartz, Foudray and Czaja present. Also present were
Douglas K. Wise, City Planner, Dennis Kraft, Community
Development Director; Cncl. Clay; John K. Anderson, City Admr.
and Trevor Walsten Asst. City Attorney. Comm. Rockne arrived
at 7: 50 P.M. Comm. Pomerenke arrived at 7: 58 p.m. and Comm.
Schmitt took his seat at 8:00 p.m.
- Chair VanMaldeghem referenced letters of opposition, stating the
writers' name( s) and reason of opposition, which will be entered
into the record and on file at City Hall.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY SCOTTLAND
(STARWOOD)
Czaja/Foudray moved to continue the public hearing regarding the
conditional use permit request to operate an outdoor music
center as a minor commercial recreational facility upon 86
acres. Motion carried unanimously.
Doug Wise, City Planner, gave an overview of the information
presented at the previous hearings: a location at the
intersection of 12th Avenue and Valley Park; a pavilion with a
capacity of 5,000 people and another 12,000 on a lawn area;
there is also to be a parking area for 6,679 cars.
A motion was made at the July 30, 1987 Planning Commission
meeting to ask the City Council to authorize a trip to a music
center which is similar to that proposed and to hear a rock
band. One member of the Planning Commission, one member of the
City Council, one staff member and a number of citizens went on
such a tour and will be reporting on this tonight.
Barry Stock attended this concert as a member of staff and was
responsible for setting this up. Be spoke regarding the
difficulty in finding any heavy metal or hard rock group within
the two-week time frame. River - Bend Music Center in
Cinncinnati, Ohio was chosen as it was similar to Shakopee, and
Kenny Loggins was the performer, by no means constituting hard
rock. This music center is adjacent to a race track and to an
old coney-island type amusement park. Highways similar to those
surrounding Shakopee are also in existence.
At the request of Mr. Zak, a conference call was also set up
yesterday evening with the Mayor of Cuyahga Falls, where Blossom
Music Center is located and with the Manager of BMC.
Mr. Stock reviewed the investigative processes taken as follows:
a) Staff and independent agencies have reviewed the developers
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) .
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 2
b) Surveys have been taken at eight amphitheaters throughout the
country, with specialized surveys to the Mayor, Assessor, Chief
of Police, City Engineer and City Planner.
c) A tour of Riverbend Music Center in Cincinnati, Ohio was made.
d) A conference call with several interested parties was held.
Chair VanMaldeghem requested at this time that all audience
commentary be made briefly and in an orderly manner.
Bruce Malkerson of Scottland Companies read a letter to the
Planning Commission stating that he believes that no facts or
evidence is supportive of a denial based on criteria of the
Planning Commission.
Mr. Malkerson showed how traffic problems- at Blossom Music
Center cannot be compared to Starwood's situation because the
roads do not go through residential areas in Shakopee the way
they do at Blossom Music Center.
Mr. Malkerson referred to another music center which was denied
and pointed out that this was not an identical situation and had
very different facts and zoning.
Be stated that he has reviewed the materials submitted by the
opposition and does not find any facts or questions not already
addressed.
Digressing from the written text of his letter, Mr. Malkerson
assured that any mosquito control would require the written
consent of the City.
Mr. Malkerson returned to the text of the letter, stating that
any undesirable performing groups would be adverse to Starwood' s
interests. An annual licensing ordinance would be adopted by
the City Council. _
Failure to adhere to any conditions of a Conditional
Use Permit or annual license would cause such license to be
revoked.
Chair VanMaldeghem advised those in the audience to get a copy
from the back table of the 12 criteria for consideration of a
Conditional Use Permit.
Joseph Zak, 5371 Eagle Creek Blvd. addressed the Mpls. Tribune
article stating that he denied saying that the "city fathers
were against us" and clarified that his meaning was that more
help could have been used from city administration in the area
of technical expertise.
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 3
Mr. Zak agreed with Barry Stock regarding the Kenny Loggins
concert not being rock, but the time frame was difficult.
The negative impact of music centers - traffic, proper
compensation from taxes, downside of business - all were the
same in other places where these music centers have been denied.
Mr. Zak spoke on the real estate issue, pesticide issue, the
problem of finding experts who would work for nothing to support
the opponents position.
There are issues of trust between the city, the developer and
the citizens. He said it was difficult to find businesses
willing to go up against the proposal.
The analysis passed to the citizens and they had less clout.
Mr. Zak discussed the modeling technique used on computer in
_
--relation--tot
he traffic study. He pointed out that in Shakopee
--- _ we are all customers and whether we are for or against this
music center, we want prosperity and growth of residents.
Residential growth figures for surrounding towns are much higher
than Shakopee' s. Mr. Zak expressed a concern for the police.
Other possible options for this site would be a retractable
domed amphitheater with 10,000 seats. This would be much more
expensive with air conditioning and heating costs, but would
offer 'class' and give Shakopee a national reputation. Another
possibility would be a computer manufacturer.
Our kids will be getting jobs at the amphitheater as security
people for other kids.
Mr. Zak reported as to the size of the area, summarizing that
the area will contain 1. 5 times the population of the City of
Shakopee in a 25 acre area.
Mr. Zak questioned what measures could be taken during a storm,
or lightning emergency.
Will nearby businesses be able to deal with the pre-concert
sound checks during isolated times of the day?
Chair VanMaldeghem then reminded the audience that this is a
continuation, to keep in mind what has already been discussed at
previous hearings and what needs to be addressed of the
criterias. Also she reminded the audience to direct their
comments to the Planning Commission.
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 4
Jim Gerlach, 637 4th Avenue East, doesn' t think he understands
criteria #9 that the amphitheater cannot cause traffic
congestion. Mr. Gerlach provided a video which showed visual
facts of congestion in the areas where the proposed amphitheater
is going to create traffic problems. The Renaissance festival
will conflict with 16 days of Starwoods ' schedule..
The video showed the Bloomington Ferry Bridge Road on low
traffic days and it was pointed out that on race track days the
traffic congestion also spills over into Bloomington. Also
consideration should be given to spring roadblocks when the
traffic will then be diverted to Highways 169 or 35W.
Also, Mr. Gerlach stated that the warm-up which will take place
4-6 hours before performance time may be unacceptable to Conklin
Company, a nearby business and they should be contacted to see
if this will bother them.
Mr. Gerlach quoted the noise ordinance relatiag _ to_ the____
disruption of peace and quiet and comfort of any person between
the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. According to this, concerts
must be over at 10 p.m. to be legal. ,
Ken Ashfield, City Engineer, reported the proposed traffic
changes with the traffic improvements which are under way now.
Information has been reviewed for the EAW in consideration of
traffic.
Mr. Zak put alot of time into this and it provides the drive for
staff review from a different perspective.
Impact Traffic Study - Mr. Zak completed an analysis with a 4
second per car turn figure at a light or stop sign. Many
calculations are based on that assumption.
Mr. Ashfeld stated:
In reality, the turn time is not 4 seconds per car. Considering
a left turn lane with the traffic stacked (queue) , the turn time
is an average of 2.1 seconds per car . A study done when there
is a queue of more than 6 .cars, that time per vehicle was
reduced to 1.3 seconds per vehicle. This was dealing with 2
lanes of traffic, which left that figure at 2. 6 seconds/vehicle
to commence movements and clear, of the intersection.
Peak traffic would not be arriving between 7 p.m. and 8 p.m. 'as
indicated in Mr. Zak' s report. Actual peak arriving time will
be between 7: 30 and 8:30 p.m.
Shakopee Planning Commission L [
August 20, 1987
Page 5
Also, it is assumed that 308 of the traffic would arrive in the
hour before the peak traffic hour of the event. Before the main
performance, there is a back-up band and much of the traffic
would arrive during the back-up performance arriving for the
main attraction.
For the EAW we dealt with an 8: 30 p.m. starting time.
Comments on findings of Mr. Zak's cover memo dated August 18,
1987:
The 4th paragraph eluded to problems which would result from
Bloomington Ferry Bridge or Shakopee bypass construction.
Roadway construction will take place with roads open. The
Bloomington Ferry Bridge will be constructed in a different
alignment so that the old bridge would stay in place until the
new one is built. The Shakopee Highway 101 bypass is in
undeveloped property so these roads also will not be closed.
Perhaps some lanes will be closed, but not the entire road
during the construction period.
S2 -This was based on assumption of 4 seconds/vehicle which is
the result oferrors in the calculations. we believe the early
traffic will not be of the magnitude Mr. Zak's report assumes.
The timing of the signals at Valley Park Drive and County Road
83, as stated, are in excess of 2 minutes. The actual cycle
time is a result of traffic actualization loops in the
roadways. Traffic loop detectors actually adjust themselves
according to the traffic. The time between the left turn arrows
would be reduced.
¥3 - Inaccuracies in reporting early arrivals has already been
noted.
Comments regarding the times of Starwood' s performances and
departure times of Canterbury Downs have been worked out so the
two times are not conflicting peak times. This refers to West
101 and converging traffic. The two traffic movements can
happen simultaneously and are not conflicting at all. Traffic
leaving would be on a free right turn. Traffic coming left off
of 101 would be on their own cycle.
The worst problem would be the intersection of 12th Avenue and
County Road 83. During peak events or conflicting traffic,
whether residual out of Canterbury or going into Starwood, a
patrolman would need to be at that location.
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 6
#5 - This issue is confusing, and no comment is made at this
time.
#6 - Compounding is going to add to an already congested
roadway. Level of sevice resulting at intersections based on
EAW review of traffic movements included new traffic and
background traffic. With Valleyfair, the race track and
Renaissance traffic, the background traffic takes into account a
very high background figure.
#8 Incorrect assumption of 4 seconds/vehicle.
#9 - Incorrect assumption of 4 seconds/vehicle.
Mr. Ashfeld stated:
The traffic study from Mr. Zak provided hasn't changed my
opinion as yet. Traffic is here, now. Short of improvements,
the traffic will not get better but it will not get worse.
John Anderson, City .Admr.. asked for clarification regarding peak
traffic. Starwood ' s traffic won't fall on present peak for
commuter traffic. If development in the Industrial Park would
be this type of use, this would not add to the worst peak of
current traffic.
Discussion was held regarding the matter of whether truck or
employee traffic which would add to the present current peak
times (5 - 7 p.m. ) and the trade off of traffic like that of
Starwood ' s which would add extended hours onto the peak.
Mr. Zak responded to the assumption of 308 early arrivals saying
that this was from the develooers. Starting times being changed
is a ploy to cover up that fact that 2,200 cars are going to
turn left onto an already crowded roadway and this just cannot
get any better. He said that Starwood 's starting times are
being moved around in order to mold an accomodating figure for
Starwood. On concert nights, 6,300 cars are going to show up
here. They will come when they want and leave when they want.
Shakopee's citizens are trying to live, commute and shop here.
There will be more hours of congestion, more cars and more
traffic jams. Three routes are already congested and these cars
will begin to go into the residential areas. Free tickets, free
Parking allowed at Canterbury Downs have eliminated the 25C per
ticket to the community.
Also, County Rd. 16 was opened up out of Canterbury Downs to act
as a pressure valve to traffic problems.
Safety valves will direct the traffic through housing
developments and will increase residential traffic.
What about surrounding municipalities such as Savage, Prior
Lake, Burnsville, Eden Prairie, etc? Did the EAW go to these -
areas?
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 7
A significant impact will be felt in these areas as well as in
Shakopee. Everyone will be caught in traffic and be angry about
it. The bypass is scheduled for 3-6 years. Are we willing to
put up with this for 6 summers?
Cliff Stafford, 2320 Eagle Creek Blvd. , referred to the Memo
from Douglas wise regarding the overall needs of the city and
existing land use. It is his opinion that more permanent type
of industry, not seasonal recreational industry is needed. This
includes permanent jobs and not additional seasonal positions.
He is concerned about the safety of the surrounding land -
traffic causing increased accidents, a rise in intoxicated
drivers, health problems due to increased litter, congregating
juveniles possibly along the roadways to hear 'something for
nothing' .
Due to the overcrowded area, there is also more opportunity for
crime to be committed.
Traffic problems would be aggravated by what Starwood proposes.
Susan Hofmaster, 1028 Dakota St. , has a question about an
article in the newspaper last week about the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency approving an Indirect Source Permit. She also
questions the starting time of 8:00 or 8:30 p.m. PCA's
controlling interest in noise goes over the City ' s jurisdiction.
The noise level from 7:00 to 10: 00 p.m. (L50) cannot go over 55
decibels after 10 p.m. The City of Shakopee says that the
decibel level in an industrial park cannot be over 55 after 10
p.m. also. If these concerts are going to start at 8:30 p.m.
and cannot go over 55 decibel level, how can that be done?
Jane Swenseen, 1091 Harrison St. , makes a living at a seasonal
job and stated that the zoning decision must be made
objectively. She feels that the Planning. Commission must vote
in favor of Starwood. Starwood has answered questions and
provided evidence and the opposition has provided very little
evidence in regards to traffic, sound, drugs, crime and the
like.
Marlene Larsen, 1440 Blue Heron Trail, was one of the unbiased
individuals who went to gather information about River Bend
Amphitheater. In talking to representatives from the Sheriff ' s
office, Management of River Bend and residents, no complaints of
sound, no devaluation of property was noted. They saw no reason
why this could be a detriment to a community. Why should
residents have to go to Minneapolis for a cultural event or have
our children go to Bloomington for a rock concert? Why not here
in our locality? Riverbend Music Center is well maintained and
clean. A wide variety of ages were in attendance. The music
was loud and was contained in the facility itself.
An amphitheater would be an asset to our community if the
technicalities are worked out.
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 8
Al Conger, 2666 Hauer Trail is not against cultural
entertainment here in Shakopee. He enjoys the small town
atmosphere. No one enjoys commuting in this traffic. He feels
that residents must control their lives around the entertainment
already here now. Extending peak traffic hours to last longer
is a detriment. People are trying to sell their houses are
having trouble because of the congestion already in Shakopee.
Chair VanMaldeghem asked if any local realtor was in the
audience who might comment.
Esther Rademacher, 614 Apgar, is with Edina Realty in Burnsville
and works with people who are interested in the whole area south
of the river. She said that people don 't want to come to
Shakopee due to the congestion and traffic. The future
valuation of property is unknown until that time that a music
center is built and any problem is created. Savage is currently
more in demand than Shakopee.
Czaja/Schwartz moved for a 5 minute recess at 9:45 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Chair VanMaldeghem called the meeting back to order at 9:56 p.m.
Jim Burkhart, 820 Marshall Road, has been a realtor for more
than 2 years. Property values are not able to be forecast until
that time when a change is made. Yes, there are people coming
into Shakopee school district, but most of these are requiring 5
- 10 acre parcels and that does not mean within the City of
Shakopee.
Bob Mayer 952 So. Clay is an 18 year resident of Shakopee. Mr.
Prayer went to the concert at Riveibend Music Center and said that
with earplugs you can still hear the music. The amphitheater is
adjacent to a family park which used to be an amusement park.
The touring group watched the exits and within 1/2 hour the
parking lot was empty. Traffic was not a problem that night.
Another interesting note was that in talking to Sheriff's
department and the Management of River Bend, it is not the music
played but the performing group that seems to affect crowd
behavior.
The facility is owned by the Cinncinnati Symphony and they hire
a company to manage it. Crowd behavior was excellent that
Particular night. A good Dart of their success was due to the
pact that they have community backing. There is a feeling of
support from the community for this facility, possibly because
it is owned by the Cinncinnati Symphony. When asked about a
drug problem, the response of management was 'no more than any
time you have a large concentration of people - not much
different from the schools ' . Management handles incidents well
and they seem to have an excellent management system and
community backing.
Shakopee Planning Commission q
August 20, 1987
Page 9
Donna Hyatt, 1077 Swift Street, also attended the Fiverbend Concert
and called it an informative venture. She said the concert was
lovely. Absolutely nothing about Cinncinnati paralleled
Shakopee. This could only be classed as a sales pitch.
Cinncinnati has 1 million residents; Shakopee has 11, 200.
Hamilton County has 730 sworn officers, 179 are patrol units;
Shakopee has 17 sworn officers, 11 patrol units.
In River Bend, 10 officers are used to direct traffic. Sworn
personnel are not used in the theatre. River Bend hires its own
security. When the facility was new there were terrible traffic
problems. The ten traffic officers has helped that. Sometimes
there is marijuana, but not alot of other drug problems.
Cinncinnati is very clannish and very conservative. They just
don' t have the problems other places do.
None of the highway traffic surrounding River Bend was commuter
traffic. Even so, they experience traffic problems when there
is a large concert.
Comparison was also made to the Met Center which uses 8
Bloomington police officers to clear their parking lots. Field
parking, with no stripes or assigned spots will be used at
Starwood and this causes havoc.
Met Center hires one officer for each security person who is
working to control crowds. They also hire Farmhouse Drug
Treatment for most concerts. Problems are minors drinking,
people coming to concerts to party, or to cause fights. Rock is
not 'out' but the crowds are a bit more mellow. Cinncinnati has
a conservative crowd and young people.
Addressing the petitioning aspect, it was all done in person and
by asking if they would like to sign a petition against
Starwood. Only if no one was home was a flyer left. About 100
signatures were received on the bottom of the flyers. All
signers were adults and homeowners with pride in their property.
This amphitheater is not a popular choice with valid reasons -
traffic, pollution, crowds and 1,100 residents want to find a
way to stop it.
Bob Turek, 731 W. 10th Avenue, stated that he does not believe
it can be proven that this proposal for Starwood meets the 12
criteria for approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Melanie Kahleck, 221 E. 1st Ave. , is a Shakopee resident and
mother of two children. She spoke of her support of the music
center as a cultural and family development.
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1967
Page 10
Gale Fink, 2330 Berg Drive, addressed traffic problems and
stated that there is no need for paperwork to show that crime
and traffic is up and property- values are down. He said he is
convinced this is going through due to increased pressure by
Starwood. Mr. Fink has been here since 1969 and is concerned
for the police of the area and commented on the fact that money
seems to be a concern here, not living conditions.
Bob Schaefer, 13700 Canterbury Road is a realtor with Edina
Realty. His first concern is what impact this will have on
surrounding towns.
He also is concerned about the 12,000 people on the lawn, which
is called festival seating. At a Who concert with festival
seating, 3 people were killed. Without reserved seating, there
is a push to the best spot. People also arrive very early to
s get the best seating.
Traffic is already a problem here. From a realtors ' point of
view, Shakopee has a good location. Traffic is a deterrent for
some people, however, there is a good school system and close
enough location to a lot of good things. People will either
-accept the traffic or move out. Unless you are a teacher or a
realtor, you will have to commute across the river. This
amphitheater is a good thing to have here but some big problems
need to be worked out. A covered domed theatre is a good
suggestion, but it is probably not cost effective.
Richard Soderberg, 1046 Tyler, was concerned about the
interruption of traffic causing more problems into the downtown
areas. To conduct business in this city you need to drive on
back streets. On opening day at Canterbury Downs, he spent over
3 hours in traffic from Lake Street to Shakopee, with even the
county roads being jammed with people trying to get into
Shakopee. Construction which is scheduled to take 6 years could
last as long as 12 years before completed. It is already
difficult to patronize local establishments. What about the
cost to the taxpayers and to Scott County Human Services of
People being hurt and having no insurance?
Mr. Soderberg estimated that he drives by at least 3-4 persons
every night who are driving impaired. The police department is
already working 60-70 hours per week. Police burnout is of
concern to him. He also expressed concern about the litter,
drugs and after-event hang-arounds. People are already moving
out of Shakopee. Experiencing the sight of someone overdosing
on LSD or other drugs is not a pretty sight for our children.
Mr. Bruce Malkerson of Scottland Company stated that through
this 9 month process they have endeavored to provide all facts
on relevant and legal issues and submit those to the city and
Shakopee Planning Commission
Augus t 20, 1987
Page 11
have on public file. The EAW process requires this done and
this was analyzed by staff, opponents, others and state
agencies.
Questions have been raised tonight that have not been answered
before. One is why did the race track start using the gate on
County Road 16. The reason is that after patrons requested to
use this exit, the new manager complied with their requests
without contacting me. After I found out about it, I informed
him of the restrictions called for in the Environmental Impact
Statement -._and this exit will not be used except under peak
-' daytime events as called for in that document.
Jeff Siegel will address the issue of soundchecks.
In the EAW process there was ample opportunity for other
surrounding communities to comment on this. We gave a
presentation to the City of Prior Lake early in the process and
offered to do the same for Savage and they declined. When the
EAW was placed on file, statutory notice had to go to all state
agencies and surrounding communities and was recorded in local
and regional papers.
A question was asked how the PCA viewed the sound analysis.
When you file a EAW with a sound analysis, the PCA is one of the
agencies who reviews that EAW and reports whether or not there
are any problems or whether they feel an EIS is required. The
Minnesota PCA on July 8, 1987 sent a letter to the City that the
noise does not appear to be a problem with the project due to
the lack of sensitive receptors in the immediate project area.
The nearest residence is 4,400 feet away at the Canterbury Inn
Hotel. Accoustical calculations indicate that the noise
standards will be met at all standard receptors. However, if
there are any noise standard violations, the noise levels can be
controlled in the stage mix. In this case, that condition would
be included in the Indirect Source Permit for the project. We
must obtain and are in the process of obtaining an Indirect
Source Permit.
We have submitted testimony regarding real estate. There are
600 new lots approved in the City of Shakopee. These are
offered by knowledgable realtors and they would not be investing -
if they were not selling. We have A study done of homes in
Shakopee and there is no difference than others generally found
in any suburban area. There has been testimony other than
tonight that there is a continual increase in the population of
Shakopee.
In summary, in response to comments regarding Scottland having
pressure or money, we have tried and hopefully succeeded in
always stating facts, hired independent experts and asked them
to analyze the proposed project and and submit their findings to
you. we have had to submit alot of detail because it was
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 12
necessary. We are sure that we will only receive a Conditional
Use Permit because we have met the criteria you set forth. We
have offered lengthy lists of benefits to Shakopee of this music
center.
Jeff Siegel, Project Manager for Starwood discussed the sound
check issue. Only 508 of the time in contemporary shows do
groups use a sound check. Groups have been rehearsed on tour.
There is a rehearsal studio in Chanhassen. Rarely do any groups
open in the midwest. -- _---- - -
What is done is a mike check and a line check, which can be done
without the speakers on with electronic devices. On occasion
after 4:00 p.m. a sound check is done, being 5 - 15 minutes in
length, not consistent, but an on and off situation during that
time. They also have a goal of not allowing soundcheck to
become a nuisance or an entertainment.
Conklin Company's manager called and stated that his opinion has
not changed regarding this. A letter written previously stated
that they welcomed the music center and look forward to its
opening. He said that he stood by that letter.
A motion was made by Foudray/Schmitt to close the public
hearing.
Based on legal counsel, Chair VanMaldeghem declared the motion
to close the public hearing out of order due to a possible need
for further information.
Comm. Czaja asked questions 1 ) how would the patrons be
protected in the event of a storm or lightening storm? 2 ) what
effect does growth traffic have on the traffic in the area? 3 )
what is the legal definition of immediate vicinity? 4 ) what
liability will the City have to a performer or crowd at the
facility? and 5) Is a sound chart available which gives the
entire area, not just 3 specific points?
Mr. Malkerson responded to each of the questions as follows:
1 ) Plans for evacuation, instructions to crowd will be written
up and approved by the Chief of Police of Shakopee. Canterbury
Downs is a national weather service reporting station and
Starwood plans to have a company provide meteorological data to
Starwood.
Discussion was held with regard to where all the people would go
and what kind of plan would be set up with protection for all
those outside. Mr. Malkerson • said they would adopt a plan
similar to those at Canterbury or Valleyfair which has less
covered space than Starwood will. This will be in written form
and approved by the Police Chief.
2 ) Starwood traffic is not during the current peak. Future
projected growth of the industrial/commercial and residential
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 13
area would include commuters from the residential aspect and
there is ample capacity after Starwood for future developers
that may be using the traffic system during that time period.
3) Legal Counsel addressed this by advising the Planning
Commission of the clause in Conditional Use Permits which
provides conditions if the proposed activity would adversely
affect the surrounding area or the community at large. Each
applicant must be taken on a case by case basis and the area can
extend into the community at large and could protect the welfare
of any part of it.
Mr. Malkerson indicated that he disagreed with this. Also,
related to that in consideration for Conditional Use Permit
criteria #1 referring to "diminish or impair property values
within the immediate vicinity" there has been no testimony that
any diminution exists.
4) Discussion was held regarding the liability of performers or
crowd. Mr. Malkerson assured the City that they would not be
held liable or responsible. This is in the hands of management
and private industry. Someone may try to sue the City as well.
The developer has proposed to name the city as additional
insured under their liability policy.
Legal Counsel agreed that the City would not be responsible.
5) Mr. Malkerson said that to his knowledge a sound chart has
not been made of the whole area. Any analysis the Jaffe report
made is available.
Chair VanMaldeghem asked Esther Rademacher as a realtor if by
denying this Conditional Use Permit these prospective buyers
might then decide to come to Shakopee. Rademacher stated that
people are hesitant to come to Shakopee due to the traffic -
that somthing should be done about the traffic before it is
added to. They won't come to Shakopee because of the congestion
here now, and they prefer to move elsewhere.
Bev Koehnen, 2036 Canterbury Road, had some questions regarding
the frequencies used in the study and the units of measure used.
Mr. Perez, sound expert for Starwood, answered her questions
explaining that frequencies are used from 20 - 20, 000 and there
is an electronic filter which shapes sound to the human ear. He
also explained that decibels are used as a unit of measure as
adopted by agencies who measure them.
Comm. Czaja asked for an explanation of sound skipping.
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 14
Mr. Perez read into the record his letter to Mr. Malkerson and
Mr. Siegel, responding to this matter as follows:
A question has been raised about the possibility of sound from
Starwood leaving the area and showing up at more distant areas
at high intensities. Long distance propagation of sound is
affected by both wind and temperature conditions in the
atmosphere. These effects result mainly from changes mainly to
the speed of sound ( the higher the temperature, the higher the
speed of sound) and wind components add or subtract to the sound
wave. To illustrate this effect, I am attaching a series of
graphs showing various atmospheric possibilities and the
resulting behavior of the soundwave. (This is on the back -
Typical atmospheric conditions that would result in unique
long-distance propagations of sound) .
In my 24 years in noise control, the only time I had to concern
myself with the above phenomena was during my work with NASA as
it related to static tests of Saturn rockets. Needless to say,
the 214 decibel of power level oftheSaturn 5 could not be
compared to the sound emanating from Starwood. Furthermore,
these phenomena are of concern great distances away from the
source. In the immediate vicinity of the sound source other
less exotic, that is vegetation and barriers, considered in the
Jaffe report, are of much greater importance than the described
atmospheric condition.
In my evaluation of this issue, it is my conclusion that even in
the rare case where some focusing may occur many miles away from
Starwood, the resulting sound levels would be well within the
State standards.
Further discussion was held with regard to this unique weather
area, the Valley. The analysis done by Jaffe acoustics included
most significant parameters. The temperature due to the unicue
Valley conditions was not considered. Long distance propagation
of sound was not considered in the Jaffe report. in the rare
occurrence, there will not be any violation of standards.
The Legal Advisor then stated in regard to the latitude of the
Planning Commission to impose additional conditions to protect
the surrounding area and community as a whole, he does not want
to convey that always applies in looking at the 12 criteria with
reference to #1 especially (property values in the immediate
vicinity) . The notice to affected property owners, described as
within 350 feet of the outer boundary is more appropriate.
Comm. Schmitt asked if Starwood intends to charge for parking on
the site.
Shakopee Planning Commission J /
August 20, 1987
Page 15
Mr. Malkerson said they do not intend to charge for parking, but
in the event they would, the pickup points need to be moved to
the interior of the site.
Comm. Schmitt noted a descrepancy in two documents. One
indicates there will be no parking fees and another one says
there will be fees charged.
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to close the public hearing. Motion
carried unanimously.
A five minute recess was called at 11:27 p.m.
Chair VanMaldeghem called the meeting back to order at 11: 42
p.m.
Chair VanMaldeghem requested Dennis Kraft, Community Development
Director, to comment on the status of the Indirect Source Permit
and the noise issue. Mr. Kraft confirmed that an Indirect
Source Permit has not been issued, but must be issued before
this project can begin.
He also clarified the standards the Pollution Control Agency
will be using and which will be included as part of the Indirect
Source Permit.
A motion by Schmitt/Pomerenke for approval of the Conditional
Use Permit Resolution #492, subject to Conditions 1 through 15
of the Conditions below.
Czaja/Schmitt moved to add the Conditions 16 through 26.
Discussion ensued on the wording and me=aning of individual -
conditions. The following conditions are in final form after
completion of the discussion.
STARWOOD MUSIC CENTER CONDITIONS
1. The EAW for the Starwood Music Center along with all the
statements made therein, and all of the mitigating measures
stated therein are hereby adopted as a condition of the
Conditional Use Permit.
2. A written agreement between City and developer containing
the security requirements for the facility. Said agreement
shall include the following:
A. Licensed officers will be permitted within the site.
B. Number and type of security personnel required for each
type of event.
C. Starwood shall be responsible for all costs relating to
on and off site security and traffic control.
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 16
D. All ushers as well as security personnel must receive
training in security procedures, first .aid and drug
abuse prevention/treatment.
E. The agreement must be approved by the Chief of Police.
F. The agreement can be amended at the request of either
Starwood or the City, with proper notification and
review.
G. Applicant and/or his agent will contract with the local
police department and county sheriff for traffic control
by on duty officers at all major county and state
roadway intersections within the City of Shakopee.
3. A qualified physician or paramedic team with ambulance shall
be in attendance at all performances. In addition, a drug
crisis unit and trained team will be on the site for all
concerts as directed by the City Police Chief.
4. No alcoholic beverages shall be brought into the facility by
patrons. No consumption of alcoholic beverages shall be
allowed within the parking lot or other areas of the site
outside the performance area. The facility operator shall
be responsible for enforcing these conditions.
5. The Starwood Music Center shall only be allowed alcoholic
beverage licenses for the serving of beer and wine and only
two containers be sold at any one sale and the serving of
these beverages be terminated- 1 hour prior to the end of the
event.
6. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of
required improvements:
A. An eight foot bituminous trail along 12th Avenue and
Valley Park Drive shall be required.
E. Additional street lighting to be installed in accordance
with the requirements of the SPUC Manager and the City
Engineer.
C. Water system improvements along 12th Avenue required to
complete a looD from Canterbury Road to Valley Park
Drive to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC manager.
D. Payment in lieu of park dedication as required by City
Code Section 12.07, Subd. 5.
/ q
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 17
7. Deferred assessments against the property shall be paid
prior to inssuance of a building permit.
B. Any plans for use of the portion of the site not included in
the project shall require platting of the entire parcel.
9. General security and off site management:
A. Overnight camping on any part of the property or within
the immediate vicinity shall be prohibited.
B. No parking shall be allowed outside the immediate
vicinity of the facility.
C. No loitering will be allowed on the facility or in the
immediate vicinity of the facility 12 hours prior to or
after an event.
10. No event shall start prior to 8: 00 p.m. on Monday - Friday.
11. Approval by the City Engineer of final calculations for
storm drainage and detention area, and for peak sanitary
sewer flow from a major entertainment facility that would
have intermissions generating at a peak flow.
12. No event will be allowed that displays a history of causing
a disturbance. A citizens' group shall be formed to review
events as well as to promote communication between and among
the citizens and the applicant.
13. Sound levels at the stage are limited to 100 decibels.
Sealed monitoring devices will be installed by the City at
the developers ' expense, one at the stage and one or more
off the site. Fines for sound levels in excess of 100 db at
the stage and sound levels in excess of those identified in
the application will be established by City Ordinance.
14. As a condition for granting this permit, Scottland and/or
its successors in land ownership will file a certified
statement of intent (moratorium) agreeing to refrain from
any rezoning requests and/or minor entertainment conditional
use permit requests on all properties zoned I-2 within 3,000
feet of this facility for a period of 7 years or until
commercial recreational uses are eliminated from the I-2
zone.
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 18
15. Developer agrees to clean all litter on all adjacent
properties and on all feeding roadways within 24 hours after
a concert/event on the site. Said area shall be bordered
on the west by County Road 83, on the south by County Road
16, on the east by the NSP substation road and on the north
by Highway 101.
16. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is to be submitted and
approved prior to issuance of the Building Permit.
17. Ticket sales are to be limited to the state capacity of the
facility, which is 17,000.
18. No event shall last longer than 11:30 p.m.
19. No pest control measures shall be taken that will have a
detrimental effect on the environment.
20. Lighting shall be designed such that no direct light be
emitted outside the facility.
21. Any change in use of this facility as stated in the
application must be approved by this body (Planning
Commission) .
22. That the City receive advance notice of all events and the
anticipated attendance.
23. Helicopters will not be permitted except under emergency
conditions.
24. Beside off-site ticket sales, no event ticket sales will be
allowed in the immediate vicinity and prior to the parking
of the vehicles inside the facility.
25. I£ traffic levels at Starwood exceed the criteria as set
forth in this application, all ac-ivities must be curtailed
until resolutions are found.
26. City legal staff shall review this resolution _ and all
conditions contained within the resolution. The Planning
Commission reserves the right to amend the resolution and
its conditions to comply with legal opinion.
A roll call vote was taken: Ayes: Comm. vanMaldeghem
Comm. Pomerenke
Comm. Czaja
Comm. Schwartz
Comm. Foudray
Comm. Rockne
Noes: Comm. Schmitt
Shakopee Planning Commission
August 20, 1987
Page 19 -
Chair VanMaldeghem advised the applicant and the audience of the
7 day appeal process.
Czaja/Schmitt moved to recommend to City COuncil that a special
study be initiated to evaluate and recommend solutions to the
problems created by our changing environment, mainly, but not
limited to, the recreational entertainment facilities within and
surrounding our City. This study should be focused on, but not
limited to, issues such as increased traffic, noise, crime, etc.
Motion passed unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
Motion by Czaja/Schmitt to table the approval of the July 30,
1987 minutes of the Planning Commission until the next meeting.
Motion carried unanimously.
Foudray/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:25 a.m.
Douglas K. Wise
City Planner
Peggy Swagger
Recording Secretary
fZD
PROCEEDINGS OF THE DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
City Hall Council Chambers
August 12, 1987
Chairman Laurent called the meeting to order at 7:30 A.M. with
the following members present: Gary Laurent, Jim Stillman, Joe
Topic, Bill Wermerskirchen, Terry Forbord and Tim Keane. Members
absent: Harry Kohler, Pete Sames and Melanie Kahleck. Also
present were: Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; Ken Ash£eld,
City Engineer and Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director.
Ginger O'Brien and sherry Consoer were also present representing
Intra Designs Inc.
Terry Forbord requested that the following items be added to the
agenda under information, 1. Downtown Construction Project
Update, 2. 169 Bridge Update, and 3 . Pellham Lot Update.
Wermerskirchen/Topic moved to approve the agenda as amended.
Motion carried unanimously.
Stillman/Topic moved to accept the minutes of the July 14, 1987
meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock stated that Ms. Ginger O'Brien representing Intra
Designs Inc. had approached City staff stating their desire to
appear before the Downtown Committee and discuss some of the
design services that her company can offer. Mr. Stock went on to
state that since the Downtown Committee is in the process of
establishing some downtown design standards he thought it was
appropriate for Ms. O'Brien to appear before the Committee to
discuss some of the services that they might be able to provide
to the City of Shakopee. Ms. O'Brien then stated that Intra
Design specialized in the area of interior design but that they
have had experience with exterior renovations. She specifically
stated that her company had met with Mr. Pearson in designing the
awnings for his building. Ms. O'Brien questioned if the City of
Shakopee had a theme in mind for the downtown area. Chairman
Laurent stated that the Downtown Committee was interested in
creating a turn of the century look. Ms. O'Brien then questioned
if the City had any design guidelines in mind for the downtown
area. Mr. Stock stated that the Committee was in the process of
reviewing and adopting a set of downtown design standards that
would be utilized in conjunction with any rehabilitation or
construction in the downtown area. Ms. O'Brien than questioned
what the City' s time line was on proceeding with downtown
rehabilitation. Mr. Stock stated that he hoped to have several
City incentive programs in place prior to January 1, 1988. Later
this fall or early next year he expected that the City would have
to solicit requests for proposals from architectural or design
firms who may be interested in contracting with the City for
design services that would provide assistance to businesses
-1-
seeking rehabilitation or new construction through the various
incentive programs. Mr. Laurent thanked Ms. O'Brien and Ms.
Consoer for appearing before the Downtown Committee and stated
that the City would be in contact with their firm at a later date
when specific requests for proposals have been prepared for
design services.
Mr. Stock reported that he had been approached by Mr. Terry
Hennen who questioned the equity of the current assessment
policy. Mr. Hennen pointed out that the lot in which he is
located is being assessed over $6,000. Other lots of similar
size are being assessed approximately $3,300. Because the lot in
which Mr. Hennen' s property is located is divided in to four
separate parcels, the front footage used in calculating the
assessment for these parcels was based on the Lewis Street
frontage. Mr. Hennen stated that he did not think it was fair
for this lot to be assessed over $6,000 just because it was owned
by four separate individuals. He has pointed out that if the lot
were owned by a single party the assessment would be $3,300.
Mr. Wermerskirchen stated that the assessment policy used in
conjunction with the Downtown Project was based on the earlier
assessment policy used when the downtown parking lots were
constructed. Mr. Laurent stated that Mr. Hennen' s estimated
assessment of $1,200 is not unreasonable. Mr. Stock stated that
he did not believe that this was the issue. Mr. Forbord stated
that since these parcels fronted Lewis they were receiving
benefit in proportion to their estimated assessments. Mr. Stock
requested the Committee to table this issue until staff could do
a comparison between the existing assessment policy and an
assessment policy based on square footage. Mr. Stock also stated
that he had informed Mr. Hennen that this issue would be tabled
until a later date.
Forbord/Stillman moved to table this issue until the next regular
meeting of the Downtown Committee. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock presented a set of downtown design standards for the
Committee's review. Mr. Stock explained that the proposed design
standards were prepared based on design standards followed in the
communities of Eau Claire, Hastings, Red Wing and the Main Street
Program. He went on to state that the design standards are
merely guidelines that the City would use to encourage historic
preservation. The proposed guidelines will be incorporated in to
the economic development incentive programs that are developed
for use in the downtown area. Those individuals applying for
assistance through these programs would be strongly encouraged to
follow the proposed design guidelines. Mr. Keane suggested that
it might be appropriate for the City to establish a design review
committee to oversee any new development or redevelopment in the
downtown area. Mr. Wampach questioned the funding source for any
downtown incentive programs. Mr. Stock stated that there are
several alternative sources of funding including tax increment
surplus, HRA reserve fund and retired assessments that were
-2-
initially paid for with tax increment financing. Mr. Wampach _
then questioned if the City Building Inspector was going to
survey the buildings in the downtown area to determine if it
would be more cost effective to rehabilitate or demolish certain
structures in the downtown area. Mr. Stock stated that he hoped
to do a complete inventory of the properties in the downtown area
prior to initiating any economic development programs in the
downtown area. Mr. Keane questioned how new buildings would be
effected by the proposed downtown design standards. Mr. Stock
stated that a new condition could be added under general
standards relating to new construction. Mr. Forbord suggested
that staff develop a set of separate design standards for new
construction in the downtown area. Mr. Keane suggested that
these guidelines could focus on the design goals of the Downtown
Committee and might incorporate credits for building vertically
and incorporating court yard space. He also suggested that the
design guidelines could focus on the appropriate building
materials for new construction in the downtown area.
Wermerskirchen/Keane moved to approve the . Downtown Design
Standards and recommended that they be forwarded to City Council
for approval and incorporated in to all City incentive programs
utilized in the downtown area. Staff is also directed to prepare
a separate set of design standards for new construction in the
downtown area. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Ashfeld gave a brief report on the downtown construction
stating that the project was on schedule and they have received
no complaints from property owners in the downtown area at this
time. He also stated that he and Mr. Stock had met with
representatives from First National Bank and they are going to
improve their parking lot to coincide with the streetscape
elements proposed in the downtown area.
Mr. Ashfeld then gave a brief update on the downtown bridge
stating that the City is in the process of selecting a consultant
to complete the final design of the right-of-way alignment for
the bridge. Mr. Ashfeld then went on to state that the City is
considering several options for a foot bridge across the river
connecting the trail systems. He stated that one option being
discussed at this time is to utilize the piers of the existing
bridge for a new foot bridge across the river. The problem with
this alternative is that no one is very excited about taking
responsibility for the bridge once it is completed.
Mr. Keane stated that he felt it was very important for the City
to create a strong point of entry in to the downtown area. He
went on to state that he thought the Committee should consider
addressing the types of elements or themes that they want to
incorporate in to this point of entry. Mr. Laurent stated that
he agreed that this was a separate issue that should be addressed
in the near future. Mr. Wermerskirchen stated that he felt it
might be more appropriate to wait until we know the exact
location of the right-of-way alignment. Mr. Keane suggested that
-3-
the consulting engineers report back to the Committee when the
horizonal points for the right-of-way have been determined. Mr.
Forbord also suggested that Tim Erkkila representing Westwood
Engineering be incorporated in to this process. Mr. Ashfeld
stated that it was obviously premature for the City to construct
this point of entry at this time but he agreed that the City
should investigate plaza schemes and point of entry themes during
the design stage of the new bridge. He recommended that bridge
head improvements should be strongly considered.
Mr. Stock gave an update on the Pellham lot. He stated that Mr.
Dave Brown has approached the City regarding the possibility of
creating a tax increment project for this site. Mr. Brown is
proposing to exchange his lot for the City parking lot.
Initially Mr. Brown proposed a one story office building for this
site. Mr. Stock reported that staff is trying to encourage Mr.
Brown to build at least a two story structure and also
investigate the possibility of purchasing the entire half block.
Mr. Keane stated that it was important for the Downtown Committee
to discuss in greater detail the type of development the
Committee wants to see occur in the downtown area. He stated
that the block in question was very crucial in redeveloping the
downtown area. It was the consensus of the Downtown Committee to
meet in two weeks to discuss the role of the Downtown Committee
in encouraging appropriate development in the downtown area.
Forbord/Wermerskirchen moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 a.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
-4-
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator /
FROM: Ken Ashfel d, City Engineer
SUBJECT: August Project Status Report
DATE: August 25 , 1987
Attached is the project status report for the month of August.
The following is a summary of activities.
Project Under Construction
Parks Project: Paving on Hiawatha Park remains to be completed
as well as some additional trail work to complete the restoration
at the new Chamber building.
13th Avenue (C.R. 89 — East) : Grading & underground work is now
completed with base construction to follow.
1987 Pavement Preservation — (Overlay) : The contractor is
profiling the pavement in preparation for surfacing. This
profiling will eliminate an edge at the gutter line as a result
of the overlay.
Downtown Streetscape Project: The underground utility work has
been completed on 2nd Avenue and Lewis Street. Concrete work is
scheduled to begin on August 31 . This project has been
progressing relatively smooth with excellent cooperation from the
merchants in the project area. One complication involved the
undermining of Betti Lu' s shop during installation of the
sanitary sewer service up to the store front. The building did
not and does not have a foundation around the building which
caused the undermining. It was imperative that immediate action
be taken and with the assistance of Lee Houser, the problem was
corrected. Lee managed to get a building contractor in on late
Friday and early Saturday to construct a foundation in the area
that was undermined.
The First National Bank is planning on rehabilitating their
parking lot to coincide with the streetscape scheme. This will
be a private contract between the bank and the contractor. The
Engineering Department is acting as liaison between the
contractor and bank and assisting the bank in design layout to
the extent that we see benefitting the overall project such as
access locations, etc.
Other Proiects
Bids are being taken on August 28 for the Heritage Place
development and the Marschall Road watermain and sanitary sewer.
Bids are being taken on September 18 for Vierling Drive through
Hauer' s 4th Addition. Plans are completed in preliminary form
Project Status
August 25, 1987
Page 2
for the Upper Valley Drainage Project and are being reviewed by
Mn/DOT. Apparently, Mn/DOT has now earmarked $172 ,000 for
contribution to this project. A proposed bid letting date has
not been programmed as of yet.
The developers of the Canterbury Estates plat (Robertson pit) has
complications with the final purchasing of the property for the
plat. Until the property is purchased, the final plat will not
be completed. Council ordered plans and specs for the VIP
extension but the alignment of the VIP and Upper Valley
drainageway are tied to the final platting.
Adoption of assessments for the following projects are scheduled
for September 8, 1987.
Heritage Place
Marschall Road Water & Sewer
13th Avenue (C.R. 89-East)
Valley Park Drive North
KA/pmp
-------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----
-
-- ----- ----- -----
- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- -----
---------- ----- ----- ------- ----- ----- ----- -----
---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----
- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
---------- --
-- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---- --
----- ]-- -�-- -- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----
-- ----- ----- ----- -----
---- ----- -
-- -- --- ---- ---
----- -----
----1------------1----- ----- -----
----- ------- -- -----
--- - -- - -- - --g-
----- ----- ---- -- ----- ---------- -----
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
-- ----- -----
-1-----IJ -- ----- ----
Ah
R - ----- ------ ---_ ____ ____J_-__J__3_ _-a_
----- ---- ---- ----1---- --g- ---- --3-�-- - -- -
s -- -------------- ---- --------- --------------1
-
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---- 1 - --�-----
® --- ---- -- s----- I-----
- ---- ----1---- -
_ 1----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----11 �
s=a-¢---- -----
- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
i
--------
----- ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- - _--
-- - -- - --- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
-- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -11 - 1 -
---- -----
----- ----- ----- --
--- ----- ----- -----
-- --
- ----
--- — ---- -- — ---- ----J---- ---- ---- ---- ----
=a�— �— — — ------- ------1----1---------1
- - ----- ----1
- ----1----1------
---------------------- ----
- ----- ---------] - - ---- -- -----
-- -- ---- ---- - ------- -----
----------1----I----1-- - ------------ - -- -�
_ a � g1 �
A ---- ----- --
---- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
-- ----
--1---- --------------
--- ------------1-------------- ----------- e -
� L ?
- ------ ---A--Aa --------- ---- --- m--- =----�--
- --� 1----1----1- --- ----- ----- -----
--I-� 2�
a 1 1
6 ---- ----1----
ga- ----- ----- ----
-
---- --- ----- ---- ----
lag It
- � -
d � �
_
-------- ---- --s-1
a
------------------
_ -
i it X11 X11
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 1, 1987
Mayor Reinke presiding
11 Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
2] Recess for H.R.A. Meeting
31 Re-convene
41 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
51 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
61 Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterick
are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of
these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event
the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered
in its normal sequence on the agenda. )
*7] Approval of minutes of August 4th and 17th, 1987
81 Communications: (Items noted for consent will be received and filed)
a] Judy Glasford re: downtown flags
b] Leo Mc Govern Sr. re: storm water drainage bill
c] Robert Vierling re: complaint concerning animals
*d] George Kehoe re : regional meeting of .League of Mn. Cities
*e] Steve Keefe, Met Council re: programs available for older people
f] Liz Will re: League of Mn. Cities 75th anniversary
g] Dave Drealan re: Southwest Communities Coalition
h] Thomas Lannon, Deputy Auditor re: Tax Forfeiture Sale
9] Public Hearings:
a] 7:45 P.M. - Appeal of Board of Adjustment and Appeals denial
of a variance from front yard setback requirements
for property located at 620 West 5th Avenue
b] 7:45 P.M. - Continuation of public hearing held August 4, 1587
on the proposed improvements to Vierling Dr.between
CR-16 to CR-17 by streets, storm sewer, watermains,
and sanitary sewer
10] Boards and Commissions: Downtown Committee :
a] Downtown Design Standards - Buildings (Res. No. 2784)
Energy and Transportation Ccmmittee:
*b] Request for 1987 Regional Transit Board Budget Amendment
*c] Expanded Dial-A-Ride Service Hours
*d] Home Energy Check-Up/Minnegasco Project Extension
Planning Commission:
*e] Approval of Registered Land Survey for City owned property in
Block 29 (public library) - Res. No. 2780
f] Study Regarding Impact on Commercial Recreational Development
on the City
uogesgsTuTwPV AgTO
u0slapuV '7I ugof
'id'd OO: L qU L86T '8 aagwagdaS 'Bepsony og uanoCpV [VT
[o
[q
4a8Pn8 8861 PaPu@=O0a3 S ,JO4vd4sTuTwpV AgTO 30 uoTgngTjqsTQ [U
:ssauTsng aagg0 [£T
uo?goaTZ IUTOadS V sO3 BuTTTVO - Z8LZ 'ON 'Sag [3
AgTO pue 8OaG=O'J
3o aagw qo uaamgag quawaaa?V aseaq BUTpuawV - SBL? 'ON 'sag [a„
VT-L86T
'squawanojdwl aoUTd aBegTsaH uo pT8 SuT4deooV - LSLZ 'ON 'sag [P.
b-L86T
'uTUwsagUM PUOg TTU40ssUW uo PTg BuTgdaooV - 98L? 'ON 'sag [o.
T-986T
'STe,xageq uTsag 'qS sawTOH uo NaoM BuTgdaooV - 98LZ 'ON 'sag [q
aATaG BuTTaOTA UO 2=jaUd Bu?goTsgsag - £8LZ 'ON 'sag [U+
:SaouauTPsO Puu suo?gnTOsag [ZT
anbizTuO ssaoOJd BUTuuUTd 01Ba4va4S [x.
Spund neo? UOTZTSTnboV BUM-3O-474BTg u 4TIodo,z4aN
g4TA Pe. TnboV STaOSUd so3 squeuaAOD aAT40Ts4sag pue 94u9waQa2V [ C+
' ouI gnTO uewTTnd Aq. smeq .zonbTq- 3o uOTgeTOTA (T
saTgUS 1006 3o BuTsu90T7 [g
- WV OO:OT qe Bul=TBag AUpunS uo sonbTZ 30 aTUs [B
LO'99£`88$ 3o qunowV uT STITg OAwddV [3
quawq.xedaQ 93i1oM OTTgnd - sasegosnd quawdTnbg TUgTdUO [a+
aTOTgaA aATgUBTgsanuI pass 3o esugojnd [P.
ssapdO a2uW40 aAT40adsOsd 43000Sd adUosgaasgS umoqumOQ [0
08LZ 'sag - ZT-L86T 'uiPPV qqb s ,uanUH gBno.xgg aAIJU BuTTsaTA [4
aATUA moTa-N3U9 s ,Bdag uam0 pue aua0 [U+
[00:6 punoav xUaaq agnuTw OT U aNu4 TTTm TToun00] :33U4S wos3 sgsodag [TT
Omy aged
486T IT aagwagdaS
VQNZOV ZAISVZNZZ
TENTATIVE AGENDA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
Regular Adjourned Session September 1, 1987
Chairperson Leroux presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
2. Satisfaction of Mortgages
3 . Shakopee Valley Motel Tax Increment Financing Project
4. - Other Business
5 . Adjourn
Dennis R. Kraft
Executive Director
# a
MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive Director
RE: Satisfaction of Mortgages
DATE: August 28, 1987
Introduction•
In the Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization
Project the BRA provided lots to lower-income families
conditioned on those families continuing to reside in the homes
purchased for at least five years. Residence for a shorter
period would require prorata repayment of the lot value.
Background:
Robert and Mary Heimerman of Lot 5, Block 3, Macey's Second
Addition, executed August 19, 1982; Lois M. Keim of Lot 3, Block
3, Macey's Second Addition, executed August 31, 1982; and Mark
and Jeanne Foudray of Lot 4, Block 3 , Macey's Second Addition,
executed August 31, 1982, have met the five year requirement of
the promissory notes.
Requested Action.
To authorize appropriate BRA officials to execute and
deliver Satisfaction of Mortgages to Robert and Mary Heimerman
for the property located on Lot 5, Block 3, Macey's Second
Addition; to Lois M. Keim for the property located on Lot 3,
Block 3 , Macey' s Second Addition; and to Mark and Jeanne Foudray
for the property located on Lot 4, Block 3 , Macey' s Addition.
� 3
MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive Director
RE: Shakopee Valley Motel Tax Increment Project
DATE: August 19, 1987
Introduction•
At the August 18, 1987 BRA meeting the HRA directed the
staff to meet with Mr. Wallace Bakken and provide additional
detail on Mr. Bakken's most recent plans for his motel,
restaurant, campground project.
Background•
This project was approved by the HRA during the summer of
1986 and at that time tax increment bonds in the amount of
$500,000 were issued for various public and private improvements.
The attached HRA memo of August 14, 1987 provides both more
detailed background information on the project and it also
outlines Mr. Bakken's request for the receipt of some tax
increment bond proceeds upon completion of the campground.
Attached also please find an amended and restated contract
between the City and the HRA for this project. This amended
contract provides for new dates of completion for the project and
indicates that Mr. Bakken will have completed his campground by
January 2, 1988 and the campground will have a minimum market
value of $855,600. Also included for the HRA' s consideration is
an assessment agreement between Mr. Bakken and the HRA. This
assessment agreement has been reviewed by Mr. Krass, the
Assistant City Attorney as well as by Mr. Bakken' s attorney. The
agreement was prepared by Mr. Jim O'Mera, an attorney with
O'Connor and Hannan. As was indicated at the meeting of August
18, the financial analysis prepared by Springsted and Associates
indicates that it is possible to give Mr. Bakken an amount of
$100,000 once he has completed the work on the Jellystone Park
Campground. The calculations by Springsted indicate that the
City will remain in a positive cash flow situation for this bond
issue.
Alternatives:
1. Approve the amended contract with the Shakopee Valley Motel
which will provide the motel in the amount of $100,000 once
the Jellystone Campground is finished in a manner consist
with the agreement.
2. Inform Mr. Bakken that the BRA expects the conditions of the
original agreement to be complied with, with the exception
of the deadline dates contained therein and that no funds
will be released until such time as all of the improvements
are completed.
Staff Recommendation:
Alternative #1 is recommended with the stipulation that Mr.
Bakken signed the attached assessment agreement prior to the time
that any tax increment funds are dispersed.
Action Requested:
Move to approve Resolution # 87-4 authorizing an amount of
$100,000 to be conveyed to the Shakopee Valley Motel and Mr.
Wallace Bakken at such time as the Jellystone Park Campground
phase of the Shakopee Valley Motel project is completed, provided
that the Jellystone Park component has a minimum market value of
. $855,600.
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 4, 1987
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7: 05 p.m. with Cncl.
Wampach, Vierling, Leroux and Clay present. Cncl. Lebens was
absent. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator;
Douglas Wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Community Delvelopment
Director; Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; Julius A. Coller, II. , City
Attorney; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk.
Wampach/vierling moved to recess for HRA. Motion carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Clay moved to reconvene City Council at 7:07 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
The City Policy of Non-Discrimination on the Basis of Handicapped
Status was read by Mayor Reinke.
Cncl. Clay gave a liaison report on the recent public hearing by
the Planning Commission.
Cncl. Leroux stated he had received a call concerning handicapped
accessibility at Canterbury Downs, both in parking and
accommodations for viewing races. There was discussion.
Leroux/Vierling moved that the Building Inspector be requested to
check on handicapped accessibility at Canterbury Downs. If it is
found that the facility meets only minimum standards for
handicapped accessibility, Cncl. Leroux asked whether Council
would be willing to converse with Canterbury Downs about
expanding what is currently available. He also asked that the
press might wish to make some mention that if people are having
difficulty gaining handicapped access to Canterbury Downs, it
would be interesting to hear about the problems. The motion
carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved the consent business. Cncl. Wampach asked
that item 13b (issuance of bonds) be held from consent business.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved approvgil of the minutes of the July 7 and
July 14, 1987, City Council meetings. (Approved under consent
business) .
Mayor Reinke indicated that inasmuch as the Planning Commission
tabled the Starwood Music Center Public hearing, Council would
also table this item. Cncl. Leroux addressed a memo concerning
concerts and amphitheatre review wherein it stated that residents
in attendance at the public hearing questioned whether any of the
Planning Commission members had ever attended a rock concert.
city Council
August 4, 1987
Page 2
Also, it is being recommended that a committee be formed to
attend a rock concert, preferably in a setting such as would
exist in this community if the project were approved. He
questioned whether there was a definition of "rock concert"
offered at the public hearing. Mr. Kraft stated he did not think
a clear definition was offered, however, the intonation was in a
negitive manner. Discussion was held.
Leroux/Vierling moved that a committee of two members from
Council, two from the Planning Commission, one from City Staff
and one interested citizen not from amongst the leaders of the
opponents or proponents be formed to investigate and attend a
rock concert.
Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Vierling, Leroux, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Noes: None
Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to open the public hearing on Proposed
Improvements to 13th Avenue between CR-16 to CR-17 by streets,
storm sewer, watermains and sanitary sewer. Motion carried
unanimously. The public hearing opened at 7:38 p.m.
The City Engineer stated that the purpose of this hearing is to
consider a public improvement consisting of building Vierling
Drive from County Road 16 to County Road 17, the main
consideration being that portion extending in a westerly
direction to County Road 17. He noted that in the feasibility
study it was pointed out there is one property owner involved
with this particular project area. The pertinent information and
figures were given to the property owner some time ago, but he
has not yet reviewed all the information as it would relate to
the marketing and development of that property and they are
requesting continuation of this public hearing for one month.
Mayor Reinke noted that it appears there would not be any
construction begun this year in regard to the section problem in
Hauer' s 4th Addition to County Road 16. He stated this has been
a concern as far as traffic patterns in that area and it was
desired to have that section built as soon as possible for school
bus and construction traffic. The City Engineer noted that one
thing that could be done to expidite this is to let bids on the
project, but not award them until State Aid signs off on the
plans. He indicated that if that is desired, they would prepare
plans to be brought back to Council for approval and that they
could begin the bid letting process.
Cncl. Leroux questioned if the public hearing were continued for
one month, if that would not affect the portion in Hauer' s 4th
Addition. The City Engineer noted that if it is desired to move
City Council 7
August 4, 1987
Page 3
ahead with portion on Hauer' s 4th Addition, Council could
authorize them to take bid-letting. The particular costs of that
project could be itemized and those which are the developers
responsibility spelled out. They could then move ahead with the
project and the developer would provide that dollar amount to the
City. There was discussion concerning putting the utilities in
now or at a later time. It was noted that if done now, some
future costs might be avoided, as well as street cuts. A
disadvantage would be that if utilities are in place and there
are design changes, they may have to be moved.
Leroux/Clay moved to continue the public hearing to September 1,
1987. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Clay moved that the Engineering Department be directed to
proceed-with bid preparations and receiving bids for the portion
of Vierling Drive from County Road 16 through Hauer's 4th
Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to open the public hearing for the propsed
extension of the V.I.P. sanitary sewer from County Road 17 to
County Road 79. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Engineer noted that this public hearing concerns the
extension of an in-plce interceptor for sanitary sewer collection
located at County Road 17 and extending that to County Road 79 in
an effort to accommodate a proposed housing development that is
through the preliminary plat approval stage. Some impacts of
this particular project were reviewed with Council, as well as
the levels of assessments. The method of calculating trunk and
interceptor costs was presented and discussed. The City Engineer
pointed out that a part of the area concerned is now (as of last
Friday) a part of the City. The original proposal was to carry
the costs through as system costs until the interceptor was
extended into that particular area. However, now that this is
part of the City, they can petition for the service pipe from
that interceptor to be extended at any time. This area then
does, indeed, receive benefit from the proposed lines. Mayor
Reinke related that to his knowledge, although that area is now
City, it is not yet included in the Municipal Urban Service Area.
The City Administrator stated there would need to be a plan
amendment to extend the MUSA line.
The City Engineer noted that they could continue with the current
process and in the future a feasibility study and assessment for
costs associated with that particular property could be done when
the benefit is realized, or continue this hearing for two weeks
and provide notice to those property owners that they are
properly notified of the hearing, hold the hearing, and then
assess that property. It was the City Engineer's recommendation
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 4
The costs be carried throught and assess that particular area
when benefit is realized,or when an extension of the V.I.P. is
requested.
Council discussed various aspects of costs in this project as
compared with other such projects.
Mayor Reinke asked for comments from the public at this time.
Jerome Vierling, 1461 County Road 79, requested clarification of
whether this area was all R-2. The City Engineer noted there is
some property to the southerly line of Canterbury Estates that is
zoned Ag. The zoning of the area involved was reviewed. The
City Engineer felt that until the property is rezoned to some
form of residential, they would not realize full potential of the
trunk.
Cncl. Vierling questioned how her property on CR-79 North of the
Bypass would benefit from this. There was discussion and it was
noted a question to be considered is what the property would be
used for in the future. It was suggested that Cncl. Vierling
could discuss thismatterwith the City Engineer at a later time.
Leroux/Clay moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2770, A Resolution Ordering
An Improvement And The Preparation of Plans And Specifications
for VIP Sanitary Sewer Extension Project No. 1987-13 and moved
its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Leroux, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Noes: None
Abstain: Vierling
Motion carried.
wampach/Clay moved to authorize the proper City Officials to
execute an agreement with Orr-schelen-Mayerson & Associates for
the design of the VIP Extension Project at a cost not to exceed
$14,500.
The City Engineer noted that if there is not an immediate need to
install this project, the engineering could be done by Staff, but
he was of the impression that it was desired by the developer to
have this interceptor installed as soon as possible.
Cncl. Wampach modified his motion in that Orr-Schelen-Mayerson &
Associates will not be used for this unless the developer
requests that this be done as soon as possible. It was clarified
that this modification will allow either action to be taken as
appropriate.
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 5
Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Noes: None
Abstain: Leroux (was not present at the time of the
motion) , Vierling
Motion carried.
Leroux/vierling moved to open public hearing for the Appeal of
Board of Adjustment and Appeals denial of variances regulating
the construction of accessory buildings for property located at
1199 Quincy Street. Motion carried unanimously. The hearing
opened at 8: 45 p.m.
The City Planner reviewed the background regarding this matter,
noting that Mr. Gerald Schesso, owner of the property, has
appealed the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
denying a variance for an accessory building. The accessory
building is already in place. Mr. Schesso began building a large
boat in his backyard and this Spring constructed a large
structure over. the boat. There are three variances needed in
order for this building to be allowed to remain: (1) to allow the
building to be ten feet higher than the principle dwelling, ( 2)
allowing an accessory structure to exceed 10% of the lot area by
720 square feet, and (3) to allow an accessory structure to be
located nearer the street than the principle dwelling by ten
feet.
Assistant City Attorney, Mr. Krass, was present as he was
involved in the initial hearings regarding this issue. Mr.
Leroux asked him to claify a statement in the Board of
Adjustment and Appeals minutes indicating that a variance cannot
have a time limit. Mr. Krass noted that ordinarily time-lines
are more a part of a condition and properly belong to a
Conditional Use Permit as .opposed to a variance. He felt this
situation, however, because of its uniqueness called for some
creativity in interpreting the ordinance. Considering the nature
of this variance request and the use of structure involved, he
related he would give an opinion that a time-line on this
variance, should Council choose to grant it, would be in order.
There was discussion.
Mr. Krass related that as he understood the testimony at the
Board of Appeals, the construction of the boat cannot occur
without the structure, and having granted the right to construct
the boat, he thought that "extraordinary circumstances" as
referred to in criteria for granting variances are created in
that the boat cannot be constructed without the structure for
which variance is being requested. He noted that in his opinion
a decision made in either direction would be supportable.
Insofar as a policy decision, he shared Council' s lack of concern
about precedent in this situation. Cncl. Leroux stated he felt
city Cob •^_il
August 4, 1987
Page 6
at some point soon Council should do something to clarify this
ordinance so no further enterprises of this nature would be
undertaken.
Cncl. Wampach wished to hear from the applicant about what would
happen if this variance were not granted. He felt the City had
some obligation, especially insofar as the example being set to
the rest of the young people in the community as far as
determination and accomplishment and what you can do if you set
your mind to it. He felt that although this is a large project,
there will be good publicity for those building it and for the
city as well.
The City Administrator noted for audience clarification that in
this particular situation there is a good portion of the building
permit request process that staff and the applicant agreed to,
and a portion that there is an honest difference in opinion on
which was how much the City Staff actually knew about the scope
of this project. Since the onus tends to fall on Staff in making
sure all aspects are covered, however, this muddied the
situation.
Gerald Schesso, 1199 Quincy Street, addressed Council noting that
in the beginning, the construction book for the project was
brought to City Hall which laid out the entire plans. In that
book is a chapter on preparation to build, which includes a
section on framing up for a plastic building. A Staff person at
that time said they did not need to see anything further, that if
they owned the property they were welcome to build a boat, and so
construction was begun. They have invested $30,000 to $40,000,
in this project. They asked neighbors if they had any objections
to this project and they did not; several neighbors help on it
when they can. He has yet to receive any negative comments on
the project. He noted that moving the boat could be detrimental
at this point, plus costs that would be involved with moving the
boat, rental of a space in which to work on it, milage, time,
etc. They anticipated completion by Fall of 1988 and he noted
that if it is not completed at that time, it would be relatively
close enough to completion so it could be moved and finished
elsewhere. At this point, Mr. -Schesso related his best time
estimate for completion of the project is 12 to 15 months under
ideal conditions. The structure is as large now as it will be
and it is not their intent to enclose the structure.
Vierling/Leroux moved to close the public hearing at 9:15 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach offered variance resolution of the City Council
CC-496 and moved its approval with a time-line of expiration date
of July 31, 1989. Mr. Schesso asked whether if need be at the
City Council /
August 4, 1987
Page 7
end of that time, he could come before Council and request an
extension. He was informed that he could do so, but that would
not necessarily mean that it would be granted.
vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Clay moved to open public hearing on the Appeal of Board
of Adjustment and Appeals denial of an 18 foot front yard setback
variance to build an attached garage at 1015 East Shakopee
Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. The public hearing opened at
9:18 p.m.
The City Planner gave Council a background on this matter, noting
Steve Plonski was appealing denial of a variance of 18 feet from
the required 30 foot front yard setback for construction of an
attached garage.
Mr. Plonski addressed Council, noting the point made about
possibly building a detached garage was that by doing so it would
take the only view they have from their back window to their
yard. He also related that a lot of dirt was hauled in for fill
in thebackyard and that it is still settling. There is also a
watershed that runs through the backyard. He pointed out that
the house was already constructed when they bought it, so they
did not have any input into how the house was placed on the lot.
Dawn Plonski stated that since the time of their original
request, they have dropped the request variance down by four
feet. She also pointed out that they found through research of
records that there were two variances of 11 and 15 feet
previously approved by Council and that this occurred after the
ordinance was in effect. She felt the traffic on those locations
is heavier than on their street. Also, that their vehicles have
been parked in the spot where the garage -would be built for a
number of years, so people are used to slowing down and looking
around the corner.
Cncl. Leroux stated he would like to have both of the variances
referred to brought back to Council so the causes for granting
those variances can be determined. Council also asked that the
Engineering Department provide some information on the slope of
this particular lot.
Leroux/Vierling moved to continue this hearing to August 18,
1987, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved for a ten minute recess. Motion carried
unanimously. The meeting recessed at 9:35p.m.
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 8
Vierling/Clay moved to reconvene the meeting at 9:48 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct Staff to administer the Downtown
Streetscape Project so that assessments for the entire project
area are adopted in 1988 and that capitalized interests on the
project is assessed. (Approved under consent business) .
Leroux/Vierling moved to appoint a consultant selection committee
comprised of Jerry Wampach, City Council; Ken Ashfeld, City
Engineer; Tim Johnson, Mn/DOT; and Steve Alderson, Met Council,
for the purpose of selecting a consultant to design the T.H. 169
Mini Bypass located in downtown Shakopee. (Approved under consent
business) .
The City Engineer reviewed a memo Council received concerning the
railroad corridor improvement project that has been pursued for
the downtown .area. The Mn/DOT findings were noted. Their
requirements of closing four crossings is a saftey improvement
issue and is seen as a method of justifying the cost of the
improvement. He noted he was recommending as an initial
counterproposal that Apgar and Naumkeag be closed and if this is
not acceptable with Council, then further pursual of that should
be done. In that case, he indicated he would still want to
pursue obtaining the rubberized crossings.
There was discussion.
Leroux/Vierling moved that Staff notify Mn/DOT that Council is
not amenable to closing any crossings in the downtown area and
that Staff be further directed to begin negotiations with the
railroad for undergrounding the communications lines, rubberized
crossings and any signalizations which may be necessary.
Cncl. Wampach noted that there have not been accidents at the
crossings on Naumkaeg and Minnesota Streets, but that there have
been alot of "near misses" . He felt that when dealing with the
railroad, it should be included that the City should get some
type of warning signals on those crossings. The City Engineer
stated he would review the signage situations in those area.
Cncl. Wampach also asked that Staff review the possibility of
having some speed limitations on the trains as they travel
through and out of the City. Several Council members responded
that the City couldn't control train speeds.
Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Vierling, Leroux, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Noes: None
Motion carried.
City Council
August 4, 1987 ,
Page 9
The City Engineer presented information on traffic control and
regulatory signage for Fourth Avenue and Fuller Street. It is
proposed to relocate the stop signs on Fourth Avenue and Fuller
Street from a stop on Fourth to a stop on Atwood and to remove
the yield signs on Fourth Avenue at Fuller Street and install
stop signs to institute a stop condition an Fuller Street at
Fourth Avenue. He added comments received from the Public Works
Superintendent indicating that the grades on Fuller are such that
it is a difficult area to keep de-iced in the winter.
Leroux/Wampach moved to replace the yield signs on Fourth Avenue
at Fuller Street with stop signs.
The City Administrator expressed the need for some overall
guidance on this matter, because when improvements are made in
trying to get systematic traffic signage, a concensus is not
reached and improvements are done intersection by intersection,
thus ending in a piecemeal effect. There was discussion. It was
noted a study on signage in the City was previously requested,
but as yethad not been received by Council. Motion failed with
Cncl. Clay, .Vierling & Mayor Reinke opposed.
Clay/Vierling moved to remove the yield signs on Fourth Avenue
and install stop signs on Fuller Street.
The City Engineer noted he had spoken with the County Engineer,
as these are both county roads, and he indicated he was in favor
of stop signs either on the north/southbound legs or the
east/westbound legs, but that something should be done with the
yield signs. Cncl. Leroux stated he felt it would be very
dangerous to put a stop sign on Fuller Street because of the icy
conditions on a slope.
Motion carried with Cncl. Wampach and Leroux opposed.
Leroux/Vierling moved to nominate Bill Preiss to fill an
unexpired term on the Community Recreation Board expiring
January, 1988. (Approved under. consent business) .
Leroux/Vierling moved to nominate Terrance Joos to fill an
unexpired term on the Industrial Commercial Commission expiring
January, 1990. (Approved under consent business) .
Leroux/Vierling moved to nominate Laura E. wermerskirchen to the
Community Recreation Board along with Bill Preiss. Motion
carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to drop plans to draft an ordinance
regulating grills and barbecues on decks. (Approved under consent
business) .
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 10
Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize an additional allocation of
$1,215.88 to Shakopee Community Recreation for inclusion in its
1987 Budget from General Fund Contingencies which has a 6/30/87
balance of $77,561. (Approved under consent business) .
Leroux/Vierling moved that the appropriate City Officials be
authorized to enter into the Home Energy Check-up Program
Agreement with Minnegasco. (Approved under consent business) .
The City Administrator indicated Council received a memo for
review from Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant, which attempts
to answer additional questions asked by City Council at the last
meeting concerning the U.S. West Economic Development proposal.
He related that the State of Minnesota, along with a number of
other states in the U.S. West service area are competing for a
major research center which would have about 1500 engineers or
techincians. The question before Council in preparing a -
development package is whether to offer any City incentives.
Questions regarding tax increment financing, what other
communities are doing and alternative ways to package a proposal
were covered in the communication.
There was considerable discussion with various pros and cons
voiced in this matter.
Leroux/Vierling moved to recommend that the appropriate City
Officials be directed to inform U.S. West that the City of
Shakopee will provide development assistance to U.S. West in the
amount of $2,000,000 should they decide to locate their research
and technology facility in Shakopee, plus Staff be directed to
identify additional facilities that may be needed to support such
a facility and identify their costs and time frames.
Vote was taken and the motion carried with Cncl. Wampach and Clay
opposing.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct Staff to continue following
Administrative Policy #115 ("Flower" policy) dated -1/9/85.
(Approved under consent business) .
Gregg Voxland, Finance Director, presented information requested
by Council on "available" cash, as Council had discussed using
such to reduce the tax levy for a new City Hall. After reviewing
the various fund balances, Mr. Voxland stated it is his
recommendation to remain with the current policy and continue
past practice and transfer funds after bonds are paid off into
the Capital Improvement Fund or other debt service funds. The
information presented was discussed.
City Council 7
August 4, 1987
Page 11
The City Administrator stated a decision needs to be made on how
much money from those fund balances it is desired to contribute
to the new City Hall so the newsletter can be prepared and sent
and discussion can begin about what the level of the bond
election will be. A review of the cost of the project was given
by the City Administrator.
Leroux/Vierling moved that surplus debt service funds be
transferred into the Capital Improvement Fund after the bonds are
paid off and that of the 1974 improvements, 1976 improvements,
1977 A and 1977 C improvements, which total approximately
$572,000, $350,000 of that amount be set for the building of a
new City Hall. Cncl. Clay questioned if Mr. Voxland was
comfortable with that motion and he indicated that he was.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to accept the proposal of Jasper,
Streefland & Company for 1987 audit services in the amount of
$8,000 and that the City Administrator is authorized to execute
the Understanding of Engagement. (Approved under consent
business) .
Leroux/Clay moved approval of the bills in the amount of
$267,593.94.
Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Vierling, Leroux, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Noes: None
Motion carried.
The City Clerk stated a new State law effective August 1, 1987,
allows a municipality, by ordinance, to authorize an on-sale wine
licensee who also has an on-sale nonintoxicating malt ligour
license and whose gross receipts are at least 60% attributable to
sale of food, to sell intoxicating malt ligour on-sale without an
additional license.
Leroux/wampach moved to direct Staff to prepare an ordinance
which would permit the sale of strong beer under the State
requirements. Motion carried unanaimously.
At the last meeting Mr. Stan Ockwig, General Manager of the
Canterbury Inn, requested Council to consider amending City Code
to expand the sale of intoxicating liqour on Sunday to include
10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. The City Clerk reported Staff had
checked with professional convention planners to see if the sale
of liqour on Sunday prior to 12:00 noon was a consideration in
selecting a convention site. The responses received were
reviewed.
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 12
Mr. ockwig addressed Council, noting that as he had previously
explained, this is not a primary money-making proposal in itself,
but rather that it is being requested so they are able to have
this available as a marketing technique.
Cncl. Leroux noted he would be amenable to this, but only for
Class C license holders which would restrict this to
hotel/motel/restaurant facilities. Cncl. Clay felt that may
create an unfair competitive situation for other resturants in
the City. There was further discussion.
Vierling/Wampach moved to set a public hearing to consider
whether or not the City should permit the sale of liqour prior to
12:00 noon on Sundays and make a decision based upon what is
heard at that time.
There was discussion and Cncl. Leroux stated he did not wish to
see this opened up and suggested that this be limited to a Class
C license. He felt also that aside from the present motion,
actual legal opinion should be obtained as to the ability to
limit this to Class C license holders.
Leroux/Vierling moved to amend the motion that a public hearing
be held for Class C licenses only and that a firm legal opinion
be solicited for that case. Mayor Reinke questioned the
amendment as to whether this is restricting comments that could
be discussed at the public hearing to only those pertinent to
Class C licenses.
Cncl. Leroux clarified his motion to reflect that it be the
intent that this would be for Class C license holders. He stated
that at a public hearing any comments could be heard from the
public concerning serving liqour before noon on Sundays.
Vote was taken on the amendment. Motion carried with Cncl. Clay
and Wampach opposed.
Vote was taken on the motion, as amended. Motion carried with
Cncl. Clay and Wampach opposed.
Leroux/Clay offered Resolution No. 2773 , A Resolution Providing
for the Issuance and Sale of $2,660,000 General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds, Series 1987 A and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Vierling, Clay, Leroux, Mayor Reinke
Noes: Wampach
Motion carried.
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 13
Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 2774, Resolution Providing
for the Issuance and Sale of $705,000 General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 1987A, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Vierling, Leroux, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Noes: None
Motion carried.
The Community Development Director presented a consideration
emminating from the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act.
Scottland Companies and PACE Productions have proposed the
construction of an 86 acre facility known as the Starwood Music
Center and because of the size of the facility an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) has to be prepared. Council is aware
that the City of Shakopee has been designated as the responsible
governmental unit for EAW, and so the City Council has the
responsibility to determine whether an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) must be prepared for this porposed project. In
this matter Council needs to consider the completeness and
accuracy of the information in the EAW and also should consider
any potential impacts of the project which might warrent further
investigation and/or the need for the preparation of an EIS. In
doing this, the various comments received from various entities
and individuals should also be considered. The notice for this
was published in the Environmental Quaility Board Monitor, as
prescribed by State law, on June 15, 1987, and the opportunity
for written comment was for the time period from June 15, 1987
to July 15, 1987. Council is asked at this time to render a
decision on whether an EIS needs to be prepared. The Council
must make a decision by August 14, 1987, and since this is the
last scheduled meeting prior to that date, a decision is sought
at this time. There are three choices available: a negative
declaration meaning that an EIS does not need to be prepared; a
positive declaration meaning that an EIS does need to be
prepared; or to do nothing, which would essentially be the same
as making a negative declaration once the time period expired.
The project as proposed would begin construction in the Fall. of
1987 with completion anticipated by Spring of 1988 with proposed
opening in June, 1988. Operating season would be scheduled for a
90 to 130 day period and during that time performances would be
scheduled on 51 occasions between May 15 and September 15. The
Center would also be available for graduations, town meetings and
theatre presentations. The project area is .generally located
west of Valley Park Drive and North of 12th Avenue in the
Canterbury Industrial Park. The proposed site is designated as
an urban service area in the Metropolitan Development Guide. The
maximum design attendance for the facility would be 17,000
persons and 6,679 vehicles. The facility would have a stage
facing north toward the Minneosta River with covered seating for
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 14
5,000 and a grass covered earth berm for an additional 12,000
persons.
The specific requirements contained in the EAW were reviewed and
the areas addressed were: Topography; Soils; Geology; Physical
Effects on Water; Water Quality Effects; Sanitary Sewer; Air
Quality After Construction; Performance Noise; Solid and
Hazardous wastes; Fish, Wildlife and Plants; Archaeological and
Historical Resources; Parks and Recreational Resources; Other
Resources; Community Services, Transportation and Energy.
This project will be a one-phase project, so it is not assumed
there would be further future development that would result in an
accumulative impact on the environment. Another phase the EAW
addresses is the extent to which the environmental effects are
subject to mitigation by on-going public regulatory authority.
One thing required for this site is that the City will have to
issue a Conditional Use Permit for the project prior to
construction beginning. - The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
will need to issue an Indirect Source Permit (ISP) for the
project prior to operation of the Music Center. If they
determine a need for background carbon monoxide monitoring, that
element will be contained in the ISP. If the control of
amplified noise deemed to be a problem, the ISP will also address
that. There is a need to identify mitigating traffic measures
and this can be included in the Conditional Use Permit.
The Community Development Director noted that as discussed
earlier, the Planning Commission recently heard testimony and did
not take action and continued the hearing until August 20, 1987.
He related that is another control device that is pending at this
point.
The Metropolitan Council commented on the need for Shakopee to
address its comprehensive plan. It is their contention that this
facility is inconsistent with the industrial use contained in the
comprehensive plan. This item does not directly relate to the
EAW, however, it was a vehicle which allowed them to comment on
this. It is the opinion of Staff and the developer that this is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and consistent with the
City Zoning Ordinance. State law clearly indicates that if there
is a conflict between the two, the zoning ordinance will prevail.
Clearly this is a conditionally permitted use within the I-2
zone.
In summary, the Community Development Director again noted the
alternatives available to Council. He stated it is his
recommendation that Council make a negative declaration at this
time, indicating that the Environmental Impact Statement is not
necessary for the Starwood Music Center based upon the written
City Council /
August 9, 1987
Page 15
comments that were received during the time period of June 15,
1987 to July 15, 1987.
Cncl. Wampach asked how the City Council, being elected by the
people to represent them, could turn its back on over 1000 people
that have indicated they do not want the Music Center. Mr. Kraft
noted that based upon the requirements in the law there is
nothing in the environmental review process that relates to
petitions other than if the developer did not want to prepare one
and the project was of such a scope that it would be needed, the
submission of petition with 25 signatures and addresses would be
something that could activate the process whereby an EAW would be
prepared.
Council entered into discussion. Cncl. Vierling questioned if
provision could be made in the Conditional Use Permit to allow
some control should this not prove to be what it is purported to
be insofar as the type of music that will be played. The City
Administrator noted the Assistant City Attorney was asked to be
in attendance at the Planning Commission hearing and was
specifically asked to be prepared to comment on that. He related
the developer offered to create a Citizens Committee to review
this, but there is some question as to whether such would be a
City authorized Citizens Committee. He felt this will be
discussed by the Planning Commisssion and that the Assistant City
Attorney would hopefully have an opportunity to address that at
the next hearing.
Cncl. Leroux felt the City could initiate a license for this type
of venture, granting an ordinance could be drawn up. He noted
his concern relates to what the City could put into an ordinance
so if a Conditional Use Permit is granted and the project is
built, the City would have something to fall back on in the event
the business begins to go in the hole. Also, if the facility
would be sold, the City needs to be able to control whomever may
buy it. A deep concern he had is that this is one of the biggest
issues before this City since he has been on Council and Council
has no idea at this point of what conditions have been proposed
by the Planning Commission. Although he did not attend the
public hearing, it was his understanding that the conditions were
not brought up at the public hearing.
Mayor Reinke noted that the EAW is an entirely separate issue
from the items being considered as far as the Conditional Use
Permit is concerned. He stated Council has to make a decision on
the EAW based on the information presented.
Cncl. Leroux asked the City Attorney if because the proposed
conditions for Conditional Use Permit have not been read into the
record of the public hearing as of yet, is it possible that this
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 16
body could direct Staff to add conditions to the proposed
conditions for the Conditional Use Permit. He indicated a
scenario wherein if conditions in the proposed Conditional Use
Permit are read into the record at the public hearing and the
Planning Commission denied Conditional Use Permit and Council
denied Conditional Use Permit, but it was ordered by the courts
that Conditional Use Permit be issued, all the conditions would
have to be met because they were a part of the continual process.
He asked the City Attorney if that was correct and the City
Attorney noted that was the case as the City had learned.
Cncl. Clay noted that in review of the EAW he did not see any two
governmental agencies contradicting each other when there was
more than one commenting on the same issue. He noted that he did
not see where Council could make a viable and legally supportable
argument to have anything but a negative declaration.
Joe Zak addressed Council. He noted that the EAW statement was
done by Starwood Corporation, which is a very large corporation.
It would be very difficult for a group of very concerned citizens
to come up with a sound study to refute that done by Starwood
consultants. He requested Council to ask itself why there are no
downsides indicated in the report as pertains to this project.
He stated there are downsides and felt that Council needs to be
aware that there are many people who live in other areas where
there is this type of facility who have concerns and he felt some
study and time should be given as to why those people do not like
such a facility. He indicated that if he had the money
necessary, he could hire a sound consultant (and indicated he is
working on that) that would indicate that the stagehouse has not
been developed and the sound speakers are not yet there and until
that time, the configuration of sound is speculation. He did not
believe that the sound factors indicated would indeed be such in
reality. He stated people are moving from the City because of
this project and that the quality of life in this City is going
down. He felt that decisions are being made out of fear of a
lawsuit rather than whether or not it is good for the town and he
felt that was absolutely wrong and a disservice to the people of
this City.
Stephanie Walker addressed Council noting she attended the
Planning Commission hearing and that she was in agreement with
Mr. Zak. She expressed the danger of bringing a drug-related
rock concerts to a family community, as well as noting the
traffic problems that would be encountered. She felt the only
people being considered were those coming into the City and those
leaving it, not those residing here. She indicated there was
opportunity to question the Chief of Police at the Planning
Commission hearing and she asked him if in a seating capacity of
17,000 there was a crowd of 8,000 would he perceive it possible
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 17
that 4,000 of those attending a rock concert would be using drugs
and he nodded yes. She also asked him if he intended only to
arrest those causing a disturbance and his reply was that at
other facilities in other areas they do not arrest everyone with
an inch-long joint. She stated that tells her that Council is
willing to let drugs come into the community. She felt what is
being considered is reports from consultants and cold, hard
facts, and that the moral issue is not being considered.
Cncl. Leroux noted in response to comments made that this
community has increased 22% during the past seven years and in
the past year plats have been approved for about 750 new homes
because people want to move into this community. He noted that
the Council members are here to try and serve everybody in this
City, including those opposing this matter and the developers who
are pursuing the project.
Bruce Malkerson with Scottland Company addressed Council. He
noted this process was begun nine months ago when they shifted
from a permitted use to a conditional use and indicated they
would be proceeding and doing an EAW and a general time line and
the areas that would be addressed were given. The EAW addressed
those items as required under the statute. It is not a
Conditional Use Permit, it is not an application for Conditional
Use Permit, it does not address the twelve findings that the
Planning Commission and Council will be addressing. It is but
one step. All an EAW does is set forth facts related to the
catagories that are required by State law. At the Planning
Commission hearing and at this meeting, he indicated comments
were made about the experts that developed the analysis in the
EAW. He noted those experts represented all sorts of different
people and he noted their credentials and spoke of their
integrity. He noted that in addition, the analysis were analyzed
by Staff of the PCA and they felt the EAW was sufficient. He
stated the facts the opponents want to and have been submitting
are relevant in the Conditional Use Permit process, but not the
EAW because in the EAW process the facts being discussed are
prescribed by State legislature. He also noted that there has
been much testimony in support of what they want to do in the
record, from leading citizens in the City, neighborhood
businesses adjacent to them, and from other associations in town.
He believed Mr. Kraft adequately stated what the requirements are
in the State law, summarized the review by independent agencies
fairly and that Staff recommendation that there should be a
negative declaration is fully supported in the record and any
other declaration is not. He felt it should. be made perfectly
clear that however the EAW is voted, that this is not a vote on .
the Conditional Use Permit; this is not telling them they are
going to be able to proceed. This would only be saying that the
statutory requirements were followed and that you will then go to
1
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 18
the next step, which is continuation of the public hearing of the
Planning Commission.
Cncl. Leroux noted that one item in the EAw pertaining to sound
has been challenged by Mr. Zak and he has stated he can come up
with an expert who would argue the 35 decibels and would come up
with a different finding as to nearest residence.
Mr. Zak noted that as he mentioned he is not a highly paid
consultant and he did not wish to impugn the dignity or respect
that he had for people that were with Mr. Malkerson. What he was
trying to bring about is the fact that a citizens group is now
compelled to try to match a large corporation. He stated he
cannot match the resources, nor the people involved with
Scottland to come up with a sound study, but that he would come
up with something. He questioned other areas not addressed in
the EAw or not addressed as well as they should have been, such -
as the use of Malithion for mosquito control; run-off, as there
will be antifreeze, car oil, tars, etc. ; cadmium lead in the
holding tank if there is going to be one; traffic issues; noise
impact on the trumpeter swans, ducks and other wildlife in the
lake. He stated this has not been the most publicized issue, but
has rather been very subtly put in. He noted another issue is
whether the City wants an industry in town where safegaurds must
be placed on it so we, as citizens, are not abused by it. He
questioned if this were to come to the Mayor's back door if he
would be very happy about it. He noted this will affect the
whole town, the whole town will be impacted by the traffic, the
crime and the pollution and those are issues that will be present
because they are at every other center like this in the United
States.
Mayor Reinke noted in response to Mr. Zak' s comment about the
proposed project site being in his backyard, that it is indeed
near his property; it is at his backdoor. He also pointed out
that the racetrack facility is in his backyard as well. He
stated that from that standpoint he does have an understanding of
what people are concerned about. He stated it was questioned of
Council members how we got here. He stated he had been elected
by the people four different times to serve on the City Council
and has always taken an oath to serve the people of this City and
obey the laws of the State and the City and that he has not
waivered from that oath of office once while sitting at this
table. He noted they are given basic facts to work with and it
is Council's decision as to what the final result will be in each
particular case. In looking at decisions made by Council, they
don't look at one individual, at one neighborhood, they don't
look at who they are or where they live; they have to make a
decision that is based on what is felt to be the best decision
for the overall good of the City. He stated he would hope that
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 19
the decision made on this particular issue will be based on
facts, not emotion.
Mr. Malkerson pointed out that their proposal has been public
since November. It was in the Star and Tribune, the local paper
and on television. He also responded to the question raised as
to why a business would be wanted in the communitythat required
some controls, noting they would need a Conditional Use Permit,
but normally so do churches, schools, resturants, etc. He stated
at this point they are only talking about EAW with procedures
provided by statute and he believed those had been met.
Wampach/Leroux moved for a positive declaration requiring an EIS
survey due to the fact that there are all these chemicals that
people are involved in and there are many questions not answered
here that it was felt should be addressed. - -
Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach
Noes: Vierling, Leroux, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Motion failed.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2765, A Resolution Making
a Negative Declaration on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet
for the Starwood Music Center and moved its adoption.
Susan Hofmaster, 1028 Dakota Street, asked if it was possible
that by approving this EAW, Council could be influencing the
Planning Commission' s vote by indicating Council approval of the
EAW and thereby approval of the first condition of the conditions
in the permit. Cncl. Leroux stated this was not correct and that
he intended to make a motion later to make the EAW a part of the
conditions.
Roll Call: Ayes: Vierling, Leroux, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Noes: Wampach
Motion carried.
Leroux/Clay moved that with regard to the continuing public
hearing on Conditional Use Permit for Starwood Music Center, that
the conditions for the Conditional Use Permit in addressing
citeria #1 must include reference to the EAW, all the statements
made therein and all the mitigating measures stated therein to be
a condition of Conditional Use Permit. Cncl. Leroux stated that
he believed this meant that if 35 decibels at some point cannot
be met and it can be proven it cannot be met, automatically that
condition fails. Motion carried with Cncl. Wampach opposed.
Cncl. Leroux discussed tying the Conditional Use Permit to a
licensing authority.
City Council 1
August 4, 1987
Page 20
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct Staff to develop an ordinance for
licensing of any entertainment center serving more than 1000
people at one time within the City of Shakopee. Motion carried
with Cncl. Wampach opposed.
Mayor Reinke asked that Cncl. Leroux meet with the City Attorney
regarding development of this ordinance.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2766, A Resolution
Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for
Bids for Heritage Place Improvements, Project No. 1987-14 and
moved its adoption. (Approved under business consent) .
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2767, A Resolution
Declaring the Cost to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of
Proposed Assessment for Heritage Place Improvements, Project No.
1987-14 and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent
business) .
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2768, A Resolution
Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for
Bids for Marschall Road Watermain, Project No. 1987-4 and moved
its adoption. (Approved under consent business) .
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2769, A Resolution
Declaring the Cost to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of
Proposed Assessment for Marschall Road Watermain, Project No
1987-4 and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent
business) .
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2771, A Resolution
Declaring the cost to be Assessed and Ordering the Preeparation
of Proposed Assessments for Valley Park Drive North, Project No.
1986-11 and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent
business) .
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2772, A Resolution
Ordering that Excavation be Filled or the Erection of A Building
at 1210 Polk Street, Shakopee, Minnesota, and moved its adoption.
(Approved under consent business) .
Clay/Leroux offered Ordinance No. 223, An Ordinance of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 10
entitled "Public Protection, Crimes and Offences" by Adopting
additional exception to Subd 4 B and by Adopting by Reference
Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 10.99 which among other
things contain penalty provisions, and moved its adoption.
There was question as to how the DNR will handle issuance of
permits and Staff was requested to make available to Council City
City Council
August 4, 1987
Page 21
information on how the permit process will work, where permits
will be made available, if they will be issued through a lottery
or application, etc.
Vote was taken. The motion carried unanimously.
The City Engineer noted Mrs. Lebens had requested that he look
into the possiblity of using excavated material from the downtown
project in the vicinity of the extension of Bluff Street to
facilitate a future connection between Levee and Bluff. He
stated they met with DNR and they have approved putting fill in
that particular area and hopefully at a future time they could
,present to them a total plan if acceptable with Council. This
was acceptable with Council.
The City Administrator noted that Mr. Kraft and Cncl. Clay were
dealing with Mr. Gene Brown, investigating the possiblity of his
renting to the City the Pelham Hotel site for off street parking
during construction of the downtown - project. He stated they
referred to the lease the City recently entered into with the
Chamber of Commerce for the building site in the park and
modified it accordingly. He read the modifications to Council.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct the appropriate City officials to
enter into the lease with Gene Brown Agency for rental of the
former Pelham Hotel site for off street parking through November
15, 1987.
Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Vierling, Leroux, Clay, Mayor Reinke
Noes: None
Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to adjourn to August 18, 1987, at 7: 00 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously and the meeting adjourned at 1:30 a.m.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
. . Betty Brumm
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Special Session Shakopee, Minnesota August 17, 1987
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with Cncl.
Clay, Lebens, Leroux, Vierling and Wampach present. Also present
were Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney; Judith S. Cox, City
Clerk; and John Dubois, Asst. Chief of Police.
Leroux/Lebens moved to accept the special call of the Mayor.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to recess to an executive session to discuss
possible pending litigation. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to re-convene at 8:55 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Leroux moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Judith S. Cox
Recording Secretary
City Clerk
rt\
RECEIVED
August 24, 1987
Shakopee City Coucil AUG2 519S
129 E. 1st Avenue CITY OF S
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 HAKOPE[a
Dear City Council Members :
During the past three years I have had an opportunity to drive
through your community a number of times. Specifically, I have
driven, coming from Burnsville, down your Main Street, (1st Av. )
and then on through to the other side of town. Each time I was
aware of the two flags, one of which flys above City Hall and
the other flag across the street from City Hall. I have always
made a mental note that I would make a complaint about how
shabby and dirty these flags look every time I come through town.
Somehow, I always thought thatsomeone else would notice the flags
and get something done.
Yesterday, while on my way to the Renaissance Fair I first noticed
a flag on the left side of the street just before you enter the
business district that, while not too dirty, was flying with very
shabby, ripped edges . I then drove on further to find the two
flags flying downtown. They were very dirty and soiled but, an
improvement over last summer when they were both dirty, soiled,
torn, and ripped. I traveled on to the edge of town to find
another flag on the right side of the road next to a chiropractors
office which was in only a little better shape than the flags
downtown. In just a very short distance I saw four American flags
which are truly a sad comment on your communityll
I am very much aware of the problem with diesel fuel fumes causing
the downtown flags to become dirty. I was told by your City
Administrator that in fact the flags were replaced three times
last year. However, I must beleive that your annual budget could
make an allowance to find funds to, at minimum, replace the flags
each month in June, July, or August while you have the greatest
numberof tourists coming through town. It would be far more
attractive not to fly a flag at all then to display what you
presently have.
I am also aware that your community has an active VFW and American
Legion. I am surprised that someone from these organizations has
not insisted that the American flag be displayed in a respectable
manner. I beleive there is a booklet that provides the rules to
flag etiquette that they could provide you with. You might even
find a patriotic community member who would volunteer to launder
the flags each month.
page 2 (continued)
I am left with the impression that, while your community is
interested in drawing tourists, (notice the clean, well kept,
attractive yellow banners which are posted on every block) your
community fails to appreciate something as simple and basic
as flying a clean, beautiful, respectable, American Flag.
I would also like to say that I am the mother of a young man
who is currently serving in the 101st Airborne. He has spent
every day of the past 2k years in preparation to defend his
country if it became necessary. I wonder how he would view
the way you have displayed your flags.
I am looking forward to my next visit to Shakopee. I will truly
appreciate seeing our American Flag displayed with the honor
that it was intended M
Sincerely,
dy A. Glasford
2312 arkwood Drive
Bums ille, Minnesota 55337
C.C. American Legion, Post #2
Veterans of Foreign Wars, Shakopee Post
CITY OF--SHAKOPEE FlRST CLASS MAIL
1171 LITY BILL 3gRK0� PO"°`MIT NO °
FOR:
moa ACCOUNT NUMBER FROM: _
Mf
AMOUNT nznef CITY OF SHAKOPEE
AR 48.04 129 EAST IST AVENUE
' . MILL-MG PERIOD SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
FROM TO
METER READWG T�: LED L. MCGOVERN 6 N
P0.EVIOUS PRESENT 216. N IST 3T
SMAKUPEE MN -55379'
USAGE
TOTnis �
THIS AMOUNT tWE �`
AFTER
REMINDER-THIS ACCOUNT IS PAST DUE. PLEASE PAY
PROMPTLY
KEEP THIS STUB FOR YOUR RECORDS RETURN THIS PORTION WITH PAYMENT
i
I e� �
9 R �
68
e-z
i
RECEIVE
A)G
z
O,TM OF SKAKOPEE �� Ak ' 5T3 3
g�
Shakopee Police Department
476 Gorman Street
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Chief Brownells August 24, 1987
Regarding the complaint concerning my animals, I have
now permanently soundproofed my living room window, upstairs
front, with soundproofing I use when I am home recordings
thus muffling any noise they may make toward the street side.
I am rather surprised to discover that a noise com-
plaint would be treated with such urgency that you should
swing over on the wrong side of the road to deliver the com-
plaint yourself, with your visit being followed less than
ten minutes later by another. office delivering the same
complaint. -You must also realize that now that the dogs cannot see
out the front, they are less protection to my home than they
have been in the past, so my home will need additional police
surveillance to prevent thefts from the porch and ground floor.
I myself will be more vigilant and more often in my back
yard at night, so please besure to caution your officers that
because thereis not always a car there doesn't mean that I'm
, t not home. I sometimes park my car down another street and
walk because there's been a few prowlers lately.
I sometimes keep odd hours, and from time to time I've
heard that the police and others assume I no longer reside
there at all and I wish to dispel that, rumor. Though I'm often
away at nights, I don't ordinarily like to divulge this be-
cause that knowledge makes my home more vulnerable to yard
theft, break ins, etc. .
This winter, the inside of the house is going to be re-
modeled so if you see lights on and movement within, it's
probably me, and the outside will be done next summer.
As to the two dogs, they are the best trained, gentlest
and well mannered dogs in the City of Shakopee. They've just
had their shots renewed and their tag numbers are 1813 and
1814 respectively. -
The kids in the neighborhood all play. with them and it's
hard to get them outside without them dropping by.
RECEIVED
AUG 2 41987
F77� -- --
/ 2O
Re: Noise Complaint August 24, 1987 o c,
These dogs have their own bedroom and bed. They have the
best of food consisting of chicken, turkey, beef, and gravy,
and, in fact, Dr. Kelso, the Vet, cautioned me that I was
feeding them too well.
They now have their own Arrow travel trailer in which
they have a large double bed, gas and electric lights, two
fans, their own sink and water, gas stove, and even a TV
set and am-fm radio, so you can dispel any concerns for
their treatment. -
These dogs are never outside unless I'm.with them, which
is more than you can say for the other dogs in the neighbor-
hood who are tied outside (or running loose) 24 hours a day.
YW dogs are never ignored, and certainly they have
better care than most of the kids in this town= they're bet-
ter trained and more obedient. ` - -
As for the dogs barking; I know that you're acquainted
with Gordon Gelhaye very well and I stxongly suggest that you
ask him what he said a couple days before your complaint was
registered about my dogs. This should enlighten you as to the
other dogs in the neighborhood that are barking.
In my many years of raising animals (I'm 65 and have al-
ways had animals there) , it seems strange that only since the
City has shown interest in my property, that I am suddenly
' being harrassed with complaints concerning them. Just to
mention a few of the animals I've raised there; lion, apes,
monkeys, wolves, skunkes, snakes, and others to numerous to
mention. It does seem strange that there are suddenly ',so
many" complaints concerning two garden variety dogs such as
a Great Dane and a Lab. - -
As for the mortuary next door, more than once my drive-
way has been blocked off, therefore I could not use my boat
to go fishing or use my driveway for other. activities. They
also put up signs on my property that state "no parking"when-
ever there is a funeral up around the corner. I had friends
from South Dakota who told me they had intended to stop and
see me but were deterred by the signs and they didn't wish
to park two blocks away and walk back, so they went on.
It also seems very odd to me that a man running a busi-
ness on the same half block as my property has 120' of
frontage on 4th Avenue should pay. only $1700 for assessments
when I, with my 180' (only 60 feet more) should be forced to
$4365.65 for mine. So, my additional'60 feet cost me over
M00 more.
3. rcG
REs Noise Complaint August 24, 1987
These are things I think the City of Shakopee should
really take care of. McNearney's business disturbs all
the animals on the block with loud voices and slamming car
doors, as well as the entire neighborhood, and why isn't
the city concerned about enforcing off-street parking for
the funeral home instead of allowing businesses like his to
creat• a disturbance up and down the street?
I would like a written reply from you regarding this
letter to show that I've complied with your instructions;
this letter to be filed with my Attorney (and in my files)
to show my cooperation with the City.
Sincerely,
- Robert F:vierling
P.S. And as far as service goes to this community, there
isn't a person in Shakopee that can even come close to the
volunteer work that I've done. Instructorships in Mn.
Firearms Safety, Mn. Snowmobile Safety, Mn. Recreational
Vehicle, American Red Cross, DCPA Radioactive Training,
Tennis Classes, Aid to Senior Citizens, and others too
numerous to mention; these hours total more than 150 years
of service to the community and the State of Mn. and others.
It seems to me the more you've done for your community, the
bigger the fool they try to make of one. The expenses incur-
red all came out of my own pocket, so maybe I really was a
fool to devote so much time and effort to a community suc
as Shakopee has turned into. -
✓` CCe City of Shakopee
City Council �Q
i
Robert V. Vierling
221 E. 4th Avenue
Shakopee, Mn. 55379
THE CITY OF OWATONNA 1 21987
C'TY OF SHAKQP&j
OFFICE OF MAYOR August 11, 1987 540West Hills Circle
GEORGE E. KEHOE OWATONNA, MN 55060-4794
Ph. (507)451-4540
Dear City Official:
I wish to extend to you a cordial invitation to attend the League of
Minnesota Cities' regional meeting hosted by the City of Owatonna on
Thursday, September 3, 1987, at the Performing Arts Center of the City
Administration Building, 540 West Hills Circle, Owatonna, Minnesota.
The afternoon program, beginning at 2:30 p.m. will be roundtable
discussion focusing on finding solutions to your local problems. League
staff will be prepared to discuss such issues as the newly enacted
naturalization and immigration laws, the dramatic rise in water quality
permit fees, the solid waste landfill contingency action plan, the newly
created state-wide insurance plan, the levy limit restrictions placed on
cities by the 1987 legislature, and many more. Please come to discuss any
of your city's problems and exchange your valuable ideas. This brain-
storming session will help you find the answers you need.
From 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. there will be a session on how to lobby effectively
and how the League's district contacts and coordinators program can
benefit you, your city, and the League.
We will be serving dinner at 6:30 p.m. and the evening's agenda will focus
on legislative issues of importance to municipalities. City officials will
be asked for input for the development .of the League's 1988 City Policies
and Priorities for Legislative Action. League staff will review and
discuss issue papers on transportation funding, a uniform election day,
economic development tools, the homestead credit program, property taxes,
land use and planning issues, and voting equipment. The League' s video,
"How to Lobby, " and the door prize drawing will round out the program.
To make reservations for your city, please return the enclosed registration
form as soon as possible. In case of cancellations, please notify Mayor
George E. Kehoe of any cancellations by August 31, 1987. Your city will
be billed for those who did not attend and did not cancel their reservations
by the aforementioned date.
We look forward to seeing you on September 3.
Si rs,
hoe
— Home: 1025 Minnesota Ave. S.E. --- The City Of Friendliness and Beauttfu<Parks — Home Ph: (507)451-2141 —
LMC REGIONAL MEETING - OWATONNA
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1987
REGISTRATION FORM
We will have city officials attending the regional
meeting in Owatonna and we agree to pay for these meals unless the
host city is notified of any changes by August 31, 1987.
Names/Titles of Persons Attending:
Person making reservation:
City: Phone: S )
Number of attendees x $ 6 .00 = $
Please make checks payable to the City of Owatonna and return with
registration form to:
George E. Eehoe, Mayor
540 West Hills Circle
Owatonna, MN 55060
6 " 2-0-)
Metropolitan Council
300 Metro Square Building
,tr f�mn IWIIIIII � Seventh and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
0
Telephone (612) 291-6359
nv,ti r.�T
August 10, 1987 R�Cclf.' t3
Mayor Eldon Reinke AUG
City of Shakopee
129 1st vC�Tt
Shakopee MN 55379 QF SHAKGpEF
Dear Mayor Reinke:
The Metropolitan Council is sending you the enclosed information to inform you of the
programs that are available for older people in the area you represent.
Through its Program on Aging, the Council is the federally funded and state-designated
Area Agency on Aging for the seven-county Metropolitan Area. The program staff and the
Council's Advisory Committee on Aging plan and coordinate services for older people in
the region. They also grant approximately $4 million in federal Title III Older Americans Act
funds annually for nutrition and supportive services for persons age 60 and over. Although
services are available to all older adults, those who are frail, isolated or in economic need
are especially targeted. Because of the services provided to these people, they are able to
remain independent in their own homes as long as possible.
The services supported by Title III funds include congregate dining, home-delivered meals,
transportation, chore services, nursing home ombudsman, special access services for
minority and communications-impaired elderly people, senior centers, homemaker services,
adult day care, and legal services. Attached is a brief description of programs available in
your area which are funded through the Program on Aging.
If you have questions regarding these services, please call the directors of the projects in
your area or the Program on Aging staff at 291-6445. We are happy to assist in making
these services available to your older residents.
Sincerely,
Steve, Chatd
Attachment
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Project: Senior Law Project
Sponsoring Agency: Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services
Contact Person: Steven Wolfe
Phone: 222-5863
Amount of Grant 1987.1988: $56,000
Service Area: Ramsey, Carver, Scott, Washington, and Dakota Counties
This program provides legal and paralegal services in order for seniors to access the
benefits and services to which they are entitled.
Project: Nursing Home Ombudsman Program
Sponsoring Agency: Minnesota Alliance for Health Care Consumers
Contact Person: Stephanie VanZant
Phone: 825-6861
Amount of Grant 1987.1988: $15,000
Service Area: Metropolitan Area
This program works to assure the rights and safety of nursing home residents through
coordinated professional and voluntary programming. Nursing home ombudsman services
include individual problem solving casework, volunteer education, family council
development, training programs/materials for professional and community groups, policy
analysis, research, drafting of legislation, and testimony on any service-related, eligibility, or
enforcement issues is long tens care.
Project: Chinese Special Access Services
Sponsoring Agency: Chinese Senior Citizens Society
Contact Person: Yung Kang Lu louseau
Phone: 331-5988
Amount of Grant 1987-1988: $13,650
Service Area: Chinese Seniors in Metropolitan Area
The purpose of this program is to assist all Asian-Pacific seniors in the Metropolitan Area by
providing social service information and referral and social/educational activities.
Project: Communications Access Project (Hearing Through Older Ears)
Sponsoring Agency: Minnesota Foundation for Better Hearing and Speech
Contact Person: Nancy Fredericks
Phone: 223-5130
Amount of Grant 1987.1988: $19,482
Service Area: Hearing-Impaired Seniors in the Metropolitan Area
This program provides public education, information, and advocacy on speech, language,
and hearing impairments. The services provided by the program include a resource guide
and a six-session hearing loss presentation held at various locations throughout the Metro
area.
Project: Scott-Carver Congregate Dining Project
Sponsoring Agency: Scott-Carver-Dakota Community Action Agency
Contact Person: Judson Kenyon
Phone: 496-2125
Amount of Grant 1987.1988: $22,359 state, $120,031 federal
Service Area: Scott and Carver Counties
The congregate dining program promotes better nutrition in a social setting by providing
hot, well-balanced meals in eight dining sites throughout Scott and Carver Counties.
Project: Scott-Carver Home-Delivered Meals Project
Sponsoring Agency: Scott-Carver-Dakota Community Action Agency, Inc.
Contact Person: Judson Kenyon
Phone:448-2302
Amount of Grant 1987.1988: $38,209
Service Area: Scott and Carver Counties
This program develops, plans, organizes, and coordinates home-delivered meals projects
throughout Scott and Carver Counties. The program serves 18,000 meals per year at four
sites with meals catered out of local congregate dining sites.
U league of minnesota cities
August 14, 1987
Dear City Official:
The fugue of Minnesota Cities is celebrating its 75th Anniversary
this year. As a part of the celebration, the League is encouraging
cities to participate in "Cities Week." The purpose of Cities Week
is to recognize cities, and help citizens understand the role of
cities. We'll ask Governor Perpich to proclaim May 1 through May
7, 1988 as Cities Week.
Enclosed is a packet of information on some suggested events for
your review. You can choose to participate in one, some, or all
of the activities. We hope that all cities will release balloons in
their cities on Wednesday, May 4, 1988 at 1 p.m.
Cities Week will be a successful celebration if each community has
a Cities Week committee and contact person. Some city officials
have already volunteered to serve in that role. The designated
contact person will be the liaison with the Cities Week
Subcommittee of the 75th Anniversary Committee. The Cities Week
committee in your city can be the city council, a volunteer citizens
group, or any other organization the city chooses.
The costs to participate can be very minimal so you can join in
the festivities without a major dollar outlay. A commitment of your
time will he the major cost of involvement.
Please return the attached RSVP Cities Week card to Jean Mehle,
League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN
55101.
Best regards,
Liz Oitt, Chair
Cities Week Committee
encl.
1 63 university avenue east,at.Paul, minnesota 55101 (6123227-51300
1988 CITIES WEEK
RSVP
Our city would like to participate in Cities Week activities. (See
the attached pages for more information about how to get
involved.)
City of
Contact person
Title
Address
City / State / Zip
Phone
We would like more information on the following:
Please return this form to Jean Mehle, League of Minnesota
Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55101. For more
information call the League at 612/227-5600.
1988 CITIES WEEK
ORGANIZATION
I. Establisha CitlesWeek Committee.
These me some options you may wish tome.
A. Citizens committee representing local business, city officials,
school officials, civic organizations, church groups, and interested
residents. (Designate a contact person to correspond with the
League and the Cities Week Subcommittee.)
B. Committee made up of city council members who delegate
specific responsibilities to volunteers. Volunteers may be city or
school officials; business people; or civic, cburch, or citizen
representatives. (Designate a contact person.)
C. Committee made up of city council and city clerk (or
other staff members) with the clerk as the designated Cities Week
coordinator and League contact person.
D. A joint committee made up of several neighboring
communities would plan a joint celebration. (This would be
especially effective if a school district covers more than city.) Each
city would have two or three representatives on the committee but
would designate only one contact person.
E. Any organizational structure you choose.
It. Cities week committee would coordinate selected events for
the community. (Choose one, some, or all.)
A. Release of Balloons
B. Community/Volunteer partnership
C. Open House, City Tour, Council-Citizen Meeting
D. Mayors Exchange
E. Cities in the School
F. Other activities your committee chooses to sponsor
Information on these activities is on the following pages.
1988 CITIES WEEK 81,
BALLOONS
To draw attention to "Cities Week" activities, your city may want
to release balloons at 1:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 4, 1988 after
the Civil Defense sirens go off. We invite cities all over the state
to participate. Please help make this a media event.
Some ideas:
• Have your mayor read the Governor's Proclamation.
• If your city is involved in "Cities Week" in the schools
activities, have the student mayor as a speaker or invite essay
contest winners to read their essays.
• Invite your local legislators to participate.
• Include any activities you feel would add to the events like
having the school or community band or choir perform.
To generate interest you could ask local businesses to donate
prizes, and either insert a coupon stating the prize in the
balloon, or attach it with a twister hand. Prizes would not need
to be elaborate; such as a free malt or a box of cookies.
Advertising the availability of prizes may help you draw a larger
crowd.
Balloons with the League logo "League of Minnesota Cities --
Helping Minnesota Grow for 75 Years" will be available from the
League office (see order form below). Please place your order by
March 1, 1988.
BALLOON ORDER FORM#
Our city would like to order balloons at
circle one
$4.50 per 50 $9.00 for 100 $13.50 for 150 $18.00 for 200
$22.50 for 250 $27.00 for 300
City Name
Address
Authorized Signature
1988 CITIES WEEK
CITY / VOLUNTEER PARTNERSHIP
f. Recognition dinner
Cities Week may be a good time to recognize the people in
your community who help the city business run smoothly.
Include all volunteers such as commission members, committee
members, volunteer firefighters, reserve officers, school board,
other.
You may want to include essay contest winners and other
students.
This may be a good time to present a slide show about your
city.
II. Awardsprogram
This program could be similar to the recognition dinner
without the cost. You may want to give out awards after a
council-citizen meeting or when you release balloons. Any
city-sponsored activity will work.
Your city may want to include an overview of each volunteer
group. And, you could give a certificate of appreciation to
each volunteer. Call the League for a sample certificate.
1988 CITIES WEEK
OPEN HOUSE / CITY TOUR / COUNCIL-CITIZEN
MEETINGS
I. Open house
A. All or selected publicfacilities could be open togeneral
public for 2 - 4 hours during the day.
B. Provide a one page handout as to function of each
facility and a map showing locations.
A. City hall
B. Public works garage
C. Police department
D. Fire department
E. Selected park structures
F. Well
G. Water treatment plant
H. Lift stations
I. Other public structures
IL City tour - provide map of intinerary
A. New development
1. Commercial
2. Industrial
3. Residential
B. Park facilities
C. Streets/bridges - point out future repair needs
D. Tax exempt properties - schools, churches, hospital, etc.
E. Cable facilities
F. Available development sites
G. Historic sites
III. Council-citizen meetings
A. Overview of city government
B. Open agenda
C. Slide show of community
D. Recognition of volunteers
U
1988 CITIES WEEK
MAYORS EXCHANGE
A featured event of Cities Week will be the Mayors Exchange
Program. The major focus of the program is to allow city officials
to become better acquainted with other communities. The LMC
Board of Directors listed this project as a priority at their retreat
last fall.
Attached is a Mayors Exchange interest sheet. Please indicate your
community's interest in participating in the program. If there is a
certain city you would like to pair with, please let us know. Also,
you may wish to point out what types of projects, problems,
programs, and activities you would be interested in showing to
officials from other cities. The exchange of mayors could take
place for one day during Cities Week or at another time
convenient to both cities.
Please return the interest sheet to Jean Mehle, League of
Minnesota Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55101, by
February 15,1988.
The Cities Week Subcommittee members will draw names for
pairing cities in late February, unless two cities agree on the
pairing prior to the drawing. You may choose to pair with a city
of similar size, from an area close to your city, or one that is
very different from your city.
The Mayors Exchange Program is an ideal vehicle for everyone to
participate and show the pride they have in their community. If
you have any questions, please call the League office at
612/227-5600.
We look forward to your participation in this first Mayors
Exchange Program and hope it will become an annual event.
1988 Mayors Exchange Program Interest Sheet
Please check the following that may apply to your city:
Our city will participate in the Mayors Exchange program
Our Cities Week contact person is
Address
Our mayor is
Our city would like to pair with a city of the following
population:
a. Under 2,500
b. 2,500 to 5,000
c. 5,000 to 10,000
d. Over 10,000
e. Any of the above
Our city would like to pair with a city from the following area
of the state:
a. Northeast
b. Northwest
c. Southeast
d. Southwest
e. Central Minnesota
f. Metropolitan area
g. Any of the above
Our city has made arrangements to pre-pair with
the city of
What type of projects, programs, problems, and activities would you
be interested in seeing in another city?
What types of projects, programs, etc. would you be interested in
showing another community?
Please return this form to Jean Mehle, League of Minnesota
Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55105 by February
15, 1988.
1988 CITIES WEEK /1
CITIES IN THE SCHOOL G
Contact school officials early in the school year so they can add to
curriculum and contact principal. Plan an assembly for the local
school. Work with the school principal for implementation.
L Elementary school
A. Mayor and council present program geared to 6-12 year olds
1. Brief history of city
2. Duties of city council
3. Duties of city staff (where appropriate)
4. City/school relationship
5. City services
6. Citizen involvement
7. Questions and answers
B. Mayor and/or city clerk present program
Same as above
C. Hold mock election of students to mock city council
Clerk could explain election procedure
11. Junior high school
A. Mayor and council present program geared to 13-15 year olds
1. History of city
2. Essay contest: 'What does city government do for you?"
Publish winner in local newspaper
3. Duties of city staff/council
4. Hold mock council meeting with audience participation
B. Mayor and clerk or city administrator present program
Same as above
C. Hold mock election
III. Senior high school
A. Mayor and council present program geared to 16-18 year olds
1. History of city
2. Essay contest on community. Suggest city officials to
judge. Publish winner.
3. Outline city services
4. Outline interrelationships with other governments
school
township
county
state
B. Mayor and clerk or city administrator present program.
Same as above.
C. Hold mock council meetings with student participants.
SCHOOL IN THE CITY
This program is geared for the junior and senior high schools. Have
interested students sign up.
I. Shadow program - student spends an afternoon with city official
A. Coordinating teacher assigns students to participating staff
or elected official
B. Students assume role of person shadowed and hold mock
council meeting
C. Students to report back to their peers
II. Reception or picnic supper or dinner for all participants
III. Special council-citizen meeting
A. Summarize the day's shadow program and
introduce participants
B. Present certificates to students
C. Rest of agenda is open for citizen input
IV. Hold a mock city council meeting with students as
council members and mayor
CITIES' WEEK VOLUNTEERS
Aug. 1, 1987
City/Contact/Title
Apple Valley,Lynn Boland,Personnel Director
Coon Rapids, Joan Anderson
Golden Valley, Pat Butler
`Hanover, Barb Irvine, Councilmember
Hoyt Lakes, Gerald O'Donnell, Mayor
Keewatin, Delrose Israelson, Clerk
Lyle, Nancy Williamson,Clerk
Madeha, Joe McCabe, Administrator
Mapleview, Kenneth R. Nash, Mayor
"Mendota Heights, Liz Witt, Councilmember
`Minneapolis, Duke Addicks, Legislative Liaison
Moorhead, Morris Lanning, Mayor
Nashwauk, Arleen Halliday, Clerk/Treasurer
'New Hope, Carol Carlson, Director of Administrative Services
Prior Lake, David Unmacht, Assistant Manager
SL Anthony, Dave Childs, City Manager
SL Cloud, Patti Gartland, Administrative Aide
`Waite Park, At Ringsmulh, Mayor
Zmnbrota, Alfred E. Colling , III, Mayor
` Cities Week committee member
" Cities Week committee chair
i
PLANNING, ZONING AND CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 600 EAST FOURTH STREET
(612) 448-3435 0 CHASKA,MINNESOTA 55318-2185
COUNTY OF CAQVQ
RECEIVED
3 August 1987 '
AUG 1 01987
To: Mayors & Council Meroers, Southwest Area Ccamunities
CITY OF SHAKurE
From: Dave Drealan, Cin behalf of the Southwest Communities Coalition
Subject: Organization 8 Participation for 1988
On the first of July Carver County hosted a meeting for the elected officials from
the communities that have been involved in the past activities of the Coalition.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss participation in the Coalition for 1988
and the organization of the Coalition. The b,sic issues are whether the estab-
lishment of a more formal organization is necess:,-y or desirable and partic ,nation
in the Coalition for 1988. At the close of the meeting it was decided th it each
community should try to decide by early August whether it is interested par-
ticipating in the Coalition and in further discussing the Coalition's organization.
Quite a number of communities have indicated interest in continuing the coalition
,nd in further discussing the organizational structure. The Coalition is interested
rn your Community's position regarding your participation in the Coalition. If your
Community is interested and has not yet notified the Coalition eithsr L�ru a letter
to W. Gnan or by sone other contact with the Coalition, please notify tF..i Coalition
(in care of Dave Drealan at the address on the letterhead) regarding your
community's position.
The major issue discussed was the role and organization of the Coalition. John
Boland has written a memo addressing both issues; please find the Tram attached.
Anothir meeting of elected Officials will be sc:,eduled for the first part of Sao--
te-oar. Your community will be contacted with the tiffs and location.
If�vou have m�any77 Questians regarding this matter please contact me.
P lJnmalwe Actium Elul Op 11-1-11 EIIbW
Boland & Associates
2443 E. Larpenteur Ave., Suite 110
Maplewood, MN 55109
(612) 777-3388
TO: Participants in Southwest Coalition of Communities
FROM: John Boland
DATE: July 15, 1987
In response to some concerns raised by some of the elected
officials at the Chaska meeting on July 1, 1987, I thought it might be
appropriate to lay out some of the options available.
The planners group has met over the last year and a half and has
made some impact in certain areas pertaining to the Metropolitan
Council. One option available would be to keep the status quo. The
planners group would continue to meet and monitor the Metropolitan
Council's adoption of the Water Quality and Transportation chapters to
the Development Guide.
Another option, one heavily discussed at the July 1 meeting,
would be the involvement of elected officials directly in the
formalizing of the Southwest Coalition of Communities. The
advantages of this would be to give the group more visibility, allow
policy makers to deal with policy makers at the Metropolitan and
State levels, and put the Coalition on an even par with the other two
regional groups already existing in the metro area.
What seemed to cause some concern was the potential for
conflict among members of the Coalition. For example, in the area of
scarce resources such as highway funding, the planners group has
operated on the principle that we deal in areas where we can all agree
and avoid those where we do not. We found in our year and a half of
operation that we agree with the vast majority of issues in which the
Metropolitan Council deals.
It is not intended that the Coalition would be an arbiter or
usurper of existing groups or issues. However, the planners group felt
that the three advantages listed above were worth the formalizing of
the group. If nothing else, it would serve as a basis for communication
among the members of the Coalition themselves as well as with
Metropolitan and State agencies.
If there are any further questions, please feel free to call me at
777-3388.
THOMAS L. HENNEN
SCOTT COUNTY AUDITOR
COURTHOUSE - RM 102
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1398 T.J. Lannon
(612) 445-7750 Ext 160 Deputy
August 26, 1987 RECEIVED
AUG 2 71987
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
129 E IST AVE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
Subj : Tax Forfeiture Sale
Dear Sir :
The County of Scott will be conducting a sale of property that
has been forfeited to the State of Minnesota for non-payment of
taxes. The property will be sold to the highest bidder above the
value listed below. The sale will be held at the Auditor's Office
in the Courthouse in Shakopee , MN at 10 .00 o'clock on Tuesday,
September 8, 1987. Sealed bids only will be accented. A bid form
is enclosed for your convience .
Parcel #27-915033-0 Sale Price $ 200 .00
2.9 acre tract in Gov' t Lot 4 & 5 15 115 22
(owned by Gary Ripley)
If you have any questions please to contact me at 445-7750 Ext 168.
Sincerely,
Thomas J Lannon
Deputy Auditor
Enclosure :
TAX FORFEITURE SALE BID FORM
BIDDER INFORMATION J
1 . NAME:
2. ADDRESS:
3. PHONE #:
4. COUNTY & STATE
5. OWNERSHIP•
PARCEL INFORMATION
6. PARCEL #•
7. LEGAL DISCRIPTION:
BID INFORMATION
S. AMOUNT:$
NOTE: THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE THE COUNTY AUDITOR WILL BE THE
BID AMOUNT PLUS AN ASSURANCE FEE, STATE DEED STAMPS,
CONSERVATION FEE, STATE DEED FEE, AND RECORDING FEE.
(The successful bidder will be notified of the total
amount due . )
9. SIGNATURE:
THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR BID FORM ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN AND ARE CONDITIONS
UPON WHICH THE BID IS SUBMITTED. UPON SUBMISSION, THIS BID IS VALID AND
BINDING UPON BIDDER.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR BID FORM 0 /�
PLEASE PRINT ALL INFORMATION, EXCEPT ITEM k 9.
1 . Name of all owners of the property, if bid is accepted.
2. Address to which tax statements should be sent .
3. Phone number whera bidder can be reached during normal business
hours (home and/or business, both if appropriate) .
4. County and State in which owners are a resident .
5. Is the ownership to be individually, joint tenants, or
tenants in common . If incorporated give state of incorporation .
6. Nine digit identification number published with the description .
7. Legal description of the property as published in the official
newspaper or list .
B. The amount you are bidding for the property.
NOTE: Assurance Fee is a state title fee of three percent (3%)
of line S. The State Deed Stamps are determined by
selling (bid) price . The Conservation Fee is $5.00 . The
State Deed Fee is $20 .00 . The Recording Fee is $10 .00 .
(These are in addition to the bid amount . )
9. Signature of ALL owners of the property ( those to be shown on
the deed) .
10 . Place bid form in a separate sealed envelope marked on the front
with the parcel identification number and the statement "BID FOR
THE FORFEITURE SALE" . Then return to the following address:
THOMAS J. LANNON
DEPUTY COUNTY AUDITOR
COURTHOUSE - ROOM 102
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1398
11 . The successful bidder will be notified of the additional amount to
cover the fees.
THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR BID FORM ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE TAX FORFEITURE
SALE BID FORM AND ARE CONDITIONS UPON WHICH BIDS ARE SUBMITTED. UPON
SUBMISSION, THIS BID IS VALID AND BINDING UPON BIDDER.
lgbiz Inbenture, made __..._._._._._day of.............. 19 17-1
between .............. ...................... ............. ...... ..............
a corporation under the laws of the State .............. Party of the first part,and
..............Ci-ty nf Shakopea_-&-muni .................... ---------- - -- ....
sR corporation under the laws of the State of..................1Uznes,,t,&..... ---------------
party of the second part,
miffiracth, That the said party of the first Part, In consideration Of the sum of
One--Dolla;r and-other-good...and valuable.-Gonsider-ation DOLLARS,
to it in hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,
does hereby Grant, Bargain, Quitclaim, and Convey unto the said party of the second Part, its successor,
and assigns, Forever, all the tract......_..or parvel..—.. of land lying and being in the County of......._........._.._
.....................-...Scott .......... and State of Minnesota, described as follows, to-wit:
All that part of Government Lot 4, Section 15, Township 115, Range 22,
Scott County, Minnesota, the boundary of which is described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast corner of said Government Lot 4; thence North 0()0261()5t'
West along the east line of said Government Lot 4, bearing assumed, a distance of
1686-10 feet; thence North 8200510411 West a distance of 771.54 feet; thence North
71047'40" West a distance of 21.07 feet to the easterly line of a roadway easement as
described by Valley Engineering for Connie Ordeman, drawing dated 2-20-76; thence
North 00006'22" West along said easterly line of said roadway easement and its
northerly extension a distance of 374.65 feet to the actual point of beginning of the
boundary to be described, said point lying on the northerly line of said roadway
easement; thence continuing North 00006'2211 West a distance of 850 feet more or less
to the shoreline of Dean's Lake; thence northwesterly along said shoreline to the
intersection with a line which lies 60 feet westerly of, as measured perpendicular to,
and parallel tosaid extension of the easterly line of said roadway easement; thence
South 00006'22" East along said parallel line to its intersection with a line that
bears South 89053'38" West from the point of beginning; thence North 89053'38" East
to point of beginning. It is intended that the southerly line of the above described
easement is also the northerly line of said roadway easement.
baffiv from state dead is
41
wft
1z C--T-t� -
State transfer
hereon
100 100 100 100 100 100 125 -Do 1 II V 0 q56 kLIK BET)
ry mf
r m'^ z z f
,n o w qNp o
m "w oz
� f
N J ry O m I N U LL $ Q W O
� NQ F p mLL 2LL Y10
_ rc F aw alp � � o wn
rcw ` y
ua u
< YC Q�\
3
\ m ya m
o m W M1
• � F Z„ NK
�W
Q �ti
tJ i
v
u r
•� W p
z r m
mm o
Gp METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL
163637 �`
IV 112 SEC. i 5 T. A
SHORE LINE AERIAL PHOTO
DATED AUGUST 1957
I
I
PEEN THE NW CORNER OF GOVT NE COR_OF SEC. IS �
N
y0MM� \\
a� wn
a L 9 \\
s- HARLES GRIFFIN
h 12929 7!55
O b •\
aW. ry N
N p
co
o n ?P
n Yy
Pry \T I• � 045� \
r
$ . � a$3 3
/OY g rn a n n a
R B _
7 3.31 2 152216
S mo r 33 L09
UJ
PARN
ao Ns n a3
a OJ N O U 2
NrcN 0 la s 5 q
3 Ci
V ` w
4 � ? 3
2 I 2 p
0 2
2 W
ftakuppr Tommunity $'PCuIiPS
129 Levee Drive
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Phone 445-2742
Community Education • Parks • Recreation • Adult Education
Memo To: John Anderson, City Administrator
From . George Muenchow, Community Recreation Director
Subject: Dean's Lake Land Purchase
Date September 1, 1987
Introduction
Per your request I have briefly reviewed the possibility of acquiring a
parcel of property on the south shore of Dean's Lake that currently is
available through Tax Forfeiture means through Scott County. Unfortunately,
if we are interested in making a bid for this parcel, a decision has to be
made now since the parcel bids will be opened early next week.
Background
There are a number of concerns relating to the acquiring of this land for
park purposes (canoe access):
1. Physical.. .. .. .. ..The parcel is completely under water. In order to
provide a place for automobiles to park, an unknown
amount of fill would be needed to construct a parking
lot.
The periphery of the lake is a mass of weeds,
underbrush, downed trees, bogs etc. To reach open
water with a canoe, a person would have to struggle
through about 350 ft. of this water covered mass of
vegetation.
2. Legal. .. .. .. .. . . ..Since the roads in the area of this parcel of land
are private there has to be some question regarding
encouraging the public to use this proposed Canoe
Access.
3. Moral.. .. . .. ... .. .There are very few areas within the City Of Shakopee
where wild life has a good chance of not being disturbed
by man. Dean's Lake probably is at the top of the list.
Under present conditions, human beings have a difficult
time getting to open water. The encouragement of usage
of the lake would have to be a negative factor on the
wild life.
4. Maintenance. .. .. ..If the City did acquire this parcel and chose to
develop it as a canoe access, there would be some
maintenance involved, particularly garbage and rubbish
pickup and removal.
5. Previous Plans. . . . .At no time in the past has the City indicated an
interest in providing access to this lake. The State
Of Minnesota has a plan of providing access to bodies
of water in the state, particularly where access currently
is not available. Dean's Lake is not on their list.
Recommendation
The Community Recreation Director recommends not to acquire this parcel of Tax
Forfeited Land.
A COOPERATIVE EFFORT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT 720 SINCE 1954
oN. ,-d
�.� -av-, /� �
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Appeal of Variance Denied to Ron Schmitt for
Front Yard Setback
DATE: August 25, 1987
Introduction•
Mr. Ron Schmitt has applied for a four foot variance from
the average prevailing front yard setback as required by Section
11.03, Subd. 7.F. for an addition to the front of his home at 620 -
West 5th Avenue. At their meeting on August 6, 1987 the Board of
Adjustment and Appeals denied Mr. Schmitt' s variance request.
Mr. and Mrs. Schmitt have appealed the denial of the variance to
the City Council.
Background•
The attached information provides the background for the
appeal, included are:
1. Staff report to Board of Adjustment & Appeals
2. Site Plan
3. Minutes of the August 6, 1987 Meeting
4. Information handed to Planning Commission by Mrs.
Schmitt at hearing.
5. Letter of Appeal from Mr. & Mrs. Schmitt
6. Memo dated August 6, 1987
Action Requested:
Offer Variance Resolution of the City Council CC-504 and
move for approval or denial.
Zo
MEMO TO: Shakopee Board of Adjustment and Appeals
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Schmitt variance
DATE: July 31, 1987
Introduction•
Mr. Ron Schmitt has applied for a four foot variance from
the average prevailing front yard setback as required by Section
11.03 Subd. 7.F. for an addition to the front of his home located
at 620 west 5th Avenue. The zoning district is an R-2 and was
platted prior to the effective date of the zoning ordinance.
Considerations:
Section 11.03 Subd. 7F states:
"Where adjoining structures existing on the effective date
of this Chapter have a different setback from that required,
the front setback of a new structure shall conform to the
average prevailing setback in the immediate vicinity. The
City Administrator shall determine the necessary front yard
setback in such cases. "
Upon physically measuring the surrounding homes, it was
discovered that the average setback is 1714". This would allow
Mr. Schmitt to construct a 6' addition to the front of his house.
Mr. Schmitt does have approximately eleven feet to use for this
addition on the east side of the home without encroaching on the
side yard setback. Mr. Schmitt could also construct an addition
on the back of his house.
A new average prevailing setback will be established if this
variance is granted.
Findings•
Criteria: 1. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply
to the property which do not apply generally to other
properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result
from lot size or shape, topography, or other
circumstances over which the owners of property since
enactment of this Chapter have had no control.
Finding: 1. The exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
that exist are not unique to this property; location of
building on property (i.e. front yard setback) . The
lot size, shape and topography are similar to other
properties in the vicinity.
Criteria: 2. The literal interpretation of the provisions of
this Chapter would deprive the applicant of rights
commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same
district under the terms of this Chapter.
Finding: 2. The applicant would not be deprived of rights
commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same
district under the terms of this chapter. All property
owners must follow the City Code in order to alter
their property in any way.
Criteria: 3 . That the special conditions or circumstances do
not result from the actions of the applicant.
Finding: 3. The present front yard setback does not result
from actions of the applicant, but these conditions are
not unique to the property. The design, location and
size of the addition are within the control of the
applicant. Other alternatives which comply with the
City Code are available to the applicant.
Criteria: 4. That granting of the variance requested will not
confer on the applicant any special privilege that is
denied by this Chapter to owners of other lands,
structures or buildings in the same district.
Finding: 4. If granted this applicant will have the privilege
of being able to encroach on the average prevailing
front yard setback in the immediate vicinity, which is
denied by City Code to other owners of lands,
structures and buildings in this district.
Criteria: 5. The variance requested is the minimum variance
which would alleviate the hardship.
Finding: 5. Alternatives do exist which would allow for the
constructing of an addition to the house and comply
with the provisions of the City Code.
Criteria: 6. The variance would not be materially detrimental
to the purposes of this Chapter, or to property in the
same zone.
Finding: 6. The variance would be detrimental in that it would
create a new average setback, thus allowing other
property owners the right to encroach on the front yard
setback without securing a variance.
Recommendation:
The staff recommends denial of Variance Resolution *504
requesting a four foot variance from the average front yard
setback as required by Section 11.03 , Subd. 7 (F) for the
property located at 620 West 5th Avenue.
3
FIA
- I
1
F-' 40,
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOARD
4
OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 6, 1987
Vice Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with
Comm. Rockne, Foudray and Schwartz present. Comm. Schmitt,
Pomerenke and VanMaldeghem were absent. Also present were
Douglas K. Wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Community
Development Director; and Cncl. Steve Clay.
Rockne/Schwartz moved to appprove the agenda as written. Motion
carried unanimously.
Foudray/Schwartz moved to approve the minutes of July 9, 1987.
Motion carried unanimously.
Foudray/Rockne moved to open the public hearing to consider an
application for a four toot variance from the average front yard
setback as required by Section 11.03, Subd. 7 .F. for the property
located at 620 West 5th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the background of the request.
Vice Chairman Czaja asked for comments from the audience.
Rosemary Schmitt addressed the Commission stating that they would
like to build a 10 foot addition to the front of their house
because of their growing family. she said the cost would be
extremly high to build to the rear of the house, and that the
living room is located in the front of the house and would be
more practical to add on to the living area.
They were a number of concerns brought up by neighboring
residents regarding the view from their houses being blocked.
Mr. Delium, 504 5th avenue, said that four years ago he was
refused his request to build onto his front porch because it
would make the other houses uneven. Fred Lebens, 604 West 5th
Avenue, said he thought it would spoil the view of the whole
block if that house were uneven.
Foudray/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Foudray/Rockne moved to deny variance Resolution No. 504
requesting a four foot variance from the average front yard
setback as required by Section 11.03, Subd. 7 (F) for the
property located at 620 West 5th Avenue for the reason thatthe
petitioner did not present a hardship. Motion carried
unanimously.
CT a.,
Hardships to Consider
I. My husband and myself are long term residents of
Shakopee. Ron has owned and lived in this house for 13
years. We have lived at 620 W. Fifth Ave. for 10 years
together and do like the location and the neighborhood.
We did plan to raise our children at this home as it is
across from the park and close to schools and our church.
We do have two girls ages 5 & 4 and the house has become
cramped for space. As our family grows we do need more
space and if we are not allowed to put this addition on
our house , we will be forced to move, which would be
financially impossible. I would then be forced to enter
the work force and our children would be pushed into
daycare situations .
II . Other Alternatives
A. In the floor plan of this house & yard (page 3) ,
as you can see, the bedrooms are to the West and it
wouldn' t be very pratical to have an entryway and
entry closet through a bedroom.
B. Both the kitchen and bathroom are located to
the South and it would be very costly to move both
the kitchen and bathroom. Our estimate from a
builder to build out the back of our house was
close to Fifty Thousand ($50,000. ) Dollars.
C. We do have a tree of approximately 100 years
in the backyard that would need to be removed for
an addition to the South. This tree is the only
shade tree in our yard.
D. The livingroom area is in the front ( or street
side) of the house and it seems to be most practical
to add footage there. (FOR BOTH COST AND APPEARANCE)
III. Many of the homes in this neighborhood are placed
closer to the street than our house is and we are
asking for compliance rather than variance.
IV . Immediate Vicinity Average
A. Two houses were purposely omitted by the city
planner to prove his case . I believe this
ommission excuses the average .
i
B. Using a redmarkerI color coded the lots which
the city planners office used to determine the
average. (Page 4) And , using a yellow marker I
coded the lots which I used. Using the properties
that are yellow coded and the same method the
city planner ' s office used we end up with a
111' 5" average.
V. President has already been set
A. 503 West Fourth Ave. added a garage with 15 ' 5"
to the sidewalk, The garage is 18' wide, it was _
built 2-3 years ago says Ray Hennes who did the
work. He believes a variance was needed.
B. 202 & 202 1/2 West Fifth Ave. This addition of
2 years has 8' 6" to the sidewalk line. This addition
is 13' 11" wide in the front and 18 ' 9" in depth.
Mary Ernst stated the entire old diningroom was
torn to the ground and the new addition was errected .
This was in 1985. Mary believes that only a building
permit and not a variance was required.
Respectively , -
Ras��� Schmit-�
J QriU�
ioi I�� 9
Cemen�
,ts Slab a
RIX"Oe.k e
211XIlyp '
r 1
4' r •o I fYa�g
`h�r���¢ 1 � 3—ter Pe�
rrprt� Itne U"�rOCyl _ aAr�m� - J. JIM
? Line
1
"VI
our e+rwa
11' y
ou r
0
N
D
L ,
� RHYd 1103
IaauLs
1
jig ;.
�"� •,� � � II t� ,f t f ``,, . ' �aQ3AYQ63� N ` Ip � � ..
715 W 70705 'i ��l�o�iYiP� A• Pr� �'a s
�' T7'�'j T c a r
a�, y • !. lK. 1 aH W A7 ` ,i4 f 1 L, a �.�T2=; a ' • `J '^'�. �✓p1
s. •73y 9d /Y76b' ' .�(cr• �`� -y 51.
Y 1 - - 1 • Y l3 } , 1 '
L
.'f /
ri
tl
It
At
YL !
O/
t '1
^;r
-a7 ' COQ (c mff4
17 /u,
�a
1 %) 1011 G�a7 /0, „ . .
3 /o 41
los a 7, � �.�e �• �-ta�
15.7/ a�' � " '/' iy s17„
I- 71Y
flecevpD
of
)�2
a�.c
#y
MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission 9 �'
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Schmitt Variance Request
DATE: August 6, 1987
Introduction•
On August 4, 1987 Mrs. Schmitt called the Planning
Department and indicated that it was her intention to request a
variance for a fence in excess of 6 feet and that she had
included it on her variance application. Staff was unaware of
the request and in reviewing the application (copy attached)
found that no mention of the fence was made in either the section
"Variance Requested" or "Description of Hardship". A fence is
mentioned in the section describing the structure to be
constructed.
I have discussed this issue with Mr. Coller, the City
Attorney, and he reviewed the application. It is the City
Attorney' s opinion that the Schmitts did not request a variance
for a fence because it was not mentioned under "Variance
Requested" . Mr. Coller indicated that if they desire to apply
for avariance for a fence, they need to start the process over
with a new application for the fence. -
Date Piled:
Nearing Date r
Appl. Pee•
Receipt. No.:
• IResoluti on No.:
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Application for
VARIANCE
BASIC INFOR�MATI�ON c
Applicant: /5/x/7 . lC)7=/ 7� �} Phone: /C �j- /7V5
Address : (p2p U], 54-hAye . �� O
Property Owner : , �j2 s_ Q ns JP, Phone:
Address :
Consultant/
Contractor: /04l � 5-1�7n Phone: 377- 83s/
Existing Use Present
of Property : 80 rt) 54ead� Zoning: -
Proposed Use - Parcel
Of Property: !So mP I .D. No. : 27-20/5/S- O
Location of A +
Requested Variance: ��Qri-� SirA P n4 r- tAr+u fP, '
Variance Qq na L
Requested : ��� Var;on2e due i-n llrlrrXSlll.r>
Has the applicant previously sought to Plat, Rezone, Lot Split, obtain a
Variance or Conditional Use Permit on the subject site or any part of it:
No J/ Yes _ What was Requested :
When :
What type , if any, improvements are proposed , described: � n rb
nnl
Do you blleve that an undue hardship exists b`dse upon circumstances
unique to the subject property: No _ Yes , describe: �IP 24111
nn c 100'k r IQ et W G'vii70 nrP a /s vPr�r mol/
Loo Ked CL>< th2 FJossi b,'/;fles o-Foinc� t9e
b a c K rd �SoctfA) of +h e fast- s /d e d- I n o 4e r
+o cCo +ha, - -the house woctld have -tom .. be
9uj�ted and a new door Plan deVisec ' The.
F rOn-t- 's t1,e on y 0- 05+ lef�OEC4l v� (Over)
VARIANCE RESOLUTION OFTHECITY COUNCIL NO. CC- 504-
WHEREAS, Ron Schmitt having first
filed an application to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals dated
Jul 21 1987 , for a variance from the strict
app ication of the provisions o the Shakopee Zoning Ordinance ,
Section
, to-wit:
A variance from the average front yard setback
: and
WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is
described as : 620 West 5th Avenue
and
WHEREAS , said proposed variance request was Denied
by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals at their meeting o Au 66, 987
and this decision has been appealed to the City Council ; and
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council on Sept. 1, 1987 held
a public hearing on the appeal from the decision o the Board o
Adjustment and Appeals.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that upon bearing the advice and recommenda-
tions of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and upon considering the
suggestions made by the applicant and suggestions and objections raised
by the affected property owners, within a radius of 350 feet thereof,
in public hearings duly held by the Shakopee Board of Adjustment and
Appeals and the Shakopee City Council that the aforementioned variance
be and is hereby: as follows :
BF. IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Shakopee City Code 11. 04,
Subd. 5 B-5, if an approved variance is not utilized within one year
from date herein approved or by Sept. 1, 1988
null and void. Iit shall become
Adopted in regular session of the City
Council of the City o Shakopee, Minnesota he this 1st day of
Sept. 19 87
ATTEST:
1p
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Vierling Drive Public Hearing
DATE: August 26 , 1987
INTRODUCTION 6 BACKGROUND:
At the request of the sole abutting property owners, Council
continued the August 4 , 1987 public hearing for Vierling Drive
from C. R. 17 to the east approximately 3200 feet to September 1 ,
1987. The request was based upon the property owners inability
to consider their position and provide testimony. As of the date
of this memo, staff has not -received any feed back from the
property owner, Scottland Companies.
Attached is a copy of my July 30, 1987 memo containing options
available to Council . The alternatives are addressed in more
detail in the feasibility report.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Reopen the public hearing.
KA/pmp
HEARING
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer?/1—
SUBJECT: Vierling Drive ; C.R. 16 to C. R. 17
DATE: July 30, 1987
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND:
A public hearing is scheduled for August 4 , 1987 for the purpose
of considering a public improvement consisting of building
Vierling Drive from C.R. 16 to C.R. 17. Council has previously
been given a copy of the feasibility report.
The feasibility report addressed three alternatives for project
phasing of that portion of the project through Scottland
properties, summarized as follows:
Alt. 1 Postpone all improvements.
Alta 2 Postpone utilities, construct street.
Alt. 3 Construct utilities & street.
The plans and specifications for that portion of Vierling Drive
through Hauer ' s Fourth Addition are now complete and sent to
Mn/DOT State Aid for review. Hopefully , we will have the
approved plans back for Council review and approval in a couple
of months.
RECOMMENDATION:
If Council selects project phasing Alt. 1 , one of the following
actions should be taken:
• Move to direct staff to discontinue consideration of
improvements to Vierling Drive from C.R. 17 to the east
approximately 3200 feet.
• Move to direct staff to include improvements to
Vierling Drive from C.R. 17 to the east approximately
3200 feet in the 19_ Capital Improvement Program. -
If Council selects project phasing Alt . 2 or 3 , the following
action should be taken:
• Move to direct staff to draft a resolution ordering the
improvement of Vierling Drive from C.R. 17 to the east
approximately 3200 feet. (Note: the language of the
resolution depends on project phasing alternative
selected) .
REQUESTED ACTION:
Direction to staff is requested.
KA/pmp
lDa/
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Downtown Design Standards - Buildings
DATE: August 13, 1987
Introduction•
In the future, it is likely that the Downtown Committee will
discuss offering incentive programs to property owners in the
downtown area (B-3) to encourage the improvement or renovation of
building exteriors. In order to assure that exterior
improvements are of an appropriate design, design standards
should be developed and applied by the City of Shakopee in their
approval and implementation of any incentive programs. The
Downtown Committee has attempted to develop a set of design
standards that will help preserve and enhance the uniqueness of
the downtown area.
Background:
The design standards developed by the Downtown Committee
have been written in general terms in order to be applied to the
different building styles which exist in the City's downtown
area. Precise and detailed standards would require distinct and
unique standards for each building style; therefore, the general
standards proposed by staff will be relevant to every building.
The application of the standards should be flexible, realizing
that a standard which does not reasonably address or "fit" a
particular building style should not be considered binding.
Furthermore, because of the need for general requirements,
the standards are less well-suited to newer buildings than to
older structures. Owners of structures of all vintages and
owners/builders of planned new buildings are strongly encouraged
to keep these standards, as well as the goals, purposes and
objectives, in mind as they develop concepts and plans for
construction. In this way, the existing design quality of the
downtown area can be respected and utilized to further both
Private and public purposes.
The proposed standards go beyond minimum building and
housing code requirements and introduce standards of building
design that will be strongly recommended for all projects
receiving City financial assistance. The intent of these design
standards is to insure that, when City funds are expended for
building rehabilitation or new construction in the downtown area,
public purposes are furthered. The design standards promote a
respect for original quality of building design, protection of
property values of adjacent buildings, and improvement of
Shakopee' s downtown image and potential physical attractiveness.
Shown in attachment #1, is a copy of the proposed downtown
design standards approved by the Downtown Committee at their
meeting on August 12, 1987. The standards proposed have been
prepared based on Design Standards followed in the communities of
Eau Claire, Hastings, Red Wing and the Main Street Program.
The Downtown Committe is recommending that the design
standards be applied to all existing buildings receiving
assistance through a City incentive program and within the B-3
District. The Downtown Committee also recommended that staff
further investigate building material standards for new buildings
that may be constructed in the Downtown Area. The Committee also
suggested further information on the possiblity of creating a
design review committee that would be responsible for ensuring
that any new construction or rehabilitation is consistent with
the design guidelines and design goals of the City. Pending
Downtown Committee action, I will report back to the City Council
on these two issues at a later date.
If Council concurs with design standards proposed by the
Downtown Committee, it would be appropriate at this time to
approve Resolution No. 2784 (Exhibit A) adopting the Downtown
Design Standards for the rehabilitation of existing buildings in
the downtown area and incorporating these design standards into
all financial incentive programs that the City may develop for
use in the downtown area. Possible programs that we are
investigating at this time include a revolving loan program and
building facade improvement program. Exact specifics have not
been worked out at this time. Possible funding sources for these
programs include surplus TIF, HRA reserve fund or the pending
assessment pool.
Alternatives•
1. Approve Resolution No. 2784 adopting the Downtown Design
Standards for the rehabilitation of existing buildings in
the downtown area and incorporating them into all City
incentive programs that may be developed for use in the
downtown area.
2. Suggest changes and/or additions to the proposed standards
and table any action on Resolution No. 2784 until our next
meeting. -
3. Do not adopt Resolution No. 2784.
4. Table action, pending further information.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
/00-
Action
oo_-
Action Requested:
Move to approve Resolution No. 2784 adopting the Downtown
Design standards for the rehabilitation of existing buildings in
the downtown area and incorporating them into all City incentive
programs that may be developed for use in the Downtown Area (B-3
District) .
tw
design
ATTACHMENT #1
DOWNTOWN DESIGN STANDARDS (B-3 District)
A. General Standards
1. Original building elements and materials
should be repaired as necessary and retained,
rather than being removed or covered. In the
event replacement is necessary, the new
material should match the material being
replaced in composition, design, color,
texture and other visual qualities.
2. The removal or alteration of building
elements or architectural details should be
minimized.
3 . Rehabilitation work should correct any code
violations on the facade. In addition, if
existing non-facade code violations can be
corrected only with increased difficulty. and
expense because of the facade work, then the -
necessary improvements should be included as
part of the exterior rehabilitation project.
4. Rehabilitation should be encouraged which
maintains an appearance consistent with the
actual character of the building and that
exhibits quality of design, materials, and
features.
5. Alterations to the original facade -- where
desirable -- should be done in a manner such
that, if the alteration were removed in the
future, the essential form and integrity of
the original building would„be impaired.
1Cr
6. Buildings which are part of a series -- or
group of similar buildings -- should
demonstrate continuity of design.
7. Signs, materials and other existing features
which do not meet these design standards
should be removed.
8. Contemporary design for facade renovation may
be acceptable if such design is compatible
with the size, scale, color, materials and
character of the building and its
surroundings. The imitation of historic
styles not compatible with the actual
character of a building is strongly
discouraged.
B. Building Elements (storefronts, windows, doors and openings,
upper facade and windows, cornices and building caps, sides
and rears. )
1. The size and shape of original doors and
windows should not be altered. Recessed
window glazing and door wells should be
maintained.
2. Clear distinctions between first floors and
upper floors should be maintained.
3 . Cornices, parapets and related elements which
make up the top of the facade should be
repaired as necessary and retained.
4 . Where energy conservation in buildings with
large window areas is a concern, preferred
solutions are insulating glass, internal
shutters, and solid opaque panels mounted
inside the windows. If the complete closing
of a glazed bayisreasonable, the use of
deeply recessed panel which maintains the bay
outlines is the desirable solution.
5. The horizontal and vertical alignments of
window frames and the patterns created by
upper story windows should be maintained.
6. Sides and rears of buildings which have
prominent views from public streets should be
rehabilitated at the time that the front
facade is improved.
7 . Previously boarded or bricked up windows and
doors should be re-ported whenever possible.
C. Rehabilitation Elements (repairs, materials, painting)
1. Repair and cleaning of existing surfaces and
materials-- particularly those characterized
by fine detail-- is strongly preferred to
adding new surfaces and obscuring original
materials and surfaces.
2. The sides and rears of buildings should
incorporate-- where possible-- the same
primary materials and similar colors and
details used on the front facade.
3. Brick surfaces should be cleaned by the most
gentle method possible (e.g. cleaning with a
mild detergent; sandblasting should not be
undertaken) . Painting previously unpainted
brick surfaces is strongly discouraged.
4. Materials which are normally painted, or
where paint has been applied in the past,
should primarily utilize "earth tones" (i.e.
browns and beiges, golds, green-browns, grey-
greens) , used to highlight trim and other
accent features.
5. In cases in which facades have been wholly or
partially resurfaced with wood, glass veneer,
stucco, or other materials, strong
encouragement is given to removing these
materials and repairing the original surface.
D. Building Appurtenances (signs, canopies, and awnings,
mechanical equipment)
1. Signs should be subordinate to buildings, in
terms of size and design. Signs should fit
within the existing facade. Preferred
locations are the "sign panel" (first floor
area above windows and doors) , on windows,
and on the edge of canopies.
2. Signs should identify the business only,
rather than any particular product or band.
3 . TV antennas, air conditioners, stacks, vents,
solar panels, and other - mechanical equipment
should be placed in as inconspicuous a
location as possible.
4. Where heavy clusters of mechanical, heating
and/or air conditioning equipment must be
placed on the roof, attractive screening
should be used.
5. Unused appurtenances and miscellaneous
elements (e.g. empty electrical conduits and
unused sign brackets) should be removed.
6. The use of awnings to unify groups of
buildings is encouraged. This should be
accomplished through the use of uniform
materials, height and width.
7. Fabric canopies and awnings which conform
with the design guidelines and standards are
acceptable. Permanent metal awnings,
mansard-shaped awnings and canopies, and flat
canopies should be avoided.
S. Signs, canopies and awnings, and mechanical
equipment should not obscure building
features.
Exhibit A / 6L-
RESOLUTION NO. 2784
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING DOWNTOWN DESIGN STANDARDS
FOR REHABILITATION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS IN THE
DOWNTOWN AREA WITH THE HELP OF INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Shakopee City Council to
offer incentive programs to property owners in the downtown area
(B-3 ) to encourage the improvement or renovation of building
exteriors; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Committee has developed a set of
design standards that will promote a respect for original quality
of building design, protection of property values of adjacent
buildings, and improvement of Shakopee' s downtown image and
potential physical attractiveness; and
WHEREAS, in adopting a set of design standards, it is with
the understanding that the application of the standards should be
flexible, realizing that a standard which does- not reasonably
address or "fit" a particular building style should not be
considered binding.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the Downtown Design Standards,
outlined in Attachment #1, attached hereto and made a part
hereof, are hereby adopted with the explicit purpose of
incorporating them into all of the City incentive programs that
may be used for the rehabilitation of buildings in the downtown
area.
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 1st day of September, 1987.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1987.
City Attorney
io 6
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry. A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Request for 1987 Regional Transit Board Budget
Amendment
DATE: August 25, 1987
Introduction•
In 1987 the City of Shakopee has done quite a bit of
experimenting with our Dial-A-Ride Program. The Dial-A-Ride
Program has been so successful that the City' s option to utilize
a third vehicle during the summer months had to be executed to
handle our ridership demands. In 1987, the City of Shakopee also
initiated an evening dial-a-ride service during the summer
months. Again, this program has proven to be a success and is
being recommended for continuation through the remainder of this
year. Implementation of these new dial-a-ride services has
created a need for the City of Shakopee to amend our transit
assistance agreement with the Regional Transit Board in pursuit
of additional funding to offset the costs of these new services.:
Background:
In the fall of 1986, the Shakopee City Council approved an
amendment to the dial-a-ride contract for the addition of a third
dial-a-ride vehicle for nine months of the year. The remaining
three months were available at the option of the City. When the
dial-a-ride contract was amended, staff stated that there was
adequate funding available within our dial-a-ride budget to fund
the addition of the third vehicle for nine months. With the
success of our dial-a-ride program, it was necessary for the City
of Shakopee to exercise the three month option for the extension
of the third vehicle during the summer months. In conjunction
with this extension, the City of Shakopee expanded their dial-a-
ride service hours to the evenings during the summer months. The
extension of the third dial-a-ride vehicle during the summer
months was not budgeted as a program expense in 1987. The Energy
and Transportation Committee is recommending to City Council that .
the Transit Assistance Agreement between the City of Shakopee and
the Regional Transit Board be amended to reflect the additional
costs of operating the third dial-a-ride vehicle during the
summer months. The approximate cost for this service was $7 ,510.
The extension of the dial-a-ride service to the evening
hours during the summer months was a demonstration project for
the City. Adequate funding was available within our budget to
fund this three month demonstration project. If City Council
concurs with the recommendation of the Energy and Transportation
Committee and wishes to pursue the continuation of the dial-a-
ride evening hours for the remainder of 1987, it would be
appropriate at this time to direct the appropriate City officials
to contact the Regional Transit Board and request the 1987
Transit Assistance Agreement between the Regional Transit Board
and the City of Shakopee be amended accordingly to pay for the
costs associated with the dial-a-ride program expansion. Staff
is projecting thatwe will need to add two vehicles during the
evening hours when school is in session. The estimated project
cost for the dial-a-ride service extension between September and
December of this year is approximately $7,510.
Because of the new programs that we have implemented, there
has been additional marketing costs that were not projected when
the 1987 transit application was submitted to the RTB. The
Energy and Transportation Committee is therefore recommending
that the Transit Assistance Agreement between the Regional
Transit Board and the City of Shakopee be amended in the amount
of $5,500 for additional promotional expenses associated with the
new dial-a-ride services implemented this year and also to expand
our van pool marketing efforts during the remainder of this year.
The total amount of the budget amendment being requested by
staff for the transit program in 1987 is approximately $20,519.
Shown in attachment #1 is a breakdown indicating how this amount
was determined. Staff is confident that the Regional Transit
Board will approve the budget amendment since we originally only
requested $155,000 in our 1987 budget request out of
approximately $200,000 that is available to the City of Shakopee
through the opt-out program.
On August 20, 1987 the Energy and Transportation Committee
moved to recommend to City Council that the appropriate City
officials be directed to submit a budget amendment request to the
Regional Transit Board in the amount of approximately
$20,519.00.
Should the City not pursue this course of action, we would
be forced to discontinue our extended dial-a-ride service hours
for the remainder of this year. Since the money is available
from the Regional Transit Board, this would not seem to be a
positive course of action.
Alternatives:
1. Direct the appropriate City officials to submit a budget
amendment request to the Regional Transit Board to amend the
1987 Transit Assistance Agreement between the City of
Shakopee and the Regional Transit Board in the amount of $
20,519.20. -
2. Do not amend the 1987 Transit Assistance Agreement between
the Regional Transit Board and the City of Shakopee.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
Action Requested:
Move to direct the appropriate City officials to submit a
budget amendment request to the Regional Transit Board to amend
the 1987 Transit Assistance Agreement between the Regional
Transit Board and the City of Shakopee in the amount of
$20,519.20.
ATTACHMENT #1
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Proposed 1987 Transit Assistance Agreement Budget Amendment
Request
1. Addition of 3rd Dial-A-Ride Vehicle for 8 hours of service
daily (M-F) during the summer months (June - August)
Cost Calculations
Projected Expense -
8 hrs/day X 21 days/mo. X 3 mo. X $18.90/hr. _ $9525.60
Projected Revenues -
504 hrs of service X $4 Rev/hr = $2016.00
Projected Project Cost - $9525.60 - $2016.00 = $7509.60
2. Extension of Dial-A-Ride Service hours for three hours daily
(M-F) September - December running two vehicles.
Cost Calculations
Projected Expense -
3hr/day X 21 day/mo X 4 mo X 2 vehicles X $18.90/hr =
$9525. 60
Projected Revenues - 504 hrs of service X 4Rev/hr =
$2016.00
Projected Project Cost = $9525. 60 - $2016.00 = $7509.60
3. Promotional costs associated with advertising the new Dial-A-
Ride Services - $ 2500.00
4. Promotional costs associated with expanded van-pool
advertising campaign - $3000. 00
Budget Amendment Request Summary
1. Third Dial-A-Ride Vehicle Summer Months $ 7509.60
2. Extended Service hours $ 7509.60
3. Dial-A-Ride Advertising $ 2500.00
4. Van Pool Advertising $ 3000.00
Total Budget Amendment Request $20519.20
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant 'O
RE: Expanded Dial-A-Ride Service Hours
DATE: August 25, 1987
Introduction:
On June 8, 1987 Shakopee began operating summer evening
hours for the Dial-A-Ride Program. Based on ridership data for
the past two months, the Energy and Transportation is
recommending that the extended service hours be continued through
the remainder of 1987 and the Dial-A-Ride Contract be amended
accordingly.
Background-
Shown in attachment #1 is a report indicating the level of
ridership for the summer service hours during the month of June.
Note that during the month of June we averaged four (4) passenger
trips per hour. During the month of July ridership increased to
an average evening ridership of 6.7 passenger trips.
In the last three months I have received several phone calls
from Shakopee residents who are interested in seeing the evening
service hours expanded on a year around basis. Residents have
informed me that they would be more apt to use the evening Dial-
A-Ride service during the winter months when it gets darker
earlier and the temperatures begin to drop. The Energy and
Transportation Committee and I believe that it would be prudent
to consider extending the Dial-A-Ride service hours at least
through the remainder of this year. This would give us a better
indication of the ridership levels we might experience during the
school year and winter months.
The summer evening hour dial-a-ride demonstration project
was initiated through an option agreement that was specified in
our original dial-a-ride contract. Since we have now exhausted
that option period, it would be appropriate to amend the dial-a-
ride contract to provide for the continued operation of our
evening hour service through the remainder of this year. (See
attachment #2) I have also included in this amendment an option
arrangement for the City to continue the evening hour program
through the remainder of the contract period if the program is
successful or reduce the service hours as deemed appropriate by
the City.
The estimated cost for the extended service hours is
approximately $1500 per vehicle/per month. There is adequate
funding within our Dial-A-Ride budget to continue funding the
demonstration project through the remainder of this year. If the
City council concurs with the findings of the Energy and
Transportation Committee, it would be appropriate at this time to
recommend approval of Dial-A-Ride Contract Amendment #3 extending
the Dial-A-Ride evening service hours through the remainder of
this year. In December, the program . will be re-evaluated to
determine if it should be continued on a year round basis.
Alternatives•
1. Move to approve Dial-A-Ride Contract Amendment #3 extending
the evening service hours through the remainder of this
year.
2. Move to end the Dial-A-Ride summer service hours effective
September 7, 1987.
3. Move to expand the Dial-A-Ride evening hours on a year
around basis at this time.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
Action Requested:
Move to approve Dial-A-Ride Contract Amendment #3 extending
the Dial-A-Ride summer service hours through the remainder of
this year.
Attachment B1
Dial-A-Ride Summer Hours 6: 00 PM - 8:30 PM ,Q G
Ridership Report
June
DAY DATE DAZ1Y Tc^2_9
Monday 6/08 1
Tuesdav 6/09 5
Wednesday 6/10 3
Thursday 6/11 4
Friday 6/12 2
Monday 6/15 3
Tuesday 6/16 8
Wednesday 6/17 2
Thursday 6/1B 1
Friday 6/19 4
Monday 6/22 3 -
Tuesday 6/237
Wednesday 6/24 7
Thursday 6/25 11
Friday 6/26 2
Monday 6/29 3
Tuesday 6/30 2
*Total For Month 68
Ave. Eventing Ridership 4 Dass. trips
July
Day Date Daily Total _
Wednesday 7/1 13
Thursday 7/2 9
Friday 7/3 closed
Monday 7/6 2
Tuesday 7/7 4
Wednesday 7/8 2
Thursday 7/9 3
Friday 7/10 9
Monday 7/13 11
Tuesday - 7/14 12
Wednesday 7/15 4
Thursday 7/16 6
Friday 7/17 5
Monday 7/20 7
Tuesday 7/21 4
Wednesday 7/22 8
Thursday 7/23 10
Friday 7/24 10
Monday 7/27 5
Tuesday 7/28 1
Wednesday 7/29 10
Thursday 7/30 7
Friday 7/31 7
Monthly Total 149
Ave. Evening Ridership - 6.7 pass. trips
Attachment $2
AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE
SHAKOPEE DIAL-A-RIDE
SERVICE CONTRACT AGREEMENT
1. Amend Section 7. Consideration to read: The contractor
shall submit requests for reimbursement of eligible actual
costs not to exceed $405,865 for the contract period. The
City will in turn examine and approve such requests as
deemed appropriate and submit them to the Regional Transit
Board for actual reimbursement.
2. Amend Section 12 g. Service Package to read: Effective
September 8, 1987 the contractor shall provide a third
vehicle (minimum 12 passenger - maximum 24 passenger) . The _
charge for this vehicle will be based on a twelve (12) hour
day for (5) days per week at the contract rate of $17.90 per
hour.
The City reserves the right to reduce the service hours of
this vehicle to an 8 hour day upon a 15 day written notice
to the contractor.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
By:
It' s Mayor
By:
It's City Administrator
By:
It' s City Clerk
DATE:
KARE KASS
By:
It' s Director of Operations
DATE:
C / -J
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator V U
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Home Energy Check-Up/Minnegasco Project Extension
DATE: August 26, 1987
Introduction•
On August 4, 1987 the Shakopee City Council authorized the
appropriate City officials to enter into a Home Energy Check-Up
Program Agreement with Minnegasco. This agreement outlined the
responsibilities of the City in regard to the Home Energy Check-
Up Program. The agreement also guaranteed funding for the
participation of 150 homes in the project and a financial
commitment from Minnegasco in the amount of $80.00 per household.
On August 19, 1987 Minnegasco officials contacted me and
questioned whether or not the city of Shakopee was interested in
extending this contract to a two year period with the same
conditions as specified -for the first year of funding.
Background:
On August 20, 1987 the Energy and Transportation committee
discussed this issue in greater detail. It was the consensus of
the Committee that it would be a prudent move for the City to
take advantage of Minnegasco' s offer and extend the project to a
two year period. Essentially, Minnegasco' s offer would allow
the City of Shakopee to offer 300 energy audits over a two year
period with funding provided by Minnegasco in the amount of
$80.00 per household. The amount of funding provided by
Minnegasco is sufficient to cover the costs of the City
associated with implementing and managing the program. The
Energy and Transportation Committee also stated that because the
Minnegasco Programs are only offered once to a community, the
City should proceed with the one year extension at this time.
At the August 20, 1987 meeting the Energy and Transportation
Committee moved to recommend to City Council that the Home Energy
Check-Up Agreement between the City of Shakopee and Minnegasco be
amended to extend it for a second year at this time. If City
Council concurs with the recommendation of the Energy and
Transportation Committee it would be appropriate at this time to
authorize the appropriate City officials to amend the existing
Home Energy Check-Up Program Agreement with Minnegasco and extend -
the project to a two year period. Approval of this action would
provide for a two year Home Energy Check-Up Program to audit 150
homes in each year of the program with funding provided by
Minneagasco in the amount of $80 per household.
Alternatives•
1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to amend the Home
Energy Check-Up Program Agreement with Minnegasco and extend
it to a second year.
2. Do not extend the existing Home Energy Check-Up Program
Agreement with Minnegasco.
3 . Table action on this issue pending further information from
staff.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative 41.
Action Requested:
Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to amend
the existing Home Energy Check-Up Program Agreement with
Minnegasco and extend it a second year.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Registered Land Survey
DATE: August 25, 1987
Introduction•
The City has purchased land in Block 29 of the original plat
for the City. The City has prepared a registered land survey to
be recorded with the County. At their meeting on August 6, 1987
the Planning Commission passed a motion recommending approval of
the registered land survey.
Background•
The City has purchased the land located in Block 29 and
approved transfer of tracts A & C to the City BRA. This transfer
of land allows the HRA to aggregate parcels to promote potential
development in the downtown.
At the request of the City Attorney and County Surveyor a
registered land survey has been prepared by the City because
individual lots have been split. The registered land survey will
not affect any public right of way or public utilities.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the
registered land survey.
Action Requested:
Offer and pass resolution #2780 approving the registered
land survey for . parts of Block 29, Original Plat, City of
Shakopee.
RESOLUTION NO. 2780
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REGISTERED LAND SURVEY
OF PARTS OF BLOCK 29, ORIGINAL PLAT, CITY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did
approve the Registered Land Survey of parts of Block 29, original
Plat on August 6, 1987; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all
things.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that the Registered Land Survey of parts of Block 29,
Original Plat, described as follows:
That part of Lots 1 through 5, inclusive of Block 29 0£ the
City of Shakopee, Scott County,. Minnesota described as
follows:
Beginning at the southwest corner of said Block 29;
thence South 89027102" East, Bearing Assumed, along the
southerly line of said Block 29, a distance of 299.60
feet to the southeast corner of said Block 29; thence
North 0005' 15" East, along the easterly line of said
Block 29, a distance of 9.74 feet; thence northwesterly
326.14 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the
south having a central angle of 6002 ' 34" a radius of
3092.36 feet and a chord bearing of North 66044' 44"
West, to the westerly line of said Block 29; thence
South 0002138" West, along said west line of Block 29,
a distance of 136.44 feet to the point of beginning.
Together with that part of Lots 1 through 5, inclusive, and
Lots 8 through 10, inclusive, of Block 29 of the City of
Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota described as follows:
Commencing at the southeast corner of said Block 29;
_ thence North 0005 ' 15" East, along the east line of said
Block 29, a distance of 9.74 feet to the point of -
beginning of the land to be described; thence
northwesterly 326.14 feet along a non-tangential curve
concave to the south having a central angle of 60
02 ' 34" , a radius of 3092.36 feet and chord bearing of
North 66044144" West, to the westerly line of said Block
29, said curve hereinafter called Line "A" ; thence
North 0002 ' 38" East, along said westerly line of Block
29, a distance of 70.22 feet to its intersection with a
line lying 66. 00 feet northerly of and running parallel
with said line said parallel line hereinafter called
lIne "B"; thence southeasterly along said Line "B" , a
distance of 258.87 feet to its intersection with the
) 0 ¢
west line of Lot 5 said Block 29; thence South 0004106'-
West,
°04' 06"West, along said west line of Lot 5, a distance of 8.79
feet to its intersection with Line "C", said Line "C"
being 58.00 feet northerly of and parallel with said
Line "A"; thence southeasterly along said Line "C" a
distance of 66.12 feet to its intersection with said
east line of Block 29; thence South 0005115" West,
along said east line of Block 29, a distance of 64. 49
feet to the point of beginning.
be and the same hereby is approved and adopted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk be and
the same are hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Registered Land Survey.
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
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO.
7423 N Obs IS"E 56 Coaoee •�
Ir ,
CV
4 -
v � /
�p 0
- - -�U NCo4' �l"E Nej
or
ILIle
Ki
6 0 1�,
ILIy
0 i
i Jr fn
iL
48.7Z 141.94 NONOZ'se'E
N O'Oi'3E5•" E �nzai w P.-=
L ... 'i _. . �_.�_ : c
The so,EA 9ne of $(ocA Z9, OF THE CITY OF bdAROPEE >0 0 30 a
/a assumed to have a bearing of K-!89'37'02'W'
MEMO TO: John K. .Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Study Regarding Impact of Commercial Recreation
Development on the City.
DATE: August 25, 1987
Introduction•
At their meeting on August 20, 1987 the Planning Commission
passed a motion recommending to the city Council that a special
study be initiated to evaluate and recommend solutions to the
problems created by our changing environment, namely, but not
limited to the recreation/entertainment facilities within and
surrounding our City. This study should be focused on, but not
limited to, issues such as increased traffic, noise, crime, etc.
Background-
During the last three months the Planning Commission has
been reviewing the conditional use permit application for the
Starwood Music Center. The Planning Commission has held three
continued public hearings on the proposal and at their meeting on
August 20 approved the conditional use permit. Throughout- the
public hearings Shakopee residents raised concerns anout the
affects of existing commercial recreational development and the
proposed Starwood Music Center on the community. After taking
action on the conditional use permit application the Planning
Commission passed a motion recommending a study be undertaken to
determine these affects on the City and recommend courses of
action which can be taken to alleviate potential problems.
Staff Comments:
A memo dated May 14, 1987 from Dennis Kraft outlined the
suggested work program for the Planning Department for the next
year. This memo pointed out that the City Planning staff does
not have the time available to complete the work program. If
this study is to be undertaken it would be necessary for the City to
hire a consultant to complete the work.
The above referenced memo contained as part of the suggested
work program updating of the City's Comprehensive Plan during the
winter and spring of 1987/88. The staff suggests incorporating
this study into the work program for updating of the City' s
Comprehensive Plan.
Alternatives:
1. Pass a motion to not undertake a study on the impacts of
commercial recreational development on the City.
2. Pass a motion approving the study and directing staff to
advertise for a consultant to complete the study.
3 . Pass a motion requiring the study be incorporated into the
work program for updating the City' s Comprehensive Plan.
Action Requested:
Offer and pass a motion to proceed with one of the above
outlined alternatives.
MEMO TO: Mayor .and City Coucnil
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Gene and Gwen Berg's Back-Flow Value
DATE: August 24, 1987
Introduction
The Shakopee City Council, at its July 7, 1987 meeting authorized
the City to pay 75% of the cost of installing a sanitary sewer
back-flow value in the private service line of Gene and Gwen Berg
at 1601 Shakopee Avenue. Council made this decision because the
Berg's are at a low point on the sewer line and have experienced
three backups in 12 years.
construction completed
The City was provided with three estimates by Gene and Gwen Berg.
The low estimated was Wayne Burville Plumbing at an estimated
amount of $745.00 and the high bid was $810.00 by Aarons
Plumbing. Mr. Burville has completed the work and submitted his
itemized bill for labor and materials which exceeded the estimate
by $239.56 (final bill $984.56 ) .
I have had LeRoy Houser, who inspected the installation review
the materials in the bill and the hourly rates charged by Mr.
Burville (attached) . The materials are reasonable and the hourly
rates charged by Mr. Burville and his assistant are the present
market rates. I reviewed with Gwen Berg the amount of time spent
on the job and she said that it was a realistic estimate of the
time spent. Mr. Houser said that the overrun was fairly typical
of all plumbers because they charge by the hour.
Alternatives
1. Reaffirm the City's earlier decision to pay 75% of the
increased installation costs at $984.56 for a City share of
$738. 42.
2. Pay only 75% of the original estimate of $745.00 or $558.75.
This would mean the Berg's would have to pay the difference
or negotiate some reduced settlement with the plumber.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative No. 1. The dollar difference is not
significant, and payment of 75% of the bill is consistant with
Council's original intent.
Action Requested
Authorize the appropriate City officials to pay $738.42 to Wayne
Burville Plumbing for 75% of the installation costs of a sanitary
sewer back-flow preventer at 1601 Shakopee Avenue.
JKA/jms
Wayne Burville Plumbing N° 008561
11037 Eastview Circle � p
i esakoyee. Minnesota 55379 Date 19 LiL
! / Phone:612445-4173 G
PH:H.41j5— S/
Name W.
Address /G o / a�` � Zip: S`—
I Unit:Name PH.
Address D Q City
If Type of Work / yep=Z
OTT Descnptlon Price Amount
I
i
i
i
1
1
Total Materials /7o
Houm Labor a / -Sp %Rate�'�,Sp J7/.P Totel Labor Y
a G ��• �� '� otsl Amount Due nID
i Received by:
Notice: Please read consumer information provided on reverse side.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND READ:
Because of changes in the Minnesota state laws contractors are
required by law to furnish owners with the following information;
i
CONTRACTOR NOTICE TO OWNER
Persons or companies furnishing labor or materials for the im-
provement of real propertymay enforce a lien upon the improved
land If they are not paid for their contributions,even If such parties
i
1
have no direct contractual relationship with the owner. —
i# Minnesota law permits the owner to withhold from his contractor
7
so much of the contract price as may be necessary to meet the
demands of all other Iain claimants, pay directly such liens and
3 deduct the cost thereof from the contract price or withhold such
f amounts from his contractor until the expiration of 120 days from
1 the completion of such improvement, unless the contractor fun
nishes to the owner waivers of claims for mechanic's liens signed
by persons who furnished any labor or material for the improve.
ment and who provided the owner with timely notice.
Terms: All accounts are due and payable upon receipt of this
invoice. Billing accounts 30 days past due will be charged .50%
Interest per month which Is an annual rate of 6% simple interest,
allowed under the Minnesota usery law for this type of account
icontract with homeowners.
iBusiness and commercial accounts will be charged 1.5% per
month interest which is a annual rate of 18% except where
specifically prohibited by applicable law.
I
11
� I �L
h�o-Q-d
P - Y " Ab 5 fO� ,. p .- Jai-R- 33 •
- " ABs S.� 90a (. .91 / 3 .8;�-
BS S. $3
! - X 2 ABS S. / !
Abs /•s/
ABs �-t 45 89
a ABS
/a [
I �x a" ABs P syr
/ • � a.e.e�+-e-Q yce-2s_ ccs-e.�. �c. �s
15 � � �j ca-,.-.�--^� �r"•`",� @ 3• � 2 45'3 ��
ate
2� a -Q c
P-�-
�o- -2z-
a / a �- � � 7•S o S9/, a5
i
o "I ao y 4cl� /a . 00 aog . sp
7 P
7/ l3
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
SUBJECT: vierling Drive through Hauer' s 4th Addition
Resolution No. 2780
DATE: August 19, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is a feasibility report for public improvements within
Hauer ' s 4th Addition and Resolution No . 2780 approving the
project and calling for bids.
BACKGROUND:
In addition to the feasibility report and resolution, there are
two attachments to this staff memo. Attachment A indicated the
streets within Hauer ' s 4th Addition which have all public
improvements completed. Attachment B indicates those streets
which have been studied and considered in the feasibility report.
Throughout planning and plan development of this subdivision, it
was anticipated that all public improvements would be constructed
by the developer with appropriate City cost sharing addressed in
the developer ' s agreement. The developer ' s agreement also
provides for the option of the developer petitioning the City to
make the improvements and assess the benefitted property. The
developer is requesting the City to make the improvements and
through the petition process has waived all rights to public
hearing and rights to assessment appeal .
At this point, plans and specifications for the improvements are
complete and at Mn/DOT for review. By adopting Resolution
No. 2780, Council will be approving the plans and calling for a
bid letting date in advance of state aid approval . Although
unlikely , this fast tracking procedure may result in a change
order to accommodate unforeseen state aid requirements.
The plans have incorporated a few innovative design elements
relating to storm drainage, erosion control, turf establishment,
and landscaping. The plans and specifications are on file in my
office and I will be available prior to the September 1 , 1987
Council meeting if any Council members wish to view the plans.
Of course, the plans will be available at the meeting if Council
wishes to review at the table.
Vierling Drive
August 19 , 1987
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 2780.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No . 2780 , A Resolution Receiving a Report,
Ordering an Improvement and Approval of Plans and Specifications,
and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for 13th Avenue, Jasper Road,
and Limestone Drive, Project No. 1987-12 and move its adoption.
KA/pmp
MEM2780
§% G v
LU
- «yam
Ft
��'` \ 2A.
- -
- � �
._A0461 � D
20 ri•• { gw tri '>} 1
z
4
Si
IN
Lu
ZZ,
• : i i en- t QED vas _ t;
`r 4 ft
_ _ �r8✓.r� _ ;-sem•—_
X13 . LZ
Nitw
ATT/Li t1 M � Ai T R
RESOLUTION NO. 2780
A Resolution Receiving A Report
Ordering An Improvement And Approval
Of Plans And Specifications
And Ordering Advertisement For Bids
Roadway, Watermain, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Sewer Main
13th Avenue, Jasper Road, and Limestone Drive
Project No. 1987-12
WHEREAS, a report has been prepared by Ken Ashfeld, City
Engineer , with reference to the improvement of 13th Avenue ,
Jasper Road, and Limestone Drive within Hauer' s 4th Addition and
this report was received by the Council on September 1 , 1987 .
WHEREAS, the Council has considered the improvements of said
13th Avenue, Jasper Road, and Limestone Drive within Hauer' s 4th
Addition in accordance with the report and the assessment of
abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the
improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an
estimated total cost of the improvements of $949 ,000.00.
WHEREAS, the Council has received a petition dated June 1 ,
1987 signed by all owners of the property abutting said improve-
ments waiving their right to a public hearing and their right to
assessment appeal .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . Such improvements are hereby ordered as proposed in the
report dated August 20, 1987 .
2. Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer is hereby designated as the
engineer for this improvement.
3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of
the 1987-12 Public Improvement Program.
4 . Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on
file and of record in the Office of the City Engineer, are hereby
approved.
5. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in
the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertise-
ment for bids upon the making of such improvements under such
approved plans and specifications. The Advertisement for Bids
shall be published for three weeks, shall specify the work to be
done, shall state that bids will be received by the City Clerk
until 10:00 A. M. , on September 18, 1987 , at which time they will
be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by
the City Clerk and Engineer, or their designated party , will then
be tabulated, and will be considered by the Council at 7.:00 P.M. ,
or thereafter on October 6 , 1987 , in the Council Chambers, and
that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the
City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier' s check,
bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of
Shakopee for not less than five (5%) percent of the amount of the
Bid.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this _ day of ,
19_•
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this _ day
of , 19 _
City Attorney
�1
FEASIBILITY REPORT
FOR
SANITARY SEWER, WATER SYSTEM,
STORM SEWER AND STREETS
WITHIN HAUER'S 4TH ADDITION
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
I herebey certify that this plan, specification, or report was
prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
duly Resistered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State
of Minnesota.
Date — Registration No. 16185.
AUGUST 1987
118
INTRODUCTION
This report will address sanitary sewer, water system, storm
sewer, and street improvements within Hauer' s 4th Addition within
the City of Shakopee.
PROJECT AREA
The project area consists of Vierling Drive and portions of
Limestone Drive and Jasper Road within Hauer' s 4th Additions.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
The proposed improvements consist of sanitary sewer, watermain,
and streets on Jasper Road and Limestone Drive . - Proposed
improvements along Vierling Drive consist of sanitary sewer,
trunk watermain , storm sewer, storm water retention and a
collector street of nine ton design and urban , four—lane
characteristics. Also proposed along Vierling Drive is concrete
sidewalk, boulevard trees and street lighting . At the
intersection of Vierling Drive with County Road 16, turn lanes
and bypass lanes will be constructed on C. R. 16. Vierling Drive
carries Municipal State Aid designation and is classified as a
collector street.
ESTIMATED COSTS AND COST SHARING
The following is a summary of estimated costs for each major item
of the proposed improvements.
Sanitary Sewer
The estimated cost for the sanitary sewer is as follows:
Construction Cost $49,000.00
Contingencies (10%) $ 4 ,900.00 -
Subtotal $53,900.00
Indirect Costs (25%) $13 . 500 .00
TOTAL $67 ,400.00
The costs attributable will be 100% assessed to the benefitting
lots within Hauer' s 4th Addition.
1
Water Svste.
The water system is a 16 inch trunk facility with the following
estimated costs.
Construction Cost $126,800.00
Contingencies (10%) $__12.700.00
Subtotal $139 , 500.00
Indirect Costs (25%) $ 14,400.00
TOTAL $174,400.00
Since this is a trunk facility , Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission has a policy of paying for all oversizing costs. The
project cost will have the following estimated participation.
Assessed Cost $78,500.00
SPUC Cost $95,900.00
The water system trunk charge will be paid by the developer
directly to Shakopee Public Utilities.
Storm Sewer 6 Storm Water Retention
The proposed storm sewer will serve Vierling Drive as well as
adjacent developable property. State aid will fund that portion
of the storm sewer costs attributable to Vierling Drive. The
amount of the state aid eligibility will be calculated by the
hydraulics department of Mn/DOT during plan review . The
remaining portion of the cost will be assessed to the benefitting
lots of Hauer' s 4th Addition.
A storm water retention pond is proposed along the south side of
Vierling Drive . This detention facility will maintain pre-
development runoff discharge rates until which time runoff can be
accommodated by the Shakopee Bypass. At the time that Mn/D0t
permits discharge to the bypass ditches and further development
is proposed south of Vierling Drive, the detention facility can
be eliminated.
The estimated cost of the storm sewer system is as follows:
Construction Cost $105,800.00
Contingencies (10%) $ 10.600.00
Subtotal $116,400.00
Indirect Costs (25%) $ 24, 100.00
TOTAL $145,500.00
The amount to be funded by state aid and the amount to be
assessed will be determined by Mn/DOT.
2
r (�
Streets
The estimated costs for street construction of Jasper Road and
Limestone Drive is as follows:
Construction Cost $17,200.00
Contingencies (10%) $ 1 .700.00
Subtotal $18,900.00
Indirect Costs (25%) $ 4.700.00
TOTAL $23,600.00
This cost will be 100% assessed against the abutting, benefitted
lots within Hauer' s 4th Addition.
The estimated costs for 13th Avenue is as follows:
Construction Cost $391 ,400.00
Contingencies (10%) $ 34, 100.00
Subtotal $430,500.00
Indirect Costs (25%) $107 -600.00
TOTAL $538,100.00
The City has a policy of funding that portion of the street costs
attributable to functional classification. In addition, the City
agreed to pay 100% of that portion of 13th Avenue that is not
abutting Hauer' s 4th Addition which is approximately the easterly
900 feet. All City participation will be funded by state aid.
The street improvement costs will be shared as follows :
City Cost $398, 100.00
Assessed Cost $140,000.00
AgSFSSMRMTS
The developer of Hauer' s 4th Addition petitioned for the proposed
improvements waiving all rights of public hearings and assessment
appeal rights . The estimated project costs include assumed
contingency and indirect costs. It is anticipated that all
improvements will be made prior to adopting assessments,
therefore, actual costs can be assessed.
The developer provided for the cost of plan development.
Therefore, when final assessment amounts are calculated, plan
development will not appear. For the purposes of determining the
feasible nature of this project, all costs have been included,
proposed as well as costs already absorbed by the developer.
3
SUMMAR
The proposed improvements are feasible and will result in an
improvement to the benefitting properties within Hauer' s 4th
Addition as well as to the general motoring public.
4
m t• n
f tt' 4
�•Y
•°r + _.., Gz .rte' ���'� r _ '��_ se
N —T
!� � c6� " .1' T Y � •;• �- _ to
c-ruaY 42FA
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Downtown Streetscape Project
Prospective Change Orders
DATE: August 26, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
There are currently three change orders that are in the process
of administration by the Engineering Department for the Downtown
Streetscape Project . Change Order No . 1 consists of a
clarification of selected alternative bids and provides for a
review of the alternate bids on Phase I before proceeding with
Phase II. There is no change in contract amount due to Change
Order No. 1 . Change Order No. 2 consists of the work done to the
old Pelham Hotel site to provide for a temporary parking area.
The cost of this work has not been finalized as of yet but should
be a relatively small cost . Change Order No. 3 consists of
proposed revisions to underground conduit work included in the
contract. Change Order No. 3 is the focus of this memorandum.
BACKGROUND:
The existing electrical system in the downtown area includes a
substation located next to Community Services and primary routes
along the alley north of City Hall and along Fuller and
Sommerville . The distribution lines run along the alley
alignments and connect to the various users. Attached is a rough
sketch indicating the primary routes.
The contracts for the downtown project include installing conduit
to accommodate the future undergounding of distribution lines
within the alleys. Conduits will be installed across the streets
at the alley locations. The purpose of these installations are
to prevent future street cuts when actually undergrounding the
wiring. This .protection is relatively inexpensive because the
conduit is for crossing the street only . Although access
structures are contracted for these conduit crossings, it is
desireable to increase the size of these structures to adequately
handle the wiring and personnel.
The main purpose of this memo is to discuss the merits of
providing conduit for the future undergrounding of the primary
runs on Sommerville and Fuller. Unlike the alley crossings,
putting in the conduit is not inexpensive due to the following.
• Borings under the railroad tracks
• Size of conduit to accommodate the primary runs
• Much longer runs which are longitudinal with the street
versus crossing the street
Downtown Streetscape
August 26 , 1987
Page 2
The estimated cost for installing the conduit on Sommerville and
Fuller from the south side of 1st Avenue to the north side of 3rd
Avenue (existing project limits) is $40,000.00 per street.
I see three main issues when considering the merits of installing
the conduit with this project ;
1 . The cost effectiveness of installing the conduit now
versus a future street out ; and,
2. If installed, how long before the conduit is actually
used; and,
3. Aesthetics of the in-place primary facilities.
1 . Cost Effectiveness
It is the posture of the City to plan for the future as much
as possible to avoid added costs and avoid cutting into new
streets. This is evidenced by the conduit installed in the
Second Avenue parking lot, alley crossings and the City ' s
five-year no street cut policy.
In the case of the proposed conduit, trench settlement is
not a problem as with deeper utilities. A narrow trench is
dug to a 3 '-2" depth, conduit set and then poured with
concrete . The remaining backfill is road base and
surfacing.
The main problem is the aesthetics of a patch. The patch
could be obliterated by a seal coat across the entire street
at a cost of approximately $1 ,000 per block. Since we seal
coat a street about every seven years, the cost of trench
restoration would depend on the place in time of the seal
coat life-cycle.
2. Conduit Use
There are no plans for undergrounding the primary line on
Fuller. There are no firm proposals for the undergrounding
of the primary line on Sommerville, but it appears this work
would be logical due to the bypass work proposed in 1990.
Also, the primary line along the alley north of City Hall
will need relocating due to the bypass project.
3. Aesthetics
The primary line on Fuller is not too bad aesthetically
because it is quite high and not so obtrusive. The line on
Sommerville is on older poles and closer to the ground
making it much more visible.
Downtown Streetscape
August 26, 1987
Page 3
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
As mentioned previously, when the minibypass is constructed, the
primary line on Sommerville will be affected but most notably,
about four blocks of primary in the alley north of City Hall will
need to be removed. It seems logical to underground this line
but the problem is location. Traffic will be maintained on 1st
Avenue until the bypass is complete so this is not an option.
This memo suggests that the alley between 1st and 2nd is a good
location . This proposed location would provide for the
undergrounding of the primary line, the distribution line within
these alleys and possibly the restoration/reconstruction of these
alleys as part of the bypass project. To provide for this
proposal, the conduit crossings between 1st and 2nd should be
increased in size to accommodate primary lines.
Much of the information contained in this memo is the result of
consultation with Lou VanHout, Shakopee Public Utilities Manager.
His assistance has been very helpful and much appreciated.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . As a minimum, . I recommend that the access structures that
were contracted for be increased in size to adequately
handle future undergrounding of distribution a= primary
runs. The estimated cost of this change is $15, 172.00.
2. It is also recommended that the conduit crossings between
1st and 2nd be increased in size to accommodate primary line
installation when the bypass is constructed at an estimated
cost of $4 ,500 .00.
3. It is alos recommended that conduit of size to accommodate a
primary line be installed on Sommerville between 1st and
3rd. The estimated cost of this installation is $40,000.00.
The actual cost has yet to be determined because Engineering
is still exploring the possibility of using an abandoned
storm sewer line under the tracks as a conduit run versus
boring a casing pipe. If this can be done, we estimate a
savings of approximately $5 ,000 .00.
4. It is also recommended that if Council wishes to have
conduit installed on Fuller to accommodate that primary
line , direction be given to staff. Due to the cost and
uncertainty of when this installation would be used, staff
is not recommending this installation with this project.
Downtown Streetscape
August 26, 1987
Page 4
SUMMARY:
Change Order No. 1 is a result of Council action awarding the
project with certain alternate bids and will be coming to Council
for final approval . There is no increase in contract cost as a
result of this Change Order. Change Order No. 2 is a result of
previous Council action which leases the old Pelham Hotel site
for parking. The increase in contract cost is not determined at
this time. Engineering is using contract items where appropriate
and "time and material" items in an effort to minimize cost. It
is anticipated that the costs will be modest. Change Order No. 3
provides for added conduit improvements to accommodate future
electrical undergrounding . Based upon the aforestated
recommendations , the increase in contract cost would be
approximately $59,672.00.
It should be noted that Change Orders No. 1 , 2, 3 are not the
result of unforeseen site conditions but would result in
increased project assets.
REQUESTED ACTION:
No Council action is necessary at this time regarding Change
Order No. 1 and No. 2 but will come to Council at a later date
for final approval.
Since final costs are not determined on Change Order No. 3 , final
approval is not being requested at this time. The following
action is being requested:
Move to direct the City Engineer to cause the installation
of changed conduit installations and the addition of conduit
on Sommerville Street between 1st Avenue and 3rd Avenue as
addressed in the City Engineer's August 26 , 1987 memorandum.
KA/pmp
STREETS
D O G
G -
`l G _ p 0 l Q J
CD m o m a �• NCD
CDc o _. ,n cn
cn Ul Cn (D
F S�
Q CD mo O m
In 0. Q D
O
Q n
— g Atwood � o " rn
a cnTQ
CD I 0 N =- :E
CD
cDuu Fuller -- ---- __ _ Ln
c 0
CD rn 0 � o
25
Holmes :� m ° o C:° °
m
O n `— — D g �• m
UJ _ Q VT
� Lewis e� m 0 o
o
CD cno :
:E cn O
SOmmerville�-,=—� — _ _ ---
OM
N°�r
Q i CD
U)
o > > `� m
m (D
0
� � m
c � o Nj
n � r
i N m �
F s
K j F
r g
8d
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Purchase of Used Investigative Vehicle
DATE: August 26, 1987
INTRODUCTION
Council authorized $7,700 in 1987 capital equipment funding
to replace a vehicle used for investigative activity.
BACKGROUND
On April 28, 1987, council authorized the purchase of a used
vehicle, however the purchase was not completed due to a
mechanical problem.
The department has obtained three quotations for the purchase
of a used vehicle. We would also request council to declare
the existing vehicle surplus property so that it may be sold
at auction. The vehicle should not be transferred to another
city department.
Ouotations
185 Ford LTD - 48,000 miles $5035.00
'85 Oldsmobile Ciera - 49,000 miles $5700.00
'85 Chevrolet Impala - 54,000 miles $5350 .00
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize staff to purchase from North Star Auto Auction a
1985 Ford LTD at a cost of $5035. Declare 1984 Oldsmobile
four-door sedan surplus property.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Authorize staff to purchase from North Star Auto Auction a
1985 Ford LTD at a cost of $5035. Declare 1984 Oldsmobile
four-door sedan surplus property.
RNNEAPLIS
ORTHSTAR
unownuxswc.
NORTHSTAR AUTO AUCTION, INC. A Subsidiary of Anglo American Auto Auctions Inc.
August 27, 1987
Mr. John DuBois
Shakopee Police Department
Shakopee, M 55379
Dear Mr. DuBois:
The following vehicles were submitted for bids on surveillance
vehicle:
85 Ford LTD Serial No. 1FABP3937FG175662
48,000 miles Bid: $5035.00
85 Olds Ciera Serial No. IG3AJ19EXFD393318
49,000 miles Bid: $5700.00
85 Chev 7mapla serial No. lGlBL69ZOFY133784
54,000 miles Bid: $5350.00
S' ly,
J
M� F10RTHSTAR AU'1C) AUCTION
JA/kvb
P.O. Box 257 • Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 9 612/445-5544
OH2O96 SHKO37 AUG 27 1987 08:07:29 06/27/87 08:07:35
w
TXT
LIC/NTG395. LIY/87. LIT/PC.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
129 E IST SHAKOPEE 55379
VIN/103AR69A6EM444055. VYR/84. VMA/OLDS. VMO/4DCSU.
EXM/JUL. STICKER:06516158. -
_____________________________________________________ _____________________S_
OH2O97 SHKO37 AUG 27 1987 08:07:29 06/27/87 06:07:54
NO HIT
RMR LIC/NT0395
______________________________________________________________________________.
5u12 pl a 3
MEMO
TO: John Anderson 8. City Council
FROM: Public Works Dept.
SUBJECT: Capital Equipment Purchases
DATE: August 28, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
The 1987 Capital equipment budget provides for the purchase
of a 2 1/2 ton truck, equipped with a sander, plow, underbody
blade and a propane conversion. The truck, which was ordered in
January, was delivered last week. We have received quotations
for most of the accessories and would like to order this
equipment shortly, in order to install it before the snow
equipment is needed this fall.
We had budgeted $42,000 for the complete truck and
accessories, and the truck was delivered for $29,749, which will
provide approximately $12, 250 for the snow equipment, radio, and
LPG conversion. We will have enough money budgeted for equipping
this truck with the necessary equipment.
BACKGROUND:
PLOW: We have again proposed to install a plastic
(polypropolene) plow on this vehicle. This is the same type of
plow that we have mounted on truck Units #102 , #103 , and our Case
front end loader. We have found that these poly plows are very
durable, and push snow much easier because the polypropolene
offers very little frictional resistance, subsequently using less
truck horsepower, and using less fuel, and not working the
engines as hard as the conventional all-steel plows. This is
especially noticeable with the heavy, wet, slush type snowfalls.
This type of a plow is a "one of a kind" type of purchase, and
generally costs about $1000 more than the conventional all-steel
type plows. However, the quoted price we have received,
($5785.00) is $193.00 less than we paid for the last plow in
1985.
Quotes received:
Boyum Equip. Co. Frink Model 4511 Polymar plow
Lakeville, Mn. 3" Hydr. lift cylinder
$5785.00 29" Busting hitch (female mounted on
plow.
Itasca Equip. Co. Wausau 45" X 11' hydr.reversible
Savage, Mn 3" lift cylinder.
$5000.00 29" Busting hitch (female mounted)
(This is a conventional steel-type plow
shown for comparative purposes, with
last years quoted price. )
p
SANDER:
Quotations were received from several distributors for
sanders to mount on the truck. (City installation)
We have been dividing our fleet with roll-type and spinner
type sanders. Each type of sander is used for different
applications, as required. The roll sander drops a heavier
pattern of sand/salt material, but limits its distribution to
only the width of the truck. The spinner sander actually
"throws" the material, but this pattern is much lighter in
density, but is excellent for center line sanding. This truck is
scheduled for a spinner type sander.
Quotes received:
Itasca Equip. Co. Amer. Roads Model TG505 $1628
Boyum Equip. Co. Central Model 5-330RL $1750
Ruffridge-Johnson Fox Model 237 $1350
The distributors will charge $350 for installation if we decide
to have the sanders installed at their shops because of the
workload in our shop.
UNDERBODY BLADE:
All of our heavy trucks have been equipped with underbody
blades since 1973. As we have placed new trucks into service, we
have simply transferred the blade from the older truck onto the
replacement vehicle, because they are fairly durable. We use
these blades all year long, for leveling gravel, bituminous
material, snow/ice, etc. This underbody blade purchase is the
first blade replacement that we have made in 14 years. This type
of installation is a fixed angle, one way blade. There are more
expensive blades available that are reversible, but we have never
needed the reversible feature.
Quotes received:
Root Model F-5 Ruffridge-Johnson Equip. $2484
Monroe Model 10 Boyum Equip. Co. $2415
Both distributors will charge $350 for installation of these
blades at their shop. We would only use this option if our shop
cannot handle the workload.
This truck will be converted to propane as soon as we feel that
the gas engine has been sufficiently broken in. The price that
we have from our propane engine supplier is the same price that
we had in 1985. ($700.00) We will install the equipment
ourselves and use their dynometer for fine tuning the conversion.
The propane conversion will be purchased from Propane Carb &
Turbo Co. of Shakopee, Mn.
We intend to install a low band Motorola 2-way radio in this
vehicle. They have come down considerably in price lately. We
have a quote of $745 .00 from the Motorola Co. We will install
the radio in our shop.
1987 Budget $42,000
- 29,249 Truck
- 500 PTO revision (change order)
--------------
$12,251 Available for accessories
- 2,415 Underbody blade
- 350 Blade mounting ( if needed)
- 1,350 Spinner sander
- 350 Mounting (if needed)
- 5,785 Polymer plow
- 700 LPG conversion
- 745 2-way radio
---------------
$ 556 Balance
RECOMMENDATIONS/ACTION REQUESTED:
PLOW: 1 . Purchase the Frink Model 4511 Polymer hydraulic
reversible truck plow from Boyum Equipment Co.
for the quoted price of $ 5785.00.
SANDER: 2. Purchase the Fox Model 237 spinner sander from
Ruffridge-Johnson Equipment Co. of Mpls. , for
quoted price of $1350.00.
UNDERBODY: 3 . Purchase the Monroe Model 10 underbody blade
Boyum Equipment Co. for the quoted price of
$2415 .00.
LPG KIT: 4. Purchase the propane conversion kit from Propane
Carb & Turbo of Shakopee, Mo. for the quoted
price of $700.00.
RADIO: 5 . Purchase the Maxar Mobil Motorola radio from the
Motorola Corp. of Minnetonka for the quoted
price of $745 .00.
This memo has been reviewed by the Capital Equipment Committee.
llF
N �rororo ro ro ro ro ro � rororororo ro -
Y J MJW W y W Y Y WYYYY Y n N
J J y J o JJJJK M S 0
P0 0 WNNN - M N N aaal : O ~
N • ♦ a J Y P • p ♦ 0 ♦ 0 i NNpNp ♦ JC
O K
O
O T
D
mmmm m m m m m m mmmmm m y
0000 \ \ 0000 m i
N N NNNN N N N N N N NNnpN N D
W w INN , NN N N N N NN w F
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ "0I00 mmO O
J YJJO J m J K y J JMy
J J J JJJ m
m
a
3
0
NN c
z
roro u+ mm r
-um as
oro rororo N!J uu mm PaNniJ wN
J 00 OyyyJ YW
oO Oo +JaPeY
w ee 000eo Oe eb + + NN uWeUaJ PP
O TTTT O O m
DDDDD D
noon w
C 99AA A C D C AAAAA 0
r 2 bWWb r r y 2 m 00000 O
O m yyyy 0 0 m D A n <
0 A
00
2 W 33253 m
DDDR Z 2 \ 0 0 D Z
W «« 0 C P C 22222 y O
mmmm y 1 22222 m O
D 9 f 4 w r mmmmm O A
y D O m A -I WwOOO n
m rrff n 0 C O 00000 D 2
mmmm \ 2 £ Kyyyy 0 m
'K DD_D_ D_ O PI S 2 DDDDa O
2 9 \ 2 S
c mmmm s
9a99 o i I r A
s mwwm n y m
w
m
m m WWWWM m m m W w W W w W 9
O o 1 1 o O O a o o ccccc m -1
c c 0Omm c c c O z c TTTTT s m
T T nwnn 9 T 9 T T 9 rrfrr r 3
3 '3 DDY D' 3 2 3 m P Z mmmmm O T
y w A
y y y y y O y 2
O O T
r
W c
z
_ _ s
n
ro f0 ww" ro N u fm 0 T222 IU Z
m ry o000 to In N e eee a am K
w null 1 u m a.le � uu i z
11111 1 � 1 1 11111 1
W 1Y-- a Y P ObaYY a �+
N N ro'-mm N N a J p -pY- ro �
W
u
P T
O O
i J
2
m T
w s
sn
m
i i i i i i m
n n
F F W N 0 W
N N W m W N W y
N 4 V V U V V V V
W I 1 1 \ 1 1 I I
V '
V m ♦ i ♦ i i ♦ f f f
6 N
c W_
r s
m
1 c
_ LL
e s
PPPPP f it 11111 1 II 1
p of NN P FP NAN�P P d P� N
'oN00 ' II 1111 b I I 10 O
'1 � n AA PPPPP M q O
J AAAMM N PA AAAAA N N NN m
O fPPPP f P Pf PPP P P P fP f
V 11111 I 11 IIIIN 1 I 1 11 1
< eeame a o"� e000_ e m o ee e
z FF Ff'FfF W
p WN 6L666 „
0m VVVVU 0 �+
LL F JJ NWNWN W J
� M WN 00000 = U 6
V ¢¢»> JJJJJ S W W
W KK0 6 as NWWWW 6_ Q
U � W
C 0N0NW JJ a aaa u _
a ^ y h JJ J
L LLLLLLLLLL � » NNNNN r 64 6
w p�oY000 J �a wwwww J L 4
mmm o m JJJJJ o ¢ LLa J� J
.. LLLLL4LL w fF mmoom w Y WN N
w
N
V WNWWW
2 FhFFF 6
U r r rru
UUVVV Q 0
W .ZZ
VVVYY V
y � v n IfLL _____
6 1-1-1-FF 0 6t b
O
WWww WWW6 0K LLLLLLLLLL S F
0 WW YY 00000 ON 3 j
Z Ff hYF
W m »= WWWWW S K
> W 000J0
ZZ 6 W O == W
FFF L SS VY VU
WWWWN W 66Q6 J 6 WW
^wtii„ d00 w wwwww a m z ZZa J
Y JJJJJ L Z L S
P OOOeON PaW FNNNNN _ f mm • bN F
�NN � WN FFrM1h
MNOPa _ bb AN OA dN PP o0 1fQm
Z
J
O_
t
60 WWWmW W mm mWWWO W 0 0 WW 0
Y NNNNN N NN NNNNN N a N NN
6 NNNNN N NN NNNNN N N NN
W F 00000 00 00000 o e o0
6 0 o O
m
O
T O
F 2
V V WWWm .- O0000 W P WW P
NNNNN N ddNNN n M AA M
V AMARA Ih'1 nA AAAAA n A M nn M
_ i NNNNN f N f NN # NNNNW • N • N i N f NN • N
ry roro N roro rororo ro ro ro ro rororo -
u yu u y J uUu W u u U uuu O
N NN N NN !at Y y a � Win n J
N ! UU + a + 00 ♦ m00 • y + 0 + U ♦ N • NNN t F A
2 1
O K
O
O T
D
m pm m pm 'm'm pm\pa 'm mp N I INN m i
ro roro ro roro rororo m ry ro s
N NN N NN NNN N N N NNN F
y Jy J Jy YYy M y J m YYJ m
m
s
z
m
NN 2
N NN JJ NN r Y
N _ WW NroN Nroaro UO � � 00 PWr_ r
N NN NPP ya02 NN NOPP N
o PPO NN o00 oNON PP Oe oo PP o000 W
y WW Nm bmm T T Z SSS
a sa v vo mvo A m m
TT
r AA m yy Oy Oyy p m b T AAA
A KK __ ytiy A Z mo
m m i
m
W yH 9OIY <yy O D m
Kt 2 y r AAA A
r nn b o
m SS CC 000D n 999 S
m
W0 "r 0 2 AAA ^
cc rrr b o00
AA mmm o- - oov z
00 yyy S D O
A
zz o b .nn sm+
m
M
A
W y y m 9 9 W 9 W N 9 y A m W -
9 AA C AA 9.11
r mm r yy rYr T T 'r' Trr
rr mmm m
�I w 4> m4m m m - aWW W
0 44 m90 N < G N <
CC C
CC m0 W
WW y
WW
O
Wb S
p r0 O o0 yoo O J o O 000 D
ro u uio u!u I'o u aro am !u !u !u ro ro
- WU - NNO -o- - r r o 000 yAz
P 1 I I 11 O 1 I o of I 1 1 1 O
-y-
aro -__
p ~� W ua- 4 _ m a 1 1 '_
_ aW N y_ _N N ro y <
a
u
9 i
m o
m
y
3
m 9
W D
I m
I t n n n 1 m
y W W W N
f w w w m m
w I i I
u
W 6
p m + f + +
< w
6 - W
L -
h i
m
O
I 6 N
w P
o i p
N n m
Z d O �md F II f
n M r P f< h f
I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I
O P O d N N add h M N P
S M r N N off F N
1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
F N d d
S N n n M nnl'1 M
J M M N d d n M MMY1 d n f
O P P P P f<f f • f P
I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
M M M <
6 O O e o � o h o W O 000 O F N
2 T
O wb0
m T
¢ 2
_ 0mp
m m ¢ w < < ¢ aaa m w
a a a f x x i a m JJJ a m w
W w Z b O J J p O 66< W O m
L 6 O W W m 6. 6 hF J S
¢
F
m
V
W V
¢ V 6 U = y 2 O
Z F W ¢ Z W O Z U
y w W w > m ¢ W < 6
W J 6 4 W L WW
W =V 2
4 C 2
Z n O V 0 O W 6 ¢6C 2 4 W w
w ¢ Z T O O 666 6 S ¢
> O O W
z _N V Z ¢ ^s yyy J < J
Y F J p ¢ _Q O ___ 6 ZW Z O
J m J W 9 T W
< 4 < a w x p < ¢ zJ <uh J > > m W W L 1n^f x Z O
• • f t f i f f f • f i • •
1
PO nM mm as
bd NN ww mm F
oN m0 w d Nm b0 pP PP 00 NfP NN MdN
F NN Mn PP Mn
2 0
J nn
O
L
6
W
c m r F r M1 rr h h
\ ; m ` m m "m m m \ m
a a a a N a w a
w ...
d.N - a a w m
f° T o e o o mo o e o
6 O O e
LL p O o o Oo O
O
T O
� 2
W N N N N O m m w 0O w w m m
me u F r r n �- n F hnF r h
n n n n n
N t d t o + a + N . . d d N a NNry a a N w
ro ro ro
J J I m -
m m m m K
2 K
O f
O
O T
D
m y W
p ro N a
W m m z
m
0
Tm
m
a
3
O
YPIOtlYp-W M
m embOlbY NN
. WIO-m-P.N "1
ID YmOLOe-Nw 00 00 e0 N
O < A
y O
O TTTTTTTTT 2 F 4
K
Z CC_C_CM
_C CCCC_ 0 r
D 2 r 2 K <
r emoo . n o o i
mKJPPro--e 0 r 3 O
-L- YNKW�- D D OA
m W
yKKKKKKKK Z W
000000000 0 3 3
DDyKy1KyK
DDDDDD n n
rrrrrrarrr z
i
W
m
9WW__ 93K0 m W W �+ a
DtimtlVDAam r C C K
KOCmmmasA o T i m
aamKmm zm n T 3
oxa n „a
racai� �� i m m loll
MD000TF T C Z A
0a
C2 <O Z
m
K3m O
m im c
< KZ Z
K
n T
r o
K
K
an
0
'n 'n z
z
K
2
m In o
H
1
O
O
x K
m a
W a
a m
m
m m
m m m 0 010 w m m o O m m m m mmm rm 00 .
W W W W F F C W W W F W F F F F F FFF F FF
Y r Y O w w vI Y Y � w m �O s0 �O i0 sD i0 sD s0 s0 N N
W w w N N Y r w W N N N W N N NNN N W w
Y Y Y N 0 O O �O Y Y 0 0 0 0\
O OO O r Y vt 0 0 0 Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 O w w a
O S O O H N N O O O O O S O O S SSS 0 Y N r C
SSS0 H000 0000000000wH
m m,tr rcz Om m m m 0 0 0 N m m o Y o m m m m m mmm m 00 0
cYw�nF F F Y Y Y w F F. r � Y r r Y r Y rrY Y YY z
1 1 1 1 1 0 YY Y r Y r Y r Y r Y Y Y Y Y r r r r Y Y Y Y
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 00 D
ca ro m a n YY r Y Y Y Y Y 0 r Y Y Y Y r r r r r Y Y Y Y
m W K x m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 O 00 n W'
HM
0 9 N 9
K w
m
N .. .. .. 3
mm W X t N Y VI O -F F r w m Y Y Y W VIN m O
C O� F ut ut N O 0 0 ut VI N Y W w r r ✓t ut N F Flo C
K m O O Y O O O O O m O O F O Y O
O W of d w ut
Y iv0 0 0 0` 0 0 0 0 orn 0 0 w r 0 0 0
a
H �O O O O O O O S O O F O O N N O O O N M� O\ 00 O
� 0
z
N
ro
_ O C ro 0 0 = 0 a 0 3 x 71 m m m x x x x - [sJ a
O O O K N O m N N N m N N m N .O ry a
O P. m � S O M O m 3 3 µ µ µ 3 3 3, 3 C
• W K K N C M O H Y' H H H H d C
&a 5 N Y S m O D ro O O M " m w F
W Y N W m 3 W d (n m LJ W m m m r r Y p m
uOFt w
POWKm•
OD H H H3K
M
O 0 O
0 0
ornO0 0. m o ON0, OO4
m < b b b
N
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N N O
W W W W W Wm W Wm Wm Wm Wm Wm W Wmm Wmm W W W W W W W W S
Nm _1 a\ T T O� O� um Nm ww
m Z
F W N Y O s0 m -1 m ut F W N Y O �O m -1 N N Q\ N N O
lD W
JJ < m> o ' - o
> O m r
x K pJ fn K - a n
K2 m m x m pl Z O
7 q m 0 K 0 O 3 W O m O �
O O 'J m n O K K M a
N O H O m H m Y m m M11 m I I < O
< N 3 .mT O N S S C N
mM C .T 0 J
air O 00 'OO b
N N
x
Ol O O W N Y W F W
m F F N Y ut O F F Y W m Y r r Y m Y
P F vI ut O
0 o o 0 O ut o rn 0 r o w w r Y ut ut t w
rn rn o o r S 0 o r � o
N utO O D\ 0 0 0 0 0 m O O m Y 0 0 0 Y F O
sD
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0
l/g
Jumus A. COLLER. R
`ms a Lz ATa ronxEY AT LAW aiz ms �zm
�esa-iwowzsr ri wewvc
SHAEOPEE. MINNESOTA
55379
HMO TO: SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL 1
FROM: Julius A. Coller, II
DATE: August 28, 1987
IN RE: Authorizing the sale of intoxicating liquor on Sundays between
10 AM and 12 o'clock midnight limited to Class C license holders
BACKGROUND: I have been asked for a written opinion on whether or not the
City can authorize the sale of intoxicating liquor for consumption
on the premises in conjunction with the sale of food between the
hours of 10 AM and 12 midnight on Sundays, providing this is limited
to Class C On—Sale liquor licenses.
ANSWER; Based upon an investigation and full consideration of the matter
and the finding that the possibility of abuses and public nuisances
arising from the additional hours of permitted sale of liquor in
conjunction with thesale of food between the hours of 10 AM
and 12 o'clock midnight as limited by the conditions and restrictions
attaching to Class C licenses,would not be apt to occur, it is my
opinion that granting the additional hours of sale would be a valid
exercise of the City's police power as well as its control over
the liquor licansea, and assuming that the Council desires to make
such concessions, a public hearing must be set on the proposition and
thereafter, if it wished to proceed further, the Council would pass
an ordinance permitting Class C holders to sell intoxicating liquor
for consumption onthe premises in conjunction with the sale of food
between the hours of 10 AM and 12 midnight on Sundays, providing
that the licensee is in conformance with the Minnesota Clean Air Act.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk rJ
RE: Licensing of Pool Tables
DATE: August 21, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
When Council approved applications for pool table licenses
for 1987, they asked Staff for a report on the need for licensing
pool tables.
BACKGROUND:
Minnesota State Statute provides that Council shall have
power by ordinance to prevent or license and regulate the
exhibition of circuses, theatrical performances, amusements, or
shows of any kind, and the keeping of billiard tables and bowling
alleys, to prohibit gambling and gambling devices, andto
license, regulate or prohibit devices commonly used for gambling
purposes.
On August 28, 1973, Council adopted Ordinance No. 356
regulating and licensing pool tables. The fee contained in the
Ordinance is the same fee charged today; $100.00 for the first
pool table and $50.00 for each additional table.
Three establishments currently hold a pool table license:
Jerry' s Pizza for one pool table, Eagles for one pool table, and
Richard's Pub (R. Hanover, Inc. ) for four pool tables.
When reviewing the 1987 fee schedule published by the
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, it appears that not
all cities license pool tables and it also appears that
Shakopee's fees are the second highest listed.
I do not know the reason for adoption of the original
ordinance in 1973 ; whether it was to provide a source to insure
compliance with State and Local Laws, or a means to generate
revenue. Over the years the number of licenses has decreased.
I checked with the Chief of Police and he does not recall
any incident where the police were called relating to the use of
pool tables.
ALTERNATIVES:
1) Status quo
2) Repeal licening provisions
3) Reduce license fees
4) Raise license fees
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Alternative No. 3, reduce fees.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Direct Staff to reduce the license fee for pool tables to
$50.00 per license when the 1988 fee schedule is prepared. _
JSC/tiv
y 6.31
SEC. 6.31. BILLIARDS, POOL AND OTHER GAME TABLES.
Subd. 1. License Required. It is unlawful for any
person to keep or maintain any pool, billiard, snooker or other
game table, available for public use without first having obtained
a license from the City.
Subd. 2. (Repealed by Ordinance No. 79 , 4th Series,
adopted 11-17-81. )
Subd. 3. Practices Prohibited. It is unlawful for any:
A. Pool, billiard, snooker or other game table
licensee to be open between the hours of 1:00 o'clock A.M. and 6:00
o'clock A.M. of any secular day, or between the hours of 1:00
o'clock A.M. and 12:00 o'clock noon on any Sunday, and permit use
of such licensed facilities.
B. Minor to play pool, billiards, snooker or other
such table game where non-intoxicating malt liquor or intoxicating
liquor is sold or consumed, unless accompanied by his parent or
guardian. -
-� C. For any licensee to cause or permit any minor to
play pool, billiards, snooker or other similar table game where
non-intoxicating malt liquor or intoxicating liquor is sold or
consumed unless such minor is accompanied by his Parent or
guardian.
D. For any licensee to permit any form of gambling
thereon.
E. For any licensee to permit any person to become
disorderly or to use profane, obscene or indecent language.
F. (Repealed by Ordinance No. 103 , 4th Series,
adopted 9-7-62.)
G. (Revealed by Ordinance No. 103 , 4th Series,
adopted 9-7-82. )
Subd. 4. Notice. No billiard, pool or game table
license application, or recuest for transfer thereof between
persons or locations, shall be acted upon by the Council until at
least ten (10) days have elapsed after the - date of one publication,
in the legal newspaper of the City, of a notice of such application -
_
or request for transfer. . . - - - -
Source: City Code
-. l Effective Date: 4-1-78
EXCERPT FROM ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES 1987 I
FEE SCHEDULE, JULY, 1987.
AMUSEMENT & COMMERCIAL RECREATION
BILLIARDS/POOL TABLES
CITIES
0 - 2, 500 FEE 10,000 - 20,000 FEE
Andover
St. Francis 12.00 Anoka 25 .00
Spring Park Champlin
Woodland Hastings 10. 00
Hopkins
2,500- 10.000 Inver Grove Hgts.
Lakeville
Bayport Mounds View
Chanhassen No. St. Paul 15.00
Chaska 50. 00 Oakdale
Circle Pines Ramsey
Dayton Robbinsdale 10. 00 _
Deephaven Shakopee 1st/100 ea.ad.5O -
Falcon Heights 1st/25 2nd/15 Stillwater
Fridley 1st/40 ea.ad. 10 Woodbury 60.00
Mahtomedi
Mendota Heights
Mound 10.00
Newport 25.00
Orono
Osseo 10.00
Prior Lake
Rosemount
St. Anthony
St. Paul Park
Savage
Shorewood
Spring Lake Park
- Wayzata 1st/25 ea.ad. 10
OVER 20.000
AppleValley Golden Valle
Blaine Maple Grove y 50.00
35 -00
Bloomington 20.00 Maplewood
Brooklyn Center 25.00 Minneapolis 1st/80 ea.ad.20• -
Brooklyn Park 40.00 Minnetonka 5.50/table max. 52
Burnsville New Brighton
Columbia Heights 50.00 New Hope 25.00 ±
Coon Rapids inc. in amus. lie. Plymouth
Cottage Grove 35.00 Richfield
Cryst00
Eagan10 -
al . 50 Roseville 1st/653ea.ad.l:.
Eagan
Eden Prairie St. Louis Park 15.00 t't Edina St. - Paul tst/117 ea.ad. 32t
t -
i
-19-
i --
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Pullman Club Inc. , Liquor Violations
DATE: August 28, 1987
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND:
Pursuant to Council direction, the City Attorney has prepared the
attached Resolution No. 2789 which sets a time and place for a public
hearing pursuant to law on whether the liquor licenses of the Pullman
Club, Inc. should be revoked or suspended and whether its surety bonds
should be forfeited.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 2789and move its adoption
j
RESOLUTION 112789 -
A Resolution Setting a Time and Place for a Public Hearing Pursuant to Law on
Whether the Liquor Licenses of THE PULLMAN CLUB, 'INC. should Be Revokedor .Suspended
and Whether Its Surety Bonds Should Be Forfeited
WHEREAS, At all times relevant hereto THE PULLMAN CLUB, INC. held the following
liquor licenses issued by the City of Shakopee for one year beginning July 1, 1987:
Off-Sale License
On-Sale License
Sunday Liquor License; and
WHEREAS, Daniel Colich is the President of THE PULLMAN CLUB, INC. and is in
active control and management of the place of business of said licensee; and
WHEREAS, On June 11, 1987 the said Daniel Colich plead guilty on District
Court of the First Judicial District tothe following violations of the State liquor
laws:
1. To violation of Minn. Statutes 609.676 Subd 1(1) maintaining or operating
a gambling place, a gross misdemeanor
2, To violation of Minn, Statutes 609.76 Subd 1(4) collecting the proceeds of
any gambling device, a gross misdemanor
3. To violation of Minn. Statutes 609.755 (4) Allowing premises to be used for
gambling, a misdeanor; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 340.A415 requires the Council to either suspend for
up to 60 days or revoke the licenses or impose a civil fine not to exceed $2,000 for
each violation, but that no suspension or revocation shall take effect until the
licensee has been afforded an opportunity for a hearing pursuant to the Administrative
Procedure Act; and
WHEREAS, Each surety bond filed hereun pursuant to law provides that, in the
event of any violation of law relating to the sale of intoxicating liquor, each such
bond shall be forfeited to the municipality issuing the license.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL That a hearing be held
in the Council Chambers of the City of Shakopee pursuant to law at 9:30 o'clock in
the forenoon on the 15th day of October, 1987 to determine whether the liquor
licenses of THE PULLMAN CLUB., INC. should be suspended and if so, for how long; or
in the alternative whether the said licenses should be revoked and whether said
bonds shall be forfeited to the City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED That notice of said hearing shall be forthwith served
on THE PULLMAN CLUB, INC. by service on its President Daniel Colich and a further
notice shall be served on Daniel Colich as an individual at the same time by personal
service.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED Thatallthings necessary and proper to be done to
carry out the intent and purpose hereof are hereby authorized and directed to be done.
Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota this _ day of 1987.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form
th' 28th day of August, 1987.
City Attorney
JULIUS A. COLLER. Il
A.co.usn ATTOHNEY AT LAA'
�e ss- n.o wss� Avcrvoc ms z
SHAEOPEE.MINNESOTA
65329
August 20, 1987
RECEIVED
ALIG 2 11987
Mrs, Judith cox
Clerk
City Clerk CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue - '- - -
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Judy:
In re: Agreement and Restrictive Covenants
Enclosed are two sets of agreements and restrictive covenants that I
received from the Metropolitan Council and which are required by the
Council. Similar ones have previously been executed but they were never
completed and the person who signed them in behalf of the Metropolitan
Council is no longer employed by the Council. The Council has redrafted
the covenants and has sent them to me requesting that they be executed
by the City and then returned to the Metropolitan Council.
I have checked them and everything seems to be in order. So, would you
kindly put them on the September agenda for authorization from the Council
for the three Shakopee Officials to sign them for the City and then return
them to me so that I in turn can return them to the Metropolitan Council.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Juliu�oller, II
JAC/nh
ACTION REQUESTED:
Authorize the proper city officials to sign agreements and
restrictive covenants with the Metropolitan Council for parcels
3-6 and for parcel No. 7 acquired with Metropolitan Right-of-Way
Acquisition Loan Funds. -
AGREEMENT AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
19by and between the City of Shakopee, parTy—of the firs par , an he
Metropolitan Council of the State of Minnesota, party of the second part.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS:
A. Party of the first part has acquired a fee interest in the following
described real property, to-wit:
Exhibit A attached.
B. Party of the second part has contributed funds toward the acquisition
of said interest in said real property pursuant to its Loan Program and a Loan
Agreement with party of the first part as authorized by Minnesota Statutes
Section 473.167.
C. Said Loan Program was established pursuant to said law to provide for
the acquisition of property within the right-of-way of a state trunk highway
shown on an official map when necessary to avoid imminent conversion of such
property to a use which would jeopardize the property's availability for
highway construction.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the grant heretofore made by second
party to first party as aforesaid and in consideration of the mutual agreements
and covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
No sale, lease, mortgage, or other conveyance, nor the creation of any
easement, restriction, or other encumbrance against the above-described real
property shall be valid for any purpose unless the written approval of the
Metropolitan Council or its successors is duly filed and recorded at the time
of the filing and recording of the instrument to which such approval pertains,
nor shall said real property be used for any purpose except Trunk Highway 101
unless the Metropolitan Council or its successors shall consent to such other
use or uses by instrument in writing duly filed and recorded and designating
the nature, extent, and duration of the use for which such consent is given.
- 2 -
This Agreement and Restrictive Covenant may be enforced by the Metropolitan
Council or its successors by appropriate action in the courts of the State of
Minnesota.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be
—wecuW in their respective names all as of the date first above written.
ApprRved as to form: METROPOLIT I COUNCIL
By
Davidenz, Executive Direotor
This document drafted by: JC CITY OF SHAKOPEE
City Attorney
City of Shakopee By
211 West First Avenue Mayor
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
By
C ty A tmstrator
By
City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of
1987, by , and
, or ott uounty, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, on be aF-T)� It3e corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this/ day of
1987, by David Renz, Executive Director of the Metropolitan Council , a
political subdivision of the State of Minnesota.
dowa4g�
NQAary FUDIIC
KK074A
14 ELIZABETH MARQUARDT
q NOTARY PUNUC-MINNESOTA
w WASHINGTON MUNW
MY Comm.EXOMS Au(.22.EM2
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF PARCELS 3, 4, 5, and 6
PARCEL 3:
That part of the West Half of the SW 1/4 of Section 9, Township 115, Ng 22,
Scott County, Minnesota lying North of County Road 016 and Westerly of Lot 1 ,
Block 1, DCCD 1st Addition, Subject to the Northern Natural Gas Company
Easements.
PARCEL 4:
Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1;- Lots 6 and 7, Block 4; Lot 1, Block 5 and
Outlot E, Killarney Hills Addition to Scott County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 5;
Lot 8, block 1, Killarney Hills Addition, Scott County Minnesota.
PARCEL 6:
Lot 11, Block 1, Killarney Hills Addition, Scott County] Minnesota.
ABLEGD . . .
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Strategic Planning Process Critique (\
DATE: August 27, 1987
Introduction
The City Council, when approving the 1988 Strategic Planning
Goals and Objectives, asked City staff to evaluate the process in
used in 1987 to establish the 1988 goals. In particular Council
was interested in reducing the time taken to establish the goals
and to reduce the repetitiveness of the process by possibly
making it an every other year process.
Department Head Evaluation
The departments heads discussed this subject at their August 26,
1987 staff meeting. The consensus was that the format used in
the 1987 process to establish the 1988 Strategic Plan was worth
saving because it created more discussion and broader
participation. It was suggested that the time to complete the
process could be reduced by requiring that participants list
their four key priorities prior to the first meeting, and that
the individual lists be collected and tabulated for discussion
before the first meeting. Department heads felt it was worth
beginning the meetings informally and spending time discussing
the items on the list before Councilmembers and department heads
voted to pick the top four from each list.
Department heads suggested an alternative to the every other year
goal setting process. They felt that there was value in an
annualized process that got Councilmembers and department heads
together in an informal goal setting environment. It was felt
that the types of goals being generated under the new process
were much broader and would not likely be accomplished in one
year. So it was suggested that every second year be a simple
review of progress made on the prior year' s goals. This review
could be accomplished in one 3-4 hour meeting and would include
unstructured discussion of progress made on the - prior year's
goals. Any changes to be made in the goals would be done by
consensus at that meeting.
Alternatives
1. The City can repeat the 1987 Strategic Planning Process in
1988 with no modifications.
2. The City can restructure its Strategic Planning Process by
alternating a review year with a priority setting year.
This would insure that every second year would be limited to
one 3-4 hour meeting and would provide Councilmembers and
department heads the opportunity to discuss goals in an
informal setting.. - - - _
3. The City could in fact change its procedures and meet every
other year as Council initially suggested.
4. Council can decrease the time involved in the process by
having participants list their 4 top priorities and then
have that list compiled before the first meeting. This
along with a simple review of the "Mission Statement" should
limit the process to two meetings.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative No. 2 and 4 for the reasons discussed
above. This would mean one 3-4 hour meeting on a review year and
no more than two 3-4 hour meetings on a goal setting year.
Action Requested
Pass a motion establishing 1988 as a strategic plan review year
requiring one joint City Council and department head meeting to
review the status of goals and objectives established in the 1988
plan, and adopting procedures to shorten - regular year goal
setting process by - completing certain written materials in
advance of the first meeting.
JKA/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 2783
A Resolution Restricting Parking on Vierling Drive
(MSAs 112)
MSAS 112 (Vierling Drive) from C. S .A. H . 16 to the west
approximately 3100 feet in the City of Shakopee, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has planned the improvement
of MSAS 112 Vierling Drive from C . S . A . H . 16 to the west
approximately 3100 feet, and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee will be expending Municipal
State Aid Funds on the improvement of this Street, and
WHEREAS, this improvement does not provide adequate width
for parking on both sides of the street, approval of the proposed
construction as a Municipal State Aid Street project must
therefore be conditioned upon certain parking restrictions, and
WHEREAS, the extent of these restrictions that would be a
necessary prerequisite -to the approval of this construction as a
Municipal. State Aid project in the City of Shakopee has been
determined.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: .
That the City of Shakopee shall ban the parking of motor
vehicles on both sides of MSAS 112 (Vierling Drive) at all times.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,
19_,
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this _ day
of , 19_-
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer*
SUBJECT: Vierling Drive
Resolution No. 2783
DATE: August 25, 1987
INTRODUCTION A BACKGROUND:
Vierling Drive from County Road 16 to Polk Street is being
planned as a collector street. The planned width of this
collector street is 50 feet which will accommodate two lanes of
traffic in each direction without parking.
Plans for Vierling Drive from C.R. 16 to the west approximately
3100 feet are at Mn/DOT for review. The attached Resolution
No. 2783 restricts parking on Vierling Drive.
Alternatives:
1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2783.
2. Do not adopt Resolution No. 2783 and not use state aid funds
on this project.
3. Do notadopt Resolution No. 2783 and add an additional 18
feet width of street to accommodate parking.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council adopt Resolution No. 2783 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No, 2783 , A Resolution Restricting Parking on
Vierling Drive (MSAS 112) and move its adoption.
KA/pmp
RES2783
RESOLUTION NO. 2785
A Resolution Accepting Work On The
Holmes Street Basin Storm Sewer Laterals
Project No. 1986-1
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City
of Shakopee on May 28 , 1986, S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. , P.O. Box
212, Shakopee, MN 55379 has satisfactorily completed the Holmes
Street Basin Storm Sewer Laterals , Project No . 1986- 1 , in
accordance with such contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the work completed under said
contract is hereby accepted and approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk and Mayor are
hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on
such contract in the amount of $ 0.00, taking the contractor' s
receipt in full.
Adopted in - session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this _ day of
19
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 19
City Attorney
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
CONTRACT NO. : 1986-1 DATE: August 26, 1987
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Holmes Street Basin Storm Sewer Laterals
CONTRACTOR: S.M. Hentges 6 Sons, Inc.
P.O. Box 212
Shakopee, MN 55379
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT , . . , . . . . . . . $ 941,253.82
QUANTITY CHANGE AMOUNT . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
CHANGE ORDER N0, 1 THRU NO. 6 AMOUNT , . . $ -6,921.16
FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 934,332.66
LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . $ 934.332.66
FINAL PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ -°-
I, hereby certify that the above described work was inspected
under my direct supervision and that, to the best of my belief and
.knowledge, I find that the some has been fully completed in all
respects according to the contract, together with any modifications
approved by City Council . I, therefore, recommend above specified
final payment be made to the above named Contractor.
rofessionol Eng eer
rib
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: John DeLacey, Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: Holmes Street Basin Laterals, Project No. 1986-1
DATE: August 28, 1987
INTRODUCTION :
Council action is required for a resolution accepting work on
Holmes Street Basin Laterals, Project No. 1986-1 .
BACKGROUND:
All of the work for this project has been completed in accordance
with the Contract documents.
The Certificate of Completion is attached.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 2785, A Resolution Accepting Work on the
Holmes Street Basin Storm Sewer Laterals, Project No. 1986-1 and
move its adoption.
JD/pmp
MEM2785
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson City Administrator
FROM: Ray Ruuska, Engineering Coordinator
SUBJECT: Marschall Road Watermain, Project No. 1987-4
DATE: August 28, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
Bids were opened on the above referenced project on Friday,
August 28, 1987. The Engineer' s estimate was $64,100.00.
BACKGROUND:
Eight bids were received with the low bidder being G. L.
Contracting, Inc. of Minnetonka with a bid of $50,595.26.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No . 2786 , A Resolution Accepting Bid on
Marschall Road Watermain, Project No. 1987-4 to G.L. Contracting,
Inc. , 11421 W. 47th Street, Minnetonka, MN 55343 in the amount
of $50,595 .26 and move its adoption.
RR/pmp
MEM2786
RESOLUTION NO. 2786
A Resolution Accepting Bid On
Marschall Road Watermain
Project No. 1987_4
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the
Marschall Road Watermain , bids were received , opened and
tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received
complying with the advertisement:
G.L. Contracting, Inc. $50,595.26
Bodine Excavating, Inc. $61 ,405.50
F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. $62, 178.00
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $63,536.50
J.P. Norex $64, 170.69
B & D Undergound, Inc. $66,850.54
Widmer, Inc. $70,808.00
Albrecht Excavating $93,723.00
AND WHEREAS, it appears that G.L. Contracting, Inc. ,
11421 W . 47th St . , Minnetonka , MN 55343 is the lowest
responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and
directed to enter into a contract with G.L. Contracting, Inc. , in
the name of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of Marschall
Road Watermain , Project No . 1987-4 by Utility Improvements ,
according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by
the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their
bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the
next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been
signed.
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
10_
ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Shakopee
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day of
19_.
City Attorney
�a C�
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson City Administrator
FROM: Ray Ruuska, Engineering Coordinator
SUBJECT: Heritage Place, Project No. 1987-14
DATE: August 28, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
Bids were opened on the above referenced project on Friday,
August 28, 1987. The Engineer' s estimate was $292 , 185.00.
BACKGROUND:
Six bids were received . The apparent low bidder , G . L .
Contracting, Inc. submitted their bid on an incorrect proposal
form. The City attorney recommends G.L. Contracting' s bid be
rejected. Therefore , the low bidder is Widmer, Inc . of St.
Bonifacius with a bid of $252,097 .50.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 2787, A Resolution Accepting Bid on Heritage
Place Improvements, Project No. 1987-14 to Widmer, Inc. , P. O .
Box 219, St, Bonifacius, MN 55375 in the amount of 252,097 .50
and move its adoption.
RR/pmp
MEM2787
RESOLUTION NO. 2787
A Resolution Accepting Bid On
Heritage Place Improvements
Project No. 1987-14
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the
Heritage Place Improvements, bids were received , opened and
tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received
complying with the advertisement :
Widmer, Inc. $252,097 .50
F.F. Jedlicki, Inc . $269,740.50
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $274 ,997 .89
Bonine Excavating $314,803 .50
Albrecht Excavating $320,431 .50
AND WHEREAS, it appears that Widmer, Inc. , P.O. Box 219, St.
Bonifacius, MN 55375 is the lowest responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and
directed to enter into a contract with Widmer, Inc. in the name
of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of Heritage Place,
Project No . 1987-14 by Utilities , Streets, and Appurtenant
Improvements, according to the plans and specifications therefore
approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the
City Clerk.
2 . The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their
bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the
next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been
signed.
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
19_.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day of
19_.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator ,Q�j+„/
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Amending Lease between Chamb r of Commerce and City of
Shakopee
DATE: August 28, 1987
Introduction
Prior to securing a loan for construction of the new Chamber office,
the City has been asked to amend the lease between the Chamber and
the City dated April 21, 1987.
Background
The lease states that the City is the present owner of the fee title
to the land upon which the new Chamber building islocatedand the
improvements to be constructed thereon. It has been made clear in -
a subsequent agreement relating to the Visitor Information Center/
Convention Bureau that the Chamber will build and own the Visitor
Information Center/Convention Bureau. The attached amendment will
bring the lease dated April 21, 1987 into conformance with the
subsequent agreement dated May 5, 1987.
Action Requested
Offer Resolution No. 2788, A Resolution Authorizing the Correction of
an Error in that Certain Lease Agreement Dated April 21, 1987 Between
the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce, and
move its adoption.
JSC/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 2788
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CORRECTION OF AN ERROR IN THAT
CERTAIN LEASE AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 21, 1987 BETWEEN THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND THE SHAKOPEE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
WHEREAS, on the 21st day of April, 1987 a lease agreement
was made and entered into by and between the City of Shakopee and
the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce and that an erroneous
statement appears in the second paragraph on page 1, which is as
follows:
". . .and the improvements to be constructed thereon. . . "
This statement was inadvertently inserted in said agreement and
should be stricken therefrom.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL on
behalf of the City of Shakopee that the lease agreement dated
April 21, 1987, page one, paragraph two, should be amended to
read as follows, to wit:
"WHEREAS, Lessor is the present owner of the fee title
to the land located in the County of Scott, State of
Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached
hereto and made a part hereof (said land) being
hereinafter (referred as "Premises" or "Demised
Premises") ; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that with the exception of the above,
the said agreement remains as originally and heretofore written.
Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council
held this day of 1987.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1987.
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Special Election
DATE: August 25, 1987
INTRODUCTION•
The attached resolution was drafted by our bonding
consultants, O' Connor and Hannan, some time ago for Council's
consideration for setting a special election for funds to
construct a new City hall. If it is desirable to hold a special
election this november with the regular municipal election, the
resolution should be adopted at the September 1st Council
meeting, preferably, but not later than September 15th.
BACKGROUND:
Ballots must be ready no later than 30 days prior to the
election for absentee voters. In order to meet that time frame
the resolution setting a special election should be adopted at
one of the next two Council meetings.
The Scott County Auditor' s office will be coordinating the
printing of the ballots for the AIS optical Scanner for
governmental units in Scott County holding an election this fall
who wish to use the optical scanner (Prior Lake, Savage, Shakopee
and the Prior Lake School District) . They will also be present
on the evening of the election for processing and counting of the
ballots. It will be more costly to use the AIS Optical Scanner
rather than hand counting the ballots - approximately $500.00-
$600.00. This additional cost is for programming and printing of
the ballots. However, the final results from the election will
be ready sooner than if hand counted and the voters will not
become confused by changing back to paper ballots every other
year. If Council does not wish to use the AIS Optical Scanner,
Staff should be informed.
Also, attached is the most recent computer run from
Springsted projecting the annual debt service for financing a new
City Hall.
ALTERNATIVES•
1) Adopt Resolution No. 2782, as drafted
2) Amend Resolution No. 2782
3) Do not adopt Resolution No. 2782
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 2782, A Resolution Determining the Need
for the Issuance of General Obligation Bonds and Calling a
Special Election Thereon, and move its adoption.
JSC/tiv
SPPINGSTED iNCORPORa ED
Po trcEa FSan�t,Piac ,
BS East$alce 1 Place Suite 106
Sarni Pad.uinn?soia 55101 2143 RECEIVED
612-2233-0
AUG 1 21987
CITY OF SH4xOPEE
August 10, 1987
Mr. John Anderson, Administrator
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Mr. Jack Borman
Borman and Associates
206 First Street North
Minneapolis, MN 55401
RE: Estimates of Municipal Building Debt Service
We are providing the City with revised estimates of the annual debt service
and mill rates reflecting the updated project budgets supplied by Mr. Borman.
These new budgets are for the Gorman site and the Block 50 site. For each
site, optional budgets are presented for 10-year and 15-year bond issues.
The alternative project budgets are as follows:
Table I: Alternative Project Budgets
Gorman Site Block 50 Site
10-Year 15-Year 10-Year 15-Year
Land $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000
Construction 1 ,345,000 1 ,345,000 1 ,345,000 1 ,345,000
Equipment 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000
Contingency 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Consultant Fees 126,000 126,000 126,000 126,000
Legal 20,000 - 20,000 20,000 20,000
Bond Issuance 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
Total $2,081 ,000 $2,081 ,000 $2,231 ,000 $2,231 ,000
Less: Cash (850,000) (850,000) (850,000) (850,000)
Plus: Discount 179,000 219,000 199,000 249,000
Netlssue $1 ,410,000 $1 ,450,000 $1 ,580,000 $1 ,630,000
Schedule: A A-1 B B-1
Ino.a^a O"cE .wens, r.
2i.2$ F '.ct sa,S:E ..C .fc 6E - 2. .C.-
19w= c -
2
1szeaa7sc � —14132-62a2
Mr. John Anderson Z�
Mr. Jack Borman
August 10, 1987
Page 2
Schedule A is an estimate of a bond issue for the Gorman site with a 10-year
repayment program. For this schedule as well as all remaining schedules the
interest rates listed in column 4 represent those currently available. The
average annual tax levy with provision for the 5% statutorily required overlevy
is $202,937. This debt service levy would cause the present mill rate to
increase by an estimated 2.56 mills based on the current assessed valuation of
$79,322,144.
All four schedules are referenced at the bottom of the project budgets. The
following table summarizes the average annual debt service levy with the
estimate of mill rate change given the current assessed valuation.
Table 2: Estimated Average Annual Debt Service
Tax Levy and Mill Rate
Site Gorman Gorman Block 50 Block 50
Issue Term 10 15 10 15
Schedule A A-1 B B-1
Average Annual Levy $202,937 $163,848 $227,355 $184,797
Mill Rate Change 2.56 2.07 2.87 2.33
Year of Last Levy 1996 2001 1996 2001
We trust this information fully responds to your request. Please feel free to
contact us if we can be of any further assistance.
Respectfully,
David N. MacGillivray
Project Manager
doh
SCHEDDLE A
a
Y
A A
06 1�0 AA eNbNbMWOMN O�
ri OYv Olb W1�N1�eMrW N
O O
NN.tiNMONMMnn OJ
C O O O O O O O O O O N N
y r W N N N N N N N N N N O
N O
O p N O O O
mw •�Nb £
6 N b Y
(.! ry•"� NNNNONNOOO O •"I b 1� N C
CZ N N Ntp WONNnI�eNbe NI�Qt N
dr y 6d� NON01 Qtr CIb@N 1� N.ti tO N U
N n FU d M M N N M r N M M N W
6N CY —
— rr rrr———T T0�0�01 M
a •r c rn c
L T L r Ol T
6 C1 6 r i
Q atS @ 1� •N N
e M >
J Y� N N N N O N N O O O O y V1 O
NN WONNI�I�e N{Oe N NN '9 N
O d� NONQQ1r Q)b@N 1� dY NO N
W i L C y M N U N
S a M W N N Q1 r N M M N d
U Y QJ 1�nbNNeMNr N Y o O w d Of T T
C d E E
C •r Y
m A a
O� N.. 34 iE iE 2E$E iE iE H 2E dE C O y C
C y v O O N N N N N O O C r d N
WON@I�O�r MION Qd$ L c C
v m ua0
C eNNNNNbtO 4p l0 r O
N =
mm
N
0 , NM 0000000000 O iY d4 - LN M V
N 6� 0000000000 o OP•N+•e+ �QMi E ✓�
a n U O�nOO�n OCl000 o •NM O'•-�
c•^ c rNMMeNb1� W �N a N �n Y
c U rrrrrr rrrr a O� ba) O:
L M L dLy
£C n r Tc Y r
W W C > y d i
£Y W 0 L�F3
a C O\ d + J W N O L
. - w W •� QfOrNMeNb1�W Y y W a
6OE OyN WOI OI OI OI O�O10�Ol O� q AOI N 'O
prr Nv -- ---- �0 ---
YL:t m N L£ y� > >r 10 =
A 6 t0 rd NCN Nr
Q R F N
OOa 9L OPV WWWm mP OI Of OI N Y£Q Np1 WYu
tiw.�•�����titi.01- J U �n N >� Lr N
f
SCHEDULE A-I
v
a
Y
n m
pbj Lp X^^ NbMRMin �♦D 1�1�000OIN N
6 111 m1� Mb01W0100bbOJ V1� OC^ ^
i OYv 01b V6�ODOM010 GJ b••+bNN
1py ^H LL'9NVNlpNNNbCNN••nNM T
�rbi�b.b����titi tin nb-�.br O _
N O
7O N {pOb �
01W Ob1p
H
afA ^ Y-"• OOObWCDmOYfbbtff tffMO 1� N1�01 O C
CZ mm b M'+bMOSMnbMMTOOTC 1n Of n+O m
L6' O� Lv OOfb T01 MIHMbOmMOfOV O mN� N U
m6 f U d ma bl�OIORRNI�C1�M10b N _W
6N Cy ------b blp^.b- -- --- � C
m � L
m a
W Y^ OOObp�090D 01010 f0101nM0 1� Y N O
J N1L1 M^bOJT M1�bMMTOOTd' 10 N .. NM 'J' N
O Lv 001b 010 M10 MtOOmM010R O L CY Mti U N
M01b C;a.;0; a .;,za
N U � 01W C1mnnl04D 10NVMNN.•-� 0 ^ UL I� A A
v y a d E E
O m O e0y d �
Q]
O N 01 L
01 N•••. XXXX$tXX XXXXXXXX C 3Y C
c de 001n u1 1n 1p 10 00obino c^ a m u
yv NONaI� T^M10mT00^N ad U d O
� 1' V101n 10 b1lIb b1D 1p tD 1�1�1�1� p
= y NDN
d—
y m M O
0C C 0 00 O C O O 0C 0O 0O 0O 00 O C C 0 0 O C X X L O y L 9
p� 6•••� 000 O O�b^ 70 E N 1n
1nb 01nOOt000t000bbb O •1�C O'N
CbO
C bbl�f�WNNT�O^NNM^ p TT
C{ E ^^^^ L d L Y
f C L �••� ^^ !sL Y•�
O 0 Y i 1F 3
d a W .^ Q10^NMa10bAmT0^NM m m^T N NQ
pO E DyN 9TT01 CST TO1 OfTT0000
m� H-•Tn------T�0000
YC7m ^^ iF NNNN Y •• ^ � YOB
m 6 � � m d m C N m•�
L O a N N a N L m Y 7 C L L Y^
W� i .• tti ls�+ f�O�T O -+NMK10 lO 1�WT0^ •• dmC dols NdY
00 m .. a O >•"� 01010 Os 01T TOS Os 01T 010100 N Yf6 N Of dy U
N d 9 L d� �ti�.T- ^.Ti.T-��•T•�rT•sti ti.T•�NN 6 9 V N L > d m m
T-M YY mJ O Ojj^• N !J = L
Uwe OE Y r c� ¢6Z 66v �
SCFEDIX-E B
v
d
Y
� A
m i
.ti p N A1� N1�0�••�ONNC<m C
L OYv N -1b C01C OlC0)N M
O O
b U H 01 m b C b m m m b 0 N
C N N N N N N N N N N n N
Yom+ W NNNNNNNNNN N
N O _
N 04 O Of
pIW QOM £
¢O �Y^ M_MM1H 101040000 01 C1�.•n W C
9Z A A Nlp tiN04 tl'Nn<O M m04m A
d•� Y 6a`+ MMm1�0-O-••+m 10•-1n N U
LC O+ L
A6 1� U d ml�-Mb1�m1�bM V 1F
6N C Y •ti••+ra rn n+n+na ny••n rn ti
d •r
LC
L T .-• m T
n m n N L
m a4 O N N A
W ti M a
J Y^ MMM10401040000 Of Y N O
O N10 tiN01V N1�<O M N N1� O N
O a•••� MMm1�0-O-•-�b dY NN A
W L L C Y M N U A
2 d M1�OMb1�mA bM V d 0N
U Y 01m ml�b-CMNrn m Y O a lT T T
N N nCi 40 m a i A A A
C •r Y
O p N v
m m a
Oi N^ K?42:iE 2E 2E 2.•d.^2F SE c OY c �
C �� OONN 0 10 10 40 6 0 Cr a A Y
mONCA01•ti e! C9 QnZ L G
9 C V1010 N101040404D 10 u a O
- 7U
A m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O a^ d d
o^ G.M.. 0000000000 O aE iE ton YL'O
m A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 M 0-
a n U -O-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N M Qti E N N
C•� C -MMC-- t�m010 m O- d Y N L
£ C n •„� C L d L Y
• TL Y�
^£Y m 01 C >Y d L
d C O� a rJm A D L
n0 E OYN mOf 01010101010 P01
LY1-
L > > A Q A A A
OT N a Y
V L .. 1{_ T^ 1�m010�NMC-b .. dAC� dad YL �
OOm W 9 L O N� mmm01010f04mmm N Y£Q N 01 dY U
.�-•.m+.m-�.mntititim.mim J U A > L� A
Q D d L > d A
Y^ • Y YA H 0 01�•"'� N d d Y a
Uw� p£ }
SCHEDULE B-!
a
Y
n A
pml On X�^ bm.•+H to Yf 1"1WnQfhn Qn+Q 4[I
IO AA b�PmllltiQObW1�•-�PbN (�f
~ L OYv Q.tiQ 01�PI0 P•-�1�ONOW1� N
• O '� O MIAmNNNNtO 1nNNtO l�blO •"�
Y r=+ W n
N O
'J G N b 0 4bll F
PW
'3r 10 u90 � Y
¢N Y� OOOOObOWO00bb1�10 b PQQ �"� �
9Z AA b NID.•+."�N OI000W bI�IWbW Ill OQb '
an Y6d� �MIOQONmOt�'IONb•-DPW I() ONN N U
An r u a QIO I�fhQ QI"l mlDvlO naD nln o+ �
•r C P T
nW 1� Q1� N A
Q P >
J N Ilf N b•-�.•�Ill 011l O Q W b fel W t0 W Ill N .. N Q � N
O Lv I�I7 tpQONW pt.- - - - - m IO L CY M� U A
� d Qrn l�frlPQmlhb P�••�N I'I N•-� P d � N .
Z Y OOPPmml�l�bl0 lllQ Cl N.+ O Y O d P T T
Ol N•-. X
g g X gXX X$a X$e X g X X C OY =
c d Q O O O m b IO III b 0 0 Ill Ill
yv mONQ1�P•-�17 tOmP00 •-� N ¢6Z L C
C QIf11040 LLY 1040 bID 40bl�l�l�n a
9 NC N
� 000000000000000 o a� aa—
A
p� 6✓ o0000000000000o O Op.bi lPpO 70 EHN
N A • • • .I�Q VN •�
a n u o b o o b o b ui o Il+vi II7 4t)II7 b o
C.� C I��WWWPPO^.•-�.Ni.fin�.b-�� IO �PbW 6"J Yid
•f y W d �J W A O L
a C .a � . .. PO•-�N l7 QI0 tO t� WPO^+Nn y
60 E A� P^P�^P�^�^P0000 TW O A•+ a C C
L O a N N d • L A Y 7• C L L y
NO n' Y AY Cn' C¢ d Y LJ
� AWPO•"�N C1 Q104D I�mPO.+ •• d A C d d T N aY
Al a 9 L d•-' .Pitt--.P- XPi- — ti ff-.P- —— -
Tb Y Y Y A J O O >> N >J y t
ooror oolo! r
00•-10^1 OOCOV N
O P m m O P r m
W N! N P
w
d O OPO q O O m O m q
W Q� Q NNN N ^Nm Ill
7 M = ^ ^
W -^y co 00'10.. OONOry •+
O O m O V O ONO N P
(� �1 V_ oNPrry oNorn m
W
mY }♦ �n
V O O m O m O ONO N r
O N g r N O N O r n m
\ N m n n n
�N ^
oolo! ooPOP N
O O O O O O O N O N Nm
O N O r n O N O r n
o-n N �Nn ry
p
000
ti N q
rm rnn m W
mF OOnOn 00'10•"� D 01 O
P4 pN IV 00n0r1 oOmom c OY.-i".nY d
Nm Or1DrP OrmrP m ^ UOYm Y
.N
- % omry .+ omry m+d.qa1+^+ E A
^ o
U Ydm
F z .. .. .. y
U p W W d M1l o P ry r N f o P N r N fA d O F T C •J m
.741 mu0 O m.Nary H Oi 0, ~ Am . 0 , O
U 'Y �4' o Adm Ud NL
ppji £ L f o0.10.+ m ool0! O.4ti �.pi A9
zz � u o oonon a oOmom n
Lm tiu i 2 YddYi•O m
m m H O OPO P f O O r O r Cep O A Y d Y
m z o000o z oonon r ^ WL uu m
m omNrm i omNrm m dTd mry
S b m W U d q W d
�Lw9 LO
U d
Us ua
C L d
4 0 o N r r 4 O o m P m c^ A Y • m
34
OPr1 p mP.n qY C > d Od
0 W W^
m F Y
j. m m oolOnn N ooNc., m E�1y Ci0 m0.
7
m Cz Ci 7 OOOt N ^^ U an d
p NON
x y pr.+ Y or., d YFdU LY _
'O p d d�1 T•O T �^
O F m m m imEYu^ -�
m m
zm 4 > d •• m > m .. i m b SEE � u
£ y
p4
d �L UL uu WC
m o d •• o •• -•
} T wn m sud
•,i F � W
y X U y X F g W LY d O
m .� d m n m S A W m £ A W •• d^ •p T O b C
041 00p Xd q d mU dmdu^ 0
z 6 P m m d Y U E
4 A ••
•• m O cAu^ d4 dE OY dHOu ^ 7 E
UE W 2 A0 S AW SY O
^'O > Mv
"^ d
m W A d 0 0 d m > W d L
W
ym YA d0W0. dmOC m6 O >V3 y.l
•,�
D
O £ 2 d Y O
4 •p m4U `1 G. t14 U`1L yF d 'O'^ ..Ei
} £ d } d u u m d•O Y r
FOm 0Ef fhl L dmd
O d O ✓• ^� N N N O
M f A d O A N L
UUU mCU 44444 9mmm mp • E3.O.OU 41E
0000� ooron r
• oom ooN .Ti
Nr'1 � N r'I •4
oomom ooror T
O N N N O N N N
O N N N O N! b
N m P T N m N m
rm ^m
oomom oomom
O O N N O O T O
O N r O N m m �
O N r ^ N N r ^
01.
N N
Orry N Or1.1 f•1 rtl
b
N P m m N P m m
N!
00•V O.� 00000
O O^ O O m b
Ol
O O O O O O O m O m
O O N N O O n n r
or.X .+ orry n b
m N p p m N! !
O O O O
r m !m O W
m F ^N N
.0..m
1; f•1 ONN 1.1 WY1
NO mN mN > O UW
U Y d
fZ •• •• •• P
my WNY F 000.OT OOAIO t•1 A WW
p Y W U U OOP P 000 O N UI U+•
UO earai' r� O.+m P E Oy0 O m .ai0 WU
O O O•"1 N N U �•"�N N Q W • '• C
4mU• HCL G O Aam ay
fOd .yi LyL F OOmOm m OOr-IO
mm N dLm
!Lm qY O OOY Y OON m !b Y'1 Aq
6L LS 5 Omry n = OmN aOC > •J
n mmiN N F ��ry ry qY.n W3
¢ i• ..Eii 3 3 Yj..ai mT
6m YA
W m f O O m o m f O o N o N m ^q n a Y
m y OON N y OOT m N A W
m O O T T = O O T m b a T A m
d L �
L G d a u A U d
ow
4 O n N m F o N N vmi � O r y S L
4 A E � a EY
0A0 w
.L. m
W F F Y u
U A W d
u] N •y Y .n
p � oP.X w Om oPry � m mE � my
m E ^ m Lim L•Ti
n
C y .. N
FO w u
O Wa E WW
4 > W .. m > a •' y mO
moa zo � •• uy z u .0.�. ao a
i u m c
m m 0 a m U A ti i x � £ A i A f •• d^y a C
y.] O 6 m i •• A F m > •' W E' m U V . 0
u W
YL , L x NgAET Nq NET Tm W
aAy
S Tmf SY AMf xY O •,iV Ea ,
v£i .U. .fi W m ..E N m W d E aWi m W O• uOi i o >9 w•Oi
2 m Y AOA O .n A
4 O
O £ 2x L O m4UJY m4UJM1 Lf a E
T auu
„ OC E F m N mo
UVU U U
44444 m99mm mO E3
o oror 000mo r'1
o o.� o.+ oorvoN o
ONPrN ONOr1�1 m
O P m m O P r W
O! O!
N N
O O P O P O O r O r m
OOn OIn OONON m
ONPrN ONO rr+l M
N N N N N N m N
OOr"r Oro OOrvON ry
OOIG 010 ONOrI'1 m
O N! ! N N N !
O O T O ry O O ry O ry N
O O m O m O O V O! m
ONPrN ONO rI'1
N mAI I.1 rvryP N
�N �
O O O O!
ONOrO OPO P �
O O O O O Y
n O O!O ONO rf'1 m
O NI.f N
p 000 .iN N ^INry 'O W
rm Il�om N
m f O ONO m O ONO N � 'J a a a T
•'�q �NY O�mrP O�mrP m +a. U 'JYW Y .
m . a
m—O l E A v
Nd. PY > OL CO u
U A awh Aw
NM � � OONON OONON n
N r N m a > L L O C U^
U p A W a f O f T C O M P
U. .�acd W p NbmuUb �G
6� £ray � OOrvON 6 ONON N
qy y^ O O'Im r.� S O ^mr'1 m wicGLT a
.A b 3
10 m T
dm yq
mm Z 00000 Z OOr'fOry K ^MmYU WY
bam
4] OmNrm £ OmNrm TL tl 'J % b
£ W m U b ra A d
OON qm dL Wra Ga
d u U d O
- g—
g .
F y q OONrr 4 rmm C^ yWV SL
Q F O O N V N F ry m N ^
gaa+ vC >d Eb
r m N amWW aY U
j m GU] OOVmm d OOYr-l0 r ErumLu and
000lm
0 r) oorvNr m ^'� m a
0 � H.o
m F '� m m umEayi Y^
E a � W
O m ~1 y
C O N y Y •Y N
z2 6 > ay m > ay Vz. mW dEE � U
Z N y Y
�+ Om Z Vy y bU^ jG Uy UL mC -
£
m0T y A.� bx Yi] £A YN f .. Nyib YO
m uVi sm A qTm ac
d .].y dd m i •• NF m > % �E mU UNO^^^ uW
xd a ygmET 41 % aYUEL m^
061 LG gmFSM ANFSY ~ O a.+o^Wn Eb
mZN YWW +E. aWNd '^E amWd 4 ,0 O > , Yc3
YNOVO YN NNO � O 40 mY
cc
aY W >
Oiz Ym0 mm
pgU �y mgU `16 £ F dY amN'a Em
BOG mEF T! - ^ Fm Lu W % b
uUU, gggqQ CmSMm C .^. E 3'OL U 41F
0000� oomoa �
00 r oom m m iry
ry�ti � Nn.oa w O"
oomom ooNON
ONN N GNm'1 n
ONN N y
Nmm m N.G m. N
00 V O V O O O O O
O O N N O N m
ONr r M
O N r r N N n r
HN N
ONN N
O r N N O r n m
Nfm m fb m
OONO.1 OONON �"�
O O N O O N N n
.0 r: � oom m m
ove ! ora f
yn on
O O O O O O ONO N �
O r N N m
O m! ! O m! f
O
O O O m N P N
rm fn.+ m
nom oomom �
.mnm o00 o N oY �
O tiN.�a O!N N O! m m m Yd �'O
•a pm Nn n Omrvn n AY9 'JO
Nm N > O Um
F2 " "' OONON � Ad V,W
m rn y d Y F O O f O! O O m m m d >
OHN N LG "� G
4F tiUu m nrvN N 4U1 nN AA ^
0
� .�n £ �L F oomom � jomOn 6�m' AO
4a d+ O Omn n = Omn m dOC '�
� N Al E,. ONN N f ANN N qY.n WS
V'I
Y A
Y O!n .i X ��•� •� W m d O
q % O ONO N X O O m O m U C X L d
f u 4 oom m 4 Oom m N G+' u 1y
U F O N N F O ry N N N ^
m F u.y
W F A m 6
m e ocr O oe.Pa � m mE " ai
4 n d del d T
ow
N A F A m L d u d d
= rN Z Y U.n 2 Y Uy dLU mC
y m „ d N U m� i A � i A d A E •• W^i d G
0Qti O 6 N £ i % aF m �pGi •• �E' mU rodL A.y
041 L Y yNFou dy9 Ed
4
SUF '� Z Am A m m
w m d..E. y W m E d W m o.
mzN d a mm. . 0 Ymomo E mYa >
O £ Z d O m6U Ja m4UJd £ F yYd ^
`� p � m L v Y-m•
^ OG Ed
0 U 16444 mCOmm M11p E1
UUU U
ooror ooPOP
OOnOn OOIO OP !
OPm �O OPr +O
OV Of
N N
OOnOm OO�OO b.
NNm 1l1 O1NW Y1
r! r!
n •+
OOnOn OOe'IOm N
OOmO�D OOmOb O
O N P r N O P O n n y
NYIf f NPm !
n nm
OOmOm OO�OOm mm
O P P r N O P O r m
P m m m N m! n
ti N n
00 l O V O O m O m
0 0 0 0 0 O O m O W m
oPorm oPorm m
O n n N
.1m
N
p 000 tiN MN 'O
rm
e Mmbdq
P 4 o Q10,
n m m N N O r V P O m P N 'O+ U •J Y W Y
.W
Ny OmN n Ttiry > OLCO •JO
np Pn UdL UW
U
m n Y W U U O ONO N O O V O b N g d d A O Y UY
O P N n U Om N n MA W
E•nO O vCi
4F O C mn m qW U
V nCM1 d p qdm Ud �A
p .Zn
£rL F_ OOnOn m OOmOm m O.L O. dCL
y Yn T�pY »
Zm OY
c!-1 Ot Onm�n W 0.'0
+�C O.m AL
40. i3 O i .
dm q F ^gym n F Own n X A •00
m q W d d 3
yy Ed 3 3 YdJ.diYYL mT
L m Y q
b C F O OPO P F O O O O O n �N A q ✓ d Y
M11 2 O O O O O Z O O!O! m W Y U m
41 OmPrm £ OmlOrm N dmgUd'O m0
n T �Onn 4 Vnn Wd �LWp LO
d
U
UiOy OOm PP x .SWc
L3L
Orr d
yF OON VI(1 F OO NEON N nWY� WT E
Y m N E Y Y W 3 W W^
b E U q dOn
j m fUi] OOVmm 41 OOrNN P EnyLL'L '1 NOS
^i 0001V •] OONPr Vi wq % .n and
yL Onn L f0 r.+ dEYEOU Li .
N F r m L Y r y y n
F O d 4 0 u d~ U m Yq
00.
ti .Yi 1 r N 0✓
Nq O Y m
RIUm q 9 m m
qdYO. dW dd
a > d •• m > yti „ Y EE CO
M "'m z u Uy o a .. UT d dU O d
pY HYUyyY] > C
mmn m U qn dX U Wn yX F 'OwLd
m 1 d m m E q Y q m £ W q d w ✓=ti.rWi Y C
yp 0 P > .. WF N i .• 0f rf UmOn�. Ym
YhF 0Y N'O qET dOgET mU6` mdY U E 4
nYR 1, F2Y WOF OY n0 d .Oigy mu Ed
0 ..qi 0[ZO E m N m L y Nf' 0
il L O >9 Y c 3
W P mWOdu Yb0m
di0 O F A 'p OOY Yq
mW d 40
0 _
Y 'p0 .400 . m4U.]d £ F dY d0wm wm
T •U
e.�O 10 N0 * Wd0 0L
UUm � =U 44444 COMM mp E39Au mE
00000 oo.. om �+
oom 1A oom ry
oor r ooP P y
o Ir-.oi w r n.oa w
N
O O m O m O N!O S P
O P N ry O N!
PV01 P NmP P
OOmO.D OOmON P
OOP P OON .Y P
O P r r O P r r
bIP PP
N •I
O O M O M O ONO N P
O r N P O r t M K
P!V m P!V V
N!
00.'10'1 OOPOP m
O O P P O O! ! P
oor r oom m m
ore
O O P O P O O M O M m
Or'1 OrN N m
O P! a q N! !
O O P N
rG ! r
m F r m m m
•mi q . O OPO m
m P N N O O! O O N N m O U Y •
0.
O O!P P O!V ^
.L. .� .� P w d AO
ry m. m ry M P m N P > O ] O
p m
U Y d
O.MO! O O O O O 1W A d
U (] A
mw m O'1 P P E O r'1 O O m d p b P
6F md0 O O'IN ry Um oNM M La "'�
m rN mA •
[mj .moi C G h M >1 r d u
O Adm Na
CCiE oomom m oomol4 m d� .mi A9
pdjm A E OmN N f ��N N XL..Ci Ip0
A d s
G m y w
b m F
0..0.
F O O r O r CMM W ,
m 2 O O P P 2 O O OO P P !
m O O P P £
m % O OPO P % O O r O r
E u 4 OOm 1O 4 OOONm P C+• A 3y
U
q 1p F O N P P F P P m
W. 0 uU
Y m m
U
j Z hUl 0010! 41 00000 ! yti d ,my d'
x L mm.a .n L mm r. d�Ury aY
EO m •• ~ p Y 4 b� Y W A
P m A 9 m T d d
Yd yd � c
x Y
d w W
m m d m (UO S W d A S A Y A E •• d^�Y b C
m m u b
Y
10 Ou dF Ou O d.0iT Ey
SVm A m yWW d yWb � d Od' > Ad
O > q
y.1
m Z O d W b dl d W W O. m W •O
YDP U p bWddU WNO yWyv q0 1a0uR A >
O £ % d 040 `10. 414 U.]4. EE W. W
�• Fm L u
= 00 . E NNMlP ^INM ' d mL
'� O 84646 0000M0M " o E3 bE'
UUm U U
ooror oorvory .Pi
O O N O N O O n O n
OPPrN OlflOrn m
O P V V 00 p r V
ry! N
O OPO PO O m O m P
O O n O n OON O O n Orn n. P
O N P r N m
P P rv.m P
r!P H^
O O N O N
O O O n OOn N
O O m O V O! ! m
O P P r N O P O r n m
OP! ! OY1m !
P n m n
O O n O n O OPO P m
O O m O m O O!O! m
O N P r N O P O r n m
n P m! n
�Nn ,NN
O O O O! O ONO P
O O O O O O OPO N
O P O r n O P O r n N
O N n N O N n N
p O O O O N q
r 41Im, O
m f n G O O n O n
"'�C mNN OrVrP OOmOP N YNO.1nW ✓m'0
NC OmN mNN '� > OL CO 'i0
NO WN uUdL Um
U lam
EZ " ••
m w u m u U o o N o N o o vPi o YPf m W d d a o N U
4] P N r P E o P N r P W a >L c
.Ujy CNr n N - N DE Tc 'J mP
6 F O P ry a
uo Om Om�ry � mN TA ' EyU a^
y .yn £ L F ooNON m ooNo.. n oi .i TSy A,a
CC q1 'J' at
G OO�DOm m
CN qs F O•'�mKiCO.gT > D
rw- S rw•� vo
% L mm
Yjy ✓iy mT
YA
W m F O OPO P E O O a O! P C g L A 1 d H
m z o000o z oonon m -. m 1d m
41 omPrm £ OmPrm dTL
UO mAd
aWAUbq
£ 4 b.miN 4 b.OiN nNPL UNi9 LO
q uU uc
gyp. d % OOmPP % OOPNm P UC O O La
E F OON1pP E OO NOP -/. a1q �q E
O P N p O P N q Y C > d O a
n 41 P 41 P dAW •1 ; 1W D
m F d 0
u A u - w.n
U
j m fU.l OOVnn !u oonnN m E•+ dmL 'J mD.
7 O O O!m •� O O N P r W ^r 1 N W d
p o O N O P f O NOP P m E �• W m
a U W Lm L
1
42 y N
Op > Y O m 3Y GOrU mm
� � ~ C 00 d T w m
N q
Y z 4 4 i d •• m > d .• V L a y G d m ti u
Z •' m 1 UN_ Z
r_rON b .. y b .. U= ul mC
.pN Y F .>i m E D m 4 D d W ✓
L .l � OL
w £ > •• mF vmi £ > .. WF rF L~ 1=.T..Wi ye
0 .
F uY d g m ET q A E T N 41 m d u U E L m-•
6 e. r rO.4 dF0 ✓ mmEx1 O d.>i q'D�W"U� Ea
V)um yqm Emm a � Wm d pm > md L q 'J
y O L q d m W L a m 0 D. fd d O >g Y C 3 d•y
COP vi0 1mO myu
O £ mmONO 40 LAY mcO1 m >.
Y qm d4U `1 Di 014U.] C £ F dY amaq ^ m
N •U mEF E41 LuudWd ✓'^
r p.•p] d O r N m N m P V: '.J ; A a O m W L
UUp GCU 44444 OOmpO 4: 0 Eg
TAh1F
0000� oom.o� m � '
oom oon.
OOr r 000 m
N
O O m O m O ONO N
ONn N Orv^ •'�
N
r 10
O O m O m O ONO N N
O O N N O O m m
NNr r �1Nr r
N
O O n O n O O m O m N
N
!m m N !V m
O O N O N O O O O O
O O N N O O N n r
O O r r O O m m N
O n! ! O n! !
O O O O O O O m O m m
p1N N OON •v �O
Orr{ OrN N m
OPP ! OOP !
p O O O N N m N
rm nr m
mF ^o, oomom oomom o o 'W
oo! ! o0o a m o ✓ d
mO P m - It
Nm . mN mN > o om
.. o
F i
WWI V ✓ o. ..
N..i uE OOTOP OOPOT O Ad U.•W.
Um Cdmm
Tn �••�S O' F O.tlT m m ap wC
4 F O O N ry ry O N ry ry aW q w
U' r.IGGi d O Adm �a '
hm1 .Z. £ wt F Oomom C oorOr m G�ti mq
mm •pY '.J 00! f G OOm m n
4d i3 = Omn n 2 Omn n m YOB >7
d N A y m E N N F ��N N A ✓ a 3
am ti ✓ 3 3 " �H m a.
Y A
m C E O O m O m F O O m O T ti O q W Y
N 2 OON N Z OOm m n
4] OOm P £ OOm
d W m A d
Y u W
� x ooNON x porno.+ m u c x t d
F u 6 OOV V 4 ooT T C^+ y 3L
.rWi F C; 00
F o ry N m Y
m d �W d
✓ F E ✓ y...
� m m ooPo! tUn oonon ti E•+ d ma
n oor n oom � Yom "
p O O!ti � per"'^ m mEu mi
x a mm.+ .. a mm.. a9y a ✓
N E m L �'~Y yti
fo W •• •+ �' m 3u c mb
y m m 1 H ..✓i 1 '•. w
O W d W
x aV
� ' m 2 �+ U•+ 2 u �Uw p�tU mG
Ox y
`') .y ✓ F '� A U A.-�� d z F IO�Y t Y O
4l m a m (V-0 £ A L W m £ W ✓ A •• d'y ✓ d C
d J � O y m > .. W E m > •• W F r E L �
O 4 m d Y y y N E T N'O S E T .--1
4 .Oi � 4 df OM ANEm1 O dr.•O Ed
2 U N A W 2
A m .,E, a m W d n a W m WM N G• O >V W^
20 ^ umOm0
W p_N U O ✓ W O W O m m W 4 O A u m A >
O Y d m4 . 400Qa.14 . 4UL £ F dY W E W
FOOE tiN ! Nn Eta to u.0
. O N C 7 i m d m F
UVm U u 44444 mmmcm mm E3
RESOLUTION NO. 2782
RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NEED FOR THE
ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND
CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION THEREON
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota as follows:
1 . The City Council hereby finds and determines:
a) that it is in the best interest of the City and its
residents that the City acquire land and construct thereon a
new City Hall (the "Project") ; and
b) that it is necessary to the sound financial
management of the City that the project be financed in whole
or in part by the issuance and sale of the City' s general
obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $1 ,630,000 .
2. The proposition for the issuance of such bonds shall be
submitted to the voters of the City at a special election to be
held on November 3 , 1987 . The election shall be held and
conducted in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota
relating to special elections.
3. The City Clerk shall cause a notice of election in
substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A to be posted
and published as required by law as follows :
a) The notice of election shall be published once in
the official newspaper of the City at least two weeks prior
to the election;
b) The notice of election and a sample ballot shall be
posted at each of the polling places at least ten days prior
to the election;
c) The notice of election and a sample ballot shall be
posted in the office of the City Clerk at least four days
prior to the election; and
d) The sample ballot shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City at least one week prior to
the election.
4 . The polls for the election shall be open at 7 : 00
o' clock a.m. , C.T. , and shall remain open until 8 :00 o ' clock
p.m. , C.T. , and the polling places for the election shall be as
follows:
�Z
Pollina Places
Precinct 1 Fire Station
334 West 2nd Avenue
Precinct 2 - Public Library
235 South Lewis
Precinct 3 - Presbyterian Church
909 Marschall Road
Precinct 4 - FRgle Creek Town Hall
Junction of CR-16 6 CR-83
Precinct 5 - Christ Lutheran Church
1053 So. Jefferson
5. The City Council currently has under consideration two
possible sites for a new City Hall , the Gorman Street Site ,
located on Gorman Street immediatley east of the City' s police
and public works facility , and the block 50 Site, located on
Third Avenue immediatley south of the City' s Library . In order
to gather additional information on the preferences of the
electorate regarding those two sites, the City Council hereby
directs that the ballot shall also contain an advisory question
indicating whether the voters prefer the Gorman Street Site, the
Block 50 Site, or have no preference as to those sites. This
question shall be purely advisory and is not intended to be
binding on the City Council as to one or the other of those sites
or alternative sites.
6. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to prepare
separate ballots for the election to be printed on blue paper in
substantially the following form:
OFFICIAL BALLOT
SPECIAL ELECTION
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
NOVEMBER 3, 1987
QUESTION N0, 1
SHALL THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ISSUE AND SELL ITS GENERAL OBLIGATION
BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1 ,630,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ACQUIRING LAND AND CONSTRUCTING THEREON A NEW CITY HALL?
(_) YES
(_) NO
INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS ON QUESTION NO. 1 : Voters
desiring to vote in favor of the foregoing proposition
shall make a cross mark (X) in the square opposite the
word YES . Voters desiring to vote against the
foregoing proposition shall place a cross mark (X)
opposite the word NO.
QUESTION N0. 2
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING SITES WOULD YOU PREFER FOR THE LOCATION OF
A NEW CITY HALL?
(_) The Gorman Street Site, located on
Gorman Street immediately east of
the City' s police and public works
facility.
(_) The Block 50 Site, located on Third
Avenue immediately south of the
City' s Library. _
(_) No Preference .
INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS ON QUESTION NO. 2 : . Voters
should make a cross mark (X) opposite one of the three
choices. Question No. 2 is advisory and informational
only and is not intended to be binding on the City
Council . A voter may respond to Question No. 2 whether
the voter responded YES or NO to Question No . 1 . A
voter' s failure to respond to Question No. 2, or an
invalid response to Question No. 2, will not void the
voter' s response to Question No. 1 . -
7 . The City Council shall meet in the City Hall on
, 1987 , at o ' clock p.m. , C.T. , to
canvass and declare the results of the election.
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 1st day of September, 1987 .
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this 1st
Day of September, 1987 .
City Attorney
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF SPECIAL ELECTION
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special election will be held
in and for the City of Shakopee , Scott County , Minnesota, on
November 3 , 1987 , at which the following proposition will be
submitted to the voters of the City for their approval or
rejection:
SHALL THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ISSUE AND SELL ITS
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $ 1 , 630 , 000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ACQUIRING LAND AND CONSTRUCTING THEREON A NEW
CITY HALL?
(_) YES
(_) NO
The following question shall also be submitted to the voters
on a non-binding advisory basis:
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING SITES WOULD YOU PREFER
FOR THE LOCATION OF A NEW CITY HALL?
(_) The Gorman Street Site, located on
Gorman Street immediately east of
the City' s police and public works
facility.
(_) The Block 50 Site, located on Third
Avenue immediately south of the
City' s Library .
(_) No Preference.
The Polling Places for said election are as follows:
Precinct 1 - Fire Station
944 West 2nd Avenue
Precinct 2 - Public Library
35 South Lewis
Precinct 3 - Presbyterian Church
q09 Marschall Road
Precinct 4 - Eagle Creek Town Hall
Junction of CR-16 and CR-83
Precinct 5 - Christ Lutheran Church _
1053 So. Jefferson
The polls for said election will be open at 7:00 o'clock
a.m. , C.T. , and remain open until closing at 8:00 o'clock p.m. ,
C.T.
Any qualified registered voter of the City is entitled to
vote at said election, and any resident of the City not
previously registered as a voter may register on election day,
with proof of residence as required by law.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Judith Cox
City Clerk
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Dated: