Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07/05/1988
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: June 30, 1988 1. The City has received a request to block off the Horizon Drive cul-de-sac for a block party on July 9th. The Chief of Police has no problem with this and the City Public Works crew will provide barricades. For new Councilmembers, we have a policy for approving these requests administratively if the Chief of Police sees no traffic of safety problems. 2. On June 30, 1988 the City Clerk received a call from Mr. I. T. Dahl, 1260 Polk, expressing his anger because he and his neighbors were unaware of the election. He wanted to know when people received notice of the election. The City Clerk explained the State requirements for notification of an election. Mr. Dahl indicated that we would be hearing more from him. 3. Attached is the meeting calendar for the month of July. 4. Attached is a memorandum from LeRoy Houser regarding his action against Heavy Duty Air, the new industry moving into the industrial park. If you have any questions regarding the specifics please contact LeRoy. 5. Attached is a letter from Bill Weir, Regional Park Manager, DNR, regarding the status of our negotiations with the DNR and Mr. Sweeney for the trail easements. The tone of the letter is discouraging, however, since the letter Mr. Sweeney has met with Bill Weir and the negotiations are again moving forward. I will keep you posted regarding the City's involvement. If the DNR and Mr. Sweeney can resolve most of the issues between themselves that will reduce the City's role. 6. Attached is a memorandum from Barry Stock regarding the Energy and Transportation Committee's six month evaluation of the Dial-A-Ride fare increases. 7. Attached is the "Business Update From City Hall" which will go out with the Chamber's July newsletter. 8. Attached is a memorandum from Glenn Purdue, the Counsel for the Suburban Rate Authority regarding the 1987 NSP General Rate Case. I have underlined the key results of the rate case settlement on page two and three. 9. Attached is a stockholders reports from the Toro Company. We receive these reports for informational purposes because we have provided the Toro Company with industrial development bonds which financed their recent expansion. 10. Attached are the minutes of the June 7, 1988 meeting of the Shakopee Coalition. 11. Attached are the agendas for the July 7, 1988 meetings of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission. 12. Attached is the agenda for the July 6, 1988 meeting of the Community Development Commission. 13 . Attached is the agenda for the July 6, 1988 meeting of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. 14 . Attached are the minutes of the June 22, 1988 meeting of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. 15. Attached is a letter I received from the Minnesota Valley Savings Bank announcing their are "Now Open" in the Shakopee Professional Building. 16. Attached is a memo from Gregg Voxland regarding utility billing software. 17. Attached is a letter from Gregg Voxland to Theodore Hukriede regarding his storm drainage utility bill. JKA/jms July 1988 3 UPCOMING MEETINGS SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SRT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 City Hall 7:00pm City 7:45am 7:30pm Closed Council Downtown Planning Committe Commission 5:00pm CDC 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 4:30pm Public Utilities 6:00pm Board & Commission Member Picnic 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 7:00pm 7:00pm City 5:00pm 7:00pm Community Council Employee Energy & Recreation Picnic Transp. 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 June Rugust S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 30 31 none 06/29/1988 MEMO TO: John E. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building official RE: Certificate of Occupancy Fee for Heavy Duty Air - 4500 Valley Industrial Blvd. DATE: June 29, 1988 At 9:00 p.m. June 28, 1988, Fulton and I conducted a surprise inspection of the Heavy Duty Air facility. We suspected they were occupying and manufacturing in the building without first obtaining final inspections and the certificate of occupancy. The inspection confirmed this. The owner was advised of the penalty two weeks ago (loss of the C.O. fee of $4,575.00) when he allowed his leasee in the building with their equipment. He chose to ignore my instructions. He has been officially notified as of this date to vacate the premises until the certificate of occupancy has been issued. Also, he has been notified he has lost his certificate of occupancy deposit. LH:cah ,w STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PNONENO. 296-2553 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 FILE NO. June 23, 1988 ' ? ,r,^,i_•,:T1'C�,"j JUN2 %1988 John Anderson CITY OF SHAKOPEE City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Shakopee, Sweeny, DNR Contract Dear Mr. Anderson: The past month we have been researching alternatives available to the state to accomplish the objectives of our proposed contract. We are looking at alternatives because there are proposed conditions (covenants) that require the state to do things that are illegal or inappropriate. Specifically: o The state can not agree to construct the driveway from Bluff Avenue to trail easement one because the state can not spend money an land that it does not have a legal interest in; either through an easement, fee title, license or lease. While I know of no law that would prohibit the construction of the driveway, we are dealing with an issue of appropriate use of tax payers dollars and it is simply not ethical to spend state dollars on something that has no public use. o Another problem is the vacation of Minnesota and Market Streets. Upon vacating these streets, the underlying land reverts to the adjacent landowner (Sweeny and state). The problem for us is that once the state becomes the owner, we have no legal authority to trade it away other than through a land exchange which is an alternative previously rejected by the state because the value of the property Mr. Sweeny wanted was far in excess of what the state would get in return. In order for the state to proceed with some kind of equitable solu- tion, I propose that the agreement be changed to reflect the following concepts which would be predicated on a new law that allows the state to sell state trail property to adjacent landowners. In previous negotiations with Mr. Sweeny, this was not an option because state law didn't permit us to make an outright sale to Mr. Sweeny. The concepts are: 1. That the state purchase the two trail easements from Mr. Sweeny at the appraised value. The state would also agree to the walls and fences currently proposed. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER -011w® Mr. John Anderson June 23, 1988 Page Two 2. That Mr. Sweeny purchase state lands needed for his operations. These lands don't necessarily have to be the vacated streets. We now have some new authority, and with it some flexibility to mutually agree on which lands would be sold. 3. That the requirement that DNR construct the private driveway be deleted. If these concepts meet Mr. Sweeny's approval, I would be happy to redraft the language in the contract to reflect them in more detail. Sincerelyrr,//, W� Bill Weir Regional Park Manager cc: Bob Sweeny BW1418:1k MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RB: Dial-A-Ride Fare Increase Evaluation - Non-Agenda Informational DATE: June 20, 1988 INTRODUCTION• On March 1, 1988 the Shakopee City Council approved a Dial- A-Ride fare increase. It has been approximately 6 months since the fare increase was adopted. On June 16, 1988 the Energy and Transportation Committee met to review and evaluate whether or not we should amend the fare structure at this time. BACKGROUND: This past winter, substantial increases in the number of riders using the Dial-A-Ride service and several complaints from passengers who were concerned about the length of their trips prompted the Energy and Transportation Committee to investigate alternatives for servicing our increasing Dial-A-Ride program needs. After a lengthy review process and public hearing on the subject, the Committee proposed two changes in the Dial-A-Ride fare structure. First, the Committee recommended to increase each of the advanced notice categories by 12 hours. The fares would then be classified in categories of less than a 24 hour notice and more than a 24 hour notice. Second, the Committee recommended that fares for riders calling in with more than a 24 hour notice be increased $.25 across the board. Fares for riders calling in with less than a 24 hour notice were proposed to be increased by $.50 in both the adult and student category and $.25 in the Senior Citizen and children under 6 category. Shown below is the current fare policy. Current Fare Policy Srs. and Children Adults Students Under 6 Less than a 12 hour notice $1.50 $1.00 $ .75 More than a 12 hour notice $1.00 $ .75 $ .50 Since the Dial-A-Ride fare increase was implemented, we have received two letters from Shakopee residents. Both of the riders did not have a problem with the increase in the fare but were dissatisfied with the 24 hour advance notice requirement. I did write a letter to each of these individuals explaining to them why we needed to change the fare policy. I also informed them that the Energy and Transportation Committee would be reevaluating the fare structure during the month of June. The Dial-A-Ride operations report (see Attachment ql. ) reveals that the fare increase has had the desired impact. Note that the ridership dropped by nearly 900 rides when we implemented our new fare structure. we also saw a drop in ridership during the month of April. This drop in ridership was expected. You will also notice that during the month of May our ridership levels are comparable to what we have experienced in past years. The stabilization in ridership levels would seem to indicate that our riders have become accustomed to the new fare categories. The Energy and Transportation Committee is confident that we will be experiencing ridership levels in excess of 4000 passenger trips per month this coming winter. They therefore moved that the Dial-A-Ride fare structure be maintained as it currently exists. IJ r r � b IV OZOm IN R1 a N a N O C1 a F F F PIC a 1D a O m W .-. m KryM 0, 7 m m Oa 10rta r7KMry Q7 m H x Y'A M NNORFKa WAhF rt H X rF• Fa 59QNm rp' Fa 7 H OH H ah t7 tYNl rt aM O O SO KK NNHtJ KK N W Y N W A N N W A A W W W N r N N N W W N W J N r Q. UI W N O W O W mUIN N m OF" N r W VI O A 10 r J W J J H O A Y N UI A .D O VI W W J A r w w r r Y r r r W m �OJY W W NF+ NOAmlll 10 �0m W 0 O r A O �OW OBD rm �n W �ONm W rmON r r O A m rrYl-' r rrr rrrrYrr W O r 00 W W m AN W 1pArONNUlO W m O N l D r Y A J m l f O J O m l p N A r m W J W rt N H lT �D lT O m O� J l0 r N O A 1p W U1 VI r r VI t I b W W W I 77 W J W N O J O A A UI 1-' J Y r W N O VI W A I O N W \O W W UI W N UI A tD UI W t0 lT J A RJ h] O ro M a o la 00000 000000000000 n y H O z N A O J J O N r O O O m l I m J m m m O W a ro C'1 r J 111 b J VI VI N tT r Ul W m lT A b W r N UI r Y a 0 H A N NJ1001T W mrJ W SDN OHO W N �0 a O A W W JO UTA O� W IDJA OUI W A100 W W N . y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O J 0 W J m m m m m o o W W O m W m m J m J m J n S (11 O J t 11 A g A O m J A A O� m l T m N W N J R Y' V I r O m J �O U I m W m W O J m W Y N l0 N O F r W J W A O W A W r W J W N lC W A J A W m r N A O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N Y H J O O 00000 000000000000 N N N n J A O r , wow NNNN rYrNNNI-+ N oz O W O w m Y J W N N W O N W J O N N m N r C O U N N Y A 0 0 O A A N r A W N O r J A N N Y H J W W W UI {)1W W NAOAO J . A J W RF 10 J �D ON W m W JNIIIUIJJJNNO W UI m a N b l T O W A r U i W W O O D U I U I W V IOwo A l 7 BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL Vol.2 No.7 Dear Chamber Member: July 1,1988 ADMINISTRATION Shakopee's 1st Annual Derby Days celebration June 25th and 26th was very successful. Many people deserve credit for making this a success. It was an excellent example of the energy that can be generated when the Chamber,Chamber Retail Committee,civic groups,corporate sponsors and City TEAM 1 JP. medal thanks are due the DerbyD•3fc Committec. The enthusiasm reminded me of 1984 when the ar- rival of Canterbury Downs united and focused am creative energies on group marketing for tourism. In both then and now the energy generated has rippled through the community! The June 21, 1988 issue of the Citizens Lague.Minnesota Journal included their annual taxing sure This year Shakopee's total tax (City, County, School, Mise.) dropped $300 (29.41%) on our average ($79,464) priced home to VM or 0.91% of that home. The Metro average in the survey was$1,095 or 1.11%and Shakopee ranked 69tb out of 9 . Nut yearwe will probably bounceback up as has been our pattern since 1984- Attached is_chart on how 1984 taxes break d $82 000 house d how CITY taxes are snent. RUTI DING: We have started construction coordination and inspections on the Minnesota River Scenic Overlook across from the Levee Drive Highrise. We have had a flu=of single family housing permits the last two k -about one per day. CITY CLERK The$1500000 Community Center referendumfor constructFonof a community center at the Minnesota Valley Mall fit d 784 to 605 on June 29Po with 24%of registered voters voting. City Council has set a public hearing for July 5,L988 at 8:00 pm to consider the vacation of Apgar Street between 1st and 2nd Avenues. This is in follow-up to an agreement made with the railroad. In exchange for eliminating the railroad crossing at Apgar, the railroad has agreed to remove the spm tracks and upgrade the existing tracks at Scott and Atwood. Council has renewed beer and liquor licenses for businesses effective July 1. COMMI JNITYDEVELOPMENT OnJune 1st the City,in participation with Riva Ridge and the Levee Drive Highrise,initiated apilot apart- ment recycling program with a gram from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Develop- ment. Aecontractor^tctcollecting recyclable materials(n finer_glass and aluminum and steel cans)on a weekly basis at no cost to The ity or the partit%ating come. ToTo�participation has far exceeded our exnectationc. Upon completion of the six month demonsta- tion project and an evaluation,the City of Shakopee may investigate the development of apartment recy- cling programs at other apartment complexes within the community. If you are an interested apartment owner call 445-3650 and ask for Rarrv. COMMIRSITV RFCRFAnQN(= SCR sponsoredactivities,which is jointly sponsored by the City and Shakopee Scbools,are particularly visible during the summer months. Weekday evenings anyone driving down 10th Avenue will observe baseball and softball games on all school and city athletic fields with boys,girls and adults having a good time. The Municipal Swimming Pool in Lions Park is also very busy with thousands of people of all ages at- tempting to keep cool during this warm weather. For information regarding any of these programs you may call SCR at 445-2742. FNC:FNFP'.RING DFPARTMPNT Construction is proceeding on schedule for Part 2 of Phase I of the Downtown Streetscape project. Hol- mes Street was paved by lune 24th in time for Derby Days. All underground utilities on Atwood Street and 2ndAvenue are nearing completion and they should be open to local traffic after the gravel is in place. The construction activity will be moving to Fuller Street shortly. Thanks to all the do r businesses fnrtheir rnn�eratinn and na[i n ed,rinn rh's. r r -- If the weather continues like it is Weproject should be substantially completed by August 1,1988. Bid openings are scheduled for three more projects as follows: 6th Acpm,e/Adams Srreer 'r f7�S.kYI reconstruction-Jiv 1ct_Vierling D f C`Ln.R d 77 e t r ly t rd lothA Overlay JuIX.18Lh. — The Valley Industrial Sewer extension project is proceeding on schedule and should be completed byJuly 1st. Vierling Drive from County Road 16 west is scheduled to be paved by June 30th. Staff is working closely with our consultant on the preliminary design for the Downtown Mini-bypass and bridge. Z FT D Iil T — oCD 0 CD Z) rt co 0 Lo o I X nCD N � 0 CD x N O i < -� N (D C I OC N 7 n m CD m n. I v,- n bT m N a 6Y � C7 m m O m N O N m O N W N f m O co n m p m O O N a p 3 CD co 3 Ui fT �p p > O m m m O n O f= ^ O O ' N CO O O O m a m N U I O N m m O N 0 � c © w m N a en N . N O [T W m V N N m O> > O t0 O N > W N m ,p O Lo 0 O L7 N m O m N m 00 c v a p Q1 Lai I v a ID N LP eR � O J a U <p N N m m m O m m m m m O mm v cO m O O7 � � O 3 I i i ams ❑ a3 a � , 0 1 � :D — 1 x 1 04 N c ! CD < O O I � I / m / 1 � I 1 1 f C I f (� 1 / Q Q 1 O 1 44 N0 1 O fl N v- ✓ �� ��I ya .a to f I C QJ �-j Q m p d x ^ = 0CD O u _ C 0) a II c o c Sv CD O O r C) . .- \\ v � Q N p CD - I \\ Q Y I \ x I \ I \ I \ I \ I \\ O O N n N p l<O c> c _ x O rn Ln N —7 . U L4 c =C N VI N '..' ('dry O O 6$m N T LeFererc Lefler RennedT (*Brien & Drau z a Profnaftrol Lla[oh.. 2000 Firer Bank Place West MEMORANDUM Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone 161213334643 Telecopier 16121333-0540 TO: SRA Board of Directors J.hn E. DDennisFROM: Glenn Purdue, SRA Counsel re. John David J.Kennedy Joseph E.Hamikon DATE: April 20, 1988 John B. Dean Glenn E. Purdue Richard J.Schieffer SUBJ: 1987 NSP General Rate Case; Status Report Charles L. LaFev.re Herbert P. Lefler 111 James J.Thomson,Jr. Thomas R.GaK This is a very unusual case. NSP filed for a $99,299,000 Steven B.Schmidt increase in its Minnesota retail rates. SRA intervened John G.Kreasel James M.Bas did about a dozen other parties. The unusual aspect Ronald H. Barry n is that in this case, an effort has been made to reach a William P.Jordan settlement rather than go through the full and laborious William R.Skalleve Rodney D.Andaman (and expensive) hearing process. This was tailored for Conine A.Heine us as we had determined that we could not afford to Davie!D.Beaudoin sponsor a witness. Our marching orders were to try to Steven M.Tanen Mary Frances Skala enY defend the ver substantial savings carved out of the Leslie M.Arman last NSP filing, primarily in the SRA's review of NSP's Timothy J. PeWlenty fossil fuel inventory. ROK A.Sponhorn Julie A.Bergh Darcy L.Hnesman After several meetings of all involved and many side Daviel C. Roland conversations, a settlement in the total amount NSP is to Karen. a chichi k receive has been agreed upon, and a settlement of the Paul D.Beertschi g P r Baan Frig rate design issues is also agreed upon. The hearing Clayton L.LeFevere,Retired Process lasted approximately five days, rather than a Herbert P. Lefler,Retired potential three weeks. The Commission was asked to agree that if it rejects the settlement, it will return the matter to the hearing examiner for a hearing. This decision required about three-fourths of a day of delib- eration by the Commission. NSP and the parties have agreed that it should receive a $75 million increase. This is an overall average in- crease in rates of 7.198, rather than the 9.528 for which NSP asked. The stipulation on the revenue side calls for a rate of return on common equity of 11.78. Our main issue in the 1985 case was the fossil fuel supply. We were able to take $5 million out of rate base, which resulted in a savings of about $2 million in electric bills since the last case. In this case, 1 again raised the issue through information requests and E April 20, 1988 Page 2 oral discussions with agency people. Early in February, and prior to the agreement on the stipulation, NSP decided to file supplementary testimony adjusting many of the numbers in its original filing. It took $8,385,000 out of rate base by reducing its requested fuel supply inventory value. I attribute this solely to our pressing of the issue. The only explanation in the supplementary testimony and the reason for the adjustments is that "questions were raised. " I submitted the question of whether we ought to sign the revenue stipulation to the Executive Committee with a recommendation that we do not as we had obtained that which we sought without agreeing that $75 million was the right amount. Since that date h - *=..e agreed not to attack the $75 million in return for that is to da n ora promise from Ncp •.._« �• .. l review its fossil fuel inventor a it curre t. It wi also submit the policy to us for comment. This will occur within a year. On the basis of this oral promise, I agreed not to attack the revenue stipulation. I did cr ss examine NSP's rate manager as to the viability of - its current ossil fuel policy. This cross examination seemed to be quite successful. --agreed that NSP must have a written fuel policy inventory and while he would not admit it, i�was quite obvious that its written policy is inadequate and ou o a e. We signed the rate design settlement document. we norma y o e esign issues, except in the past case we supported a municipal pumping group which was successful in obtaining a Commission order allowing it to continue as a separate class. There are approxi- mately 1900 pumping meters in NSP's service area. The annual sales to pumpers are approximately $217 million. 1 we participated in the rate design settlement. �Bv virtue . I of the agreement that NSP would take $29 million �s the pumping increase was reduced by approximately $45 ore imoor an fact that we were able to t' emand- metere um in rates from the eneral service rates. Historically, a two a been the same except that the pumpers were not subject to a demand ratchet. This was litigated in the last case and we were able to maintain the monthly demand billing. In the general service class, all of NSP's increase was put on demand charges as the reason for the increase was viewed as the addition of the Sherco III generating station to the rate base. While I did not agree with this analysis, there was overwhelming support for it. The way the numbers work out, the energy charged to pumpers will actually be reduced, and the demand charge will go up significantly, but it will stay $0.05 per kilowatt below the demand charge in the general service class. The work we did in April 20, 1988 Page 3 the last case served us well. Because the pumping rate is now different from the general rate (and less) , pumpers will have more choices as to what rate they want applied to their various pumping stations. Many large pumping stations are not the municipal pumping rate, but are on, for instance, the peak controlled rate. On the sma l_Lwin' ra a there are 1137 meters) , the company proposed a $60,000 increase. T i was reducerto�S�E »� t e approximately 258 re uc ion because of the a 75 mi ov revenue increase. NSP proposed to move the sural municipal pumping up to the small general service class rates. We resisted arguing rate shock, etc. and demand differences. A savings of about $15,000 per year was accomplished there. The City of St. Paul intervened and joined us on the pumping issues. Verne Jacobsen of the St. Paul Water Utility and Gary Ashley, a consulting engineer, provided valuable assistance. We budgeted $10,000 in the 1987 budget for this case and $20,000 in 1988. In addition, we budgeted $5,000 in contribution to the municipal pumpers group, a total of $35,000.00. Through the March billing, we have spent $10,902.70. If the Commission accepts the settlement, I expect the total billing for the case to be about $15,902.70. In addition, I asked the municipal pumping group to support us this time on the coal fuel inventory matter, and they suggested they might be willing to contribute $4,000. At this writing, I do not know if that has been received. If received, it would reduce our total cost for the case to $11,902.70. The dollar effect hof our actions in the case is difficult to— caste. The $8 million reduction in fossil fuel inventorywould mean approximate y m ion per year in electric ra e—s. 'LTi a reauction in s ree fi[itrg a the. savirias in e d be rounded or purposes to a— pprorTY7Ra[e39� d be lion It has been assumed that about 808 of NSP sales are in the metropolitan area. SRA cities probably contain approximately 208 of the residents in the city. The percentage of business usage is not known. Based upon these assumptions and using the percentage of residents, the SRA's involvement will result in a savings to SRA members o approximately 3 r n the order of $2100 per vote. The cost of the case will be eit er $35 or $62 per vote depending on whether the April 20, 1966 Page 4 pumpers contribute. Of course, these are only the dollar rewards; the other favorable results are not so easily quantified. The settlement stipulation will go to the Commission for action. It will either accept or reject in whole or in part. If *hnr� i.9 � rejection, parties will have the right to reopen if they wish. 0060ME06.B18 $" 1 w.0 5UN2 ' The Tom Company CITY nc7 8111 Lyndale Avenue South,Minneapolis,Minnesota 55420 612/888-8801 • Telex290928 June 15, 1988 Dear Stockholder: For several years your Board of Directors has viewed with concern the growth of abusive tactics in attempts to take over major companies.One of the actions taken in response to these developments was the adoption of a Share Purchase Rights Plan in April 1986. In view of developments since that date,your Board has decided that it would he beneficial to the Company and its stockholders to substitute a new rights plan for the original plan. Accordingly, on June 14,1988,the Board authorized redemption of the original rights and provided for a distribution of new rights. This action is more fully described in the enclosed press release. The new rights will initially trade together with your common stock and will be represented by your common stock certificates. The new rights are not currently exercisable and, as indicated in the enclosed press release,do not become exercisable unless certain acquisition events with respect to the Company occur.A complete description of the new rights plan will be sent to you on or about June 25, 1988. The redemption of the original rights will result in a one-time payment to you of$.033 per right which is attached to each outstanding share.This payment will be made on July 12,1988 to stockhold- am of record on June 24, 1988. Sincerely, 4' Kendrick B. Melrose President and Chief Executive Officer PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: David L. Mona Vern Johnson Mona, Meyer & McGrath The Tom Company (612) 831-8515 (612) 887-8911 TORO ANNOUNCES SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS PROGRAM MINNEAPOLIS,June 14, 1988—The Board of Directors of The Toro Company(NYSE:TTC) today declared its normal quarterly dividend of 10 cents per share of common stock payable July 12, 1988 to stockholders of record June 24,1988.The company also declared a distribution of one Preferred Share Purchase Right for each outstanding share of the company's common stock.In this connection, the Board also authorized the redemption of the company's existing rights which were established in April 1986. Kendrick B.Melrose,Toro's President and Chief Executive Officer,said,"The new rights,which will be effective today, have been under consideration for some time and meet the Board's desire to provide additional protection against abusive takeover tactice such as partial tender offers and selec- tive open market purchases. The new rights are intended to assure that stockholders receive fair and equal treatment when efforts are made to gain control of the company without paying all stockholders a premium value. "The new rights also contain provisions that permit a bidder to call for a stockholders'meeting to vote to redeem the rights upon compliance with certain procedures when a fair cash offer is made for all the company's shares," he added. Each right will entitle stockholders to buy one one-hundredth of a share of a new aeries of voting preferred stock at an exercise price of$85.00.Each one-hundredth of a share of the new preferred stock has terms designed to make it the economic equivalent of one share of common stock.The rights will be exercisable only if a person or group acquires 20 percent or more of the company's common stock or announces a tender offer,the consummation of which would result in ownership by a person or group of 20 percent or more of the common stock. If the company is acquired in a merger or other business combination transaction,each right will entitle its holder to purchase, at the right's then current exercise price, a number of the acquiring company's common shares having a market value at that time of twice the right's exercise price. In addition, if a person or group acquires 20 percent or more of the company's outstanding common stock, otherwise than pursuant to a cash tender offer for all shares in which such person or group increases its stake from below 20 percent to 80 percent or more of the outstanding common stock, each right will entitle its holder(other than such person or members of such group)to purchase,at the right's then current exercise price,a number of shares of the company's common stock having a market value of twice the right's exercise price. Further,at any time after a person or group acquires 20 percent or more(but less than 50 percent) of the company's outstanding common stock,the Board of Directors may,at its option,exchange part or all of the rights(other than rights held by the acquiring person or group)for shares of the company's stock on a one-for-one basis. Prior to the acquisition by a person or group of beneficial ownership of 20 percent or more of the company's common stock,the rights are redeemable for one cent per right either at the option of the Board of Directors or automatically in connection with the consummation of a tender offer for all abuse at a cash price per share equal to or greater than the price approved by stockholders at a special meeting which would be called under certain circumstances in accordance with procedures contained in the rights plan. The Board of Directors is also authorized to reduce the 20 percent thresholds referred to above to not less than 10 percent. Rights holders of record, as of the close of business on June 24, 1988, will receive the $.033 redemption payment for each right which is attached to each outstanding common share of the company. For tax purposes, the company will treat the redemption payment as an extra dividend, which will be paid in addition to the regular dividend payable to record holders on said date.The new rights will be distributed to stockholders of record as of the same date,and will expire on June 14,1998. The company has 10,086,083 shares of common stock outstanding. The Toro Company is the nation's leading independent manufacturer and marketer of equipment offering labor-saving,resource-conserving solutions to the problems of outdoor maintenance,for both residential and commercial use. /o SHAKOPEE COALITION MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 7, 1988 The meeting was called to order at 4:35 PM in the Citizens State Bank Community Room by George Muenchow. Members Present: Gary Laurent (Rotary), Mary Sullivan (Community Action Council), Phyllis Hussong (Community Action Council), Jim Weeks (Representing Brian Norris of Citizens State Bank), Tina Floyd (St. Francis Medical Center), Barry Stock (City Of Shakopee), Claude Kolb (Knights Of Columbus), Laura Matuska (Scott County Human Service), John K. Anderson (City Of Shakopee), Cathy Ten Eyck (Shakopee Jaycees), and George Muenchow, (Shakopee Community Recreation). It was agreed that the meeting should be conducted in the format of a sharing session by all present. George Muenchow reminded everyone that the Municipal Swimming Pool is scheduled to open this Saturday at 1:00 PM which will be welcomed by many_becauseof the_turrent extremely warm weather. The opening time correlates with the closing of the local schools, the availability of employees who work at the pool (mostly students). and the busy work schedule in spring of the City Of Shakopee Park Department. Currently a cooperating project is occuring in rennovating area baseball/softball fields that have deteriorated over many years of active use. The Lions Club, Youth Baseball/ Softball Association, Shakopee Schools, City Of Shakopee, and Shakopee Community Recreation are cooperating. Jim Weeks was representing Brian Norris who is attending Banking School away from Shakopee this month. They are happy to provide our nice meeting facilities which we appreciate. Tina Floyd commented that St. Francis Regional Medical Center has been very busy of late including a lot of new babies being born. Another ambulance is being added which will be stationed in Savage. They are focusing on the Life Line program, a system where Sr Citizens, living at home, have a beeper available to use in calling for help, if, and when, needed. Hope to have this system working by fall. John Anderson A new industry is moving into the industrial park called "Heavy Duty Air"; a new plat is underway across the road from the Jr High School. Gardner Bros. are having a new home "giveaway" in their new development near Hauer's Addition which will be a part of the Minneapolis Aquatennial program. They expect over 12,000 to come and register. Downtown Phase II re-development is well under way with pavement on Holmes Street to be installed by June 24. Thirteenth Avenue from Hauer's Addition to d17 is in the works. Plans have been formulated to re-surface 10th Avenue. The first phase of construction for the southerly by-pass at its junction with $101 possibly might happen in 1989. Continueing on to B83 might happen in 1992. The Upper Valley Storm Sewer Project is on hold because of having to run through two Trout Ponds in Memorial Park that are rated very high by the State Of Minnesota ONE. Scott County is in the process of purchasing the former Womens Correctional Facility Property to probably use as a County Detention Center perhaps cooperatively with Carver County. Mary Sullivan reported that the Food Shelf would receive funds from proceeds from the Jaycee Softball Tourney during Derby Days. The problem at this time is that there are very few teams registered. She asked for help in stimulating teams to participate. Barry Stock serves as Special Projects Co-ordinator for the City Of Shakopee. The regular Newsletter and are participating in a major story in the Minnesota "Real Estate Journal" that will focus on Shakopee this summer. A Gazebo has been authorized for construction along the Huber Park Trail on the Minnesota River across from the Levee Drive High Rise. Derby Days, a promotion of the Shakopee Chamber Of Commerce, is going very well. Many activities have been scheduled. Derby Hats are for sale and a coupon book will be distributed. Marketing for this event is being focused on Shakopee residents, Chaska, and neighboring communities on this side of the river. Cathy Ten Eyck reported that the Jaycees conducted their annual Sand Box filling program this past Saturday and are providing funds for the construction of the football field at Tahpah Park. Laura Matuaka is the new Volunteer Coordinator for Scott County Human Services and she is busy getting acquainted and finding ways to network with existing programs. She will recruit volunteers with the initial focus on services to children because of parameters established by the State Of Minnesota who provide funds. Gary Laurent informed that Rotary is currently deeply involved in a Polio Plus Program with the intent to stamp out polio around the worly within the next few years. The project is currently way ahead of its fund raising goal. The club listens to requests from others for funds and does its best to help. Claude Kolb a. The Lions Club gathers around $90,000.00/year in various fund raising efforts. A lot of this money is allocated to improvements in Lions Park. A new building is being planned for scouting participants. b. The Knights Of Columbus will hold a Spaghetti Feed with proceeds to go to the Shakopee resident who recently received a new heart. It will be held at the K.C. Hall during Derby Days. Phyllis Hussong reported that the Food Shelf usage was up from April, but down from the same time one year ago, possibly indicating that there is a downward trend. In May there were 150 Households served in the two counties (508 individuals) . They are investigating the self supporting program entitled "Fair Share" which might start locally in August. The program requires an individual to do two hours of volunteer work and pay $12/month and then be entitled to receive $30 worth of food. Anyone is eligible. The food comes from surplus foods. The meeting adjourned at 5:40 PM. No meetings in July or August. THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6 at 4:30 PM. TENTATIVE AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, MN July 7, 1988 Chairman Rockne Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda . 3. 7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED• To consider the preliminary plat approval of Hentges First Addition located upon the property North and West of Highway 169 on both sides of Third Avenue. Applicant: Steve Hentges and Lon Carnahan Action: Recommendation to City Council 4 . 7:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider amending of the Shakopee City Code, Section 11.03, Subd. 7 1. 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. 8: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the request for a conditional use permit to construct a tower addition in excess of 45 feet in height upon the property located at 800 West First Avenue. Applicant: Rahr Malting Co. Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #531 6. 8:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the request for a conditional use permit to move-in a principal building to be used as a classroom upon the property located at the corner Of C.R. 15 and loth Ave. (Sweeney School) Applicant: Independent School District #720 Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #532 7. 8:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider the request for a conditional use permit for outdoor storage of rock and stone products upon the property located East of County Road 89 and South of 13th Ave. (E. 419.66' of Lot 1, Block 1, Patch 1st Addition) . Applicant: N.W. Asphalt Inc. Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #530 8. Annexation - Comprehensive Plan Amendment 9. Discussion a. Approval of subdivisions containing flag lots. b. Use of plantings for screening C. Extended occupancy in RV Parks. 10. other Business a. How should the city conduct hearings on zoning subdivision, and other land use matters? from the League Magazine b. 11. Adjourn Douglas Wise City Planner NOTE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. TENTATIVE AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, MN July 7, 1988 Chairman Rockne Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7: 30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3 . 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED• To consider a variance request to allow a 10' rear yard setback instead of the required 30' setback for the property located on the proposed Lot 4, Block 1, Hentges 1st Addition (North of Hwy 169 & East of Third Ave. ) . Anolicant: Steve Hentges Action: Variance Resolution #523 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. Note Meeting Time: 5:00 P.M. TENTATIVE AGENDA Community Development Commission City Hall Council Chambers July 6, 1988 Chrmn. Keane Presiding 1. Call to order at 5:00 P.M. 2. Approval of the minutes - May 4, 1988 3 . Park Land Dedication Fees 4. Discussion Items: (Verbal) a. Port Authority/Econ. Dev. Authority b. Metro East Development Group 5. Economic Development Update: (Verbal) a. Mn Valley Mall Referendum b. Shakopee Valley Motel Project C. 6. Informational Items: a. Real Estate Journal (Verbal) b. CDC Developers Newsletter C. Business Update from City Hall d. CDC Newsletter (Verbal) e. Comp Plan - CDC Participation - (Verbal) £. City Commission Picnic g- 7. Other Business a. Next Meeting - Wednesday, August 3, 1988 - 5: 00 PM b. 8. Adjourn Barry A. Stock Administrative Assistant CITY OF SHAKOPEE Please call Barry or Toni at 445-3650 if you cannot make the meeting. /3 Note Meeting Time: 7:45 A.M. TENTATIVE AGENDA Downtown Ad Hoc Committee City Hall Council Chambers July 6, 1988 Chrmn. Laurent Presiding 1. Call to Order at 7:45 A.M. 2 . Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of the Minutes - June 22, 1988 4. Downtown Mini By-Pass 5. Downtown Redevelopment Action Plan 6. Informational Items: a. b. 7. Other Business a. Next Meeting: July 20, 1988 b. Update on Joint City/Council Meeting C. d. e. 8. Adjourn Barry A. Stock Administrative Assistant CITY OF SHAKOPEE IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING PLEASE CALL BARRY OR TONI AT 445-3650 TO LET THEM KNOW iy PROCEEDINGS OF THE DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE Regular Session City Council Chambers June 22, 1988 Chairman Laurent called the meeting to order at 7.45 A.M. with Commissioners Ruben Ruehle, Melanie Kahleck, Gary Laurent, Terry Forbord, Joe Topic, Mary Keen, Shiela Carlson, Jim Stillman, Harry Koehler, and Jerry Wampach present. Absent were Commissioners Bill Wermerskirchen and Ex-Officio member Tim Keane. Also present was Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant, John Anderson, City Administrator, Dave Hutton, City Engineer and Jeff Stewert, representing Howard, Needles and Associates. Chairman Laurent asked if there were any additions to the agenda. The following items were added to the agenda. Update on Joint City/Council Meeting, Southwest Development Coalition, Port Authority and Minnesota Real Estate Journal. Kahleck/Stillman moved to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried unanimously. Forbord/Topic moved to approve the minutes of the June 8, 1988 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer reported that the preliminary design is proceeding on the downtown mini by-pass and Highway 169. He pointed out that in the review of the final design, several important concerns were raised that need to be addressed before proceeding any further. Mr. Hutton then reviewed the five perameters that were used in preparing the preliminary design plans of the mini by-pass. He noted that using the preliminary design perameters, the elevation of Levee Drive would need to be lowered by approximately 9' directly under the new bridge to provide adequate vertical clearance for vehicles. This would result in a retaining wall along the North side of Levee Drive approximately 21' high and a retaining wall between the alley and the mini by-pass of approximately 4' high. The elevation of the new bridge would then be approximately 6' lower than the existing bridge. At the present time the existing retaining wall along Levee Drive at the 169 Bridge is 8 1/2' high. Mr. Hutton stated that the major concern that the Committee should look at when reviewing the design plans is whether or not the project meets the Committee's and the City Council's goals of tying together the Minnesota River, the trail system and downtown businesses if there is a 21' high retaining wall between Levee Drive and the new mini by-pass for almost two blocks. Mr. Hutton then posed the following questions to the Committee for discussion purposes. 1. What role will Levee Drive play in the future? 2. What is the present and future development status of the property East of the bridge? 1 3. Due to the elevations of Levee Drive, access to the existing recreation building needs to be addressed. 4 . Is the public boat access ramp to the river permanent or can it be relocated elsewhere in Huber Park? 5. What is the effect of the bridge on the new rest room along the DNR Trail? 6. Are the retaining walls desired to separate the mini by-pass from the alley and/or downtown businesses? 7. Can the bridge over the river be raised and what effect does that have on the overall aesthetics and the ability of the project to tie together the river, DNR trail system and downtown businesses. When addressing these concerns, Mr. Hutton noted that there were three interrelated items associated with this project: Namely, 1) the height of the bridge, 2) the elevation of Levee Drive and 3) the elevations of any retaining walls along the by-pass or alleys. Mr. Hutton then reviewed several alternatives illustrating how the interrelated items affect each other. The alternatives reviewed by Mr. Hutton included extending Levee Drive with an underpass clearance of 1416". The second alternative included extending Levee Drive with an underpass clearance of 10' . The third alternative maintained a 10, underpass clearance at Levee Drive and raised the retaining wall along the alley 2' higher to provide a visual separation of the by-pass. A fourth alternative presented called for not extending Levee Drive through the bridge but providing an 8' high pedestrian trail underpass. Mr. Hutton addressed a fifth alternative that was not included in the memo. The alternative called for the construction of the retaining walls along Levee Drive and the pedestrian underpass (81) . Under this alternative, Levee Drive would not be extended at this time. However, if at a later date the City of Shakopee decided it was prudent to extend Levee Drive, it could be done. Discussion then ensued on the various alternatives and the impact of raising or lowering the bridge head elevation. Discussion ensued on the design review committee that was established several years ago to look at various bridge alternatives. Commissioner Forbord stated that he thought that the Committee should be reestablished to look at these design considerations. He also stated that before he would feel comfortable in making a decision on this issue he needed more information on the need for Levee Drive and the proposed land use for Huber Park. Mr. Forbord also questioned whether or not the DNR boat ramp could be relocated. Discussion then turned to the need for an alley along the backs of the buildings on Blocks 3 & 4. Mr. Stewert stated that from a design stand point the elevation of the bridge could realistically be lowered or raised 2 2' . If the bridge were raised or lowered to a level greater than 2' the site alignment for the mini by-pass would be compromised and Mn DOT would likely disapprove of it. Mr. Forbord suggested that the committee not make a decision on this issue until more information can be obtained on the future use of Blocks 3 & 4, the potential impact of eliminating Levee Drive. Mr. Forbord stated that we should gather the opinions of the professional consultants that we have used in the past to analyze the issues as they relate to the mini by-pass. Mr. Stewert explained that the Historical Society review has delayed the project for approximately one year. He noted that the Historical Society had questions on two buildings and the possible location of old foundations that may have historical value. Mr. Stewert reported that the finding of no significant impact would hopefully be completed later this fall. Mr. Forbord stated that he felt the design review committee should be reestablished to protect the interests of the City of Shakopee as the process proceeds. Mr. Anderson questioned whether or not analyzing these issues would delay the design. Mr. Stewart stated that if the City wishes to analyze several of the Committee's concerns, he felt that there were other design elements that could be worked on by the engineers. Mr. Hutton requested Mr. Stewart to explain the impact on the project if the bridge head elevation were raised to the approximate height of the existing bridge. Mr. Stewart stated that if this were done it would add significant cost to the project for retaining walls. He also doubted whether or not Mn DOT would approve raising the bridge more than 2' from where it is currently proposed. Mr. Topic questioned whether or not an informal poll of the Committee members could be taken to determine who is in favor of extending Levee Drive through at this point. An informal poll of the Committee members revealed that the majority of the members did not feel that there was a need for Levee Drive. Mr. Topic stated that he favored the alternative which installed the walls for the possible extension of Levee Drive at some later date in the future. At this time however, he felt that a pedestrian underpass was all that was really needed. Mr. Anderson pointed out that if Levee Drive is not extended under the bridge, it would cut off automotive access to the river boat launch. The City would then be responsible for providing an access from the East to the access. The estimated cost to construct a road access to the existing boat ramp from the East would range between $20,000 and $40,000. Forbord/Rahleck moved to have the consultants do a traffic analysis on the need for Levee Drive with assuming the completion of all the downtown redevelopment elements including the mini by- pass and have Westwood analyze what type of impact that it would have on the original plan and additionally have investigate need for an alley on Block 3 & 4 and whether or not the boat launch 3 could be relocated. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Forbord suggested that the Planning Commission take a look at the land use planning for Blocks 3 & 4 in downtown Shakopee. Mr. Anderson stated that it is not common practice for the Planning Commission to simply analyze the land use for two specific blocks. He felt that the Planning Commission would simply refer this issue back to the Downtown Committee for their review and analysis. Mr. Forbord stated that he felt it was important for the consultants and/or staff to analyze the impact of the elevation of the mini by-pass on the development of Blocks 3 '& 4. Forbord/Keane moved to reestablish the Mini By-pass Design Advisory Committee to make sure that the City's best interest in the short and long term remain intact. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Laurent then gave a brief report on the status of the joint City Council/Downtown Committee meeting. He reported that he has received a favorable response from Mayor Lebens and that the meeting will likely be held as a work session at some place other than City Hall sometime in July. Mr. Forbord then gave a report on the Metro East Development Group that has been formed by communities and development interests on the Eastern side of the Metropolitan area. He questioned whether or not the City of Shakopee could work with surrounding communities to establish a similar coalition. Mr. Stock noted that he would bring this issue before the CDC for their consideration. Mr. Forbord questioned whether or not the City of Shakopee had investigated the formation of a Port Authority to insist in encouraging development in downtown Shakopee. Mr. Stock stated that the CDC has discussed this issue in the past and that he would complete further investigation and place it on the CDC's next agenda. Mr. Forbord stated that the City Council approved placing an ad in the Minnesota Real Estate Journal Market Focus Section in cooperation with the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Stock noted that the issue would not be circulated until the end of July. Kahleck/Carlson moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 A.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock Recording Secretary 4 l5 MINNESOTA VALLEY REC,E SAVINGS BANK June 29, 1988 John Anderson City Administrator 129 E. 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson: We're Shakopee's newest savings bank and we want you to know that we're "Now Open" in the Shakopee Professional Building located at 327 Marschall Road. Minnesota Valley Savings Bank is a Federally Chartered Savings Bank which opened for business in Mankato on August 17, 1983. In November of 1986, we opened our branch office in Waseca. The office in Shakopee is our second full service branch. We enjoy the highest net worth ratio of any savings and loan in Minnesota and our deposits are insured up to $100,000 by the FSLIC. In addition to checking and savings accounts, we offer consumer, mortgage and business loans. The enclosed brochure highlights additional bank services we provide. During the next three weeks, we'll be serving coffee and cookies in our lobby and we invite you to stop in and meet us. Also, be sure to register for our weekly drawing and your chance to win a Skotch gas grill. We look forward to meeting you and hope you will be able to attend our open house in the near future. Spi5erely, I , Jamewionte/�%?�G Jeanette Ball Assista t Branch Manager Savings Supervisor How Office Branch Ofc Branch Office 915 S. Front Street 327 Marschall Road Nonhridge Shopping Center Mankato, MN 56001 Shakopee. MN 55379 Waseca.MN 56093 (612)6963902 (507) 835-81M (507) 625-8721 Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Utility Billing Software (Informational) Date: June 30, 1988 Council authorized the purchase of utility billing software from Quest. The vendor has failed to deliver the product agreed upon and may be going out of business. Staff is searching for a comparable software package and unless directed otherwise, will assume that Council approval for acquisition of the Quest package will apply to the acquisition of a comparable package. GV:mmr CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE,SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 44536M np July 1, 1988 Theodore Hukriede 1993 Shakopee Ave E. Shakopee, MN. 55379 Dear Mr. Hukriede, We have received your note on your storm drainage utility bill. I know that some people have a hard time making ends meet and can sympathize with your situation. However, there is no process or procedure for reduction of bills due to economic situations or age. It maybe of no consolation, but there will be no additional penalties or interest added to your bill for 1988. If a bill is not paid, it goes on the property tax statement the following year and this is split into two payments which may be easier to handle, although it makes the tax payment bigger. All improved parcels in the City are billed for the storm drainage utility. Sincerely, igg ox nd an a Director GV:mmr cc: Councilmembers The Heart of Progress Valley AN EQUAL OPPONNNIIY EMPLOYER CITY OF SHAKOPEE STORM DRAINAGE BILL SHAKO E SIR:T ttA r• OR: 1993 SHAKOPEE AVE. E .,� _ SEE -AMOUNT ACCOUNT NUMBER - IAR 14.45 'CITYOF ,SHAKOPEE - - - - I BIwNGPERKIO 129- EAST 1ST-AVENUE �1O"' SHAKOPEE, MN '55379� ro I i ✓TO: THEODORE HUK �.�f� `/'^:�✓-�/W l 1993 SHAKOPEEAVE E SHAKOPEE MN 55379 MAKE TO: F SHAKOPE MAO Iq;g5 . , o TES - 7=05Z 53:}-21- -4 -REHINDER=THIS: ACCDUNT-"IS' PAST DUE TLYI . PLEASE PAY' 'PROMPI KEEP THIS STUB FOR VOUR RECORpS 1 RENRN�THYIS pORRON WITH PAYMENT � 4ue- 4�� TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 5, 1988 Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding 11 Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. Recess for HRA Meeting Reconvene 21 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 3] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 4] 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. ) *5] Approval of Minutes of June 7, 1988 6] Communications: a] AMM Bulletin re: Constitutional Challenge to 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill b] Barbara M. Yanisch, Catholic Charities re: rural outreach program report c] AMM Legislative Policy Committees 7] 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - Vacation of Apgar Street from 1st Avenue to 2nd Avenue 8] Boards and Commissions: Energy & Transportation Committee *a] Community Energy Council Grant Amendment *b] Dial-A-Ride Saturday Service Evaluation 9] Reports from Staff: (Council will take a 10 minute break around 9:00 P.M. ) a] Dust Control Request b] Community Center Study Proposal c] Canterbury Downs Use of Gate No. 5 d] Upper Valley Drainage Right-of-Way Acquisition e] Approve Bills in Amount of $1,572.871.41 *£] Lions Park Trail Extension *g] Extension of Employment of Planning Intern *h] Initiation of Litigation Against Donald Parrott *i] Audit Services for FY 1988 J049245TUTMPV A4T0 uosaapuy •x uyor •N'd OO:L gp 886T '6T ATnr 'Appsany o; uano Cpy IZT [0 [q (aATgpguay) 2ppu91RD gabpng 686T [p :SSauTsng 291q40 ITT SS X00T9 UT A91TV aqg og s4uamanoadm2 L-886T uo buTapaH V buTTTRO pup gaodau y buTATaOSH - LT6Z *OK 'saH [qx 409COad 9AT20 buTTaaTA T-886T uo spill buTgdaooy - SZ6Z •0H •saH [6 aanaS k1u4TUPS anuaAy ygxTS Z-886T uo SPTH buTgdaooy - VZ6Z -ON 'saH I3 uOTgpnaasaad guamanpd 8-886T so; supTd buTaapa0 pup soads 9 supTd buTAoaddy - CZ6Z 'OH •saH [a gabpng 8861 ayg buTpuamy - ZZ6Z -OR 'sad [P. Apd-gnoy4TM-9np97 BUT -papbaH AOTTOd Tauu0sa9d aqg buipuamy - TZ6Z 'ON 'saH [0s goa Coad gsaM SATa0 buTTaaTA T-886T 9T44 a0; Agaadoad 3o uoTgTSTnbOy buTZTaoygny - OZ6Z *ON •saH Iq* S-L86T goa Coad abpuTuaO AOTTVA aaddn ayg ao; Agaadoad 30 uoT4TsTnb0y buTZTaoggny - 6T6Z -ON 'saH Ips :Sa0upuTpaO Pup suoTgnTOsaH IOT paay TUTguaPTsaH UT sx0nay Tang y auTTospy ;O buTxapd [A sguamgsn Cpy SMTpTO 8Oupansu2 In aogoadsu2 buTsnOH p buTaTH [g agppdn sngpgs - 409Coad abpuTpaQ AaTTRA aaddn S-L86T Is Z-L86T guampuamy 409agu00 - g0a Coad unOgum00 Z-L861 Ia dpaM aaal Z-LS61 adposgaaags un04uno0 [b• uoTSTATpgnS sgybTaH UOZTaOH [d• guamaaaby uoTsuagxg g0paguo0 - gaaags gaxapm 9-886T [0. SguamaAOadmI uoT40asa84uI 69T/T0T ApnybTH [u AOTTod guamssassy Tvloads uTp=9:tVM [m sgaodaH Tenuuy L86T IT* saa;supay pun;aaguI [x: abpxOpd 90ugansuI a;TT 9 ggTpaH dnoaO ;o buTPPTS IC• :p9nuT4uo0 33p4S moa; sgaodaH [6 -Z- abed 886T 'S ATnr vamaw BAIiviNai TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting July 7 , 1988 Chairman Steven Clay presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 2 . Approve the June 7, 1988 and June 21, 1988 Meeting Minutes 3 . Other Business a. b. 4 . Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 7, 1988 Chairman Clay called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. with Comm. Wampach, Zak and Scott present. Comm. Vierling was absent. Also present were Mayor Lebens, John Anderson, City Administator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Julius Collar II, City Attorney; Douglas Wise, City Planner; James Hutton, City Engineer; Dennis Kraft, Executive Director and Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant. Wampach/Zak moved to approve the minutes of April 5, 1988 and May 3, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. The Administrative Assistant commented on the Residential Rental Rehab Grant Program. He stated that on May 3, 1988 the HRA moved to direct the appropriate City Officals to inform the MHFA that the HRA was interested in participating the Rental Rehab Grant Program. He stated that it would be staffs recommendation to approve the grant program summary. Wampach/Scott moved to approve the Rental Rehab Grant Program summary as presented by Staff. Motion carried. Comm Zak voted against this. The Executive Director then commented on the Joint Powers Agreement between the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority which would allow for the purchase of the formser Women's Correctional faccility in Shakopee. The SCHRA is requesting that the Shakopee HRA enter into the agreement. The City of Shakopee originally expressed interest and obtained an option to purchase the land, though the City later terminated that option without exercising its right to prachase. The procedure which must be followed if the land is to be pruchased requires that the HRA enter into an agreement with the SCHRA which will allow the purchase of the facility via a joint powers agreement. Mr. William Jaffa and Ms. Marjorie Henderson were also present to comment on the agreement. Ms. Henderson stated that the closing on this property has to be done by July 1, 1988. There was a general discussion by the Commissioners, Staff and the representatives from the SCHRA. Resolution 88-1, a Resolution Approving in Concept, A Joint Powers Agreement between the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority Permitting Purchase of the Former Minnesota Women's Correctional Institute for Future Development was reviewed. Zak/Scott moved to Delete: WHEREAS, it is presently anticipated that the site will be developed for use as a multi-purpose County Criminal Justice Center. from Resolution 88-1. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak moved to approve as amended in concept Resolution 88- 1, A Resolution Approving in Concept, A Joint Powers Agreement between the Scott County Housing and Fledevelopment Authority and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority Permitting Purchase of the Former Minnesota Women's Correctional Institute for Future Development. Motion carried unanimously. The Exeuctive Director asked that the "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED" be more clariafied. It should read: by the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority Board of Commissioners that a joint powers agreement is hereby authorized for the purposes set fouth above and under terms and conditions in concept to be approved by this board. Wampach/Zak moved to approve Resolution 88-1 as amended (above) . Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Zak moved to direct staff to draft the joint powers agreement giving the city detail authority over the consturction of the facility if not in the best interest of the community. Motion carried unanimously. The Executive Director then commented on the possible location of a Christian Broadcast Station EVBM TV-45 in the City of Shakopee. There was a general discussion by the Commission. It was the consensus of the Commission that the Executive Director indicate to KVBM TV-45 that further action would be taken at this time. Wampach/Zak moved to adjour. Motion carried unanimously. Metting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Dennis Kraft Executive Director Jakki K. Snyder Recordingg Secretary HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL MEETING SHAKOPEE, MN JUNE 21, 1988 Chairman Clay called the meeting of the Housing & Redevelopment Authority to order at 7 :05 P.M. with Comm. Zak, Scott, Wampach present. Absent: Comm. Vierling. Also present: John Anderson, City Administrator; Doug Wise, City 'Planner; Judith Cox, City Clerk and Barry Meyer, Assistant City Attorney. Wampach/Scott offered Resolution No. 88-2, Resolution Authorizing the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority to Handle the Housing Duties of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:10 P.M. Jane VanMaldeghem Recording Secretary J OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 7, 1988 Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. with Councilmembers Wampach, Scott, Zak and Clay present. Councilwoman Vierling was absent. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Julius Collier, City Attorney; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; David Hutton, City Engineer; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Uirector, Barry Stock; Administrative Assistant, and Doug Wise, City Planner. Mayor Lebens recognized the interested citizens in the audience. Mr. Joe Notermann commented on the dust problem on the gravel road by the old reformatory. He asked that chemicals be placed on it to keep the dust down. Clay/Wampach moved to direct City Staff to bring back information to the Council before the next council meeting on dust control and other improvements to the road. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Wampach moved to approve the consent business. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Wampach/Zak moved to approve the minutes of May 10, 1988 meeting. Motion carried. Councilman Clay abstained. Clay/Wampach moved to receive and file the certificate of appreciation to the City of Shakopee from the Scott County Transportation Coalition. Motion carried unanimously. The City Administrator commented on the League of Minnesota Cities proposed constitutional amendment LMC Dues Adjustment. Wampach/Clay moved to authorize Shakopee representatives to vote for the Constitutional Amendment for League of Minnesota Cities dues. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimously. Noes: None Motion carried. Zak/Clay moved to open the public hearing on the improvements to 11th Avenue between CR79 and Minnesota Street. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer commented on the improvements of 11th Ave. He reviewed the costs and gave examples of what the estimated assessments would be for the improvements. There was a general discussion by Council and Staff regarding the improvements/costs. City Council June 7, 1988 Page 2 Mayor Lebens asked if there were any questions from the audience. Mrs. Roger Schmeig asked how the assessments would be taxed. The City Engineer responded. Wampach/Clay moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Clay offered Resolution No 2905, A Resolution Ordering and Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for 11th Avenue from County Road 79 to Minnesota Street, Project No. 1988-5, and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimously. Noes: None. Motion carried. Wampach/Zak moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute an agreement with Pioneer Engineering for the design of 11th Avenue at a cost not to exceed $5,300. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimously. Noes: None. Motion carried. Zak/Scott moved to open the public hearing of the appeal of Mary Dixon from the Planning Commission's denial of a variance to construct an attached double garage at 314 E 8th Ave. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner commented on appeal. He reviewed the Planning Commissions actions and the actions of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. There were many comments by the people in the audience regarding the garage. Mary Dixon commented on the size of garage she wished to construct. Hellard Bachman was opposed to the garage. He stated that there are 5 others in the area that do not comply with City Codes and how bad they look. Charles Lipke stated that it is not feasible to have that size of a garage on that small of a house. Val Pink also commented on the feasibility of the garage. Steve Schmitz stated that it would depreciate the values of the other homes in the area. City Council June 7, 1988 Page 3 Clay/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Zak moved to deny the granting of variance Resolution of the City Council No. CC-524 for Mary Dixon, 314 East 8th Avenue. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous. Noes: None. Motion carried. The City Planner then commented on the Comprehensive Plan amendment for the proposed annexation area. He stated that at the meeting of April 5, 1988 the City Council received a recommendation from the Planning Commission to submit a comprehensive plan amendment to the Metro Council for a sewer service to the proposed annexation area located south of the Senior High and west of CR 79. Following tabling of this matter by the City Council at that meeting, staff was directed to meet with the Metro Council staff to review the proposed alternatives. There was a general discussion by Council and Staff at this time. Scott/Zak moved to table this item until the Planning Commission has a chance to look at it at their meeting on June 9, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. The City Clerk then commented on the request from the Jaycees for a temporary 3.2 beer license for Derby Days. She provided an ordinance for Council consideration which would allow issuance of a temporary beer license with a limited cancellation clause for public liability insurance. Terry Joos commented to the Council regarding the license. Mike Pennington also commented to the Council. Zak/Wampach offered Ordinance No 245, an Ordinance No. 245, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter S, Entitled "Liquor, Beer, And Wince Licensing and Regulation" By Amending Section 5.07 And Adopting By Reference Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 And Section 5.99, Which Among Other Things contain Penalty Provisions, and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous. Noes: None. Motion carried. Wampach/Clay moved to table the application of the Shakopee Jaycees for a temporary 3.2 beer license. Motion carried unanimously. City Council June 7, 1988 Page 4 Zak/Clay moved for a 10 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Clay moved to reconvene the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Jim Streefland, Jaspers, Streefland & Company, reviewed the 1987 Financial Report. After a discussion on the report the following motion was made. Zak/Scott moved to. receive and file the 1987 Financial Report. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner then commented on the recommended changes to the l City Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. One item not discussed at the previous Council meetings was the maximum street grades allowed by the City's Subdivision Ordinance. There was a general discussion regarding the amendments. Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Ordinance No. 246, with the amendments regarding the street grading for local streets be raised from 5% to 7%. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2897 amending the Energy and Transportation Committee's Enabling Resolution to expand the responsibilities of the Energy and Transportation Committee to include solid waste management, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved that the appropriate City Officials be authorized to enter into the recycling program agreement between the City of Shakopee and Scott County funding City costs associated the operation and administration of the City's recycling program. (Approved under consent business) . The Administrative Assistant then commented on the 1989 LAWCON grant application. He stated that the preliminary applications for 1989 outdoor recreation grant programs are due by July 8, 1988. It would be appropriate that the City Council discuss whether or not to apply for such funds. The two programs for this year would be the traditional grant program and the athletic facilities grant program. The traditional grant is funded with Federal LAWCON funds and the athletic facility grant is funded with state funds. City Council June 7, 1988 Page 5 Zak/Scott moved to direct the appropriate City Officials to submit a preliminary traditional and athletic LAWCON application for improvements to Eastside Park for calendar year 1989. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous. Noes: None Motion carried. ' The Administrative Assistant then commented on the ad for the real estate journal. Scott/Wampach moved to not place an ad in the Real Estate Journal. Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Scott and Lebens. Noes: Zak and Clay. Motion carried. The Administrative Assistant then commented on the Huber Park Trail and observation Platform. He stated that on June 3, 1988 bids were received and publicly opened for the Huber Park Trail and Observation Platform project. He stated that the City Engineer reviewed the bids and the low bid of $107,729. 65 of Job Erection and Engineers, Inc. was slightly above the Engineer's estimate of $107,198.00, but it would be staff's recommendation that the bid from Job Erection and Engineering, Inc be accepted. Clay/Zak moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2911 accepting the bid on the Huber Park Trail and Observation Platform Project No 1987-15 to Job Erection and Engineering Inc. PO Box 316, Shakopee MN, 55739 in the about of $107,729, 65. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Zak, Scott, Clay, and Wampach Noes: Mayor Lebens The Administrative Assistant then commented on the "Derby Days". He stated that he has been working with the Chamber of Commerce on the community celebration scheduled for June 25th and 26th. He reviewed the schedule of events and the funding needs. Clay/Scott moved to approve the Chamber of Commerce's request for inkind assistance for the proposed Derby Days Celebration and grant permission for the following: 1. Permission to block off Lewis Street between First and Third Avenues and Second Avenue between Lewis and Sommerville Streets from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on June 25th and 26th, 1988. 2. Permission for the sale of goods on public property. 3. Permission to utilize City Maintenance crews to assist in preparing for the celebration and to assist in clean-up following the event. City Council June 7, 1988 Page 6 4. The provision of one police officer during the day on June 25th, and 26th and one police officer for the Gary and the Beachcombers Concert at the Shakopee Municipal Pool on the evening of June 26th. 5. City Council permission allowing sky divers to land on City Property. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Wampach moved to set the mileage reimbursement rate for the use of personal vehicles for City business at $.22.5/mile effective July 1, 1988. (Approved under consent business) . The City Administrator then commented on the Employee Exemption Status under the FLSA (Fair Labor Standards Act) and the positions which he recommended that they be classified as exempt from receiving over-time. There were 5 positions that were discussed; Administrative Assistant, Planner II, Deputy Police Chief, Inspector and Recreation Supervisor II. The affected employees are currently at the top pay plan step for their position except the Administrative Assistant position. Three of the people filling these positions were also present to comment on why they thought they should not be changed to being classified as exempt at this time. There was a general discussion by Council and Staff. Wampach/Scott moved to maintain the status quo of the current Employee Exemption Status until the people filling the currently unclassified positions are changed. Motion carried unanimously. There was then a general discussion regarding the Pulltab Licensing. It was the consensus of the Council that someone within the association should be responsible for the sale and collection of the pulltabs. Scott/Wampach to draft an amendment to the present ordinance for the issuing of licenses for pulltabs. Motion carried with Cncl. Clay opposed. Wampach/Clay moved for a 5 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Clay moved to reconvene the meeting at 11:55 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Wampach moved to authorize the Personnel Coordinator and Public Works department to advertise, select, and make a recommendation to Council to hire a Labor Equipment Operator for the Street Division as authorized by the 1988 budget. (Approved under consent business) . City Council June 7, 1988 Page 7 The City Engineer then commented on State Aid Streets. He stated that Council directed staff to enter into an agreement with the SOO Line Railroad for the removal of spur tracks thru Atwood and Scott Streets. He stated that it would be staffs recommendation that the state aid route be changed from Apgar Street to Scott Street from 1st to 6th Avenue. ' Clay/Zak moved to authorize staff to apply to MN/Dot to redesignate Scott Street from 1st to 2nd and 2nd from Scott to Apgar as a state aid route and remove Apgar Street from 1st to 2nd from the State Aid system per exhibit A. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer then reviewed the Upper Valley Drainage Project - Amendment to Extension Agreement. He stated that when the City entered into the original agreement with OSM, obtaining permits ` was not part of the scope of services. To obtain and process all permits, prepare and Environmental Assessment Worksheet and prepare the plans/specifications required to adhere to the permit requirements an amendment to the extension agreement of up to $25,000.00 would be needed. Wampach/Clay moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to enter into an amended extension agreement with Orr-Schelen- Mayeron and Associates to a maximum amount of $25,000. 00 for the Upper Valley Drainage Project. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Zak, Scott, and Clay Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried. The City Engineer then commented on the Meadows 1st Addition Reimbursement Agreement. He stated that the current City special assessment policy stated that the assessments for new residential street construction will be based on a 36 foot wide pavement and the assessment for new watermain construction will be based on 6 inch watermains, with any costs due to larger sized watermain/streets shall not be assessed to the property owners. In the Meadow's lst Addition subdivision, Vierling Driveis being constructed as a 50 foot wide collector street. The approximate cost to the developer for constructing a 50 foot wide collector street rather than a 36 foot local street is approximately $9,000. All the watermains in the subdivision are being constructed either as 8 or 12 inch watermains versus the standard 6 inch. The approximate cost to the developer for constructing oversized mains is $19, 000. He ended with saying that the City will reimburse the developer for the costs associated with oversizing the streets while SPUC will reimburse for the oversized mains. City Council June 7, 1988 Page 8 Clay/Zak moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute a reimbursement Agreement between the City and the Developer of the Meadows 1st Addition subdivision for the oversized streets and watermains for a total cost of $28, 000. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. The City Engineer then commented on the Downtown Streetscape Project No 1987-3 Atwood Street Sewer Extension. Clay/Zak moved to . authorize the installation of the sanitary sewer line in Atwood Street between 1st and 2nd Avenue and concur with the City Engineer's recommendation that no assessments will be levied against the railroad property until such time as the property may be buildable and that should the property hook up to this sanitary sewer in the future a connection fee of $1500 will be charged. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Clay moved to authorize Change Order No. 7 in the amount Of 19,109. 35 addition to the contract for the Downtown Streetscape Project No. 1987-2 to Hardrives, Inc. of Maple Grove Minnesota. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Clay/Wampach moved to execute Change Order No 8 to add the installation of a new watermain and service laterals in Atwood Street between 1st and 2nd Avenue using the unit prices covered under the current City Contract with Hardrives, Inc. for the Downtown Streetscape Project No 1987-2 at an approximate cost to the contract of $20,000, with SPDC having agreed to pay $10, 000. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Wampach/Clay to approve installation of the watermain to the railroad tracks to complete the loop at an approximate cost of $22,000 if paid for by SPUC. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Scott/Clay moved to deny participation in the cost with SPUC on the installation of a new watermain in Atwood Street between 2nd and 3rd Avenues ($5,000 SPUC and $16,000 City) . Motion carried with Cncl. Wampach opposed. City Council June 7, 1988 Page 9 Clay/Scott moved to authorize staff to proceed with constructing Phase I of the Upper Valley Drainage Project, from the Upper Valley to 4th Avenue, and revise the plans to reflect to stage construction; and notify MN/DOT to resume preparation of the shared funding agreement. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Wampach moved to approve the application and grant an on- Sale 3.2 beer license to the Church of St Mark at the 3rd Ave and Scott Street playground for July 30 and 31, 1988. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved . to authorize proper City Officials to enter into an agreement for participation in Urban Corps Program between the City of Minneapolis and the City of Shakopee for the period July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to approve the bills in the amount of $142,163.57. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Clay/Wampach offered and moved Resolution No. 2909, a Resolution amending Resolution No. 2817 adopting the 1988 Budget. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Zak moved to offer and adopt Ordinance No 244, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 5, entitled "Liquor, Beer and Wine Licensing and Regulation" by Amending Section 5.45, Subdivision 1 and Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 and Section 5.99, Which Among Other Things Contain Penalty Provisions. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No. 2903, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and ordering Advertisement for Bids for Vierling Drive from CR 17 to the east, Project No. 1988-1. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2906, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on an Improvement to Market Street from 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue, Project No 1988. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2900, A Resolution Declaring Adequacy of Petition and Ordering PReparation of a Report for Alley Improvements, Block 55 Between Lewis and Sommerville Streets and 4th and 5th Avenues. (Approved under consent business) . city Council June 7, 1988 Page 10 Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2901, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project No 1988-2. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2904 Authorizing the Execution of Two Separate License Agreements Between the Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Company and the City of Shakopee. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No. 2910, A Resolution Authorizing the Sale of Property to Malkerson Motors, Inc. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2907, A Resolution Authorizing the Execution of An Escrow Agreement Relating to Meadows lst Addition. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2899, A Resolution Appointing Judges of Election and Establishing Compensation. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2902, A Resolution Initiating the Vacation of Apgar Street Between 1st and 2nd Avenues within the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2989, A Resolution Apportioning Assessment Among New Parcels Created as a Result of the Subdivision of Eagle Creek Junction 2nd Addition. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to offer and adopt Resolution No 2908, A Resolution Apportioning Assessments Among New Parcels Created as a Result of a Lot Split to Outlot A, Prairie House 1st Addition. (Approved under consent business) . The item regarding Mrs. Nagel's glasses was continued to the next scheduled meeting. Clay/Zak moved to the authorize the Public Works Dept to Hire Barbara Potthier as a Secretary/Receptionist commencing June 22, 1988, at a Step 2 salary of $6.55/hour, with a 6 month probationary period, and pro-rated employment benefits. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Councilman Wampach commented on the Sprinkling ban. City Council June 7, 1988 Pahe 11 The City Attorney commented on the agreement between the Soo Line and the City of Shakopee relating to the vacation of property from Apgar. Clay/Scott offered Resolution No. 2912, A Resolution Approving Clarification of Track Removal and ' Grade Crossing Agreement. Motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney reported that the appeal to the annexation of the Carl Vierling property has been denied. Zak/Scott moved to -adjourn to Tuesday, June 21, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 12:55 p.m. Judith S. Cox a C a �K� Sny r Re o ing Secreta as ociation of B U L L E T I N metropolitan PE:.-F c municipalities Jane 15 , 1988 JUN ?198f 1 TO: Mayors and Managers CITY OF: ,HAKOW E RE: CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO 1988 OMNIBUS TAX BILL The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities' (AMM) Board of Directors would like your input and advice on a matter of some urgency and potential major city impact. The AMM Board of Directors is considering a request from the Municipal Legislative Commission (MLC) to participate in a legal challenge to a portion of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill. BACKGROUND: The MLC which is composed of 15 metropolitan suburbs has voted to pursue a legal challenge to the ' disparity reduction aid' provided as part of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill . The lawsuit will challenge the 'disparity aid ' based on Minnesota Constitution Article X, Section I, which reads in part : 'Taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects and shall be levied and collected for public purposes - - (emphasis added ) Article 4, Section 26, Subd . 3 of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill establishes a "disparity reduction aid" which has the effect of "buying down" local government mill rates to approximately 128 mills. The cost of this program is $63.2 million in 1989• If the combined mill rate of schools, counties and cities exceeds 128 mills , the State will provide disparity aid to local units of government to be used to reduce the mill rate to 128. This policy is not in itself unconstitutional . However , the metnod the Legislature adopted to distribute disparity aid can create a nonuniform tax on the same class of subjects by the same taxin6 authority and therefore may be constitutionally flawed . A nonuniform tax result can occur because disparity aid is distributed to local units of government but the aid cannot be used to lower the tax rate citywide or countywide or throughout the school district but rather it can be used only to lower the tax - ate within a portion of a city, county or school district. -1 - 183 universfty avenue east, st. pad, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-0008 For example, two taxpayers living in houses on different sides of a street with identical market values and receiving identical county services, could pay different county tax rates. This could happen because one house is in City A (where the combined total mill rate is over 128 mills) and one house is in City B (where the combined total mill rate is less than 128 mills) . The disparity reduction aid received by the county can only be used to reduce the county tax rate in city A in this example. As you see , the county tax rate would not be uniform on the same class of subjects and would seem to raise a constitutional question. STATUS: The MLC expects to have the legal brief filed by June 22nd . or 23rd . and has selected outside legal counsel to work on the case. It is their intention to file this suit on behalf of an ' individual taxpayer ' . The suit if successful , could prevent the distribution of the ' disparity reduction aid ' and since the distribution of this aid would effect the levies that will be set by local units for payable 1989, it is hoped that the suit will be decided before cities certify their 1989 levies (final date is October 25) . The MLC asked the AMM and others to participate in this legal challenge. The AMM Board considered this matter on short noticeat the June board meeting and after a lengthy discussion , decided to defer a final decision to the July 7th. board meeting. The Board :nd Staff would like your advice and input on this matter to enable the Board to make a decision that will reflect the membership feelings on wheather or not to participate and if so, hen to what extent and in what manner. NEXT STEPS: Please feel free to contact individual board members (roster enclosed) or AMM staff members : Roger Peterson/Vern Peterson (227-4000) to discuss this matter in more detail . If your city would like to participate or consider participating directly is this matter , please feel free to contact Bob Renner at 893-5550 . Mr . Renner is the Legislative counsel for the MLC. WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU! Sincerely , � , a Gary B -tian , AMM President Maplewood Councilmember -2- 6-1-88 AMM BOARD OF DIRECTORS Q� 1988 - 1989 PRESIDENT •Mr. Gary W. Bastian 2997 Chisholm Pkwy. Councilmember Maplewood, MN. 55109 City of Maplewood 331-8955 VICE PRESIDENT •Mr. Walter Fehst 4221 Lake Road City Manager Robbinsdale, MN, 55422 City of Robbinsdale 537-4534 PAST PRESIDENT •Mr. Neil W. Peterson 9818 Cavell Circle Councilmember Bloomington, MN. 55438 City of Bloomington 881-8210 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Mr. Mentor "Duke" Addicks 325M City Hall Legislative Liaison Minneapolis , MN. 55415 City of Minneapolis 348-5907 Ms. Karen Anderson 3311 Martha Lane Councilmember Minnetonka, MN. 55345 City of Minnetonka 938-2808 Mr. Larry Bakken 2361 Kyle Ave. , No. Councilmember Golden Valley, MN. 55427 City of Golden Valley w. 641-2189 H. 521-6011 •Mr. Mark Bernhardson Box 66 Administrator Crystal Bay, MN, 55323 City of Orono 473-7358 Mr. Ed Fitzpatrick 5273 Horizon Drive, NE Councilmember Fridley, MN. 55421 City of Fridley 572-9615 Mr . Kevin Frazell 750 So. Plaza Drive Administrator Mendota Heights, MN. 55120 City of Mendota Heights 452-1850 •Ms. Carol Johnson City Hall Room 307 Councilmember Minneapolis, MN. 55415 City of Minneapolis 348-2213 Ms. Sharon Klumpp 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. _ Asst. City Manager St. Louis Park, MN. 55416 City of St. Louis Park 924-2500 -1- •Mr. Bob C. Long 713 City Hall Councilmember St. Paul , MN. 55102 City of St. Paul w. 298-4473 h. 690-1212 Ms. Diane Lynch 347 City Hall Asst, to the Mayor St. Paul , MN. 55102 City of St. Paul 298-4323 Mr. Gerald Marshall 7538 Lee Ave. , No. Councilmember Brooklyn Park, MN. 55443 City of Brooklyn Park 933-8500 Mr . Donald Ramstad 6811 Balsom Lane Councilmember Maple Grove, MN. 55369 City of Maple Grove 725-5752 Mayor Bill Seed 5979 Bacon Ave City of Inver Grove Heights Inver Grove Heights, MN. 55075 638-7471 *Ms. Leslie C. Turner 6701 Parkwood Lane Councilmember Edina, MN. 55436 City of Edina 938-0912 Ms. Gloria Vierling 1461 Co. Rd. 79 Councilmember Shakopee, MN. 55379 City of Shakopee 445-6440 Mayor John Walker 1660 Woodbury Road City of Newport Newport, MN. 55055 w.p.221-7551 h. 459-9844 *Executive Committee Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) 183 University Ave. , East St. Paul , Minnesota 55101 227-4008 -2- CACCHARMS o rvwmwes e OF THE ARCHDIOCESEOF ST.FAIL hrvDMIrvrvFAPIXJS (613�Ml C- K CamurRy SaNm tar¢ mck F,L•;e�,..,;;y �, aNrW.b,rar June 15, 1986 �`• JUN2 21988 RLRAL OLRRFACH PROGRAM REPORT FDR YOUR INFaRKgTION C,Ty OF SHAKOPEE As an elected official, you may want to be informed of a local effort underway to develop a one-stop information, referral, and service center targeted to serve the concerns of rural people and communities. My name is Barbara Mader yanisch and I work with the Catholic Charities Rural Outreach Program officed in Montgomery, Minnesota.- Currently, I am coordinating this cc munity-driven effort to develop a u,e-stop center. A steering committee made up of residents of the Rice, Scott, and LeSueur county area has begun meeting recently to address the start-up tasks and planning required to develop the center. Members of this committee as of this time are as follows: NAME TOWN OF RESIDENCE - Ralph Hardrickson Kilkenny Lisa Filan Kilkenny Gene Kunz Morristown Dave Topp Northfield Sue Meyer New Prague Ellie Depuydt St. Peter I am serving as staff resource to this committee. R full board of directors will be organized this fall. The center's location, which is yet to be determined, will serve Rice, Scott, and LeSut r counties es .v-l1 a- nearby communities in neighboring counties. The center will cooperate with existing local services in addressing the following: 1) The future of the family farm; 2) The future of rural communities; 3) Immediate and long-range legal, financial, and tax concerns as related to family-run farms and other rural businesses; 4) Water and soil conservation; and 5) Changes in lifestyle due to leaving farming, relocating, illness, disability, death of a spouse, and so on, including counseling and other support services for those in such transition. 64 FOIkVr Nrayli;Male mnu Wtiana r1a rM Wry.aM-.0 ..k"I McrttlnM E C-11 11.4erttl—If v—v for Famlra aM<Mtlren. -2- If you have any questions about the proposed center, want to offer ideas and suggestions, or would like to get involved as a volunteer or board member, please contact me at 612-364-7321. You may call anytime, day or evening, and leave a message. I will be happy to return your call. Sincerely, Barbara Mader Y h Rural Outreach f BULLETINas ociation of JUN2 a metropolitan 1988 munici alities p CITY OF SHAKOP- June 21 , 1988 . TO: AMM Member City Officials FROM: Gary Bastian, President and Maplewood Councilmember RE: MEMBERSHIP ON AMM LEGISLATIVE POLICY COMMITTEES -BE PART OF THE AMM VOICE -BECOME INVOLVED -MAKE YOUR CITYS' POSITION FELT IF YOU ARE NOT CURRENTLY A MEMBER OF AN AMM LEGISLATIVE POLICY COMMITTEE , please take a few minutes to read the brief descriptions of the five standing committees (on back) and volunteer a small amount of your time to make an impact by filling in and returning the attached form. The committees will begin meeting in late July and will meet every other week through September . The Board of Directors will be making committee appointments on July 7th. and would like a clear indication of those officials who are willing to devote time and energy to serve on one or more of these committees. Mayors, Councilmember, Managers, and Administrators will receive this Bulletin individually. However , if other city employees such as finance directors , housing officers , planners, etc. would like to serve, please submit their names. The Board would also welcome suggestions for specific issues or concerns to be studied by the committees. Please contact either Roger Peterson or Vern Peterson in the AMM Office (227-4008) if you have questions. NOTE: PRESENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL CONTINUE FOR ONE MORE YEAR AND NEED NOT RESPOND TO THIS BULLETIN. -1- 183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-0008 COMMITTEE DESCRIPTIONS: 1 . METROPOLITAN AGENCIES COMMITTEE (Kevin Frazell, Chair) Considers legislative issues and non-legislative issues related to the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Commissions. The Committee monitors the structure and relationship between the regional entities and local units of government and reviews amendments to Metropolitan Development Guide Policy Chapters or any new chapters developed. In past years, the Committee has developed policy on land use planning, metropolitan significance, solid waste management, surface water management, etc. 2. MUNICIPAL REVENUES COMMITTEE (Larry Bakken, Chair) Considers any matter concerning revenues, taxes, and city expenditures. Included are state aid formulas, state aid dollars , levy limits , property tax and fiscal disparities. The Committee will be looking very carefully at the effects of the 1989 property tax system changes , distribution of state revenues, etc. 3. HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (Mark Bernhardson, Chair) Concerns itself with all issues related to economic development and housing including subsidized housing, affordable housing, and activities of the Metropolitan HRA. Reviews all amendments to the Metropolitan Council's Housing Guide Policy Chapter . Will carefully review existing tax increment financing (TIF) law and the laws defining local development/redevelopment authority. 4. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (Duke Addicks, Chair) Studies all major issues related to transportation and transit at the metropolitan, state and federal levels. The ten ( 10) elected officials who represent the AMM on the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) and the eight (8) city staff officials who represent the AMM on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) are encouraged to be members of this Committee along with other city officials. 5. GENERAL LEGISLATION COMMITTEE (Karen Anderson, Chair) Examine issues which have impact on metropolitan area cities outside the scope of other AMM committees. In the past, this Committee developed policy on municipal self insurance, municipal consolidation, pensions, cable communications, PELRA Amendments, etc . -2- 6 � ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES (Please return by not later than July 1st. ) NAME CITY POSITION CITY PREFERRED MAILING ADDRESS (street) (city) zip code) PREFERRED TELEPHONE CONTACT NUMBER PLEASE INDICATE COMMITTEE CHOICE 1st. and 2nd. ) MUNICIPAL REVENUES METROPOLITAN AGENCIES HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GENERAL LEGISLATION TRANSPORTATION SUGGESTED ISSUES TO BE STUDIED: PLEASE RETURN TO: Association of Metropolitan Municipalities 183 University Ave . , East St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Attention: Carol Williams 1988 LMC Legislative Committees AMM Legislative Committees Development Strategies - Joe Municipal Revenues - John A. Land Use, Energy, Environment Metropolitan Agencies - Gloria and Transportation - Gloria Rousing and Economic Revenue Sources - John A. Development Elections and Ethics - Judy Cox General Legislation Personnel and Public Transportation Safety - Jerry Board of Directors - Gloria Federal Legislative MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Vacation of Apgar Street Between 1st Avenue and 2nd Avenue DATE: July 1 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: A public hearing on the vacation of Apgar Street between 1st Avenue and 2nd Avenue has been scheduled for July 5 , 1988. Staff would like to address several issues relating to this subject prior to public testimony being received. BACKGROUND: On May 17, 1988 the City of Shakopee signed an agreement with the Soo Line Railroad and Rahr Malting to vacation Apgar Street at the railroad crossings and in turn the Soo Line would remove all spur tracks thru Scott Street and Atwood Street. City staff, as well as representatives from the Soo Line were aware of several issues that needed to be resolved prior to the street being vacated and negotiations have been going on to resolve these issues. These negotiations may or may not be completed by the public hearing . In addition, an addendum to the original agreement may need to be executed to address these negotiations. Issues Directly Affecting Abutting Property Owners Staff would like to first address the concerns and then discuss alternative solutions. 1 . Shakopee Oil Company bulk plant The Shakopee Oil Company has a bulk oil storage plant located between the main line tracks and the spur tracks. It has not been determined if they actually own property abutting on Apgar or if they are an "island" with the Rahr property. The property boundaries in this area are extremely complex and staff is continuing to research the property lines. The oil plant does have a existing driveway access onto Apgar Street. Prior to locating or closing the street, an access to the oil company must be provided. 2 . Rahr Malting Co. Rahr Malting trucks enter their plant using the 2nd Avenue entrance. They leave the plant by going thru the Shakopee Oil company property on a service road and directly onto Apgar Street at the same point the Shakopee Oil access is at. Rahr has indicated that they could exit their plant the same way they enter it, but that would mean crossing the main line tracks twice to get to 1st Avenue. They would prefer to exit via Apgar Street. 3. Stemmer Feed Mill The feed mill has a driveway off Apgar Street just north of the north spur track. Depending on the exact location of any barricades, their driveway may or may not be affected. This is the only access for the feed mill. The owner of the feed mill has also contacted staff to indicate that many of the grain trucks come from the south and the closing of Apgar will require them to travel on 1st Avenue for one block before turning left onto Apgar Street, when currently the trucks do not have to use 1st Avenue. 4. C.H. Carpenter Lumber Co. The lumber company also has a driveway onto Apgar, just north of the spur tracks. Their situation is similar to the feed mills regarding traffic flow , but the driveway is located far enough away from the tracks so that it wouldn' t be affected by any barricades. They also have an access directly onto 1st Avenue. 5. Crown Auto Stores Building The proposed vacation will not extend to 1st Avenue and therefore should no affect this property directly. Summary and Alternatives for Abutting Property Owners Legally , the City cannot vacate a public street and create a situation where a property would not have access onto a public street (such as the Shakopee Oil situation) . Staff has been well aware of that fact and have been discussing it with the affected properties. The current proposal to address the driveway problems listed above is as follows: 1 . The City would vacate Apgar Street from the south track (main line) to the north spur track. 2. The barricades would only be placed on either side of the main line tracks to prevent through traffic. 3• The remainder of Apgar in this area would remain open to allow shakopee Oil trucks and Rahr Malting trucks out onto 1st Avenue. 4. That portion of the tracks would be turned into a private crossing. Rahr Malting is willing to sign an agreement with the Soo Line to maintain this private crossing. 5. A single barricade with a sign stating "Road Closed- Private Crossing" or something to that affect would be placed just north of the north spur track to prevent automobiles from driving up to the mainline tracks and then turn around to go back out . The single barricade would allow Rahr trucks and Shakopee Oil trucks to go out onto First Avenue. It would also enable the feed mill trucks and carpenter trucks into their properties. The Soo Line Railroad, Rahr Malting Co. , and Shakopee Oil Company are agreeable to that arrangement and are willing to sign formal agreements in that regard. The only item that this alternative does not address is the impact on the traffic routes for the feed mill and lumber yard trucks. They will still have to go around onto Scott Street and onto 1st Avenue to get to Apgar Street. There is a traffic signal at Scott Street which will make it easier to get onto 1st Avenue. Staffalsorealizes that traffic from the 101/ 169 intersection backs up past Apgar Street during busy periods, but the construction of the Hwy. 101 Bypass, new bridge, and mini- bypass should solve the traffic congestion problems downtown. Also, prior to any formal vacation, the boundaries and ownership for this area should be determined by staff to ensure that the Shakopee Oil property will not be landlocked by the vacation. Community Wide Issues Relating to Apgar Street Staff has had numerous phone calls from residents outlining their concerns over closing Apgar Street. The following summarizes the main concerns brought to staff' s attention: 1 . Vehicular traffic will be required to travel one block east to enter onto 1st Avenue at Apgar Street. Staff feels that with the traffic signal at Scott Street and the condition of the crossing at Apgar Street using Scott Street would be a much safer route to get to 1st Avenue. 2. Closing Apgar will increase traffic past the hospital , school, and fire station. 7 Apgar Street, from 10th to 2nd will remain open and vehicles will continue to use it. There are approximately 4 ,000 vehicles per day using Shumway, Apgar and Scott Streets. The traffic may increase slightly , but vehicles will continue to use all 3 streets to get to 2nd Avenue and then travel down to Scott Street to get onto 1st Avenue. Street improvements may be necessary to 2nd Avenue eventually. It is also desirable to have collector streets go past the fire station, hospital and schools so that emergency vehicle and school buses do not have to travel thru residential neighborhoods. 3• State Aid Designation. Council directed staff to request a redesignation of state aid streets to compensate for the closing of Apgar. The proposed new route would be on 2nd Avenue, from Apgar to Scott Street and Scott Street, from 2nd Avenue to 1st Avenue. The remainder of Apgar would remain state aid street. 4. Traffic would not have a straight route from county Road 77 to 1st Avenue. Again, Apgar Street will remain open from the south end of the City to 2nd Avenue and will remain a state aid street. Traffic would have a direct route to 2nd Avenue. If the state aid route is ever switched to Scott Street, there are preliminary proposals to "curve" Scott Street to match into County Road 77 south of 10th Avenue. 5. The traffic congestion downtown and backups on 1st Avenue would create difficulties in vehicle being able to get onto 1st Avenue. Again , with the traffic signal at Scott, staff feels that would be a much easier access point onto 1st. Traffic should not be blocking the intersection and if they are, violators should be ticketed. The proposed highway improvements to Shakopee should relieve the downtown traffic congestion. Benefits to Closing Apgar Street at the Tracks 1 . Decreased Maintenance on the crossings for street. Prior to working on any agreements with the Soo Line, there were 3 tracks on Atwood, 3 tracks on Scott and 7 tracks on Apgar for a total of 13 tracks , all of which required maintenance of at the City' s expense. The agreement has reduced this to 2 tracks total. All spur tracks will be removed thru Scott and Atwood Streets, leaving the main line track only. All tracks on Apgar will be eliminated by the vacation process. 2. Improved safety by having one less crossing for potential accidents. Mn/DOT has indicated that they would like to see as many crossings closed as possible. This is really the only crossing in the downtown corridor that can be legitimately closed. 3. Additional street closings on Apgar Street may be considered to create additional residential lots, eliminate any cross traffic to existing lots and eliminate any future assessments to these corner lots . This is not being proposed at this time, but could be considered in the future. 4. The traffic signal at Scott Street makes this a much easier access onto 1st Avenue and also aligns up with Levee Drive for any through traffic. 5. From a traffic standpoint, this more desirable to have hospitals, fire stations and schools on collector streets so that emergency vehicles and school buses do not have to travel through residential neighborhoods. 6. A traffic study was done by a consultant in 1984 that discussed the Apgar Street corridor and traffic control improvements. Attached are excerpts from that report. All other department heads, including the fire chief, police chief, city planner, and public works superintendent have been contacted and do not have any concerns with the proposed vacation. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission was contacted and they have no concerns. The hospital and school were also contacted and have indicated that if they have any concerns they would present them at the public hearing. ALTERNATIVES• 1 . Vacate all or part of Apgar Street between 1st and 2nd Avenues. 2. Close all or part of the street at the tracks, but do no vacate any portion of Apgar Street. _ 3. Leave the street open to traffic which would require an amendment to the agreement with the railroad. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that Apgar Street be vacated from + 20 feet south of the southernmost track to + 20 feet north of the northern most track, that the street be barricaded completely on either side of the main line, that a single barricade be placed on the north side of the tracks indicating that the road is closed and the crossing is private , dependent on final negotiations between the Soo Line, Rahr Malting and Shakopee Oil Company. Staff realizes that the traffic patterns of the traveling public will need to be altered and that there will be some inconvenience to the public, but that these can be overcome and that the overall benefits to the City are substantial enough to warrant vacating this portion of the street. ACTIOR REQUESTED: After all public testimony has been received at the public hearing, Council should decide whether or not to vacate a portion of Apgar Street or simply close the street or leave it as is. DH/pmp A?t_•_ -7- 1 _'ae_ 14 .8 S_-=" ='-ra _ l:c . _ a / Solt .*, are =, enents dispersed De-ween _ _ t .. is co -r do : z : M S.. �_z}. S_- �� _ _ e Bourn c. _ O.S Avenu= S_-e_ . .-❑ Courts sh,� Ca- - - _nese vol -'=a - 7 =%-0 _. _as t: s �nr :ease o^c essively as _ . zverse the :esinea ' izl r Scc _ S __ _ z=eL tcczr2 e dcv; :c_n Snawo?a e . 5 si €ned ib•'a . c _ s cesp• _cl , 1. 01 ` ac = ess Dc_-_ to SL . ones on .._goer _nza on ?z:et_=ei :Dadra �••_ • street are sli €nr lv .z• to De .� Ss. Cor:ido: vo_ _es z pea- .._€. esc in the area cetveen r. - _ Avenue , 6th Avenue zad 3rd n ann:ez'_mar55 4 , OOD lac : y� oe_neen the =::ee sr_ ee _s. S ZZDS e> Tided g her _ esideatiz E to 1 €ccc_S soap o: 10th Avenue is - ? tDdcae as adLc tiDnzl2 , ;Ap _ ___ _ed cc _ _.co:. - - • :SDs n= r czI cn✓a-n _ tae cell; of - Do__caue to count.,, e •_ts z_c_-+_ cazl travel Sha cc to 15- _1thDD -h A?gzz Street is _on _rano•__ nye= ons y tL2nC CCessi^_s UeC>. ga le - - _ S _D e a _e55u Ceei _ a V _lle5 =Eke -he 1 _ _ _sD_ B �-_ _ __._ a C _C Co_ D9e__ _�_ _ _ _D _CLC_a._a__c, _ - _ C __ _e_ _5 _DT Ce razz am- to i g.,a_ to czc_.z e_ s . Creation c' - _"- - _ tress_ S __ ___ ac _ _coocad zad oa€< ____ _ __ _ _ _ _ __,.tom s .-, nD = DeCVeen ea a A area sC__^ C_ _ ____a cc t_ _s C?vet __ _ ___ -rt - C Ce _ C_ ____•s_ _ _-D _ 3 'y _'- c_reCII=CCTe _.nC_arra C_a_ --ac- - =z __ _ ntS J- De_ C= zne j _ __ ___`__5 _ -C - ane ___ _ _ - - -c __ a __' __D -. __ __ _ _ _ � __ __ _Eras _ `_ _�Se _ c _s p5 c __ _ _ •_ -a C i De= u?gtzt_ag c.o __= _ ie �_:zck e.-. • . s _ arossa ^_-..e or se__ zero-_ ' to __?rove __ E c_ce_e_ _ (_; zla: Elan- -'7a S__ee-s. -=d Avenues) _ De_�ec., _ _ ___ ___ s Co_=cD_^^. _ _ __ "_ a De CICSBG /E25 or S - __Y4 - C_ _=__ c _ t -antis -OS7• ta-- LD n5_D D1oar" _ CC Loc- - c_n =1 zn - __ _ e_..ec e•-xnsict. the Z-1_ _ _ __ _ 11 ttt LED ^: c_ J <•��_ I Li I I . Ii I i L ,- \' �jI j' I1I ! "_�- ' III -- I ' III I ! !.I ! I I t 3 . IIII �+tn' L f =i l III- IIII °7II -LIIIi L - FU IT Ii:• I' - III � - I' I •�=. IIII i Is' II T J� I l l 111 I I I 13 ,.-'! I I ji " I .I�JIiI " !' III� I�� IIII + 1 � i•Illp I. -� �-� nzI AL• L bOCC Ll if =' I�. - — MEMO TO: Judy Cox, City Clerk FROM: Douglas R. Wise, City Planner RE: vacation of Apgar between First and Second Avenues DATE: June 27, 1988 The Shakopee Planning Commission at their meeting on June 9, 1988 discussed and reviewed the proposed vacation of Apgar between First and Second Avenues for compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Planning 'Commission at the meeting passed a motion recommending vacation of the street segment and finding that the vacation is not in conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan. COX I 37 P (A 757r45 _ • u C II II .�:� S. 757 +25 ap zi 0"'1: It 0-10S 7S 3Y/0 Ius,ssEjlPirx L/ �t?7y 57. �. - II II II ta'Y.0 %' "�f3 pS'- 55 32.3 / WE II I es ut »z4 1 fl tl la oo .n an/ spJ •[ I% .UA -- . ilp 11 q l 0 III' ICAC $ Z __- -p II N {)J a it Lo (nll II 1 ��� N I • �km I II ! `• OLpO !03 / ��� /ar .. `41. 3' I 1111 Fr._ /e ktq.•Sa Cee IPI QCD nOD- C7,71�U/`r[3CR' CO //�E 83<.9.-• roes I t,..- •., ', m � �./ 4 ; ._111 a c. /fob �: _ �•�°Z= { ,.= °� X77 _ m 1 oIt m Vin° ,Q �� �� ~ 1 NN -c V v . m jl IIIc ,� �= I ;i ; 4 _ cn ° a>In� Tl < Md > Rarrres oY%rte o S7 CONSENT MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Community Energy Council Grant Amendment DATE: June 20, 1988 INTRODUCTION• Last fall the City of Shakopee received a grant from the Department of Trade and Economic Develgpment (DIED) to initiate a home energy check-up program. The grant agreement called for the City of Shakopee to complete 175 home energy check-ups prior to December 31, 1988. Because public response to the program has been less than satisfactory, the Energy and Transportation Committee has reviewed possible alternatives for continuing or ending the program at this time. BACKGROUND: In conjunction with the Community Energy Council Grant, the City of Shakopee received funding from Minnegasco to complete 150 home energy check-ups in 1988 and 1989. To date we have completed approximately 25 home energy check-ups. I believe that there are several reasons why our program has not been accepted by the public. First, Minnegasco requires that home energy check-ups be based on applicant eligibility. While our eligibility requirements are not very restrictive, the fact that this statement appears on all ads may have discouraged some Persons from applying for the program. A second factor that may be contributing to the lack of interest in the Home Energy Check- Up Program is the fact that energy prices have stabilized. Finally, our Assistant City Building Inspector and I have not had the time to put into the program to make it a success. Following are several courses of action that Energy and Transportation Committee considered: 1. The City could choose to request DIED to extend the Community Energy Council Grant for one year. This would give us more time to complete home energy check-ups. Additionally, staff would recommend that the City of Shakopee contract with the Scott/Carver Community Action Agency for auditor assistance. They currently have a certified home energy check-up auditor on staff and are willing to contract with the City for auditor assistance. The agreement between the Scott/Carver Community Action Agency and the City of Shakopee would simply specify that the City of Shakopee would pay a specified dollar amount per audit completed by the Scott/Carver Community Action Agency. The City of Shakopee would still be responsible for marketing the program and purchasing home energ materials. y check-up 2. The City could decide to simply maintain the program as it presently exists. However, if we do not complete the audits required by the DTED grant agreement we will be responsible for returning a portion of the grant funds for the uncompleted audits (approximately $3000. 00) . Under this scenario we would still have an agreement with Minnegasco to complete an additional 150 audits in 1989. However, given the time restrictions placed upon our Assistant Building Inspector I doubt if it would be possible for us to complete that number of audits. 3. The City could decide to discontinue the program at this time. Under this scenario we would responsible for reimbursing DTED for that portion of the grant that was not expended for the Home Energy Check-Up Program (approximately $3000.00) . We would not be responsible for reimbursing any funds to Minnegasco. Of the three alternatives, the Energy and Transportation Committee favored alternative #1. The Committee felt that there is a need for the Home Energy Check-Up Program in Shakopee and that the contract arrangement with Scott/Carver Economic Agency would be in the best interest of the City. During the winter months when things are slow for our Assistant Building Inspector he could also perform home energy check-up audits as time permits. The Committee is therefore recommending that the City submit an amendment to DTED for the Community Energy Council Grant requesting a one year extension and authorizing the appropriate City officials to enter into an agreement with the Scott/Carver Community Action Agency for home energy check-up auditor assistance. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Request DTED to amend the Community Energy Council Grant agreement extending it one year and authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an agreement with the Scott/Carver Community Action Agency for home energy Check-up auditor assistance. 2. Continue the program as it presently exists. 3 . Discontinue the program at this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REOUESTED: Move to submit an amendment request be to DTED extending the Community Energy Council Grant agreement one additional year and authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an agreement with the Scott/Carver Community Action Agency for home energy check-up auditor assistance. CONSENT Wk MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Dial-A-Ride Saturday Service Evaluation DATE: June 20, 1988 INTRODUCTION• Last fall the City of Shakopee received a grant from the Department of Trade and Economic Development to initiate a Saturday Dial-A-Ride program on a demonstration project basis. The demonstration project will end on July 9, 1988. The Energy and Transportation Committee has evaluated the demonstration project and is recommending that the Saturday Dial-A-Ride service be continued through the remainder of the contract period. Now that Scott County is being served by Metro Mobility for handicapped service, the Committee is also recommending that the Dial-A-Ride contract be amended deleting the section referring to the contractors responsibility to provide handicapped service. BACKGROUND: On January 16, 1988 the City of Shakopee initiated Saturday Dial-A-Ride service between the hours of 9 AM and 2 PM. Ridership during the months of January and February was quite good for a new service. However during the month of March ridership dropped significantly. Based upon the comments received from the Dial-A-Ride users, the Energy and Transportation Committee decided to expand the Dial-A-Ride service hours for the remainder of the demonstration project effective April 2, 1988. With this move we saw a significant increase in ridership during the months of April and May. Shown in attachment #1 is an operations report for the Saturday Dial-A-Ride service for the past 5 months. Our subsidy per passenger trip is higher than we are experiencing in our Monday through Friday Dial-A-Ride program. However, this can be expected with a new service. Based on the ridership data and the availability of funds, the Energy and Transportation Committee is recommending that the Dial-A-Ride Saturday service program be continued thorough the remainder of the Dial-A-Ride contract which expires on April 15, 1989. The Committee is also recommending that the Dial-A-Ride contract be amended accordingly. In order to insure that adequate funds exist to operate the Saturday Dial-A-Ride service program, staff would also like to recommend that the contract language amending the Dial-A-Ride contract extending the Dial-A- Ride service be written in such a fashion giving the City the right to cancel the Saturday service upon a 30 day advanced notice from the City. Shown in attachment 42 is Shakopee Dial-A- Ride Service contract amendment 2#7 outlining the changes as proposed herein. The Committee is also recommending that the contract be amended deleting the section referring to the provision of handicapped service. On June 1, 1988 Metro Mobility expanded their program into Scott County. It would simply be a duplication of services for the City to continue providing handicapped service. For the record, we have had only 4 wheel chair passenger trips since we began our service in 1984 . ALTERNATIVES- 1. Approve Dial-A-Ride contract amendment #7 extending the Saturday Dial-A-Ride service hours through the remainder of the contract period and eliminating the provision of handicapped service. 2. Do not continue the Dial-A-Ride Saturday service. 3. Move to extend the Saturday Dial-A-Ride service for another 6 months on a demonstration project basis. 4. Extend the Saturday Dial-A-Ride Service hours through the remainder of the contract period and do not eliminate the provision of handicapped service. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative $1. ACTION REQUESTED. Move to approve Dial-A-Ride contract amendment #7 extending the Saturday Dial-A-Ride Service hours through the remainder of the contract period and eliminating the provision of handicapped service. Attachment #1 Saturday Dial-A-Ride Operations Report Total Subsidy Per - Month #Pass ,4SR St. 4GP Cost Pass. Trio Jan. 47 16 16 15 $231.50 $ 4.92 Feb. 57 20 10 27• $315.50 $ 5.53 Mar. 26 9 2 15 $333.25 $12.80 Apr.* 66 11 10 45 $646.75 $ 9.79 May* 65 14 6 44 $509.05 $ 7.83 June* *Extended Service Hours to 5:00 p.m. Saturday Dial-A-Ride Service Ridership Report January 4 of Rides 1/16/88 19 1/23/88 13 1/30/88 15 Total 47 February 2/6/88 15 2/13/88 9 2/20/88 12 2/27/88 21 Total 57 March 3/5/88 4 3/12/88 9 3/19/88 1 3/26/88 12 Total 26 April 4/2/88 17 4/9/88 11 4/16/88 13 4/23/88 13 4/30/88 12 Total 66 Attachment #2 Amendment #7 Dial-A-Ride Service Contract Amendment The following sections are hereby amended and adopted effective June 21, 1988. 1. Amend Section 7 . Consideration' to read: The contractor shall submit_ requests for reimbursement of eligible actual -- - costs not to exceed $633,652 for the contract period. The City will in turn examine and approve such request as deemed appropriate and submit them to the Regional Transit Board. 2. Amend Section 12 £. Service Package to read: The contractor must make available two vehciles (minimum 7 passenger maximum 24 passenger) . 3. Adopt Section 12 L. Service Package to read: On or before July 9, 1988 and at the City's request, the contractor shall provide the necessary staffing and equipment to insure the save delivery of Saturday Dial-A-Ride service. One vehicle shall be provided to service the Saturday Dial-A-Ride program. Additional vehicles may be added upon the City's request. The Saturday Dial-A-Ride service shall operate between the hours of 9 AM and 5 PM. These hours may be subject to change upon a 15 day advance notice from the City. Saturday Dial-A-Ride service will be based on a $17.90 per hour fixed cost. The additional hours of Saturday service shall not be used in calculating the monthly ridership thresholds. The City reserves the right to cancel the Saturday Dial-A-Ride service upon a 30 day written notice to the contractor. The City of Shakopee by: Its' Mayor by: Its' City Administrator by: Its' City Clerk Date- KARE KABS by: Its' Director of Operations Date: 9a_ CALCIUM CHLORIDE MEMO ADDENDUM JUNE 30, 1988 1 . ESTIMATE COST/AMOUNT OF CHLORIDE APPLIED TO RURAL ROADS. Current policy: Valley View Road - 5 locations McKenna Road - 2 locations Each location receives a 300' x 22 ' application. 300 feet is used to insure some protection against wind drift of dust outside of chloride treatment area. 300' x 22' = 6600 ft. -------- = 733 sq. Yds. 9 application rate: 0. 30 gallons/sq.yd. = 220 gallons/treatment per location. 220 gallons @ . 80/gallon (County bid price) _ $176 .00/location mid-May and mid-August applications = $1320 each or $2640/year. Cost to dustcoat all rural roads entirely: Valley View Road approx: 9400' McKenna Road 6000' Pike Lake Road 2800' Mielke Driveway 2500' Muhlenhardt Rd 3800' (expecting County turnover this year) Killarney Hills Addt. 350' Jasper Road (Hauer Addt) 300' E.C. Town Hall Road 1320' Murphy Landing entrance 250' O'Dowd Lake driveway 1100' -------------------------------------------- 27 ,820 lineal feet 27 , 820 x 22' = 612,040 i --------- = 68,004 sq. yds: 9 68,004 x 0. 30 (rate of application) = 20,400 gallons 20, 400 (gallons) @ 0.80/gal . (county bid price) _ $16,320 Total cost to duatcoat all Eagle Creek roads ( 2 applications) $32 ,640 96L,, w i 2 . COST OF APPLYING CHLORIDE TO URBAN STREETS & ALLEYS. We have determined that there are approx. 15, 100 feet of unimproved (gravel) streets in the City urban area. 15, 100 x 22 = 332,200 ------- = 36,911 sq. yds @ 0. 30 = 11 ,073 gallons 9 11 ,073 gallons @ .80/gallon = $8,858 each application. twice per year = $17 ,716 per season. We receive many requests for dust control in alleys There are approx. 48, 170 l. f. of alleys @ 11 feet each. 47 , 170 x 11 = 529,870 ------- = 58,874 sq. yds. @ 0.30 =17 ,662 gallons 9 17 ,662 gallons @ . 80/gallon = $14 , 130 per application twice per year = $28,260 per season. STREETS $ 17,716 per year ALLEYS $ 28,260 " 11 ---------------------- $ 45,976 TOTAL/YEAR 3. STREET IMPROVEMENT COSTS. CURB AND GUTTER - est. cost is @ $6. 50 per lineal foot. 15 , 100 l .f. of unimproved streets times two (sides) or 30,200 l .f. of curb/gutter @ 6 .50 = $ 196 , 300 (although all unimproved streets may not need curb/gutter. ) BITUMINOUS SURFACING (no base preparation estimated) 22' x 2" or $25. 00/ton or $7 .00 per front foot. Streets 15, 100 l.f. @ $7 .00 = $105 , 700 (per 22' width) Alleys 48. 170 l.f. @ $3 . 50 = $168,600 (per 11 ' width) i f i 4. DIFFERENCE IN HOME TAXES. (AVERAGE) LeRoy Houser informs us that the price of the average size i lot is approximately the same for rural or urban areas . This price varies between $18 ,000 and 24,000 per average lot rural or i urban depending on lot size. RURAL HOMES The average rural lot is much larger at 2 1/2 acres, and generally has a separate well and septic tank system. Traffic in front of these lots are usually at a high speed and creates a lot of dust. It is not economically feasible for a home owner to pave the road in front of their property for dust control and the City does not have a policy for paving rural roads except for the standard assessment policy which is used in the urban area. For this reason, the calcium chloride treatment that we provide the rural homes is the only relief that these homeowners can be offered, unlike an urban homeowner who has options for improving their streets with affordable assessment Oil used for dust control treatment is no longer permitted for environmental reasons , and too much oil will destroy the gravel base and sub-base material by making it lose its body or binding quality. Calcium chloride is only a temporary treatment that must be applied several times per season to be effective. This chemical works by attracting the atmospheric moisture, and thereby wetting the gravel surface. With an extremely dry season, such as we are experiencing, we don't believe that two applications is really adequate, but that is all that we have budgeted. Scott County has been applying calcium chloride for many years to control the dust problem, and we adopted their policy in 1980. This rural dust control policy has been a welcome relief to the people who benefit by it, especially when the City has no future plans to have the road in front of their homes improved, primarily because of the frontage/coat. It generally is not an advantage for a farm to have a paved road near their property except near their dwellings. Scott County improves/paves their rural roads without an assessment to the adjacent property owners. ( i .e. County Road #17 . ) These improvements are paid by the Road and Bridge fund. URBAN HOMES (with sewer/water and paved streets. ) The urban lot is also evaluated between $18,000 and 24 ,000 , depending on lot size. The urban lot, with City sewer and water, usually has an improved street which the property owner has paid for by an assessment process. If a street is not improved, then the lot, without including the structure, is not evaluated as much as a lot with an improved frontage. At some point, the urban property owner has paid for the improvement, where the rural property owner can not be feasibly expected to pay for these improvements. That is the major difference between urban and rural in regard to street improvements . This is also why the City Council adopted a rural dust control policy in 1980. The intention of the policy was to encourage the urban property owners to petition for the street improvements , or have the streets improved by Council initiative so we can have a cleaner City image. If a calcium chloride policy is adopted for the urban area, we can expect to have a City of gravel streets without much hope for an image improvement. f 5 . DESIGNATE CERTAIN STREETS FOR CHLORIDE APPLICATION. (By traffic count) i Enclosed is an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count made by our Engineering department in 1986 . ADT's can be used to determine priority for street improvements. Streets with a higher rate of traffic should be improved because they require more maintenance: constant grading problems and upkeep suffer wind erosion require graveling subject to potholes create dust more difficult to plow, especially when there is no frost hard on vehicles noisier than bituminous surfaces constant source of complaints from the neighborhood and passing vehicles. Gravel streets are scheduled for grading generally after significant rainfall when they are moist enough to cut with a blade edge. If they are not wet, then they are difficult to cut into, or all we can do is roll the dust from side to side. We try to grade the City gravel streets as needed (about once a month) , and grade the rural roads after every rainfall. All of the City alleys are graded in the Spring, but may require extra j maintenance, as needed, during the remainder of the year. Ideally, we would like to grade the alleys in the fall , but this is always possible because of other work commitments. I ;f������ VE U'L=JI:��'�� FNM\ m a XvcLue P9 g r 119 NgITHCRN � t � � [LLLIXXFT 1 _ Nllli XDDX 1Ir \ P \ O Q IB I] 16 s� CO RD E T Rd VA ' I a'CO 19 20 21 TINDER TRAILS ADD-M, zpTx we CO IID i2 >'OnwO (We Xoox L I is ♦ o \_ 26 30 AoomoX T-- MARj 5 DEGn DOLNi .1 a ' �I1 o As - 4 `\ 14 A 13 DW CS4, 16 I DE'i � O�M � y.w IORIZON RIVERVIEW EIGXTS ESTATES �E �Li NO ADO MORIZ N \ NEXT$ AM 23 22 24 A 11 — Pke Cate CORD az F I 27 ze n 1 \ LR.Le 3y , R. r+f' 101 1f9 rO C • 4Y EDEN PRAIRIE 6600[ Y 1980 POP.16.263 rrc9 CHAIGHAEN 1^�/f� '1 "�+ rAA y1D/" vn 21 vn =sz DO '. 1900 POPs6.35 lei/1 j ux-1s � • (W s.Ie NN11!! 'VV 1 lol . rus � ZZZ CEl�\ �/ Trager Coori Ij / A. b ro 3 • _�° ,,.YE � • � g� _ /0700 ' I g • d !tn YL� .3.�Z l.. O nM N• H O• lm 4 •T O •. em �,' TATE s.. • a rvE [. s+. ,a +vc 1 REOR R a MEN a. .B ., �.rE. [.' _ .. An. E„ „ .mEn s. 2� E. uT 6�. .r�� �•G :.arrs rr. r 1v— SHAHOPEE rec 1980 POP.9.941 111—_ 1 . w•u sr. ll , ''7v + O uzs ' ' 198 ► ADT IS a E.sl ZjACK50N TOWNSHIP 1980 POP.1983 Ire^ 7�/7 A �� • 1, •. J •�II}T ft f4�lD F4lw Y II IIN., CR � lz 11 � �{tioss 101 �i '1 + uu+n.• t II RIu \ .Rest Area f z CP CO O 93s � . uaa OPEE JP.9941 f o r Y `_llY � fc TRAILER CDIJRT ,-�— �� F . r :♦ /meq c yp.n ST. i // I �D s ; eoE 3` tru •vc.s � ct � sxn sr.l $ y k. 111 X111� ••9? : -. t. : i ,�. nnso• rn E" � 4' • I P4• �� x.na••o°o an. � � ,1 x.aw++ooc fT. npo V � o.usnoao a. p• 1 S/ l� ,� N5Lan sr. J 7O no sl.✓ ti ssIL 31.1 =f ' ErtN .� ' . COUNTY �,l"�S� •rJD� y ,�r135 «, Q - 3 Qj • d� - SHA 7 1980 P 022 AktsT y y ,! �J i111FA i0 �1 oqc - a pRtA.15 CR g >n 1 52 ' !2b MEMO TO: JOHN ANDERSON/CITY COUNCIL FROM: JIM KARKANEN-PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: DUST CONTROL REQUEST j DATE: 6/14/88 i I INTRODUCTION: Pursuant to your 3-part memo regarding the Council request for more information pertaining to Joe Notermann's appearance at the Council meeting June 7th, 1988. BACKGROUND: Your 3-part memo contained several questions that you requested of our department regarding the request for dust control on Adams street north of 6th Ave. 1 . WHY MUST SCHOOL BUSES USE ADAMS STREET? This question was asked of Norbert Schmitt who is the owner of Shakopee Services, the bus operator for the Shakopee School District. He responded that this route was the shortest and most direct route to the schools in this area (Sweeney school) , and that this route traversed through the least populated neighborhood of any other route which his vehicles could use to get to the school loading area. 2 . WILL THE SCHOOL BUS OPERATOR PAY FOR DUST CONTROL? The school bus operator emphatically reminded me that when he wanted street improvements in front of his house, he had to pay for them himself, and that the traffic that used his street did not have to pay a "toll fee" for using a street. 3. WILL SCOTT COUNTY PAY FOR DUST CONTROL ON ADAMS STREET AS AND EXTENSION OF COUNTY ROAD 015? This question was asked of the Scott County Highway Department road foreman who indicated that it was not their policy to dust coat streets outside of their normal rural policy. Besides, Adams street north of Hwy 300 is not a county road. 4. WILL THE CITY REQUIRE SCOTT COUNTY HRA TO PAY FOR SOME DUST CONTROL IN THE NEW JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT? This question was asked of Dennis Kraft, our HRA director, who stated that the County has not purchased the property yet, and that the resolution for the joint powers agreement has not been started yet. 5 . TALK WITH CITY ENGINEER ABOUT THE DUSTCOAT CONTROL AFTER THE SEWER PROJECT HAS BEEN COMPLETED. The City Engineer was consulted, and agreed that no dust control measures should be considered until after the project has been completed. We both agree that a permanent improvement should be recommended to Council for this street after the sewer project has been completed. CLI The City of Shakopee, in 1980, had already adopted a dust control policy in regard to urban and rural dust control . Later, City Administrative Policy No. 70 was passed by Council motion which states that the City will not participate in dust control measures in the urban area, but will allow calcium chloride treatment if the property owner wants to pay for it. The policy was adopted in response to a petition which was presented to the City in June of 1982. In this case, the property owners near 11th and Spencer paid for the dust control treatment themselves . In 1987 , the property owners on Market Street between 3rd and 4th Avenue, requested a calcium chloride application. This request was approved by Council with the provision that the petitioners pay for the application. This dust control treatment was applied on two occasions that year, and the adjacent property owners were billed for both applications , with the Engineering department acting as an administrator of the project. Administrative Policy No. 70 states: "In brief, the city does not permit oil treatment of any kind for dust control, only calcium chloride. The only roads eligible for dust control treatment paid for by the City are rural roads , urban roads can receive dust treatment if they pay for it. The City contracts annually with the low bidder for Scott County dust control program, and the Public Works Superintendent coordinates all City Applications. " 5/18/82 - (motion) "Colligan/Vierling moved to reject the request of dust treatment for llth Avenue, but if the residents in the area would like to do something themselves for dust control , they should work that out with the City. Motion carried unanimously. " We have had several requests for dust control annually, and we generally give them the name and phone number of our dust control contractor, and they generally coordinate with the contractor. We insist on knowing where and when the treatment will be applied so we can properly prepare the street surface for the dust control treatment. The property owner is generally billed directly by the contractor at the current contract price. The City of Shakopee dust control policy, adopted in 1980, was patterned after the Scott County policy. This policy recommends a calcium chloride application for rural residents only because it is difficult to encourage anyone in the rural area to request permanent street improvements because of the prohibitive cost to these residents. The policy approved by Council in 1980 indicated that temporary dust control in the urban area was not recommended because these residents should be encouraged to petition for permanent street improvements. �0�_ The policy adopted in 1980, and the Scott County policy both specify that if a home is located within 175 feet of the roadway, the road would receive a calcium chloride treatment twice a year. This application is generally scheduled mid-May and mid-August. The chloride application is normally 300 % 22 feet, and calibrated at an application rate of 0. 25 to 0. 30 gallons per square yard for the initial treatment, but the second application can be applied at a lesser rate, perhaps at a 0.20 to 0 .25 gallon/sq. yd. rate. This application rate will fluctuate depending on general weather and seasonal conditions, and is applied in liquid form by a special distributor truck. A normal dust treatment will generally cost approximately $175 to $200 per 300 foot application. This price is for the normal contract application, but if the contractor has to make a special return trip for subsequent applications , the price per gallon could be increased. A normal 300 x 22 foot application is 733 sq. yards, or 220 gallons per application. IM 0. 30 gallons per sq.yd. ) Our dust control budget reflects rural dust control treatment only. Information for your second 3-part memo for: WEST 4TH AVE - ADAMS TO HARRISON The Street department can, and does provide pothole patching on 4th Avenue as requested. Several years ago, the City Council directed our department to provide only "minimum maintenace" in this area. To provide minimum maintenance, it is our intention to fill deep potholes with bituminous material where applicable, and to fill any deep gravel holes with a granular material . In the winter, we plow an access road through the 4th Ave R/W so foot traffic and vehicular traffic can gain access to Adams street. The blacktop surface near the apartments on Harrison street was built by the apartment owner many years ago as a driveway to the Harrison apartments, and was not intended as a City street. The remainder of the street R/W was filled in by a local developer with material hauled in from other locations, after the bituminous driveway was constructed by the apartment owner. The driveway is not of the proper thickness , nor does it have the proper base or sub-base for the traffic which uses this driveway, and does not meet our standard criteria for street construction. It is our opinion, and the opinion of the City Engineer, that a permanent road surface be built for this street , and that proper storm drainage also be provided. Attached is a consulting engineering report regarding a Council request to do a preliminary investigation report for the purpose of constructing street improvements on 4th Ave. from Adams St. to Harrison St. The conclusion of this report informs us that portions of the roadbed is constructed with various fill materials, and the suitability for roadway construction is questionable on a preliminary basis because amounts of organic material were found in the sub-base material . Because the roadbed is relatively flat, the report recommends that a storm drain system be installed with the street construction. Our engineering department is not aware of any other soil boring tests that have been conducted in this area during the past several years , nor do they have any report on file. Dave Hutton, City Engineer, and I both recommend that 4th Avenue from Adams to Harrison be improved, either by petition or Council initiative. Because of the abnormally dry season, we can probably expect ' more dust control complaints, and/or requests for calcium chloride. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Rescind/revise Administrative Policy No. 70 . 2. Deny request for dust control on Adams St. 3. Refer complainant to our dust control contractor and coordinate his request with the contractor. The contractor will bill the property owner direct. 4. City pay for the dust control application. 5. Initiate street improvements for Adams Street. RECOMMENDATION: Alternatives 3 and 5. Refer the complainant to the contractor if temporary dust control is desired, and initiate, by Council action, or by petition, a street improvement project to take care of a recurring problem. This street will be closed during the sewer replacement project on Adams street. We also recommend that a street improvement project be initiated to resurface 4th Avenue from Adams to Harrison Streets . i i Administrative Policy No. 70 � Q/ .4 Subject: Dust Coating " Date Adopted: June 4, 1982 Source of Authority: City Council Motion The City's policy on dust control has evolved over a number of years and is based upon the action taken by Council on the two attached- memos. In brief the City does not permit oil treatment of any kind for dust control, only calcium chloride. The only roads eligible for dust control treatment paid for by the City are rural roads, urban roads can receive dust treatment if they pay for it. The City contracts annually with the low bidder for Scott County dust control program and the Public Works Superintendent coordinates all City applications. 5/18/82 - "Colligan/Vierling moved to reject the request of dust treatment for 11th Avenue, but if the residents in the area would like to do something themselves for dust control, they should work that out with the City. Motion caried unanimously." r . . CITY OF . SHAKOPEE �i:- 1➢S •_' 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 MEMO John Anderson - Administrator is OM: Jim Xarkanen - Public Works Dept. �B.TECT. W 4th Ave - Adams St.-to Harrison St. ,TE: .Aug. 14 , 1981 This memo is in response to your request regarding the maintenance', history of West 4th Ave. between Adams St. and Harrison St. The Public Works Dept. was instructed by former Administrator Doug Reeder in early May of 19f0, to cease maintaining this portion of West 4th Ave. because the street had not been constructed to City specifications or standards. Prior to these instructions, we performed minimum maintenance to this street because of the poorgradeof sub- base material and lack of gravel base material placed by the developer of this area. We did,however, d • minimum grading during the summer, and did snow removal to keep the R/W available for access to Adams St. for the children in the area to walk to school. Bo Spurrier informed me that in April, 1980, the Council had a lengthy discussion about the R/W because of a conditional use permit application in the area. I suspect that Mr. Reeder' s directive to cease maintenance on this street was as a resultofthe Council's discussion. Since that time, we periodically check the R/W to insure us that there aren't any severe traffic hazards or problems to any traffic which may happen to use this R/W. The west end of this R/W has always been used by the apartment on Harrison St. as a driveway entrance. The bituminous surface is very thin and in a constant need of repair. ' Attached to this memo is a copy of the consulting engineer' s report concerning the material used as a sub base by the developer. Cou,uc,L AST/Ditl � .fElNrtal� �llli.�irna,.. m•ri�T��a.,f�A �� i .n April 7,1980 REPORT 1980 Improved,uts T0: City of Shakopee FROM: Suburban Engineering, Inc. SUBJECT: 4th Ave. - Adams to Harrisfon St. GENERAL As directed, we have made this preliminary investigation for the construct- ion of a local City street improvement on 4th Ave. from Adams St. to Harri- son St. , including necessary storm sewer construction. In addition, a separ- ate study was made to investigate the improvement of Adams St. to a finished collector street. The report on the Adams St. investigation is included with this report but may be considered as a separate project with special provisions for modifying the intersection of Adams St. and 4th Ave. EXISTING CONDITIONS Vre',present -roadway of 4th Ave. is a marginal gravel surface about -30'ft. "1e,:.an 80. it. wide iigbt of way. The.#rsfll ..Srade is minimal and slopes from #dams to -Harrissn. Drainage is presently provided at a catch basin in the southeasterly corner located off the roadway in a low area. The basin is connected to the trunk storm sewer on Harrison Ave. , lWording .,co.,pre I imin;ry„,yoils.a boring -1nTera,efien,--=portions 'Of-Vhe-roadbed 1s constructed on fill material in the vicinity of Adams and the suitability for roadway construction is questinable on a preliminary basis. The natural u wales are a silty sand and are considered acceptable for roadway construct- ion. Additionalsoilsdata is necessary for final desigr. For preliminary design purposes, an "R” value of 15 was assumed which is based on soft soils. Small amounts of organic materials were -found in the sub-base materials. I TWtea n / EXISTING CONDITIONS (con't) �w 4e1veways to the north entering apartment sites are not well defined and lutowfde poor control _ of cars entering or leaving the street. Those driveway "A aaaiati"'y flat so that drainage must be carefully considered. DESIGN CRITERIA '$4e :preliminary : thickness design is based on present City standards and I M[IDOT standards. The criteria used is a 20ear 9 ton loads. The subgrade factor used is "gu y projected volume of 50,000 - 15 which represents porer soils found in the soils investigation. The preliminary thi kness hdesigned j is 2" more gravel than a minimun construction standard of Shakopee for local streets. In the preliminary design,anew profile is proposed to meet the new profile Of Adams S[. Other grades will be at City minimum grades and adjoining lands as will match close as possible. PROPOSE_ ED PROJECT q'he .proposed Project will be a finished local street, 36 ft. wide with curb ire gutter and catch basins unitary sewer and water main has been installed Qreviously. ESTIMATES OF COST AND ASSESSMENTS The detailed estimates of cost for the street, storm sewer and water main are included fn Appendix A. The estimate of costs are based on available date of soils and ledge rock information and on what we expect contractors to bid for such work in 1930. The cost estimates include an allowance for adminiscr.elon, engineering, fiscal, legal and miscellaneous charges. The estimated cost of the improvement is $75,840.00. It is Proposed to use the adjusted front footage method for street benefits to the properties abutting the improvement. The estimated assessments for street is computed on the basis of a minimum local street according to the City Policy. The extra cost is proposed to be Paid from other street funds. Accordingly, the estimated assessment cost is $62,475.00. The corresponding assessment rate for a minimum local scree[ is $55.05/ft. 2 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Shakopee Community Center Proposal DATE: July 1, 1988 Introduction The Shakopee City Council, at its special June 29, 1988 meeting, discussed how it might continue to investigate proposals for a community center after the recent referendum. Council requested that staff bring back before it a copy of the study proposal presented to Council by the Shakopee Community Recreation Board. That proposal is attached. Background At Council's June 29th meeting the discussion by Council covered a number of the points made in attached memorandum from the Shakopee Community Recreation Board. In addition, there was discussion about the value in having a separate study committee working on the hockey arena question. The intent was to allow the two committees to study the issues independently and to then investigate coordination of their efforts before making a final recommendation to City Council. Alternatives 1. The City Council can take no action thus interpreting the results of the June 28th referendum to mean that the voters are no longer interested in a community center proposal. 2 . The City could study the need for a hockey facility without incorporating other community center activities. This alternative might be pursued if Council believes there is a role for the City if the hockey "bubble" is damaged within the next year or two. 3. The City could create a committee to study the community center proposal including the elements that were incorporated in the referendum on June 28th. The rationale behind this approach would be to interpret the vote on June 28th as the voters turning down a specific proposal placing the facility at the mall. 4. The City could combine alternatives 2 and 3 and create two separate study committees. Recommendation If Council still wishes to study the issue of the need for some kind of community center facility then I recommend alternative No. 3. If, after the study committee begins its work, the committee recommends a separate committee to review the hockey situation that can be addressed. Action Requested Authorize the Community Recreation Board to study community center proposals within the specific parameters outlined in their memo of April 27, 1988 and to report to Council by December 31, 1988. JRA/jms S�hakvprr Lommunitg lgrrrratinn y � 129 Levee Drive Shakopee, MN 55379- Phone: 612-4452742 Memo To: Shakopee City Council From Paulette Rislund, Chmn. , Shakopee Community-Recr gn--B,gar� Subject: Shakopee Community Center Proposal \ Date . April 27, 1988 The Shakopee Community Recreation Board at its Meeting April 25 spent a good share of time discussing the issue of the City owning and operating a Community Center. The Board has perceived that an extensive amount of interest has surfaced on this subject during the recent study of a Community Center Proposal in conjunction with the upgrading of the Minnesota Valley Mall. The Board further agrees that a multi-purpose facility is needed that will theoretically accommodate the needs of all of the community. Previous study has shown that there are immediate needs that must be faced: 1. The "Bubble" could fall down any day. The new structure is needed. The leadership of the Hockey Association has indicated that they are not excited about continueing their operating of an Arena. 2. An indoor walking/jogging track is needed for Sr Citizens and others. 3. Special facilities for gymnastics instruction, youth wrestling programs, youth and adult basketball and volleyball games, social center for youth etc. The community is growing. Facilities for the near future must be planned now. Beacuse of this apparent deep seated community interest the Board strongly recommends that the City Council initiates a thorough review of a Community Center Proposal. It further is our recommendation that a diversified representation of the community be appointed to give input to the study while actively working with Council and Staff. The Shakopee Recreation Board is available and ready to work with you if so desired. It is the Board's feeling that the study should include all or part of the following: 1. Ascertainment of the wants and needs of the community. 2. Determination of pros and cons of various locations. 3. Acquiring information whether Shakopee could be designated for the location of an Armory. 4. Compilation of number and size of activity areas to be included. 5. Recommendation on how to manage this facility. 6. Re-study the financing issue. The Study Committee should be directed to report back to the City Council with its findings at an appropriate time. A COOPERATIVE EFFORT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT 720 SINCE 1954 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrato RE: Canterbury Downs Use of Gate No. 5 DATE: July 1, 1988 Introduction Councilmember Joe Zak has received numerous calls from citizens complaining about Canterbury Downs use Of Gate No. 5. This issue is being placed back on the agenda to clarify when, if at all, Canterbury Downs is Permitted to use Gate No. 5. Background Attached for Council review is a memo from Tom Brock from Canterbury Downs outlining their present use of Gate No. 5 and its use during 1987 and 1986. Also attached is a memo from Tom Brownell reporting a complaint his office received regarding traffic exiting Gate No. 5 and blocking private driveways along Eagle Creek Boulevard. Also attached is an earlier memo from Councilmember Zak voicing two concerns about the 'racetrack. Concern number two has been dealt with and concern number one relates to the subject of this memorandum. Attached to Joe's memo is a copy of the minutes of the City Council meeting on May 3rd when this issue was presented to City Council along with the supporting documentation under a cover memo dated April 29, 1988 from City Planner Doug Wise. Finally, I have also included copies of the original Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and one amendment. Definitional Problem It is clear from the testimony at the May 3rd City Council meeting and from some of the calls that Councilmember Zak has received that many residents are under the impression that Gate No. 5 can only be used for "emergency purposes" . It is equally clear that Canterbury Downs is under the impression that the original application documents, specifically the Conditional Use Permit, Environmental Impact Statement and Indirect Source Permit, provide for "peak" use of Gate No. S. Tom Brock's memo of June 30, 1988 provides us with Canterbury's first specific definition of "peak". They propose that peak be defined at 13,000 for exiting crowds only. Furthermore, they have stated that there would be a maximum of 30 Gate 5 openings per year. Alternatives 1. The City Council can direct the City Attorney to review all of the approval documents to determine if the City has a legal right to force Canterbury Downs to keep Gate No. 5 closed except for emergency purposes. 9 � 2. The City Council can concur, after looking at the approval documents, that Canterbury Downs does have permission to open Gate No. 5 as a result of the permitting process. Council can then determine if public statements made during the public hearings that "Canterbury Downs agreed not to use Gate No. 5 except for emergencies", should be used to keep Gate No. 5 closed or to curtail its usage. 3 . The City council can accept the definition of peak traffic usage for Gate No. 5 as outlindd in Tom Brock's June 30, 1988 memo, or some alternative to their peak crowd definition of 13, 000 or more. Recommendation I recommend alternative No. 3 with a more restrictive maximum number of usages during the season. I also recommend that any usage be coupled with: 1) the appropriate traffic management to avoid driveway blockage, 2) a stronger effort on Canterbury's Part to educate their cliental to use Shenandoah Drive and Highway 101, and 3) that they be required to monitor traffic flow during 1988 for review and analysis at the end of the season. Action Recuested Pass a motion accepting 13, 000 patrons or more as the definition of a peak crowd for Canterbury Downs use of Gate No. 5 for exiting patrons, that the usage be limited to 20 times per year, that proper traffic management be applied, that patrons be educated about the use of Shenandoah Drive and Highway 101 and finally that records be kept for 1988 for analysis during the off season. JKA/jms _ � C�- CANTUBUR ' jt/t :;'�' 0 o W N 5 1988 4lry June 30, 1988 TO: John Anderson Shakopee City Administrator FROM: Tom Brock —7�, Director of Operations Canterbury Downs RE: Gate 5 We have continued- to use Gate 5 for exiting traffic during peak events in compliance with our original conditional use permit, Environmental Impact Statement and Indirect Source Permit. We are now proposing more specific standards be established within these guidelines . We recommend Gate 5 be used for peak exiting traffic only,. for those events with attendance of 13,000 or more. In addition, we would recommend that use of Gate 5 be limited to a total of 30 times for the 1988 season. Thus far, in 1988, Gate 5 has been used for exiting ten times, leaving 20 potential uses for the season. This compares to the 1987 total of approximately 20 times and 1986 total of 10 times . The increased usage of Gate 5 has been due to a change in patron traffic patterns and demands. This peak traffic standard is a . separate issue from emergency use of Gate 5 . Per original agreements , Gate 5 will continue to be utilized for emergency vehicles such as police, fire and ambulance. Canterbury Downs/1100 Canterbury Road/P.O. Box 508/Shakopee, Minnesota 55379/(612)445-7223 City of Shakopee pKO p POLICE DEPARTMENT 476 Soulh Gorman Slreel t — SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 .4 - ILOI..ITel. 612/445-6666 - C C k � TO: John Anderson FROM: Ton Brownell RE: Traffic Blocking Driveway DATE: June 27, 1988 Mister Zefere Lusignan, 3650 Eagle Creek Boulevard, 445-3593, is complaining that traffic is stacking west of County Road 83 past his driveway when Canterbury gate on County Road 16 is used for traffic leaving the facility. The stacking results in the blocking of his driveway so that he cannot leave his dwelling and motorists becoming frustrated and using his driveway as a turnaround so they can proceed west on County Road 16 to avoid the intersection of County Road 16 and County Road 83. iC7o SE:�•_ J ��e_�a TO: JOHN ANDERSON P-C fv�D C/� FROM: JOE ZAK 4*3 113eg SUBJECT: GATE 5 OPENED AT CAN?EF,BU^n`. DOWNS CF`r,, .syn �rE DATE; MAY --1 , 1488 JOHN, IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTEN?ION BY A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THAT GATE 5 AT CANTERBURY DOWNS WAS OPEN FOR PATRON EGRESS ON SATURDAY MAY 28, 1988. IT WAS AGAIN OPEN ON SUNDAY MAY 29TH AND MOST PROBABELY WILL BE OPEN TODAY MEMORIAL DAY. O) I TALKED WITH TOM BROCK OF CANTERBURY AND HE TOLD ME THAT ACCORDING TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THE GATE COULD BE OPEN TO ALLOW PATRONS ACCESS TO RT16 (EAGLECREEK BLVD) . HE ALSO TOLD ME THAT IT WOULD BE OPEN ON SUNDAY AND MONDAY. CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG JOHN, BUT DIDN'T WE JUST DECIDE NOT TO OPEN THE GATE EVEN ON A TRIAL BASIS? ARE WE OR ARE WE NOT PERMITTED TO OPEN THE GATE PER THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT?? WHAT IS CORRECT HERE? IF THERE IS AN EMERGENCY ONLY PROVISION_ THEN THE TOTAL TRAFFIC COUNT (PEP, J. ZAK J DAVE CZA7,�, COUNi)-EXITING FROM GATE S WAS ONLY 1S5 VEHICLES. THE OTHER -SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS WERE OVER 300 VEHICLES TURNING LEFT ONTO CTY 16 FROM 87. S (NON EXISTENT ROAD? NON EXISTENT TRAFFIC COUNT?) THIS INCLUDE 2 BUSES WHICH I BELIEVE ARE PROHIBITED FROM USING CTY 16. (CONSOLIDATED COACHES AND RICHFIELD) THIS WAS ON A TOTAL ATTENDANCE OF 14166 ON SUNDAY MAY 29TH. HOW DID THAT CONSTITUTE AN EMERGENCY? O ALSO, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PORSCHE CLUB OF AMERICA HAS LEASED SPACE IN THE PARKING LOT TO PURSUE RACING, REVVING OF ENGINES, ETC. IS THAT PART OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERRMIT? THERE APPARENTLY WAS A GREAT DEAL OF NOISE IN THE 11:00 P. M. AREA. I CANNOT VERIFY BUT HOW DOES THIS FIT IN WITH THE SAFETY AND NOISE ORDINANCES ? OR DO WE EVEN CARE? LET ME KNOW ON THIS PLEASE. I AM NOT TRYING TO RAG ON CANTERBURY AND I BELIEVE TOM BROCK IS SINCERE I8' TRYING TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. (HE AND I DISCUSSED THIS ON SUNDAY MORNING BEFORE THE END OF THE RACE DAY) ONE SUGGESTION WAS TO MEET WITH DAVE HUTTON AND TRY TO COME UP WITH SOME OTHER TRAFFIC TURNING PATTERNS ETC TO HELP THE TRAFFIC PROBLEM. I AM QUITE GLAD THAT ONE OF OUR BUSINESSES IS ZN -A POSITION TO NEED HELP HANDLING ALL THE CUSTOMERS AND IS PROSPERING AGAIN AFTER A DOWN YEAR, MY PROBLEM IS SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON THE PHONE (AGAIN) ON AN ISSUE THAT I THOUGHT WAS SETTLED. THE QUESTION -- AFTER THE DISCUSSIONS AT CITY HALL ON THE GATE 5 ISSUE THIS MONTH, WHY IS THE GATE STILL OPEN ? MANY THANKS. JOE ZAK Vierling/Wamnach moved to select _ Wolsf eld, Jarvis, Gardner Inc. , Minnen .olb*nn* " authorize the Mayor and cit P Minnesota 14ft contract for Council approval y for the updating rator ooSn the iai: .s s ,,... Comprehensive Plan. Motion carried unanimously. y� Wampach/Clay moved to authorize submission of a loan apost of the plication to the Metronol-tan Council for 75% of the total c project and designating the remainder of the cost to come from the 1988 fund balance. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved for a five minute recess at 8 : 28 P.M. carried unanimously. Motion Councilman Zak arrived and took his place. Wampach/Clay moved to re-convene. Motion carried unanimously. (�h . Tom Brock, Operations Manager, Canterbury Downs, addressed e Council regarding using Gate =5, which exits onto CR-16, more ecuently to facilitate exiting traffic. ifford Stafford 2328 Eagle Creek Boulevard, -stated tyzL he lieves that there is a definite traffic increase when Gate 5 open.hy Stafford, 2328 Eagle Creek Boulevard, stated that when terbury Do»'ns was preparing to develop, one promise that was e was that Gater5 would be used for emergency use only. Dscussion followed as to whether or not to hold on the rea public hearing �sest and whether or not to allow the use of Gate t5 until the public hearing to measure the i,-ipact CR-16. Of traffic on Zak/Scott directed staff to schedule a public hearing on the use _of Gate ;5 by Canterbury Downs for June 7 , 1988, eliminating the provision £or a trial use of Gate r5 until then, and that the Discus use of Gate ?5 w-11 be based upon the public hearinc. Discussion followed on the merit of keeping Gate n5 open until, the public hearing to measure the impact Of traffic on CR-16. Ro11 Call: Aves; Cncl.Zak and Scott- Noes; Cncl.,Wampach Vierling, Clay and Mayor Lebens otion failed. Zak/Wampach moved to reject all bids for the Huber Park Trail Observation Platform. Motion carried with Mayor Lebens opposed. Zak/Wamnach authorized appropriate City Huber Park Trail Over-Look and amend the plan specifications officials to rebid the he provide for an alternative method to be utilized in the MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator ` G FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Canterbury Downs Request to Utilize Gate a5 DATE: April 29 , 1988 INTRODUCTION• Canterbury Downs has requested o£�the City permission to use Gate n5 (the gate exiting onto C.R. 16) on a regular basis for exiting traffic during the 1988 racing season. BACKGROUND: When Canterbury Downs was initially constructed and received a conditional use permit and later a planned unit development approval from the City it proposed five gates entering and exiting the property. The environmental impact statement completed for the facility indicated that Gate r5, the gate exiti gonto C.$,. �6, would be only used for overflow traffic. Attached you will find- a page excerpt from the Environmental Impact Statement which reads "Five entrances to the racetrack site are assumed two are off C.R. 83, one is off 4th Avenue, one is off the proposed North-South collectoronthe Western boundary of the site, and one is off CSAH 16. This last gate will be the least utilized. It will remain closed for all events, except occasionally when it will be used during peak day time events to provide some relief for the remaining gates. " Canterbury Downs has comuliedyith this requirement with the exception of a shortcuring the summer of 1987 . At that i; a new manag_ment took over the track and was unaware of the restriction applied to the use of this gate. After being made aware of the provision Canterbury Downs ceased utilization of the gate on a regular basis. Attached you will find communication and backup information submitted to the City by Canterbury Downs. It is their conclusion based on the information included that use of this gate on a regular basis for exiting of traffic will improve the traffic circulation both within the track property and on the adjacent roadways at the end of the races. City staff conferred with the Assistant City Attorney and concluded that this is a traffic management issue and not a land use change, therefore action can be taken by the City Council without recommendation of the Planning Commission. Because it would be considered a traffic management issue there is no clear procedure for reviewing and approving or disapproving the reo_uest. It is the option of the Council to act on the request as they deem appropriate. If the Council feels it necessary they could set a public hearing to allow for public input into the decision making process. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The City Council could offer and pass a motion approving the request of Canterbury Downs. 2. The City Council could offer and pass a motion denying the request of Canterbury Downs. 3. The City Council could request, additional information be provided as well as provide an opportunity for citizen input concerning this matter. The Council could offer and pass a motion setting a public hearing for the June 7, 1988 meeting. If the Council so desired it could also consider allowing Canterbury Downs to utilize the gate during the interim period for exiting of traffic and monitoring traffic flow to determine the impact on traffic circulation around the track. The Council could then take action at the June 7, 1988 meeting after weighing the evidence from the track and input from citizens within the community. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative n3. The issue of the use of gate i5 for exiting of traffic from Canterbury Downs has caused concern within the community in the past. A major reason for the City not wanting Canterbury Downs to utilize this gate on a regular basis in the past was the concern that traffic exiting this gate would proceed in a Westerly direction and creating additional traffic in the residential areas of the community. Due to this previous concern, staff recommends that the Council hold a public hearing giving citiZeas the Opportunity to address Council regarding the request from Canterbury Downs. — ACTION REOUESTED• 1. Offer and pass a motion directing City staff to schedule a public hearing on the use of gate ;5 by Canterbury Downs for the June 7, 1988 meeting. 2. Offer. and pass a motion authorizing Canterbury Downs to use Gate t5 on a trail basis prior to the June 7th public meeting with the option of closing Gate r5 prior to June 7th if major problems arise. P�rcen: Direction of AnDroach TH 41 Bridge 3 TH 169 Bridge 10 CSAH 1S North 15 TH 101 East 53 CR 42 oast - „• 12 CR 83 South 1 TH 169 South - 6 - Figure 4.2.4 indicates The direction of approach on the existing highway system which would be used until future roadway improvements are completed. Direction o: approach for design day events as well as for peak evens are shown. Due co me magnitude of the crowd during peak evens, approach directions were moe;�ied somewhat. The majority of these modifications were minor except for traf5c - approaching on County Road 42 from the east. During peak events, is s �r anticipated that larger crowds would be attending from outside the metropoii:an area and that neopie hving to the east (primarily Dakota County) would use this _ route To reach the racetrack. - Figure 4.2.5 shows the direction of aparoach once the proposed fuTure highway system in the area scompleted. Major differences between Figure 4.-,.b and Figure 4Z5 are due to the eonstuction of me proposed Shakopee Bypass and me reconstruction of County State Aid Highway 1S. Once inside the studv area, rips are distributed in a logical manner To access the site. For arriving Trac=ic, aporoximateiv one-ha'- of The westbounc sr.e _ _=== on TH 101 access tae site a: %alley Park Drive. Of The remaining ha-'f, :we-= c> use CR S3 and ons--third uses the north-south collector s:.ree--. For — _ ieavin_ the site, parking lo: controls will be used to insure man eastbound -affic On T-: 101 is e - as neariv as possmie di -fbuted eoualiy among the Three exits ma- Bead to TH 101 (North-South C011eCmr street, CR S3 and Valley. Park Drive). =srppund =r - -��,. a-iving on TH, 101 will use The North-Soum collector primarily. Likew^s :or Westbound westbound tr�-'fic leaving the site via TH 101. Five entrances to the raceck site are assumed: two are o_ CR S3, one s pf_ .*< - 4th Avenue,=one is c`_ me proposed North-South collector on the western boundary of the site, and one is o_ CSAH 16. This last SETE will be the leas: utilized. It will I remain dosed for all evens, except occasionally when it will Be used during peak JII daytime evens to provide some relief for me remaining gats 42.3.3 Non-Site Traffic - - In order to dere:mine background traffic in the vicinity of t::^.e site, -attic counts were taken along Trunk Highway 101 at Valley Park D:ive and County Road 83, on Fridav, August 26, and Saturday, August. 77, 19£3. During these periods, Valley' ' as well as The Renaissance Festival and State =air were operating. in addition, -affix counts conducted on the above days for use in dezermining raceraak background -aific were Taken on days (Friday and Saturday) when the '_l=ie Si;. - Bingo Parior was in session. : ConsecuenTly, n is ief= taa: mese C---'n= reDresnT gr worst case background Traffic conditions. -To preserve mis `worst case" ouch- , no CA VERBURY. - - ; - ° D 0 w N s :: 7 April 21, 1988 Mr. John Anderson City Administrator .City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Use of Gate f5 Dear Mr. Anderson: I believe that any question concerning the use of Gate ?5 is a traffic management question which if it is to be reviewed by anyone other than City staff, then it should be reviewed by the City Council. The racetrack is not asking for an - amendment to any conditional use permit or planned unit develooment. The extent of the use of its entrance cafes was never cart of the conditional use permit approval process. When the racetrack submitted its various materials to the City in 1983 for approval, it showed that Gate f5 would be used for 10% of the traffic. see Exhibit F. which is the submission to the Metropolitan Council and the Citv of Shakopee in the fall of 1983 that shows Gate r5 to handle 10% of the traffic. In our final EIS approved by the City, after the conditional use permit was approved, the only limitation onGate- 5 was 11 a statement that the southerly gate would be closed after 10 P.Y. See Exhibit B. - In any event, in the past we have limited the use of Gate E5 to peak event use. For the reasons noted in the enclosed memorandum from Barton-P_schmar. Associates and letter from Canterbury Downs, we want to use it more frequently to facilitate exiting traffic. Canterbury Downs/1100 Canterbury Road(P.O. Box 508/Shakopee, Minnesota 55379/1612)445-7223 City Of Shakopee Page 2 April 21, 1988 If you would like further input from us on this subject or if you want us to appear at a council meeting to review this, please let me know and as alw;_vs wewould be glad to attend and answer any questions. In any event, we expect opening weekend to be a peak event under our old policwhen we would use Gate ;5 y and perhaps it would be helpful for City staff to review its use on those days so you can see how it works to facilitate existing traffic. Please let me know what you would like to do or any comments YOU may have. ery ly^yours, Mike Manning General Manager Tom Brock Operations Manager �z'+v0(�'y' go 3 tat Avenue E: � rr* T.H. 101 - I'� a . 'r !teal;2, o V-1,•�• c �` ; 25%,C- 3s% s%F38%F East-West Road - `. ;__ r_ V 4 m c'S-t 56.a� Figure 10 Site Access .a Existing Road.eys -- Proposed RnaOWays Proposed Mterseallon Improvements DO%- Per Cent of eMernfg Traffic by Gate s...s.-..�N.......ev.....•.,� t NON-SITE TRAFFIC Existing traffic counts were taken along Trunk Highway 101 at Valley Park Drive and County Road 83 on Friday, September 2, 1983, and Saturday, September 3, 1983. During this period, Valley Fair as well as the Renaissance Festival were operating. Conse- quently, it is felt that these counts will represent *orst traffic conditions for the peak arrival and departure times at the Track and were used for all existing intersection analysis. For future conditions (implementation of County Road 18 river crossing, Shakopee Bypass, etc.), the year 200D traffic volume assignment in the recently completed D.-aft Environmental Impact Statement for County Road 18 west arterial aherrate (recom- mended alternative) was used. Figure D-E, Current and Future ADTs, shows average daily traffic projections. The existing ADT is based on MnDOT's 1982 traffic volume mans. SITE ACCESS Once inside the s^.udy area, :.rips were distributed in a logical manner to arrive ax the site. Of soeciai note is the use Of Valley Park Drive to access the site. Approximately one-half of westbound Trunk highway 101 sit- :. is will use Valley Park Drive. This is approximately - _.he split which balances the level of service at Count' Road 83 and a: Valley Park Drive. Valley Park Drive will be extended southerly to intersect with the proposed east-west street that intersecrs, to the west, with County Road 83. Five entrances to the racetrack site are assumed: Two off Of County Road 83, one e_`- of D-7 County Road 16, one off of Fourth Street, and one along the western edge o: ffsl�- I (see Figure D-2) off of the proposed collector street. Distribution of traffic at intersections adjacent to the site under all alternatives studied are attached. INTERSECTION ANALYS!S Based on the data and assumptions indicated earlier in this report, the level of service analysis for critical intersections was performed. Detailed anaivsts for each intersection at various peak hours are attached along with a description of the capacity analysis parameters. Tables 4 and 5 show the resulting levels of service for the overall intersection (weighted average of all movements) and for the most congested intersection movement. Table 4 .:� addresses level of service for the existing highway system. The design event can be easily accommodated. Exiting special event traffic (25.000) will encounter congxion at the Trunk Highway 101 and Valley park Drive intersection, and at the CR 19 and TH 101 intersection. Special events are anticipated to occur four or five. times Der. ,year at a m.,aximum. Consequently, rather than designing a system to accommodate these crowds prior to implementation of the ultimate highway system,., transportation system management (TSM) techniques will be initiated. - Maximum crowds that can be handled without intersection congestion, on the existing roadway system, on special even: days range between 19,000.and 20,000. Traffic patrol supervision similar to that provided at-past Viking games at the Metropolitan Stadium :A 0-8 T �• us g ll 77, 4th Avenue LH. 101 _ vlp r T F 0.R. 42 —J \ 41 m $( Figure 4.2.2 �2acetrac% Proposed Access Improvements = Existing Roadways y — Pro ooa.E Roadways z * Proposed Intersection lmcrovements 1 , 7. Treating the track with water or dust controlling chemicals. f f - 8. Covering the loads of trucks hauling dust-producing materials from the site. 9. Ceasing dust producing activities during periods of high winds. 5.3 Noise j The following are measures to minimize noise effects attributed to the operation J of racetrack development. 5.3.1 Building Design i The grandstand will be an enclosed structure comprised of the following materials, which may be subject to possible design changes. (a) Front (track side) will consist of 1-inch thick insulating glass, non-opening. (b) Back of structure will be primarily windows. (c) Ends will consist of pre-fabricated steel with 6-inch thick batt insulation. j , .(d) Roof will consist of pre-fabricated steel with 4-inch urethane insulation. (e) Decking will consist of metal with 214-inch concrete overlayment. Sound levels inside an enclosed grandstand of this type will be inaudible in the neighboring residential areas. 5.3.2 Public Address System Noise levels created by the PA system at Tampa Downs racetrack in Oldsmar, Florida, were measured to determine the volume. The sound created by this system was measured to be within the range of 75-78 dBA at ear level. This system was designed for calling of races, so its volume is controlled to overcome masking created by the cheering crowd. L- is anticipated that the volume requirements for the Shakopee racetrack would be similar. Accordingly, to meet nighttime noise standards and to achieve the required 75-78 dB.A volume a, ear leve:, the Shakopee PA system will need to consist of 10 or less speakers at a height less than. 31 feet from ear level. 5.3.3 Traffic Routing The south entrance gate to the proposed racetrack site will be closed after 10 p.m. to prevent site traffic from entering the residential area along CSAH 16. Traffic will be routed through industrial areas. Additional measures should be outlined in the Special Provisions of all construction contracts, which designate specific haul routes located outside noise sensitive areas. 110 Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 612-332-0427 hII+pi2ANA7N. TO: T= Brock - Canterb r-y Downs FROM: Deane Wenger - Bar`inn-As=artan Associates, Inc. Holly Bassett - Barton-Aschitan Associates, Inc. , =E: Marti 31, 1986 S'Jd7ECT: Sa th Gate Entranne/- ut, at Canterbury Dowas 4- Canterbxi y Doubts is considering additional use of the south gate ro which er-its onto CR 16 airing the peak departure titre at the track to eliminate corgesion on and off site. You have asked us to analyze the eyising traffic management plan and to info= you if such additional use of gate t5 would halo to eliminate congestion on and off site. For the reasons sated herein, we conclude. tnat such use would be beneficial to overall traffic management. Figure 1 urticates gate locations at ¢n-ter-airy Dods. The peak cepa;cure is anticipated to last from one-half hour to one hour dependina on etterr:ance levels. Due to the more sporadic na--are of a_rivim racetraok, patrons, it is not anticipated that the so= gate will be used for ve^.icles etering the race?-MZ... Allowing additional exiting from C=^t_rnzy Downs to C2 15 w7=1 prim r'iy ;.-curve local access and retuce delays currently oo=u==ing at gate I. ?;es of the trips that weld use anis exit to head w.sr are Already using CR 16. 't is estirated tnat this is approxizateiy for permet of the racetrack taffic. The n fferssr is that vonraas that now exit via CSP-Ti 83 t richt to eo -— on CR 16. If they are alluded to exit to CR 16 direly, the volutmes on CSM 83 north of CR 16 are re :oed, the CR 16 - CSAH 83 imt osection is relieved and the dest:rlbed exiting traffic does not have to wait in long lines t0 exit onto CSAR 83. :he aaestien than arises wmether the C4 16 eyit to co ws would be so convenient that -sips f-m cher roaces would begin using it. 'the ansae is M. When the track was first cpenixg, the mversion might have been expected. Now, however, a signal has been installed on Fourth Street and CH 17 in Shakopee so the egress frpm no=m of the tack park-mg is the twist convenient. Since werbourd CR 16 traffic must still wait for gaps in the CR 17 traffic to promed onto M 17, it will rot be so attractive a routing assto divert large voinanes. 1 T, 9 � Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. March 31, 1988 Page 2 The CR 16 exit would also be used to Nznit a left-turn exiting movement to eastbound CR 16. This will increase the CR la•volumes for a short distance to CSAH ,_ A t ie advantage for drive,-s would occur due to more balanced -- --traffic volumes apptnachieg the CR 16 - CSAR 83 inte:�ion. in addition, a significant nwaoer of these exit drive_*s Econ gate t5 world turn left on CR 16 and then would turn riot fr® CR i6 to southbo15 -uld tL thence south to CSAH 42. '4e do not anticipate the exit will cause any additional traffic problems, notPn CR16tial£rvn hazaalgate €,5.or diversion of trips except for the Ming to CSAR 83 via _. In addition, it should not cause any significant reroitrt of trips beyorrl �e CSAR 83 - CR 16 itr,.eisertior,. It is not anticipated that e a im fnn the south gate will significantly ' traffic on CR 16 east of CSM 83. This is be_ause it is easier +A rales a right ty alto CSAH 83 and south on CSA.H 42 than, it will be tc wait for gaps in CSAR 83 traffic to head east on CR 16. Cate receipts indicate t'mt 41 trent of racettaC:x traffic use gate =1 (CSAR 2. at 12th ;,venue) . Of that traffic, 33 pea-ce-t exit to the south on CSAR 42. If the so'ffl gate `5 was oom, it is esiria;zi that : one=nzf of the sout28x -Td traff ,t n i . �_t one-t'�_i td to `ic would vs..se the Barth crate t5 ixs, ad Of gate ,'1. This would arovide fora r ,La.on o£ i cars queuing to turn r gbt o of gate ';1 and provide additionalcty for roYhroutd are eastb=-d traffic at gates 1 arc =2. Yicure 2 snows estiaetzi South gate exiatr dissibution during the peak departure tine,. Tr^vugh the additional use of g za° ,5, the at CSAR 83 and nate tl Vi be safer for use by Pat-xS and etre- mo',.cris*s Li— Intersertion. lk^- I y / _ ' I c c T.H. 101 .". . GATE E2 o 1J GATE 2 —a 72'h Aven 08 ULl GATE 1 � + ...... �lF.h j Essi-West floatl ��^ - C C UIC,S I �{ 7e l _ L.R. 42 I Canterbury Downs Access Gates MGR 31 'e8 11:38 MNTERP.RY DOW6 P.5n 40t A�omf rI:T m A •,� T.H. 101 o � � r C f �. 12th Av¢nu¢ Entt-ww hood ZY\ s oI c 4s„t.k 0 F. 42 Distribution of Traffic Exiting via South Gate LUJ 6srtm-hsc�n AaaxkxEns, kx. Figure 2 C NERaUY D O W N S April 4, 1988 Mr_ Doug Wise City Planner City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, M1Q 55379 Dear Mr. Wise: RE: Additional use of Gate 4,5 In the cast, Carterbury Downs has primarily used Gates 41, 4-2, `3 and =4 for vehicular entrance and exit. For the reasons stated 'herein, we are now considering the limited use of Gate -`.5 or, County Road 16 for exiting traffic from the racetrack.. however, since we told the City Council we would review with them any changes in the use of Gate =5, before doinc so we would like to brine this matter before the City Council for preliminary briefing and feedback. We would request to be out on the agenda under "Other Business. " Our internal traffic management policy in the past has been that Gate E5 will remain closed for all events , except occasionally when it will be used during peak daytime events to provide some relief for the remaining gates. Canterbury Downs is proposing to change its internaltraffic management Dian to provide that, Gate "5 will remain closed during incoming traffic for all events except emergencies but be regularly open daily for peak exiting traffic to provide some relief for the remaining gates. We are proposing this modification for two reasons. First and most importantly, we believe it will improve the safety of the intersection of Gate xl and County Road 83 and the intersection of County Road 63 and County Road 16. Second, we believe it will decrease the period of time that exiting traffic moves through Shakopee as a result of Canterbury Downs. We have reached this conclusion based upon Canterbury Downs ' three years of operation experience and the enclosed report from Barton-Aschman Associates_, Inc. , our traffic consultants . Canterbury Downs/1100 Canterbury Road/P.O. Boz 508/Shakopee, Minnesota 55379/(612) 445-7223 9 Page Two 1. Canterbury Downs has used Gate t5 for exiting on peak days per our original traffic management plan for three seasons with no resulting problems. 2. During August of the 1987 season, Canterbury Downs used Gate x5 for peak exiting daily on a trial basis with no resulting problems. We should have reviewed this with the City staff prior to the additional use of Gate 15 but the new General Manager was not aware of the prior traffic -- _-- management plan when he directed staff to use Gate n5 more frequently. Once he was informed of the plan, he instructed staff not to use Gate t5 for daily use until we reviewed this with the City. 3 . General traffic patterns for the 1985, 1986 and 1987 seasons support the use of Gate t5 as proposed. 4 . Customer feedback from these three seasons in which customers have complained about not being able to exit efficiently enough and customers have specifically asked to use Gate S5. Daring our three years of experience, we have learned that less than 4% of the cars leaving Gate tl turn south on County Road 83 and then turn west on County Road 16 in order to return to downtown Shakopee. Many of our local patrons use this route to return to their homes in Shakopee. However, each of these cars presently must exit Gate rl and take a -fight turn, and then they must turn right again at the intersection of County Road 83 and County Road 16 adding unnecessarily to congestion at the intersection of Gate =1 and County Road 83 and the intersection of County Road 63 and County Road 16 and thereby slowing up southbound tra`_fic on Countv road 63. By opening Gate =5 for exiting traffic, these patrons can achieve the same result but without slowing up other cars leaving Gate rl who wish to no north or south on County road 83 or east on 12th Avenue and then to Highwav 101. Also by Opening Gate :5, a higher percentage of the patrons who drive south on County Road 83 to County Road 42, can accomplish that without adding to the traffic at Gate tl and County Road 83. More of the remaining cars at Gate `:'1 will then be able more efficiently to drive straight ahead east on 12th Avenue to Highway 101 or drive north on County Road 83 to Highway 101. Some cars will continue to turn right at Gate `l and drive south on County Road 42. Page Three We sincerely believe this proposal would improve traffic flow for both Canterbury Downs and Shakopee. We ask the City Council for its reaction and ideas and look forward to meeting with them. Sincerely, -- Tom Brock Director of Operations TB/jh cc: Mike Manning Tim Thompson Tom Brownell it CIT': OF SHAKOPEE Q C;, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. 351 WHEREAS, Brooks Hauser 6 Brooks Fields of Scottland, Inc. having duly filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit dated October 20, 1983 under the provisions of the Shakopee Zoning Ordinance , Section ii l��,ba, iA c ink>� 11 13 S�dfel(lows : a h h ygbl 7 . 'f f 45 f f structures, to allow for construction of grandstands and light standards and to allow for an npproximateRO acre pn=ibn of th "=l _ fnri111, t d inrn An T-1 (tighr Tndu crrial ) .one " and WHEREAS , the present zoning for the parcel on which the Conditional Use Permit is being requested is designated as : T-1 f, 1-2 and WHEREAS , the property upon which the request is being made is described as : dylvcb a th s'a and WHEREAS , upon hearing- the advice and recommendation of the City Planner and upon considering the suggestions and objections raised by the affected property owners within a radius of 350 feet thereof in a public hearing duly held thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE„ MINNESOTA, that the aforementioned Conditional Use Permit application be and is hereby : APPROVED as follows : 1. The applicant provide the City with detailed plans and designs for the racetrack facilities upon their completion to permit review for conformance with all applicable local land use and zoning regulations, with particular attention provided to setbacks and screening rrom ad,7acent properties. 2. The applicant participate and assist the City in developing detailed land use plans for the area in ano around the racetrack properties once final development begins. 3. Theapplicantprovide a final arainage plan for surface water manaoement ace .Looie• to the City Engineer. 4. That maximum care be taken in the layout and desien c` racetrack lichtin , as we as other racetrack faci ities and appurtenant structures, to insure adjacent properties are -not negatively affected by light, blare, noise, odors or dust, exoecially tnat t e western ight stanaards do not adversely affect the private airport located to thenortheast of the site. 5. That the City will continue to exercise review authority as more detailed plans are developed for the tleSlgn OT L e rd CBLrdCK TdCtI1n es. ine ;.icy wiii continue r0 monitor and approve plans for all proposed public and private improvements to roads, uri iries and other necessary public support systems sucn a5 fire and police protection. - - - BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Shakopee City Code, Section 11. 04 , Subd . 6C-12, if an approved Conditional Use Permit is not utilized within one year from date herein approved or by November 3 19 84 , it shall become null and void . Adopted in Regular session of the Shakopee Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this 3rd day of November 19 83: 4CbadV1rV, -Pr-1a=,ng Copimission 'TATE OF MINNESOTA) CITY OF SHAKOPEE AI'.ENDMFNT and/or RENEWAL to CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. 351 WHEREAS , Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. did on Mav 27 1986 file for an amendment to and/or renewal o the e>:isting Conoiciona Use Perm--' t Resolution , which was initially adopted by the Shakopee Planning Commission on November 3 , 1983 under the provisions of the Shakopee Zoning Ordinance, Section 11. 32 ,Subd.37 6 30 , Sec. 11. 33 ,Subd. 3C, as follows : to exceed the heia_ht limitation of 45 feet for structures, to allow for construction of grandstands and liaht standards d to allow for an approximate 80 acre poruon o_ the commercial recreation facility to extend into an I-1 zone. ; and WHEREAS , said requested amendment(s)/renewal of condition-(s) would allow for: Move-in dwlg. units to a permanent location within the City. and WHEREAS , the present zoning for the parcel on which the Conditional Use Permit exists is designated as : I-1 and I-2 and WHEREAS, the property upon which the conditional use is being utilized is described as : 1100 Canterbury Road N9' 1 os Section 9 ; and WHEREAS, upon hearing the advice and recommendation of the City Planner andupon considering the suggestions and objections raisesd by public hearing duly held thereon. - - -- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SP_AKOPEE PLANNING COPLMISSION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the aforementioned amendments to conditions and/or renewal of, existing Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 35l be and is hereby : Approved as follows : No Certi'icate of Occupancy shall be issued until all building code r eau_rements are met. Dona equal to toe value of toe improvements shall be reau'red. 2. Units must be modified on the exterior to be comPa`..ibie with the the existing structures !ocatea on the szte. Aoc: aeslgn snarl be the dame as existing buildings on site. 3. Uaas must be landscaped with screening provided on the n=th, eases and sour.. 4 . The ap_rlicant shall develop a Housing Plan which will address future nous�nc needs, to De approvea by toe -laming Commission Prior to construction of any additional housing. Dwelling sha'-= _-e for stable personnel only. Adopted in - reaula_ session. of the Shakopee Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this 5th day of June 19 86 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Upper Valley Drainage Right-of-Way Acquisition DATE: July 1, 1988 Introduction The City of Shakopee is in the process of acquiring right-of-way for the Upper Valley Drainage Project. Mr. Scherber and Mr. Clark own a parcel of property that will be divided by the construction of the drainage way. They have contested the location of the drainage way in court and failed. Now they are again requesting that our attorney bring their request before City Council in the form of a proposed settlement for City Council's consideration. Background Mr. Carmichael, the attorney for Mr. Scherber and Mr. Clark, has corresponded with Rod Kress who has represented the City throughout the acquisition process and in the courts. Mr. Krass has forwarded correspondence from Mr. Carmichael to Council. It is attached--and -dated June 22, 1988. In the correspondence Mr. Carmichael explains to Mr. Kress that he is "renewing the offer of Mr. Scherber and Mr. Clark to convey the southerly 100 feet, the easterly 100 feet of the southerly 660 feet (approximate) and a southwesterly 1 acre triange for the sum of $100, 000.00. " Since he specifically requested that this offer be presented to City council the Assistant City Attorney has forwarded it Council. Alternatives 1. The City can reject the offer as presented by Mr. Carmichael in his letter of June 22, 1988 to Mr. Philip R. Krass. The circumstances around the owner's original request have not changed since the matter was tried in court where the judge ruled for the City. The ruling was on the City's right to acquire the right-of-way for a public purpose not on property value or damages. We do not feel that the property owner has established any condition which would suggest that the City vary from its original appraisal offer. 2. The City could accept the offer for acquisition of the right-of-way as presented above for the sum of $100,000.00. This $100,000.00 offer is approximately $40,000.00 higher than our appraisal offer. The reason that the City might consider this offer would be because we concur with the owner's claims for severance damages as testified to by their engineer and planner. Recommendation The Assistant City Attorney and I recommend alternative No. 1. We also recommend that the City employ a professional planner so that we can have his testimony available at the condemnation hearing (a board made up of three people appointed with real estate experience) when land values and severance damages will be the subject of the hearing. Mr. Krass and I have discussed this and believe that the City should select a planning consultant not presently under contract with the City, but with some knowledge of the City and/or with some experience in testifying at a condemnation hearing. The three planners that we feel fit these criteria are Fred Hoisington, John Shardlow, and (name to be provided by Rod) . Action Requested 1. Direct the appropriate City officials to contact Mr. Carmichael who is representing Mr. Scherber and Mr. Clark and indicate that the City Council is not interested in their offer as outlined in Mr. Carmichael's letter of June 22, 1988 to Mr. Philip R. Krass. 2. Direct the appropriate City officials to select a planner for testimony before the condemnation hearing and bring back an agreement for said planner's services for Council action. JKA/jms RECEYVED- 9�( LAWOfFICFS JUNE 41988 / KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED CITY C" _.. ._ . ._ PEE PhAp R. Kness Marschall Road Business Center Dennis L Monroe Barry K.Meyer 327 Marschall Road Trevor R. Maten P.O. Box 216 Jay D.Goldberg Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 Diane J.Canso'Telephone(612)4455080 Lachlan B.Muir FAX(612)445-7640 James B.Croft Colleen M.Trends Kent A.Cadwn,CPA June 28, 1988 Mr. John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: City of Shakopee v. Batch, at al. Our File No. 1-1373-210 Dear John: Enclosed please find the most recent correspondence I have received from the attorney for Mr. Scherber and Mr. Clark. By copies of this letter to all of our staff people, I am asking everyone to take a look at the letter, my response, and give me a reaction. I am wondering at this time if we ought to have a professional planner take a look at the parcels as they would be severed by this ditch tobe able to testify that the Land as severed east and west by the ditch and divided north and south by the zoning line is still developable in a reasonable manner. At the court hearing, the property owners' planner, Wayne Tower, testified as to the difficulties of developing what will end up to be four quarterly parcels. I think we better be prepared to deal with those issues. If you agree, please suggest and put us in contact with a planner as soon as possible. Very truly our BRASS M CBARTERED llip R Brass PRR:mlw Enclosure cc: David Button, City Engineer Robert D. Frigaard, Project Engineer Peter Patchin VGEP()IWFLL IA5681 RowD cx.xLes x.uxNlcn.el vrx Povxzn srxeez Mllrx ewROLxs.MxxResoza 554(a eroN.xlxxesou asH>� MIGx.H1 H.LH.RON PAIN owxv n N�DOw eLC (612) 545-0000 ......... HPeN e.exoexsoN MN Tov FREE 500-343-4545 r exoexsoN SOI PnAH Peace crHPex a.Hoae GaHLH MGLAw MlxxHwxoLls xv9eHlNsox,NlNxesoz.mxso ROLE L NwIL JR. ZHLIfAelYx fie,¢)X] 19x3 (BI E(EB>->63 LVL x.lx HSLND .. w.xxveooexeNN Josexn x.PULxexr JaRzs VrCHr June 22, 1988 Mr. Philip R. Brass BRASS & MONROE 327 Marschall Road P.O. Box 216 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Re: City of Shakopee V. Hatch, et al. Your File No. 1-1373-210 Our File No. 2058-88-0005 District Court File No. 88-03217 Dear Mr. Brass: we have proceeded to employ an appraiser for the Commissioner' s Hearing in regards to the above matter. In discussing the matter with our appraiser and reviewing previous reports from our planner, Wayne Tower and our engineer, Bill Price, it seems to me that the City' s most cost-effective resolution of the matter would be to relocate the ditch across the Scherber/Clark parcel as proposed in my correspon- dence to you of April 27 , 1988. Messrs. Scherber and Clark would be willing to convey the Southerly 100 feet, the westerly 100 feet and an approximate 1 acre triangle in the Southwest corner totalling approxi- mately 5 . 25 acres for the sum of $100,000.00. The City' s appraisal seems to neglect the severance issues and ignores the potential inverse taking of much of the Scherber and Clark property adjoining the ditch. The City must contemplate the cost of bridging the ditch. You may recall that Wayne Tower testified that the ditch will probably have to be bridged in two places in order to accommodate development of the property. These are recoverable expenses from the City. The City's engineer speculated that the dirt cost may be $40, 000.00 greater to locate the ditch along the South line of the Scherber/Clark parcel. With the increased dirt cost of approximately $40, 000.00 and q Mr. Philip R. %rass June 22, 1988 Page 2 the set payment of $100, 000.00, the City is still money ahead on the project and the City may be able to reconvey the Southwesterly triangle of the Scherber/Clark property and recoup some of its acquisition cost. I am herewith renewing the offer of Mr. Scherber and Clark to convey the Southerly 100 feet, the Easterly 100 feet of the Southerly 660 feet (approximate) and a Southwesterly 1 acre triangle for the sum of $100,000 . 00. Please present the offer to the City Council and let me know whether we can resolve this matter without both sides incurring further costs and expenses . I will look forward to discussing the matter with you at your convenience very?kL ours, ARN C r C:rf� CC: Jerome P. Scherber t m a — a N ♦ d a y o m m A ♦ J • po a W i W • o a l F Z -1 O -C o m � \ \ \ P P P p D 0 W W F m m m m m m m m m m m m 9 m m I I D mmi _ _ a_ Ny ♦ ♦ 'mum. na yN _' y ANN - - NN YJ PP N o_ Ipp oe GG oo NN wN eoc oo G 00 NN NN O m o r m m ,r.� v a z a x n v z m "il x 41 N D D D. w m m = y S y yc cD 0 2 I o1 � 1 I a OI W iN N V N I b I O p N N N N N -ZI P o p I Z ro me u P i J a m W m O N I ! m S m v x z x z w n N V W d Y Y Y Y Y Y U V Y V 1 W W ¢ • • f • • i d f N 1 W 6 £ 0 f o r n m r > � a Nn rdr aaem y N � _ _ ^ __r ` a_ 1 P P P 1 1 i � e all- d °` u w ia`w rwr N a- - N Z N P N. N 1 O;o j O Pj o N 1 _ P e o � N o O o O F A O � q FlFlP A ^19 o d A a A p O PPP P �'. P P li P P i P � P 1 N � I � Qo d N O o O N o O O �'�. -.. 0 '. d00 6 j 2 i MNS ` r I i.. K N ¢ Q_ KC ¢ Oa Q Nr m N a 'z m �^ £ w a � ', d N W WNN WWa J p. J W J � LLLLLL »LL � 6V W J DOO 6p¢V d JJ F J K O N N W 666 FF W � b0 L �. N F f N Fpp I O D I N III V LL' 1V' '.,. U O V '., V ''. W W W i. V J y Opo U O r �u O �" j ZZZ LLLLLL F F"' r £LL PKC � IVi' ' 66 h O'' j ',. F �', 6 O �Y Y 6 O WD Z � N HP qy N :. Op Z > p Q ��d N 1- Y N < Q W W 6 _K K_ y V p 2 u Y Y YYY pDp J JJ E me �P cP NN * i deNOo - ooP x ` N NN 6P 11 rr ^N rr - Pn PON -PN nFl o(^ N � N �0 J .� � Q '... W q� a �0 N d b 0 m '. 0 S d 0 '. b00 d \ \ \ \ 6 a N a N N 'd NNN N `N NN N Z W \ \ \ < 0 0 0 o O o00 000 0 C } O r Z [� F 0 � m � P oo FlNIi N NN rw r N CN N m N N N N N M NNN N Na Fl - U 0 f � t ! � f - • b N0- } Nd0 f 0 i N@ f - m m m mmmm m a m m i m iri dw n' s n fi W a .p w y x - x P a NNNN Y N a J t .O a N x S O Z J ' O K e o T a J m NN N f0 NONb� N � D S m m m m mmmm m m 9 m m m m m mmmm m m m m m a N _ '. dmN� WW NN NN N -f ' I WW 'NN WW N>m.AJ WW N yy '. NN NN WJd -m NN N ''. oo 'I oe o0 Nm mm > mNma WW o0 0o WW 0 '' m 0 D 9 T 0090 Z Z 2 m S D u mmm ^ O 0 o a a m m n i m b nnx� z A C Ob a I A � C C O O AAAA y y P O 'i if r r 9 mbm x m m N S AAmm c N O y Z e o -IPpW D of 1 : I el I l l s o 0 0 W m N I r i N ti e OOOo 0 0 x w y4lA W I u m m i P y N O N m i m 3 m D aO m � z b b b m m P a % % a m a % % a % V Y Y U U U V U U V W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 u W N t u G a 6 W 1 s N O 0 N o s 'm n a N n a � b z n a- -N m a n _ _ _ n 1 ii I a w F o m- -u m _ z a n - nP I 1 1- N In Z n r 1'1 J. nn NN ' a N n N N OI P P PP P 1 1 I P 1 I I 1 1 Z O' y� F Z F_F_ F_ Z > » N Z % C < % m W < W L WW W GQ Q W S O. % % % LL L L` J J L LL LL LL W d V V V J V W O J 00 a 00 0 6 J O J JJ J J J �+ 6 W 66 L % 00 0 % J m W N O K O J 00 »_ U G SL > O. WW.. I W Y m i d V %m" Z '. � t % V V W �+ J W W W W % J J > J 2 ¢ 0 J m V 6 O m Q F m% N O Z Z O '. % O O N �- W W J 6 Z W KK V % J a 2 W Z2 6 O 6 66 VV Z > O O CK 00 W - W 6 Y LLLL > rr J J O Q Q Z 6 J J Z J S 2 M1M1 O Q G % %% F %. JJ > > > 3 3 t • : : ♦ . r nn NN Cm NON 1'�M NN bN f-r NN NN -- NNa I'� 1'� mm i rr - � men nn nn _ _ J NN av pn I O L m mm m m m0 m m m0 m \ O \ \m Y c m Pa c c� P N N NN N NN a N N S W \ \ % r 6'. o o ao 0 0 0o e o 0 0 LL O o O U Y No o mm b N o @ = N N N N NN N N u m m mm m m m m m m m m m_ a m _ m m e ' i m m m m m m m m e m o 0 0 o m �` � m P m a u N - e .a m -� P N a u ro - e : s z v o < 0 O T P P P P P P P P a P o P P m P P P �i N_ N N N N � N N � N � � b N b N N Nu' N �� m m m mm m m m a m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m ',. - - z _ y � -- Nro Nro mm mm .._ o -� me PP � � 'NN - - J+I ee NN N 'Nw WW as NN wN mm NN NN WW 0 00 aA WW NN WW o0 0o mm oo goo a0 0o Nm o Aa o YIW ' w � i m a z m o r '. .� x n a s a �c z m r v K v z z T y m N m a m 'm v w o x o a � y c s o z v s z m o a o r o m a m v a v o v .r. o <m m n m v w o v v w c � y o i y � o a m z m s i z a m z x o n r - c v r > < z ti o z_ x w x � p a n � z w m .. m o N � v m m � n < z a z � x � i m n � C D n Z y < x N y � m "° n m m a m x � v n n �� I. c w N m i m � O O � m 3 m 3 m � N O m 3m O 9 m T y i o c a o o r � m y v m c r � � o o T m T m o � v w n m T v z �I N m n v x m m r v r m s w o � w v ' n T °' m .. 9 m w w „ T - A w N N ^ o- m A < Z '< w o N o r �. r m m N i N - � o_ 4 1 'i y �L,, I. o a O � A > I o C O Y W I O W N N W o N_ � N W ro - y R � � N _ S � _ � VI O ''� � W d � m j � _ I P _ _ _ _ y _ _ _ a r o N l W W VI c m d < N P W .0 o A m a 1 m � I m i m m D m I m � m it w N N x W j V W Q N N i 6 W_ 0 i 0 W O 1 6 ^ I I I O y 2 F c n nN a n 61011 '. p Z QOJYZF J O N OW Oq>W Q i I. W N 6 = W ¢N W20S63¢ O � 6¢u V3�� MLL0 d ^ ¢ WZF06 £O ^ 2W¢Y2 660¢3Pm030u LL O <¢¢Q¢OmPP WNFN ^ J J 1FSV00 NW V Y � JJJ «< JJQJJJJ 2 yi > FffFfFYFFFFFF Y N � N ¢ 0000000000000 I. 4J 0 M FFFfFFFFFFF - '., p 3 I J _n.O NmNNPON_P♦ I '. 2 c o _aaanmFFm I, '., > < '�+ ce o mnoocmanommm � I ' J a H.H.ZZZZODZZZ a u �� DD3»J7 � Y Z LLLLLL4LLLLILLLLLLLLLLLL O O u F t t NN t i omN o mP,m 1-pGN 0 Na N NONON n0 ry N oo _ p PNPOFNO--tl NN - 00 - NnNmNnFNPb _ 2 FNNb_PN- P J I'In Yln O b N - _ NF q O N W W m O \ m 0 f20 F N N N GO e O o 0 O m m V _ m 00000 D o o RIM m m m m m m m mmm WOO O O O N bF o I� 3 FFFFF F F t N OON�` F F F F F' F F F FFF FFF F F F F W F c CJ 0\0\Q\O\ Y Y Y O W0r W0r 0r 0r r0 r Y Y 0 H NNN mmm 0Nw mN0 000 �D �O WOr Wr V0 O 0 . . . NWwpp N O O O O 000 CHH Y Y Y o Yi 0 O O o 0 0 000 W, Y r O 0 0 0 0 000 O aA 4 m C WWFw\p N F F OO O O O O O O O p pOO NYY Y Y Y F O Y N NW NYY N N N O 600 WV��n r r N Y 0 00000 0 0 0 m m m m m m m m m m mmm N00 0 0 o m m 0 p r Y Y Y r r Y Y rn rn Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y r r Y w Y Y r r r .n F Y y 00000 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 > Y Y Y Y r Y Y O Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y r r Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 0 9 00000 0 o Y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 D o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 c w rn w F O WW mm �O mO\ �Op �01 N N W W 0 Y Vwm mom O Om 0 O �n � m O O O O N �,616 W N N V Vp O O O R > O OH " O o 0 o N w O W N O O O O O Y 0 0 0 0 O c a vi m m m a ry m ry m N a a m a R N m m a = = a 3 3 H O p 0 a > m m H [t O a J OC Y Y ro •O p p C yJ d v b N 3 '] '] S m n o o w w s as m m H L+1 [J m m J J �-. a M M `G H P• p H ro n O a m M a m N y ILL a m y s k C C M K m m O y y O n C O O y O 3 p O 0 Y m w Y a Y o m Y m J J a 3 3 to m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N N N N N N N N p 0M�mm� m m N N NNN ��N N N N 0000 NN0 v0i F W N O O Y m 0 m 0 . Z c o w m '3 z µ C-0 b] v m 0 o m 0 o I- o m ✓' m w 3 < N C m m a W U) c+ B M 0 3 r N 3 3 O J r Q M y O w m o 0 Z Z W O O c+ H H N ci M K G y ml N Y Z Z H O W N C C W r a_ m O m J Y m Y a Y O' O J K J • p Y W m m M M ❑ m m m ml m � a m Y Vi J lA m Y < m m m S K S P w m C N 0 F m O O o m m y m m m p Y F W Y r N m m W 0 W Y W 0 �1 N w F m F W R lyp N w N W vri K 0 vwi Y N N v 0 0 0 O r m O O m m N N N o O N L 0 D\ O O �O 0 0 0 N W 0 W 0 0 1 F 0 0 0 0 Y 0 0 o a M H ro > o s H U ,y m Q E a C N u t U w c p1 a m £ m o > S . v 6 0000 0 1 0 000 U N N N N N MI N H H.1 0 io �i nHC' C-� M1ONON� o00 0 CNN Nw C E m w < V C C L y O O �100M cN.� , NWOO Yi � N N O O C O O.Y in -6 Y O E W N Q N In E 00 Y O b W N m N G > G Y } O M H so F H E O H E f�. N E 0 30 Y N my W F F F F 0 U 0000 O O W O» 0 m d < 0000 O E UH to P. W Y HHRH H p l l l l l l FH H R H U 0000 O W 001-N OJ OJ W H N N H H _ } m o` < p t SOOO w MMMM M S G HHRHH 0000 Ol CONSENT !,�,haknprr (rnmmunitg i9mratinn q� 129 Levee Drive Shakopee, MN 55379 Phone: 612-445-2742 Memo To: John Anderson From George Muenchow, Community Services Director Subject: Lions Park Trail Extension Date . June 30, 1988 Introduction Bituminous trails are an important facet of recreational usage within Lions Park. Construction of different segments have been planned over a period of several years. The southern loop, which includes a ponding area and small bridge, is scheduled for construction in 1988 (5 Year Capital Improvement Program). Background The Shakopee Lions Club, which has been a major partner in the development of Lions Park, is interested in financially participating in this project. They have allocated $20,000.00 from their 1987-1988 Budget for this purpose, the amount that is designated in the C.I.P. Schedule. If it is determined that more money is needed to complete the Trail Construction phase of this project, they will be willing to address this in their 1988-1989 Budget. Engineering has reviewed this project and is willing to incorporate it into its schedule with construction to take place the fall of 1988 or the spring of 1989. Permission is needed from the City Council to authorize Engineering to go ahead and develop plans and specifications. Alternatives 1. Forego the offer from the Shakopee Lions Club and postpone construction of this planned facility. 2. Proceed with plans to construct the southern look trail segment at Lions Park, which includes a ponding area and a small bridge using donated funds from the Shakopee Lions Club. Recommendation Proceed with Recommendation 112 authorizing the City Of Shakopee Engineering Department to prepare plans and specifications for the construction of a southern loop trail segment in Lions Park including the development of a small pond area and bridge. Action Move to authorize the City Of Shakopee Engineering Department to prepare Plans And Specifications for the purpose of constructing a Lions Park Southern Loop Bituminous Tail Extension including the preparation of a small pond and bridge as a part of the project, funding to be provided by the Shakopee Lions Club. A COOPERATIVE EFFORT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT 720 SINCE 1954 i, i --- ---- --- --- --- --_ ---- - - - - _ -- __ _- - ---�- _- ---: ---- _�_ � - $ � �� J T � ' �; i -- b � 7� � � ��, � r � ;, J �-�J� � ,. '� J �� ���� ;' � `�" ��- , � e :� � : � �� �3 � �� - � � �. � , � � J �� � I . _ . � � I I ` � � I � �-1.� � ... I J � � _ � .� . CONSENT 9� MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Extension of Employment of Planning Intern (Jon Glennie) DATE: June 28, 1988 INTRODUCTION• The pay roll authorization for Planning Intern Jon Glennie will expire on June 30, 1988. It is requested that Mr. Glennie's appointment with the City be extended through August 31, 1988. BACKGROUND: The City originally employed Mr. Glennie in July, 1987. Since that time Mr. Glennie's work has been acceptable quality and he has become an asset to the department. He continues to broaden his base of knowledge in various departmental operations and is readily able to handle new tasks as assigned. The extension of this internship has been discussed with both Gregg Voxland and Marilyn Remer in the Finance Department. Generally internships will be for a maximum period of one year. The City's personnel policy defines a temporary employee as someone who is appointed on a temporary basis for a continuous period not to exceed one year. The 1988 budget allocation for the Planning Intern position is $10,000. As of June 5th $5,800 has been expended. At this time Mr. Glennie has been periodically working on the Energy Conservation Program. This represents a source of funding outside of the $10, 000 allocated. If necessary, a budget amendment could be made which would provide sufficient funding for the Planning Intern position for the remainder of 1988. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Extend Mr. Glennie's pay roll authorization through August 31, 1988 . 2. Terminate the internship effective June 30, 1988. 3. Extend the internship for a six month period ending December 31, 1988. 4. Create a permanent Planner I position at budget time and have it be effective January 1, 1989. 5. Create a permanent Planning position at this time and advertise for the position to be filled. 6. . Authorize advertising for the filling of the intern position for the time after Mr. Glennie's departure. RECOMMENDATION• Alternatives #1 and 46 above are recommended. ACTION REODESTED: Move to extend the Planning Internship of Jon Glennie through August 31, 1988 and authorize the appropriate City officials to advertise for the fillifig of the Planning Intern position for a six month period starting no earlier than September 1, 1988. CONSENT q-k, MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Commission RE: Initiation of Litigation Against Donald Parrott DATE: June 28, 1988 INTRODUCTION• In 1987 the City initiated legal action against Mr. and Mrs. Donald Parrott for certain zoning and related land use violations. At this time it is requested that the City initiate legal action in that Mr. and Mrs. Parrott have apparently violated the conditions of a stipulation which they and the City signed during October, 1987. BACKGROUND: This matter was discussed with Assistant City Attorney Rod Krass and it was Mr. Kress's recommendation that the City initiate a civil suit against the Parrott's at this point for violation of the contract they entered into with us in October of 1987. Another property owner in the area has complained about the apparent violation of the contract. The action initiated by the City is the result of that complaint. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to initiate a civil law suit against the Parrotts for violation of the stipulation entered into in October, 1987. 2. Take no action on this subject at this time. RECOMMENDATION• Alternative nl above is recommended. ACTION REQUESTED- Move to authorize the appropriate City official to file a civil suit against Don and Lorraine Parrott for violation of the stipulation entered into between the Parrotts and the City of Shakopee in October, 1987. 9 0 Memo To: John K. AndersoCONSENT n, City Administrator a From: Gregg VOxland, Finance Director Re: Audit Services for FY 1988 Date: June 23, 1988 Introduction Jaspers, Streefland & Company has submitted a proposal for audit services for FY 1988. Background Jaspers, Streefland 5 Company has submitted their proposal for audit services for FY 1988 in the amount of $8,200. This is line with previous years. Staff has recommended for many years that Council change auditors order to have someone with a fresh view point in different experiences review our work. Council has chosen not to do so. Jaspers price is reasonable and I feel to look at other proposals on the basis of price would not be in the best interests of the City. Council should decide if they are going change auditors or not. If they are, then the auditor with the best qualifications should be ranked as such with price being given lessor consideration. Alternative, 1. Accept Jaspers, Streefland 6 Co. proposal. 2. Change auditors and seek proposals. Recommendation Staff recommends alternative #2. However, Council should not select alternative n2 just to ^window shop^. Jasper's price have been stable and is not a reason to change by itself. Also, in view of past year's recommendations and Council action, the action below is written in conformance with Council's past action. Actin Move to authorize the City Administrator to execute an Understanding of Engagement with Jaspers, Streefland h Company for audit services for FY 1988 in the amount of $8,200. GV:mmr CONSENT Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Bidding of Group Health & Life Insurance Package Date: June 24, 1988 Introduction The City is required by statute to rebid. employee insurance coverage every four years or 508 increase in rates. We have to rebid for 1989 because it has been four years. Background The City used the D.A. Tange Company to prepare the specifications and evaluate the bids four years ago. Tange is no longer in business and staff does not have the time or the expertise to properly accomplish the task. Funding is in the 1988 Budget to retain someone else for this task at an estimated cost of $4,000 to $5,000. Alternatives 1. Retain the same risk manager as Scott County. 2. Authorize staff to select and retain a risk manager for rebidding. 3. Solicit proposals and bring back to full Council. 4. Set up committee to select and retain a risk manager. 5. Authorized staff to make selection and bring back to Council before making commitment. Recommend Alternative #5. Action Requested Move to authorize staff to make a selection of a Risk Manager for the bidding process of employee group insurance and bring the matter back to Council for final approval. CONSENT 9 `< TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator / FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Interfund Transfers DATE: June 21, 1988 Introduction Request Council approve of the following'interfund transfers. They have been made inaccordance with the budget and previous Council action unless other wise noted. The transfers are for 1988. Backeround The detail of the transfers is; From Tax Increment Trust to HRA for admin fees $31,000.00. From Tax Increment Trust to General Fund for admin fees, $75,000. From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 86A Ref.TIF, $249,000.00 From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 86A TIF, $18,000.00 From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 86B TIF, $118,000.00 From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 87A TIF, $419,000.00 From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 87B TIF, $75,000.00 From General Fund to Community Recreation - $48,150.00. From General Fund to 85A Imp. Debt Service - $6,396.00. From General Fund to 86A Imp. Debt Service - $34,460.00. From General Fund to 86B Imp. Debt Service - $29,096.00. From General Fund to 86A Ref. Imp. Debt Service - $52,577.00. From General Fund to 87A Imp. Debt Service - $4,473.00. From Sewer Fund to Sewer Debt Service $20,000.00. Action Requested Move to approve the transfer: From Tax Increment Trust to HRA for admin fees $31,000.00. From Tax Increment Trust to General Fund for admin fees, $75,000. From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 86A Ref.TIF, $249,000.00 From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 86A TIF, $18,000.00 From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 86B TIF, $118,000.00 From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 87A TIF, $419,000.00 From Tax Increment Trust to Debt Service Fund 87B TIF, $75,000.00 From General Fund to Community Recreation - $48,150.00. From General Fund to 85A Imp. Debt Service - $6,396.00. From General Fund to 86A Imp. Debt Service - $34,460.00. From General Fund to 86B Imp. Debt Service - $29,096.00. From General Fund to 86A Ref. Imp. Debt Service - $52,577.00. From General Fund to 87A Imp. Debt Service - $4,473.00. From Sewer Fund to Sewer Debt Service $20,000.00. 'CONSENT MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: 1987 Annual Reports DATE: June 29, 1988 Introduction Attached are the 1987 Annual Reports from various City departments. Discussion The Council should remove this item from consent agenda to discuss any desired format changes or any surprising statistics. Action Requested Move to receive the 1987 Annual Reports. JKA/jms 9m MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer ,.�✓'� SUBJECT: Oversized Watermains - Special Assessment Policy DATE: June 22, 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses the oversizing of watermains and specifically how the current City special assessment policy relates to the SPUC policy on funding for costs associated with installing oversized watermains. BACKGROUND: At the June 7 , 1988 meeting , City Council directed staff to review the current City special assessment policy regarding oversized watermains and if necessary, to revise it to conform with the SPUC policy on their definition of oversized watermains. The issue came up when the developer for the Meadows 1st Addition subdivision requested that the City or SPUC reimburse him for the additional costs associated with installing 8 and 12 inch watermains , versus the standard 6 inch main outlined in the special assessment policy. At the June 7 , 1988 meeting City Council authorized staff to enter into a reimbursement agreement with the developer to compensate him for the installation of oversized mains. For this particular development, the utility manager indicated that the current SPUC policy allows 8 and 12 inch mains to be used as standard sizes and that they would not automatically reimburse the oversized costs for this subdivision simply because the watermain was greater than 6 inch. The general discussion by Council and staff was that the two policies should agree and staff was directed to review the special assessment policy and make any recommendations necessary to make it conform to the SPUC policy. In reviewing the SPUC policy on Trunk Watermain Assessments (refer to paragraph 5 , on page 2 of the attached SPUC policy , Resolution #222) , it states that standard sized watermains shall be as follows: 6 inch for R-1 , R-2 , and R-3 residential areas. 8 inch for commercial, business, schools, and high density residential (R-4) areas. 12 inch for industrial areas. City Council also adopted this SPUC policy by Resolution No. 1791 (attached) Watermains June 22 , 1988 Page 2 Staff has attached a copy of Page 16 of the current special assessment policy, which states that watermain assessments will be based on 6 inch mains for residential areas and 8 inch mains for commercial and industrial areas. This policy is somewhat similar to the SPUC policy , but clearly there are some differences, most notably regarding the high density residential areas (R-4) and the industrial areas. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Revise the special assessment policy to state that standard sized watermains will be determined by SPUC. 2. Revise the special assessment policy to include the specific language of the SPUC policy defining standard sized watermains as: 6 inch for R-1 , R-2 , R-3 residential areas. 8 inch for commercial, business, schools, and R-4 areas. 12 inch for industrial areas. 3. Do nothing, thereby leaving the standard sized watermains as 6 inch for residential areas and 8 inch for commercial and industrial areas. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 2 , to revise the special assessment policy to include the same language as outlined in the SPUC policy defining standard sized watermains for specific zoning. Staff feels that both policies should be consistent, but also that some consideration should be given to raising the standard size watermains in residential areas to 8 inch. Most communities are not using 6 inch mains anymore except for dead-end cul-de- sacs and are using 8 inch mains as the norm. SPUC has also requested 8 inch mains on residential areas for some recent subdivisions. In addition staff would like to point out that the costs associated with the 8 and 12 inch mains for the Meadows should be reimbursed for by SPUC rather than the City, as it appears the mains would be considered oversized based on the current SPUC policy Watermains June 22, 1988 Page 3 The SPUC policy indicates that prior to paying for any oversized watermains, the plans should be submitted to the Commission for review and approval prior to the construction . The Utility Manager did review, approve and sign off on the watermain design for the Meadows 1st Addition prior to any construction starting and since the manager acts on SPUC'.s behalf, the oversized watermain costs should be absorbed by SPUC. ACTION REQUESTED: 1 . Authorize the appropriate staff to revise the current special assessment policy to include specific language regarding standard size watermains for specific zoning such that it conforms to the SPUC policy. A formal resolution need not be done as Resolution No. 1791 previously approved would seem to suffice. If SPUC raises the standard size watermain for residential areas to 8 inch, the City should also revise the special assessment policy. 2. Authorize the appropriate staff to officially notify SPUC that the City feels the additional costs for the 8 and 12 inch mains being installed in the Meadows 1st Addition are "oversized" based on current SPUC policy. Since the plans were approved by the Utility Manager, the costs should be born by SPUC. DH/pmp MAINS �fbK SApGil. � �S,SE'SS� � 'i Gil IX. Continued sanitary sewer shall be sed snfor waermaofb-inch and8-inch mains upon rhe cos construction respectively , which is the smalLeAssessmencst now af or wacerl and in =hod , a residential area of the City . s sewer in commercial and industrial areas will be based upon 8-inch mains * been approved y the gunk When en w cermainU[ilpitygCbenefitsssiohavepo,rion of the cost of LCity' s Public said work will be paid by said utility . Costs due to larger mains and appurtenances may be paid for arges and es :ion generalObligation mf funds . Servicesa installed,to h individual properties shall be fully assessed to the benefiting property- ments -The various methods of assessments are as follows: A. Adjusted Front Footage Method (Water and Sanitary Sewer) c Y) . When assessment 1s to be determined by the adjusted rout foorage method, each parcel shall be assessed for improve- ments as hereinafter stated. [ion 1 . Rectangular Interior Lots mens. The rectangular lot is defined as having no more than 2 .0 feet difference between the front and back lot lines . The adjusted front footage is the actual front footage r Locs whose frontage is of the lo[ . For rectangula greater than its depth, the "odd shaped lot" method as explained below shall be used. -y Sri 2. Odd Shaped Lots (Unit Bases) For odd shaped lots , such as exist on cul-de-sacs, curved streets , etc . ; and where [here is more than 2 .0 feet of difference between the front and back lot lines , the "odd shaped lot" method of determining the adjusted front fOOC- age shall be used . The adjusted front footage0shall be at computed by dividing the area of the l000tage units 9 , 00 to land determine the equivalent number of t f In the parcel . The number of units multiplied by 60 feet will giv e . he ssments computede toha maximumd depths of o 1508 feet?only . shall be oth (16) RESOLUTION N0. .791 7 / A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A TRUNK WATER ASSESSMENT POLI')' j V_ PURSUANT TO POLICIES ADOPTED BY Till i SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Shakopee Public UCiities Commission lid on the 2nd day of February, 1951. adopt its Re's`olution Inc. 222, setting forth its policy for trunk voter assessments, a copy of which is attached 'hereto, made a pari hereof and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, it is the intent and desire of the City of Shakopee to adopt the trunk water assessment policies of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission for use in any and all assessments for trunk water lines as well as for connection fees for any trunk water lines not publicly financed through Chapter 429; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, as follows: 1. That the trunk water assessment policies as set torch , in the attached Resolution of the S'nakooee Public Utilities Commission are hereby adopted, together with any and all changes, amendments or modifications thereto, which SPUC shall transmit to the City within Len days after adoption by SPUC. 2. That all City of Shakopee trunk wale- assessments, cr connection fees in lieu thereof, shall be made in accordance with the polities contained in said Resolution. Adopted this 3rd day of February, 1981, in regular session of the Shakopee City Council. Mayor o`_ [he C1:y c'_ Shakopee ATTEST: . f!er V Prepared and approved by: ]CRASS, MEYER & KANNING CHASTERED _ Assistant Shakopee City Atto-neys _?21 Four ch Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 R1'_SOLL"ION C 222 , ' A RIfSOIXT ION ESTABLISNING A TRINK NATER POLICY, S'E'TTING PEES, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION E 217 Be it resolved by the Shakopee Public Itilfties Commission as follows: WHEREAS, there are trunk Charges incurred in the construction and oceration of a man cipal water system Which are m addition to those Costs of installing lateral service to abutting Property; and M2REA5, those costs have been, and ere ¢.petted to be, borne by the Shakopee Public Utilities CearieSion, and One present water connection charges are deemed to be insufficient to fully fund these trunk e _ ses, and ® WER3:A.g., an engineering study tNA been conducted to determine a fair and reasonable charge reacired to viae for Water system trunk Construction made necessary q system grouch; and NY.ERIIkS, the Shekoshe Public Utilities Commission on the Bth day of September, 1990, adopted Resoluven 12u7 Which the Come...1.1 now finds to be inconsistent with now1v developed leferma_von and studies; NOW TEES DORS, be it resolved by -One Shakopee Public Utilities Comniesi.n es follows: - 1. There is berebv created a trunk fund to accumulate funds Collected by trunk water assessments o_ Connection fees in lieu thereof, Which funds shall be utilized to pay costs incurred C, ine construction of trunk Water facilities. 2. That in all areas df the City of Shakopee in Which bleier service IS newly mane available by the City of Shakon e, she Shakopee Punlic Utilities Commission, or _Private development, there she!'- be charged a _rank assessment in the amount Of $ <_.00 per acre. O_ rn the 1 alternative, if no such trunk assessment is levied, a connection fee in addition to all Other connection fees which conn tion fee shall be E` valent to a trunk assessment, With said additional connection fee to be paid Within thirty (30) days of the date said water service becomes I available. 3. Areas which are consi-suairf no _uresently have municipal water seevice presently available are all prooerries immediately abutting an I existing vacovnavn and extending a distance of 150 feet in depth back from the vatermann into this property, provided thatthe vatermain extends ' the full distance across or along the edge of the property in question. Also construed to have water serwce presently available is all land which has previously paid a trunk water assessment and which has lateral watermarn exten6ed,to within 150 feet co the point of use of the water. Such lateral extensions shall be in accordance with existing City of Shakopee design criteria and specifications. 5. The land area scainst which said trunk water assessment shall he charmed, shall beat a minimum, all the property abutting a proposed new waterma_. and extending a distance of up to one half the difference - between the proposed wacermian, and the next parallel antitivated watermain, unless a different configuration is determined by the Commission u be appropriate due to a land terrain or other logical � barrier. 0 The trunk costs paid from the trunk fund shall incluoe but not be limited to the cost of avers_ring materia_, and the costs o_ construction labor due to ove_slainq as mtermined by the Commission. In addition to such cons_uction costs, there shall be paid from the trunk fund an allowance fox engineering, fiscal, legal and inspection Costs. -xpe ditures for ove,s zing, for proposes this o sopa, must he authorized and approved by the Commission a.rer the Coomssion is notified in writing of any planned installations of watemseins within the City of Shakopee. Tne Commission in its exclusive discretion may then find it to be in the best interests of the water system that larger size mains tbm those pr000sed be installed and the Commission elects to r _ re the larder size mains and o - the difference as provided in this paragraph. Standar _ purposes o this Daragranin , shall be a six inch 7� waz e - n F-1 and .-2 and k-1 residential a eight inch w - forcommercial or business z Schools, shopping c andhigh density residential IP-51; a twelve sins Cerof Industria The Commissionshould not be obligated to pay any additional rests unless the plans of estimated costs shall have been Sm sented to the Commission prior to construction of the waterma in for review and approval, and actual cost data be furnished after the complevon add acceptance of thew Lerma in to cbe satisfattion of the Commission. 6. The truhe water assessment established in paragraph 2 shall be increased on tie first day d5 January each year, commencing January 1, 1902, y an amount egoal to the present trunk water charge nultiolied by the ' percentage increase to the construction cost index for the previous 12 months as reported by the Engineering News Record. Be it further resolved by the Shakopee public Utilities Commission that Resolution 9]1] shall be and hereby is in all respects repealed. Mooted in regular session of the Shako,,. Public Utilities Commission is I day of Tebruarrvv _ 1981 Nally Bishop, Piasidenc / U ATTEST: I 9 dela Rout, pc ilitiea Cdmmiaainn Manager (R ®y III I 1 � MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Interim Highways 101/169 Intersection Improvements DATE: June 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Staff would like to update City Council on recent discussions with Mn/DOT regarding interim improvements to the Highway 101/169 intersection. BACKGROUND: At the May 17, 1988 meeting, the City Administrator provided City Council with a status update on discussions with Mn/DOT regarding the subject intersection improvements. At that time, the major thrust by the City was in trying to get Mn/DOT to create additional traffic lanes on the bridge to improve the overall traffic flow at that intersection. Due to the costs involved with this proposal (approximately $400,000 - $500,000 ) versus the length of time the improvements would benefit the community (3-4 years) , City Council decided not to pursue that particular course of action. Council then instructed staff to continue to meet with Mn/DOT to come up with other, less costly, alternatives for providing temporary improvements to the traffic flow at the 101/169 intersection until the new bridge is constructed. Possible Intersection Improvements Staff has met with Mn/DOT to explore alternative ways to improve the traffic flow at that intersection. In addition, Mn/DOT has analyzed each alternative to determine the effect of each on the traffic flow . The following levels of improvements were explored: Level 1 Close Holmes Street permanently or allow right turns in and right turns out of Holmes, but prohibit straight thru traffic (See Attachment A) . This is the condition that has existed for several weeks during the current downtown construction, so Mn/DOT was able to take actual traffic counts and compare them to counts taken last fall. Based on this data, the closing of Holmes Street improved the characteristics of the intersection by 18% . This is based on the total critical volume, which is around 1700 vehicles during normal traffic . When Holmes Street was closed, the critical Intersection Improvements June 27 , 1988 Page 2 volume dropped to 1400 . By closing Holmes Street, there is more "green time" to give to the remaining 3 legs of the intersection. Level 2 Prohibit parking on 1st Avenue for both sides of the street from Lewis to Fuller, (See Attachment B) one block in each direction from Holmes. This would enable 5 traffic lanes to be created on 1st Avenue, which would enable a number of additional movements to be made. a) A double left turn would be permitted for eastbound traffic going onto the bridge. b) Westbound traffic would have one thru lane and one right turn only onto the bridge. c) A double left turn off the bridge onto eastbound 101 would be created. These improvements would be in addition to the Level 1 improvements. Mn/DOt traffic engineers have estimated that if both Level 1 and Level 2 improvements were added, the critical volume would drop to 1130 or an improvement in traffic flow of 34% Another option would be to add parts of this alternative depending on where eliminating parking would be most desirable. Level 3 Add a full width right turn lane coming off of the bridge to permit additional traffic stacking for this movement ( See Attachment C) . This improvement would be added to the first two levels. This improvement will result in additional right-of-way acquisition to construct the necessary lanes. Mn/DOT has estimated that at this level of improvement, the critical volume would decrease to 950 or an improvement of 45%. (Based on all 3 levels behind implemented) Level 4 Restrict left turn movement off the bridge into the alley behind City Hall or close the alley completely. This improvement could be used in conjunction with all of the above alternatives. No estimate of the percent of improvement to the intersection could be determined by Mn/DOT, but the general Intersection Improvements June 27, 1988 Page 3 consensus was that this would help alleviate traffic backing up on the bridge due to a vehicle waiting to make a left turn into the alley. Project Fundina Project cost for Levels 1 and 2 would mainly consist of restriping lanes, additional signs , temporary islands and possibly additional signal modifications to accommodate double left turns. Mn/DOT has estimated these costs as follows: Restriping, signs, and islands $ 5 ,000 - $10,000 Signal modifications $ 3.000 - $10.000 Total Cost $13,000 - $20,000 Mn/DOT has indicated that they would provide funding for any restriping , signs or temporary islands , but that any signal modifications would be a City expense. Project costs for providing an additional right turn lane were not calculated because staff felt it was not feasible to purchase additional right-of-way for an interim improvement. Alternatives: 1 . Discuss the various levels of improvement and decide what type of interim improvements would best benefit the overall community. 2. Hold a public hearing or at a minimum discuss the impacts of closing Holmes Street and eliminating parking on 1st Avenue with the downtown businesses. This could possibly be coordinated thru the Downtown Committee. 3. Implement the improvements on a "trial basis" for the remainder of this year' s tourist season and then decide if they should be implemented permanently until the bridge and mini bypass are completed. 4. Request staff to explore other alternatives with Mn/DOT. 5. Do Nothing. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternatives 1 , 2 and 3, to discuss all of the potential improvements, decide which improvements are beneficial for the interim, hold a meeting with downtown businesses to receive their input and implement the improvements on a trial basis through the reminder of the season. m' Intersection Improvements June 27, 1988 Page 4 ACTION REQUESTED: 1 . Discuss the overall benefits of the various levels of improvements and decide which alternatives would be justified. 2. Authorize the appropriate staff to either schedule a public hearing for the improvements for the July 19 , 1988 meeting or schedule an informal meeting with the downtown businesses to discuss the proposed improvements and recieve their input. DH/pmp INTERSECT 4 Q 31 r�ri IID BIT r II S� 2-S BLK BIT i I I -S-BR 2-S-BLK I'I 2-S-BRK BITS � ` r IB cor c sa ' r —s---- E / HOLMES STREET -� E . L y _ F-BR ��---5 2-S-ST z v, 6•ul •la8ITI-S-ST WORT-7-CO Lm1-5 BLK OTIN HA DBRE2-S-BRKBIT SHAKOPEES-ST BAKERY AILFAIIILY •120 w Cal 2-S-BLK/BRK INS. FONDER'SCARPETCRAV0. A ES B2-S-ST 2 2-5-BRK j K EAGLE PET CTR pLIBIT2-S-BRKII � •1I2 II VFw I -S-BRK I� -S-ST • I -S-BRK COUNTY 2-5- •137 m IW LEDICAL I -S-STUCCO 1!m ATTACHMENTA y I BIT I. I I I ro iI -I ' 2 -5 $LK HIT 1 -S-BR 2-S-BLK 2-S-BRK BIT I- y �, 1B' CbNC SH � HOLMES STREET r — 2-5-ST BIT-S -104FCK WORT-T-CO �.3-8RK HAAOTINWAREr2-5-BRKBIT _S_n HAKOPEEERY UYAWILY -120 N m°32-S-BLK/BRIM FONDER'SCARPETyGRAVEL B 12-5-ST2 5-BRK 1 I1 -S-BRK EAGLE PE7 CTR I p6� BIT 2-5-BRK I I I IIS 0322 VFW 1 -S-BRK i I I -S-BRK -S-ST 2-5-ST I ) I •137 m COUNTY m WMICAL s104 1 -S-STUCCO I I m n ATTACHMENT B m I z I BIT ro illl � I J 2-S-BLK BIT I A, I 2-S-BLK LI 2 -S-BRK BIT (� m ` r lar con;c sw — r m HOLMES STREET r= - 31 L b C7 �A 2-S-ST BIT 9104 11� I`S-ST WORT-T-CO / 3-8RK I B;T mII • � -S-BLK HARDWARE 2-S-BRK OTIN I 2-5 BRICK ®A II BITKOP -S-STBAKERYE `m AUJAROLY -120 N 2-S-BRICK m 03 2-S-BLK/BRK INS- FCNDEL''SS R GRAVELANNIES BAR ® 2-S-ST =II 2-S-BRK I . I1 I 2-5-BRICK I EAGLE PET CTR p BIT 2-S-BRK �. s1I2 VFW 1 -S-BRK 1 -S-BRK -s-sr � 2-5-ST I l 1 l •137 CI ACOUNTL sj04 1 -S-STUCCO r)m J ATTACHMENT C CONSENT �10 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer--;;0 SUBJECT: Market Street - 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue DATE: June 30 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is a contract extension agreement with Orr-Schelen- Mayeron & Assoc. for design services associated with the Market Street Project. BACKGROUND: On June 21 , 1988 City Council held a public meeting on street improvements to Market Street from 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue. At the conclusion of the meeting , Council ordered plans and specifications for the improvements by Resolution No. 2914. Council also authorized staff to enter into an agreement with our consultant, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Assoc. , to provide design services for this project. The exact dollar amount of the contract extension was not known at that time. Attached is the contract extension agreement with OSM indicating that their fees for this project will not exceed $3 ,500 .00 . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve the contract extension agreement with OSM for $3 ,500 .00. 2 . Reject the proposed agreement. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the attached contract extension agreement with Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Assoc. , Inc. for Market Street from 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue , Project No. 1988-6 in the amount of $3 ,500.00. DH/pmp MARKET OrT A" 1, 2021 F SI Hennepin Avenue Minneapolis,MN 55413 612-331-8660 June 28, 1988 FAX331-3806 Engineers Surveyors Planners City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Attn: Mr. David Hutton, P.E. City Engineer Re: Contract Extension Agreement Market Street From 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue Dear Mr. Hutton: As per our Agreement for Professional Services with the City of Shakopee, Section 1-A - 3-b (Major Projects), this extension agreement is for the design of Market street from 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue. The project will include streets, storm sewer and sidewalk. Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. agrees to accomplish the attached Scope of Services for a fee not to exceed $3,500. The City of Shakopee agrees to reimburse OSM for these services in accordance with Section IV of the Agreement for Professional Services. If this proposal meets with your approval , please sign below and return one copy to our office. We look forward to working with you on this project. Yours very truly, Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON CITY OF SHAKOPEE &ASSQ�CIAATTE}S, INC. Robert D. Frigaard, P.E. John K. Anderson Associat'e,`J�Jy City Administrator John �BadalichP.E. Vice President RDF:mlj Attachment ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR MARKET STREET FROM 1ST AVENUE TO BLUFF AVENUE FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SCOPE OF SERVICES A. DESIGN PHASE 1. Review and evaluation of the preliminary report prepared by the City 2. Necessary surveying work to prepare final constructions plans (easement work will be extra) 3. Review testing program and evaluate borings (testing to be paid for by the City) 4. Final project design 5. Preparation of design plans, specifications and bidding documents 6. Preparation of detailed construction cost estimate 7. Prepare and submit necessary permit applications to regulatory agencies B. Assist the City in advertising for bids and provide recommendations for award of contract B. CONSTRUCTION PHASE 1. Provide required construction engineering services as follows: a. Periodic observations of the work in progress (once a week - 4 hours) b. Preparation of supplementary drawings to clarify working drawings c. Review of shop drawings to determine compliance with plans and specifications d. Review of necessary testing done by testing laboratories e. Final inspection and report of completed project f. Completion of as-built plans for City records 0a,kn ` SiOMM"ffon& A 4ssodates.inc 2021 East Hennepin Avenue Minneapolis.MN 55413 612-331-8660 June 28, 1988 FAX 331-38M SuNeyers Surve}rors Planners City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 ' Attn: Mr. David Hutton, P.E. City Engineer Re: Contract Extension Agreement Market Street From 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue Dear Mr. Hutton: As per our Agreement for Professional Services with the City of Shakopee, Section 1-A - 3-b (Major Projects), this extension agreement is for the design of Market street from 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue. The project will include streets, storm sewer and sidewalk. Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. agrees to accomplish the attached Scope of Services for a fee not to exceed $3,500. The City of Shakopee agrees to reimburse OSM for these services in accordance with Section IV of the Agreement for Professional Services. If this proposal meets with your approval , please sign below and return one copy to our office. We look forward to working with you on this project. Yours very truly, Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON CITY OF SHAKOPEE & CIATE�S'r,/, Z INC. Robert D. Frigaard, P.E. John K. Anderson kAssociat'e�`J/� City Administrator John �BadalichP.E. cePresident RDF:mlj Attachment 7e ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR MARKET STREET FROM 1ST AVENUE TO BLUFF AVENUE FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SCOPE OF SERVICES A. DESIGN PHASE 1. Review and evaluation of the preliminary report prepared by the City 2. Necessary surveying work to prepare final constructions plans (easement work will be extra) 3. Review testing program and evaluate borings (testing to be paid for by the City) 4. Final project design 5. Preparation of design plans, specifications and bidding documents 6. Preparation of detailed construction cost estimate 7. Prepare and submit necessary permit applications to regulatory agencies 8. Assist the City in advertising for bids and provide recommendations for award of contract B. CONSTRUCTION PHASE 1. Provide required construction engineering services as follows: a. Periodic observations of the work in progress (once a week - 4 hours) b. Preparation of supplementary drawings to clarify working drawings c. Review of shop drawings to determine compliance with plans and specifications d. Review of necessary testing done by testing laboratories e. Final inspection and report of completed project f. Completion of as-built plans for City records CONSENT MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator / /J FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Horizon Heights Subdivision DATE: June 24, 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses a drainage concern in the vicinity of the Horizon Heights Subdivision. BACKGROUND: In July, 1987 the property owner at 8234 Eagle Creek Road (Mr. Ralph Ferry) requested that City staff investigate the volume of stormwater runoff being generated by the Horizon Heights Subdivision and the impacts of this water on his property. According to Mr. Ferry, there has been a substantial increase in the amount of water coming down the hill past his house since development has ocurred at Horizon Heights. Due to staff workloads, this drainage analysis was not done until late in the year during 1987 . Subsequently, due to the changes in the Engineering Department and extremely dry weather during 1988, resolving Mr. Ferry' s drainage concerns have taken longer than anticipated. Mr. Ferry' s house is located approximately 500 feet north of the subdivision line. There is an area of approximately 25 acres that drains thru a low point that goes alongside of Mr. Ferry' s driveway. This is the same drainage pattern that existed prior to any development. The construction of Horizon Heights has not changed the drainage routes any. What has increased is the amount of runoff. There is no doubt that the development has increased the overall volume of runoff for this drainage basin. The majority of this is due to the amount of impervious area increasing (roof tops, pavement, etc . ) . In this case, Horizon Circle was constructed with asphalt curbing and generally the road is going downhill from east to west. At one point where the grades on Horizon Circle are relatively steep, a bulb cul-de-sac was constructed. Basically, this enables all the water coming down the hill along the asphalt curbs to flow into the cul-de-sac thru the driveway openings and down the hill towards Mr. Ferry' s property. It is staff' s opinion that this is the primary reason that the stormwater runoff has increased. Horizon Heights June 24 , 1988 Page 2 ALTERNATIVES: There are two proposed solutions: 1 . Install a depressed concrete pan along the curbline of Horizon Drive thru the cul-de-sac to keep the water flowing down the hill, instead of out the driveways off the cul-de- sac. (See attached sketch) The estimated cost for this would be $2,500.00. 2. Install a catch basin and storm sewer system. The catch basin would be installed just upstream of the cul-de-sac and the storm sewer would discharge into the existing ditch downstream of the cul-de-sac. The estimated cost for this would be $6,000.00. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to install a concrete pan along the cul-de-sac. This would be the most cost effective and would keep the majority of water on the public right-of-way. It should be pointed out that during extremely large storms, the pan would not control all of the water due to the high velocities associated with those storms. As a matter of fact, Mr. Ferry first notified City staff of this problem the day after the "Super Storm" last summer, according to handwritten notes in our files. There may indeed have been prior notification of the problem, but there are no records of it. Very few storm sewer systems are designed to handle such high storms. If adding the concrete pan still does not resolve all concerns, the storm sewer system could be added at a later date , and utilized in conjunction with the concrete pan. ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize City staff to install the concrete pan as shown on the attached sketch at an estimated cost of $2 , 500 .00 . The construction could be added onto an existing contract for one of several projects already under construction. DH/pmp FERRY cc: Mr. Ferry north y6949s0 �y N°i/h /irofNlN/Fo/Sec24-T._i�5. )0,01 PAR K o° see�� _O ` 0 4/Soa fe \6 9r\ LI .0 1V'P All.0,0 p vvi proposed concrete pan ky ds P��co e � N4, a�� �� h SZg6.9j iz4.34 ld as N e I �� `NBS`4.gBjy 59 / M� \��-,•Y�r - J _ •�B:E� /03 a9 /96.0¢ 17,7 Z� / 6o .;! 0* y o CONSENT 9t MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Downtown Streetscape Project NF1, DATE: June 28, 1988 INFORMATIONAL ITEM Councilman Wampach requested staff to provide City Council with the recommended standards for removing tree wrappings from the trees planted as part of the Downtown Streetscape Project. I spoke with the Landscape Architect for Westwood Engineering and also several tree nurseries including the nursery who supplied the trees downtown. Apparently, the horticulture industry has no standards either way . Everybody I spoke with indicated the wrappings could stay on and eventually decompose or they could be removed once the tree starts to bud the first year. Either way is perfectly acceptable to the industry and will have no ill- effects on the trees. Mn/DOT requires them to be left on for their projects. The thoughts are that leaving the wrappings on will protect the bark from exposure to sun or road salt, while in converse if the wrappings are removed the bark will be able to breath easier and absorb water better. Aparently, all trees react differently to the wrappings, even trees of the same species. Westwood has indicated that the City could remove the wrappings, but that it would not harm the trees to leave the wrappings on. As part of the Downtown Stretcape Project, we will be removing the wrappings from the trees planted last year. I can well understand it if Council finds the above inconsistencies within the industry as frustrating as I did. ACTION REQUESTED Acknowledge Receipt of. DH/pmp TREES 1 7��y9 T 9r MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrayor FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Downtown Streetscape Project Westwood Engineering Services DATE: June 30, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Westwood Engineering Company has requested a change order to their original contract for engineering services for the Downtown Streetscape Project. In addition, staff would like to update Council on two other items featured in the original contract. BACKGROUND: On May 8 , 1987 the City of Shakopee signed a contract with Westwood Engineering to provide engineering services for the design and construction of the Downtown Streetscape Project. The scope of services included surveying, design, landscape design, construction staking and inspection/engineering assistance. In short, the professional services fee as outlined in the contract are as follows: Total Design Fee $ 184,500.00 Construction Staking 55.000.00 Total Fees $ 239,500.00 I have attached copies of pages 5 and 6 of the contract outlining specific language covering the compensation for these services. It should be noted that the last line on page 6 indicates that the total amount of $239 ,500 shall not be exceeded without written authorization of the City. Westwood Engineering has submitted a request for a change order to the total design fee. The amount requested by Westwood is $10,915. 19• (Copy of their request is attached) . Westwood has also indicated that two other features of our contract will result in additional monies being expended by the City above and beyond the cap of $239,500.00. Staff would like to address all three of these items separately. Change Order to the Design Fees As outlined by the letter from Westwood there are 4 separate items that they feel were added to the overall scope of services and resulted in overruns in their design fees and surveying associated with that design. YL Westwood Engr. Services June 30, 1988 Page 2 Item A: Railroad Spurline Revisions. The original scope of services outlined in the contract indicated that Westwood would coordinate all railroad activities and contacts pertaining to the design of 2nd Avenue. In talking with the previous City Engineer, Ken Ashfeld, this item was intended to cover all Chicago & Northwestern R.R. negotiations. The revisions being requested by Westwood pertain to all discussions and meetings with the Soo Line Railroad and other design revisions relating to the removal of the spur tracks. These discussions were being handled by Mr. Ashfeld until his departure and then Westwood assumed those duties. The total requested change order for this item is $5 , 182.80. Staff feels there is justification for this item. Item B: Parking Lot Revisions, 2nd and Faller The requested change order for this item is $530.00. The scope of services oultined in the contract clearly states that all design work associated with City parking lots , alleys , etc . will be part of the contract. This design work was estimated at $24,600.00 as outlined on page 6 of the contract. Staff feels that this item is covered by the fees in the contract and therefore the requested change order is not needed. Item C: Retaining Wall While it is true that a retaining wall was not anticipated at the time the contract was drafted and therefore not specifically listed under scope of services, staff feels that this item should be part of the overall design services . Once a design is in progress, many items come up that were not anticipated but must be addressed in order for all the street grades, curb and gutter, etc. to match into existing properties and driveways. A retaining wall by the bank became evident early on in the design process. Very little design was needed for this particular wall since the same wall that exists at the 2nd Avenue parking lot will be utilized. No detailed design plans were ever drawn up for the retaining wall by Westwood. 9 � Westwood Engr. Services June 30, 1988 Page 3 The total requested change order for this item is $1 ,331 .00. Staff feels that this is covered by the design services of the contract and therefore not justified. Item D: Miscellaneous Plan Revisions. The total requested change order for this item is $ 4 , 353 .00 . Upon contacting Westwood regarding specifics for this item, they indicated that items such as the retaining wall, alley work, reversing parking layouts, etc, result in many more plan revisions than anticipated. Several of these items were addressed previously above and without any further documentation and specific breakdowns, staff does not feel this item is justified. Summary of Change Order : Staff feels that only Item A , consisting of $5,182.80 , is justified. As indicated previously there are two other features of the contract that were brought up by Westwood and need to be addressed at this item, namely the construction staking and inspection/engineering assistance portions of the contract. Construction Staking According to Westwood, the construction staking portion of the contract was intended to be strictly an estimate, but that their fee for this service would be paid for on an hourly basis. The estimated fee for this service was approximately $55 ,000 .00 . (Again refer to the attached pages 5 and 6 of the contract) . The charge for construction staking as of May 21 , 1988 totals $53 ,537 .00 . Westwood has estimated that by the end of the project, this total will be approximately $70 ,000 .00 . In essence, the amount estimated in the contract will be exceeded by $15,000 .00. Westwood feels that the language in the contract adequately covers this overrun and that no change order is needed. The Assistant City Attorney has reviewed the contract and agrees with Westwood. Staff has attached a letter from the Assistant City Attorney on his interpretation of the overall contract. The previous City Engineer also feels that this was the intent of the contract. Westwood Engr. Services June 30 , 1988 Page 4 Engineering staff feels that the surveying performed by Westwood was extremely inefficient and therefore resulted in more time spent on the job. Staff also feels that the final plans prepared by Westwood resulted in numerous field adjustments which directly increased the surveying costs. In addition, Westwood indicated to staff on numerous occasions that there was a "not-to-exceed" cap on the surveying fee, therefore staff did not monitor the surveying time as closely as possible. In short, staff feels that any additional surveying fees in excess of $55 ,000 .00 are not justified but refusing to pay those fees may result in legal action based on the language in the contract. Inspection/Engineering Assistance Westwood is indicating that this item was to be billed on an hourly rate and is in addition to the $239,500.00 "not-to-exceed" figure outlined in the contract. The contract language on page 5 indicates the City will be billed on an hourly basis for additional inspection as requested . There is no mention of engineering assistance. Westwood has done no inspection for this project. The amount of time being billed as engineering assistance is $16 ,448 .25 to date . This figure should not increase substantially as Westwood's involvement in the project is basically over, except for staking. The Assistant City Attorney has reviewed the contact and has indicated that language relating to this item is ambiguous and possibly unenforceable. The previous City Engineer has indicated that the intent of the contract was to pay for this fee on an hourly basis. Staff recognizes that engineering assistance by the design engineers is necessary on a project of this magnitude and that the submitted fee of $16,448.25 is probably justifiable. Due to the inadequate language in the contract though, if the City refused to pay this item Westwood may not be able to dispute it. Westwood Engr. Services June 30 , 1988 Page 5 Summary of All Additions to the Contract Fees Change Order as Requested by Westwood $10, 195 . 19 (Total) Total Estimated Surveying Fee over Contract $15,000 .00 Engineering Assistance $16 .448.25 Total Additions to contract Outlined by Westwood $41 ,643 .44 Westwood Engr. Services June 30 , 1988 Page 5 Adding this to the "not-to exceed" figure of $239,500.00 brings the total fees for Westwood' s services to $281 ,000.00 . A good rule-of-thumb for a project is that all engineering costs (design, surveying, staking, etc. ) should be around 20-25% of the total construction costs . Adding in staff time of approximately $100 ,000 .00 to date brings the total engineering costs to $381 ,000.00 or about 16.5% of the $2,300,000 .00 project. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve of all requested additional fees. 2 . Deny all requested additional fees. 3. Discuss each item separately and decide which additions are justified. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternate No. 3 to discuss all of the additional fees associated with Westwood for the Downtown Streetscape Project and decide which additions are justified. Due to the fact that I am relatively new in Shakopee and did not have personal knowledge of the methods employed by Westwood in designing and surveying this project, numerous discussions and research was done to determine how to address the overruns requested by Westwood . Meetings were held with engineering staff, Westwood staff, the previous City Engineer, Assistant City Attorney, and City Administrator. Westwood Engr. Services June 30 , 1988 Page 6 Staff recommends that Item A listed in the change order request of $5 , 182 .80 be approved but that the remainder of the change order be denied. Staff also recommends that the additional staking costs of approximately $15 ,000 .00 be denied and that the engineering assistance costs of $16,448.25 be approved , contingent on legal Counsel. ACTION REQUESTED: Depending on the overall discussion by Council, staff should be authorized to pay Westwood Engineering Company whatever additional engineering fees are felt justifiable. DH/pmp WESTWOOD WWESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY June 20 , 1988 Mr. John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Change Order request for Professional Services on the Downtown Shakopee Streetscape Project Dear Mr. Anderson : As a result of our meeting on June 15, 1988 and in accordance with the Westwood Planning & Engineering change order letter dated March 22, 1988, I have compiled additional data to explain the overrun on the Streetscape Project . The Westwood staff feel confident that the project would have been completed on budget without the significant number of revisions made to the plans during the winter of 1987/88 and Mr . Ashfeld's departure. The March 22 letter requested authorization for a change order of $10 , 195. 19. The data listed below Indicates additional work totalling $14,423.40 beyond the original contract items. In theory , without the revisions and extras, Westwood could have completed the design work for Phases 1 and 2 for an amount $4,228.21 under the contract amount of $184,500 . Item A: Railroad Spurline design revisions, meetings with the Railroad and miscellaneous reports to the City . Randy Goertzen 16 hours 9 $30 .00 per hr 3 480 .00 Engineering Techs 44.75 hr 9 32.00 per hr 1 ,432.00 Chuck Poppler 6.75 hr 9 42.00 per hr 283.50 Chuck Plowe 13 hr 9 50.00 per hr 650 .00 Keith Nelson/Koppy 37. 1 hr a 63.00 per hr 2,337.30 Total for Item A: $5, 182.80 Item B: Parking lot Landscaping and Revisions, 2nd Avenue and Fuller Street: Randy Goertzen 4 hours a $30.00 per hr $ 120 .00 Engineering Techs. 11 .5 hrs 9 32.00 per hr 368.00 Chuck Poppler I hour a 42(..00 per hr 42.00 8525]415 IYAYZAOA BOULEVARD,BY BROOKLYN PARK MINNESOTA 552fi(E 1SIb��55VW I VIM B $ 530 .00 Item C: Retaining Wall by the Bank on Holmes Street as a result of the movement of parking from the east to the west side: Randy Goertzen 13.5 hours 9 $30 .00 per hr 8 405.00 Engineering Techs 25 hours 9 32.00 per hr 800 .00 Chuck Poppler 3 hours 9 42.00 per hr 126.00 Total for Item C: 8 1 ,331 .00 Item D: Revisions to the plans at the direction of the City based upon neighborhood meetings, design discussions, and design committee re-direction: Randy Goertzen 12 hours 9 $30 .00 per hr $ 360 .00 Engineering Techs 100 .75 hrs 9 32.00 per hr 3,224.00 Chuck Poppler 7 hours 9 42.00 per hr 294.00 Chuck Plows 9.5 hours 9 50 .00 per hr 475.00 Total for Item D: $ 4,353.00 Additional Survey time for detailed design: Westwood Survey Crew-time 11/22/87 thru 12/19 $ 386.00 12/21 thru 1/22/88 656.60 1/25 thru 3/19 1 ,304.00 3/20 thru 4/23 680 .00 Total of Survey Time: $ 3,026.60 In addition to the foregoing material please remember the two distinguishing features of the contract signed by the City Administrator on 5/6/87: 1 ) The construction staking costs were estimated in the original contract and were to be billed on an hourly basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule. 2) The inspection and construction assistance provided by the consultant was to be provided on a request basis at the discretion of the City Engineer. The City intended to do the project inspection with their own personnel . This time was to be billed on an hourly basis. No estimate In the contract was given for this work Mr . Anderson, I hope this additional material has assisted you in the process of gaining approval of the change order request . Since the request is approximately 3 months old, Westwood requests your immediate attention to this item. We will do whatever you request to provide additional materials for Justification purposes. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation on this endeavor. Sincerely, WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY Richard L. Ko y, .E. Vice-President RLK:dk LAW OF CES KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED Philip R.Krass Marschall Road Business Center Dennis L.Monroe 327 Marschall Road Barry K.Meyer Trevor R.Walsten P.O. Box 216 Jay D.Goldberg Shakopee,Minnesom 55379 Diane M.Olson Telephone(612)4455060 Robert J.Walter FAX(612)445-7640 Lachlan B.Muir James B.Croft Colleen M.Trende Kent A.Carlson,CPA July 1, 1988 Nr. David Hutton City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, NN 55379 Re: Westwood Contract Our File No. 1-1373-216 Dear Nr. Hutton: After our meeting on June 28, 1988, I have reviewed the April 7, 1987 agreement between the City of Shakopee and Westwood relative to providing certain engineering and surveying services for the downtown redevelopment project. In particular, you have asked me to comment on three invoices or potential invoices which have or will be submitted by Westwood to the City which you questioned. Those three bills and my comments regarding them are as follows: 1. Westwood has submitted a change order for an increase from the total design service fee from the $184,500.00 in the contract to an amount now designated by Westwood at $194,054.21. I believe the design service fee as set forth in the contract is, in fact, a set fee, and since the contract specifically indicates that fee will not be exceeded without written authorization from the City, I do not believe the City is obligated to enter into a change order for the requested increase. I see nothing in the design service portion of the contract which would indicate an expectation on the part of either party for such an increase without prior authorization from the City. Although you were not certain it was your belief that the contract document itself was prepared by Westwood. I£ that is true, the City's position would even be stronger since any ambiguity in the contract would be resolved against the party drafting the contract. Likewise, if it turns out the City drafted the contract, our position would be somewhat weaker. Nonetheless, and in either case, my opinion is that we are under no obligation to pay the additional $9,500.00 under this first claim. 2. Westwood estimated in the contract that construction staking would be $55,000.00. That estimate appears on page 6 of the contract. The second paragraph on page 5 of the contract states in the second sentence thereof, "the fee for this service (construction surveying) shall be hourly as per the attached q h- Mr. David Hutton Page Two July 1, 1988 fee schedule. " The contract does indicate that the total fee for the contract, including the construction staking, will not be exceeded without written authorization from the City. That language seems inconsistent with what appears to me to be an agreement that construction staking will be paid for on an hourly basis. All-in-all I would interpret the contract as requiring the City to pay for actual surveying work required to be performed by Westwood. You estimate that final figure may reach $70,000.00, an increase of $15,000.00 over the estimate. I do not believe that increase requires a change order and I do believe the City will be obligated to pay that increase provided Westwood can show the time was both needed and expended. You have informed me that some of your staff have questioned the need for some of the staking work done by Westwood, and that some of that staking time may have resulted in engineering errors made by Westwood. Those are fact issues which must be dealt with and may leave room for argument over some of that additional $15,000.00. Absent our ability to show that unneeded staking work constitutes a portion of the time submitted by Westwood for construction staking, it is my opinion that the City is obligated to pay the additional amounts requested. 3. Westwood has also submitted a bill through May 21, which includes additional engineering in the amount of $16,448.25. You indicated that final bill may be slightly higher. Westwood'a rationale for the additional engineering costs so billed are contained in paragraph 3 of page 5 of the contract which states as follows: "Additional inspection as requested by the City as aid for city staff will be billed on hourly rates. " You have informed me that the City requested no additional inspection. Westwood's June 20, 1988 letter to John Anderson indicates in the bottom paragraph of page 2 that Westwood believes the "construction assistance" it claims to have provided this project falls under the category of "additional inspection" as set forth in the third paragraph of page 5 of the contract. I believe Westwood's reading to be very strained indeed. It appears that the additional engineering work can hardly be categorized as "inspection" but rather was simply engineering related to the changes in the field staking. You have indicated many of those changes were as a result of initial errors made by Westwood in its design plan. It appears to me that this third claim is really part of the first claim, and would require a change order and prior written authority from the City. While this third claim is not as clear cut as the first, my opinion is that the City has no obligation to pay this claim. As I indicated in my response to the first claim, assuming Westwood actually drafted this contract, any ambiguity with respect to this third claim would tend to be resolved against them as drafter. Likewise, if we drafted the contract, that same rule of law would make the City's position more difficult. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Ver/y trul r / S EHARTEHED PRK:mlw COMPENSATION We would propose to furnish the work activities described above, based on a fee expressed as a percentage of actual construction cost. For this improvement project, there will be a fixed fee of 6.7 percent based upon the curve shown on the attached figure labelled as "Curve A, Median Compensation for Basic Services.. .". Below, an estimate of cost for professional services is outlined. Included in the cost estimate are all of the basic services included in the Scope of Services section of the contracts. Construction surveying will be performed by 4pstwood Surveying, Inc. , and under our supervision. The fee for this service shall be hourly as per the attached fee schedule. Additional inspection as requested by the City as aid for City staff will be j billed on hourly rates. All work will be billed monthly, based on the amount of work performed during the previous month. All invoices are due and payable 30 days from data of invoice. All invoices outstanding 60 days or more from date of invoice will be charged a finance (interest) charge at the rate of 1.25 percent per month. Any special reports, studies or other work ordered by the Owner shall be performed on a per diem basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule. Construction Cost Estimate of Project--30 Block Faces Based upon information contained in the "Downtown Revitalization Project Engineering Feasiblity Report" dated November 7, 1986. 1987 Phase 1 Construction Area (see figure 1) : - Cost per-Block Face No, of Block Faces Totals Design 1 $ 86,402 7 $ 604,814 - Desian 2 $ 83,006 5 $ 415,030 Design 3 $ 58,821 1 $ 58,821 13 $1,078,665 5 1988 Phase 2 Construciton Area (see figure 1) : q ~ Lost per Block Face No. of Block Faces Totals Design 1 $ 86,402 5 $ 518,412 Design 2 5 83,006 9 $ 747 ,054 Design 3 $ 58,821 2 $ 117,642 29 $1,383,108 Total Estimate of Phase 1 R Phase 2 Construciton: 52,461,773 Design Documents and Construction Assistance: Compensation from curve for Design services: 6.7; Design Services Estimated Fee: 164,900.. Minus-cost of the Feasibility Report: $ (5,000) Addition--cost of engineering work on private property and in alley ways, City parking lots, etc. 1.0: 24,600 Total Design Service Fee for work defined in proposal : $ 184,500 Survey Work Preliminary survey data collection fees are included in the "Total Design Service Fee" �— Construction Stakino-Estimate Total Professional Services Fee Estimate S 239,500* *This fee shall not be exceeded without the written authorization of the City. The attached "Fee Schedule for Professional Services" dated May 1, 1967, shall be used as a basis for periodic billing on the project. 6 � S MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer�p..--_ SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage Project DATE: July 1 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Staff would like to provide Council with a status update for the Upper Valley Drainage Project. BACKGROUND: On June 7, 1988 staff presented Council with a status update for the Upper Valley Drainage Project and requested permission to construct the project in phases, with Phase I going from the Upper Valley to 4th Avenue. Council authorized staff to proceed with the phased construction but a concern was raised over ^� possible flooding occurring due to no outlet being provided at 4th Avenue. The City' s consultant, OSM has completed an analysis of the drainage ditch and the effect of not providing an outlet at 4th Avenue. Attached is a memo from OSM summarizing their findings. In brief, these items should be noted: 1 . The proposed ditch can store 40 acre-feet of water without overlapping its banks or 4th Avenue . 40 acre-feet is equivalent to 1 foot of water over 40 acres. 2. It would take a rainfall of 3.3 inches to generate 40 acre- feet of runoff. 3. If the gravel pit at the upper end does not overflow, which is highly unlikely, the ditch can accommodate runoff from a 4 inch rainfall. 4. The 40 acre- feet storage will be removed through infiltration and expiration within 20 days. From their analysis, it is highly unlikely that any flooding will impact on private property due to no outlet being provided. In an emergency situation, if there are extreme rainfalls and possible flooding, a temporary outlet could be provided thru 4th Avenue by open cutting a ditch or by pumping the water over the road. As an added measure, staff is recommending to OSM that a small pipe outlet (12 inch diameter) be provided through 4th Avenue, which will be inadequate to discharge any appreciable runoff during a storm but will greatly reduce the length of time needed to drain the ditch after the storm is over. Upper Valley Project July 1 , 1988 Page 2 Mill Pond Permit Status Staff would also like to update Council on the status of the permits which the City applied for to various agencies because of the trout stream classification of the -Mill Pond. The indications are that the City should receive a response from all agencies within 2-3 weeks. OSM has informed staff that some of the agencies (such as the Pollution Control Agency) are using the trout stream classification to require a permit and then using the permit process to address a much larger issue, namely non-point pollution to the Minnesota River. For example, as a condition of their permit, the PCA may require the City to enact ordinances requiring upstream ponding of storm water and sedimentation treatment of the water . The PCA currently has no jurisdiction in requiring these items but would like to obtain the jurisdiction and therefore may be treating this project as a "test case" . OSM feels that there may be additional action necessary to resolve these issues. Other communities , such as Eagan , Burnsville , Savage and Inver Grove Heights, have had similar difficultieswiththe PCA resulting in additional taxpayer dollars being spent to mitigate the effects of the storm water discharges into the Minnesota River. It may be in the best interest of the City to meet with these communities, possibly involve the state legislatures, talk to legal counsel experienced in dealing with these issues and decide what the best course of action to take would be. Our consultant recommends that the City wait until the official response to our permit applications is received (within 2-3 weeks) and then decide on the proper course of action. ACTION REQUESTED: No action is requested at this time. Staff wanted to provide Council with a status update of the situation and inform them of all new developments regarding this project. DH/pmp PERMITS A�s�so�camfa&�Inc 2021 Fast Hennepin Avenue M E M O R A N D U M Minneapolis,MN 55413 612-331-8660 FAX331-3806 Engineers TO: Dave Hutton, City of Shakopee Sarveyors Plannen FROM: Peter R. Willenbring, P.E. DATE: June 28, 1988 SUBJECT: HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS OF DRAINAGE AREA TRIBUTARY TO THE PHASE I PORTION OF THE UPPER VALLEY DRAINAGE WAY OUTFALL PROJECT As requested, we have completed a hydrologic analysis of the drainage area tributary to the Phase I portion of the Upper Valley Drainageway Outfall project. This analysis revealed the following: 1. Approximately 2400 acres can contribute runoff to the Phase I portion of the project when constructed, however, if the gravel pit area does not overflow, this area is reduced to 1300 acres. 2. 40 acre feet of stormwater storage can be accommodated in the ditch and piping system between elevations 739 and 748. This stormwater storage would be contained within the ditch and not impact private property outside of the ditch easement.. 3. A hydrologic analysis of the drainage area indicates that a 3.3 inch rainfall would generate approximately 40 acre feet of runoff. This is based on the assumption that a significant rainfall event had not occurred prior to this 3.3 inch event. Runoff volumes for other amounts of rainfall are shown attached Table 1. 4. The soils in the vicinity of the ditch system are estimated to have an infiltration at a rate of .15 inches per hour. Assuming this infiltration rate would take place over a 6500 foot long ditch over an area 35 feet wide, this would correspond to an infiltration rate of about 1.5 acre feet per day. 5. Evaporation is estimated to remove .1 feet per day from the ponded water. From this abstraction, approximately .5 acre feet per day could be removed, resulting in a total rate of infiltration and evaporation at 2 acre feet per day. Based on this information, it could be expected that 40 acre feet of water stored in a ditch could be removed through infiltration and evaporation within about 20 days. Based on the above information it appears that: 1. The ditch should be able to store a single rainfall event of 3.3 inches, two rainfall events of 2.8 inches and multiple rainfall events of 2.0 inches or less. 2. If the gravel pit does not overflow, the ditch should be able to accommodate runoff from up to a 4 inch rainfall event. PRW:alr TABLE 1 RAINFALL (in) RUNOFF VOLUME (Acre feet) 1300 Acres 2400 Acres 1.5 <1 <1 2.3 2.2 4 2.8 10 18 3.3 22 40 3.6 30 56 4.2 53 98 4.6 68 126 5.3 101 188 5.9 134 248 �S RAINFALL IN MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL METROPOLITAN AREA FOR DURATIONS FROM 30 MINUTES TO 24 HOURS AND RETURN PERIODS FROM 1 TO 100 YEARS Data Taken from U.S. Department Of Commerce - Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. 40 - Dated May 1961 Return Frecuency 24-Hour 12-Hour 6-Hour 3-Hour 2-Hour 1-Hour 30 Minutes 1-Year 2.3 2.0 1.70 1.5. 1.4 1. 2 0. 9 2-Year _2.8 2.4 2.1 1. 7 1.7 1.4 1.1 5-Year 3. 6 -I 3.1 2.7 2.3 2.2 1. 8 1.4 10-Year 4.23.7 3.1 2.6 - 2.5 2. 1 1. 7 25-Year 4.6 4.2 3.5 1 3.0 2.8 2.3 1. 9 50-Year 5.3 4. 6 4.0 -3.4 1 3.1 2.7 2.1 100-Year 5. 9 5.0 4.4 3:8 3.5 2.9 2.4 Maximum probable 6-hour precipitation for 10 square mile area = 24 inches . 14.E« - I o db,� r�„ CI Ca,-.<<.,-• - I6.s 4 ; -7L- MEMO TO: City Council FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official RE: Hiring of Housing Inspector DATE: June 30, 1988 INTRODUCTION ^ We (Dennis Kraft, Marilyn Remer and myself) have completed the interviews for the Housing Inspector. We received seventeen applications for this position. BACKGROUND Three possible candidates emerged, Mr. Tom Wigfield, Mr. Newton Parker and Mr. Rick Paulseth. Mr. Wigfield is presently the Housing Inspector for St. Louis Park. He would require no additional training, however, he has a minimum salary requirement of $34,000. Mr. Parker has a college degree, a good basic background in the industry and would require a minimum of training. All interviewers were of the opinion he would place emphasis on cooperation, not a police action, and with a little help could implement an extremely workable program that would have public acceptance and cooperation. Mr. Parker has previous experience with Section 8 Housing programs. The supervisor for that program was contacted and gave an excellent recommendation. We recommend starting salary to be $23,219/yr. , Step 1 of the 1988 pay plan for Asst. Inspector with six months service credit for previous work experience, at which time he will move to Step II $24 ,767/yr. This is accpetable to Mr. Parker. Mr. Paulseth is presently employed in Planning. He possesses minimum background qualifications and with training and guidance could possibly do the job. His salary request was $10.00 to $11.00 per hour. Mr. Paulseth could do the job with training and instruction. However, this would create a void in Planning. RECOMMENDATION It was the consensus of the interview committee that Mr. Newton Parker was the person who should be hired if we are to embark on this program. Mr. Wigfield's salary request could cause some problems with staff in other departments. We recommend the hiring of Mr. Newton Parker for the Housing Inspector position at entry level one. ACTION REQUESTED Direct personnel to hire Mr. Newton Parker at entry level one ($23,219) effective July 15, 1988. LH:cah MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Insurance Claim Adjustments DATE: July 1, 1988 Introduction The Shakopee City Council held a worksession on June 28th to meet with our insurance agent and the League of Minnesota Cities insurance adjusters to discuss their procedure for handling insurance claims. As a result of the discussion at that meeting Council moved toward a consensus on how claims should be handled. The purpose of this memo is to restate the consensus and adopt a procedure that will be followed by everyone. Background Our insurance company and our League of Minnesota Cities claims adjusters pointed out in their presentation that the standard League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) insurance contract places some responsibility on the City. The first and most important responsibility is that all claims must be reported to the carrier. The second point made was that they require anyone receiving any settlement to sign a waiver and that for the City to make a settlement payment jeopardizes the future ability of our insurance company to defend us should a claim lead to court action. Our agent and the LMC claims adjuster also emphasized that the City should review with legal counsel the City's ability to make claim payments, because if there is no negligence found on the City's part the claim payments become a "gift of public funds" made to a private individual. The City is not authorized to make such payments to private citizens. Our local agent, Lee Mennen, called me the following day and indicated that some cities have the practice of refering any claims not settled by the City's claims adjusters to the City Attorney and then have the City Attorney report to the City Council. This would be an alternative approach to the City's present use of a subcommittee made up of three Councilmembers. Alternatives 1. The City Council could specifically decide to stay out of any claims requests not settled to the satisfaction of citizens. This could be handled in a fashion outlined in paragraph number three of our current Administrative Policy No. 50 (attached) . 2 . The City Council could require that any claim not resp by the insurance company to the satisfaction of the citi and pursued by the citizen be channeled through the Ci Attorney who would receive a formal report from the claims adjuster outlining the reasons that they felt there was n negligence on the part of the City warranting payment to the citizen. The City Attorney would then report to Clty Council as a whole with a recommendation. _ 3 . The City Council could continue to use the current ad hoc three member claims committee, but have the committee meet with the LMC claim adjusters at the same time that it meets with the claimant to hear both sides of the issue. The committee could then make a recommendation to the City Council as a whole. 4 . The City Council could use some combination of alternatives 1 through 3 above. Recommendation I recommend alternative No. 1 and 2. Thus, if a citizen's claim is not resolved to their satisfaction, staff would "encourage" them to seek relief from small claims court so that a disinterested third party decides who should pay for damages. If the citizen will not take this approach then the City Attorney could meet with the claims adjuster and the citizen and report to City Council with a specific recommendation to uphold the claims adjuster's decision or to provide some other form of relief. Action Reauested Direct the appropriate City officials to amend Administrative Policy No. 50 by adding a paragraph number five that directs City employees to refer any citizen not willing take the actions outlined in paragraph three to the City Attorney who will in turn hold a joint meeting with the claims adjuster and follow up with a recommendation to City Council. JKA/jms ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NO. 90 � v Subject : Procedures for Handling Damage Claims Date: September 14, 1981 Citizens contacting City staff about a damage claim (es. water in their basement, backed—up sewer, vehicle damage because of a street condition, etc. ) will be handled in the following manner. 1 . The citizen will be instructed to contact their own insurance company and/or our agent, Sue Sichmeller of Capesius Agency phone no. 445-1922. Our insurance agent wants us to have the citizen contact them so give them the name and phone number. At this point the employee will notify our carrier by telephone and written letter of the possible claim. 2. If the citizen' s insurance company or citizen feels the City' s insurance carrier should be involved, the citizen will contact our carrier (or the contractor' s carrier if it is a construction project) . -� 3 . If the issue is not resolved by the insurance companies to the satisfaction of the citizen, then the policy of the City is to "encourage" the citizen to seek relief from the courts (district or small claims) so that a disinterested third party can decide who should pay for damages . The employee should simply explain this as City policy. 4. No City employee should imply by their actions or comments to the citizen that "the City will pay the bill or that the matter will go directly to City Council for a decision. " Any citizen who wishes to go to Council with a claim shall be directed to the City Administrator who will place .them on the agenda for the next Council meeting. MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John E. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Parking of Gasoline and Fuel Trucks Overnight in a Residential Area DATE: July 1, 1988 Introduction Our seasonal Code Enforcement Officer received a citizen complaint regarding the parking of gasoline and fuel oil trucks overnight on the street in a residential area. The Zoning Code Officer spoke with. the owner of the vehicles, Mr. Earl Dressen, 1529 West 6th Avenue, who agreed to move the vehicles off the street which he has done. Since that initial contact we now know that the vehicles can't be parked on Mr. Dressen's lot, and Mr. Dressen has raised several issues without removing the vehicles. Background Mr. Dressen has been parking his fuel oil trucks at his residence for many years. He has bulk storage facilities in the Industrial Park on land that he purchased from the City. The parcel he purchased, however, was land-locked and did not abut a dedicated roadway. This has required Mr. Dressen to obtain an easement from Ray Peterson the owner of Viking Steel, which is the property between his bulk storage facility and the road right-of- way. Mr. Dressen feels that the appropriate place to relocate his vehicles is at the bulk storage site, but that that site is not readily useable because it doesn't abut the public right-of- way and therefore cannot get a building permit. Mr. Dressen has two fuel oil vehicles and one is a diesel. He parks the diesel in a insulated heated garage on his residential property during the winter. To move his vehicles to the bulk storage site creates two problems. Number one, he must provide security for vehicles and number two, he must provide a heated garage for the diesel truck during the winter. To construct the garage he would need a variance from the City because the parcel does not abut a public right-of-way and we do not issue building permits for land-locked parcels. Mr. Dressen has also asked for an interpretation of the uniform fire code section 79. 1206. (a) which states that "tank vehicles shall not be left unattended on any residential street; nor in or within 500 feet of any residential area. . . " Does the word unattended get interpreted to mean that he cannot park their over the lunch hour? Does the word unattended restrict him from working on the vehicles on his garage at his residence? Mr. Dressen would like answers to these questions. Mr. Dressen has asked for 30 days to find a new place to park his vehicles. (He can lease space either short or long term) . The City initially expected Mr. Dressen to remove the vehicles and so provided no written correspondence to Mr. Dressen setting a deadline. After Mr. Dressen raised the additional issues Councilmember Wampach presented him with the attached 10- day notice siting the specific violations in questions on June 219t. The 10-day period from June 21st ends on July 1st. I told Mr. Dressen that this item would be place on the City Council agenda for Council's July 5th meeting. ^ Mr. Dressen has stated very clearly that he would like to see the City resolve his access problem at the bulk tank site before he is required to move his vehicles. This is not a simple problem because in dealing with Mr. Ray Peterson of Viking Steel the City does not have the normal condemnation authority for a private purpose acquisition. Alternatives 1. The City Council can notify Mr. Earl Dressen that the vehicles must be removed from the residential area by 4 :30 p.m. on July 6th. This alternative limits the City's exposure by taking affirmative action to remove the vehicles now that we have been notified that they are not in compliance with the State Uniform Fire Code which we have adopted and are enforcing. Les Koehnen can store the vehicles at his Eagle Creek facility for 75 cents/day/- vehicle with the diesel inside in winter. 2. The City can give Mr. Dressen 30 days from July 5th to remove the vehicles or to July 31st, a date acceptable to the neighbor who is moving in August 1st. This alternative acknowledges his long use of the garage on his residential property and provides time to seek a permanent place to relocate his vehicles. In speaking with our League insurance representative, Peter Tritz, he felt we would be covered if an accident occurred during the 30 day period if we were acting "reasonably" by giving him 30 days to remove them. 3. The City can allow the vehicles to remain until the City Council decides whether or not it can resolve Mr. Dressen's access problems at his bulk tank facility. This alternative ties together two separate but related issues. The problem is that one is a health and safety issue with potentially disastrous consequences for the City and the second is a "moral issue" dealing with the City's sale of land-locked property to Mr. Dressen. Recommendation I will speak with the Fire Chief by Tuesday's meeting but believe alternative No. 1 is the only responsible alternative for the City to pursue. Mr. Dressen would need to find property zoned commercial property to temporarily store his vehicles while he seeks a more permanent solution. That more permanent solution may or may not include a resolution of his access problems to his bulk tank facility. We can then determine if he can stop for meals at his home and/or repair vehicles there. Action Requested Direct the appropriate City of£icials ^to contact Mr. Dressen and have him remove his fuel oil trucks from the residential area by 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, July 6, 1988. JRA/jms CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE,SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 553791376 (612)44536M to DATE:: -�3- TO• LMR � �jn O 2 QtU COMPLAINT 7 RE: WARNING OF CITY CODE VIOLATION Dear ��• A,SSelu It has been observed at the property located at C9 1 4 c.,e- . that L ?S o1a.'Q 'q �rYn /rC F{2 iJe rN r 44-e. kc oye , /IJ•��+ r. This is in violation oftheCity of Shakopee Code Section ` /05 nS .�E which states Vii' 57 /� d e 'Ve Qlaen" S�n.�=c fae ( 0o S 9. / 06 A t4A k OA/ 477/' /�esT o✓. v� Slice` Please be advised that compliance with the applicable provisions of the Citv Code shall be within lf4. C or formal Charges 0 X will be brought against you. If you have any questions, please contact me at the Shakonee City Hall =445-3650. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. FROM: Zoning Code Enforcement City Hall 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Res c`fuly /erd u th Zoning Code Enforcement Office-- The fficerThe Heart Of Progress Valley AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ,.t204]9.1206 UNIFORM FIRE CODE (k)LonVapor Pressure Liquids.Flammable or combustible liquids with a vapor pressure of 40 psi absolute or less at 100'F.shall be loaded into cargo ranks designed and constructed in accordance with Section 79.1202. (1)Bonding of Fill Stem. The cargo tank shall be bonded to the fill stem or some pan of the rack structure, electrically interconnected with the fill-stem piping. except tank vehicles used for asphalt. rank vehicles loading any flam- mable in combustible liquids through honour connexions and rank vehicles used exclusively for transporting Class III liquids when loaded at locations where no Class I and Class 11 liquids are handled. (m)Bonding to Underground Tanks. An external bond-wire connection or bond-wire Integral with a hose is required for the transfemng of flammable liquids into underground tanks. EXCEPTION:When transferring through closed connections. Smoking Prohibited Sec. 79.1205. Smoking by rank vehicle drivers, helpers,repairmen or other personnel is prohibited while they are driving, making deliveries, filling or making repairs to lank vehicles. Parking and Garaging Sec.79.1106.(a)Parking on Thoroughfare.A lank vehicle shall nm be left unattended on any residential street.nor in or within 500 feet of any residential area, apartment at hmcl complex, =national. hospital or care facility at any time; or at adv other plate that would, in me opinion of the chief, present m extreme life hazard. In locations otherdtan those specified in Sound 79.1206(a),a driver shall not leave a tank vehicle unattended on any street,highway,avenue or alley. EXCEPTIONS: 1.Tnc nccasary absence in cormm'mm wins loadin¢mgm,vehicle.but during actual discharge for the vehicle,an.provision as.. 79.120a(b)so"apple. 2.Steps for mals during outlay or tri eht.if the soeet is well lighted as me point of Parking. i.When,in case of areidevt orommvaugcvx,rhe opentmmnst lavetomem.• usisuma. (b)Parking OffTboroughfare.A tank vehicle shall not be parked at any one point for longer than one hour==,Dz 1. Off a street,mfhway,avenue or alley; 2. ).side a bulk plant and 25 feet from me property line or within a building - approved for such use; 3. At offimr approved)orations not less than 50 feet from any buildine except in.approved for me=race or serving of such vehicle: 4. When,in case of breakdown Or other emergency.me(shumir must lea me vehicle to we neressan•action In conger me emergencv. (c)Ganging. Tank vehicles shall not be parked or garaged in any buildings other than mase specff cally approved for such use by the chief. 262 CONSENT lov MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Admini or FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage Project 'No. 1987-5 DATE; June 27 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2919, A Resolution Determining the Necessity for and Authorizing the Acquisition of Certain Property by Proceeding in Eminent Domain for Purposes of Constructing the Upper Valley Drainage Project (No. 1987-5) . BACKGROUND: City Council has authorized easement acquisition negotiations for the above referenced project. A resolution authorizing the condemnation proceedings to begin for several properties was passed in March and subsequently the condemnation process has started on those parcels. At that time The Scottland Companies, Inc. had indicated that they would be submitting a development plan for their property to the City and would dedicate their easement as part of their development. Since then, they have decided not to pursue any immediate development of their parcel. Due to the complexity of their corporate structure and numerous investors, they have indicated that it would be easier to go thru a "friendly condemnation" process rather than accept the appraised value of the taking and get all the parties together to sign the acquisition documents. In order to proceed with the construction of this project, City Council should authorize the condemnation proceedings to start. These proceedings normally take 90 days from the date of petition to the district court. If construction of the Upper Valley Drainageway were to begin prior to that date, The Scottland Companies has agreed to give the City a "Right-of-Entry" to begin construction. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve Resolution No. 2919. 2 . Deny Resolution No. 2919. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . Upper Valley Drainage June 27 , 1988 Page 2 ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 2919, A Resolution Determining the Necessity for and Authorizing the Acquisition of Certain Property Purposes of Constructing the Upper Valley Drainage Project No. 1987-5 and move its adoption. DH/pmp HEH2919 D a' RESOLUTION 2919 A Resolution Determining the Necessity for and Authorizing the Acquisition of Certain Property By Proceeding in Eminent Domain for Purposes of Constructing the Upper Valley Drainage Project No. 1987-5 WHEREAS, the City has heretofore determined that the City of Shakopee should construct a project for storm water drainage in order to ensure the health and safety and protect the property of residents and property owners involved in a project known as the Upper Valley Drainage Project to be located between the Shakopee Mill Pond and a point 1200 feet west of County Road 17; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AS FOLLOWS: 1 . Acquisitioned by the City of the easements described on Exhibit "A" which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference are necessary for the purpose of constructing the Upper Valley Drainage Project, a storm drainage facility. 2. The City Attorney is authorized and directed on behalf of the City to acquire the real estate interests as set forth in Exhibit "A" by the exercise of the power of eminent domain pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 117 , and is specifically authorized to notify the owners of intent to take possession pursuant to Minnesota Statutes , Section 117 .042 . The City Attorney is further authorized to take all actions necessary and desirable to carry out the purposes 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, City Attorney EXHIBIT "A" O S M EASEMENT NO. v-31 Description and Drawing i 1 1 1 UMDER IMFCIL W$'Df 1Nf'SI�VOf uw NESOL,•fDVLTI RlD R1NLp E.ND SUfVET D[ u• ,' '••Y Yf4.uD. u OAR 1 SCHELEN ASAI EA0:1 S,gSSOCIATES.INC xpv fs, Nl Nxvix.a . znn!x,e • aNxu roue.•i..Esm.ssns . atn mases NOTE: ND boon dory survey Work Wm P.Ht e*.d oz tD the precis. to ca tion Df this tract. PARCEL NO: 907011-0 907015-0 OWNER: Scottland, Inc. 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, MN 55379 DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL: The south one rod of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota. DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT: A permanent easement for storm sewer and drainaae purposes over, under and across that part of the above described parcel which lies within 60.00 feet each side of the following described centerline: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Southeast . Quarter: thence South 0 degrees 21 minutes 02 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line thereof, a distance of 43.50 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence North 89 deorees 31 minutes 07 seconds Eas. parallel with the north line of said Northeast Quarter of the Southeast: Quarter, a distance of 724.70 feet: thence North 47 dearees 40 minutes 24 seconds East 89.94 feet to a point on the north line of the south one rod of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and said centerline there terminating. Together with a temporary construction easement over, under and across that part of the above described parcel which lies from 60.00 feet to 85.00 feet southerly and southeasterly of the above described centerline. Said permanent easement contains 2.052 acres more or less. Said temporary easement contains 0.522 acres more or less. Said temporary easement expires December 31, 1988. EXHIBIT •A" p./ i n 907007-0 f N ..y SA�; J k eaao/o-o / ZS TCMP. Z�3/W// _ 9070e9 -O 951 zs' PERM. . ESMT7/0 'rEMP. ESMT. / x/� Esnr.J 89 3l. /SO PELI.EY+� u'TeHP ESMT. 9070/5- 0 CONSENT /06 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Vierling Drive West, Project No. 1988-1 DATE: June 27 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2920 , A Resolution Determining the Necessity for and Authorizing the Acquisition of Certain Property by Proceeding in Eminent Domain for Purposes of Constructing Vierling Drive from County Road 17 Easterly for + 3200 Feet, Project No. 1988-1 . BACKGROUND: City Council has authorized the right-of-way acquisition process to begin for the above referenced project. Appraisal reports are currently being prepared for the parcels involved. The Scottland Companies is the only property owner that right-of-way or easements are needed from. Due to the complexity of their corporate structure and numerous investors , they have indicated to staff that it would be easier to go thru a "friendly condemnation" process rather than accept the appraised value of the taking and get all the parties together to sign the acquisition documents. The Scottland Companies have agreed to give the City a "Right-of-Entry" permit to begin construction prior to the land acquisition process being completed . In order to proceed with the acquisition process, City Council should authorize the condemnation proceedings to begin. Attached is Resolution No . 2920 authorizing that process . These proceedings normally take 90 days from the date of petition to the district court. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve Resolution No. 2920. 2. Deny Resolution No. 2920. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 2920, A Resolution Determining the Necessity for and Authorizing the Acquisition of Certain Property by Proceeding in Eminent Domain for Purposes of Constructing Vierling Drive from County Road 17 Easterly for + 3200 Feet, Project No. 1988-1 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM2920 RESOLUTION 2920 A Resolution Determining the Necessity for and Authorizing the Acquisition of Certain Property By Proceeding in Eminent Domain for Purposes of Constructing Vierling Drive from County Road 17 Easterly for . 3200 Feet Project No. 1988_1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee has determined that it would be to the best interests of the general public as well as the area involved to construct said Vierling Drive and for the purpose to secure the necessary easements ; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AS FOLLOWS: I - Acquisitioned by the City of the easements described on Exhibit "A" which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference are necessary for the purpose of constructing Vierling Drive from County Road 17 easterly for + 3200 feet. 2. The City Attorney is authorized and directed on behalf of the City to acquire the real estate interests as set forth in Exhibit "A" by the exercise of the power of eminent domain pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 117, and is specifically authorized to notify the owners of intent to take possession Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes , Section 117 .042 . The City Attorney is further authorized to take all actions necessary and desirable to carry out the purposes of this Resolution. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this , 1988, day of Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1988 City Attorney —� EXHIBIT 'A" 1p O S M EASEMENT NO. a� i Description and Drawing ^^^ 1 NFPER CE[1111 IM11 rv4 SU.YR, IIAN, O[ [110[1 MAI IPE I1 t[D SR All or ' IV VI 1 VVOk[ vi p1[F CI sV rtIr1510N A 1x11 I ♦ DUIR [EG ISiE[Fp IAVD SV[vE10P E/)SM � owsEl IXE WS Or tNE S lE NNf501 A. s.MA[D AMU RtG NO,'." pAiF PE L_NO. ORR-SCHELEN MAYERON &,ASSOCIATES.INC. 2011'As' x[NXl f1A All SIIn[331 NiNxp PY 115.vIX N[503A ss,is . 61333]11560 NOTE: No boundory survey Mork Mos performed o; to the precise locotlon of this tract. PARCEL NO: 907015-0 908001-0 OWNER: Scottland, Inc. 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, MN 55379 DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL: '. The Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7. The West 16.55 Acres of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8. The Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section S. All in Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota. Property is Torrens as evidenced by Certificate of Title Number 8455. DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT: An 80.00 foot permanent easement for public raodway and utility purposes over, '. under, and across that part of the above described parcel which lies within 40.00 feet each side of the following described centerline: Commencing at the northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7 , Township 115, Ranoe 22; thence South 00 degrees 21 minutes 02 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line thereof a distance of 628.13 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence South 86 dearees 24 minutes 42 seconds East a distance of 2, 261.21 feet; thence easterly 298.96 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the north, having a radius of 1,467.91 feet and a central anale of 11 degrees 40 minutes 09 seconds; thence North 81 dearees 55 minutes 10 seconds East, tangent to said curve, a distance of 657 .45 feet to a point on the east line of the West 16.55 acres of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 115, Range 22, distant 698.38 feet south of the northeast corner thereof and said centerline there terminating. Sheet 1 of 2 Together with a temporary construction easement over, part of the above described parcel under, and across that which lies from 40.00 feet to 65.00 feet each side of the above desribed centerline. Said permanent easement contains 5.909 Acres more or less. Said temporary easement contains 3.693 Acres more or less. Said temporary easement. expires December 31, 1988 it Sheet 2 of 2 EXHIBIT: 'A' �6 �✓ O S M EASEMENT NO. 8R-2 Description and Drawing 1 XEvf[l CErtVff T"a ?HIS su•V T. PLAN, Of Bron WASrvfnvED n wE OR / `I/ `I/ ` O... t DH•fR SLAL.IIOX AND 1X.nl .X . .1 [EG ISxf t[o LAND svev[rOt fl Mf L', OE 1Nf -1-11 01 JV/X[SOEA D.EDw.vD vea D.ns•. D..0 lEc.NQ I ORR SCHELEN MAYERON&ASSOCIATES.INC 2021 Vsl nue[➢ix.rf . sNnf IS• uinx...... ssnl • gun sl bec6o 1 NOTE! No boundary survey work wm perfnrmed�m tD the precise location Df this tract. PARCEL: 907015-0 OWNER: Scottland, Inc. 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, MN 55379 DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL: The Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7. The West 16.55 Acres of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8. The Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8. All in Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota. Property is Torrens as evidenced by Certificate of Title Number 8455. DESCRIPTION OF EASEXENT: A 20.00 foot permanent easement for storm sewer and drainage purposes over, under, and across that part of the above described parcel which lies within 10.00 feet side of the following described centerline: Commencing at the northeast corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 115, Range 22; thence South 89 degrees 31 minutes 07 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the north line thereof a distance of 217 .08 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence South 00 degrees 21 minutes 02 seconds East, parallel with the west line thereof, .a distance of 706.20 feet and said centerline their terminating. Together with a temporary construction easement over, under, and across that part of the above described parcel which lies from 10.00 to 30.00 feet each side of the above described centerline. Said permanent easement contains 13,325 square feet more or less. Said temporary easement contains 25,650 square feet more or less. Said temporary easement expires December 31, 1988. EXHIBIT "A" O S M EASEMENT NO. 88-3 Description and Drawing M.F. of 1—" wss nfnR[o S. .e oP 1 1' r 1 YUDfP xr DRFO SVM ry1510� peD xa I x • OVV IEOISIE RED L.MD SV IVROf /L',im R rx Wy q lyE 31111 D ,.IxMF301... �/// P^ , i..nn,... (c..o. ORR SCHELEN"D7 .E " SASSOCIATES.INC. }D}I (1St xl xF prry xVl prn(}33" . xrx x[UVUS.xrx x[SDL 55.1] . •61})]]LS560 NOTE: No b...dory Survey work was p.rformed os to She pr.clw IDcatien of thu tmct. PARCEL NO: 907011-0 OWNER: Scottland, Inc. 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, MN 55379 DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL: The South one rod of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota. DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT: A 20.00 foot permanent easement for storm sewer and drainage purposes over, under, and across the above described parcel . The centerline of said easement is described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South 89 decrees sl minutes 07 seconds west, assumed bearing, along the south line thereof-a distance of 217.08 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence North 00 decrees 21 mintues 02 seconds West a distance of 16.50 feet to the north line of the South one rod of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and said centerline there terminating. Toeether with a temporary construction easement over, under, and across that part of the above described parcel which lies from 10.00 to 30.00 fet each side of the above described centerline. Said permanent easement contains 330 square feet more or less. Said temporary easement contains 660 square feet more or less. Said temporary easement expires December 31, 1988. CONSENT /oc Memo To: John K.Anderson, City Administrator From: Marilyn M. Reiner, Personnel Coordinator Re: Revise Personnel Policy Leave-Without-Pay Provision Date: June 28, 1988 Information Occasionally instances occur whereby an employee requests a short leave without pay. Background Current Personnel Policy provides that City Council authorize all leaves without pay. Personnel is requesting that the City Administrator, at his discretion, be given the authority to grant leaves without pay of up to five days to permanent employees for justifiable conditions. To accommodate such changes Section 13 of the City of Shakopee Personnel Policy should be amended as follows: Section 13 LEAVES WITHOUT PAY: The City Council may grant any permanent employee a leave of absence without pay for a period not exceeding 90 days except that it may extend such leaves to a maximum period of one year in case the employee is disabled or where extraordinary circumstances, in its judgment, warrant such extension. No-veca-tio -er--side-leave--bene€its- steal} aeerue-during-a-leave-of-absenee-without-pay- The City Administrator may approve an unpaid leave of up to five days per year. All requests and replies must be in written form. Unpaid leaves shall be granted only after an employee has exhausted all accumulated vacation (and sick leave if for medical reasons). For any leave of absence in excess of five days: No vacation or sick leave benefits shall accrue, nor shall paid sick leave be granted to persons on unpaid leaves exceeding five days. An adjustment to the employees starting date, for vacation accrual purposes, shall be made for any unpaid leave of absence over 90 days. Action Requested Move to adopt Resolution No. 2921, A Resolution Amending the City of Shakopee Personnel Policy Adopted by Resolution No. 1571. RESOLUTION NO. 2921 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE PERSONNEL POLICY ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 1571 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1571 was adopted by the City of Shakopee to provide reasonable and clear expectations of the condition of employment for its employees; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend certain sections of Resolution No. 1571 from time to time to maintain reasonable and clear conditions of employment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that SECTION 13 LEAVES WITHOUT PAY of the City of Shakopee Personnel Policy is hereby amended to read: The City Council may grant any permanent employee a leave of absence without pay for a period not exceeding 90 days, except that it may extend such leaves to a maximum period of one years in case the employee is disabled or where extraordinary circumstances, in its judgment, warrant such extension. The City Administrator may approve an unpaid leave of up to five days per year. All requests and replies must be in written form. Unpaid leaves shall be granted only after an employee has exhausted all accumulated vacation (and sick leave if for medical reasons) . leave of absence in excess of five days: For any No vacation or sick leave benefits shall accrue, nor shall paid sick leave be granted to persons on unpaid leaves exceeding five days. An adjustment to the employees starting date, for vacation accrual purposes, shall be made for any unpaid leave of absence over 90 days. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this da of Y 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1988. City Attorney CONSENT MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administr for FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Engineering Department Budget DATE: June 30, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2922, A Resolution Amending the 1988 Budget. BACKGROUND: The 1988 Engineering Department Operation Budget included a line item for Professional Services (object 4310) in the amount of $1 ,000.00. To date, the total expenditures for this item is $5 ,912.39. This can be broken down as follows: Date Source Amount 3/9/88 OSM $ 40.00 3/30/88 OSM $ 144.00 3/30/88 Sundee Engr. $ 2,992.39 4/13/88 David Hutton $ 1 ,800.00 4/13/88 OSM $ 288.00 5/11/88 OSM $ 648.00 The payment to Sundee Engineering was the City' s portion (501) of reimbursing the arbitration panel for their services regarding the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District drainage ditch hearings. The payment to me was for relocation expenses as part of my employment terms. These two items total $4 ,792.39 , neither of which was probably planned on or anticipated during the budgeting process last fall. Without these two items, the total expenditures for this item is $1 ,120 .00 or just $120.00 over budget. Staff is requesting that $6 ,000.00 be added to the Engineering Department budget for Professional Services to cover the two items described above and for future expenditures for the remainder of the year. The Finance Director has recommended that the Engineering Services revenue item be increased from the budgeted amount of $1302000 .00 to $136 ,000 .00 to compensate for the additional Professional Services expenditures. In 1987 , the total Engineering Services income was $189,000.00. Engineering Dept. Budget June 30 , 1988 Page 2 ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve of the budget amendment request and pass Resolution No. 2922. 2. Deny the request. 3. Do nothing and wait until later in the year to modify the overall budget by transferring funds from other areas with a surplus. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternate No. 1 . REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2922 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2817 Adopting the 1988 Budget and move its adoption. DH/pmp AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 2922 ( � A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 281T ADOPTING THE 1988 BUDGET WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a budget for the fiscal year, and WHEREAS, changing conditions and circumstances warrant amending the budget. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA, that the appropriations are increased as follows: Fund Object Name A No Division Amount 01 4310 Professional Services 41 (Engr. ) $6,000.00 and the increases are offset or funded by increases (decreases) in the following accounts: Fund Object Name h No Division Amount 01 3509 Engineering Services 41 (Engr. ) $6 ,000.00 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 10e MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineeir1>-W SUBJECT; 1988 Pavement Preservation Program DATE: June 30, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2923, requesting permission to bid the 1988 Pavement Preservation Program. BACKGROUND: The Engineering Department in cooperation with Public Works is finalizing the proposed 1988 Pavement Preservation Program. In past years, the program has consisted of a sealcoating contract and an overlay contract. The total budgeted amount for the 1988 program is $95,000.00 . - In reviewing all the streets it became apparent that most of the streets that would benefit from a sealcoat have been sealcoated within the last 4 years and will not need another treatment until next year. It was also apparent that numerous streets are in need of an overlay and many other streets are beyond the preservation program and are in need of a total reconstruction. Therefore due to the limited funds available, staff is proposing to bid out an overlay contract only. This project would consist of pavement profiling (grinding off 1 1/2 inches of existing asphalt along the gutters) , placing a 1 1/2 inch asphalt overlay over the full width of the streets, replacing any defective curb and gutter sections and adjusting all manholes and water valves The proposed streets that will be included in this project and estimated costs of each are as follows: Estimated Cumulative Street Section Cost Tota 7th Ave. St. Mark' s to Apgar $20,000 - $20 ,000 Spencer - 10th to Shakopee $10,000 $30,000 Sommerville 10th to Shakopee $10,000 $40,000 Lewis - 10th to Shakopee $10,000 $50 ,000 Fuller - 6th to 8th $12,500 $62,500 Atwood - 10th to 6th $22,000 $84,500 Shakopee - Fuller to Apgar $12,500 $97 ,000 Apgar - 10th to 6th $22,000 $119,000 Note that the total proposed cost exceeds the $95 , 000 . 00 budgeted. Staff is anticipating that the bids will come in lower than estimated, which is the overall trend this year due to the fact that contractors are extremely "hungry" this year. In Pavement Preservation June 30 , 1988 Page 2 addition, the contract will be written such that the work shall not exceed $95 ,000.00 and any street sections that would exceed that amount would be eliminated from the project. The Engineering Department and Public Works feel that additional funds should be made available to the pavement preservation program. With an annual budget of $95 ,000 .00 , the City is fighting a losing battle in trying to maintain the streets of Shakopee to accepted standards. In talking to the City Administrator and Finance Director, there are additional funds in the amount of $100 ,000 that could be used in this year ' s pavement preservation program . Staff is requesting authorization to transfer this $100 ,000 into this year ' s program. Using those increased funds, the following streets would be added to the overlay contract. Estimated Cumulative Street Section Cost lotal Shakopee Ave. - $71 ,000 $71 ,000 Market to 11th Market St. - $10,000 $81 ,000 10th to 11th . It is also proposed to sealcoat approximately $30,000-$40,000 worth of streets. The exact street sections for this contract will be determined later. Staff also feels that the overall pavement preservation program should be re-evaluated before next year' s contract. The funds available are not adequate to address the condition of the streets and the annual budget should be increased. In addition, a systematic pavement management program should be developed to rate all streets and develop short and long range goals for improving the overall infrastructure of the City. Staff will be attempting to complete this study before the end of this year. Attached is Resolution No. 2923, requesting permission to bid the - 1988 Pavement Preservation Contract. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve Resolution No 2923 . 2 . Deny Resolution No. 2923 . Pavement Preservation June 30 , 1988 Page 3 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2923 , A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for 1988-8 Pavement Preservation Program - Overlays and move its adoption. D8/pmp MEM2923 411, 11 n 1 1 i n mJ a i w � 1 .❑ x i 11,11' I 1 i > I a O . i al rT G � ❑�LJau�� © r g 1 , 11 1. / 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2923 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids 1988 Pavement Preservation Program- Overlays Project No. 1988-8 David Hutton, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of the 1988 Pavement Preservations Program, Project No. 1988-8 and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file and of record in the Office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved . 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertise- ment for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The Advertisement for Bids shall be published for three full weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the City Clerk until 10:00 A.M. , on August 16, 1988, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, or their designated party, will then be tabulated , and will be considered by the Council at 7:30 P.M. , or thereafter on August 2, 1988, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier' s check, bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of Shakopee for not less than five (5% ) percent of the amount of the Bid. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 19_• Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of _ 19_. City Attorney r /of MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project No. 1988-2 DATE: July 1 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: On June 7 , 1988 the Shakopee City Council passed Resolution No. 2901 ordering the advertisement for bids for the 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project. B" GROUND: On July 1 , 1988 at 1.0:00 A.M. , bids were received and publicly opened for Project No. 1988-2 , 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project. A total of 13 bids were received and summarized in the attached resolution. The three low bids are tabulated below: Contractor Citv Total Bid Holst Excavating Prescott, WI $76 ,918.50 S.M. Hentges & Sons Shakopee, MN $86 ,074.90 Austin P. Keller Co. St. Paul, MN $97 ,904.00 The Engineering Department has reviewed all bids that were received. We arealsoreviewing the qualifications of Holst Excavating, Inc. , the apparent low bidder, and at this time have not been able to determine if they are able to perform the work as described by the plans and specifications. Reference checks are currently being done. Staff will be giving Council a verbal recommendation on the bids at the July 5, 1988 Council meeting. The engineer' s estimate for this project was approximately $98 ,000 .00 . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Accept the low bid and adopt Resolution No. 2924. 2 . Reject the low bidder and award the contract to another bidder, probably the 2nd low bidder. 3 . Reject all bids and rebid. 4. Table any action until the July 19, 1988 meeting. 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer July 1 , 1988 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: As indicated above, staff will be providing a verbal recommendation at the Council meeting. . REQUESTED ACTION: Council action will depend on the verbal recommendation of staff. If background checks are positive , staff offers attached resolution No. 2924, A Resolution Accepting Bid on the 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project No. 1988-2 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM2924 RESOLUTION NO. 2924 A Resolution Accepting Bid On 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project No. 1988-2 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project, bids were received , opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Holst Excavating $ 76,918.50 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $ 86 ,074.90 Austin P. Keller Co. $ 97 ,904.00 0&P Contracting, Inc. $ 99,159.27 B&D Underground $ 99,647.00 J. P. Norex, Inc. $104,565.25 G.L. Contracting, Inc. $109,315.30 Orfei Cont. , Inc. $111 ,718.81 Barbarossa & Sons, INc. $114,229.00 Brown & Cris, Inc. $114,280.00 Albrecht Excavating $118,300.00 Northdale Const. $134 ,757.90 F.F. Jedlicki $137,488.00 AND WHEREAS, it appears that Holst Excavating, Inc. , P.O. Box 36, Prescott, WI 54021 is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Holst Excavating, Inc. , in the name of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer by Sanitary Sewer & Appurtenant Work, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 19_• City Attorney )DJ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Vierling Drive Project No. 1988-1 DATE: July 1 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: On June 7 , 1988 the Shakopee City Council passed Resolution No. 2903 ordering the advertisement for bids for Vierling Drive from County Road 17 to the East. Attached is Resolution No. 2925, accepting bids on this project. BACKGROUND: On July 1 , 1988 at 10:00 A.M. , bids were received and publicly opened for Project No. 1988-1 , the Vierling Drive Project. A total of 12 bids were received and summarized in the attached resolution. The three low bids are tabulated below: Contractor City Total Bid Northdale Const. Rogers, MN $399,732.33 Richard Knutson, Inc. Savage, MN $404,796 .90 J.P. Norex Chanhassen, MN $409,835. 17 The Engineering Department has reviewed all bids that were received. We havealsoreviewed the cualifications of Northdale Const. , the apparent low bidder, and find that they are able to perform the work as described by the plans and specifications for the project. _ The engineer ' s estimate for this project was approximately $460 ,000 .00. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Accept the low bid and adopt Resolution No. 2925. 2 . Reject the low bidder and award the contract to another bidder. 3. Reject all bids and rebid. RECOMMENDATION: Since there is no basis for Alternatives 2 and 3 , staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to accept the low bid and adopt Resolution No. 2925. Vierling Drive June 28 , 1988 Page 2 REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No . 2925 , A Resolution Accepting Bid on Vierling Drive from County Road 17 to the East to Northdale Construction Co. , Inc. , 14450 Northdale Blvd. , Rogers, MN 55374, Project No. 1988-1 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM2925 I� RESOLUTION NO. 2925 A Resolution Accepting Bid On Vierling Drive From County Road 17 to the East Project No. 1988-1 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Vierling Drive Project from County Road 17 to the East, bids were received , opened and tabulated according to law , and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Northdale Const. $399,732.33 Richard Knutson, Inc. $404,796 .90 J.P. Norex $409,835.17 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $418,358.38 Brown & Cris, Inc. $419, 157 .38 Latour Const. $436 ,137.86 Alexander Const. Co. $438,057 .26 Valley Paving, Inc. $438,351 .67 Lametti & Sons, Inc. $441 ,351 .11 B&D Underground, INc. $443 ,062.17 Hardrives, Inc. $445,600.87 G.L. Contracting $466,898.92 AND WHEREAS, it appears that Northdale Construction Company, Inc . , 14450 Northdale Blvd . , Rogers, MN 55374 is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Northdale Construction Company, Inc . , in the name of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of Vierling Drive from County Rd. 17 to the East by Street Const. , Storm Sewer, and Appurtenant Work, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19_- Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 19_- City Attorney CONSEW �d MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Alley in Block 55 - Feasibility Report DATE: June 27 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2917 , Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvements to the Alley in Block 55. BACKGROUND: On June 7 , 1988 City Council accepted a petition and ordered the preparation of a feasibility report for improvements to the alley in Block 55 , between Lewis and Sommerville Streets and 4th and 5th Avenues, by Resolution No. 2900. The feasibility report has been completed and the report is attached for Council review. Attached is Resolution No . 2917 receiving the feasibility report and calling for a public hearing on the proposed improvements. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2917 and hold a public hearing on the proposed improvements on July 19 , 1988 . 2 . Do not accept Resolution No. 2917. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 2917 , A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvement to the Alley in Block 55 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM2917 03 RESOLUTION NO. 2917 A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing On Improvement To the Alley in Block 55 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2900 of the City Council adopted June 7 , 1988 , a report has been prepared by David Hutton, City Engineer, with reference to the improvements of the Alley in Block 55 by asphalt pavement , and this report was received by the Council on July 5 , 1988. ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . The Council will consider the improvement of the alley in Block 55 in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting and benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $4,100.00 2 . A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 19th day of July , 1988 , at 7: 30 P.M. , or thereafter, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 129 East 1st Avenue and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. 3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 1988-7 Public Improvement Program. 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 l ' FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF ALLEY IN BLOCK 55 _ BETWEEN LEWIS AND SOMMERVILLE STREETS AND 4TH AND 5TH AVENUES CITY OF SHAKOPEE MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was _ prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. I have applied for registration as a Professional Engineer in the State of Minnesota via reciprocity and my registration is spending. Date 7��t9 Registration No. 22231 (Wisconsin) . JUNE 1988 �6 W TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. Feasibility Report Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Proposed Improvements . . . . . . . . . 1 Estimated Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Assessment Procedure and Funding . . . . 2 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . 2 Appendix 6 INTRODUCTION The City Council of the City of Shakopee has received a petition for improvements of the alley in Block 55, between Lewis and Sommerville Streets and 4th and 5th Avenues , and ordered the preparation of a feasibility report by Resolution No. 2900 on June 7 , 1988 . BACKGROUND _ The alley under study is in Block 55 which is bounded by Lewis Street , Sommerville Street, 4th Avenue and 5th Avenue . A petition for improvements was received by the City Clerk on May 16 , 1988. The City Council ordered a feasibility report prepared via Resolution No. 2900 on June 7 , 1988 . The existing alley is gravel, with no other street improvements. The alley right of way is 16 feet. The area on both sides of the alley is zoned R-2 , Urban Residential. None of the abutting properties are in the flood plain. There e and driways ss his alley. arA power numerous pole line garages is located along h then north e side of t of the alley. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The requested improvements by the petitioners is to pave the alley. The recommended improvements by this report would consist of 2 ced on base. inchs Ite isf bitious proposed n that can cinvertedrete a crown be gravel 6 inch constructed for — the alley to control storm water runoff and direct the water towards Sommerville Street. 1 ESTIMATED COSTS The estimated costs for the proposed improvements are detailed in the Appendix and are summarized below: Total Construction Costs $ 3,300.00 Plus 10% Contingency 300.00 Plus 15% Engr. & Legal Fees 500.00 Total Estimated Project Costs $ 4,100.00 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE AND FUNDING All costs associated with this project would be 100% assessable, which is consistent with past practices and existing City policies. The current special assessment policy allows for the costs to be spread over the abutting properties by either the front foot area wide assessment or per lot. It is proposed that all properties abutting the studied alley be assessed per the front foot method, based on the actual frontage on the alley. All properties would be assessed at the same rate of $6 .83 per front foot, based on the estimated project costs. The assessment costs for each property are summarized in the Appendix. Funding for this project would be included in the bonds currently being proposed by the Finance Director for purchase for additional 1988 projects. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The alley in Block 55 is not unlike many other alleys in the City of Shakopee that are gravel , but are adequate to serve their intended purpose. The lack of a hard surface pavement creates dusty or muddy conditions for the adjacent properties and is more of an inconvenience to the residents than anything. _ The City of Shakopee has a policy of not improving existing alleys unless the abutting property owners request improvements and agree to pay for them. In this case, the required number of property owners (at least 35%) have requested the improvements. All abutting property owners will be assessed for 100% of the alley construction costs. This report concludes that the requested improvements are feasible and recommends the construction of the proposed improvements. — 2 /e APPENDIX Subject Location 1 _ Estimated Project Costs 2 Assessment Calculations 3 • Ao � � � � Mimi= � � �b F� ESTIMATED COSTS ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL Grading, Restoration L.S. $1 ,000 .00 $1 ,000.00 Class 5 Gravel Base 100 Tons $ 7.00 $ 700.00 2" Bituminous Concrete 70 Tons $ 22.50 $1 .600.00 Total Construction Costs $3 ,300 .00 _ Plus 10% Contingency $ 300.00 Plus 15% Engr. , Legal Fees $ 500 .00 Total Estimated Project Costs $4,100.00 2 164 ASSESSMENT TABLE 1 FRONT FOOTAGE i ESTIMATED i PID PROPERTY OWNER i ON ALLEY 1 ASSESSMENT i , , ;; '-001405-0 !John & Kriss Radermacher i 100 { $683 .33 1 i - 1425 S. Lewis St. ;Shakopee, MN - 55379 1 ' '-001407-0 ;Clemens H. Lenzmeier I 50 i $341 .67 i 217 E. 5th Ave. 1 ;Shakopee, MN 55379 ' 90 i i r;-001408-0 ;David & Mary Antonneau $615.00 i I I ' 1225 E. 5th Ave. i I { ; {Shakopee, MN 55379 ' - 60 i $410.00 1 127-001409-0 iLawrence J. Wherley i � , 1233 E. 5th Ave. i !Shakopee, MN 55379 60 i $410.00 ; P7-001410-0 iJaime & Mary Gerold i , , 1238 E. 4th Ave. i i ;Shakopee, MN 55379 ' 60 i $410.00 1 1 7-001411-0 iElmer Andrew ' , ' :228 E. 4th Ave. { ;Shakopee, MN 55379 i I 1 60 $410.00 7-001412-0 {Stanley 6 Pamela Pint i � 1 1220 E. 4th Ave. ;Shakopee, MN 55379 ' 150 1 $341 .67 i -7-001413-0 !Dell & Loretta Osterdyk i � 1 ' 1214 E. 4th Ave. !Shakopee, MN 55379 1 ' $478.33 1 1Z7-001414-0 ;David & Linda Haggbloom { 70 � { i 1401 Lewis St. ' ;Shakopee, MN 55379 ' , ' 1 � TOTAL { 600 i $4 ,100.00 i SSESSMENT COMPUTATIONS Assessment Rate = Total Estimated Cost = $4 100.00 = $ 6.83/Ft. Total Frontage oho tom. 3 TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: 1989 Budget Calendar (Tentative) DATE: June 27, 1988 July 14 Department Heads receive budget worksheets. Department Heads receive 6 month operating statements. July 29 Budget requests due back to Finance (budget at "needs" with required list of cuts) . Sept. 6 Council receives budget. Levy special assessments. Sept. 13 Reserved for budget work session. Sept. 20 Public Hearings - budget in total Sept. 22 Reserved for budget work session. Sept. 27 Reserved for budget work session if needed. Oct. 4 Regular Council meeting - approve budget, tax levy. Oct. 9 Deadline for certifing tax levy to county. Note: Total of three work sessions if needed.