Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/20/1988 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: September 15, 1988 1. Mayor Lebens asked for a map showing the City's precinct boundaries so that she can respond to calls. If anyone else would like a copy, please let Judy or Jeanette know. You may also refer calls to the City Clerk or the County Auditor. 2 . I met with the State Department of Revenue Division of Taxes and they will be reviewing the Scott County Assessor's Office performance for us. I hope to have something in writing within 30 days. 3 . As a result of the smoking policy adopted by Council on September 6th, smoking in the hallways during recess of Council meetings is prohibited. 4. On September 12th, Council asked for a copy of the Pay Plan. Attached is a copy of the Pay Plan for: City Hall employees for 1988, Police Sergeants for 1987, 1988 and 1989, Public Works for 1987, 1988 and 1989, and Police Officers for 1986 and 1987. The 1988 salary for Police Officers has not yet been settled. 5. We have received a set of 5 volume Elected Officials Handbooks. Each handbook is 35-50 pages in large, easy to read print. Any Councilmember wished to borrow one or all five volumes can do so. Call Jeanette or Judy. Attached is a copy of the table of contents for each volume. 6. Attached is the Revenue and Expenditure Report as of August 31, 1988 . 7. Attached is the Building Activity Report for August, 1988 . 9. Attached are the agendas for the September 22, 1988 Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission meetings. 10. Attached are the August 18, 1988 minutes of the Energy and Transportation Committee. JKA/jms y RESOLUTION NO 2852 A RESOLUT=ON ADOPTING THE 1988 PAY SCHEDULE FOR THE OFFICERS AND NON-UNION EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the City Administrator hereby authorized to issue warrants upon the Citi' Treasury, from and after January 1, 1988 or other date as specified and payabic to the duly elected, appointed, or hereby designated and appointed non-union employees of the City of Shakopee, in accordance with the attached 1988 pay schedule dated January 1, 198E heretofore adopted, or hereinafter adjusted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all aforesaid disbursementsshall be made subject to the prevailing conditions of employment and satisfactory performance of all the respective duties and responsibilities as specified in State Law, City Code and Resolutions as adopted, or amended and supplemented from time to time by the Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City contribution for health, life, long-term disability and dental insurance and/or an individualized health care account as may be provided by Council, shall be no more than $2:5 per month per employee, effective January 1, 1988. All employees shall receive this $10 per month increase over the benefit provided in 1987. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all Resolutions in conflict with this Resolution are hereby repealed and terminated, effective January 1, 1988. Adopted inM1r,, C sess_°n of the City until of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, del LS w day of zC 19-L/. !Mayor of the qty of Shakopee ATTEST: _ Cit((((((pppppg Clerk Appd as to fora this I �� day of OC� 19IF7. 1988 PAY SCHEDULE y JANUARY 1, 1988 Positions Elected Officials Salary Authorized ------ ._----____ ------------------ Mavor $4,200 /yr 1 Councilpersons 3,600 /yr 5 City Employees ----'_.______-- See attached 1988 Pay Plan City shall pay 1/10th of the amount shown on the pay plan as its share for the Community Services Director Fire Chief 2,000 /yr 1 Assistant Fire Chief (1st) 1,000 /yr 1 Assistant Fire Chief (2nd) 900 /yr 1 Fire Department Engineer 1,650 /yr 1 1st Ass't Fire Dept. Engineer 1,350 /yr 1 2nd Ass't Fire Dept. Engineer 700 /yr 1 Fire Training Officer 1,350 /yr 1 Fire Captain 500 /yr 2 Firemen 7.50 /hr 35 Mi:c. Temporary Employees from 3.35 /hr N/A to 10.64 /hr City Attorney - Retainer 28,028 /yr 1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE 10-Dec-87 1988 Pay Plan ------------------------------------------------------ Step Step Step Step Step Step #1-Start #2-lYr #3-2Yr #4-3Yr #5-4Yr #6 (Top) JOB TITLE - 758 808 856 906 956 1008 -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________________________ City Admin. 40,233 42,915 45,598 48,280 50,962 53,644 Fin. Director 34,215 36,496 38,777 41,058 43,339 45,620 Comm. Develop. Dir 30,958 33,022 35,086 37,150 39,214 41,278 Police Chief 36,221 38,636 41,051 43,466 45,880 48,295 Comm Sery Dir 28,166 33,382 35,468 37,554 39,641 41,727 City Engineer 32,797 34,984 37,170 39,357 41,543 43,730 PW SUPT. 29,118 31,059 33,000 34,941 36,883 38,824 Inspector 28,474 30,372 32,270 34,168 36,067 37,965 City Clerk 24,700 26,347 27,994 29,640 31,287 32,934 ___----_____----______________________________ Step Step Step Step #1-Start #2-lYr #3-2Yr #4 (Top) 756 808 908 1006 ______________________________________________________ Eng. Coordinator 24,074 25,679 28,889 32,099 Dep Chief 30,467 32,498 36,560 40,623 - ASa't Bldg Inspect 23,219 24,767 27,863 30,959 Planner II 25,504 27,205 30,605 34,006 Tech III/KIS Cord. 23,130 24,672 27,756 30,840 Admin. Asst. 22,692 24,205 27,231 3C,256 Planner I 21,830 23,286 26,196 29,107 Er.Act.Clk/Prsnl.Cord. 21,579 23,017 25,895 28,772 Program Supervisor 22,979 24,511 27,575 30,639 Tech III 20,964 22,362 25,157 27,952 Tech II 18,242 19,458 21,890 24.322 Secretary 15,816 16,870 18,979 21,087 Acct'g Clerk 1°,057 16,072 18,081 20,090 Clark/Typist II 14,910 15,904 17,892 19,iSO Clerk/Typist I 13,363 14,254 16,036 17,tI7 Receptionist 12,783 13,636 15,340 17,044 Custodian 12,992 13,858 15,591 17,323 RESOLUTION NO. 2859 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2852 ADOPTING THE 1988 PAY SCHEDULE FOR THE OFFICERS AND NON-UNION EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the 1988 Payplan for the Officers and non-union employees of the City of Shakopee is hereby amended for the position of Clerk/Typist II to read as shown below. Step Step Step Step #1-Start #2-lYr #3-2Yr #4-3Yr 758 808 904 1008 -------- ------ ------ ------ $14,774 $15,727 $17,693 $19,659 Adopted in '' d session of t e City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, eld this SL- day of�, 19SI-0. _�7 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City /fClerk App . ad as, to form this -4— day day of City ttorn 1987 - 1988 - 1989 Public Works Salary Schedules APPENDIX A Salary and Benefit Schedule for Local No. 320 for 1987. 1987 PAY SCHEDULE Street Foreman $13.35 per hour Mechanic 12.80 per hour after 36 months 11.65 per hour after 24 months 10.49 per hour after 12 months 9.90 per hour to start Park Leadman 12.59 per hour Heavy Equipment Operator* 12.57 per hour after 12 months 12.24 per hour to start Light Equipment Operator/Parkkeeper 12.06 per hour after 36 months 10.92 per hour after 24 months 9.76 per hour after 12 months 9.18 per hour to start Laborer 9.89 per hour after 36 months 8.90 per hour after 24 months 7.91 per hour after 12 months 7.42 to start In addition, all six (6) personnel with Light Equipment Operator/Parkkeeper classifications will be paid at the Heavy Equipment Operator rate of $12.57/11r. for the last four pay periods in 1987 in recognition of their periodic assignment to operate such equipment during the year. *Two positions are authorized and are filled by a "senior qualified" Light Equipment Operator or Parkkeeper after that person has successfully completed skills testing administered by operators from adjoining cities. 12 APPENDIX B Salary and Benefit Schedule for Local No. 320 for 1988. 1988 PAY SCHEDULE Street Foreman $14.02 per hour Mechanic 13.25 per hour after 36 months 12.06 per hour after 24 months 10.86 per hour after 12 months 10.25 per hour-to start Park Leadman 13.03 per hour Heavy Equipment Operator* 13.01 per hour after 12 months 12.67 per hour to start Light Equipment Operator/Parkkeeper 12.39 per hour after 36 months 11.22 per hour after 24 months 10.03 per hour after 12 months 9.43 per hour to start Maintenance Man*** 10.24 per hour after 36 months 9.21 per hour after 24 months 8.19 per hour after 12 months Laborer 7,68 to start In addition, all personnel with Light Equipment Operator/Parkkeeper classifications will be paid an additional sixty-two cents ($.62) per hour for the last four pay periods in 1988 in recognition of their periodic assignment to operate such equipment during the year. This is the rate differential between the top HEO and LEO/Parkkeeper steps. *Two positions are authorized and are filled by a "senior qualified" Light Equipment Operator or Parkkeeper after that person has successfully completed skills testing administered by operators from adjoining cities. ***Article XVI, Sec. 16.2 provides that after a period of one year a Laborer moves into the Maintenance Man position. 13 APPENDIR C Salary and Benefit Schedule for Local No. 320 for 1989- 1989 PAY SCHEDULE Street Foreman $14.72 per hour Mechanic** 13.58 per hour after 36 months 12.36 per hour after 24 months 11.13 per hour after 12 months 10.51 per hour to start Park Leadman 13.49 per hour Heavy Equipment Operator* 13.47 per hour after 12 months 13.11 per hour to start Light Equipment Operator/Parkkeeper 12.70 per hour after 36 months 11.50 per hour after 24 months 10.28 per hour after 12 months 9.67 per hour to start Maintenance Man*** 10.60 per hour after 36 months 9.53 per hour after 24 months 8.48 per hour after 12 months Laborer 7.95 to start In addition, all personnel with Light Equipment Operator/Parkkeeper classifications will be paid an additional seventy-seven cents ($.77) per hour for the last four pay periods in 1988 in recognition of their periodic assignment to operate such equipment during the year. This is the rate differential between the top HEO and LEO/Parkkeeper steps. *Two positions are authorized and are filled by a "senior qualified" Light Equipment Operator or Parkkeeper after that person has successfully completed skills testing administered by operators from adjoining cities. ***Article XVI, Sec. 16.2 provides that after a period of one year a Laborer moves into the Maintenance Man position. **Mechanic pay rates increased 2.5% over 1988 rates. Subject to the result of pending Comparable Worth Appeal, the 1989 pay rates may be adjusted up to an additional 18. 14 1987 - 1988 - 1989 Police Sergeant Salary Schedules and Longevity APPENDIX A - WAGES A.1 Effective January 1, 1987 the Police Sergeant Salary Schedules shall be as follows: After 12 months $2,946.48 per month Start $2,821.08 per month A.2 Effective January 1, 1988 the Police Sergeant Salary Schedules shall be as follows: After 12 months $3,034.87 per month Start $2,905.71 per month A.3 Effective January 1, 1989 the Police Sergeant Salary Schedules shall be as follows: After 12 months $3,125.92 per month Start $2,992.88 per month APPENDIX B - BENEFITS B.1 That said 1988 and 1989 benefit agreements as defined in this contract for the Police Sergeants are inclusive of the benefits in Local No. 320 labor agreement with the Police Officers when established effective January 1, 1988 through December 31, 1989. 12 ARTICLE XVI. WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION Employees assigned by the Employer to assume the full responsibilities and authority of a higher job classification shall receive the salary schedule of the higher classification for the duration of the assignment. ARTICLE XVII. INSURANCE Effective January 1, 1987 the Employer shall contribute up to two hundred twenty-six dollars and eighty-two cents ($226.82) per month per employee toward health, life and long-term disability insurance. Effective January 1, 1988 the Employer shall contribute up to two hundred thirty-six dollars and eighty-two cents ($236.82) toward health, life and long-term disability insurance. Effective January 1, 1989, the Employer shall contribute up to two hundred forty-six dollars and eighty-two cents ($246.82) toward health, life and long- term disability insurance. ARTICLE XVIII. STANDBY PAY Employees required by the Employer to standby shall be paid for such standby time at the rate of one hours' pay for each on standby. ARTICLE XIX. UNIFORMS Employees will be paid a uniform allowance during January of each year. This allowance will be four hundred twenty-five dollars ($450.00) cash, for calendar year 1987, four hundred fifty dollars ($450.00) cash, for calendar year 1988 and four hundred fifty dollars ($450.00) cash, for calendar year 1989. ARTICLE XX. LONGEVITY Effective January 1. 1987 the following longevity Pay Plan will be in effect: At the start of the fifth (5th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred five dollars and sixty-four cents ($105.64) per month additional. At the start of the eighth (8th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred thirty dollars and ninety-two cents ($130.92) per month additional. At the start of the eleventh (11th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred fifty-six dollars and eighteen cents ($156.18) per month additional. At the start of the fifteenth (15th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred eighty-three dollars and seventy-three cents ($183.73) per month additional. Effective January 1 1988 the following Longevity Pay Plan will be in effect: At the start of the fifth (5th) year of service, an employee monthshall additfreceive one hundred eight dollars and eighty-one cents ($108.81) per 8 At the start of the eighth (8th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred thirty-four dollars and eighty-five cents ($134.85) per month additional. At the start of the eleventh (11th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred sixty dollars and eighty-seven cents ($160.87) per month additional. At the start of the fifteenth (15th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred eighty-nine dollars and twenty-four cents ($189.24) per month additional. Effective January 1. 1989 the following longevity Pay Plan will be in effect: At the start of the fifth (5th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred twelve dollars and seven cents ($112.07) per month additional. At the start of the eighth (8th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred thirty-eight dollars and ninety cents ($138.90) per month additional. At the start of the eleventh (11th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred sixty-five dollars and seventy cents ($165.70) per month additional. At the start of the fifteenth (15th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred ninety-four dollars and ninety-two cents ($194.92) per month additional. ARTICLE XXI. HOLIDAYS 21.1 All permanent employees and full-time probationary employees shall be eligible for eighty-eight hours of holiday pay (11 paid holidays) . 21.2 Any employee required to work on any of the eleven (11) paid holidays shall receive an additional one-half (1/2) times his/her base pay rate in addition to the regular holiday time off. 21.3 The Employer may, at his option, buy back from any employee so requesting in writing by November lst of each calendar year any holiday time off earned but not used by the employee by December 31st of any calendar year. ARTICLE XXII. VACATIONS 22.1 Employees shall earn vacation as follows: 0 - 5 years of service 80 hours per year 6 - 10 years of service 120 hours per year Over 10 years of service 8 additional hours per year not to exceed 160 hours 9 _I 1986 - 1987 Police Officer Salary Schedules and Longevity (Police Officers have not settled for 1988) A - WAGES PEffective January 1, 1986 the Police Officer Salary Schedule shall be as follows: After 36 months $2,518.59 per month After 24 months (90% of Top Patrol rate). $2,266.73 per month After 12 months (80% of Top Patrol rate). $2,014.67 per month Start . . . . . (75: of Top Patrol rate). $1,888.94 per month A.2 Effective January 1, 1987 the Police Officer Salary Schedule shall be as follows: After 36 months $2,631.93 per month After 24 months (90% of Top Patrol rate). $2,368.74 per month After 12 months (80% of Top Patrol rate). $2,105.54 per month Start . . . . . (755 of Top Patrol rate) . $1,973.95 per month A.3 Effective January 1, 1986 and for the duration of this Agreement, the Employer agrees to pay one hundred dollars ($100.00) permonth shift differential to any employee appointed or assigned by the Employer to act as an Investigator/Detective. -10- r base pay rate. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled ourt appearance does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hour CALL BACS TLME who is called to duty during his scheduled off-duty ttme shall receive a two (2) hours pay at one and one-half times the employee's base pay rate. nextenson or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for duty does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hour minimum. ARTICLE XVI. WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION Employees assigned by the Employer to assume the full responsibilities and authority of a higher job classification shall receive the salary schedule of the higher classification for the duration of the assignment. ARTICLE %VII. INSURANCE Effective January 1, 1986 the Employer shall contribute up to two hundred sixteen dollars and eighty-two cents ($216.82) per month per employee toward health, life and long-term disability insurance. Effective January 1, 1987 the Employer shall contribute up to two hundred tventy-six dollars and eighty-two cents ($226.82) toward health, life and long-term disability insurance. ARTICLE %VIII. STANDBY PAY Employees required by the Employer to standby shall be paid for such standby time at the rate of one hours' pay for each hour on standby. ARTICLE %I%. UNIFORMS Employees will be paid a uniform allowance during January of each year. This allowance will be four hundred twenty-five dollars ($425.00) cash, for calendar year 1986 and four hundred fifty dollars ($450.00) cash, for calendar year 1987. ARTICLE %%. LONGEVITY Effective January i 1986 the following Longevity Pay Plan will be in effect: At the start of the fifth (5th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred one dollars and nine cents ($101.09) per month additional. At the start of the eighth (8th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred twenty-five dollars and twenty-eight cents ($125.28) per month additional. At the start of the eleventh (11th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred forty-nine dollars and forty-five cents ($149.45) per month additional. At the start of the fifteenth (15th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred seventy-five dollars and eighty-two cents ($175.82) per month additional. Effective January 1, 1987 the following Longevity Pay Plan will be in effect: At the start of the fifth (5th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred five dollars and sixty-four cents ($105.64) per month additional. At the start of the eighth (8th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred thirty dollars and ninety-two cents ($130.92) per month additional. -7- Atthestart of the eleventh (11th) year of service, an employee shall receive one I f hundred fifty-six dollars and eighteen cents ($156.18) per month additional. At the start of the fifteenth (15th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred eighty-three dollars and seventy-three cents ($183.73) per month additional. ARTICLE XXI. HOLIDAYS 21.1 All permanent employees and full-time probationary employees shall be eligible for eighty-eight hours of holiday pay (11 paid holidays). 21.2 Any employee required to work on any of the eleven (11) paid holidays shall receive an additional one-half (1/2) times his/her base pay rate in additional to the regular holiday time otf. 21 .3 The Employer may, at his option, buy back from any employee so requesting in writing by November 1st of each calendar year any holiday time off earned but not used by the employee by December 31st of any calendar year. ARTICLE %XII. VACATIONS 22.1 Employees shall earn vacation as follows: 0 - 5 years of service 80 hours per year 6 - 10 years of service 120 hours per ,year Over 10 years of service 8 additional hours per year not to exceed 160 hours 22.2 No more than the amount of vacation leave earned in a calendar year can be carried beyond December 31st into a new calendar year, except as permited by the City Administrator. An employee who is separated for any reason shall be paid for any accumulated vacation leave, provided however, that should an employee resign without given two (2) weeks written notice and except for reasons of ill health, he/she shall forfeit his right to accumulated vacation. ARTICLE XXIII. SICK LEAVE An employee shall accumulate sick leave at the rate of one day (eight hours) per month of service to amaximum of nine hundred sixty (960) hours. After nine hundred sixty (960) hours is reached, one day (8 hours) of sick leave per month shall accumulate to a sick leave bank. Any employee absent from work for fifteen (15) consecutive calendar days shall have said sick leave deducted from the sick leave bank until such time as the sick leave bank is exhausted before deductions are made from regular accumulated sick leave. ARTCLE XXIV - BEREAVEMENT LEAVE Employees may receive three (3) days of bereavement pay for the death of members of immediate family which shall be charged to sick leave. Funeral leave benefits for the deaths of individuals other than members of the immediate family shall be charged to vacation time. ARTICLE XXV. SEVERANCE PAY 24.1 Through December 31, 1986 any employee who is separated from his/her position by retirement, discharge, death or resignation shall receive severance pay of thirty-three and one-third percent (33 1/3X) of a maximum of nine hundred sixty (960) hours of accumulated regular sick leave calculated -8- R TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter One AN OVERVIEW OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT 1 A Sense of Mission Policy Making Administration and Management Conclusion Chapter Two SETTING GOALS 10 The Classic Approach Who Is in Charge of Goal Setting? Strategic Planning The Payoff Chapter Three MAKING POLICY THROUGH THE BUDGET 18 What to Look for in a Budget Document The Budget Cycle Chapter Four INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS 24 Active Intergovernmental Policy State and Federal Relations Interlocal and Regional Cooperation Types of Intergovernmental Cooperation Chapter Five HIRING AND EVALUATING THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR 34 Hiring a Local Government Administrator Evaluating the Chief Administrator RESOURCES 52 a y�((sTyy —�Y[ Yy �+�[ �Yf[_".S..r�y—l+S�.yyTv Y y yy yy����(( yy� yy���*'i((^4��"•.�i��+��i� ++�� ���.]](� yy� y yy yy �' �'T•T.T T�T T'� T T � � TT'T"T T-TT TT.TrTTT TT T �` y -+'�'� { .k. t[3�w:.rt•ib � �- E .7.E.z � 'li�S9�..,-F � LS - HAI: 04 , E,- "��- �:�� •� � t .- - - mo=w_. � 4,.x--: __ =-" r - = s=ue ,•�-�.: �. � ♦ D ,fir .. �.......... '.,�� �`�.`-�-•-4-Y:`'-R' OR ` •i <;o- TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter One DIFFERENT MEETINGS FOR DIFFERENT PURPOSES 1 Living in the Sunshine Rules of Procedure i Chapter Two STREAMLINING MEETINGS 7 Ideas for Better Agendas Clarifying Presentations Using Time Limits Conclusion Chapter Three CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMITTEES 14 How Advisory Committees Can Be Useful How Members Are Selected The Committee's Charge Staffing the Committee Evaluating the Committee's Work Chapter Four TEAM BUILDING 20 Knowing the Players Hiring an Outside Facilitator _ The Team-Building Process Problems and Pitfalls Chapter Five EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION 28 The Elected Official's Role Organizing for Public Relations Qj._. �s Y ����.� �,�-_ y `� r -'� �'��r"�"�i-'�a� �.<"'' �•t.to ys'•` s �s'�� �- _ w TABLE OF , CONTENTS Chapter One ALTERNATIVE SERVICE DELIVERY APPROACHES 1 Reviewing Local Government Service Delivery Seven Alternative Service Delivery Approaches Chapter Two ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 11 The Local Government Perspective The Business Perspective Setting Goals Factors Affecting Business Decisions A Strategic Plan Chapter Three PUBLIC SAFETY 22 Police Services Fire Services Emergency Services and Disaster Planning - Chapter Four PUBLIC WORKS 31 Engineering and Operations Chapter Five LEISURE SERVICES 36 Reassessing Government's Role Traditional Financing of Parks and Recreation Finding a Middle Ground Conclusion RESOURCES 42 E - �" SY span., 9" �AM n TABLE Or CONTENTS Chapter Two = __ PRODUCTIVITY 5 The Demd Oaicicl's Role Con:rectmg Out for the Provision of Services The H cioen Benefis o. rroduciivin• Programs Chanter Three RISK M^NAGEM--NT 13 P.Mcinies c R-sh Ncnco=_aeni lmmementmc nes:: h ancoemem CC'lcll]SiCn Tt -M4 Chanter Four LABOR—MANAGEMENT RELATIONS 26 W. =nom e: 1ne lame K h^ .s the Deme' C i s Role? The :a',-r Stens of Cole =l+e a`rc Ci,hg = Laho+ Management C inees - Wher. unions Ask to Be o-nmon UMo= as a Camvaic issue Concinsio.-. .tom.r Chanter Five _ INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 36 Records Maneeemen! Dnc Processing Chanter Six BUDGETING 41 Urwersancna the Mralmmml Bucael Toe Ooermmc Budge'. - TheBnoee. -rarove:nen!�racess =--- _ ,he Ca..i;c nedge: - Chapter Seven -i_ FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 62 -,-- 'Ritz Desi, Mrnccem=_nt _ _ 1, is TTT"f. :. wr Wwz f�1G.. 4� r 5 � '� as f_ _ � • � s ag ZAMIM a. xr w, »2+�' ' ��� "°"� '+'s-y.�R' �aPi+ �` h�,•.,.c>xs�3'�'' yam.-fit �z..a "` +.--tri>�' '� 5M 4 - tiYh rt�aZTi-�T` a TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter One REACHING YOUR PUBLIC—PERSONALLY 1 Know Your Public Communicate Effectively y Chapter Two ETHICS: RIGHT, WRONG, OR GRAY? 5 Can We Agree on What's Right? Purposes and Provisions of Codes The Board of Ethics Other Ways to Ensure Ethical Behavior Chapter Three TIME MANAGEMENT 14 Understanding Your Use of Time Getting Organized Conclusion Chapter Four COPING WITH STRESS 21 Physical Reactions to Stress Causes of Stress Coping with Stress Conclusion RESOURCES 30 i + 4+t2 7-77FST 777714, g 3INA a Ing � v l ` %``t 4 .. 'u �v�•� 2 / �+ EsJ�{" .. a` 3'0, vC�. - - "°' _may„ .. WW W WW WWW WW 41WYW WWW WW , W '�, `i • HNNNNeeoo NOaWW pNN N W--- --o Woo NN� n lWN-ouOYw ♦ -oYNOWNpo ♦ -oamYwNSWNNwWN-J ♦ - a NN- n 0 ♦ > PP u ♦ • om is 9mm-a < - manomAAx r.N xozmmN xamanmmrp m mm Y v z DOis n000s z Ano 0000-+ - -o ..< rm cmmroo--m.. v va a o-m ye y f r xr y an cmyrrmny n �o� A�mrnc oacmoa m nn x oNz - --'�mmz .. m m zaz mmnnm'rm z rL myA o ao ps - fa ism my n mmxam<wn o `pa< xmmmmv m znmY= « 'm =� csy« .r- a � r oK 'm maAm9s azcrm ma imcon an nr a m oozn m..z `m moo<a<'o y> N.mvacvs rmpm� s ss _ <smncn z avx � sa y .� � iryyrmmmrimmi m mm s z cmna m-A i msz aN Nm <'Aoci zi`O m'am mmmmorm mm s+ xw9o Ay== zrnm-mmz-r mmw mmym mmxrwzy �mmamy1 -i 20A immmm mo Tm �i mm" i m m N j m m a i m IN do - N . . . yy y I N C m eeo N ee eooNeooaee o Oe W 40o D Ooee oNe ooeooeeeoo0 c rx Z O C � Z m y I <x a I m D 9 Z m o a I y I I Np _ N YO N� Wpw p 2. -NNoowW ' - 0No dNe ' oNo eNd NJNeNN - m ONo m_ eeeo eo Oe o ooeooee O O o 0 N a W YN IN ONN NY N0 > Wlmw '.N W J ym � ONea m wW T WOOeNON N 1 eooONOO p eooeeoow o eeoee o 00 rC YYw JOOY lNpmeO pNN YOYeJNwuJ p m_JW � I O eNeWo1 _ emd0 n - NPooe o 0o Na 0 D eaWdWpJWOw PN0 NN0 N N J y uyoPWN We w Yp a 0 Neo -00N - WWW - �Nl O X ('� v \ N a m W 6 wNm M1 dmeodmuo 6 S oNPPo ed OmAaoonPaWNFPA m m omm 6 -NnNWe � ob .Ap a 0 QJ oOW�o omP ow oh F p Z W eoo F oNWi¢n w Pw nt -Nv�Nv m W I, I. 0 i bae _ W vNN_ P1p W W N mN R N. a p I W 40 2> ¢26 ¢WW4 a.LLm mO0=4m b o r W ap W u p m O m W' < 62.Z gb Oayi pj , u r p a0 b W2.W 4LL4K OWL d 4 LL IJ' N LL -O rOmm¢¢Zbp¢ FbL +bLL j wwWu V 2u V op W¢b>u F.�O-p0� 6 W'03u W, U u V b m OV Fo _PIv= 2. e- PPN o p< Wlblmn M n^WWmbmb-m mmW - n n`nnAnnnAnnA f n ♦ Annn ♦ A ♦ ! NN - YY4UYY4Y NYY4yUNNNNNN ! ya_o DC - NNo! n0 f = •♦ N f o f tl� • tlJN �otleooe �otlPeNNeNNo f � yN�ooNe n 0 s • • m PNY N a • O y y W Gn W xn NmW3wN V =C29V99NOW C �+Omm = y ZAA .NO00DC�OCC 9 T9 D.Z2ZArmr -10 y y N D D _ An T1rCy<TySDTrurOr9 O 9x4��tia9J9 \ K ^ y m2 wAW-�D _rieOrm 90ADY 3 i. z om.Zzo 'mm r . yaz2'ct . zm om_ raiazwmm yz Nww mmu nz m m m y r Wz mo- � � �mc _ wm N . i.. ias w merxmT Tr > c or < y9m W i `mv 'cm PyPA T m_ma m�� er o z 2 ATm r r n o__s zc T w 9 A ON 9NWT ^^ O m y yyjy N Ox 2S D Cp CA 9mT ' O n n zn � m JN o p • N V 4 0 J P N 4 _ T 0 4N 4mNuy ry y Na4 m 0ry tl n _ ' 0 N P oN JN tl OY yy I pe u e =oJN W o eooweJ pp C O 0 0 o eeNoea0o � 40oNo oPYP '. N D � O y Z C y 9 ' a_ JN W -N A NPPu NNN W N a NN A I N N N N J � - 09 I N N N N N JNNeNNe ooP oN oNeo oN A i o e o e e o a eooeooeee o 0 0 a Zy u -- - - - mu uro tlNNNP� euo : w ypPb ..;MT ay w i N N N N y - NNON NpNJW J NN WN 'N p y0 T ' w 00 0 e o N eN uo eJP aUl4e PPo eJpPN- N 'NO ! 'a 'fop r0 D r u - _ Q atla p P NN NP_NM_eeP T 6 ' y y � NNu JN tl4- NNPOPWN _ � � i H u .nNOUYe- _ wNo � - e �N 4PPOP0WJ� 9 W oW NN eeJ tlNPNa0o ya'• J jauJo-JNPN N N N4 M N ! aJONa _ _ a 9 N N .PjpNNyOmnaotlo a tl 0 4o-0o-yJ Ney Z N N N N o 0 0 o W0a0 NouPo-O- W m n p N W ! J4J _0P _ PN W 4 -1 J e o - e J m aJPPmNPputlaJN NPeuO J NJJ aOJaN y W � n 6 W> N m OJ 6 LL � O Oti FQ N W',. i I O N I. n W W = � < W S> O Z '. Y O. y =J S I. i.. W Z< ". ', I W' - i. I 6 m` i � � i I. ', Qi J S. W O �' 2 _ p 0 Y O OW v2 ZL 06 7 CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT PERMITS ISSUED August, 1988 Yr. to Date Previous Year Number Number Valuation Number Valuation Mo. Ytd. Single Fam-Sewered 12 50 3 ,609,711 5 23 1,989, 500 Single Fain-Septic 1 10 1,071,700 - 10 1,293 , 300 Multiple Dwellings - 2 216,800 - 7 645, 500 (q Units) (YTD Units) (-) (4) - (-) (16) - Dwelling Additions 3 42 196,713 5 51 246,891 Other 1 5 61,595 1 14 353 , 200 Comm New Bldgs 1 2 300,000 - 4 1, 045,000 Bldg. Addns 1 8 643 ,000 - 4 162 , 000 Industrial-Sewered - 1 915,000 - 1 600, 000 Ind-Sewered Addns - 1 575,000 - - - Industrial-Septic - - - - - - Ind-Septic Addns - - - - 2 167 ,475 Accessory/Garages 1 17 124,986 5 23 144, 217 Signs & Fences 10 49 90,185 5 41 75, 345 Fireplaces/Wood Stove 1 6 20,000 - 6 15, 100 Grading/Foundation - 1 500 - 5 56, 400 Remodeling (Res) 2 20 96,550 3 24 163, 505 Remodeling (Inst) - - - - - - Remodeling (Comm/Ind) - 15 204 ,000 3 24 306,850 TOTAL TAXABLE 33 231 8,125,740 27 239 7,264 ,283 TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - - - - - GRAND TOTAL 33 231 8,125,740 27 239 7, 264 , 283 No. Ytd. No. Ytd. Variances 1 8 1 13 Conditional Use 3 15 - 15 Rezoning - 2 - 1 Moving - 3 - - Electric 37 203 22 159 Plbg & Htg 28 192 34 196 Razing Permits Residential 1 3 - - commercial - - - Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date. . . . . . .4 ,249 Cora Hullander Bldg. Dept. Secretary CITY OF SHAKOPEE 7 BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN AUGUST, 1988 7910 Larry Farrell 2093 Austin Circle House $ 130, 000 7911 Steven Pieper 2779 Jade Circle House 108,400 7912 Cancelled 7913 Q & E Homes 2581 Emer d Lane House 50, 000 7914 Void 7915 Art Berens 123 W. 2nd Ave. Sign 900 7916 Ralph Christensen 2300 Marschall Rd. Alt. 10, 000 7917 Edman Builders 1066 W. 3rd Ave. Sign 1,000 7918 Clete Link 215 S. Atwood Addn. 80,000 7919 Gardner Brothers 2135 Murphy Ave. House 60, 186 t/-- 7920 Void 7921 John Svobodny 2430 Ony Drive tom+ House 93, 600 7922 Wallace Bakken Jellystone Campground Sites 210,000 7923 Lawrence Signs 1155 E. 1st Ave. Sign 25, 000 7924 Earl Johnson 1116 Harrison Deck 410 7925 Howard Krohn 125 N. Pierce Fence 250 7926 Gardner Brothers 2133 Her1 age Drive House 73 , 306 ef3 d3 7927 Gardner Brothers 9 �ari rive'. House 71,500 7928 Gardner Brothers9� f}er�ri�Xe House 72, 270 7929 Steve Laurent 2500 Emerald ne Fireplace 2,500 7930 Robin Fish 1288 Limestone Dr. Deck 1,500 7931 Joachim Engel 3401 Eagle Creek Alt/Sign 500 7932 Novak-Fleck 1225 Minn sota St. House 66,900 ori3 Ba sdsye �� 7933 B & D Development 1294 Lime tone Dr� House 79, 300 7934 Olympic Pools 1251 E. 1st Ave. Pool 24 ,000 7935 Harvey Homes Zor zon Dr. ,/ House 155, 000 7936 Mark Crom 1032 East ew Circle Fence 225 7937 Lawrence Signs 234 W. 1st Sign 2 , 400 7938 Steve Kupfer 1205 E. 1st Ave. Fence 3, 615 7939 Gardner Brothers 2140 Murphy Ave.pp House 74,499 7940 Royston Corp. 234 W. 1st Sign 2, 500 7941 David Rockne 121 S. Lewis Sign 250 7942 Joseph Johnson 1448 Blue Heron Tr. Alt. 6, 000 7943 Q & E Homes 2601 EEmera d Lane House 60, 000 7944 Baltic Builders 1069 Monroe St. Deck 1, 000 7945 Harold Marschall 2240 Marschall Rd. Garage 3 ,400 TENTATIVE AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Adjourned Regular Session Shakopee, MN September 22, 1988 Chairman Rockne Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3 . 7 :30 P.M. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: To consider variances in order to construct a car wash at 612 East First Avenue. Applicant: Clete Link Action: Variance Resolution #537 4. Other Business a. b. 5. Adjourn Douglas K. Wise City Planner NOTE TO THE B.O.A.A. MEMBERS: 1. 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. 2 . If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. 9 TENTATIVE AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION Adjourned Regular Session Shakopee, MN September 22, 1988 Chairman Rockne Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3 . To consider a request for a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage upon the property located at 8855 - 13th Ave. East. Applicant: Backstretch R.V. Park Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution # 540 4. Amendment of City Code, Section 11. 03, Subd. 7 I. The proposed amendment will allow the City to issue building - permits to property that does not abut a public r-o-w. Action: Recommendation to City Council 5. Discussion a. b. C. 6. Other Business a. b. 7. Adjourn Douglas Wise City Planner . lb ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Regular Session Shakopee, MN August 18, 1988 Chairperson Ziegler called the meeting to order at 7 :00 P.M. with Commissioners Kahleck, Roman, Ziegler and Schmidt present. Commissioners Spiotta and Prudoehl were absent. Also present was Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant. Roman/Kahleck moved to approve the minutes of the June 16, 1988 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock reported that on June 17, 1988 Van Pool Services Inc. (VPSI) informed the City that they would no longer be charging for personal miles driven in excess of 150. They were also waiving the $250 insurance deductible in the event of an accident on their own personal use. Mr. Stock noted that at the present time Van Pool Drivers pay $.21 for each mile in excess of 150. Mr. Stock also noted that the drivers receive free gas for these 150 miles. Mr. Stock stated that it is rare that our drivers operate the vehicles in excess of the 150 miles per month of free personal use mileage. For the first six months of 1988 the City has collected less than $200 in revenues from the excess mileage policy. The 150 miles of personal use including free gas is a subsidy that the City is providing to each driver. Assuming that a van gets 10 miles per gallon and the average cost per gallon is $1. 00, it could be said that we are losing $15. 00 per month per van in revenues. Commissioner Roman questioned how many vehicles we had at the present time. Mr. Stock noted that we have five van pool vehicles. Four of the vehicles go directly to Downtown Minneapolis. The fifth vehicles destination is St. Louis Park. Additionally, the City of Shakopee has a back-up vehicle located in the community at all times. Mr. Stock then reviewed several alternatives for the Energy and Transportation Committee's consideration. Mr. Stock stated that he is recommending that the City of Shakopee maintain the status quo. Chairman Ziegler stated that he would definitely be opposed to unlimited personal mileage policy in which the City provides free gas. Commission Schmidt stated that she did not have a problem with maintaining the status quo and did not think it was that big of an issue with the other van pool drivers. Kahleck/Schmitt moved to maintain the current personal mileage policy which states that van pool drivers may receive 150 miles of free personal use each month including free gas. Mileage in excess of 150 miles would be charged to the driver at a rate of $.21 per mile. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock reported that he discovered that there is no policy relating to the incentives offered to van pool drivers. Mr. Stock noted that since 1984 van pool drivers have been receiving 150 miles of free personal use per month including free gas. Van pool drivers also are not responsible for paying a fare. Commissioner Roman questioned whether or not back-up drivers received any incentive for driving. Mr. Stock reported that back-up drivers receive a discount of 25% off the regular fare. Mr. Stock then stated that he was recommending approval of van pool policy #20 which addressed the incentives being offered to van pool drivers. Commissioner Schmidt pointed out that the van pool fare structure policy as drafted did not address the 150 miles of free personal use of the vehicle or the rate charged to van pool drivers who drive in excess of the 150 miles. Mr. Stock stated that the following language should be added to Van Pool Policy #20, "Van Pool drivers are also entitled to receive 150 miles per month of free personal use (including free gas) . Mileage in excess of 150 miles per month will be charged to the driver at a rate of $.21 per mile. " Roman/Kahleck moved to recommend to City Council that Van Pool Fare Policy for drivers (#20) be approved. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock noted that at the Committee's last meeting he stated that the Home Energy Check-up Program was having some problems. Mr. Stock stated that he is recommending that the City enter into a agreement with the Scott\Carver\Dakota Community Action Agency. The tentative agreement spells out that the City of Shakopee would reimburse the SCDCA in the amount of $50 per home energy check-up. Chairperson Ziegler inquired as to why our building department could not complete the check-ups. Mr. Stock noted that there were several problems that affected the success (failure) of Shakopee's Home Energy Check-up Program last year. He noted that on all the advertising, it was noted that applicants had to meet certain eligibility requirements. Mr. Stock stated that he felt that this had an impact on persons who may have thought about submitting an application. Mr. Stock also reported that in the winter months our Building Inspector takes quite a bit of time off. The Assistant Building Inspector also took time off during the winter months. Finally, Mr. Stock noted that the stabilization of energy prices may have adversely affected the program. Chairperson Ziegler stated that last years mild winter may have also impacted the program. Commissioner Schmidt questioned whether or not our Assistant City Building Inspector would be able to perform the home energy check-ups if he had some extra time. Mr. Stock responded in the affirmative. Mr. Stock noted that Minnegasco requires a follow-up visit to be completed by the home energy check-up auditor. Mr. Stock felt that this was a major part of the program and that he was recommending that an additional $15. 00 be paid to the SCDCAA for A each follow-up visit completed and certified. Commissioner Schmidt questioned whether or not there was adequate funding for the additional $15.00 per follow-up visit. Mr. Stock responded in the affirmative. Chairperson Ziegler questioned who would receive priority for audits if we had a large number of requests. Mr. Stock noted that he did not anticipate that this problem would occur but that the SCDCAA would be responsible for applying the eligibility requirements as attached to the agreement. Commissioner Kahleck inquired about what would happen if we did not contract with SCDCAA. Mr. Stock stated that the City would have to return the grant funds that were not used. This would amount to approximately $20,000 assuming no additional check-ups are completed. Schmidt/Kahleck moved to recommend to City Council that the appropriate City officials be authorized to enter into an agreement between the Scott/Carver/Dakota Community Action Agency and the City of Shakopee for Home Energy Check-Up Program Auditor assistance. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock then gave a verbal update on Scott County Solid Waste Disposal Ordinance. Mr. Stock noted this program would have a definite impact on our current recycling program. If the ordinance as proposed is approved, garbage haulers would be charged a $2.00 surcharge for each load of garbage dumped at the landfill. Scott County would then retroactively reimburse the garbage haulers if they could prove that a percentage of their clients were participating in a recycling program. Commissioner Kahleck questioned how Scott County would monitor recycling participation rates submitted by the haulers. Mr. Stock stated that he did not know. Mr. Stock suggested that the Committee contact the three recycling organizations in the community to explain the potential impact of the Scott County ordinance on their recycling programs. Mr. Stock noted that he would be meeting with the City's refuse hauler next week to discuss possible alternatives for resolving the problem. Mr. Stock suggested that at the next Energy and Transportation meeting, the recycling groups be present and the Scott County Environmental Health Officer be present to explain the program and potential ramifications in greater detail to everyone. It was the consensus of the Committee that Mr. Stock draft a letter to the recycling organizations informing them of the special September meeting to discuss the impact of the Scott County Solid Waste Disposal Ordinance on their recycling programs. Mr. Stock reported that he received notification from Kare Kabs requesting that the Dial-A-Ride contract be amended changing the name of the company from Kare Kabs Inc. to Ride and Student Transportation Services. Mr. Stock noted that this would be Dial-A-Ride contract amendment #6. Roman/Schmidt moved to approve Dial-A-Ride Contract Amendment $8 changing the name of Kare Kabs to Rider and Student Transportation Services Inc. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock then reviewed the transit and recycling monthly reports. Schmidt/Roman moved to adjourn the meeting at 8: 05 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock Recording Secretary TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA September 20, 1988 Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding 1] Roll call at 7:00 P.M. 21 Recess for H.R.A. Meeting 31 Re-convene 41 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 51 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 6] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk 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 September 6, 1988 8] Communications: a] Robert F. Vierling re: problems accumulated over the years b] Gayden Carruth, Sup't. of Schools re: tax increment revenues generated by the March 8, 1988 referendum *c] Ann Higgins, League of Mn. Cities re: limits on issuance costs for municipal bonds d] Steve Keefe, Metropolitan Council re: regional breakfast meetings *e] Ann Higgins, League of Mn. Cities re: cities face threat of retroactive costs for sign control ordinance actions 9] Public Hearings: a] 7 :00 P.M. - Amending the Housing Code - bring draft sent out with 9/13 agenda b] 7:30 P.M. - Proposed Assessments for the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Sewer Extension from CR-79 to CR-17, Project 1987-13 c] 8: 30 P.M. - 1989 Proposed Budget 10] Boards and Commissions: Energy and Transportation Committee: *a] Dial-A-Ride Contract Amendment #8 TENTATIVE AGENDA September 20, 1988 Page -2- 10] Boards and Commissions: (continued) Community Development Commission: b] Adopting An Industrial Development Assistance Policy (Resolution No. 2948) - see MRA agenda item $4a 111 Reports from Staff: (Council will take a 10 minute break around 9:00 P.M. ) a] $44,000,000 Sports Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 1984-B (Shakopee Race Track Project) - Amendment to Indenture and Loan Agreement - Res. No. 2950 b] Riverside Auto Sales Request to Place Cars on Right-of- Way c] Offer to Sell Land to City - Gene Brown d] John McGovern Building Permit e] Fox Run 1st Addition *f] Scott County Historical Society Lawsuit g] Capital Improvements Projects for 1989 - tabled 9/6/88 (bring item llk from 9/6 agenda) h] Adams Street Light i] Market Street, Project No. 1988-6 j ] Shakopee Watershed Management Organization k] Scottland Easement Acquisition for Onyx Dr. Construction 1] Code Enforcement Violation Information Request m] Approve Bills in Amount of $779,633 . 68 *n] Hiring of A Planning Intern o] Amendment of the City's Thoroughfare Plan for the T.H. 169/101 Bridge and Interchange (Mini By-Pass) 123 Resolutions and Ordinances: a] Res. No. 2951, Adopting Assessments for Vierling Drive from CR-16 West through Hauer's 4th Add'n. , 1987-12 *b] Res. No. 2949, Receiving Petition and Ordering Report on Alley Improvements between 6th and 7th and between Lewis and Holmes *c] Res. No. 2947, Authorizing Participation in A Disaster Training Program in September d] Ordinance No. 252 , Rezoning of Property N. of 3rd Ave. and East of Adams Street 13] Other Business: a] b] C] 14] Adjourn to Tuesday, September 27, 1988 at 7: 00 P.M. to continue discussion on the 1989 budget. John K. Anderson, City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Adjourned Regular Meeting September 20, 1988 Chairman Steven clay presiding 1. Roll Call at 7 :00 P.M. 2. Approve the July 5, 1988 & September 6, 1988 Meeting Minutes 3. Shakopee Square Properties Tax Increment Project 4. Other Business a. b. 5. Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 5, 1988 Chairman Clay called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. with Commissioners Wampach, Zak, Vierling and Scott present. Also present were Mayor Lebens, John K. Anderson, City Administrator, Dave Hutton, City Engineer, and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Wampach/Zak moved to approve the Minutes of June 7, 1988 and June 21, 1988. Roll Call: Ayes; Comm.Wampach, Zak, Scott, and Chrmn. Clay Noes; None Abstain; Comm.Vierling Motion carried. Comm.Zak brought up an article in the recent issue of the National Cities Weekly put out by the National League of Cities regarding a historical preservation national main street project which was done in 1985 on Main Street on East Carson on the South side of Pittsburgh. He expanded on the article and stated that Shakopee should make more of a concerted effort to bring businesses into our community. Zak/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. 16V � Dennis Kraft Executive Director Judith S. Cox Recording Secretary SHAKOPEE HRA Regular Session September 6, 1988 Chairman Clay called the meeting to order with Comm. Vierling, Wampach, Zak and Scott present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; David Hutton, City Engineer. Wampach/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of August 17, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. Comm. Wampach expressed concern on the letter from the City Attorney, Mr. Coller to the Attorney General on the City's liability to guarantee or insure a loan for the proposed Hockey Association ice skating arena. He wanted to know if the Attorney General was aware that a referendum was held on this issue and that it was defeated. The City Administrator said that a letter of follow-up could be sent to the Attorney General on that issue. Vierling/Zak moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7: 05 p.m. Carol Schultz Recording Secretary *�3 MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive Director RE: Shakopee Square Properties Tax Increment Project DATE: September 12, 1988 INTRODUCTION• The Shakopee Valley Square Properties Redevelopment Agreement is scheduled to come before the HRA as of September 20, 1988. BACKGROUND: The item which was scheduled to be heard . at the September 20, 1988 meeting has been reviewed by the developers financial advisors and another attorney recently hired by the developer. This attorney, Mr. Mark Haggerty, is both a lawyer and a financial advisor and was recently retained by the Shakopee Valley Square Partnership. This matter was discussed with Mr. Haggerty and he has requested that the item be tabled until October 18, 1988 . In that the letter of credit has been renewed for another year, and in that the amendment to the agreement should not be made without provision of sound financial information the request appears to be reasonable. _ ALTERNATIVES• 1. Table the Shakopee Square Properties Tax Increment Project discussion until October 18, 1988. 2 . Take action on this proposal at this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the HRA table the Shakopee Valley Square Properties Tax Increment Project discussion until October 18, 1988. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to table the Shakopee Valley Square Properties Tax Increment Project discussion until October 8, 1988 . # yCL. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Industrial Development Assistance Policy DATE: September 13, 1988 INTRODUCTION• Development inquiries in the last month have prompted City Council to make a decision on whether or not the City will take a progressive approach to attracting industrial prospects. At the direction of City Council, the Community Development Commission (CDC) has prepared and is recommending Council approval of a policy on the provision of economic assistance to qualified industrial prospects. BACKGROUND: The Community Development Commission and City Council have been made aware of the development incentives being offered by our three major competitors. (Lakeville, Chaska, and Chanhassen) All three of these communities have aggressive economic development incentive programs that are available to qualified industrial prospects. (Shown in attachment #1 is a brief summary of the economic development incentive programs offered in these communities. A more detailed analysis is available upon request. ) In early August an industrial firm approached the City regarding the City's interest in offering economic assistance to the firm if they were to locate in our community. Staff brought this issue to Council's attention and informed Council of the economic development incentives being offered by our competitors. Following a meeting with the interested company, the development contact team determined that the business would be an asset to the community. The contact team also recommended to City Council that an economic development proposal be submitted to the industrial firm. In preparing the proposal, staff attempted to incorporate the development incentives being offered by our competitors. On August 2, 1988 the Shakopee HRA approved submitting the economic development incentive proposal to the industrial prospect. At this time we have not received formal conformation on whether or not the industrial prospect will be locating their facility to our community. The economic development incentive proposal included the City's assistance in working with the industrial prospect to secure industrial revenue bond financing. The proposal also called for the use of tax increment financing. This financing mechanism would provide three years of tax increment proceeds (minus fiscal disparities) to be provided to the industrial prospect for land acquisition and/or development costs. On August 2, 1988 the Shakopee HRA directed the Community Development Commission to formulate a policy on industrial development incentives. The CDC has reviewed the industrial development incentive policies of Chaska, Chanhassen and Maple Grove. They have incorporated elements proposed from these three programs into the industrial development incentive policy. (See attachment 42) The policy sets forth some general goals and attempts to develop criteria on businesses eligible for program assistance. The program also identifies the contents of a developers agreement and an application process. The incentives offered through the policy include industrial revenue bond financing assistance and tax increment financing. These two incentives may be offered to developers who meet the development criteria set forth in the policy. The level of tax increment financing to be offered shall be limited to three years r of tax increment capture providing that the developer agrees to pay the fiscal disparities out of the project. Finally, the program identifies the activities eligible for financing with the tax increment financing proceeds. The CDC believes that the proposed policy will allow Shakopee to compete for development with neighboring communities. Without such a policy, they feel that very little industrial development will occur in our community until the major roadways in our area are completed. Once the highways are completed, the CDC believes that Shakopee will no longer have to offer industrial development incentives to potential businesses. In summary, the City of Shakopee needs to make a decision on whether or not they want to wait until the major roadways are completed to increase the tax base as a result of new business start-ups or whether they want to take a progressive approach and aggressively solicit qualified industrial prospects to our community. Staff would like to note that the increase in land value as a result of new businesses attracted through this policy will not have an immediate impact on increasing the community's tax base but that the businesses will have a spin off affect on creating new jobs, housing starts and commercial activity. On September 7, 1985 the Community Development Commission moved to recommend to City Council and the Shakopee HRA that the Industrial Development Incentive Policy be approved. If City Council concurs with the CDC's recommendation it would be appropriate to approve the Industrial Development Incentive Policy by resolution. (Resolution #2948, see attachment #3) ALTERNATIVES• 1. Approve the Industrial Development Incentive Program. 2. Amend the Industrial Development Incentive Program. 3 . Do not approve an Industrial Development Incentive Policy at this time. 4 . Table this issue pending further information from staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REODESTED: Shakopee HRA Move to approve the Industrial Development Incentive Policy and recommend to City Council that they consider approving the policy. Shakopee City Council Offer Resolution 42945, a resolution approving and adopting an industrial development incentive policy related to the use of tax increment financing and industrial development revenue bond financing for qualified industrial prospect and move for its adoption. INCENTIVE Community Development Commission Development Incentive Survey Following is a brief summary of the development incentives being offered by Shakopee's three major competitors for Industrial Development. Shakopee Canterbury Industrial Park Area: 1500 acres Terms: $.90 Sq. ft. (Price includes specials) Incentives: IDRB's and Tax Increment Financing will be considered by the City on a case by case basis. Chaska Arbor Park Area: 60 - 70 acres Terms: $20, 000/acre Specials not included in sale price ($18, 000) Incentives: Any site $1.00 (qualified businesses and developers) or a credit for sales price of $20,000 per acre based on computation of 3 years taxes. e.g. 120, 000 sq. ft. building generating $1/sq. ft. times 3 years _ $360, 000 toward land, building permit, park dedication fees etc. Credit paid by City to buyer at closing of land. Owner assumes special assess- ments of $18, 000/acre over 10 years at 8%. Chanhassen Chanhassen Lakes Industrial Park Area: 260 acres Terms: $1.50 sq. ft. (Price includes specials) Incentives: City will write down special assessments, building permit, park dedication, SAC/WAC fees from 7-12% to qualified businesses. Industrial Revenue Develop- ment Bonds (IRDBs) , and Tax Increment Financing are also available. Lakeville Airlake Industrial Park Area: 1500 acres Terms: $40,000/acre (Price includes specials) Incentives: City will provide tax increment financing to qualified proposals up to 8 years to writie down entire price of land. IRDBs also available. Attachment #2 CITY OF SEAKOPEE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM Program Goals 1. To promote economic development which will increase the City's overall tax base. 2. To improve the community's economic vitality through the creation of additional jobs and support services. 3 . To assure that projects developed in the Industrial Zoning Districts are of top quality and maintained. 4. To enhance the competitive position of Shakopee for new and expanding industry. Program Summary The proposed program will provide Industrial Development Revenue Bond (IDRB) and/or up to three years of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance to qualified Industrial prospects. Qualified industrial projects (applicants) must meet or exceed the following development criteria to be eligible for program assistance: a. The project must be located in either the I-1 or I2 zoning district. b. The project must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. C. The project must occupy a minimum land area of 5 acres. d. A 10-to-1 ratio of estimated market value increase for the amount of tax increment assistance shall be used as an approximation of the return necessary for a minimally adequate project. e. The project must generate at a minimum, 50 fulltime job equivalents. f. The project must not create an environmental hardship for the community. g. The applicant must be willing to enter into a Developer's Agreement approved by the City. h. The applicant must make application for IDRB and/or TIF assistance on forms available from the City. i. The applicant should at all times retain and be assisted by qualified financial consultants and/or underwriters, and by legal counsel. j . Construction of the project shall not be commenced until the City has given preliminary approval to the application for financing. k. The City reserves the right to select a third party administrator/consultant to assist in the review and project development process. 1. The City reserves the right to consider and approve projects which substantially comply with the development criteria, as set forth in the program providing other tangertial items such as building materials, building quality, job quality, etc. exceed normal standards and have in the Council's judgement a significant positive impact on the community. M. The applicant must submit preliminary plans of the project and evidence of ability to finance the project. n. The applicant must provide security to the City to cover all costs paid by tax increment, unless the TIF plan is a "pay as you go" plan. o. The applicant must pay all costs of establishing the district unless the City agrees to allow costs to be generated by the district. p. Development must be of high quality with high quality building materials and landscaping as agreed between the City and the Developer. q. The City reserves the right to deny any application for financing at any stage of the precedings prior to adoption of the final approval authorizing the issuance of bonds. r. During the three year tax increment capture, the project will be responsible for paying the fiscal disparities contribution. Content of Developers Agreement 1. Property Identification Number. 2. Legal description of Parcel. 3 . Name of developer and project description. 4 . Documentation from the Scott County Assessor's office regarding the original assessed value and the projected assessed value after construction. 5. Documentation from the City indicating the amount of increment that will be made available. 6. Letter of Credit or Performance bond in the amount of the tax increment that will be pledged to the project. 7. Documented evidence of the amount of special assessments and City development fees. B. Prior to closing, the Developer will present plans and specifications of the project. Also, the Developer will present evidence of ability to finance the project. 9. A clause will be included for unavoidable construction delays. 10. A statement from the developer indicating that they are an equal opportunity employer. 11. A copy of the developers Affirmative Action Plan Certificate of Compliance. 4 a� 12. A clause indicating that the developer will file job openings with the local job service and advertise for open positions in the official newspaper of the City. 13 . A clause identifying development costs that will be reimbursed to the City out of the TIF proceeds. (i.e. Administrative costs, professional fees, etc. ) Activities Eligible for Financing with TIF Proceeds 1. Land write down (in part or in whole) 2. Cost of streets and utilities 3 . Grading costs 4. Utility hook up fees 5. Demolition and relocation costs 6. City costs such as trunk utility costs, building permit fees, park dedication fees, application fees etc. 7. Extraordinary landscaping and lighting 8. Extraordinary building enhancements 9. Soil corrections Application Process 1. Applicant shall make an application for TIF usage on forms available from the City. 2. The following information may be requested by the City: a. Statement of Public Purpose b. Description of Project C. Plans and Drawings of Project d. Description of the Company e. Legal Opinions f. Investment Bank Letter of Feasibility g. Market Analysis h. Pro Forma Analysis i. Financial Statements j . Certified M.A.I. Appraisal k. Traffic Impact Analysis 1. Other Documentation As Requested By City 3. City staff or the City's agent will review the data and make preliminary recommendations to the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority and City Council as to compliance of the application and proposed project with City objectives and eligibility criteria. 4. Final evaluation of the application will include, in addition to items subject to preliminary review, review of applicable credit analysis, credit enhancement and legal compliance. Formal recommendation will then be made to City Council. 5. After a review of the formal evaluation, the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority and City Council will consider final approval of the establishment of the TIF District and/or IDRB Bond sale and hold the appropriate public hearings. 6. All applications and supporting materials and documents shall become the property of the City. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Application for Industrial Development Assistance 1. Business Name: 2 . Address: 3 . Phone: 4. Contact Person: Date: 5. Assistance Being Applied For: IDRB TIF 6. Location of Proposed Project: 7. What is the principal business or product of the Company? 8 . How many acres will the project occupy? 9. What is the present employment of your business? 10. How many full-time employees will be employed in the business to be constructed in Shakopee? 11. Is the company for whom the project is being proposed public or privately held. Public Private If private, who is the principal owner? 12 . What is the estimated size of the proposed facility? Office: sq. ft. Assembly: sq. ft. Warehouse: sq. ft. Manufacturing: sq. £t. R & D: sq. ft. Other: sq. ft. TOTAL sq. ft. 13. What is the estimated cost to complete the facility? a. Land Acquisistion . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. Building Construction . . . c. Property Development (grading, landscaping) . d. Road Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . e. Utility Improvements. . . . . . . . . . . . . f. Machinery and Equipment . . . g. Professional Services (Arch. , Legal, Fiscal) . . h. Fees and Permits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOTAL 14 . What is the current Market Value of the property? 15. The City reserves the right to request financial statements and/or tax returns of the applicant for the years of operation. 16. The City reserves the right to request three bank references from the applicant. ai Attachment #3 RESOLUTION NO. 2948 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE POLICY RELATED TO THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BOND FINANCING FOR QUALIFIED INDUSTRIAL PROSPECT WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council believes the attraction of qualified industrial prospects to our community will be a positive affect on Shakopee's economic vitality; and WHEREAS, communities in the metropolitan area are actively competing for the location of quality industrial prospects to their respective community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL that the Industrial Development Incentive Policy set forth in the attached Exhibit A are hereby made a part hereof and adopted by the Shakopee City Council effective as of the date of this resolution. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this _ day of 1988 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 6, 1988 Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. with Cncl. Viewing, Clay, Zak, Scott and Wampach present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; David Hutton, City Engineer; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director; Judith Cox, City Clerk; Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney arrived later on during the meeting. Clay/Vierling moved to recess to HRA. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling moved to reconvene to City Council. Motion carried unanimously. Liaison reports were given by Councilmembers. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address anything not on the agenda. There was' no response. Clay/Vierling moved to approve the consent business. __ Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Clay/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of July 5, August 16, August 17, and August 23, 1988 . (Approved under consent business. ) Weir Beckon, President of Heavy Duty Air, addressed the Council on the matter of correspondence received from Leroy Houser in regards to their request for a temporary certificate of occupancy for their 55, 000+ square foot building in Canterbury Park. There has been some misunderstanding in regards to the construction and occupancy of this building. Clay/Vierling moved to direct staff to sometime within the next month get together with the building inspector and sit down with Mr. Beckon and get a list of events that took place and compile the information for a meeting with Cncl. Clay, Zak and Wampach and try to come up with a solution. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to support the issues on the ballot as marked for the 1988 LMC Regional Meetings/Issues Papers except to take no position on the Code of Ethics. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Clay moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a five year agreement with the Laurent Building property owners for the location of a trash receptacle on the NE corner of the Blue Arrow Parking Lot providing that the property owner agrees to maintain and construct a 6 foot high fence around City Council September 6, 1988 Page -2- said garbage dumpster subsequent to the payment of a fee in the - - - amount of $5. 00 per year. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to authorize payment of the annual membership dues to the National League of Cities in the amount of $556. 00. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Wampach moved to approve bills in the amount of $422,188. 61. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. The City Clerk reviewed the subject of possibly amending the City Code to permit issuance of a liquor license to bowling alleys. Clay/Zak moved to table discussion until there is an interest by _ a bowling alley to obtain a license. Motion carried with Cncl. Vierling opposed. Discussion ensued on the performance review of the part time temporary Zoning Code Enforcement Officer. This person was hired for 6 months and after completing three months he has handled 33 complaints, 27 of which have been resolved, 6 are unresolved and there have been no citations issued. Discussion ensued on whether or not to continue this position for another three months. Vierling/Wampach moved to continue the position of the Code Enforcement Officer for another three months, continuing our commitment, and then folding it into the Building Department. Motion defeated with Cncl. Vierling, Clay, Wampach in favor of the motion. Scott Zak moved to terminate the Code Enforcement Officer position on October 31, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on the Appeal by Allstate Leasing Corporation from Planning Commission denial of a Conditional Use Permit to move in a temporary sales office at 8050 East Hwy 101. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the proposal of Allstate Leasing for a Conditional Use Permit. Susan Estell, attorney for Allstate Leasing Corporation, said that the trailer would be a temporary sales office for a car dealership. They need a sales office that is visible. They would be willing to put skirting around the city Council September 6, 1988 Page -3- trailer and replace the siding with wood so that it will look more permanent. Clay/vierling moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Scott offered Conditional Use Permit CC-534, Move In a Temporary Sales Office at 8050 East Hwy 101, and moved for it's Denial, (with the understanding that the applicant can come back and resubmit an application. ) Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Wampach moved to open the public hearing on vacation of 11th Avenue between Minnesota and Dakota Streets (North of Meadows Addition) . Motion carried unanimously. The City clerk reviewed the conditions of the final plat approval of Meadows lst Addition saying that the developer submitted the petition for the vacation of 11th Avenue between Minnesota and Dakota Streets which was a condition of the plat approval. Mrs. Roger Schmeig, 1068 Minnesota Street, said she has been bothered by kids going through her property with their cars, snowmobiles and motorbikes. She would recommend that the property be closed entirely and not put a sidewalk in at all at this time. The City Administrator said that in regards to the cars using the sidewalk there would be fencing and landscaping at the end of the sidewalks which would resolve the issue of cars using the sidewalks. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone else from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no response. Vierling/Zak moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved that the vacation of 11th Avenue is not in the public interest and that it not be pursued at this time. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on the lith Avenue Right-of-Way within Prairie Estates Subdivision. The City Planner explained that the final plat as approved shows a 40 foot Right-of-Way and 15 foot easement, providing a 55 foot buffer between any existing properties and new houses in the Prairie Estates Subdivision. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this item. There was no response. Clay/Wampach moved to reaffirm Council's position on the Prairie Estates Subdivision as approved at the Tune 21, 1988 meeting. City Council September 6, 1988 Page -4- Motion carried with Cncl. Vierling abstaining. Clay/Scott moved for 10 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Wampach moved to call the meeting back to order at 8:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved the appropriate City officials be authorized to enter into the agreement between the Scott/Carver/Dakota Community Action Agency and the City of Shakopee for Home Energy Check-up Program auditor assistance. (Motion approved under consent business. ) Clay/Vierling moved to approve Shakopee Area Transit Policy (Approved under consent business. ) W20. Discussion ensued on the Interim improvements to Hwy 101/169 Intersection. The City Engineer reviewed the two possibilities that may improve the flow of traffic through town. One being prohibiting left turn movements from 1st Avenue to southbound traffic on Sommerville, Lewis, Holmes, and Fuller Streets; another being prohibiting parking on 1st Avenue during peak times. He said left arrows cannot be added to the existing stop lights at this time without significant modifications and MN/DOT is not willing to do that at this time. There seems to be no peak time on 1st Avenue. Cncl. Wam ach p had a concern on the traffic coming from the south on Holmes and their need to get across the bridge in the he morning. Cncl. Zak said he had a document from downtown businessmen stating their opposition to cutting out parking on 1st Avenue. Cncl. Vierling said she could not support cutting out parking on 1st Avenue either. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address the issue. City Attorney Julius Coller, II, arrived at 9:10 p.m. and took his seat. Mayor Lebens said she would prefer using Levee Drive at least for all local traffic in Shakopee. Charlie Fonder, Fonder Carpets on 1st Avenue, could not see restricting left hand turns off of lst Avenue because it would back up the traffic on 1st Avenue. Gregg Wiser, Eastman Drug, said closing Holmes would not serve in the best interest of the people of Shakopee. Mary Lou Sinnen, 229 West 1st Avenue, said she is against eliminating any left hand turns off of 1st Avenue because it would take business away from some of the other businesses in that area. She had a main concern on the length of the walk City Council September 6, 1988 Page -5- signal on lst Avenue not being long enough for the senior citizens to cross the street. She said it is hard to get across with pedestrian signs because they are not long enough. She suggested putting signs for pedestrian crosswalks. She supports using Levee Drive. Chuck Mensing, 117 Fuller, said that contrary to what the traffic report said on increased traffic on Fuller when Holmes was closed the traffic was increased significantly. Richard Larson, 213 East 1st Avenue, had a concern that the signs were moving traffic. He suggested using more signs and marking crosswalks better. By putting signs on the edge of town it may help to slow traffic down before it hits town. F Bev, 117 East lst Avenue, said she supports Mayor Lebens suggestion on using Levee Drive to eliminate some traffic from lst Avenue. She would also like something done to improve the length of the lights at the crosswalks. Roger Buxton, Valley Sports, suggested that Council consider taking no action at all. Glen Graber, 919 5th Avenue, suggested trying to get the traffic to slow down before they enter town. He said it should be cut down to 30 miles per hour before they even hit the bridge on the west end of town. Shirley Garness, Shakopee Bakery, presented a petition on not banning parking on lst Avenue. Clay/Zak moved to receive and file the petition from Shirley Garness on not banning parking on lst Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Ruben Ruehle, Ruehle Jewelers, addressed the issue of closing Holmes Street and it having a detrimental effect on local businesses. He said he does not feel the people of Shakopee should have to pay for a State mess. Bruce Garness, said that by eliminating left turns on to ist Avenue will actually create more traffic on other streets. He suggested taking care of the residents of Shakopee first. Dave Eckhart, 2017 Norton Drive, had a concern on Shakopee becoming a bedroom community to the Metropolitan area. Gary Laurent said he sees no choice but to whether this traffic situation out until the bypass is completed. He supports a leave it as it is situation. City Council September 6, 1988 Page -6- Norman Monroe, 312 East 1st Avenue, said that by eliminating left turns downtown it might decrease people coming downtown because it would slow traffic down considerably. He does support eliminating left turns into the alley behind City Hall. Clay/Vierling moved to prohibit left turns from the bridge into the alley behind City Hall. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Zak, Wampach, Mayor Lebens Noes: Cncl. Scott and Vierling Motion carried. Clay/Vierling moved to reject the Railroads proposal and subsequent agreement to remove the Railroad power lines in Downtown Shakopee. (Motion carried under consent business. ) Discussion ensued on the Evaluation of the Downtown Committee. Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant, reviewed the history of the Downtown Committee stating that in 1981 they were created as a subcommittee of the Industrial Commercial Commission, now known as the Community Development Commission, to prepare and recommend a downtown economic development strategy to the City Council. There has been several discussions on the merits of maintaining the Downtown Committee as an advisory body. Cncl. Vierling said she feels there are still a few items that the Committee has not completed and should be evaluated before a final decision is made. Mayor Lebens said she feels the objectives have been met. There was some discussion on just disbanding the Committee or phasing it out over a period of time. Cncl. Scott said he feels an independent merchant association would be good including the east and west ends of the mall to get some new input from different areas. Cncl. Wampach said he has been a member of the Committee for a number of years and he feels it would be a mistake to ban this committee at this time. Cncl. Vierling suggested that Council meet with the CDC to determine the status of the Downtown Committee. Cncl. Scott moved to disband the present Downtown Committee and form a Merchants Committee which would include the easterly shopping center, the downtown and the mall. Motion died for lack of a second. Gary Laurent, Chairman of the Downtown Committee, said that there are still goals of the Downtown Committee that need to be achieved whether it be by the present Committee or an independent merchants association. He suggested having a meeting to evaluate the need for a Downtown Committee before making a final decision to disband it. Bill Wermerskirchen, Bill's Toggery, said he also feels that the Downtown Committee should be evaluated further to determine what the Downtown Committee actually does and what goals have not yet been met. City Council September 6, 1988 Page -7- Charlie Fonder said if people wish to donate their own time to serve on the Committee it should be further evaluated before it is disband. Vierling/Clay moved to table discussion on continuing the Downtown Committee until a joint meeting can be held with the Community Development Commission to discuss this issue further. Motion carried with Cncl. Scott and Mayor Lebens opposed. Clay/Vierling moved to authorize staff to enter into a purchase agreement for law-enforcement software programs to include installation, training, and prorated system maintenance with Contract Programming Specialists, Inc. , in the amount of $8,830. 00, using contingency funding. (Motion carried under consent business. ) Vierling/Wampach moved to hire the firm of Dorsey and Whitney as bond counsel for the City of Shakopee. (Cncl. Scott was absent for roll call) Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Consensus was that Mr. O'Meara still be used for the Bakken Project and for the Upper Valley Drainage Project. Discussion ensued on the personnel assignment of Police Officer Russell Lawrence to Investigative Officer- due to an automobile accident which prohibits him from returning to work as an active street officer. The Police Chief recommends assigning him to a detective position. Vierling/Wampach moved to appoint Officer Lawrence Acting Detective with his salary to remain the same. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Zak moved to approve the request of the neighborhood and remove the island in the cul-de-sac on Merritt Court and deal with any others as they come in. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Clay/Vierling moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to proceed with signing the City up to the Gopher State One-Call System as recommended by the League of Minnesota Cities. This includes submitting the information form and initial start-up fee of $25.00, but not executing any agreements at this time. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. City Council September 6, 1988 Page -8- Clay/Vierling moved to table discussion on the Capital Improvements Projects for 1989. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling move to concur with the Selection Committee for the Shakopee Bypass (T.H. 101) consisting of Mike Christiansen, MN/DOT; Dave Hutton, City Engineer; and Brad Larson, County Engineer. (Motion approved under consent business. ) Clay/Vierling moved to authorize proper City officials to reduce the $170,940.00 letter of credit from Heritage Development, Inc. by $85, 000.00. (Motion carried under consent business. ) Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2941, A Resolution Vacating Easements in Prairie House 1st Addition As Herein Described, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business. ) Clay/Vierling moved for approval of Administrative Policy No, 176, A Smoking/No Smoking Policy effective October 1, 1988. (Approved under consent business. ) Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2942, A Resolution Relating to the Adherence by City Employees and Officials to the Provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business. ) Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2943, Authorizing the City of Shakopee to enter into an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the Upper Valley Drainage Project No. 1987-5 and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business. ) Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2944, A Resolution Accepting Bids on 11th Avenue Project No. 1988-5 to Hardrives, Inc. of Maple Grove, MN, 55369 and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business. ) Clay/Vierling moved to approve Resolution No. 2945, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for the Upper Valley Drainage Project Phase I (from 4th Avenue to County Road 79) Project No. 1987-5 and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business. ) Clay/Zak moved to adjourn to Monday, September 12, 1988 at 7 :00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11: 15 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol Schultz Recording Secretary CNS e N T' 7* I I7 N P t7,U 17 / a n/ City Council September 6, 1988 Page -7- Charlie Fonder said if people wish to donate their own time to serve on the Committee it should be further evaluated before it is disband. Vierling/Clay moved to table discussion on continuing the Downtown Committee until a joint meeting can be held with the Community Development Commission to discuss this issue further. Motion carried with Cncl. Scott and Mayor Lebens opposed. Clay/Vierling moved to authorize staff to enter into a purchase agreement for law-enforcement software programs to include installation, training, and prorated system maintenance with Contract Programming Specialists, Inc. , in the amount of $8, 830.00, using contingency funding. (Motion carried under consent business. ) Vierling/Wampach moved to hire the firm of Dorsey and Whitney as bond counsel for the City of Shakopee. (Cncl. Scott was absent for roll call) Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Consensus was that Mr. O'Meara still be used for the Bakken Project and for the Upper Valley Drainage Project. Discussion ensued on the personnel assignment of Police Officer Russell Lawrence to Investigative Officer due to an automobile accident which prohibits him from returning to work as an active street officer. The Police Chief recommends assigning him to a /detective position. The City Administrator explained that this is an appointment within the Police Civil Service Commission and that both comparable worth and the union provide for an additional $100.00 per month for a detective. There are no requirements which ' provide that the position be competatively appointed. Discussion was held on: was the position loregted for the individual, is there a need for a second detective, is there a more senior patrolman who is more qualified, and is the individual alified?. Vierling/Wampach moved to appoint Officer Lawrence Acting Detective with his salary to remain the same. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Zak moved to approve the request of the neighborhood and remove the island in the cul-de-sac on Merritt Court and deal with any others as they come in. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. tQ/ Mr. Robert F. Vierling Re: Continued lies, underhanded 221 E. Fourth Avenue maneuvers, falsified reports, and Shakopee, Mn. 55379 deliberate harrassment by City Dn- ployees. Shakopee City Council; Mayor 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Dear Council Members and Mayor: Sept. 6, 1988 I would like some direct answers to problems that have accumul- ated over the years; with no more stalling, tricks, or harrassments to my rights. I simply want "yes" or "no" answers or direct explana- tions as called for - nothing else, or answered by anyone other than the City Council and Mayor. I want no more "tabling" or "on file". I want this read aloud at the Council Meeting, with no more "artful dodg- ing. Let's get a little backbone into this Council by giving honest replies to honest questions! 1. Now that Brownell has run out of tricks and manipulations, and has no reason now not to give me a gun permit, I want to hear from the City Council and Mayor whether or not you will instruct him to issue the permit. Answer "yes" or "no" with following explanation. 2. When is the City of Shakopee going to fix the damage that the City and Hentges Construction has done to my property with their Criminal Trespass and personal property damage, which now amounts to a few thou- sand dollars. Please offer date of repair, and monetary damages forth- coming. 3. When is the City of Shakopee going to make arrangements for a settlement to pay the bills for the back injury received due to the City's neglect of two winters ago? I have a letter from the City and so has the Shakopee Medical Center, stating they would take care of this, but after large hospital, medical, and drug bills, the City turned around and dis- claimed responsibility. How rotten can you get! Name date you will make arrangement for settlement, and list those who will be paid. 4. The alley which was put on my block which cost me a few dollars less than $1200.00 was put in wrong, as some of you already know. I have a letter from the City stating that if they did not fix it, they would re- imburse the $1200.00. They fixed the West end of the alley but did not fix the rest of the 3 lots that my property adjoins. Please name date when you will repay this amount plus interest. 5• The Holmes Street drain does not benefit my property. State law, which Shakopee cannot supersede, definitely states that when it is of no benefit to your property, you cannot be charged assessments for it. Anderson charged me just under $1400.00. When I pointed out that he didn't know what he was doing, he agreed to drop it down to just over $1,000.00, admitting in writing that he was wrong. To me, this is thieveryl I want to know when the City of Shakopee intends to reimburse me the $1064.00, plus interest, for the last 4 years. Please name expected date. Pg. 2 - - sept-6, 1988 o-, 6. As for assessments on E. Fourth Avenue, my neighbor, who has 120' was assessed only $1780.00, while I, with 180', (which is only 60' more,) was assessed $4,365.00. Anderson, as usual, had an excuse for that. He states in a letter I received from him, that McNearney's corner lot (4th and Lewis) had only 71' on Lewis, so therefore he only had to pay $1,780.00. Now, I only had, at that time, 71' on Sommerville and 4th, therefore, I should only have been charged $1,7$0.00 also. Ergo, what is correct for McNearney also applies to my corner. I have already paid more than that amount, so I would like the difference taken off my tax roll. You can see why Anderson is untrustworthy. He has de- liberately overcharged on three projects, and this harrassment cannot be simply coincidence. Please acknowledge "yes" or "no" as to whether or not this will reduce my tax, and in what amount. 7. I was promised that the alley light would be placed in its proper position to benefit everyone in the block, notjust the two on the West end. Your new Engineer promised he'd do something about this, but, of course, nothing has been done. Please name date of removal and re- placement of above mentioned light. 8• The new City Engineer also promised he would take care of the dangerous matter of the large rocks used for decorative fill on the South side of East Fourth between Lewis and Sommerville. These rocks are of a large size, and are good missiles for kids, who, have so far, broken out 9 of my windows. These are also a menace to other neighbors, drivers, and pedestrians in the area when they are hurled by passing automobile tires. Please name the date you intend to remove large rocks and replace with smaller, decorative fill. 9• 1 was also promised, again, in writing, that the City of Shako- pee, who overcharged me for some 9 months at $37.50 monthly for sewer and water (on which they'd made still another "mistake"), would either give me a refund or credit, and this was okayed by the Council itself. Please name date reimbursement or refund can be expected. 10. When is the Council going to reprimand Hauser for his deliberate lying and hsrrassment concerning the statement that I have "tanks" in my corner lot. I've had a lot of undue criticism and harrassment by people thinking that I actually had tanks still there. All this caused by his (Hauser's) big mouth! Either give me the date of Hauser's expected apology or the date when you would like to start digging up my so-called "tank" (along with 32 others I can name in town) and I will call the Mn. Pollution Control Agency to be there as my witness. Name the date. 11. Speaking of Hauser, when are you going to reprimand him for the business that he runs on the side, which is in direct conflict with his job; or, has he gotten out of the liquor business at the Backstretch? Also why is he allowed to build a duuplex and large double garage on one small lot, when I was not allowed to build a garage on 3 large lots? Doesn't this come under misuse of official capacity? Name date you intend to take steps against Hauser. a, Page 3 - - Sept.6, 1988 12. On receipt of your letter of August 18, 1988, Mayor Lebens instructs me that under Ordinance N 222, Mr. Jones has the authority to issue weedand nuisance citations. I did not question that - I questioned the fact that he writes citations of legal forms impersonating a law en- forcement officer, and his falsifying of Police ICR Reports. There's one hell of a difference) Please name the date he received his 4 year Law En- forcement Degree; when he passed his Mn. test; and/or when he was "grand- fathered" in (considering his age) . Or, name a date when he will use forms other than those used by vested law enforcement officersl 13. 1 need to know why Jones wrote me a weed citation that should have gone to the City of Shakopee and Hentges and Sons Construction. You and Hentges planted that mess of pig weed, marijuana, crab grass, nuts edge, etc.. not me! I have had to go to Court once on this, and am awaiting a second Court date. I want this mess cleared up damn quick - before I'm informed of the second Court date! ! I thought the Council and Mayor were smart enough to know that making an Ordinance to supersede the state law does not make it legal! Name the date (soon) that you intend to act on this! 14. And, speaking of the above mentioned weed patch donated by the City and Hentges, I have tried now for two years to get a mower through it! Because of the ridiculous contouring, rocks, etc., I have broken the riding mower twice, and the self-propelled walking mower once! It is impossible to cut through with either mower! The amount of damages to the mower, parts, repairs, labor, etc. come to $114.00 so far! Please name date you intend to reimburse me for these ridiculous, continuous repairs! - 15• when is the Council and Mayor going to advise Mr. Brownell to apolo- gize to me in writing for his harrassment about my dogs. I have witnesses to prove the police came to warn me about "my dogs and their barking" long after the dogs had already been removed from the premesis! He also made wrongful statements about "trash" and "junk" in my house, even though he was informed by letter that there are antiques, collectors items, guns, books, radio equip- ment, and much more that is housed there - and, 90% of these articles are al- ready in boxes or crates. Date of expected apology,. please! ! 16. I didn't get an answer from the Mayor about Brownell's working his 40 hour work week for the large salary he gets, and why he doesn't have to know the law. For example, stating "alleys have 30 mph speed limits"! I'm curious to know if Brownell, or the Council and Mayor are running this City! If you have an answer to that one, I'd be anxious to hear it! 17. And, in the dirty tricks department, it was despicable of Hauser to wait until house painting and repairs were started (new roofing tiles were there on the porch for all to see) to send me a letter stating that I had to fix the hosue; knowing full well that I'd sent a letter last winter stating that repair work would be started in the summer. How juvenile! I guess I don't need an explanation for that behavior though - idiocy is always self-explana- tory! In conclusion (for the moment) there is nothing more dirty than the City prosecuting (and persecuting) someone with money paid from their own exhorbi- tant taxes, and hauling them in to Court to harrass, disgrace, and embarrass them, forcing that person to pay for his own harrassment from the Judge, City Page 4 - - Sept.6, 1988 Q 0" Attorney, Brownell, Jones, etc., all at the taxpayers expense! What you can't extort through excessive taxation, you take from the pockets another way, while certain City Officials "play for pay" and go "Scott" free at the taxpayers expense. It's ,just another example of harrassment that's causing undue expense to already overburdened taxpayersl And, last but not least, please bear in mind that some of you may yet be called to Court, the City, or personally, to straighten some of these matters out. Too many of these issues have been ignored and pending for too long! You realize, I presume, that I need these answers for specific rea- sons - so that if the City doesn't act soon, I will. Awaiting your reply, I remain Sincerely yours, obert F.Zrling Action Requested Authorize the Mayor to write to Mr. Vierling telling him that the City will only respond to specific items for which he can submit evidence that supports his point. DRA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ADDRESSING TAX INCREMENT/SCHOOL DISTRICT REFERENDUM LEGISLATION ENACTED BY THE 1988 LEGISLATURE NO. WHEREAS, the 1988 Legislature enacted statutes which provide school districts access to all monies generated by local referendum levies after May 1, 1988; and WHEREAS, the legislative intent is for school districts and cities to find a mutually agreed upon arrangement for school district access to local school referendum levies that predated May 1, 1988 to insure that cities fulfill their contractual position of trust with those holding City bonds; and WHEREAS, monies from all previous Shakopee School District referendums have been accruing as additional increment under Tax Increment Financing provisions to the City of Shakopee and were therefore incorporated in the cities revenue forecast for debt retirement purposes; and WHEREAS, a proposed statewide lottery and para-mutual racing in Wisconsin create uncertainty that might interrupt planned revenue generation from Tax Increment District #4; and WHEREAS, the projected financial condition of the school district as of June 30, 1989, indicates a general fund operating debt which may exceed statutory limits; and WHEREAS, representatives of the Board of Education of Independent School District No. 720 and the City have met on a number of occasions without finding a mutually acceptable agreement; and WHEREAS, the Board of Education of Independent School District No. 720, by resolution passed September 12, 1988, requested that all revenues, generated by the March 8, 1988 referendum, and currently accruing to the City of Shakopee under Tax Increment Financing provisions, be provided to the school district for the 1989-90 school year by the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council for the City and its bond holders desires to respond to the School Board Resolution with like-in- kind. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City will make Tax Increment proceeds collected available to Indepenent School District No. 720 from the March 8, 1988 referendum as follows: g � Resolution No. Page Two 1. The City will turn over all of the Tax Increment revenue accruing to all City districts except District #4. 2 . The City will turn over all of the Tax Increment revenue accuring to District #4 in 1989. 3. The City will willingly apply the May 1, 1988 legislation to any and all new or replacement levies approved by School district voters after the acceptance, by School District No. 720, of this agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1988. City Attorney MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Negotiating Committee RE: Tax Increment/School Referendum Legislation DATE: August 23 , 1988 The Negotiating Committee is seeking City Council approval to place the following proposal on the table for discussions with the Shakopee School District. 1. Goal - To reduce School District and City tax burdens, protect School District programs, and protect the City's debt service obligations. 2. Specific Proposal: The City approves turning over the SIF capture from all TIF Districts except District r4 (Racetrack) to the School District with a pledge from the School District to refrain from seeking additional legislative changes in the TIF laws. 3 . The City and School District acknowledge that the School District will use a major portion of the estimated $275, 000 received from the 19.79 mills applied to the districts turned over to the School District to avoid statutory debt in 1988-89. 4. That this will be a three year agreement and that both parties intend to renew the agreement at the end of three years if the purposes stated in irl above are being net and there is no dramatic change in the City's debt service needs for District 1, 2, 3 and 6. I 7b Shakopee Public Schools Independent School District No. 720 District Office Joan Lynch,Chair 505 S. Holmes Street Suzanne Van Hout,Vice Chair James Sorensen.Clerk Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Janet Wendt'Treasurer (612)445-4884 Jane Codson.Director James O'&ien,Director Gayden F.Carruth.Ph.D..Superintendent of Schools Steven Johnson,Director Virgil S.Mears,Assistant Superintendent of Schools REC7r1e--^ SEPI 41988 September 13, 1988 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Mr. John Anderson City Administrator 129 1st Avenue East Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson: Attached please find a copy of the resolution adopted by the Independent School District No. 720 Board of Education at their meeting on September 12, 1988. I have been asked to forward this resolution to you and to ask that you present the request contained therein to the City Council as soon as your agenda schedule will permit. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, r� � �QA&7L) `^ ln"AA Gayden F. Carruth Superintendent of Schools GFG:cb cc: Board of Education enclosure A Tobacco-Free School District An Equal Opportunity Employer EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION September 12, 1988 Director Johnson offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: WHEREAS, the 1988 Legislature enacted statutes which provide school districts access to all monies generated by local referendum levies; and WHEREAS, the legislative intent is for school districts to receive these monies if they are not committed to current bonding obligations of the city; and WHEREAS, monies from all previous Shakopee School District referendums have been accruing as additional increment under Tax Increment Financing provisions to the City of Shakopee; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has acknowledged that these monies are not needed to meet current bonding obligations; and WHEREAS, the projected financial condition of the school district as of June 30, 1989, indicates a general fund operating debt which may exceed statutory limits; and WHEREAS, representatives of the Board of Education of Independent School District No. 720 have met on a number of occasions with representatives of the City of Shakopee; and WHEREAS, no proposal has been received from the City of Shakopee which assures that the Board of Education can fulfill its duty of fiscal responsibility to the district and the residents thereof; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Education of Independent School District No. 720 requests that all revenues, generated by the March 8, 1988 referendum, and currently accruing to the City of Shakopee under Tax Increment Financing provisions be provided to the school district for the 1989-90 school year by the City Council of Shakopee. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Director Carlson and upon roll call vote all voted in favor thereof whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted. nONSENT g� Memo To: Sohn K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Limits on Issuance Cost for Municipal Bonds Date: September 15, 1988 Introduction There is pending federal legislation that would limit the amount cities could spend on issuance costs for floating a bond issue to It of the bond issue. Back round Congressman Donnelly is working in introduce a bill that would limit the amount cities could spend for issuance costs to 1% of the bond issue. Congress has recently added more requirements for issuing bonds and has placed restrictions on bonding. Federal regulations increase our costs but this legislation would limit our ability to pay those costs. Shakopee bond issues are small issues and therefore issuance costs are higher relative to the bond size. The attached League memo emphasizes the importance of contacting Rep. Frenzel to appose this legislation. Maintaining local authority to raise revenues for government purposes is a requirement for effective local government. Action Requested Move to direct the City Administrator to prepare a letter to Rep. Frenzel expressing the City of Shakopee's deep concern over pending legislation limiting issuance costs for municipal bonds for the Mayor's signature. G 183 University Ave.East i St.Paul,MN 55101.2526 SEP 1 4 1988 League of Minnesota Cities (612)227.5600(FAX:221-0996) Y @Ot','nKOPEE September 12, 1988 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayors, Managers, Clerks Cities in the Third Congressional District FROM: Ann Higgins, Federal Liaison��- SUBJECT: Limits on Issuance Costs for Municipal Bonds Please act immediately to provide information to Representative Frenzel on your concerns about serious difficulties your city will face if legislation is introduced in Congress to place a cap on the issuance costs cities pay to issue municipal bonds. It is very important that Rep. Frenzel be aware of the facts regarding city bonding practices and requirements already in force that result in added bonding costs at the local level. On September 1, the League informed member cities of serious concern about pending federal legislation that would require that cities spend no more than one percent of the total cost of each bond issue to meet issuance costs. Author of the legislative proposal, Representative Brian Donnelly, is still working to draw up a bill for introduction. It is very important for cities to provide information and communicate your concerns about this legislative proposal to Representative Frenzel Please let him know that under no circumstances is it reasonable for Congress to impose a cap on issuance costs for public purpose g.o. and revenue bonds. City officials need to insist that maintaining local authority to raise revenues for governmental purposes is an absolute requirement for effective local government. Emphasize the increased costs to cities of the newly imposed 186 federal tax reform restrictions on private activity bonds, plus the impending regulation of arbitrage and reporting will cost cities more, not less, to issue bonds! It is imperative that city officials act to assure that Rep. Frenzel has the necessary information about city bonding programs and practices in the Third District. Such restrictions that subject cities to such unreasonable restrictions on local authority to issue municipal bonds damage the capacity of cities to take care of necessary improvements. The proposal is unfair as well since cities are singled out for such restrictions whereas neither federal government or corporate bonding authority are hindered by such strict regulation. Please act immediately to let Representative Frenzel know of your concerns in this matter and let him know that he should not agree to co-sponsor legislation that would unfairly and unreasonably hinder cities' authority to issue municipal bonds for traditional public purposes. 29 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mean Park Centre. 230 zqs,Fifth street, sr Paul, MN. 55101 612 291-6359 September 14, 1988 SEPI `196N To: Scott County Elected Officials O17y OF County Administrator SHAK OPEE City Managers Legislative and County Hoard Candidates - Another year has gone by and it is again time for the annual series of the Metropolitan Council chair's regional breakfast meetings, Council chairs have held these regional meetings every fall since 1975. They provide an opportunity for us to talk about the issues the Council is dealing with and for you to express your ideas about the Council and its work. I would like to discuss with you the Council's priority projects for next year, and some of the metropolitan issues we think the legislature may address in 1989• A good share of the meeting, however, will be devoted to your thoughts about what you think we're doing right, what we're doing wrong and what we should be doing in the future. We will be holding at least one breakfast meeting in each county. The Scott County meeting will be held on Friday, Oct. 7, at the Canterbury Inn, 1244 S. Canterbury Rd., Shakopee. We'll meet for a Dutch treat breakfast at 7:30 a.m. and we'll end by 9 a.m. I look forward to seeing you and other public officials from Scott County at the meeting. Please RSVP to Jane Larson at 291-6500 by Oct. 4. Sincerely, Steve Keefe Chair CONSENT g� 183 University Ave.East St Paul,MN 55101.2526 League of Minnesota Cities (612)227.5600(FAX:221.0986) September 15, 1988 MEMORANDUM R 1 601TO: Mayors, Managers, Clerks BEP NLC Direct Member Cities F 9�p',nOpE FROM: Ann Higgins, Federal Liaison G�SN SUBJECT: Cities Face Threat of Retroactive Costs for Sign Control Ordinance Actions Cities face immediate threat of congressional action that will give the billboard industry retroactive legal authority to force cities to pay billboard owners compensation if local sign ordinances require a reduced billboard size and height restriction. Serious efforts on behalf of the billboard industry have been underway during the final weeks of the current Congress to attach an amendment to transportation legislation still moving through Congress. NLC has notified the League that efforts are likely next week to seek an amendment to the Bus and Truck Safety Act when it comes up for a vote on the House floor. All House members of the Minnesota Congressional Delegation need to hear now from city officials who want to retain city control over billboard size at the local level. Call your member of Congress immediately to express your concerns and urge him to oppose efforts to amend the transportation measure on the House floor.ortation measure. It is also important to contact both Senators Boschwitz and Durenberger to urge them to communicate local opposition to the addition of this costly proposal to the Bus and Truck Safety Act already adopted by the Senate. Senator Hollings (D-SC) , Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, must hear from fellow members of the U.S. Senate that they oppose the billboard downsizing amendment and do not want to see it attached to the bus and truck safety legislation. Billboard industry lobbyists have proposed an amendment that would hold cities retroactively liable for just compensation for local ordinance requirements limiting the size and height of billboards within the city limits. In December, 1987, city officials were able to defeat a similar effort to overrule local zoning authority. It is important to realize that the billboard industry has been remarkably successful at reducing local authority over the placement and regulation of billboards. If this measure should be adopted, it is clear that cities' financial liability when seeking to control signage could be costly. Both the Federal Highway Administration and recent court decisions have held that local ordinances in Denver and Houston that attempt to limit billboard size are valid exercises of local zoning authority under the provisions of the federal Highway Beautification Act. If your city has considered measures to remove or limit billboard size, the proposed amendment could seriously intrude into actions your city may take to regulate such structures under current law. Action Requested Move that our Legislators be contacted urging them to oppose efforts to amend the transportation legislation by reducing local authority over the placement and regulation of billboards. qa, MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Newton Parker, Housing Inspector RE: 9/20/88 Public Hearing on Housing Code and Certificate of Occupancy Ordinance DATE: September 15, 1988 INTRODUCTION On August 23, 1988, City Council endorsed the proposed Housing Maintenance Program and directed staff to schedule a public hearing on September 20, 1988 regarding Ordinance amendments. Staff prepared the amendments (sent to Council in packet dated 9/9/88) which include clarifications of the present Housing Code, and additions needed to implement the Certificate of Occupancy program. These changes are necessary to effectively enforce the Housing Code in a systematic manner, and to make compliance easier to understand for the citizen. BACKGROUND The purpose of the hearing is to give a brief overview of the Program and to gather citizen response to the proposal. So far, the comments I have received go 50/50 pro and con. Those favoring the program cite the positive affect of people making timely repairs instead of waiting around for hazardous situations j to develop; the improved reputation of Shakopee as a quality community; and the possibility for increased property values and lower insurance ratings. Those opposed to the program are worried about the costs of compliance; loss of low cost housing/commercial buildings; cost of annual inspections and the resulting increase in rents; the spector of "Big Brother" and the over regulation of individuals. In response I would point out that owners that have properly maintained their properties and who are providing the necessary services to their tenants, should have no problem with this program. The cost to well maintained units should raise rents 3-5 dollars per month on average. Homestead owners benefit by giving the buyer more confidence, and therefore a greater willingness to buy. Those who have neglected their properties will indeed incur extra costs, but it is the City's responsibility to see to it that the community is reasonably protected from health and safety hazards. The City must intercede when the actions of individuals jeopardize the community's right to a safe and healthful environment. The City Attorney will need more time to review the code amendments, as they are quite extensive. Once he is finished with his assessment, staff will present the final Ordinance amendment to Council for adoption. Attached you will find a summary of the program. You will also find a list of additional changes to the proposed Code. ACTION REQUESTED 1. Move to have staff prepare the final draft of the Housing Code and associated amendments incorporating changes approved at this hearing, and including approval of the City Attorney, to be presented to Council at a later date for adoption. 2. Direct staff to prepare an amendment to the City's fee resolution by adding the fee schedule for Certificates of Occupancy. NP:cah Attachment CITY OF SHAKOPEE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY PROGRAM WHAT IS A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY? A Certificate of Occupancy is a document required by the City for all residences and all new construction, which verifies that a dwelling is suitable for habitation and that it complies with the City Housing Code. The Certificate also sets a limit to the number of persons that may inhabit the certified property, based upon existing occupancy standards. It is unlawful for any residence to be occupied without a valid certificate once that residence is incorporated into the program. WHO NEEDS A CERTIFICATE? Owners of homestead property need a certificate to sell or convert their property, and owners of rental dwellings (apartments) need a certificate to rent out a unit. WHEN DOES THIS PROGRAM START? The program will be phased-in for rental properties starting September 21, 1988, and after January 1, 1989 for sellers of homestead property. Rental property owners will be notified individually by the City as to when they must apply for their certificate. Due to the complexities of starting such a program, it will take two years before all rental properties are included. HOW OFTEN DO I NEED TO APPLY? The class of certificate determines how often you must reapply. Homestead owners need apply only when selling their property, while owners of rental properties must reapply every one or two years depending on the number of units rented. HOW MUCH DOES IT COST? The fees are based on class of certificate and range from $30 for homestead, to $50+ for commercial/rental mixed use. Fees are due with the application. WHAT HAPPENS AFTER I APPLY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY? Once an application and proper fees are received by the Building Department, an inspection of the property will be scheduled by the City Housing Inspector. WHAT DOES THE INSPECTOR LOOK FOR? The inspector is looking for hazards to health and safety and for any violations of the Housing Code. Violations found that do not pertain to the Building Code are not cited and are held confidential by the Building Department. A list of items covered is included with the application form. Any item that violates the present code will not be cited if that item complied with the code at the time of construction AND if the item poses no immediate hazard to the occupants. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? If the inspector finds only a few minor violations, and if there is no threat to the health and safety of the occupant, the owner will be issued a certificate on the spot after signing a statement agreeing to make all indicated repairs. For more serious violations, a temporary certificate is issued giving the owner a set period of time to make the needed repairs. A follow-up inspection is required confirming that the work has been Properly completed before the temporary qualification is removed. Please note that the application fee covers only two inspections. (Note: If the follow-up inspection finds the worot incomplete or inadequate, then the owner will be charged for an additional follow-up inspection. ) Occasionally very dangerous hazards are found that immediately affect the welfare of the occupants. On those rare occasions, the residents would have to vacate the dwelling until the hazard is corrected. WHAT ARE MY DEADLINES? Homestead owners must apply for a certificate postmarked on or before the date he or she lists the property, or date of an advertisement offering for sale, or date of any other communication intended to convey an offer for sale. A certificate must be issued before the buyer may occupy the dwelling. Rental owners must apply for a certificate postmarked on or before the anniversary date of their last Certificate. WHERE CAN I GET MORE INFORMATION? If you have any additional questions, please contact the Building Department at City Hall or phone 445-3650. Hours are 8:OOam to 4: 30pm, Monday through Friday. The following are changes to the proposed Housing Code: 1. Change the name from Housing Code, to Housing Maintenance Code. 2 . Subd. 4 . 427 Fees. [change all to read: ] pg. 19 The fee for the inspection and issue of a Certificate of Occupancy is determined by class and shall be adopted by resolution of the Council and may be amended from time to time in the same manner. [All fees listed shall be transferred to the Annual Fee Resolution] 3 . Pg. 5, Building official. . . [Change Health Authority to Health Officer] 4 . Pg. 16, Subd. 4.424, #1 [change Certificate of Homestead Occupancy to Certificate of Occupant: Homestead) 5. Pg. 4, Subd. 4.406 & Subd. 4. 409 [change Board of Adjustment and Appeals to Housing Advisory and AnnealsBoard] O Sec.4.40. HOUSING CODE Subd. 4.401. The Uniform Housing Code, 1985 edition, published by the international conference of Building Officials, is hereby adopted by reference as though set forth verbatim herein. One copy of the said code shall be marked CITY OF SHAKOPEE - OFFICIAL COPY and kept on file in the office of the City Administrator and open to inspection and use by the public. Source: Ordinance No. 225, 4th series. Effective date: 8-27-87 Subd. 4 .402 . Title and Scope (see Chapter 1, Uniform Housing Code) . 1. Application. The provisions of this Housing Code shall provide minimum requirements to safeguard health, property and public welfare by regulating and _ -- ---- controlling the use, occupancy, location and maintenance of all residential buildings, structures and accessory structures within the City of Shakopee. The provisions of this Housing Code shall apply to all buildings or portions thereof used, designed or intended to be used for human habitation. Applicable requirements shall apply to all accessory structures, rooming houses, lodging and/or boarding houses and house trailers used for human habitation. 2. Conflict of Ordinances. In any case where a provision of this ordinance is found to be in conflict with a provision of any zoning, building, fire, safety, or health ordinance or code of this City, the provision which establishes the higher standard for the promotion and protection of the health and safety of the people shall prevail. 3. Effect of Partial Invalidity. If any subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance should be declared invalid for any reason whatsoever, such decision shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance, which shall remain in full force and effect; and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. 4. Alteration. Existing buildings which are altered or enlarged shall be made to conform to this Code insofar as new work, alterations or enlargements are concerned. If the alterations are such that they cause or threaten to cause unsafe conditions in the unaltered portions of a building or threaten the safety or safe operation of other nearby structures, then said alterations are prohibited unless the affected structures are also ��O �Op _ 2 _ ^\V brought into compliance with this and/or other appropriate codes. 5. Requirements for Repair and Replacement Work. Any person doing any repair and/or replacement work on any residential building, structure and accessory structure covered in this Ordinance Code shall complete the repair and/or replacement work in compliance with the standards contained in the definitions of repair and/or replacement inSubd. 4.410 herein. 6. Relocation. Existing buildings which are moved or relocated shall be considered as new buildings and shall comply with all requirements of this Code. Subd. 4.403 . Enforcement (reference chapter 2, Uniform Housing Code) . 1. Authority. The Building Official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all the provisions of this Code. 2. Right of Entry. Upon presentation of proper credentials the Building Official or his duly authorized representatives may enter at reasonable times any building, structure, or premises in the City to perform any duty imposed upon him by this Code. 3 . Privacy. The Building Official shall keep confidential all evidence exclusive of the inspection record, which it may discover or obtain in the course of an inspection made pursuant to this section and such evidence shall be considered privileged. 4 . Responsibilities Defined a. Every owner remains liable for violations of duties imposed upon him by this Code even though an obligation is also imposed on the occupants of his building, and even though the owner has, by agreement, imposed on the occupant the duty of furnishing required equipment or Of complying with this Code. b. Every owner, or his agent, in addition to being responsible for Or his building in a sound structural condition, shall be responsible for keeping that part of the building or premises which he occupies or controls in a clean, sanitary and safe condition including the shared or public areas in a building containing two or more dwelling units. q � - 3 - C. Every owner shall, where required by this Code, furnish and maintain approved sanitary facilities as required, and shall furnish and maintain approved equipment or facilities for the prevention of insect and rodent infestation, and where infestation has taken place, shall be responsible for the extermination of any insects, rodents or other pests. d. Heating Rental Properties. Every owner, operator or manager of any building who rents, leases or lets for human habitation any habitable room contained within such building on terms, either expressed or implied, to supply or furnish heat to the occupants thereof, shall maintain a minimum temperature of 68 degrees Fahrenheit between September 1 and June 1, inclusive, at a point 3 feet above the floor level and not closer than 36 inches from any wall. The heating equipment shall be properly installed and maintained throughout the year. e. All occupants shall, where required by this Code, keep their premises in a safe and sanitary condition. f. Every occupant of a dwelling unit, in addition to being responsible for keeping the dwelling or dwelling unit or premises which they occupy and control, in a clean, sanitary and safe condition, shall dispose of all rubbish, garbage and other organic waste in a manner required by this Code. Subd. 4 .404 Hazardous Buildings (reference Chapter 10, Uniform Housing Code) . All buildings or portions thereof which are determined to be substandard as defined in this Ordinance Code are hereby declared to be public nuisances and shall be abated by repair, rehabilitation, demolition or removal in accordance with the procedure specified in Chapter 11 of the Uniform Housing Code. Subd. 4.405 Posting to Prevent Occupancy (reference Chapter 11, Uniform Housing Code and section 4.09 of this code) . The Building Official may post any building or structure under his jurisdiction when found to be in direct violation of the Housing Code, preventing further occupancy. Posting will occur if any owner, agent, licensee or other responsible person has been notified by inspection report of the items which must be corrected within a certain stated, reasonable period of time and that the responsible person or persons has failed to correct the cited items. In cases of emergency, a building or premises may be immediately posted and the occupants, if any, evacuated. No person shall 4 - A remove or tamper with any placard used for posting. No person shall reside in, occupy or cause to be occupied any building, structure or dwelling which has been posted to Prevent occupancy. Subd. 4 . 406 Anneals 'reference Chanter 12 Uniform Housing Code . Whenever the Building Official shall take action which is disputed, or when it is claimed that the provisions of the Code do not apply or that the true intent and meaning of the Code have been misconstrued or wrongfully interpreted, the aggrieved party may appeal within 30 days from the date of the decision of the Building Official to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals as directed by section 203 of the Uniform Housing Code. Actions of the this board may also be appealed to the City Council for final decision. All appeals to the City Council require a non-refundable fee. Subd. 4.407 Procedure for Conduct of Hearin A eals (reference Chapter 13, Uniform Housing Code) . Sub4 4 . 408. Permits and Inspections (reference Chapter 3, Uniform Housing Code) . The following repairs are exempt from building permit requirements, if they do not affect or involve any plumbing, electrical, mechanical, structural or subsurface member and if the repair returns the affected area to its intended original condition: Paint Siding Roofing/Gutters/Downspouts Trim/Moldings/Shutters/Decorations Glass (but not window frames) Weatherstripping/Caulk/Tuck Pointing Walks/Landscape Masonry (if not on City easement) Non-Structural Hardware Finish Flooring/Carpets Door Slabs (but not door frames) Fences Subd. 4.409 Enforcement of the Order of the Building official or Board of Adiustment and Appeals.Chapter 14, Uniform Housing Code) . (reference Sub Hd. 4.410 Definitions (reference Chapter 12, Uniform ousing Code) . For the purpose of this Code, certain abbreviations, terms, phrases, words and their derivatives shall be construed as specified in this Part. Words used in the singular include the plural and the plural the singular. Words used in the masculine gender include the feminine, and the feminine the masculine. Terms, words, phrases and their 0-" Yeo - 5 - o'A derivatives used but not specifically defined in this Code shall have the meaning defined in Chapter 4 of the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by reference as a part of the Shakopee Ordinance Code. Accessory Building or Structure. Accessory building or structure shall mean a detached building or structure in a secondary or subordinate capacity from the main or principal building or structure on the same premises. Apartment House. Apartment house is any building, or portion thereof, which is designed, built, rented, leased, let or hired out to be occupied, or which is occupied as the home or residence of two or more families living independently of each other performing their own cooking services in the apartment house. Bulk Container. Bulk container shall mean any metal garbage, rubbish and/or refuse container having a capacity of (2) cubic yards or greater and which is equipped with fittings for hydraulic and/or mechanical emptying, unloading and/or removal. Board of Appeals. Board of Appeals when used herein shall mean the WOUSIv& +D-VtSORY,--/W0 -APPERCS-$&ARD of the City of Shakopee. Building Official, Health Officer. The Building Official or Health Officer shall be defined as the person or persons designated as Building Official or Health Authority by the City Administrator. Dormitory. Dormitory shall mean a building or group of rooms in a building used for institutional living and sleeping purposes by (4) or more persons. Dwelling. Dwelling shall mean any space wholly or partially used or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking, and eating: provided that temporary housing as hereinafter defined shall not be classified as a dwelling. Industrialized housing and modular construction which conform to nationally accepted industry standards and used or intended for use for living, sleeping, cooking and eating purposes shall be classified as dwellings. Dwelling Unit. A dwelling unit is a room or group of rooms located within a dwelling forming a single habitable unit with facilities used or intended to be used by a single family for living, sleeping, cooking and eating purposes. Efficiency Living Units. Efficiency living unit is any room 6 - having cooking facilities used for combined living, dining and sleeping purposes and meeting the requirements of Section 503 (b) Exception, of the Uniform Housing Code. Egress. Egress shall mean an arrangement of exit facilities to assure a safe means of exit from buildings. Family. For housing purposes family shall mean one or more individuals living together and sharing common living, sleeping , cooking and eating facilities. For purposes of this code family shall mean the same as household. Habitable Room Habitable room shall mean a room or enclosed floor space used or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking, or eating purposes, excluding bathrooms, water closet compartments, laundries, furnace rooms, pantries, kitchenettes, and utility rooms of less than (5o) square feet of floor space, foyers, or communicating corridors, stairways, closets, storage spaces, and workshops, hobby and recreation areas. Hot Water. Hot water shall be water at temperature of not less than 110 degrees farhenheit. Household. A household shall mean a family as defined in this subdivision. Guest. Guest shall mean an individual who shares a dwelling unit in a non-permanent status for not more than (30) days. Kitchen. Kitchen shall mean any room used for the storage, preparation, and serving of food and that contains at least the following equipment: sink, stove or microwave oven, refrigerator, cabinets and/or shelves, and a counter or table. KitchenetteKitchenette shall mean a small kitchen or an alcove containing cooking facilities. Nuisance. The following shall be defined as nuisances: 1. Any Public nuisance known at common law or in equity jurisprudence. . 2. Any attractive nuisance which may Prove detrimental to children whether in a building, on the premises of a building, or upon an unoccupied lot. This includes any abandoned wells, shafts, basements or excavations; abandoned refrigerators and motor vehicles; or any structurally unsound fences or structures; or any lumber, trash, fences, debris, or vegetation which may ye q � prove a hazard for inquisitive minors. 3 . Whatever is dangerous to human life or is detrimental to health. 4 . - Overcrowding a room with occupants. 5. Insufficient ventilation or illumination. 6. Inadequate or unsanitary sewerage or plumbing facilities. 7. Uncleanliness. S. Whatever renders air, food or drink unwholesome or detrimental to the health of human beings. Occupant. Any person, firm, partnership, association, organization, corporation or other who shall be in actual possession or have charge, care or control of any dwelling within the City. Ordinary summer Conditions Ordinary summer conditions shall mean a temperature of (92) degrees fahrenheit. Ordinary Winter conditions Ordinary winter conditions shall mean a temperature of (-18) degrees fahrenheit. Owner. Any person, firm, partnership, corporation or other association who alone, jointly, or severally with others is the fee owner of record of any dwelling or dwelling unit within the City or any trustee or guardian or other representative of the fee owner or his estate. Person. The word "person" shall include a corporation, firm, partnership, .association, organization and any other group acting as a unit as well as individual. It shall also include an executor, administrator, trustee, receiver or other representative appointed according to law. Whenever the word "person" is used in any section of this Code prescribing a penalty or fine as to partnerships or association, the word shall include the officers, agents or members thereof who are responsible for any violation of such section. Plumbing. Plumbing shall mean any and all equipment, fixtures, and connections made to water, sewer or gas lines - including but not limited to the following: gas pipes, gas burning equipment, water pipes, garbage disposal units, waste pipes, water closets, sinks, installed dishwashers, lavatories, bathtubs, shower baths, installed clothes washing machines, catch basins, drains, vents, valves and A S connectors. _ Premises. Premises shall mean a parcel of land either occupied or unoccupied by any structure or structures. Privacy. Privacy shall mean the existence of conditions which will permit an individual or individuals to carry out an activity commenced without interruption or interference, either by sight, sound, or presence by unwanted individuals. Properly Connected Properly connected shall mean connected in accordance with accepted industry standards and/or all applicable code and ordinances of this City as from time to time enforced; provided, however, that the application of this definition shall not require the alteration or replacement of any connection in good working order and not constituting a hazard to life or health. Repair. Repair shall mean to restore to a sound, acceptable state of operation, serviceability or appearance. Repairs shall be expected to last approximately as long as would the replacement by new items. Replace or Replacement. Replace or replacement shall mean to remove an existing item or portion of a system and to construct or install a new item of a quality similar to that of the existing item when it was new. Replacement ordinarily takes place when repair of the item is impractical. Rooming House Rooming house shall mean any dwelling other than a hotel or motel or that part of any dwelling containing (1) or more rooming units, and/or (1) or more dormitory rooms and in which persons either individually or as families are housed without the provision of meals. Space Heater Space heater shall mean a self-contained, heating appliance of either the convection or radiant type and intended primarily to heat only a limited space or area such as one room or two adjoining rooms. Temporary Housing Temporary housing shall mean any tent, trailer, mobile home or any other structure used for human shelter which is designed to be transportable and which is not attached to the ground, to another structure, or to any utility system on the same premises for more than (30) consecutive days. Water Closet Water closet shall mean a toilet bowl which is flushed with water which has been supplied under pressure 9 and equipped with a water sealed trap above the floor level. Subd. 4 .411. Built-in Deficiencies Exempt. The following are built-in deficiencies and shall be exempt from —compliance with the Ordinance code; provided, that such built-in deficiencies were in compliance with a building code at the time of construction and/or do not pose a hazard. 1. Ceiling Height: Any existing habitable room with less than a 7 .5 foot ceiling height shall be considered a built-in deficiency which is beyond reasonable correction. 2. Superficial Floor Areas: Any existing habitable room of less than 90 square feet shall be considered a built-in deficiency and beyond reasonable correction. 3 . Natural Light and Ventilation: Any existing habitable room with window area less than 10 percent of the floor area shall be considered a built-in deficiency beyond reasonable correction but in no case shall the required natural light and ventilation be less than 5 percent of the floor area. Subd. 4.412 . Space and Occupancy Standards (reference Chapter 5, Uniform Housing Code) . No person shall occupy as owner, occupant or let to another for occupancy any dwelling or dwelling unit, for the purposes of living, sleeping, cooking or eating therein, which does not comply with the following requirements: 1. Every dwelling unit shall have a room or portion of a room in which food may be prepared and/or cooked, which shall have adequate circulation area, and which shall be equipped with the following: a. A kitchen sink in good working condition and properly connected to a water supply system which is approved by the appropriate authority and which provides at all times an adequate amount of heated and unheated running water under pressure, and which is connected to a sewer system approved by the City of Shakopee. b. Cabinets and/or shelves for the storage of eating, drinking, and cooking equipment and utensils and of food that does not under ordinary summer conditions require refrigeration for safe keeping; and a counter or table for food preparation; said _ cabinets and/or shelves and counter or table shall X70`' lo - be o - be of sound construction furnished with surfaces that are easily cleanable and that will not impart any toxic or harmful effect to food. C. A stove, or similar device, for cooking food-, and -- a refrigerator, or similar device, for the safe storage of food at temperatures less than 45 degrees (F) but more than 32 degrees (F) under ordinary maximum summer conditions, which are properly installed with all necessary connections for safe, sanitary and efficient operation; provided that such stove, refrigerator, and/or similar devices need not be installed when a dwelling unit is not occupied and when the occupant is expected to provide same on occupancy, and that sufficient space and adequate connections for the safe and efficient installation and operation of said, stove, refrigerator and/or similar devices are provided. 2. Within every dwelling unit there shall be a non- habitable room which affords privacy to a person within said room and which is equipped with a flush water closet in good working condition. Said flush water closet shall be equipped with easily cleanable surfaces, be properly connected to a water system that at all times provides an adequate amount of running water under pressure to cause the water closet to be operated properly, and shall be properly connected to a sewer system which is approved by the City of Shakopee. The room shall have an operable window or mechanical ventilation sufficient to provide the equivalent of 5 air exchanges per hour. 3. Within every dwelling unit there shall be a lavatory sink. Said lavatory sink may be in the same room as the flush water closet, or, if located in another room, the lavatory sink shall be located in close proximity to the door leading directly into the room in which said water closet is located. The lavatory sink shall be in good working condition and properly connected to a water supply system which is approved by the appropriate adequate amount authority heated and and ich provides at all times anand unhea ed running water under pressure, and which is properly connected to a sewer system approved by the appropriate authority. Water inlets for lavatory :he shall be located above the overflow rim of these facilities. 4. Within every dwelling unit there shall be a room which affords privacy to a person within said room and which is equipped with a bathtub or shower in good working condition. Said bathtub or shower may be in the same rooms as the flush water closet or in another room and shall be properly connected to a water supply system which is approved by the appropriate authority and which provides at all times an adequate amount of heated and unheated water under pressure, and which is connected to a sewer system approved by the appropriate authority. Water inlets for bathtubs shall be located above the overflow rim of these facilities. 5. Every dwelling unit shall have at least two (2) means of egress leading to safe and open space at ground level, and which meet all requirements of Chapter 8 of the Uniform Housing Code. Every dwelling unit in a multiple dwelling shall have immediate access to two (2) or more approved means of egress leading to safe and open space at ground level, or as required by the laws of this State and the City of Shakopee. Bedrooms located below the fourth (4th) floor shall be provided with an exterior door or window of such dimensions as to be used as a means of emergency egress. 6. Structurally sound hand rails shall be provided on any steps containing four (4) risers or more. Porches, patios, and/or balconies located more than three (3) feet higher than the adjacent area shall have structurally sound protective guard or hand rails. 7. Each dwelling unit shall have facilities for the safe storage of drugs and household poisons. a. Access to or egress from each dwelling unit shall be - provided without passing through any other dwelling unit. 9. No person shall let to another for occupancy any dwelling or dwelling unit unless all exterior doors and windows of the dwelling or dwelling unit are equipped with appropriate, functioning locking devices. 10. Every foundation, roof, floor, exterior and interior wall, ceiling, inside and outside stair, every porch, and every appurtenance thereto, shall be safe to use and capable of supporting the loads that normal use may cause to be placed thereon; and shall be kept in sound condition and good repair. Every inside and outside stair or step shall have uniform risers and uniform treads. 11. Every foundation, roof and exterior wall, door, skylight and window shall be reasonably weather-tight, A ppo`'� �b 12 - water-tight and damp-free, and shall be kept in sound condition and good repair. Floors, interior walls and ceilings shall be sound and in good repair. All exterior wood surfaces, other than decay resistant woods, shall be protected from the elements and decay by paint which is not lead-based paint or by other protective covering or treatment. Walls shall be capable of affording privacy for the occupants. 12 . Every premises shall be graded, drained, free of standing water, and maintained in a clean, sanitary and safe condition. 13 . Unless other provisions are made, gutters, leaders and t'- down-spouts shall be provided and maintained in good working condition as to provide proper drainage of storm water. 14 . Every window, exterior door and hatchway or similar device shall be so constructed to exclude insects during that portion of the year when there is a need for protection against mosquitoes, flies and other flying insects. 15. Every dwelling, multiple dwelling, rooming house or accessory structure and the premises on which located shall be maintained in a rat-free and ratproof condition. a. All openings in the exterior walls, foundations, basements, ground or first floors and roofs which have a half-inch diameter or more opening shall be ratproofed in an approved manner if they are within forty-eight (48) inches of the existing exterior ground level immediately below such openings, or if they may be reached by rats from the ground by climbing unguarded pipes, wires, cornices, stairs, roofs, and other items such as trees or vines or by burrowing. b. All windows located at or near ground level used or intended to be used for ventilation, all other openings located at or near ground level, and all exterior doorways which might provide an entry for rats, shall be supplied with adequate screens or such other devices as will effectively prevent the entrance of rats into the structure. C. All sewers, pipes, drains or conduits and openings around such pipes and conduits shall be constructed to prevent the ingress or egress of ^\� rats to or from a building. d. Interior floors of basements, cellars and other areas in contact with the soil shall be rat- proofed in an approved manner. e. Materials stored outside the dwelling shall be --_-. stacked and elevated so that there will be at least an eighteen (18) inch opening between the material and the ground level so as to prevent the creation of a rat harborage area. No stacking or piling of material shall take place against the exterior walls of the structure. f. Any materials used for rat-proofing shall be acceptable to the Building official. 16. All fences shall be constructed of approved fencing - material, shall be maintained in good condition and - shall not create a harborage for rats. Wood materials shall be protected against decay by use of paint which is not lead-based paint or by other preservative material. The permissible height and other characteristics of all fences shall conform to the appropriate statutes, ordinances, and regulations of the City of Shakopee and the State of Minnesota. Wherever any egress from the dwelling opens into the fenced area, there shall be a means of egress from the premises to any public way adjacent thereto. 17. Accessory structures present or provided by the owner, agent, or tenant occupant on the premises of a dwelling shall be structurally sound, and be maintained in good repair and free of insects and rats, or such structures shall be removed from the premises. The exterior of such structures shall be made weather resistant through the use of decay-resistant materials or the use of lead-free paint or other preservatives. 18. Every plumbing fixture and all water and waste pipes shall be properly installed and maintained in good sanitary working condition. All waste system clean-out plugs must be easily accessible. 19. Every water closet compartment, bathroom and kitchen floor surface shall be constructed and maintained so as to be reasonably impervious to water and so as to permit such floor to be easily kept in a clean and sanitary condition. 20. Every plumbing fixture and pipe, every chimney, flue, 11 A ipto\ - 14 - and smoke pipe, and every other facility, piece of equipment, or utility which is present in a dwelling or dwelling unit, or which is required under this ordinance, shall be constructed and installed in conformance with the appropriate statutes, ordinances and regulations of the City of Shakopee and State of Minnesota. 21. No owner, operator, or occupant shall cause any service, facility, equipment or utility which is required under this ordinance to be removed from or shut off from or discontinued from any occupied dwelling or dwelling unit let or occupied by him; except for such temporary interruption as may be necessary while actual repairs or alterations are in process, or during temporary emergencies when discontinuance of service is approved by the appropriate authority. 22 . All construction and materials, ways and means of egress, and installation and use of equipment shall conform with the appropriate statutes, ordinances and regulations dealing with fire protection of the City of Shakopee and State of Minnesota. Subd. 4.413 Structural Reuirements (reference Chapter 6, Uniform Housing Code) . Subd. 4.414 Mechanical Requirements (reference Chapter 7, Uniform Housing Code) . Subd. 4.415 Exits (reference Chapter s, Code) . Uniform Housing Subd. 4 . 416 Fire Protection (reference Chapter 9, Uniform Housing Code) . Subd. 4 . 417. Correction of Immediate- Hazards. shall be permitted of any dwellingNo occupancy immediate t and an hazard exists. If the welling unit is n occupied and an immediate hazard exists, immediate corrective action shall be taken by the occupant, owner, agent of the owner or other responsible persons. The dwelling unit may be ordered vacated if no immediate corrective action is taken and the occupant, owner, agent of the owner or other responsible person immediateahazard,il to comply with any order to correct any Immediate hazards to health and safety for human occupancy shall include but not be limited to the following: 4 _ 15 - 1. 5 _1. Heating systems that are unsafe due to: burned out or rusted heat exchangers (fire box) ; burned out or plugged flues; no vent; connection with unsafe gas supplies; lack of fuel or use of improper fuel; or incapacity to adequately heat the living space. 2 . Water heaters that are unsafe due to: burned out or rusted heat exchangers (fire box) ; burned out, rusted or plugged flues; no vent; connection with unsafe gas supplies; lack of fuel or use of improper fuel; or lack of temperature and pressure relief valves with proper diverter pipe. 3 . Electrical systems that are unsafe due to: dangerous overloading; damaged or deteriorated equipment; improperly taped or spliced wiring; exposed uninsulated wires; distribution systems of extension cords or other temporary methods; ungrounded systems; disconnection of service to the dwelling. 4 . Plumbing systems that are unsanitary due to: leaking waste systems, fixtures and traps; lack of a water closet; lack of washing and bathing facilities; cross connection of pure water supply with fixtures, private well, or sewage lines; or the lack of water. 5. Structural systems, walls, chimneys, ceilings, roofs, foundation and floor systems that will not safely carry imposed loads. 6. Refuse, garbage, human waste, decaying vermin or other dead animals, animal waste, other materials rendering residential buildings and structures unsanitary for human occupancy, including lack of light and air. 7. Infestation of rats, insects and other vermin. Subd. 4.418. Smoke Detectors Required. (see section 4.50 of this code) . Subd. 4.419. Structural and Life Safety Standards. Compliance with the structural and life safety portions of any housing maintenance inspection required under Section 4 .40 shall be in accordance with the building code in effect at the time of original construction, provided there is no significant danger to health and safety at the time of inspection. If no building requirements were in effect at the time of construction or the requirements cannot be determined, compliance shall be made to an extent to eliminate significant danger to health and safety. This subdivision is not meant to conflict with hazardous buildings within the terms of Section 4 . 09, built-in deficiencies within Subd. 4 .411; and immediate hazards within Subd. 4.417. Subd. 4. 420 Exterior Completion• building exterior of all sides of all structures The roof and the and accessory buildings shall be finished with ' apprages roved exterior building materials within 12 months of the issuance of a building permit unless otherwise approved by the Building official. Subd. 4.421. Performance of work of Re air or Demolition (reference Chapter 15, Uniform Housing Code) . Subd. 4 . 422. Recovery of Cost of Repair or Demolition (reference Chapter 16, Uniform Housing Code) . CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Subd 4 . 423 . (reserved) , Subd. 4 .424. Certificate of Occu anc . It shall be unlawful for any person to conduct or operate or cause to be operated either as owner, lessee, agent or in any other capacity within the City of Shakopee any leased residential dwelling or to sell a homesteaded dwelling without having first obtained a Certificate of Occupancy as is hereafter provided. The Certificate Of Occupancy establishes the number of occupants that may reside in a dwelling, and verifies that the property has been inspected by the City Building Department with any and all detected violations of the City Housing Code being corrected. There are four classes of housing certificates for residential dwellings each of which has different requirements (see section 4 . 07 for certificates required for other non- residential building types) : 1. Class 1: Certificate o£ Hois Homestead Occu anc required before any homestead pro ert (sold) , ransferred contracted for sale, or leased. lAntinspection of the dwelling is required before a property is listed or advertised for sale and all code violations must be corrected to certifiy occupancy. Either a valid certificate or a copy of the inspection report must be shown to all prospective buyer(s) when a property is shown and the certificate must also be held available to be viewed on demand by the Building Official. Certificates are valid for only one transaction, but Qmay be transferred within a year from date of issue. To be valid the certificate must be signed by both buyer and seller. 2 . Class 2 : Certificate of Occupancy: Rental I is required for all rental buildings of one (1) to three (3) dwelling units each. This certificate must be renewed every two (2) years. An inspection of the premises is required and all code violations corrected to qualify. This certificate must be conspicuously displayed on the premises listed therein. This certificate must be transferred to any new owner of record. 3 . Class 3 : Certificate of Occupancy: Rental II is required for all rental buildings of four (4) or more dwelling units. This certificate is valid for one year. An inspection of the premises is required and all code violations corrected to qualify. This certificate must be conspicuously displayed on the premises listed therein. This certificate must be transferred to any new owner of record. 4 . Class 4: Certificate of Occupancy: Rental III is required for all commercial/industrial buildings that also contain rental dwelling units. This certificate is valid for one year. An inspection of the premises is required and all code violations corrected to qualify. This certificate must be conspicuously displayed in an area accessible by all occupants. This certificate must be transferred to any new owner of record. 5. Exception. Any dwelling participating in the HUD section S subsidy program, may be exempted from inspection fees provided that a copy of the most recent HUD inspection report (less then one year old) accompanys the application. subd. 4 .425. Application/Inspection. Application for the Certificate of Occupancy shall be on forms furnished by the City. Upon receipt of a properly executed application for a Certificate of Occupancy, the City Building Official shall cause an inspection to be made of the premises to insure compliance with the requirements of the Ordinance Code. The requirements which must be satisfied in order to obtain a Certificate are provided in said Ordinance Code. 1. Homestead owners are required to have their property inspected prior to advertising, listing or showing the dwelling to prospective buyers. It is the responsibility of the owner or his agent to inform any prospective buyer as to 14 e \ - 18 - the certification requirement and the status of the application. 2. All buildings containing rental dwellings must apply for a new certificate prior to the expiration of the existing certificate to avoid fines and/or penalties. The effective date of the new certificate will be for the day following the expiration date, regardless of the date of the inspection. Subd. 4 . 426. Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy ("Certificate") . All dwelling classes can obtain the appropriate Certificate of Occupancy upon satisfactory completion of all work ordered by the City Building Official and by paying the required fees. If violations exist that require a significant amount of time to correct, then the owner may obtain a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy, provided that the violations do not pose any immediate danger either to the occupant or community at large. 1. If a property is in compliance with the requirements of the ordinance Code, a Certificate shall be issued to the present owner, or agent which shall state that the structure has been inspected and is in compliance with the requirements of said Code. The present owner, or any agent designated by the present owner shall obtain the Certificate. During the period of one year following its issuance, a Certificate may be accepted by the City in satisfaction of the requirements of Subd. 4.423 without the need for a second inspection. If the City finds that the circumstances of occupancy following the issuance of a Certificate involve possible substandard maintenance or abnormal wear and tear, a new inspection may be ordered and if significant violations are subsequently found, the certificate in force must be surrendered to the Building Official and a new certificate applied for. 2. The present owner or their designated agent shall present a copy of the Certificate in force, signed by the new owner of record, to the Building Official at the time of sale or transfer of title or change of occupancy status. The proposed buyer or the Prospective occupant shall not take occupancy of the dwelling unit prior to issuance of a Certificate except as allowed under item 3 of this subdivision. 3. An owner may be granted a Temporary Certificate of occupancy prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy if approved by the Building Official. Approval shall be based on reasonable time to comply, undue hardship or other extraordinary and exceptional Qp - 19 - `r \� problems; provided, that no problem shall constitute an immediate hazard as defined in Subd.4.417 The approval shall not be given until the owner, a new owner or the agent of the new owner has filed a Statement of Intent to Comply with the Building Official upon forms provided by the City. Correction dates in the Statement of Intent to Comply shall be established by the Building official with consideration to undue hardship, extraordinary and exceptional problems and weather conditions. Failure to meet the correction dates in the Statement shall constitute a violation of this Code and a misdemeanor and shall void any approval given pursuant to this Section. An escrow account covering the cost of all repairs, established by a lending institution or person licenced to broker real estate, is required for any Temporary Certificate if a sale, transfer of property or a lease is involved. 4 . Transfer of Certificate. A certificate issued hereunder is transferable for a fee of $10 to any person who has acquired ownership of a building certified class 2, 3, or 4, for the unexpired portions --of—the term for which it was issued, provided that the -- - application to transfer such certificate is filed with the Building Official for change of ownership and the certified building and dwelling units are in compliance with the Housing Code. The Certificate shall terminate upon failure to apply for its transfer within 30 days of the date of sale or transfer of ownership of the building. 5. Every applicant for a certificate shall assist the City in making an inspection of all portions of the structure. This includes notifying the occupants of the building of inspection times and requesting their cooperation in conducting the inspection. Any failure by the owner, occupant, designated agents or any other person to comply with the requirements of the City of Shakopee Housing Code shall constitute a violation of the Code and a misdemeanor. Subd. 4.427. Fees. The fee for the inspection and issue of a Certificate of Occupancy is determined by class as follows: 20 - CLASS FEE Class 1: all homestead property Due at time of each sale $30.00 initial inspection 00. 00 1st reinspection 30.00 ea. additional inspect. Class 2: 1-3 units rental Due every two years $40. 00 initial inspection 00.00 1st reinspection 30. 00 ea. additional inspect. Deduct $10. 00 for each Section 8 unit. Class 3 : 4+ units rental - -- _ - Due every year $50. 00 initial ea. building + 5.00 per unit over 3 00. 00 lst reinspect 50.00 ea. additional inspect. Waive $5. 00 unit charge for every Section 8 unit, and deduct $10. 00 from initial fee per building if it contains any Section 8 units. If entire building is Section 8, then fee is $10.00 maximum. Class 4 : Commercial plus residential rental $50.00 initial ea. building + 5.00 per unit 00. 00 1st reinspect 40. 00 ea. additional inspect. Waive $5. 00 unit charge for every Section 8 unit, and deduct $10. 00 from initial fee per building if it contains any Section 8 units. Failure to comply is a misdemeanor and subject to additional fines and/or imprisonment. A non-refundable fee of $75.00 is required for any appeal directed to the City Council. q0�- 21 - The above certificate and inspection fees shall be tendered with the application. The certificate fee shall be subject to a 100 percent penalty per month, or any portion thereof, beyond the date due and payable. Except as provided for the transfer of certificates, no refund of certificate and inspection fees shall be made to those discontinuing operation or who sell, transfer, give away, or otherwise dispose of a certified building to another person. In the event it is determined by the Building Official that an application must be denied due to legal restrictions that prohibit the issuance of the certificate, the applicant' s tendered fees will be returned. The Building Official shall review the fee schedule annually and recommend changes as he deems appropriate to the City Council. Penalties. If an owner of a rental dwelling is determined by the Building Official to be in non- compliance with this code, the Official may order the owner to cease from renting any vacated dwelling units until compliance is achieved. The Building Official may also order the tenants of any non-complying owner to pay their rent to an escrow account up to an amount _ -deemed by the Official as adequate to pay for the work -- required to successfully comply with the code. These penalties are separate from other fines and penalties listed elsewhere in this code and may be applied concurrently with other penalties where appropriate. Subd. 4.428 . Implementation. The Certificate of Occupancy program shall be implemented in phases as follows: - 1. Certificates of Homestead Occupancy shall be required for all housing sales on or after 1 January 1989. 2. For all other residential dwelling units the requirements for certification shall not be in force until the owner is notified by the Building Official of an initial inspection to be scheduled sometime after the date of 20 September 1988. The Building Official shall phase-in inspections with respect to zoning classifications, beginning with the downtown portions of each zone first. This would create the following order of ,implementation: 22 - Zone B3, Bl, R4, R3, R2, Rl, AG, 5, I, and B2. Once a Class 2, 3 , or 4 building has been initially certified, then the schedule for recertification and all other requirements of this code shall be in force. 3 . All existing certification programs for new and permitted construction shall remain in effect and are not affected by this ordinance or any schedule therein. �6 MEMO T0: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Sewer Extension DATE: September 8, 1988 1MCDUCTION: An assessment hearing has been scheduled for September 20, 1988 for the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Sewer Extension Project No. 1987-13• This memo will provide background information on the methodology used in calculating the assessments and a history of how the assessments for other portions of this interceptor were calculated. BACKGROUND: Extensive work has been done by previous Councils and City engineers in -developing- an overall assessment plan for this entire interceptor sewer, starting at the Valley Industrial Park just south of Hwy. 101 and extending all the way up thru the Upper Valley. This year's project was another extension of that same interceptor. To fully comprehend the methods used in calculating the assessments, I would first like to brief Council on haw the assessments were calculated for past portions of the interceptor. 1981 Project In 1981 , the first phase of the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Sewer was constructed (Project No. 1981-1). This project ran from T.H. 101 near the Industrial Park, southerly to C.R. 16 and then westerly thru Hauer's Addition, terminating at C.R. 17. The total cost of this project was $879 ,912.65• Resolution No. 1891 adopting the assessments for this project was approved on August 25, 1981. Prior to preparing the assessments, the former City Engineer, Bo Spurrier, did an extensive study to determine a policy for assessing the entire interceptor as it gets constructed. The initial study report that was prepared for the interceptor in April 1979 was used as a starting point to determine alternate assessment methods. This was expanded to include fourteen total alternatives. The policy that was developed consisted of dividing the benefits into 3 areas: lateral benefit, trunk benefit and interceptor benefit. The policy further defined lateral, trunk and interceptor services based on size of pipe and depth of sewer. The benefited areas were also defined based on a certain distance away from the pipe. In other words, the entire drainage basin was assessed for an interceptor benefit, while smaller areas within the drainage basin received a trunk benefit or lateral benefit or both. On July 21 , 1981 the City Council approved of that policy as recommended by the City Engineer. Consequently, the assessments were levied for the 1981 project based on that policy. The resolution adopting the assessments (Resolution No. 1891) divided the assessments down into 3 benefited areas. The properties within the benefited area from T.H. 101 to C.R. 17 received an immediate assessment, which included lateral, trunk and interceptor costs. The properties located in the benefitted area between 17 & 79 received an interceptor assessment that was deferred until the comprehensive sewer plan was revised to include that area. In 1985, the ewprehensive plan was revised and consequently these properties were assessed for those 1981 costs plus interest. The third area consisted of those properties west of C.R. 79 and outside the corporate limits. This area received an interceptor assessment, but the City paid those costs and the resolution stated that once those areas came into the City they would receive a sewer service charge that consists of the 1981 assessments plus interest. 1986 Project The second project involving this interceptor was a short extension of the interceptor through C.R. 17. The total cost of this project was $4,546.08. These costs have not been assessed as of yet. Due to the fact that only those areas west of C.R. 17 benefit from this project, those areas will be assessed for that portion. These costs are included in the calculations for the assessments for this years project. Again, the assessment will be divided into two areas based on the overall assessment policy adopted for this interceptor. The benefit areas between C.R. 17 and C.R. 79 will received a trunk sewer assessment, while those benefited areas west of C.R. 79 will receive an interceptor assessment. 1988 Project This years project consisted of constructing the interceptor from C.R. 17 to C.R. 79. The total costs for this project were $191 ,766.05. Appendix A summarizes the costs for the project. Please refer to the attached map for a summary of the areas served. Since the service area for this project is completely residential property and all lots will be served by lateral sewers located in the streets, there are no lateral benefits of this project for these properties. Therefore, all assessed costs for the area between C.R. 17 and C.R. 79 will be trunk costs, based on the adopted assessment policy. In addition a portion of the costs for this project that are determined to be interceptor systems charges will be assessed to those properties west of C.R. 79. Basically, the assessment policy defines interceptor sewers as those sewers over 15 inches in diameter and deeper than 12 feet. The sewer that was installed was 21 inches in diameter and 10-12 feet deep. Therefore, there was oversizing of this main but no "overdepth". The interceptor costs were calculated to be the difference between the 21 inch pipe and the 15 inch pipe. 9 � Those areas west of C.R. 79 that are within the corporate limits are included in the assessment roll. Those areas west of C.R. 79 currently outside the corporate limits will not be assessed at this time. The City will pay for those costs now, but whenever those areas come into the City, they will receive a systems charge based on the assessments calculated plus interest. There are several areas that need special mention as far as assessments go: 1 . The 150 acres recently annexed, just west of C.R. 79 and south of the high school, will have their assessments deferred until the MUSA sanitary sewer service area line is extended (The City is currently pursuing this with the MWCC). 2. The 10 acres of school property will be deferred until the proposed annexation for this land is official. In addition, the school may never need this area served by the interceptor and therefore the assessments should not be levied until then. The City should absorb those costs until such time as this area ties into the interceptor and then they will get a sewer "hook up" charge equal to their proposed assessment. 3. The portion of the South Parkview Subdivision area within this drainage basin may not be assessable. As part of the plat approval, the developer agreed to install a lift station and pump the sewer north. If this is the case, they would not benefit from the interceptor sewer. Staff has calculated a second Assessment Roll for this project excluding this area from the roll. The question is, if the developer does not want to absorb the costs of a lift station they will need to utilize the interceptor sewer. Conversely, they may not want to wait until other lands east of the their property are annexed so that the interceptor can be extended to them and therefore would be forced to install the lift station in order to develop. Once Council has reviewed both scenarios and received all public testimony, either assessment roll can be adopted. Summary of Assessed Costs The assessable costs for all three projects can be summarized as follows: Project No. Lateral Costs Trunk Costs Interceptor Costs 1981-1 Previously Assessed Previously Assessed $122,269.45 (Including Interest) 1986-1 None $ 4,546.08 $ 395.32 1987_13 None $167.189.45 $ 24.576.60 TOTALS $171,735.53 $147,241 .37 Of the $147,241 .37 total interceptor costs, $65,701 .01 cannot be assessed at this time due to those areas being outside of the corporate limits. Staff will go through the assessment calculations and methodology used at the public hearing. Attached is Resolution No. 2946, A Resolution Adopting Assessments for this Project for Council consideration. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2946. 2. Deny Resolution No. 2946. RECOMMEMATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to adopt Resolution No. 2946. If the alternate assessment roll which excludes the South Parkview Subdivisions is adopted the Resolution will need to be amended to reflect the revisions in the total cost assessed. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 2946, A Resolution Adopting Assessments for Project No. 1987-13, the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Extension from the west side of County Road 17 to the east side of County Road 79 and move its adoption. DH/fmp MEW946 9 � RESOLUTION NO. 2946 A Resolution Adopting Assessments Project No. 1987-13 Valley Industrial Park Sewer Extension From the West Side of County Road 17 to the East Side of County Road 79 WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the installation of the V. I. P. Sanitary Sewer Interceptor beginning at a section of the existing interceptor located at the west right-of-way of County Road 17 and proceeding westerly to the east right-of-way of County Road 79 and there terminating ; and WHEREAS, the total cost of the improvement will be $191 ,766 .05 , including contingency and administrative fees; and WHEREAS, those benefited areas lying within the City of Shakopee corporate limits will receive an immediate assessment for trunk and interceptor costs of $253 ,275.90; and WHEREAS, those properties lying outside of the corporate limits of the City will receive a benefit in the amount of $65 ,701 .00 and since the City chooses not to assess said property at this time, the City will pay the $65 ,701 .00 now and will be reimbursed by paying a systems charge at the time of connection to the interceptor; and WHEREAS, the property currently owned by the Independent School District No. 720 is currently going thru the annexation process, the City chooses to defer those assessments until such time as the property is annexed into the City ; and WHEREAS; the property recently annexed west of C. R. 79 owned by Josephine Vierling is currently outside the MUSA sewer boundaries , the City chooses to defer those assessments until such time as the MUSA line is extended to include that property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of said: Valley Industrial Park Sewer Extension from the West Side of County Road 17 to the East Side of County Road 79 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments levied against it. 2 . Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1989 , and shall bear interest at the rate of 8 .25 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31 , 1989 , and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty ( 30 ) days from the adoption of this resolution ; he may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list, and he may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. 4. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in his office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before October 10th of each year the total amount of installments and interest which are to become due in the following year on the assessment on each parcel of land included in the assessment roll. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: 1 . That such proposed assessments together with any amendments thereof, for that property owned by Independent School District No. 720 (P. I.D. No. 6-912001-1 ) shall be deferred until such time as the property becomes part of the City of Shakopee and whenever they utilize the interceptor. 2 . That such proposed assessments together with any amendments thereof, for that property owned by Josephine Vierling (P .I.D. 9 27-912045-0) as listed on the assessment roll shall be deferred until such time as the sanitary sewer service area (MUSA) is extended to include this property. 3 . That an additional capacity has been provided in the interceptor for future use and the cost of providing this capacity is $65 ,701 .00 which amount shall be recovered in the future when those properties become part of the City of Shakopee, by means of a systems charge. This charge shall consist of the above construction costs plus interest of an annual rate of 8 .25 percent from the date of this resolution until the areas become part of the City. 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 APPENDIX "A" V.I.P Interceptor Sewer Extension Project No. 1987-13 Assessment Calculations Project 1987_13 Construction Costs $131 ,992.00 Admin. , Legal & Engr. Fees 59,77 Total Assessed Costs $191 ,776.05 Interceptor Vs. Trunk Costs Project No. Interceptor Trunk Total 1981-1 $122,269.45 Previously $122,269.45 (with interest) Assessed 1986-1 $ 395 .32 $ 4,546 .08 $ 4,941 .40 1987-13 $ 24.576 .60 $167 , 189.45 $191 .766 .05 TOTAL $147,241 .37 $171 ,735.53 $318,976.90 Assessed Costs Benefited Interceptor Area: 458 .01 acres (only 253 .64 acres in the corporate limits) Benefited Trunk Area: 274 .19 acres Cost Per Acre: Interceptor = $147 ,241 .37 - 458.01 acres = $321 .4807 per Acre Trunk = $171 ,735 .53 : 274 . 19 = $626 .3377 per acre TOTAL ASSESSMENT Interceptor Area = (253 .64 acres) ($321 .4807 per acre) = $ 81 ,540.36 Trunk Area = (274. 19 acres) ($626 .3377 per acre) = $171 .755.53 TOTAL = $253,275 .90 ASSESSED COSTS FOR ALTERNATIVE # 2 (EXCLUDING SOUTH PARKVIEW SUBDIVISION) Benefited Interceptor Area: 441 .25 acres (only 236 .88 acres in the corporate limits) Benefited Trunk Area: 274 . 19 acres Cost Per Acre: Interceptor = $147 ,241 .37 = 441 .25 acres = $333.69149 per Acre Trunk = $171 ,735 .53 = 274 . 19 = $626 .3377 per acre TOTAL ASSESSMENT Interceptor Area = (236 .88 acres) ($333 .69149 per acre) _ $ 79 ,044.84 Trunk Area = (274.19 acres) ($626 .3377 per acre) _ $171 ,715.53 TOTAL = $250,780.37 b Ep , o �f � � R iO4 to, ` tF • F Hof. �p 60 "� u o 6 d a�:. QI Vf -_•- .......................... .. of Ell 71 .su• � � 9MolZ-r a oZ•93 __ — _ _ � a» awr 7 � k LIGE 65N p:, Trarcm-, MN 5S79 JerosE A. Vi er::ny :i-.:'.i GN4d - - 36i4.24 i5p1 Y 7, Shal:opzf, 8!; SSSf9 Alphonso A. 'h Eri:¢e 46/v:; _-4J 6hanpze, MN 5 74 Lxxrenee •, Jeroee 4ier1ipy 3 27ti07005-; 3f.N6 _ -_ -21 3'4, _ 4:; 324,4-% _ 411 5¢¢:h sect-, •-•_ Snakopee, Ch' Uc E for T. ereEneooe. N12 1674 r,a.sEnili ntl. 3,OSi.64 33,067.64 Shakopee; Yii 5--75 1st Na ti rrai :aro 0< kspeE :%-90701:-1 1.SG £934,51 354 � .5.. Ln pi 3rdki.Ge= ai-Yl iN2:�P - -. Si.70 512-,:CL/tl LL i6 AVE. Sh-i:¢peE. h —57- 15; Ave. roam¢¢=. NN °.,., , JMO--re 9. VierAny E 27-412045-0 _ 1a N.N0 356,222.11 C;0 Car: i 15511 n¢, Ac:ir.. 100,' S. Atsood Sha:opeE, tiN 55:.74 - 160 $126 € 6-912001-1 1N.NG $3,214.61 10:1 : Le,, ,214,61 Shakopee, HN c,>%4 herrenor =: .e, €6I,- 0.:6 irurir. F i3 n2?p ine aile55sW[5 e•e - trl ::61:9 - .to be a551 GrRdl IHuHY F:ME• CULI4t N p,. , _Wti Cf 61.:1 fi[.il'11t 15 $7.960.75 Cr0 Ild nd Y ri :Y.60 114,92E.2$ LI- "' ._.2E $!,,954.60 G. iotE _ $22';.6[/1 ut `. _-----: slut 5 .. 1 £E [j late are ,o'.c . t ..a .._ ..----------------------------------------- - . e..a:....M. .......«ff4?i ........ e ...... Slb_I�a .pp Cail.. AS $6,:.'N.il& nui... : ie.04 fl` 2YY.li $101509.05 54 TOTS -- .a. f46 2.61 i•44bH ; «eei4i.. 4 .4Riii: ...... fF annexed In .._ ., 1 C 'L]EF C159M1 4'1561 P. D-9120,45-11 fay dE£o annexed and OE a55£55£eot el ll be Contlndent upon the Mus; tine bEind extended. 6-912001-1 -..a :. _:5E¢-e1 beim annexed and day or cay not be 255E-5Pd ba;-c :f 3E -.:zLihty and (or the NL A line ntEnSlpn. 11�' f.+rtk;lAR ]EFLRFTERCEPI On XJE[SjM-A' InterleptV Rate :Der aL. 3'33.69149 41ternate 3 2. 11. Farkrieu outiote are not inciudea Trunk Rate iper acre;: 3626.331 i'v Gate _---___-�- TO 3-S Printed: 1, Sep-88 INTERCEPTOR TkUNK. TOTAL OWNER PARCEL NO. ACRES ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT Renden Development 2'-064052-0 1.66 3553.94 3553.93 XWalden Bros. Lumber 13731 Johnson Memorial Dr. Shakopee, MN 5537; Renden Development 27-084054-0 1'..72 $240.26 32140,26 %Walden Bros. Lumber 13731 Johnson Manorial Dr. Shakopee, MN 55379 Renden Development 27-0E4054-0 i.46 3467.19 $487.19 %Naiaen Bros. Lumber 1-7 l Johnson Memorial Dr. Shakopee, MN 55379 Renden Development 27-084055-0 0.39 £130.14 $130.14 %Malden Bros. Leber 13731 Johnson Memorial Dr. Shakopee, MN 553779 Cletus J. Link 27-121026-0 $0.00 £0.00 12631 Link Drive Shakopee. MN 55379 Cletus J. Link 27-121027-0 $0.00 $0.00 12831 Link Drive Shakopee, MR 55379 Cletus J. Link 27-121028-0 $0.00 £0.00 1,831 Link Drive Shakopee, NN 55379 Cletus J. Link 27-121029-0 $0.00 £0.00 12831 Link Drive Shakopee, MN 55379 City of Shakopee 27-121030-0 $0.00 $0.00 129 E. 1st Ave. Shakopee, MM 55379 Bethel College 8 Sem. Fruits a 27-907001-0 40.00 $25,053.51 $25,053.51 3900.Bethel Drive St. Paul, MN 55112 Bethel College 6 Sem. Fnatn a 27-907002-0 121.57 $76,770.21 £76,770.21 3900 Bethel Drive St. Paul, NN 55112 rTR SAN TAR) SEWER iNTERCEETB6: A3SESSMENi interceptor Rate toe, act: 1333.69149 trunk Rate iper acrei: $626.33770 INTERCERT6R TRUNK TOTAL OWNER RARCEL NO. ACRES ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ,Alphonse A. Vierling 27-907003-0 19,20 £12,0.5.66 312,0:'5.66 1543 CA 79 Shakopee, MH 55379 Jerowe A. Vierling ,'9..7004-0 1.30 $814.24 $BI;.24 ;461 C"r, 7v Shakopee, MN 55379 Alphonse A. Vierling $ 27-9:7005-0 38.71 $24,245.53 $24,245.53 1543 CA 79 Shakopee, MN 55379 Lawrence k Jerowe Vierling $ 27-907005-1 39.05 $24,477.26 324,477.28 971 South Scott Shakopee, MN 55379 Eldon T. 6reenwopd 27-907012-0 4.i3 $S,OB7.04 $3,087.84 1674 Marschall Rd. Shakopee, MN 55379 1st National Bank of Shakopee 27-907012-t i.50 $939.51 $939.51 129 S. Holies Shakopee, MN 55379 P , Alphonse A. Vierling 27-907014-0 6.90 $4,321.73 $4,321.73 1543 CR 79 Shakopee, MM 55379 City of Shakopee 27-911025-0 35.70 $13,247.55 $13,247.55 129 E. 1st Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 City of Shakopee 27-+.12027-0 32.95 $10,995.13 $10,995.13 129 E. let Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Josephine M. Vierling @ 27-912045-0 150.00 $50,053.72 $50,053.72 CIO Carl Vierling, Main. 1007 S. Atwood Shakopee, MN 55379 ISO 1120 @ 6-912001-1 10.00 33,336.41 $3,336.91 10th k Lewis Shakopee, MN 55379 interceptor 136.88 $79,044.84 Trunk 274.19 $171,735.53 Total 511.07 1250,780.37 } The tw6 parcels indicated with asterisks 12:-907001-0 6 29-907002-01 Oecone a sued:vlslcn called The Meadows 1st Audition. Since pa,cel rm,absrs ;hays not been received yet i8/221B8i by Tne City of Shakopee the assessments are being shown as follows. Parcel No'S: 27-136001-0 thru 27-13605B-0 Ito be assiened) TRUNK ONNERSFIP ACRES ASSESSMENT All properties are Outlet A 13.tt. $8,555.77 currently Owned by: Outlet B 69.21 $41,06.16 Geld Nugget Corp. outlet C 6.91 ;4,327,99 8657 Zealand Ave. R. Outlet 8 12.71 !7,960.15 6rookiand Park, NM Outiot E 39.60 $24,928.24 55445 Li-5 BI , LI-13 62 L1-22 B3 ---- 22,28 !13,954.60 151 lots = $273.62/lot It LZ3 & 24 B3 mF L25 & 26 63 , L27-35 63 ------ Total 162.57 $101.823,72 es 53 lots are assessable as 51. Lots 23 & 24 and lots 25 k 26 Combine to fore two buildable lots, 1}HFF}{}}HFN}}}#FFFF}}FFH}FFH}}}F}}HFF}F}}F}N}H.F}}{}}}HµH}{+F{}F}HHH1 MF}.FHF}f}}H}}} 4 These two parcels (27-907005-0 & 27-907005-1) will become a subdivision called Prairie Estates 1st Addition, This plat has not been recorded yet i8l22/6Bi nor have parcel numbers been assigned. The VIP Sanitary Sewer assessments Will be split as follows: TRUNK ACRES ASSESSMENT Outlot A 13.14 $81230.06 6utlot B 3,13 $2,336.24 outlet C I6.04 fll,299.(3 8utlot 0 26.10 !16,347.41 Lot 1-13 61 ------: Lot 1-17 62 ------ 16.76 $10,509.95 134 LOTS = $309.12/iot Lot 1-4 63 ------; (34 LOTS) _ _____________ Total 17.79 $48,722.81 }HFHF}FF{}}}}F}}}FF}t}}FFH}F}NM}t}}}}}F}MFF}}HFF}}N}FFiM...}}}I FFMHN}HFF}F.H}}}FF}i}}{{} These parcels ([7-912045-0 & 6-912001-1) have been annexed or will be annexed into the City Of Shakopee from Jackson Township. 27-912045-0 has been annexed and the assessment will be contingent upon the MUSA line being extended. 6-912001-1 is in the process of being annexed and may or may net be assessed based on the servicability and for the MUSA line extension, L M B $LxUOI a L55•RY I U-o o. GYU 9 .2 x CMYRCM ' W IWOMEJ 6 1 I]�IS 6 Ion is ( xi 1 3 T w 2 5-° MINNESOTA ST. Gfl41 F,q PP Wnota P ro,1 I g OU'!4D( E k 5 IXIROT D 59.40 n� M 5 PI 5 ' fl _ OUicOi B 3J3 V/ERIINC ORI of _�----- 6W nT +.�rnoN. -?iGR\RIE � 7M FS omuT e C4 IS µ � C�TnS To,�� -- r— o li zL.,o I ij f I •i � I _ ounoi A . _ 3.VV I I I 'Th= MEAW.:S azww- -mC�s 1-0 DI ,3 bT5 D493i cq c+<z^� LI-C 62 owl 0-mlL F.— - y-5 D3 9 •• I.`l LI-x3 63 .B l..19 T,JNT A 13.14 L26-35 DJ IC J " ¢43 (}PLpT E 3.T3 oJT is C. 6,91 rm-or c \Do4 ar mC D o,a.ar n - .lo AWWO .-19 ZT-9clix�?-c 7JT br C, 13 61 GJ LT b P3\ Q,UT:cT c 3'.50 -5 D\ SK's q b Ret, ; S42- d RESOLUTION NO. 2946 A Resolution Adopting Assessments Project No. 1987-13 Valley Industrial Park Sewer Extension From the West Side of County Road 17 to the East Side of County Road 79 WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the installation of the V. I. P. Sanitary Sewer Interceptor beginning at a section of the existing interceptor located at the west right-of-way of County Road 17 and proceeding westerly to the east right-of-way of County Road 79 and there terminating ; and WHEREAS, the total cost of the improvement will be $191 ,766 .05 , including contingency and administrative fees; and WHEREAS, those benefited areas lying within the City of Shakopee corporate limits will receive an immediate assessment for trunk and interceptor costs of $253 ,275.90 ; and WHEREAS, those properties lying outside of the corporate limits of the City will receive a benefit in the amount of $65 ,701 .00 and since the City chooses not to assess said property at this time, the City will pay the $65 ,701 .00 now and will be reimbursed by paying a systems charge at the time of connection to the interceptor; and WHEREAS, the property currently owned by the Independent School District No. 720 may not benefit from the interceptor sewer, the City chooses to defer any assessments until such time as the property connects up to the interceptor sewer. WHEREAS; the property recently annexed west of C. R. 79 owned by Josephine Vierling is currently outside the MUSA sewer boundaries , the City chooses to defer those assessments until such time as the MUSA line is extended to include that property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of said: Valley Industrial Park Sewer Extension from the West Side of County Road 17 to the East Side of County Road 79 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments levied against it. 2 . Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1989 , and shall bear interest at the rate of 8.25 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31 , 1989 , and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty ( 30 ) days from the adoption of this resolution ; he may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list, and he may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. 4. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in his office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before October 10th of each year the total amount of installments and interest which are to become due in the following year on the assessment on each parcel of land included in the assessment roll. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: 1 . That such proposed assessments together with any amendments thereof, for that property owned by Independent School District No. 720 (P.I.D. No. 6-912001-1 ) shall be deferred until such timeasthe property connects up to the interceptor sewer. 2 . That such proposed assessments together with any amendments thereof, for that property owned by Josephine Vierling (P.I.D. A 27-912045-0) as listed on the assessment roll shall be deferred until such time as the sanitary sewer service area (MUSA) is extended to include this property. 3 . That an additional capacity has been provided in the interceptor for future use and the cost of providing this capacity is $65 , 701 .00 which amount shall be recovered in the future when those properties become part of the City of Shakopee, by means of a systems charge. This charge shall consist of the above construction costs plus interest of an annual rate of 8 .25 percent from the date of this resolution until the areas become part of the City. 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 9� Memo To: Sohn K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: 1989 Budget Public Hearing Date: September 13, 1988 Introduction Council annually holds a public hearing to receive comments on the proposed budget for the upcoming year. Back re ound The attached notice was published in the Shakopee Valley News. Council should hold the hearing to receive public comment. Action Reauested Hold the public hearing and receive comments from the public on the proposed 1989 budget. GV:mmr 1989 Budget Hearing The City of Shakopee will hold a public hearing at 8:30 P.M. on September 20, 1988, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota, for the purpose of hearing written and oral comment from the public concerning the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 1989. All interested citizens, groups, senior citizens and organizations representing the interest of senior citizens are encouraged to attend and to submit comments. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED 1989 BUDGET City of Shakopee General Fund Revenues Source Property Taxes Licenses 6 Permits $ 1,611,418 Intergovernmental 437,800 Service Char es 849,772 Charges/User User Fees Fines and Penalties 527,250 Other Revenue 68,000 Total 621,884 $ 4,116,124 Expenditures Activity General Government Public Safety $ 998,995 Public Works 1,308,615 Recreation 1,362,373 Miscellaneous 379,770 Total 185.871 $4,225,624 A copy of this information, the entire proposed budget and additional background materials are available for public inspection from 8:00 A.M. P.M. weekdays at Shakopee City Hall, to 4:30 129 Dated this 2nd day of September, 1988Eas[ First Avenue, . John K. Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee it C01 -' . ,_t'� I /Oct. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Dial-A-Ride Contract Amendment #8 DATE: August 23, 1988 INTRODUCTION• Our Dial-A-Ride Contractor has requested that the Dial-A- Ride contract be amended reflecting the change in name of their company. BACKGROUND: On April 7, 1986 the City of Shakopee enter into an agreement with Kare Kabs Inc. to provide dial-a-ride service in Shakopee. On May 1, 1986 Kare Kabs was sold to Rider Truck Rental Inc. Since that time, Rider Truck Rental Inc. has continued to operate their contracted services under the name Kare Kabs. On August 16, 1988 Kare Kabs formally requested that the Dial-A-Ride contract be amended reflecting actual ownership. On August 18, 1988 the Energy and Transportation Committee moved to recommend to City Council that Dial-A-Ride contract amendment #8 be approved. Dial-A-Ride contract amendment #8 simply provides that all references to the contractor as Kare Kabs be changed to Rider Truck Rental Inc. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Move to approve Dial-A-Ride contract amendment #8. 2 . Do not approve Dial-A-Ride contract amendment 48 . STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REOUESTED: Move to approve Dial-A-Ride contract amendment #8 changing the name of the contractor from Kare Kabs to Rider Truck Rental - Inc. Dial-A-Ride Contract Amendment #8 Shakopee Dial-A-Ride Service Contract Agreement The following Sections are hereby amended and adopted effective September 6, 1988. 1. Amend the entire Dial-A-Ride service contract agreement and subsequent amendments reflecting the change in ownership of the contractor. The name Kare Kabs in all references to the contractor as Kare Kabs shall be deleted from the contract and replaced by the name Rider Truck Rental Inc. THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE By Its Mayor By Its City Administrator By Its City Clerk DATE: RIDER TRUCK RENTAL INC. By Its Director of Operations DATE: R % /0L LAW OFFICES !r'✓ KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED ? to Phillip R. Krass 14hall Road Business Center Dennis L Monroe IV Marschall Road Barry K. Meyer • P.O.Box 216 Trevor R. 55379 Walsten 'GRopee,Mn Jay D.Goldberg inesota Diane M. Carlson TTelephone,(fi 12)44550800 RobertJ.Walter FAX(612)445-7640 Lachlan B.Muir James B.Croft Colleen M.T ende Kent A. Carlson,CPA September 14, 1988 The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: $44 Million Sports Facility Revenue Bond Series 1984-B (Shakopee Racetrack Project) Our File No. 1-1373-158 Dear Mayor and Council Members: You may recall that when the racetrack was initially built Congress provided authority for the track to issue industrial revenue bonds. Approximately $46 million worth of bonds were issued and utilized when the track was first constructed. Those bonds have now been retired and replaced with conventional financing. At the same time the initial bonds were put into place, the racetrack issued an additional $44 million worth of bonds to be utilized in the event there was expansion of the track. Those bonds were "parked" and the money never really utilized. The racetrack bonding attorneys have an opportunity to replace the present Series B "parked" bonds under more favorable terms, but as part of those terms they are required to deposit a Letter of Credit guaranteeing these bonds. They are prepared to do that and need simply to amend the Indenture of Trust dated October 15, 1984 to provide for such a Letter of Credit. This may seem like a great deal of work to have to go through for a relatively simple change, but a Letter of Credit was not required with the initial issuance and therefore was not provided for. The Letter of Credit will give the new bond holders more security than the present bond holders have. This slight change will in no way effect the City, which in fact has no obligations for these bonds anyway. I have reviewed all of the documentation that has been supplied by Briggs and Morgan, the attorneys for MRI, and find the documents to be in order and to be consistent with the representations the bond attorneys have given both myself and John Anderson. The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Page Two September 14, 1988 I am recommending that you adopt the short page and a half Resolution that the bond attorneys have provided which authorizes the amending of the Supplemental Indenture of Trust. If you agree, a motion to adopt that Resolution would be in order. Very truly yours, ERASS-1M OE TERED ' Phillip R. 4tr ss PRR:mlw cc: Robyn Hansen RESOLUTION NO. 2950 A RESOLUTION FURTHER AMENDING THE SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST DATED AS OF OCTOBER 15, 1984 FOR $44,000,000 SPORTS FACILITY REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1984-B AND THE LOAN AGREEMENT EXECUTED IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, on October 15, 1984, the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "City" ) issued its $44, 000,000 Sports Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 1984-B (the "Bonds" ) and loaned the proceeds derived from the sale thereof to Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. ( "MRI" ) to finance a portion of a horse racing facility in the City of Shakopee now known as Canterbury Downs ; and WHEREAS, the Bonds were issued and are outstanding pursuant to the terms of a Supplemental Indenture of Trust originally executed by the City and First Trust Company, Inc. (the "Trustee" ) October 15, 1984, and amended on December 14 , 1984, December 27 , 1984 and April 1, 1988 (collectively the "Indenture" ) ; and WHEREAS, MRI has advised the City and the Trustee that it wishes to further amend the Indenture and Loan Agreement currently in effect with respect to the Bonds to accommodate the remarketing of the Bonds on October 3, 1988 on an escrowed basis, either through the addition of a letter of credit to provide additional security for the payment of principal and interest due on the Bonds or otherwise, and, if a letter of credit is obtained, the document revisions required by Standard & Poor ' s Corporation or Moody' s Investors Services in order for that rating agency to rate the Bonds on the credit of the letter of credit bank; and WHEREAS, Section 10-2 of the Indenture provides that the City and the Trustee may, from time to time, enter into supplemental or amendatory indentures so as to thereby, among other things, either (a) grant to or confer upon the Trustee for the benefit of the Holders any additional rights, remedies, powers, authority or security that may lawfully be granted to or conferred upon the Holders or the Trustee (b) subject to the lien and pledge of this Indenture additional revenues, property or collateral or (c) make any other change which in the judgment of the Trustee is necessary or desireable and will not materially prejudice any non-consenting Holder of a Bond; and WHEREAS, the Bonds are to be purchased from the existing Holder on October 3, 1988 for remarketing to new holders; and WHEREAS, the amendments to be made to the documents, whether to add a letter of credit or otherwise will not materially prejudice any of the existing holders, since those holders are required to relinquish their Bonds on October 3, 1988 . NOW, THEREFORE, it is resolved by the City Council of the City of Shakopee that the Supplemental Indenture of Trust dated as of October 15, 1989 should be further amended to allow for the remarketing of those Bonds on an escrowed basis, whether through the addition of an irrevocable letter of credit or otherwise, including any document revisions required by Standard & Poor' s Corporation or Moody' s Investors Services in order to allow either such rating agency to rate the Bonds on the basis of the credit of any letter of credit provider, and the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Third Supplemental Indenture of Trust and Second Amended Loan Agreement, subject to review of the final forms by the City Attorney, as well as any other documents which in the reasonable opinion of its City Attorney are necessary to carry out the intention and purpose thereof. Adopted: September 20, 1988 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA By Its Mayor ATTEST: Approved as to form this City Clerk day of 1988. Assistant City Attorney 20/06 2 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Rick Paulseth, Zoning Code Enforcement Officer RE: A Request by Riverside Auto Sales to place cars on public right-of-way DATE: September 14, 1988 INTRODUCTION• Mr. Ray White of Riverside Auto Sales has submitted a request for a permit to place cars on the City right-qf-way adjacent to their business. (Letter attached) . BACEGR0UND• At their meeting on August 4, 1988 the Shakopee Planning commission brought to the attention of the Community Development Department that Riverside Auto Sales was parking automobiles on City right-of-way property. The parking of automobiles for sale on public property is in violation of City Code Section 7. 08 which requires a permit from the City Council in order for a private owner to place items on street right-of-way or public property (copy attached) . On August 10, 1988 the City Code Enforcement Officer informed Rivercrest Auto Sales that they were in violation of City Code Section 7.08 Subd. 1. Rivercrest Auto Sales asked if they could request permission from the City Council to utilize the property on a temporary basis to park automobiles. They were informed that they must submit a letter to the City Council requesting the permit as required by Section 7.08 Subd. 1. They indicated that a letter would be forthcoming. On August 26, 1988 the applicant was again contacted and informed that if they did not submit a letter the City would proceed with enforcing the Code and issuing a citation for the violation. On September 2, 1988 a formal warning letter was sent to Rivercrest Auto Sales giving them 10 days to comply with the Code or a formal citation would be issued. On September 8, 1988 the City received the letter requesting a permit to place automobiles on the City right-of-way. Rivercrest Auto Sales is requesting a temporary 90 day permit to allow them to park their cars on the right-of-way until other agreements can be made for placement of the cars. ALTERNATIVES• 1. The City Council can offer and pass a motion granting a temporary permit to the applicant for a 90 day period and include in the motion any additional conditions the Council feels are appropriate. 2. The City Council can offer and pass a motion denying the request for a permit to place automobiles on public right- of-way. Ilk STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends alternative #2. The City staff feels that the placing of automobiles on public right-of-way even on a temporary basis would be setting an undesirable precedent. The staff feels that if the Council begins allowing merchants to place their products on City right- of-way, additional merchants in the City will come forth and make similar requests. The City Council previously received a request from a downtown merchant requesting permission to place merchandise on the sidewalk in front of their building that request was denied by the City Council. The staff also believes that the issuing of a permit to allow the use of City right-of-way would risk possible legal liability by the City, the City Attorney concurred and stated the request should not be considered. ACTION REQUESTED: offer and pass a motion as outlined in either alternative #1 or #2 above. CITYSIDE SAVINGS FINANCIAL SERVICES n„ �f� /fael75EN SEP_ 31988 [t�tis�� C1r� • Crc -. kve Pqo"��lb of Ae- wh / wQ ds'e"y A qD Ji'r�`' ' `n m �� wlil to le, k'v Cl�rw✓ oL �VlOty Q.Q ©� ✓ 5 70 a27w A7 5t if If' -V C/L C 232 MARSCHALL RD. • SHAKOPEE, MIffiVESOTA 55379 • TELEPHONE(612)4954412 f UNITED STATES DF AMERICA G O V'T LOT 1 CERT. 11519 1 SEVERIN PETERSON y U 'JINN. \ \ O V 309 . OT 2 ' GOVT LOT 1, i (" c •' _ �..� (11111 T111y ro W � II jl� J LL FIRS ,I ; 1 t6 I ' v s I s 1O IO 1 N 1 'c A J 1 � I __ __ I '� A 0I 1 111 . LL Riv7.E r st Auto Sales Right-o£ -way requested for par}ci ng H. Agreement by the applicant, in writing, to be --�j bound by all the provisions in this Section. Source: Ordinance No. 69 , 4th Series Effective Date: 11-19-81 Subdivisions 5, 6 and 7. (Repealed by Ordinance No. 87, 4th Series, adopted 2-16-82. ) SEC. 7.08. OBSTRUCTIONS, FIRE, DUMPING, SIGNS AND OTHER STRUCTURES. Subd. 1. Obstructions. It is unlawful for any person to place, deposit, display or offer for sale, any fence, goods or other obstructions upon, over, across or under any street or other public property without first having obtained a written permit from the Council, and then only in compliance in all respects with the terms and conditions of such permit, and taking precautionary measures for the protection of the .public. An electrical cord or device of any kind is hereby included, but not by way Of limita- tion, within the definition of an obstruction. Subd. 2. Fires. It is unlawful for any person to build or maintain a fire upon a roadway. Subd. 3. Dumping in Streets. It is unlawful for any person to throw or deposit in any street or any other public place any nails, dirt, glass, tin cans, metal scraps, garbage, leaves, grass or tree limbs, shreds or rubbish, or to empty any water containing salt or other injurious chemical thereon; the effect of this Subdivision shall extend, but not by way of limi- t- - - - - _ i , w ,« y6 340/ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Offer to Sell Land to City DATE: September 9, 1988 INTRODUCTION• Mr. Gene Brown recently indicated his willingness to sell a parcel of land in Downtown Shakopee to the City. BACKGROUND: The attached letter and appraisal information was submitted to the City on September 8th by Mr. Gene Brown. The property that he would like to sell to the City is that which was originally occupied by the Pelham Hotel which was demolished last year. More specifically, the subject property includes Lots 3 & 4 and the E l' of Lot 2 in Block 24 of the Original City of Shakopee and is located on the North side of Second between Lewis and Sommerville Streets. Mr. Brown has indicated that he is willing to sell the property to the City of Shakopee for an amount of $150,000. Mr. Brown has also included additional comparable appraisal information of other properties which he uses to substantiate the price of the parcel in question. The amount of $150,000 represents a per square foot price of $8.80. If the City council is interested in purchasing this property they should determine what the reuse capabilities are prior to making such a purchase determination. One possible use which has been discussed in the past is that of parking. If the property is to used for redevelopment purposes this would more appropriately be within the authority of the Shakopee HRA. If the HRA were to consider this they need to determine the overall development pattern for either all of Block 24 or at least for the Southern half of Block 24 before taking action on this offer to sell. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Indicate to Mr. Brown that the City has no interest in purchasing the property at this time. 2. Decide the City does not desire to purchase this property for parking at this point but that the HRA might want to consider this as part of a larger redevelopment scheme. 3 . Discuss the matter further and direct the City Engineer to determine if there is in fact a need for additional off- street parking in Downtown Shakopee. The City might be able to negotiate an annual lease and use it as an unimproved parking lot. ifs 4. Direct staff to negotiate a purchase agreement with Mr. Brown based upon another appraisal obtained in a manner consistent with the City real property purchase practices. RECOMMENDATION• It is recommended that the City Council evaluate the four above mentioned alternatives and direct the staff to respond to Mr. Brown's offer. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to direct the staff to and inform Mr. Gene Brown of the City Council's decision. li1LS Gene Brown Agency, Inc. C� EUGENE A.BROWN,PRESIDENT 119SOUTHLEWISSTREET SHAKOPEE.MINNESOTA 55379 TELEPHONE:U5-55M September 8, 1988 Mr.Dennis Kraft City of Shakopee 129 E. 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Lots 3 & 4 and the East one foot of Lot 2, Block 24, City of Shakopee. (Originally Pelham Hotel) Dear Mr. Kraft, I am hereby offering the above property to the City of Shakopee for a price of $150,000.00. I have used comparable i.e. Hoy property and the southerly 79' of Lot 5, Block 24, (corner of 2nd and Sommerville) . Based on the above the subject property should be valued at approximately $220,000.00. If the City of Shakopee is interested and prefers to use value by an appraiser, this is acceptable. The $150,000.00 offering would be withdrawn. I am enclosing my comparables . Ressspectfu'lllllyyy submitted, Eidgene A. Brown, Owner EAB/kv Enclosure Gene Brown Agency, Inc. 119 SOUTH LEWIS STREET SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 551-9 TELEPHONE:445-5560 Pm &.1 Via P.id l EUGENE A.BROWN ROBERT J.BROWN Comps for Lots 3&4p Block 24, Shakopee Gene Brown `Pelham Property) 1. Lot 1, Block 4, City of Shakopee Hoy property—NE corner of 1st and Holmes Sold to HUD-12/86 75'x 142'=10650 sq.ft.— Sale price $140,000.00 cost. per sq.ft.= $13.1455 2. Southerly 79' of Lot 5, Block 24 Northwest corner of 2nd and Sommerville Includes cement block building-33x60'=1980 sq.ft. at $30.00 per square foot which is high=$59,400.00 plus $5,600.00 for extra leaves $60,000.00 for land. There is an easement over a portion of North 3 ft. of land. 791x600= 4740 sq.ft. ® $60,000.00=$12.658 per sq.ft. including easement Come J1 to subject property 1 x 2'=17040 sq.ft.x$13.1455= $223,999.00 Comp jL2 to subject property x 2'=17040 sq.ft.x$12.658= $215,692.00 Subject property is in much better location than comparable number 1. The comparable number 1 property was good for the purpose of highway and that is the only use. Comparable #2 adjoans subject property to the East. The easement in comparable number 2 should decrease its value plus the availibility of the property to the North for ex— pansion is very expensive. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer RE: John McGovern Building Permit Application DATE: September 16, 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses an application for a building permit by John McGovern for a car wash on Market Street. BACKGROUND: The applicant has submitted an application for a building permit to construct a car wash on Market Street, just south of 1st Avenue (See attached sketch) . Staff has denied the building permit due to Market Street being an unimproved Street. Market Street currently is a gravel road from lst Avenue to the applicants north property line and from the property line south it is simply a "grass field" with no resemblance of a road. Due to potential problems with emergency vehicular access, staff typically denies building permits if roadways are not constructed to minimum accepted standards. The applicant did petition the City to construct Market Street from 1st Avenue to 2nd Avenue several months ago, but did not have required 35% of the abutting property owners signatures, so the petition was denied by the City Attorney. Staff also feels that before any street improvements are done on this block of Market Street, the long range question of extending Market Street through to 4th Avenue should be resolved. The proposed extension of Market through the tracks appears to have some serious merit as it is one of the few north-south streets that runs completely from 1st Avenue to 10th Avenue. An indepth feasibility report should be done to determine of this street improvement has any justification before any improvements are done on this one block section. The question is should this applicant be restricted from developing his property because the City has not made a long range decision on the future of Market Street? Staff has discussed the permit requirements numerous times with the applicant. He has verbally agreed to extend market Street up to his driveway by at least a gravel base and possibly asphalt or a seal coat. He also realizes any work done within the street right of way would be completely at his expense and may get torn up at a later date if Market Street gets constructed and extended through the tracks. He also realizes he would get assessed his share for any future improvements to Market Street. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Deny the building permit. 2 . Approve the building permit with the conditions that the applicant sign an agreement with the City regarding the construction of Market Street from the existing gravel road to his driveway and discussing future assessments for Market Street. 3 . Decide that Market Street will definitely not go through the tracks and require the applicant to successfully petition for street improvements on this one block section of Market Street and for the City to complete any such improvements prior to any building permits being issued. 4. Refer the entire matter to the Planning Commission for b their recommendation before any action is taken. RECOMMENDATION• Staff does not feel that it would be in the best interest of all parties concerned to deny Mr. McGovern the use and development of his property. Therefore, if he is willing to sign an agreement with the City regarding temporary improvements to Market Street until the City decides what to do with the rest of Market Street, staff recommends Alternative No. 2 . Staff also recommends that the long range future of Market Street be discussed and determined by City Council, possibly with input from the Planning Commission or City Staff. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Direct staff to draft a Developer's Agreement between the City and Mr. McGovern regarding any street improvements to Market Street prior to issuing any building permits and to execute said agreement. 2. Authorize staff to prepare a detailed report ` summarizing the pros and cons of extending Market Street through the tracks and submitting said report to City Council and/or Planning Commission. DH/tiv CARWASH va))ey cngJneenng c,o., inc- SUITE 120-C, FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM 11,41 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL S.E. PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 TELEPHONE (612)447-2570 - (612)447-3241 STREET FIRST o -.-- _ — - ILI �fn�d e3 Ui. . v Y -..299 96 11 C N • 11 1 Y 163.07... M _ __ .. L ..... 1 � b STREET _pr OPJD - MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Fox Run 1st Addition DATE: September 16 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses the Fox Run 1st Addition. BACKGROUND: Staff has received an application for a building permit for a single family home in the Fox Run 1st Addition (See attached plat map for locations) . The Fox Run 1st Addition consists of two large lots, both fronting on Fox Run Trail. The access to Fox Run Trail comes from Martindale Drive, which is in Prior Lake. Between Martindale Drive and Fox Run Trail, there is a short stretch that is not dedicated right-of-way , but rather road easement. Martindale Drive is paved, but the easement and Fox Run Trail are gravel. The developer ' s of Fox Run 1st Addition submitted petition for street improvements to the City as a condition of the plat approval and waived all rights to any assessments. One of the conditions of the petition is that construction of any improvements will not occur unless one of the two property owners request it or if the City Council orders the improvement. The City has never acted on this petition. Staff normally will issue building permits in new subdivisions if the road is adequate for emergency vehicles (at least the gravel base should be installed) and then withhold the final Certificate of Occupancy until all improvements are final. In this instance, staff feels that the road is adequate to issue the building permit. The question is should the City act on the petition for street improvements at this time and withhold the final Certificate of Occupancy until the street is paved . This would involve the purchase of additional right-of-way between Martindale Drive and Fox Run Trail , although the existing easement language may be adequate. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Deny the building permit request because the road is unimproved. 2. Approve the building permit but a withhold final occupancy until the City constructs the road. 3 . Approve the building permit and allow final occupancy without any road improvements. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff feels that the building permit should be issued and there is not an adequate basis for denying the permit. The existing roadway appears to be adequate for emergency vehicles. In addition, the petition requests that the road be paved whenever the two property owners request it or when Council orders it done. Since the City can improve the road whenever it wants , staff does not recommend withholding the Certificate of Occupancy until then. Therefore, staff recommends Alternative No . 3 , to approve of the building permit with no strings attached . Staff also recommends that the issue of improving of Fox Run Trail and adjoining easement be discussed by Council to decide if any improvements are needed at this time. ACTION REQUESTED: Concur with staffs decision to issue a building permit and discuss the overall merits of improving Fox Run Trail at this time and instruct staff to take the appropriate action. DH/pmp CO i I FOX R UN DIFF R L! L! ' —ROAD EASEMENT PER DOCUMENT NO. 182316 - 6orth I inc o1 the 111, u. [hv N,,th.,-,t I �I N 89052108" W 60.00 w °— _ __ 1013 93_ — Z n p (r60o A-75'31'23" o Jz _ R=20.00 m < 37 _ Xa: w \ : 6000 JUS $ OWN S89.4649" h 4 ,- p-163°2435 \\ \ I \V}1 11N_1 V / I \ \ N I \ \ O M 6 01 m I City of Shakopee ,.. Scott County, Minnesota DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT RECITALS: 1 . The owners and developers o: Fox Run 1st Addic'_on have received conditional approval by Resolution No. 2458 adopted the 15thcay o: October 198 5 , for Fox Run 1st Add kion on the condition that such owners ana developers enter into this Developers Agreement; 2. It is understood and agreed by the owners/developers that the City may be doing Chapter 429 Public Improvements hereinafter sec forth ac the owners/developers request, or at the Citv's instigation, and that the City would not be installing such improvements without this Agreement ana the we-ver from the owners/developers contained herein. 3. The parties hereto acknowledge and understand that a private road presently seo_ es Fox Run !at Addition by way of roadways located in the City o: Prior Lake adjacent to this development. The parties further recognize that the direction of the road cc be constructed within Fox Run 1st Addition is undeter- mined until portions of Fox Run 1st Addition are further platted and cannot be determined at this time since the area is bounded on two sides by the City or Prior Lake. The City of Shakopee acknowledges that since it is not requiring He construction of He road prior to the issuance of a certificate of occu- pancy the standard City of Shakopee requirement for a letter of credit, cash deposit or 150% accelerated assessment payment is inappropriate. 7 TP.EREFORE, the undersigned City of Shakopee and owners/developers of ' Fox Rein lsc Adai"on agree as follows: _ 1 F That the owners/developers of ox Run 1st Addition hereby petition the City of Shakopee to install the following improvements and assess them pur- euant cc Minnesota Statutes Chanter 429: Foy: Ren ist Addition street construction in accor-dance with design criteria and standard specifics-dohs of the City of Shakopee. 1 2. ':.e owners/developers agree Her such construction will occur when ' requested in :sizing by the then owners o either lot in Fox Run 1st Addition, or at such time as the City Council determines by resolution the need for such improvements. 3. The owners/developers do hereby waive their right to a public hearing prior to the City Council of the City o: Shakopee ordering the improve- ments hereinbefore described and also waive their right to a public hearing prior the levying of the assessments related to said improvements and further waive all rights to appeal said assessments which shall be assessed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 as a result of the installation of said improve- ments. Consideration for such -waiver is understood to be the City' s acceptance of the plat of Fox Run 1st Addition without construction of said improvements , which ordinarily would pe a prerequisite to such plat approval . 4. The owners/developers of Fox Run lsc Addition agree to enter into an agreement with and pay the required fee to the appropriate utilities for the installation o_` zlec[:ic ry to serve said subdivision. 5 . The owners/developers of Fox Run Ist Addition agree to pay the City of Shakopee park dedication fee in the amount of 3250.00 for Lot 2 at the time of building Permit issuance , or pay the amount designated by Shakopee City Council resolptions for the ultimate density utilized in said Lot 2 6. This Agreement shall be binding upon the City of Shakopee, and upon the owners/developers of Fox Run 1st Addition, their heirs , successors and assigns . A. Dated this 1day of 198 . 3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE OWNERS/DEVELOPERS o. I .C.T. oolt ,ng ayl' s. ay <//�� a Limited Partnership Y �< Eldon Rein_,:z, Mayc_ _ BY Attested to by Its '/ BY: its Judi -, City- Clerk Its SCtT f"/1' J Fraerick i Ce-- n -� Corrigan STATE OF MINNESOTA) )Ss. COUNTY OF SCCT_T ) Thefor=going instrument as acknowledged before me chis�day of _ ,1987, by Eldon Reinke and Judith Cox, the Mayor and Ci[y CT'flt, the City of Shakopee, on behalf o: the City Shakopie ee. CareAiwa�sr y Rbio-lti�er lNne�w�Carq Notary Pup is My Gmm.E.L.t?Zt-02 i T - F 8 311Z I +" tea I I Ll H Z l A"�- g _ � �Frere LLU '?....� .M�J � 47, ""ll., 471 6711 CONSENT MEMO TO: Shakopee City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Scott County Historical Society Lawsuit DATE: September 16, 1988 INTRODUCTION• The City Council instructed the Community Development Director to attempt to (1) negotiate with the Scott County Historical Society on the dismissal of the lawsuit between the City and the Historical Society, or; (2) to direct the Assistant City Attorney to begin preparation for a trail on this lawsuit set for September 28, 1988. BACKGROUND- The City Council has been dealing with the question of the operation of Murphy's Landing for the past two years. Background events have included a lawsuit being filed against the City by the Scott County Historical Society and the City's granting the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project Group the authority to run Murphy's Landing for 1988. As was explained at the Special Council meeting of September 13th, the lawsuit was scheduled to go to trail on Wednesday September 28th. I have received the attached letter from Mr. Loren Gross stating thatthelawsuit has been dismissed. The Assistant City Attorney's office has been advised not to prepare for the lawsuit. ACTION REOUESTED: Receive and file the letter from Mr. Loren Gross stating that the Scott - County Historical Society has dismissed the lawsuit between the City and the Historical Society. CHRISTIAN AND GROSS ATTORNEYS AT LAW .... LYNDALE AVENYE 50, EDWARD M. CHRISTIAN MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55420 LOREN GROSS JAMES M. KEMPAINEN TELEPHONE 681-0636 September 15, 1988 Mr . Dennis Kraft Program Coordinator City of Shakopee Shakopee City Hall Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr . Kraft: I have been asked to confirm the fact that the lawsuit (actually appeal from decision of the City Council ) which was filed by the Scott County Historical Society after the retaking of Minnesota Valley Restoration Project by the City of Shakopee, has been dismissed by a stipulation of mutual — - --- dismissal which I have executed and have forwarded on to all other attorneys involved. If that stipulation has not yet reached the courthouse, it is because it is being delayed in the hands of other attorneys. I have been authorized to dismiss that lawsuit and thought I had done everything necessary to effect that dismissal . If anything more is necessary to inform the Court of that fact, I will certainly do so. 4 Y rs very truly, 0 Loren Gross LG/ar SEPI 61988 ;CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer ,�- f Ile, SUBJECT: Capital Improvements Projects for 1989 r DATE: August 24, 1988 INTRODUCTION: At the August 16, 1988 meeting, City Council passed a motion approving the 5-year Capital Improvements Program for 1989-1993. Staff would like some direction in establishing priority projects for 1989 and possibly establishing an annual Capital Projects Budget. BACKGROUND: Each year City staff prepares a draft 5-year Capital Improvements Program which is then presented to the City Planning Commission for their review and ultimately approved by the City Council. This_5 year plan is basically a long range planning tool. In other words, --any project that has ever been desired by City staff, Planning Commission or City Council is listed and -staff then attempts to spread the construction of these projects over a five year period in an attempt to balance the workload and costs. In essence, a 5-year plan is generally viewed as a "wish list" by most organizations. Approval of a 5-year Capital Improvements Plan does not in itself establish projects for City staff to work on. To initiate a project either the City Council must initiate the project or it must be petitioned for by the abutting property owners. Therefore, if a project is not petitioned for, it may never get done. Conversely, if a project is listed on the 5-year plan- under the fifth year but gets petitioned, it could conceivably be completed in the first year of the plan. Therefore, even though the 5-year Capital Improvements Program has been approved, staff would like some guidance on which projects have the highest priority for 1989. In order to have plans and specifications ready for the 1989 construction season, staff must start this fall on the process of gathering field surveys, preparing feasibility reports, completing designs and going through the legal process and resolutions, public hearings, etc. necessary to comply with state law on public improvement projects. The projects on the 5-year Capital Improvements Program listed under 1989 include the following: Project Name/Description Estimated Project Cost 1. 3rd Ave. Reconstruction between $950, 000 Shumway and Spencer, including the north-south streets between 3rd & 4th in this same section. 2. Annual Overlay Project $200,000 3 . Apgar Street Reconstruction $460, 000 between 2nd Ave. & 10th Ave. 4. Jackson/Harrison streets $100, 000 between 11th & 12th. Investigate and solve frost heave problem. 5. Sidewalk on C.R. 17 from $ 50,000 4th to 10th (East Side) 6. Lewis Street Reconstruction $360, 000 from 4th to 10th --- 7. 4th Avenue Connection to $175, 000 Adams Street through prison site 8. West Side Storm Laterals $290, 000 9. 6th Ave. Sanitary Sewer $265,000 Reconstruction from Webster to Fuller. 10. Bluff Street from Naumkeg $ 64 , 000 to Marschall Road. TOTAL $2,914,000 Obviously, it would be next to impossible to construct all these projects in 1989, not counting additional projects that would consume staff time as well, such as private subdivision work and projects petitioned for. Staff is requesting that Council review and discuss the above list of projects and provide staff with the top priorities for 1989 construction. There may even be additional projects listed in subsequent years that may deserve a higher priority. From staff's viewpoint, the 3rd Avenue project is the top priority. This street is in terrible condition and needs reconstructing. Now that the downtown project is completed from 1st to 3rd and 4th Avenue was done a year or so ago, if 3rd Avenue were reconstructed the entire portion of the Downtown area from 1st to 4th would be in fairly good shape. The annual overlay program is also very important to maintain the existing streets. Staff also feels that either Lewis Street or Apgar Street should be done next year. Another possibility would be to reconstruct Scott Street rather than Apgar Street (Scott Street is listed in the 5-year plan as 1991) . The Jackson/Harrison Street problem should also be give some consideration for 1989. The West Side Laterals should be done in the same time frame to resolve the overall drainage problems in that area of the City. The other projects listed would not be as high on staff's priority list. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Discuss all of the potential projects and concur with staff's perceived priorities. Staff could then begin the process of obtaining specific authorization for each project as time permits. 2. Instruct staff to not work on any projects unless they are petitioned for. 3 . Consider approving of an annual Capital Improvements Program that would provide staff with an exact list of projects every fall for the following year based on priorities and a set budget. 4. Provide staff with some other direction on projects. 5. Do Nothing. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to establish priorities for projects to give staff guidance for working on this fall for the 1989 construction season. Once Council has prioritized the projects, staff would then bring each individual project back to Council for authorization to proceed with the project and prepare a feasibility report to determine if the project should be done. Staff also would like to point out that as part of the feasibility report, a preliminary design and cost estimate of each project must be done. This may require some field surveys to be completed. Due to current staff workloads, it would be impossible to obtain any field work before winter, which will be too late. Staff may be requesting permission to use our consultant to obtain any field work, but if so, the request would come back before Council with specific monetary estimates stated. Staff also recommends Alternative No. 3 , that Council consider approving an annual Capital Improvements Program every fall based on a set amount for projects. In other words, an amount of $1 .0 million or $1 . 5 million , whatever Council and the Finance Director feels is a good number, could be designated for Capital Projects every year and then a list of projects could be approved based on that amount. This basically starts the fist step in "Council ordered" projects and some amount should also be anticipated for petitioned projects. If Council wishes to try and implement this type of an approach yet for 1989 projects , staff can bring back a recommendation. Otherwise some thought should be give to initiating an annual Capital Projects Budget for 1990 . ACTION REQUESTED: Move to concur with staff' s recommendation to set priorities for all 1989 project as listed in the 5-year Capital Improvements Program and direct staff as to which projects have the highest priorities. DH/pmp MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer ) SUBJECT: Adams Street Light DATE: September 15 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses a proposed street light on Adams Street between 6th Avenue and 10th Avenue. BACKGROUND: Attached is correspondence between the Utilities Commission Manager and Councilman Wampach relating to a proposed street light on Adams Street between 6th and 10th Avenue. The area in question is an extremely long section of street with no lights except at the 6th and 10th Avenue intersections. The east side of the street is basically occupied by the Women ' s Prison ground and the Boy Scout Building. The west side of the street consists of single family homes. There is approximately 1150 feet between street lights. It is extremely dark along this stretch of street. Councilman Wampach has requested SPUC to install a street light in midblock of this street. SPUC has estimated the cost of this work to be $250 .00. The normal SPUC policy is for the City or developer to pay for the initial street light installation and in this case the Utility Commission feels that the request does not conflict with existing policies. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Direct staff to notify SPUC to install the street light at a cost to the City of $250 .00. 2. Do Nothing. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Move to direct staff to notify SPUC to install a street light on Adams Street between 6th and 10th Avenue at a cost to the City of $250.00 . DH/pmp LIGHT To: Jerry Wampach, Council Liaison FROM: Lou Van HOUt, Utilities Manager Re: Street light request - Adams Street, Mid-way between 6th and 10th Avenue DATE: 9-12-88 Earlier this summer I checked into this street light request and wrote a memo on the facts of the matter. That memo, dated 8-1-88, is attached for reference. The Utilities Commission felt that the request did not conflict with street lighting practice, and they asked that the City Council be advised of this opinion when the street light request was taken to them for action. I estimate the cost for this light to be $250.00. V ATO: Shakopee Public Utilities Commission and Liaison Wampach FROM: Lou Van Bout FoP_ iNFn 0" RE: 1 . Street Lighting Request 2. Street Lighting Policy in general DATE: August 1, 1988 A short time ago I received a request for a street light which was relayed by Mr. Wampach. After visiting the site with him and discussing things briefly with the party requesting the street light , I promised him a short memo on the two matters listed above. 1. The particular street light request at band is for a location on Adams Street mid-way between 6th and 10th Avenues. I believe the reason one is desired is the fact that the existing lights are approximately 600 feet each direction and the person requesting the light feels it leaves a lot of dark area. My comment at the time was that I would have to see how the request fit into past practice, and whether or not it was an extreme case. 2. It is difficult to catch all of a street lighting policy in a single memo, whether it is Shakopee' s policy or any other city . The following is a short list of policy issues that have a bearing on the request at hand. A) Street lighting is usually found at intersections of streets in the "older" parts of Shakopee. This puts them at about 360 feet apart. B) In the downtown area there are some lights in alleys which are "street lights" . Whether this came due to zoning or not is unknown. C) In some locations at the edge of downtown there are lights which are "street lights" , and some which are "security lights" , both near each other. D) Some lights now listed as street lights were probably security lights at one time but due to lost records became street ligbt0many years ago. E) The present practice in new subdivisions is to put a light at intersections and cul-de-sacs which are more than about 75-100 feet deep. And, to locate lights on curves or long stretches of road where the intersections are far apart. The cutoff point is about 600-800 feet with no intersection and I usually consider another light with the intent to have them about 600 feet apart overall. F) Requests based on a desire for security are usually in alley on near buildings. G) The block in question has 1 , 150 feet between lights; there are several others in town which are 1 , 050 feet between lights. H) The block in question is an easy location to install a light ; the other long blocks are difficult . MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer TO-IL SUBJECT: Market Street, Project No. 1988-6 DATE: September 14 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses the bids received for Market Street, Project No. 1988-6 . BACKGROUND: Market Street, from 1st to Bluff, is currently a gravel street. Property owners on this street petitioned the City to construct the street to an urban cross-section with asphalt, curb and gutter and storm sewer. Consequently, a feasibility report was done and Council ordered plans and specifications prepared. On August 16 , 1988 Council ordered the advertisement for bids on this project by Resolution No. 2936 . On September 8 , 1988 at 10 : 00 A. M. bids were received and publicly opened for this project. A total of 3 bids were received and are summarized below: Company Citv Total Hardrives, Inc. Maple Grove, MN $45 ,677 .50 Midwest Asphalt Hopkins, MN $47 ,059.50 Wm. Mueller & Sons Hamburg, MN $48,936 .00 The feasibility report estimated the total project cost , including engineering and administration, of $30 ,000 or $51 .37 per front foot for the 3 properties involved. A public hearing was held prior to the project being ordered and this amount was presented and indicated as only being an estimate. Once the design of the project commenced and soil borings were taken, it was discovered that approximately 2-3feet of organic material was present between the existing gravel road and the bedrock. Subsequently, the final design called for removing this material and replacing it with good granular material. This item was not known at the time the feasibility report was prepared . Based on the final plans and specifications, the engineer' s estimate was revised to $33 , 600 . 00 . Adding in 25% for engineering brings the total estimated project costs to $42 , 000 . 00 , compared to the $30 , 000 . 00 estimated in the feasibility report. Market Street Sept. 14 , 1988 Page 2 The bids have come in substantially higher than our estimate (35% higher ) . In reviewing the bid items , it shows that the excavation of this organic material and replacing it with granular material will cost approximately $16 ,000 .00. This item had been estimated at around $7,000 .00. In addition, due to the extremely small quantities of storm sewers and curb and gutter, the bid prices for these items were double what was estimated . I have calculated the potential assessments for this project based on the bids received and assuming 20% administrative fees, the assessments would be approximately $90 .00 per foot versus the $51 .00 per foot estimated in the feasibility report. There are a number of reasons on why the bids came in higher than estimated. This is an extremelysmall job ( 1 block long) and it is not near any other projects currently under construction. In addition , it is very late in the year to be bidding, which by itself tends to increase bids due to uncertainties in the weather. In addition, the added excavation costs were not known at the time the feasibility report was prepared. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Award the contract to the lowest bidder, Hardrives, Inc. 2. Reject all bids and rebid this project in conjunction with another project next year. 3• Hold another public hearing on October 4 , 1988 regarding the proposed assessments on this project and at the conclusion of the public hearing , then decide on Alternate i or 2 above. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has contacted the 3 property owners involved . The consensus was that they feel that bidding this project next year with another one would possibly lower the costs . They also understand that the estimated costs will be higher than indicated in the feasibility report due to the added excavation costs. They indicated that they could express these views to Council again in a public hearing if so desired. The petitioners also indicated there is no urgency in constructing the road this fall. In discussing a possible public hearing , the City Clerk has indicted that there is not enough time to publish the proper notices for a public hearing on October 4, 1988. Therefore, the Market Street � ) r Sept. 14 , 1988 Page 3 earliest a hearing could be held is October 18th. By contract law, the City must award a contract within 30 days of the bid opening, which would be October 8th. Therefore, Alternative No. 3 should be rejected . Based on the discussions with the affected property owners, staff is recommending Alternative No. 2, to reject all bids and rebid this project next year with another one. By rejecting all bids until next year, another public hearing on the feasibility of this project could be held over the winter or as soon as possible and Council could hear testimony directly from the affected property owners before continuing with this project. Staff would like to inform Council that if the project is rebid next year (Alternative No. 2) there is no guarantee that the bids will come in any lower, even if it is bid with another project. The quantities are quite small, which by nature tends to increase unit prices. Another alternative that Council may consider is for the City to absorb those costs that consist of excavating the bad material and replace it with good backfill (about $16 ,000.00) as those costs are not associated with "normal" street construction. Council could then award the contract to Hardrives, Inc. and make a motion to assess all costs back except those relating to the added excavation. Staff is not recommending this alternative because Council would be setting a precedent for future projects without first establishing a formal policy with specific guidelines. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to reject all bids and rebid this project next year along with another project. DH/pmp REBID l l 8- MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City EngineerV4 SUBJECT: Shakopee Watershed Management Organization DATE: September 13 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is an invoice from the Shakopee Watershed Management Organization for covering the costs of preparing the 509 plan. BACKGROUND: Two years ago, Scott County gave the Soil and Water Conservation District a loan for all WHO' s to prepare their 509 plans. The amount budgeted for the Shakopee WHO was $13 ,500 .00 , which Scott County provided to the SWCD for preparing the 509 plans. The Shakopee WHO 509 plan is now completed and will begin the review phase. The review process of this plan will take anywhere from 1-2 years before final adoption. According to the Joint Powers Agreement between Jackson Township, Louisville Township, Shakopee and Prior Lake , the $13 ,500 .00 would be divided up based on 50% of area and 50% by value . Attached is an invoice from the WHO indicating that Shakopee' s portion comes to $8 ,242.00. These calculations were discussed and agreed upon by each representative at the last WMO meeting, as far as the individual breakdowns went. Once the WHO has received the $13 ,500 .00, Scott County will be reimbursed. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve of the invoice in the amount of $8,242 .00 . 2. Deny the invoice. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to approve of the invoice and submit a check to the Shakopee WHO for $8 , 242 . 00 . The calculations were based on existing area and valuations (1987) and since Shakopee has the largest amount of both , our proportionate share was the highest. ACTION REQUESTED: Direct the appropriate staff to submit a payment to the Shakopee Water Management Organization in the amount of $8 ,242 .00. • II � SHAKOPEE BASIN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION S T A T E M E N T The following is an assessment to cover the 509 Plan study and related costs, broken down into proportionment shares of the loan Scott County made to the Soil and Water Conservation Service office two years ago for this purpose: TOTAL BUDGET $13,500 50% 50% BUDGET PLUS MINUS EACH TOTAL JURISDICTION BY AREA BY VALUE TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT DUE Jackson Township $1,593 $ 378 $1,971 (14.6%) $2,263 $500 $1,763 Louisville Township 1,971 324 2,295 (17%) 2,635 500 2,135 City of Prior Lake 635 986 1,621 (12%) 1,860 500 1,360 City of Shakopee 2,551 5,062 7,613 (56.4%) 8,742 500 8,242 TOTALS $13,500 (100%) $15,500 $2,000 $13,500 Please make your check payable to the Shakopee Basin Watershed Management Organization (Shakopee Basin WHO) and present it to your representative to be submitted to the Shakopee Basin WMO Treasurer at its September 22, 1988 meeting. v JI J< MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator -�Z FROM: Ray Ruuska, Engineering Coordinator �\ SUBJECT: Scottland Easement Acquisition for Onyx Drive Construction DATE: September 16 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is a Grant of Easement for the above referenced right- of-way acquisition. BACKGROUND: An easement was needed in order to connect streets in the Hauer' s 4th Addition to Heritage I Addition. That property is owned by Scottland . Scottland agreed to sell the area necessary for street connections as indicated on the attached document. ACTION REQUESTED: A motion by City Council authorizing payment of a Grant of Easement as described to Scottland, Inc. , 1244 Canterbury Road in the amount of $2,000 .00 . RR/pmp EASEMENT 4 _ _ vrily" 0 EAS:":pF7 .1115 15,15 L'):c;;T ."fade til is dayof _:ov_eahe: 1967__ °` Scortiand !no. . a co-acration :'artOf Che Firs; Part, 1n 1111• C R ynf Sh.jk.opoc, n Muni Cipal Cor pora-ion, Siruated Jr. Scott COpn:C, ?Ilnne SOLE, party of the Second Part. in Consideration of Two_Thousanc ane n0/100 (S2.000.00) __O _ eliacs and other valuable considerations in hand maid by the Parry of the Second pa.-t, the receipt and se_'cicie:.cy of which t'ne par the Pi:st Pa-: quitclaims �- ao_es nerehr Y$R5CS4XRA'}C•}F%XS�%K2FRitt: to tike Parry of the Second Par`, its successorE an:1 ISS i9rS, t..: ease^meat described 'in _%Aibit A hcretu attached and made a part hereof, over and across the ]nnd described in said Exhibit A together with the right to conSLTUCt, ins Lal?, nail Lain, repair, pse, eniaree, modify and service said instol'ation for the purposes therein described. when IPPIJLab IL. The Part____ o_ the :first Part hereby Cerci: iesthat is the owner _ o= said property t and -s empo-+ere 'e quitclaim c)fftfrkRsa'_c easement Subject to easements and encumbrances of record. P ' 4_Tli_ES F-ERZDF The ec^_° of tie `i sL Part have herewnro Set hand-- theczy and vLa sirs; above wr-:Cten. --_— SCCTT:..%h7 _RC. STATE SS COUNTY OF SCc lS__ ) The ferep imp instrumup+. +s ci:. O., eed before me rnis 7W dny e` Mi+ Ccf:r..-,.c 1'la: �_es.nEr c S<ont n .,,c.� 98Y by M�yAt/_ F CLEAe .. - _. . . _ y.________ . and .___ Name of Frumerty C.:ne:- rimae +u`_ Proper-, Caner Sg au:rr e, Pe✓ or. This inscrumenr was d:a't 2d b _ iEAnrG UAxsEx Jalies A. Colier, _ Mm mb OTAD 211 Fest Avenue r Mrram..E,wn I- __ _ ec 1i IM 1 k- L<x1BTT °A^ A permanent easement for utility and roadway purposes over and across the property hereinafter described, to-wit: DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE ACQUIRED: PARCEL A: That part of the South one rod of the Northwest Quarter of Section D, Township 115, Ranoe 22 , Scott County, Minnesota, lying westerly of the — - - right-of.+wy--of the abandoned Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Pau} and Pacific Railroad and lying easterly of a line described as beginning at a point on the south line of said suuth one rod of the Northwest Quarter distant 1700.60 feet easterly of the southwest corner thereof; thence north at a right angle to said south line 16.50 feet and said line there terminating. li PARCEL B: That part of the north 30.00 feet of the west 16.55 acres of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section B, Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota , lying westerly of the record plat of Hauer's Fourth Addition and lying easterly of a line described as beginning at a point on the north line of said Southwest Quarter sterly of the northwest corner thereof; thence n. distant 1700.60 feet ea South at a rioht angle to said north line 30.0.0 feet and said line there terminating. CERTIFICATE of SURVEY N /\/\�\ num nnm rn.r Inn vr.nr. .. o. nron w.. rro.urc n .r m 1 �' uMou +r omcr wnmuow . w bpr mm111nu a»o sunnoa wu_m ..n roTid'If I,- --.__o4r. ORR I BCHELENIMAYERONA680C4ATEINC. SCALE, vovl un nrrun..rl • .nn All • rrn.r.run.. nunl.nu a ff . . Orr?j niauo < t L • Lk,<!<lr C� i RDI' flow L17 " � PER HAUER*S �vu RTI/ -PlIRV[`/ Fp< : Tl,5 C.ITT ofn Llj.4AoFhE U.DD17'/oK l29 E, FRS r /y✓E. ,SNAKUPEt MV. I Ilrt C. �Y^� N/CAGO, rI/CWUf AKEr The SKI CR. of A/u/ '/4 e ��f / PAC-IFIL R. Zt -'cI v / ST, PAUL y PAIFIL �crr Co . .P�y 16.5 Cr Roo) �' R rz\, Alr_RDAD 41 u r:yp w—�- NZL ZC�Zd'KI K 4vv� �RL AS I PAR,LL L A "O'V& Sq . '7-r. a PARCEL f:3 TOTAL _. . )0, 7416 SQ. V-r, i 11L , MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Code Enforcement Violation Information Request DATE: September 9, 1988 INTRODUCTION- The City Council has requested additional information on the nature of zoning and related land use violations which were handled by the zoning inspector during the past three months. This memo addresses that request. BACKGROUND- Earlier this year the City Council authorized the hiring of a part time temporary zoning inspector. Part of this process included a three month review of the performance of the zoning inspector. A report siting violation totals, including those resolved and unresolved were submitted to the City _Council for the meeting of September 6, 1988. At that timeCouncilman Wampach requested additional information on the nature of zoning - violations. Attached please find a listing of all of the complaints received, the specific code section or sections the violations occurred and the status of each of the complaints. As indicated at the Council meeting of September 6th, the name of the complainant is not divulged consistent with the provisions of the Minnesota Data Privacy Act and the recently adopted City Council policy on this subject. Attachment CODE VIOLATOR AND COMPLAINT CODE IN VIOLATION OF STATUS 1001 11. 03 Subd. 6F, Accessory bldg. Resolved violation 11. 31, Subd. 4 Accessory use violation 11.31 Subd. 6C 2 (a) outdoor storage violation (Claude Sinnen - Violator) 1002 11.05 Subd. 3C 6 open storage of Resolved commercial vehicle violation 11. 06 Subd. 21a storage of explosives violation F.C. Section 29. 1206 storage of explosives violation (Earl Dressen - Violator) 1003 4. 30 Subd. 3N portable sign violation Resolved (Allstate Leasing - Violator) 1004 4.30 Subd. 3K temporary banner Resolved (Rock Spring, Kentucky Fried, Kennedy Trans. , Midas Muffler - Violators) 1005 11.02 Subd. 24 commercial dog kennel No Violation 1006 4.30 Subd. 3K temporary banner Resolved (Video Vision, Rapid Oil, Pullman Club, L.H. Carpenter, Kentucky Fried - Violators) 1007 4. 30 Subd. 3K temporary banner Resolved (Taco Johns - Violator) 1008 11. 05 Subd. 4A fence height in No front yard Violation 1009 4. 30 Subd. 3K temporary banner Resolved (Raceway Park - Violator) 1010 11. 60 Subd. 3C,D3 (a) screening Not of exterior storage Resolved (Valley Indust. Propane - Violator) 1011 11. 05 Subd. 10 home occupation No Violation 1012 11. 60 Subd. 11 recreation vehicle Not (Mr. Parrot - Violator) Resolved 1013 4.30 Subd. 5A permit violation Resolved (Signs Of Quality - Violator) 1014 11. 05 Subd. 9, 4 .30 Subd. 3K Not Accessory bldg, temporary banner Resolved (Allstate Leasing - Violator) 1015 4.30 Subd. 3N portable sign Resolved (Gardner Bros. - Violator) 1016 11.03 Subd. 6 accessory bldg. No Violation 1017 11. 03 Subd. 6 accessory bldg. No Violation 1018 11.03 Subd. 2 non-conforming use No Violation 1019 4. 30 Subd. 3K temporary banner Resolved (Valley Liquor - Violator) 1020 4.30 Subd. 3K temporary banner Resolved (D.Q. - Violator) 1021 10.22 Keeping of animals Resolved (Harold Schmid - Violator) 1022 4. 30 Subd. 3K temporary banner Resolved (Eastman Drug - Violator) 1023 4.03 permit violation Resolved (John Radamacher - Violator) 1024 4 . 30 Subd. 3N portable sign Resolved (I.C.O. - Violator) 1025 4.30 Subd. 3N portable sign Resolved (Cys Standard - Violator) 1026 4 .30 Subd. 3N portable sign Resolved (Riverside Liquor - Violator) 1027 4. 30 Subd. 3N portable sign Resolved (Holiday - Violator) 1028 11.60 Subd. 3D screening Not (Conrady Blacktop - Violator) Resolved 1029 11. 03 Subd. 6F accessory building Not (John Nelson - Violator) Resolved 1030 APC 9 (1) use of natural fertilizer No Violation 1031 11. 60 Subd. 3 screening Not (Brooks Superette - Violator) Resolved 1032 11. 60 Subd. 1 exterior storage Resolved (Shakopee Services - Violator) 1033 10.05 11. 60 exterior storage Resolved (Grant Gerlock - Violator) 1034 7.08 Subd. 1 use of r-o-w Not (Rivercrest Auto - Violator) Resolved 1035 11. 04 Subd. 6, 11. 05 Subd. 5 Not CUP required, screening Resolved. (Hwy 101 Auto Salvage - Violator) NNNNNNNN NNN N NN N NNN N N - UUUU UUUUUU UUU U UU U m O 00mm00 00m 0 m 3 0 m0000000000 ♦ NNN e P UU : m • PPP U D ♦ a • W F Z Y O T Da a D >D-- a Da 1D > a D D F 00mm00000mm m 0 m 0 m O 000m0mmm mom m 00 m 000 m m D O C UD- WW NN Y -NWD-W� ♦NP Nm +1J P0a m0 ll JJ PyWNroWe0UW0 eW00 yU 0NP oe OeaD a 'nm P -WOW>0m-m m0 W NON UU DY WW yyyyD>DDDDD DD> W » m >DD D � D yyyYYYY 000 2 mb T yyY � o 4yyyYYyyyyy 323 F Z T - m ..Z "mm o y a z z �m s Z, o m a ""00000000o izz i c z m ii3333xx333 mmm xi aaa _ 233323 ZZ 000 p 00Z rrr D y O yDy 00 W D D 0 Sy Z aA D f99 r Z a [Oi KK y F M. ZI K y23YYYyyyYY PmW Y mw w mmb m 9 y y a m--mmmmmmmm ccc a �r c cc cv c c + m rmwmmmmmmmm m > o --i sm xxxxsxxx ...• r 9x - - 0 om000000 mWmm 3a mW 23m s m m zzzzzzAM mb o- ai >w w0. mmmmmmmm - C Y y y y y m z m a DDDUWWWWWWW NroN W NN wNN ro N y y m•DeurorororoNroNro -- a uu- m no � � iuruuu���= iu� roi -im�Jim�ro vim u VISION; is e -m- ro o m oz � o = m m \ m � � n - m b a x b W m m x x 5 Y Y Y Y V W 6 a a • • • a t d W 0 s > b _ AN��NA_N�PP 11111 1 1 2 AnAAPPP_� T b b 1 l0 T 0 o -aa=old vddad a a m 1' a _ V PIP e oeeeeooeo�� e o e o b o a e z 0 m m bWOWWWWN _Q P� > W0 b W ---------- (Wi J + W 0 W p666pJJJpJ = 6 W V H = J 6 66 y LL 7%JDJ77JOJD O N Z 6 W W O W ........... F Kmm6KC m WW,f FFYFFFIr > J W V FFf FFYFFF= O W ymj FLLLL LLplaLLLLpLL ^ O j ytj Ip J p V V OOO �pOJ�J7 > p O F J Z 0 00000000000 a u m 0 G O 000 .0000000 V Q U J 6 Y W WbWWWWbbWWW .0 ¢ O W b WWWWWWWWWWW � > �u rrtn���uwr�in < W ] F m......... 0 6 S U L 7J7DOJm7ppm O p S J 0 0000.. 000 0 m r V V V 7 0 i a _ Pms PP e a f oo e • • NN m0 Na PPPN�PNbPb _ _ Pw PP ca NN N nA a _ Wm AA z -- as 6 W W . .. ... ..... 0 P \ faP \ 0 m Qm a o00000000ae o 0 o e e a o 0 V Nm NN 0 V m . ... .. .... 0 a N — f N t NNNNNNN N0 N d a N f N a ry f ry • N NNNNN N NNb N N NN N - m mw000 0 0000 m m rmu0W 0 2 e °i __ _ _ _ - • nliwn ♦ N ♦ Newu • W • N • a • WUI > W N ♦ F Z Y O < O O T D 0 m0000 0 00m0 0 m 0 00 m 0 0 a m m 0 c z W ua WNNN mw 00 0 00 o NemwJa omwww 00 ee ww aW0 eo �O0 m 22222 O TTTT m � m 00 O_ 99A9A O ^ 'aT O mam F m r 22 = i c m x2xo-o yYYY � .y. � m x m mwrowm v sam� < W c a s c m ^ x2x2x -m+ `mem m a a v o z u a mmmmm y a m 9' � m mmmmm m mmmm i o m cc a mT m Y aizi a w z na w m F c nam m z wwNwm m � o mmmmm m mmm m m m mm m m z orrcc o rrr � c c o 9,cp c = 9 can'v'c c oomno 'v c ma T i •• ' v rr v T r m x xasmm x sass m m x x x mW m y YYYy y y Z y Y yy y Y D Z I 1 0 1 O 1 1 1 I I O N NNmN N NmNN N NN N N Z °i -- m eee" � io m ro Y Npo W ulo 11 1 1 = _ O 0 NmONro N N�Om � ro w W i a m O 3 0 m v m s m F W q W m W m m m w w 1 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y V W I I W Q m ♦ ! ♦ ! • • i i m o M1N. n S -NN 1 nlll Y 1♦ n1♦ A%I♦n J N 1♦ dNdd nAA O PI ' 11P IPIPI I ANN 6 N o _ 000e oe o000 000N. e e J JJ M1_f_Y_F J £ a ya a W � �+ LLLL WWWWW JJJJ WW L > W LLLLLLLLLL > 2 6 S JJJ 00000 6 O JJJ 0000 „ O f O %%%m ff WWWW � 06666 F 6 ¢ W F GCOOG O JJJJ ¢ ¢ UUUVu m JJJ aaaa r mmam a V Y »» 22 ZZ 00000 ^ ¢¢ F Z O_OD O_O Q L O W JJ7 YY % m___ L L Y >_ - %%m % .aaaa Y 6 pJJJ11 0000 6Q < Q6 ¢ S % m YYn� VV YYYY YYYYY O 1- • e i • • a • eN • w 00 a� 01n P nn M1M1 neeeo n_N wnne_ _ nn mm - N.NM1 M1M1 i 0a a m mmmm mmmm ... m mmmm m � s � e m ce o e o000 00 000e oe000 e o o O V 0 ""00 00 0000 00000 U N N0N% NNNN NNNNN - ♦ N N ! N a dN ♦ NNNN ! NNNNN + N ♦ N ♦ rvrororo roro NN N NNNN NN N uuuuu m m uuu NN x -- ♦ m e JJyy -INN t as : 00 a o + m -1 + — F aA l \ m \ \ \ \ a O mm 0m m 0m00000 00 m0 m 0 m m m D_ O a-N �Y NJOY00ue WW ONN JW y uN uu KwN YNN Como N 000 NN .... . .. 0 00e na +1+1 oe o0 0o zz zszsszz zs xx r z r r mm mm iiiiii zZ �� < m c 0 zz o zzzzzzz xx as a wMmmmmmm xx snnn rr z p s � c m annas °�' am a m mw sm fsm mm o0 o r z a DD 00 y nn KK ZZ r mw cc 000m000 '" m z zz m � ox xo 0 r i nn � Ky m s s m KK z io F - n � o vA ww m yyyyycc yy mem v a c g y ro am y xs c « °iN a aumwwam mm as v ro ^+ zi m i 0 c m m i W— :e 41Y NN N WJJJJWW JW N — y N W YKJ y 0o ro e�ooeo o� mm i z NN JJ WY bN aV — P N ro N m v o m m w 'D a m � m w m m m m m w w N x w w m x Y V U Y Y I 1 V Q u . • . i r ♦ . f : a w L o s NN nM NN m aP nnPn NP FF I 1 II I I bh nN� � nn N i n i i i i i i 'nn 3 nn aaan NN T of 0 TT 'ii iP ii i N - 6 nF o o ease o0 oa ee FF � o O w J h_Z WW W:_ WWW< 6L WW JJ J J C 62 J OJJ¢ 33 JO O �+ a6 L w www6 ww wW Nw 6¢ 3 N w O to w so I w W W Z 6 W 222 __ GC ww 2 00 6 V mm JJ FF r J W 6666 WW 33 Z 6 < LL Y dd sa J J Q WWWW ww O Z +a+i Z J 00 00 N V W O > SL wwww 00 YY O YYYY LLLL ZZ Q6 F ww Q O 66 00 6 6 6666 66 ¢¢ ¢¢ ¢¢ ¢ w f i f wo ♦ ♦ . ♦ . i i NNO oNeNN mqP __ Ndm nmN u �mN - PP S P = P P mm o NN V NN NN NN i d ♦ N r NNNN . Nd t dd ♦ dN • NN r N r N NNN NN NNN NNNNNNNN NNNNN NN - NNN NN NNNN NNNNNNNN NNNNN NN 000000 0000 N WW S NNN NNNNNN NNNN N NN m 00o t HJ Pwwwaa ♦ .oaaoamWW 0wm00 t N -- x mW0 t F 6 momWWW 000 0W 000000 00000000 0 .000 0 00 mW0 N N O C 2 oW0l0aJ u� Y WAW ueW .lo—em�ma Noe ..Ne Neo .Nee WJNNNN WW WNWJ 000 oee ..... eoe000000 lNooJN NN oeo aNPN 0w ..... . .. ....W www. w Ww WwW YYY 2S 00000 S S2 DDD CC CCCCC DD nn 222222 . .. ...... . . . .. YYY YY 22222 O YYY 0WW 999V1 CCC T m'm'm mmmmmm 'm 'm z -f°iy�y� mmmmmmmm mam00 m mm ��� .mmmmm Y YYY YS< vmvWmvsaa wWwa. . A mmmmmmmm Www zzz ccccc o0o i iiiiii ««« mm v mm rrr m zii nnnnnn ccccc rrr nnn m mmm z .mmm mm .wwwm.mW Baas rr yyy zzzzz m mm cc cccccccc 99 m ... A WWW ='m ccc mom Yy 000000 c az mn0 mm TTTTTT frrrrrrr ZSZzo2 m0 3 AA YYYYD 9 323 YYYJYYYY DDD 30 mmmTT Pnw S YS mmm m0 za aw ..w ZZZ YZ «« « b.w ..0.0 9Z YYY TZ CCCCO TT AT mmm0 Y 0y =m 9 w m 0_ 0e 000 0. PPPPPP ��� WW NNNNNN eeeeeeee aNaeee a -o II II !! I ! !!! O rolom _____ !u!u lu ulu lu lu lu !w!u!u!u !ro rvrvN c JJJJJJJJ NNNN W Nl Z ryullaoll N NN Y I11 1 le011 NNNNNN NNl � J�� Ml rvl � lll I _ _ eu mmm oo ---- -- ry=mio=mmm uuu NNN 000 � aaa O i 0 m 9 w s a m � m n n s x z s x Y Y Y Y Y W 1 I W r r r e r • e N O e i m N o 1, nnMnPPb_d F d d- N -dnNM1O-NFlN-d-Pn z - - -nnnnPPb_N ww 111 aaaaawawwwaaama = � N d N ad nnnnnnnnnFlFlFlFlFln N o e :�: PeePPPeP.s i 11111 n z o _ 6 JJ Q 22 NN 2 L W_WW_WWW W_W_W_W_W_W_WW_W 66 ! 2 2 LL 00__00__00_O_00__O W O L � JJ JWW 6666666666666 LL W 6» WWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W JJ JJJJJJJJJJJJJJI J O 00 J ¢ J WWWWWWWWWW J 0 N N L WW NFF N FFfFFFFFFFFf FFF N W F N e a o > o i + L_£_£_£_£_££_£_£_£L JJ J £ £_ J U Q O 000000000000000 W W 00 O UUUUUUUUVVUUUVV W O LL f- Z V S 6 WW NNN S NNNNNNNNNNNN 0 W O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWW V > Y 00 333333333333333 Z NNNNNN.NONNNNNN Y 1- O 0 N N F NN 000 N JJJD3J»>76JJOJ > • • r r r r PObe PNwwO 0 00 0o ee ee eeo b0�oe NN PP04PFl b n-ro-Pn-N - NN M1NNN FM1 d - - -nb dN --I'iw ONbNb_bNFl__0 - - - n 0 0000000NN0w0000 Nr0NNd00NN0 u N 00000000006 N S q 000mb 0000000666 u N N i d N r d r NN t NNN • N r .......... r N NNNNNN b PPPPNP P P y� _ 00000 0 S m y w PPNWPP n W N - - e + yyyyy + _ o • w + T. m m m m mmmmmm m m m mm m mmmmm m m m m au'u c JN _ N > 00 00 1 00 yJ �WNWNW NN a> _ PP eP tl 0m y> 0o J olN wo PW oo Na 0b 00 0 WW OauA oo W o0 ooe mOaW N oe �+ n T D KKKK C C C om .. asaasa v o Kn saas a aaaaaA r - yy i .. m W p m m m < = o0000o c m %i o om000 a z i n z o oa0000 i y am i mmm n � mm a o000o y i x 1 m a WPbmbW o nn mmmb o W a _ cccccc c y oo c ccccc c � 9f9999 9 V TT 99999 2 Z 0 4m1W P0b4mi W S W wP N m0Pbmm 0 S P W T mn b A 00 mb O y roe la - Ilw ca ± 1 n P I'o aro am am I'v'ro r'o vas r'o au W _ val to c P PYw4a W _ b Pppp � N p lYwaa N Y p-m000 . . N Pro m = 0 D a m z x m W P b P 0 Y � t 6 W e i 0 > _ N u z 01 n J N N N O Y � 6 0 1'1 o b o 0 o F o e OWF > LL'a2 6 N OW6 U J ¢SU J 660E 1 � F � V p6WW 2 VI-JF ¢ O>6W 0W0 QWOti> ZJ¢¢ ¢ uwo zaFFF Q '+ S 0 0 0 ^ O Q<O yZLLOJOf S y W � 0 0 = J W6 ¢QWF <OPPPW�<�F .� m O W O O O L 0 0 ¢ y FSUVOO---006LLJ [f Z Q n H o 0 u 0 J ^ � 66<JJJJJJJJJJJJJ � m � i saa<aaaaQaaaa o r F�-F FFFFFFFFrFrFF oFF0000Y00000FFF ` W J LL ` p O J (Si PNb-NNONN_N-dA G b Y �_ Q 0 O J e_ _ NN NI'�1'�bFF000 J F Z -_n__O_00_O_O_O_O_00000_O_ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL66LLLLLL O 2 0 O Q Z LL N F q Q ¢ ¢ O W J • t + + + e t • t + FNP bNi'Ib o NN NN 01'�YrP -00. 00 eO NN eN2 FF bb 0w ndFoo m0 NN NN WN PP bN--- - = ONNP N J dN -- N oFN Nd P NNP NIn L 00 NN N Q W 0 m P O Q W W < e o o e c o 0 o e o O ` a N a of N a w N N N 6 6 6 6 bbb 010 b -t to O b b b b W b W N b b W bbb � - F F F C FCF F F W W F W F' W W W W W W F F F F' F F'tF NN W I N N r ,1 J Y Y OJ N O O Y Y w r O O r r Fop 0 0 0 0 0 000 r F 0 0� O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 000 Y O O Y p �n O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O �n �m 0 0 0 0 000 Y 0 O Y O OJ 0 p O p p p 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 r C 0 O ,1 O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 R Im 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N r O O Y p �n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 R m Y m b b�b O O M -O O N W b bb b b b b b N bbb r Y F F F F . F r Y Y r Y Y r . p YO 0Y 0r 0r 000 Or Yr 0r 0Y 0r 0Y 0r Or Or Or OY .r OY Or OY Or Or OY YO OY Or r O 0 0 r D0 000 0 0 O 00 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 000 n � n G R OC N Y fA r N r Y W 0 0 w o NO Nr O mN -O1 Nb O p OO O o O N N0n wbOJb O O O bN O O O O O 1WFr000 O O O " 0 0 N bbmlF 0 OOO O 0 0 F N b � O C G� a ]1 a m a m b H C O [l� O a H ("l O p p O p a a a a a. m m m N N W N N N N h G a C N p IK 3 3 µ µ 3 3 9 W N " O O y K < 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 Y 9 3 3 3 H I? D R R c+ R R R R N m Cl N m N �• F` H Y. d � O O 5 S S S S Sp O C b V! 3 M ry m 'm+. M m Y ;y K ^� o n L m m v c a m m K a 0 0 0 r K .G. " 0 m on 0 r K '30 m M M rGr v v ro m a < m N N N N NNNN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNN :: D\Q\� D\ O\ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NN ,1 0 pmp�rnp m G LJ d vi O m b O O ry �' H C O µ 0 d tG 9 'O Y 0 r < OI Cn i+ 3 R 3 'O O R m O G G G G h [+] L1 d m O m Im L 3 a H a Y m rv* a n O Gz O NZ 9 H G O t' m G Gh' G. OR. N O Gz Z N M N 3 m Y G£ n R h 3 C N R M R C n 3 r r O O W 3 < Ih N (n m m m m um m m lA F GS L 'GOR O L £ F O S O S m F N m O G C G x m x K 0 0 m m 0 m m m G m m Y m m F+ Ix �- r N O 06 0 l 0T O O0 O 0 Y0 F . . . . . . N OOO S O0000 00 NO O m NF F X Nm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' I of in N in O O N O In y N^ N fl I w! sl O C O w O w r1 Y O 6 F o w w ti O 0 ¢ HZ E O w C W O o W d b N O d O 1 O N N b U to C >i a U = = Zi N MMMM .Y V� �p NN OJ Q\ O N N N N N N N N N N N N N d pl W cl H H J y ^I °o off m H L (D L m In N C ¢ -.0 .i M G m u u Inc N1 NI 0.r N rD E 0 0 L L N w c w U U di H dI h0 P N cI E G y N E E O O G N G w N O O W Nb N O i. O O U = E O W y F_ I _ 0 00 O O O O O O OPD G y N O 10 O`Ln H N O In H m O 4Pr H G 'J N W G E (� •i W rl H 00 w V 0 0000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 O w m m w ¢ 0 0000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 m 0000 cp N of 00 0 0 0 W O 1 Wm 4 N L E N +� 00000 O O N H H Ili M [L 0000 O O O H H H �.--I H N w y OO O O O O O O H H H H H V 0 0000 O O O N H N m V O 0000 O O O H H N N N ¢ M N D\O H H .-I 00 O O O ' - 0` NNNin T H H mM m M M S CI H H H H HH .Y H H H H H N 0000 OJ N w N 00 0 0 0 C0 : - ;SEN I MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Hiring of Planning Intern DATE: September 9, 1988 INTRODUCTION• The Department of Community Development budget provides for a Planning Intern. This is arequest to fill that position. BACKGROUND: The hiring process for a Planning Intern has recently been concluded. The previous Planning Intern, Mr. Jon Glennie was with the City for a period of approximately one year. Consistent with City policy the position is filled on at least an annual basis with a new person. Subsequent to the interview process the candidate was chosen. It is anticipated that the appointment will be made for a period of six months with an option to renew for an additional six months if the work performance is at the desired level. Ten months into the process we will begin advertising for another intern. In reviewing the qualifications of the candidates and conducting interviews with four of them it was decided that Ms. Julie Kellerman is the most qualified. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Approve the hiring of Julie Kellerman as Planning Intern for the Department of Community Development for a six month period beginning September 26, 1988 with the potential to renew for an additional six months if performance is adequate. 2. Direct the Community Development Director to reopen the process to additional candidates. 3 . Do not fill the position. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative $1 and recommends the hiring of Julie Kellerman. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to authorize the hiring of Julie Kellerman for a six month period of time beginning September 26, 1988 with the option to renew for an additional six months. Cflr'-)�'E+zT II N MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Hiring of Planning Intern DATE: September 9, 1988 INTRODUCTION• The Department of Community Development budget provides for a Planning Intern. This is a request to fill that position. BACKGROUND: The hiring process for a Planning Intern has recently been concluded. The previous Planning Intern, Mr. Jon Glennie was with the City for a period of approximately one year. Consistent with City policy the position is filled on at least an annual basis with a new person. Subsequent to the interview process the candidate was chosen. It is anticipated that the appointment will be made for a period of six months with an option to renew for an additional six months if the work performance is at the desired level. Ten months into the process we will begin advertising for another intern. In reviewing the qualifications of the candidates and conducting interviews with four of them it was decided that Ms. Julie Kellerman is the most qualified. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Approve the hiring of Julie Kellerman as Planning Intern for the Department of Community Development for a six month period beginning September 26, 1988 with the potential to renew for an additional six months if performance is adequate. The salary rate will be $5.50 per hour with an increase to $6.00 per hour upon satisfactory completion of 3 months employment. 2. Direct the Community Development Director to reopen the process to additional candidates. 3. Do not fill the position. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1 and recommends the hiring of Julie Kellerman. ACTION REOUESTED• Move to authorize the hiring of Julie Kellerman for a six month period of time beginning September 26, 1988 with the option to renew for an additional six months. The salary rate will be $5.50 per hour with an increase to $6.00 per hour upon completion of 3 months employment. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Amendment of the City's Thoroughfare Plan for the Mini By-Pass DATE: September 16, 1988 INTRODUCTION• One the required steps in the official mapping process is the amending of the City's Thoroughfare Plan Section of the Comprehensive Plan to show the realignment of the Highway 169 and 101 intersection, and the submission of this amendment to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. The City staff is recommending at this time that the Thoroughfare Plan amendment be adopted and submitted to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. BACKGROUND• At the July 19, 1988 City Council meeting the City staff provided the Council with materials outlining the official map procedure and recommended proceeding with the adoption of an official map for the mini by-pass. One of the first steps in the official map process is to amend the Thoroughfare Plan to conform to the proposed new street alignment. At the July 19th meeting the City Council directed the Planning Commission to review the proposed amendment to the Thoroughfare Plan and forward a recommendation to the City Council. The Planning commission at their meeting on August 4, 1988 passed a motion recommending to the city Council that the City's Thoroughfare Plan be amended to show the realignment of the Hwy. 169 and 101 intersection, by- passing First Avenue from Fuller to Spencer Streets. At their meeting on August 16, 1988 the City Council set a public hearing for September 13th on the amendment of the Thoroughfare Plan and adoption of the Official Map Ordinance. On September 13, 1988 the City Council held the public hearing on the proposed plan amendment and official map and passed a motion directing the City Attorney to draft the Official Map Ordinance. The City is required to submit all Comprehensive Plan amendments to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. The City can either forward the plan amendment to the Council prior to taking action or the City Council can take action approving the proposed amendment subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Offer and pass a motion approving the amendment of the City's Thoroughfare Plan to show the realignment of Highway 169 and 101 by-passing First Avenue from Fuller to Spencer Streets subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council, and direct the City staff to submit the plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. 2. Offer and pass a motion directing the City staff to submit the Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. Under this alternative the City Council would await the final decision of the Met Council prior to passing of the amendment. 3 . Take no action at this time and decide whether to approve and submit the Comprehensive Plan amendment at the time the Official Map ordinance is before the Council . RECOMMENDATION• The Planning Commission at their meeting on August 4, 1988 passed a motion recommending to the City Council that the City's Thoroughfare Plan be amended to show the realignment of Highway 169/101 intersection, by-passing First Avenue from Fuller to Spencer Streets, and adopt an official map to reserve the proposed right-of-way. The city staff recommends alternative $1, adopting the Comprehensive Plan amendment at this time subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council and directing staff to submit the Plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. ACTION REOUESTED: Offer and approve a motion approving the amendment to the Thoroughfare Plan showing the realignment of the Highway 169/101 intersection by-passing First Ave. from Fuller to Spencer Streets subject to approval of the Metropolitan Council, and direct City staff to submit the Plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council for their approval. T.H. 101 / 169 MINNESOTA RIVER CROSSING DOWNTOWN SHAKOPEE APPROACH t IAN given t _ _.H IJul iii -• � I I JI12i1I mil _ xl-�o, �E, 5 e d /a MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive) , Project No. 1987-12 DATE: September 16 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2951 , Adopting Assessments for Project No. 1987-12, 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive) . BACKGROUND: This project consisted of constructing all street and utility improvements to Vierling Drive , from County Road 16 to approximately 3200 feet west through the Hauer' s 4th Addition (State Aid Project No. 166-112-01 ) . The project also included constructing Jade Circle and portions of Limestone Drive, Emerald Lane, Onyx and Jasper Road (City Project No. 1987-12) . As part of the developer ' s agreement, the developer requested that the City construct all the necessary improvements on these streets and assess the appropriate costs back. The developer also waived his right to a public hearing on the assessments and waived his right to appeal the assessments. The project is approximately 95% completed . In order to certify the assessment roll to the County by the October 10 , 1988 deadline, the assessment roll needs to be adopted at this time. The construction costs to date are $573 ,893 .71 . Staff has estimated that the remaining construction will cost approximately $86 , 730 . 91 , for a total construction cost of $660 , 624 . 62 . Engineering and adminstration costs total $89 ,829 .64 , which added to the construction costs of $660,624.62 make the total project costs $750 ,454 .26 . Approximately $326 ,449.33 of this amount is not assessable. This consists of street oversizing costs on Vierling Drive, watermain oversizing costs on Vierling Drive and the eastern most 900 feet of Vierling Drive which does not front on this subdivision. The City will absorb all non-assessable street costs and SPUC will have to reimburse the City for any watermain oversizing costs . All remaining costs are assessed back to the developer. The total assessment to the developer is $424 ,004 .93. Attachment A summarizes the assessment calculations Since the project has not been completed yet, Council may want to "amend" this final assessment once all final project costs are known. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2951 • 2. Deny Resolution No. 2951 . 3. Amend Resolution No. 2951 based on any discussions of the Council meeting and then adopt the resolution. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . During the preparation of the assessments, staff met with the developer several times to go over the methods used and total cost assessed. The developer agrees with the calculated assessment, but he will be present at the Council meeting to discuss it with Council. REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2951 , A Resolution Adopting Assessments for Project No. 1987-12 for 13th Avenue Merling Drive) from C.R. 16 to + 3200 Feet West Through Hauer' s 4th Addition, Jade Circle and portions of Limestone Drive, Emerald Lane, Onyx Drive and Jasper Road all located in Hauer' s 4th Addition and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM2951 i y°�, RESOLUTION NO. 2951 A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Project No. 1987-12 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive) from C.R. 16 to + 3200 Feet West Through Hauer's 4th Addition, Jade Circle and Portions of Limestone Drive, Emerald Lane, Onyx Drive and Jasper Road all Located in Hauer's 4th Addition WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and passed all proposed assessments of: 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive) and all other named streets above within Hauer ' s 4th Addition by Sanitary Sewer , Watermain, Storm Sewer, and Street Improvements, and WHEREAS, B&D Development, the sole benefited property of the improvements has signed a developer' s agreement with the City and as a condition of that agreement has waived all rights to a public hearing for the assessments and also waived the right to appeal said assessments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments levied against it. 2 . Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1989 , and shall bear interest at the rate of 8 1/2 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31 , 1989 , and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3• The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty ( 30 ) days from the adoption of this resolution ; he may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list, and he may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. 0-1 4. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in his office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before October 10th of each year the total amount of installments and interest which are to become due in the following year on the assessment on each parcel of land included in the assessment roll. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this _ day of , 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 19 _ City Attorney I al fi vl .O -+ app H p n N O N O M ma ^� Pa m mb P •p NN .y Na �D .•I mSN w q n P �Ob N W •• C N1 v1 y P O m Pnf NN Ft+1 •� •-� m n y mn .pma y d �`l •O O O H nm �pm �n 11 1 u d I I I m 1 1 1 1 1 O 1 1 1 1 1 m PNP P H m m 1 1 1 1 1 O u u 1 1 I I I Ma .. aa w m m 1 1 1 1 1 nl �l �pn0 O O 1 1 1 1 1 NOIO-NOO U V 1 1 1 1 1 mu 1 1 1 1 1 �n Plnaa m m m 1 1 1 1 1 -+ Nma N p F O 1 1 1 1 1 > N C I I 1 1 1 � '•� '� I I 1 1 1 C H m m 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 1 1 N m > H R I I I I I Y of a n m C 0 V I I I I I U O P O �/1 H •N m I 1 I m in c0 S p d m I I m l U m •p 'H fiH H O F l u l m l o fH P •p ^ d w I u l 0 1 U M •p 'a Cy 1 d U 1 m O m T d •'t m 1 'd •� m u o u C I a HC C• m H m O I O O •y ❑ M O .N I W •M .4 O Uu d mN Om .D umu O d m m Y n O n v1 q U d p u m Q Oa001D t+1 �y H O d m N .1 m O Uth O �OO 1Y W P• Y O. Y O 0 U C m OP(D O m fi V G OC q ^' 000 '•+ Y Z Ym Smt+1 yNd U U H $ V .M .y v M Ih •H U m > Y •O d •O G.l N IN U O• d u m U C !Y d N O m L d M t V u •.� •HZu m F mmF '> m N M N m ^ m H H O m d m 6 H O m Y U U d u ml d U Y m 0 0 0 w P 'O O C •O F •.� F O •� H C E U u C T u B m m m H u d q F o fi 6 d m m F m W y m M U W H m m Z P P w d m o 0 F VJ O O O W + H m v v m N N a v v K N w W as o mmmmmm U O V m m W6 x W r .r P •y I n qa '� O I I I I b 1 W 6 F N a a a a a a a q .w q i a W W 0 6 r w » o m .. .. x P HgOw .t 1 1 1 1 1 1 = U W a m 0 N m S V1 m P zz - z 000000 y FOaW WH m m m m m m w m 4w M w z a w M " z n' x •J r n r r n n d - adzes H W Vk 1 1 1 1 1 1 wwwx O O N F O o 0 0 0 0 w m 3 N P N m m m N0Y m 6oK 00000000 N � x H N w m m m m m m moo 0 0 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 -a w d nrr W N N N N N N W > M q Z C O N H + 8 'TdP P.F a r qO m w .y � 0N m dr Xan z w m > �n a 3 d Y O q -+ w • �nv MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer 1�)Ativ SUBJECT: 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive) , Project No. 1987-12 DATE: September 16 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2951 , Adopting Assessments for Project No. 1987-12 , 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive) . BACKGROUND: This project consisted of constructing all street and utility improvements to Vierling Drive , from County Road 16 to approximately 3200 feet west through the Hauer' s 4th Addition (State Aid Project No. 166-112-01 ) . The project also included constructing Jade Circle and portions of Limestone Drive, Emerald Lane, Onyx and Jasper Road (City Project No. 1987-12) . i As part of the developer ' s agreement, the developer requested that the City construct all the necessary improvements on these streets and assess the appropriate costs back. The developer also waived his right to a public hearing on the assessments and waived his right to appeal the assessments. The project is approximately 95% completed. In order to certify the assessment roll to the County by the October 10 , 1988 deadline, the assessment roll needs to be adopted at this time. The construction costs to date are $573 ,893 .71 . Staff has estimated that the remaining construction will cost approximately $86 , 067 . 56 , for a total construction cost of $659 ,861 .27 . Engineering and adminstration costs total $89 ,829 .64 , which added to the construction costs of $659,861 .27 make the total project costs $749 ,690 .91 . Approximately $312, 183 .82 of this amount is not assessable. This consists of street oversizing costs on Vierling Drive, watermain oversizing costs on Vierling Drive and the eastern most 900 feet of Vierling Drive which does not front on this subdivision. The City will absorb all non-assessable street costs and SPUC will have to reimburse the City for any watermain oversizing costs . All remaining costs are assessed back to the developer. The total assessment to the developer is $430 ,721 .15. Attachment A summarizes the assessment calculations Since the project has not been completed yet, Council may want to "amend" this final assessment once all final project costs are known. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2951 . 2. Deny Resolution No. 2951 . 3 • Amend Resolution No. 2951 based on any discussions of the Council meeting and then adopt the resolution. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . During the preparation of the assessments, staff met with the developer several times to go over the methods used and total cost assessed . The developer agrees with the calculated assessment, but he will be present at the Council meeting to discuss it with Council. REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2951 , A Resolution Adopting Assessments for Project No. 1987-12 for 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive) from C.R. 16 to + 3200 Feet West Through Hauer' s 4th Addition, Jade Circle and portions of Limestone Drive, Emerald Lane, Onyx Drive and Jasper Road all located in Hauer' s 4th Addition and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM2951 ?_&I RESOLUTION NO. 2951 A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Project No. 1987-12 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive) from C.R. 16 to + 3200 Feet Nest Through Hauer' s 4th Addition, Jade Circle and Portions of Limestone Drive, Emerald Lane, Onyx Drive and Jasper Road all Located in Hauer's 4th Addition WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of: 13th Avenue (Vierling Drive ) and all other named streets above within Hauer ' s 4th Addition by Sanitary Sewer , Watermain, Storm Sewer, and Street Improvements NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments levied against it. 2 . Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1989 , and shall bear interest at the rate of 8 1/2 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31 , 1989 , and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may , at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property , with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty ( 30 ) days from the adoption of this resolution ; he may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list, and he may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. 4. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in his office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before October 10th of each year the total amount of installments and interest which are to become due in the following year on the assessment on each parcel of land included in the assessment roll. 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 m ro M1 [9 0 'd w G r N 0 W 0 0 7 9 N N N \ Q 0 1 W r 'G 6moro 'G H7 13 O rt 0 10 0 m 0 H Y-O O rtY-rt O. 7 P] z ry r M W 5 W N d D r m r H 0 m ro ? m 0 O 0 rt N ry I N K r-O rt 0 r N O N N u.7 7 N rt H N N H N N m \ rt rt 0 m C £ m r a (t0 > mf pb. GO Om \ 00no (D 10 W N N0 0 0O Y- 0 N < PI Ort Aw.-. OW 7 N Y- 0 '0 rt mOI `0 -< O , A A V If Y N m 7 m N O N w O O J A N H 0 rt rt 'O M rt y N W O U w m IPOMO m O " W tb OOU O m 1 rtN ry ry G H. N N I W rt100 O p' tD F� O o W M N I O m ll N ct0 rt 1P 1P 000 N m 1 7 O rt O r 0 0 1 0 I m 11 H '0 T ry 0 1 0 1 0 1 H O d N I ft I rt l 0 rt r J A W rt I I I I I x 0 m r N N lT C 0 ci N I 1 1 1 O C I I I I I Pl ry P Y-O d• J ro O I I I I I 2 P m < A W In I I I I I H m Y- ry m to V10100 0 I I I I I r 7 r ry O r Y-N J 10 N N I I I I I O a Y- J A w 1t I t l l l H G10 N m m Y I I I I I W N ry0 W I I I I I Y- Y- -4 I I I I I Y• Y-m 0 A rrr0 I I I I I 7 7 - N w A w w r m I I I I I 10 10 rt O A A A N < I I I I I N m 0 0 �110mw 0 1 1 1 1 1 O O M NtnAw wNO I I I I I N N O rulJlnN I I I I I rt rt ryw w MH . rt UrP W UI , m 0 Aorto rn m N 1P 1P 1P an w N rt � m W 1P tti NO P r w K Na � mr J r N W H d AOJ W ONTO ' � W IPOAAart 00ro1DOr N 0 N A A 0 N 0 O D J n m O 0 P rn w w m 3 mmIn Wl ow O Sam S a u < m z 0 J m A td ,a rov m y'O n m O 7 3 Y fr z v n to r tn < roY W m O W J � K H S N N N N N N Tf 'k O 'y A W W W W W W [a] H o o o 0 0 o r ro H- OJ 6Y A a N N H 0 01 W pJ N 10 A 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 x z 3H< �' 000000 O [9 [+J In I I I I I I H [CTJ > yC�" � NNNNN N '/v' � W OHM I I I I I I p m m m 0 z 1 1 1 1 1 1 YYrrrY a 13 vvHH w w www W w Y y 0 0 0 0 0 0 w x 0 H H 0v0 m ro tp W UI A w N J > > < < O N t11 OJJ 01 OI I Off` 71 I I I I I I Y O 000000m N H �qy ` HrM > O zv 000000 [1"1 n>wY o p; iyItOWCACtllb mInV1AwN N w O m H 3 9 m r z .3 (n �® NT 2 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineef SUBJECT: Alley - Block 81 DATE: September 15, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2949 declaring the adequacy of a petition and ordering a report prepared for alley improvements in Block 81 . BACKGROUND: Block 81 is bound by 6th and 7th Avenues and Lewis and Holmes Streets. A petition has been received and approved by the City Attorney requesting alley improvements in Block 81 . The requested improvements consist of bituminous pavement. The property owners that signed the petition indicate that they will agree to share the cost of these improvements under the 429 special assessment process. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Deny the petition for alley improvements. 2 . Accept the petition and adopt Resolution No. 2949 . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 2 . REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2949 , A Resolution Declaring Adequacy of Petition and Ordering Preparation of a Report on Alley Improvements in Block 81 and move its adoption. DH/pmp ALLEY RESOLUTION NO. 2949 A Resolution Declaring Adequacy Of Petition And Ordering Preparation Of A Report For Alley Improvements in Block 81 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . A certain petition requesting the improvement of the Alley in Block 81 by asphalt pavement, filed with the Council on September 20 , 1988 , is hereby declared to be signed by the required percentage of owners of property affected thereby. The declaration is made in conformity to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429 .035 . 2 . The petition is hereby referred to David Hutton, City Engineer, and he is instructed to report to the Council with convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement , and estimated cost of the improvement as recommended . 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 Date We , the undersigned , owners of the following described real Property. abutting on the proposed improvement and benefitted thereby, herehv petition the City Council of the City of Shakopee . for the following public imnroveme:;ts : �yI-`rL;s_ ! on $tree /Avenue, between jn Street: venue i and ! '� Steet (.4venue _ and request that same be made during ciie vear In making this petition the undersigned understands that the City of Shakopee, its agents or employee cannot guarantee the amount o= an assessment until a feasibility stud, of .the improve- ments has been prepared and accepted by City Council in accordance With NSA Chapter 424 . PETITIONER LOT BLOCK sz' 4-1 lo+s �f5 8� "" - ;mss xj ✓ Jl s herenv, verify that _ circulatea-th: above petition and that t[le 2DOve __.natures of the ..on rty ow,e— _� - --- To: Mayor, Councilmembers From: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police Re: Disaster Exercise Date: September 9 , 1988 TNTRODUCTTON A mandated hazardous materials disaster training exercise will be conducted during September 1988. BACKGROUND The Scott County Emergency Management office is requesting all cities to pass a resolution authorizing participation in the exercise. The primary respondents will be the fire services to coordinate and evaluate response to a hazardous materials disaster. RECOMMENDATION Pass resolution No. 2947 authorizing the City of Shakopee emergency respondents to participate in a disaster training program in September of 1988. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Pass resolution No. 2947 authorizing the City of Shakopee emergency respondents to participate in a disaster training program in September of 1988. RESOLUTION NO. 2947 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE TO PARTICIPATE IN A DISASTER TRAINING PROGRAM IN SEPTEMBER OF 1988 BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City Council, that upon recommendation of the Emergency Management Coordinator, Fire Chief and or Police Chief, the City of Shakopee be and hereby is authorized to participate in a peacetime disaster exercise in September 1988, to be conducted by the Scott County Emergency Management Office in conjunction with Shakopee and the several municipalities of Scott County. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this _ day of 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1988. City Attorney - � zd MEMO TO: Sohn K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Ordinance #252 Rezoning the S 1/2 of Block 3 Koepers Addition from I-1 to I-2 DATE: September 14, 1988 INTRODUCTION• At their meeting on August 16, 1988 the City Council passed a motion directing the City Attorney to draft the appropriate ordinance rezoning the S 1/2 of Block 3 Lots 1-5 of Koepers Addition and the area immediately to the East of Lot 5 extending to the Western lot line of Lot 1 Block 175 of the Original Shakopee Plat from I-1 (Light Industrial) to I-2 (Heavy Industry) . BACKGROUND: Gene Brown acting as agent for the property owners applied to the City for rezoning of the property from I-1 Light Industry to I-2 Heavy Industry. Rahr Malting has indicated that they will purchase the property if rezoned. Rahr Malting does not have any definite plans for use of the property at this time, but is purchasing it in order to reserve area for possible future expansion. The area proposed for rezoning is located immediately North of Third Avenue. The area immediately to the East and North of this property is currently zoned I-2. The property to the South is currently zoned R-3 and several small apartment buildings are located on the South side of Third Avenue. The Shakopee Planning Commission at their meeting on August 4, 1988 held a public hearing on the requested rezoning and passed a motion recommending to the City Council that the Southern 1/2 of Block 3 Lots -1-5 of Koepers Addition and the area immediately to the East of Lot 5 extending to the Western lot line of Lot 1, Block 175 of the Original Shakopee Plat be rezoned from I-1 to I-2. At their meeting on August 16, 1988 the City Council passed a motion concurring with the Planning Commission's recommendation and directing the City Attorney to draft the appropriate ordinance. The appropriate ordinance is attached. ALTERNATIVES• 1. The City Council can approve Ordinance #252 as drafted by the City Attorney rezoning the property from I-1 to I-2. 2. The City Council can offer and pass a motion to not approve Ordinance #252, thereby leaving the property in the I-1 zoning district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative $1. ACTION REOUESTED: Offer and approve ordinance $252 rezoning the Southern 1/2 of Block 3 , Lots 1-5 Koepers Addition and the area immediately to the East of Lot 5 extending to the Western lot line of Lot 1 Block 175 of the Original Shakopee Plat from I-1 to I-2. i i ----- - o,y y � /fy "A -- j it ONtO� Ct { Ge Ne Rez�N�N� of�l�s i �' 1 oc 7'oDN ORDINANCE # 252 Fourth Series An Ordinance Of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 11 Entitled "Land Use Regulations" (Zoning) by Amending Section 11.32 Light Industrial (I-1) and Section 11.33 Heavy Indusstrial (I-2) and Adopting By Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 11.99 Which Among Other Things Contain Penalty Provisions THE SHAKOPEE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS; SECTION I; Reducing the Areas of the L'ghtI d st ial Z one The Light Industrial Zone is hereby reduced by removing therefrom the following described areas, to-wit; Lots 1 - 5, Block 3, Koeper's Addition to City of Shakopee and the area immediately east of Lot 5 extending to the western line of Lot 1, Block 175, original plat of Shakapee City. SECTION II: Increasing the Area of Hay Industrial Zone The Heavy Industrial Zone is hereby increased by adding thereto the areas described in Section I immediately above. SECTION III: Adoption by Reference The general provisions and definitions applicable to the entire City Code including penalty provisions of Chapter I and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor are hereby adopted in their entirety by -reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION IV: When in Farce and Effect After the adoption and attestation of this ordinance, it shall be pub- lished once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Passed in session of the City Council of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 2nd day pfSeptember, 1988 City Attorney 1989 wage projections - Requested by Council at budget worksession. 1988 1989 1989 Wage Wage Extended Hrly 3.58 Yrly ____________________________ Anderson, John 25.79 26.69 55,521 Shaner, Jeanette 10.14 10.49 21,829 S Vidmar, Tamara 6.55 7.63 15,866 Step increase included Cox, Judy 15.83 16.38 34,079 Voxland. Gregg 21.93 22.70 47,211 React, Marilyn 13.83 14.31 29,773 Klimek, Eileen 9.65 9.99 14,982 ? Hurley, Steve - 14.83 15.57 32,389 May need comp worth adjustment Kraft, Dennis 19.85 20.54 42,733 Wise, Doug 16.35 16.92 35,198 S Stock, Barry 11.64 13.55 28,180 Step increase included Warhol, Toni 10.14 10.49 21,829 Intern 0.00 0.00 13,000 Brownell, Tom 23.22 24.03 49,988 Mohrbacher, Pat 10.14 10.49 21,829 Vancleve, Terry 9.45 9.78 20,344 Once, Agnes 9.45 9.78 20,344 Houser, Leroy 18.25 18.89 39,289 Schleisman, Fulton 14.88 15.40 32,034 Hullander, Cora 10.14 10.49 21,829 S Parker, Newton 11.16 12.32 25,618 Step increase included S Hutton, David 16.82 18.50 38,471 Step increase included Ruuska, Ray 15.43 15.97 33,218 S DeLacey, John 12.10 13.91 28,934 Step increase included New Tech 11.00 11.39 23,681 Pennington, Pat 10.14 10.49 16,372 Karkanen, Jim 18.67 19.32 40,193 Charge in George M. 4,175 4,321 4,321 City pays 1/10 of pay plan amount Top Sergeant 18.60 19.16 39,853 Top Patrol - 1987 - 16.24 5-not settled--1 Top Heavy Equip Operator 13.01 13.47 28,018 Top Light Equip Operator 12.39 12.70 26,416 Note: 1988 wage is actual as of 8/88. 1989 projection makes no allowance for comp-worth adjustments. S - employee not on top step of payplan as of 8/88.