Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
01/03/1989
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: December 29, 1988 1. The Hockey Association has applied for renewal of their gambling license, located at Canterbury Inn Players. They do meet the requirements of the City Code. 2 . We have received the final copy of the AMM Policy for 1989- 1990 as adopted by the full membership at the November 3rd meeting. If any Councilmember would like a copy please contact Jeanette. 3 . We have received a copy of the League's 1989 City Policies and Priorities for Legislative and Administrative Action which was adopted at the League's Policy Adoption Conference on November 16th. If any Councilmember would like a copy please contact Jeanette. 4 . Attached please find a letter from Mr. Gerald D. Garski, the Assistant Director of the Local Governmental Services Division of the State Department of Revenue. A copy of which was sent to Mr. Don Martin, the Scott County Assessor and which is requesting information on land values for land located at the intersections of Highways 13 and 42. In this letter Mr. Garski is asking that Mr. Martin review his valuation procedures for parcels of vacant land. It is also requested that information then be submitted to the Shakopee City Council for review. 5. Attached please find a letter from Senator Robert Schmitz and Representative Becky Kelso responding to the City's request about the forgiving of a sewer loan, which was made to the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Also included in this letter is extensive information from Senator Carl Kroening regarding the sewer overflow issue. 6. Attached is a copy of a letter which was sent by the Federal Highway Administration to Mr. Leonard W. Levine, the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation relative to a letter from Mayor Lebens requesting a public design hearing for the 169 bridge project. The letter further indicates that once this item has been answered Mn/DOT is to respond directly to Mayor Lebens. 7. Attached is a memorandum from Barry Stock regarding the DNR Trail/Sweeney Property update. 8. Attached is information from the LMC regarding upcoming seminars. Please contact Jeanette if you are interested in attending. 9. Attached is the monthly calendar for January. 10. Attached is the Business Update from City Hall which will go out with the Chamber's January newsletter. 11. Attached are the December 8, 1988 minutes from the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission meetings. 12 . Attached are the January 5, 1989 agendas 'for the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission meetings. DRK/jms STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE "6^ Mail Station 3340 DEC 51988 St. Paul, MN 55146-3340 - CITY OF gHAKOPEE December 1, 1988 - - Mr. Don Martin, Assessor Scott County Courthouse Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Martin: Recently Steve Hurni and I met with the Shakopee City Council to discuss the valuation of property within Scott County in general and the city of Shakopee in particular. During the course of our meeting the issue of the value placed on vacant land held for development was discussed at great length. Of particular interest to the Council was the land at the intersection of highways #13 and #42. The Council believed that this land was not being valued on an equitable basis with similar land being held for development within the city of Shakopee. Will you please make every effort to review your valuation procedures regarding parcels of vacant land? Steve Hurni of our staff has done some research on this issue and may be able to aid you in your valuation. I would suggest it would be beneficial for all parties if you were to send the Council a short report showing the results of your 1989 vacant land valuation. The Council believes this would assist them in making decisions at the hoard of Review. Thanks for your cooperation. Very truly yours, / GERALD D. GARSKI, Assistant Director Local Government Services Division (612) 642-0483 GDG:vh c: Judith Cox, Shakopee City Clerk AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 5 ROBERT d. SCHMITZ Senator 86th District 6730 Old Hay. 169 Blvd. Jordan, Minnesota 55352 Phone: 492-2182 Office: 286 Saute Capitol Senate SG Paul, Minnesota 55156 Phone:296-71676-7157 November 21, 1988 State of Minnesota Judith S. Cox ai City Clerk City of Shakopee NOV2 21988 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 C'Ty Cc SHAKOPEE Dear Judith: Thank you for your letter and the enclosed Resolution No. 2981 from the City of Shakopee referencing forgiving approximately $32 million in separation loans from the state. The Legislature forgave debt owed to the state from the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul for loans received by the cities to correct problems with combined sewer overflow. The debt is foregiven when the cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis issue general obligation bonds totaling $10 . 5 million and $3 . 5 million respectively. Revenue from the St. Paul bonds must go to remodel and refurbish the Como Park Conservatory ( $5 million) and for re- construction of Shepard Road ( $5.5 million) . Revenue from Minneapolis bonds must be used to acquire and develop land within the Great River Road project. Enclosed for your information is a memo from Senator Carl W. Kroening, chairman of the State Departments Division of the Senate Finance Committee which comprehensively covers all the issues regarding the combined sewer overflow issue. If I can be of further assistance on this matter, please contact me again. Sincerely, ROBE&- RT J. SCHMITZ BECKY KE SO State Senator State Representative District 36 District 36A RJ Enmu2�5{{ Orb=fITTEES • Chairman, Local and Government• Rules and Administration• Transportation Enip �rg^},yi'2�xes and Tax Law. • SUBCOMMITTEES• Property Taxes and Local Government Aids COMMISSION:Legislative Commission to Review Administrative Rules STATE DEPARTMENTS FUSITIUN ON WASTEWATER YREATMENT FAGILITIES 4-19-F9) PHILOSOPHY: The central element of the wastewater treatment provisions of the state departments conference committee re- port is an effort to rectif.• several inequities that e:tist in the current state system for funding wastewate+- treatment fa- cilities. As a result , the provisions of the bill considered as a whole provide some relief to greater Minnesota and some relief to the metorpolitan area. GREATER MINNEEOTA: i) 5% SUPPLEMENTA_ GRANTS PROGRii'1: D_rring the period between Oct 1 , 1984 and September 7.0, 1987 nea-ly 60 greater Minne- sota communities received wastewater treatment grants through the FCA that were substantially lower tnan the grant amounts that these same communities wculc receive if ^hey had been awarded the grants befo-e ano atter this period. This situa- tion was created becau_e of a decline in the amount of fed- eraln and state funds made available during this period. The FCR estimates that the statewide total of additional funds that these communities would receive if the,, were awarded grant=_ under the current guidelines amounts tc appro>zimately 516.0001000. in an effort to begin the process of bringing equity to these communities, the state departments oevelooed a supplemental grant program that provides up to 5% of the eligible construction costs of =he projects for these com- munities in additional grant monies. under this program al- most all of the affected communities will receives some as- sistance. "Chis supplemental grant program is intended to be the first phase of a longer range program to rectify this $18,000,000 inequity. $6,000,000 of the $47,000,000 appropriated to PCR for wastewater treatment grants in the 1987 bonding bill was ear- marked for these supplemental grants. These funds were made available because several of the projects that were scheduled to receive grant money from the original appropriation will not be ready for constructionaccording to the original time- table. This grant program, th.erefore, should not delay any of the scheduled prcject.s nor doe=_ it remove ether rejects frons the PCA's priority list for wastewater treatme:-t grants. 2) WASTEWATER TREATMENT FOR TOWNS AND UNORGANIZED AREAS: Under the Current wastewater treatment facilii.ies program :guidelines, onl,, municipalities �,rc el :gi5le to receive funds. Minnesota Yras areas o; the state that are not part of existing municipalities where lake=_hore population concentra- tions are increasing. As population increases, sewage dis- posal problems accelerate. Because these areas are not part pF municipalities then are not eliqible for funds under the current grant program. They-e is, 'thcrefor-e, a gap in. the =state' s funaing program wastewater treatmert facilities. Consequently, the state departments bill requires PCP. to ex- amine this problem and develop criteria for estaolishing a grant program to provide assistance to nonmunicipalities. The language require=_ a report to the legislature by Januar- 1 , 19e? that summarize_' (:he srudy and r__c.mmPnd=_ thr funding needs of _ p,ograw snr these a-eas. ; h;-_ -nll allow the leg- islature to cons_icer soiuticns ne::t legisiativc session. METROPOLITAN ARE. R=FLIEF; 11 FORGIVENESS OF COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (CSO) LOANS: The 1985 bonding bill established a CSO loan program for com- munities in the metropolitan area whereby the communities could repay 50% of the statr funds used for :orstructiorr, of the facilities. The metrgpolitan are- 16 the pr,1S area of the state where wastwewater treatment facilities receiving state funds are subjected to the loan requirement . All other areas of the state have received the Mate contribution to- wards wastewater treatment facilities as grant monies. The state departments conference committee -eport rt•tempts to rectify this inequity by forgiving s5.5 miliio-t in CSO loans for the city of Minneapolis and $10.5 million in GSO loans for the city of St. Paul . THE BALANCE: When the provisions of the state departments conference com- mittee report on wastewater treatment facilities funding are considered as a whole, relief of inequities are provided for all areas of the state. Over the last ten years nearly 43% of the state funds_ allocated for wastewater treatment fa- cities went to the metro area and 57% of the funds went to greater Minnesota. Over the long term, the programs begun in this years state departments bill will provide at least $18.0 million dollars in relief to greater Minnesota (56% of the total relief planned) and $14.0 million in relief to the metropolitan area (44% of the relief planned) . When the fact that approximately 502 of Minnesota's popuiation livess in the -ver county met-ocolitar: area is considered this relation- snip cf greater Minnesota funding to metro�olican icnding for wastewater treatment is reasonable. In addition, greater Minnesota will be the primary beneficiary if a wastewater treatment facilities prooram is begun for towns and unorga- nized areas as a result of the study being_ conducted b•: th- F'CR. wastew SENATOR CARE. 1%. KROEN ENG ?aom X124 State Capitel 4t- P.d. 4S 55135 P%one: i62, 196.4:102 Hnn:e: ::'12s 522-5624 Senate State of Minnesota April 19, 1988 MEMO TO: All Senators FROM: Senator Carl W. Kroeni K RE: Minneapolis/St. Paul Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Loan Forgiveness - Attached you will find the following information regarding the above: 1 . Excerpts from the Senate Journal from May 18, 1985, showing that the Senate' s original position was to provide Minneapolis, St. Paul, and South St. Paul with 1008 grants for the CSO problem. 2. Excerpts from the 1985 Omnibus Tax Bill which provided 508 grant and 508 loan to Minneapolis/St. Paul for the CSO problem and 1008 grant to South St. Paul. 3 . A background sheet on the Minneapolis/St. Paul CSO loan program. 4. An answer sheet on common misconceptions regarding CSO. 5. Excerpt from Minneapolis City Engineer' s letter showing that the State only pays for 12. 58 of Minneapolis' sewer separation. G �! mm lNn 5p5�� O T N_ Isl ^<-gr n n n a n S u3 3 = 3s nor^ r Ga3 m rt 03r a 2 35 i .s_vaxv» � _= :3m_T _ : . ^ ^e.� e .. c X3 ' 3 _•• c c� c� w° n3 .°� et ° _ 3W iMC- n ° G c o ^ 3 ' G°.c. fY - a z n c. . ^ nw 3.mnzGx� z a ^ - 3 rq .cc grnc IT ^ ________ozz c,r 3 ga __ � = �e� LSF. L � rt .. J. ri ZL R. '° n 2 F3` F ° ] ^n 'e' 3o,mT >> z ynm ,n p'e •' a s C� a�I �' ' =>3 I a a .°>T n is �� q mawr np3p qRm n0 >4 �"i nC� '� REFI FR NFm 0= J • S^o'-j ggon9 a z T5 pp A -i hue, nN Nna o'R _ a =8>: o`e�d y `w F ecc B > .7 m c n Oac � nm7.2 n �`< 5.� n nn ay 5 cq mno X04 pn33nn � n � Ac _m = c � ± 30'� A : 'a' 52 = _ ec v 3 ]'n y »o ^ a . � o a ? =A 3 > >5. po�_ _� rtcrt i 6 n P O a A C_A u R n .] C C ♦ ] C _m n_00 6 C ] ` m A f�J -L. on 5 lz�P 3`n` rp 3av F H ° Ao�3 n3apoe O l q rt' C rya p_ nnHn' nC� �q�l. 3Po4 p3 .^. 3'<� n n , y� a rt ^. ] '.CV e1n nR0_ n2CCOO CIA CPomn baa. a o y Um C a- Cn po O?n3 n3 ' < ]l^.y y 2 n' 9D ] ^ `e3m ~, ua q h � 3nt p FZ ti�F3 ^ Z as > ca? • _ '=� _. _ _ - o xa0 i q '-',� 2 - : � C4.a�..O C:?.A w .: o`O ` „a ,',a_.^ O in � 3 3 _ P S `G ES ni•• Pp\m RCC 23n ,a^Z C� ih�3 ia'� ^ C rt _^ C2 3 '11h iR aSS BVI u^ianrti �. i ^ � �_ y' ER - 3 w] 3 N. 'C S'a? n ^oEL ` SC C � R LLQ.`^ ? ou� �e�ev o c any n5,g> > 3a ^- -o,Am o a, 0 0 3: n s-, 3 �-1 0- ", 05,0 ^ 3ioA y 3w' 4u " m e� 'n`m m c 'nm3a m 3o a R 03p o n'nv L'n Z m .^m "n 'o'n R ' =pe m ° ° .� ° 3 =. sac _° 3yc c d3 ^. 0 'nc d. - nrtw� ngD c � So ca sG = q C C e o ^, nW� Y£� m39 H LHm_� a Rnc O•n�. a3 an'�.n A n �5,� ?n � A o ? A �+ '° �o'y s°•5, 6rtmZ � 3na� �d' 3�� o = ? n = = E � n=.o a i H' a .neC - a7i -c�R y`<P< a,.. _ Jm1w aD _ rt2Lo3 Z 9L0-'B > >� 3�.> > No.ey v_maaR•n C= o o -Z7 =a� cn3 nn1 a m yn 2 > . i danro-�^ � o 9m7 P xR0P�3 ca^n^ d2' _ ^C a-000 m a C m 033' -gym Loon C �.oO an 5,n ^sd _g ^_ 3 CN A oOs -C ... =dZ" m 0 3 'J� 00q C r C S3 ' O C O=° C . � S R A g m .= C ri _P�� uni E " � n N 0 0 •� S 6 m C 0 9 G n m m' n w Y 9 -1 ^ n " o tin y?Z m Fr Lc _ Lo.O - nn n - n9,g�.^ 9,dC v, "o u�7Te3n, r K j ;q C 3 : ''> a.°iRn� pC� P°" °� 0'�n° ° n=.?� •°w�"~' °.ngaaa N o3q3 'ogppa no. a""de -3<1..c `'n'C3 Tc og y. A i 2P iE .5,300 njt.�:ca 23 _m '<a : : _ .3 3Hn3 -x _03 - ry cz � 0'o3 �oim b 3ncem3i �.gCJc dc_ G � n.>> aM � > ' i Qe'eTa °'ati no o =x _"n � 1H�m j +rt0a " c £.n mn_o " n Fne n em G oAd _ ;.° t', C- p - -'.' A -0 - • Say m x ? m_'� " _ s n 5, ? - n K 75 2 EL g O = � n� a ea a - ti a.. ay .acyii3; °-1 a� q�^ ° qj � •`•. - j3anic - Tm �.�y >c e',�it �Zz ., > _-g ? a= F7 sr7m R ] 2t ^ CN 3 -dJ p6. V AN� - J3 — d0 SnmN � y`'' ]3 aa0 J O dk rt '> o �j ' 3aae ae e 3 ` .m 3i`c >a� _ -u 0'=3n < ' F � y to g3$ y F :_ ,eC=_ o q� [n v 9 ca'^ �cSSu ua� a.3 = °= — n? = � "°� 3g R E . n n ] a 3 >w 3 0 ] 3c- yc 3>a as- >q�C .. o' ] s•_n ] > ] - n i d .� az o 3y '�itAxf „q. D ,'>�aeqCi w 3. n St a'Om ` 3 ^ S- B 3 2ro 2 3 3 q J�ca^ 5 . -c _ ice za = 33 3' Com.;w6.S g 3 3 Z Z < ��.� << _7-7 _ _ sa Cl 9 yga� m�mmaa 3 = 3 0 ,'n =u m o ' -f o. <.3w —1 3m' Si �� � qD A S Q� '� D A p,�7`�n � y g - � O; x � Y O O O Y O Oo P ^ O Oe p,ati=a, _ n S o o om'R 3&` . j m n WNW 2. n `30 T tip Aa�.� z� 6 D Pir. - oapoT� gmmmaa n 3 = 3m9m�i � � � ..1 A 5 m =` w A S � S T � 323 rty x O Q y O n n Rm li c ��2R==>g: n - 3 m �_ c c 3 � c ?� z� �'-� c n_ r J >• _- _ "O 4 3. Fm'nv3 Y °' w ^ D• '1 n N c ` ^. < A a v.mp BSaF F z m 5 a EF!:,n FI 3 gni 'a3 a m n ° n f D m mm mmU 9 m v m 77c � v �3 m -i � : � n �• A A A w ?ao n w n n m ao A f cI� 3 i a Q n n n n Cs'n n n n j F US O y O A d 2 R. 2 A < < •" J ]. R R C R R O R O O R rt 1 i3�c T000 ^ seag �- m rt -zi 72 2 T Er •W 6 J_ T s _ A n 3 Agit 3' � R - C m a 3 eua� m ' S n a mo^ 03 m nm ^ n l t Z > =.3a ? S. 'sFF s m n T o n y A 3 3 z A D tl n v n 4 n r 'o n rf 3 m " xAA�-o - ;�,z z 3i3Z 3 ^ X - r: F "3 Ac3a n ^ n X'?3F d on :z o ? - ;n ?:3 : 's' 3i3_.5 ?3� p _ ' 3333 c c^ cs1 Z 2L 5 ' y m e3 3 T ^ a - !r (D 116.163 POLL .-00N 01,AGENCY 25M 116.162 STATE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR COMBINEDSEWER OVERFLOW. Subdivisioa 1. Definitions. (a)Except as otherwise provided in this section,the terms used in this section have the meanings given in section 116.16, subdivision 2. (b) "Combined sewer"means a sewer that is designed and intended to serve as a sanitary sewer and a storm sewer, or as an industrial sewer and a storm sewer. (c) "Combined sewer overflow"means a discharge of a combination of norm and sanitary wastewater or storm and industrial wastewater directly or indirectly into the waters of the state,occurring when the volume of wastewater flow exceeds the convey. once or storage capacity of a combined sewer system. Subd. 2. Program purpose. The agency shall administer a state financial assist- ance program to assist eligible recipients to abate combined sewer overflow to the Mississippi river from its confluence with the Rum river to its confluence with the St. Croix river. Subd. 3. Eligible recipients. A statutory or home nde eharter city_is eligible for financial assistance under the pro a cityas a perrmt,stipulation agreement, consent decree,or order issued by the agency requiring construction to abate combined sewer overflow and if the city adopts an approved plan to abate combined sewer overflow. -- Subd. 4. Eligible costs. The eligible costs under this section include the costs listed in section 116.16, subdivision 2, paragraph (6), as determined by the agency, using as,guidelines the regulations promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,United States Code, title 33, sections 1314 to 1328, except that the eligible costs include easements neces- sary for implementing the combined sewer overflow abatement plan and do not include: (1) the preparation of combined sewer overflow abatement plans; (2) acquisition of interests in real property other than easements; (3) storm water treatment facilities; (4) costs for a program to disconnect any structures or devices, excluding catch basins on public property,constructed W direct or convey storm water, mow melt,or surface water from private or public property into a public sanitary or combined sewer, (5) costs incurred before July 1, 1985;and (6) costs incurred after July 1, 1985 but without prior written approval of the agency. Subd. 5. Financial assistance program. The agency shall annually provide financial assistance to eligible recipients for combined sewer overflow projects. The agency shall determine.eligible costs for each eligible recipient and compete those ��ES d J1a1 individual coms to the total eligible con required to abate combined sewer overflows. This comparison determines each eligible recipient's proportionate share of the costs, -)—Q cr and the appropriation for the program must be distributed among eligible recipients according to their proportionate share. Subd. 6. Repayments. A city_of the first class that receives assistance under this G I'T NF$J 6 a section shall reoav one-half of each assistance p yment to after the at T sjr.Ad6 % recipient received the assistance a ent. Lne repayment must be deposited in the p1 N✓GW 6s M esota gate water pallutinn ..nrrnl fund. Subd. 7. Conditions;administration. (a)A recipient of financial assistance under this section shall construct the combined sewer overflow abatement facilities in accord- ance with the construction schedule contained in the permit, stipulation agreement. consent decree, or order issued by the agency. The agency shall require that, with federal,state,and local funds,the construction schedule would complete abatement of combined sewer overflow within ten years of the issuance of the permit, agreement, decree, or ordtt. As a condition of receiving financial assistance, the recipient shall implement a program approved by the agency to disconnect any structures or devices. MPLS./ST. PAUL COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW PROGRAM ✓✓✓ BACKGROUND 1 . The State got involved because of a lawsuit the State of Wisconsin threatened against the State of Minnesota. 2. The State decided to address the problem with legislation that imposed an additional tax of 34 per package of cigarettes. This money went into the water Pollution Control account. 3. The original position of the Senate was to provide the cities of Minneapolis/St. Paul and South St. Paul with matching (508 ) grants. (See 5/18/85 Senate Journal ) This position was changed by the Tax Conference Committee in - June of 1985 to 258 grants and 258 loans. 4. Minneapolis and St. Paul were required to speed up the separation of their storm sewers from their sanitary - sewers and pay for 508 of the project. The State provided 258 as a grant and 258 as a loan. 5. The City of South St. Paul had to pay 508 of their project and the State gave 508 as a grant -- no loan was involved. 6. The CSO problem for the metro area is the same as the waste water treatment problem for greater Minnesota. However, the state provides 508 grants to greater Minnesota cities for wastewater treatment programs. SOLUTION The Conference Committee Report would: 1 . Forgive the loan repayments of Minneapolis and St. Paul which begin to become due in 1996 if Minneapolis issues $5,000,000 in bonds for the Great River Road project and St. Paul issues $5,000,000 for the Como Park Conservatory and $5,500,000 for Shepard and Warner Roads. 2. The present value of the Minneapolis loan repayments is $3,500,000. The total to be repaid is $8, 167, 500 or $816,750 per year for 1996 to 2006. 3. The present value of St. Paul's loan is $10,500,000 or $2,400,000 per year for 10 years beginning in 1996, or a total of $24,000,000. 4. The completion of the Great River Road and the Como Park Conservatory would take a great deal of pressure off the Metro Council 's park funding program, thereby allowing smaller regional parks to be funded in future years. In addition, the Great River Road project has the potential to spur over $500,000,000 in private economic development. J = SOME COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS REGARDING COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW "The suburbs paid the cost of The notion that the cities paid sewer pipes to handle both for only half a system is false. storm and waste water, while The cities built the combined the cities just put in pipes system not to save money, but be- to handle waste water' cause it was the preferred tech- . ology of the day. The economy of laying one large pipe vs. two smaller ones is not significant because of the similarity in the methods used to lay pipe. "City residents, not suburban Actually, some areas of the :hies residents, are the cause of don't provide any water to the SYS- the overflow problem. " tem. They were built with either septic systems or separated sewer systems. On the other hand, some suburbs contribute water to the cities' combined sewers, contrib- uting to the overflow problem. The costs are not being borne by those contributing water, but on - an area-wide basis. "CSO is not eligible for CSO is legally eligible to be funded grants" up to 90s of constuction costs with- federal and state grants. It is in- teresting to note that of the 6857 million in grants spent on pollution abatement projects in Minnesota, the cities have received no direct grants "The metro area has soaked up During the last ten years, 438 of the all of the grant money in the grant monies went to the metro area past. Now it's greater Min- and 57% went to the outstate areas. nesota's turn." Compare this figure in the light of y the fact that the metro area pays - two dollars in personal taxes to + every one contributed from outstate areas, and that the rate of return is 658 in the metro area and 1718 outstate. "Current proposals of loans Under the current proposal, the metra are actually significant areas would recieve loans and the grants" outstate areas grants. After monies were repaid to the state from loans to metro areas, the outstate areas would be eligible to come back and _ recieve additional grants from this new fund pool. "If the cities received a 2 CSO can be done with less than $15 to 1 Federal/State matching million annually out of a statewide grant, there would be no pool of 640 to $60 million. Roughly money left for the non- 2/3 to 3/4 of the money would be metro programs." available for other programs even with the 2 to 1 match for CSO. The non- metro area would receive $645 million and the metro area would receive 6497 million, This is roughly the same split as the current 575-438 ratio. s Council Members Coyle 6 O'Brien -3- February 27, 1987 An important factor to keep in mind when referring to the ten year separation plan is that the $52 million of total program costs were originally estimated in 1984 dollars as was required. This nurser has to be annually adjusted for inflation. Concurrent with the reed to ccrsider inflation is understanding that the federal and state levels of ccntributicn are expected to remain fixed. All cost deviation then becomes the responsibility of the Municipality. Assuming an annual inIlation rate of 48 for the neat ten years a rough ' estimate of the City of Minraapolis' required funding for 1966 thru 1995 can be estimated. YEAR FEDERAL S= 7" CITYto TOPS, /Ju n 1986 $1,936,000 $1,633,5017 $2,054,500 $5,624,000 1987 1,936,000 1,633,= 2,279,500 5,849,000 V, /6335 1988 1,936,000 11633,5" 2,513,500 6,083,000 1989 1,936,000 11633,5" 2,756,500 6,326,000 00 I 1990 1,936,000 1,633,5 3,009,500 6,579,000 1991 1,936,000 116SNAM 3,272,500 6,842,000 1992 1,936,000 1 fur 3,546,500 71116,007 1993 1,936,000 F- 3,830,500 7,400,000 - 1994 1,936,000 1,633,507 4,126,500 7,696,000 1995 11936,000 1163S1S" 4,434,500 8,004,000 TOTALS $19,360,000 $16,335,000 $27,150,000 $67,51°,000 $, 49, 5 '>> SMI REPORT We are hered th submit-ti-ng a status report and project estimates for 1966, the first year of the Cambi:.ed Seer CwerIlCW Abatement P=9=. (In part), this report identifies the need for additional anoey to comlete the 1986 work plan. The City scheduled 50 CSO projects for 1986, swim of these projects were to be built during repaving using M.S.A. or other sate or county funding, hrwever five of these projects were postporad to later years and were not built. Because the actual money authorized by the Federal Clean Hater Act in 1986 was $1,608,816 or $327,184 (178) short of esectaticn, two additional scheduled projects had to be rescheduled for 1987. This leaves us with 43 rauai g projects. Because the Federal Ocverunent did not release the 1966 funding until late sumer, we have been allowed until Ma_v 31, 1987 to ccap ete the 1°86 Program. The late ounst-ucticn start caused by delayed federal furling made ahcut ore-half of cur ccrstruuticn work to be done during the winter. This is the major reason for an estimated $700,000 cost overmm to C=Plete to remaining 1986 C50 projects even though we had a mild winter. 4^y 7 �5 December 20, 1988 LCC2 X988 Mr. Leonard W. Levine G' Y C* c Commissioner Department of Transportation ... _ Room 411, Transportation Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 ' Re: 330 BRF 005-2 ( ) S.P. 7009-52 T.H. 169 at Minnesota River in Shakopee Dear Mr. Levine: Enclosed is a letter from the Mayor of the City of Shakopee requesting a design public hearing for the referenced project. The mayor's request is based upon two areas of concern perceived to be different than discussed in the Environmental Assessment. These concerns are parking taken by the proposed mini-bypass and vertical clearance over Levee Drive. Please review the Mayor's request. Since the City of Shakopee is actively involved in both the design and funding of the mini-bypass, it would be apprcpriiatc for Mn/DOT to respond directly to the Mayor with a copy of the response to FHWA. Sincerely yours, Charles E. Foslien Division Administrator /s/ Alan J. Friesen By: Alan Friesen District Engineer _ Enclosure Taj N n Sn m m o $ F O K a m n v m m o N m N T N rt - 3 m 3 r m O m m m rt S9 N N N O G N I m - m m G 3 U N m U' 4 U O J e1 b Y tJ J P g _ 6 5Alty t O imn rTl ^ � � 8 = � yQO �y� w 1 MEMO TO: Shakopee City Council FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: DNR Trail/Sweeney Property Update - Non-agenda DATE: December 29, 1988 INTRODUCTION• On November 3, 1988 Mr. Bob Sweeney requested the vacation of Minnesota and Market Streets North of Bluff Avenue. At that time, the Planning Commission moved to recommend to City Council denial of the vacation of Minnesota and Market Streets North of Bluff Avenue pending the completion of a Comprehensive Plan review of the area in question. BACKGROUND' At the November Planning Commission meeting, officials from the DNR were present and explained that Mr. Sweeney would not provide them with an easement across his property unless the streets in question were vacated. Upon securing the necessary easement from Mr. Sweeney, the DNR will be able to extend the Minnesota River Valley Trail from the Shakopee Community Services building through Murphy's Landing. The DNR has been *forking to secure the necessary easements through the Sweeney property for the past three years. On December 29, 1988 DNR officials met with Mr. Sweeney to make a final proposal on various land transactions that Mr. Sweeney has requested prior to approving the DNR's use of an easement on his property. The final proposal presented by the DNR assumes the vacation of Market and Minnesota Streets North of the alley on the block bound on the East by Minnesota Street, West on Market Street and North of Bluff Avenue. At the November Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the vacation of Market and Minnesota Streets North of Bluff Avenue. There seems to be some confusion regarding the current status of Minnesota and Market Streets in regard to ownership. City staff is attempting to determine what portions if any of Minnesota and Market Streets are vacated North of Bluff Avenue. Pending further review of this issue, it may be necessary for Mr. Sweeney to come before the Planning Commission to request the vacation of Minnesota and Market Streets North of Bluff Avenue. He contends that his private ownership of area occupied by Market and Minnesota Streets are necessary in order for him to operate a successful marina. The primary reason for the Planning Commission's action in denying the request for the vacation related to preserving the community's access to the DNR trail and the future development potential of the marina area. The DNR is currently in the process of obtaining the necessary appraisals to execute the land transactions associated with their easement agreement with Mr. Sweeney. Following the completion of the appraisals and the execution of the land agreement between Mr. Sweeney and the DNR, it will be necessary for the City of Shakopee to amend their current trail agreement with the DNR which would provide for the extension of the trail through Memorial Park and Murphy's Landing. It will also be necessary for the City of Shakopee to realign a current easement through the Bakken property for the purpose of the trail extension. Neither of these actions will occur until the ownership status of Market and Minnesota Streets has been resolved. I will be reporting back to the Planning commission and City Council as new developments occur in relation to the DNR trail extension and the Sweeney property. If you have any questions in regard to this issue, please feel free to call me at 445-3650. g 183 University Ave.East St.Paul,MN 55101.2526 League of Minnesota Cities (612)227-5600(FAX:221-0986) December, 1988 Dear City Clerk:Each year, the League of Minnesota Cities holds a conference for newly elected officials. This year, the conference will be held on January 28 at the Hotel Sofitel in Bloomington. The conference will focus on: * Councils: What They Can and Cannot Do * Personal Liability and Conflict of Interest * The Open Meeting Law and Data Practices Act * Survival Tactics for the Newly Elected Official * Budgeting and Finance * Personnel and Labor Relations * Planning Secondly, the Government Training Service (GTS) , an LMC affiliate, will be presenting a one-day session on "Meeting the Municipal challenge Through Strategic Thinking, Revenue Diversification, and Visible Popular Support- on Friday, January 27. Finally, in conjunction with the LMC and GTS programs, the Minnesota Women in City Government organization is presenting a program on the art of public decision making on Friday evening. This session is designed to explore how the group process really operates in a public policy setting and provides practical ideas which can be implemented at your next council meeting. Again, we encourage all interested city officials to attend this session. We ask your assistance is distributing the enclosed program brochures. They have been mailed to all newly elected officials, but we feel that all city officials can benefit from these sessions. Please distribute these conference brochures to your mayor and councilmembers. If you have any questions, please call Darlyne Lang at the League of Minnesota Cities offices, (612) 227-5600. Si�erely, a: Donald A. S01later Executive Director � D 4WO G v e Ir ly S.y •� 0 4 a . :1 'c' 'lrt nrn 7 � 041 n— VAI �•. 0a 11 :: ._c C O d O a rn e C eay�yys C V N' -0 L •� t: y 'n e ` yS F"IQ 3FE � � m E � EE W 0 t C7 m m ° ° o e E c'"— >oE as Us A m y G e � P— O � ON O-4 O `o U L y 'c mma�'� o 0 o'y 'Gm� ona dE 15 e = d = o � a" Uma y L E5 .2 F n yo -• o - o -AE V 3.2 m g :.Us � U� aW Registration Form Seminars for Elected Officials" Friday,January 27, 1989 Name Title (please print) City Work Phone (aces) Add. ("reet) (city) (state) oip) Number of Oty Employees Registration options(plea e,check): Payment options(Please theca): Meeting the Municipal Challenge(S80/person) Enclosed is my check(payable to Government Training Servict)in the amount The An of Public Decision Making(SM/person) of$_ Please bill me at above address(a$3 billing charge will be added to the amount owed). Return this form by January 20 be G ermnent Training Serrica,202 Minnesota Bulkling,66 Rast 6th Street, St. Pauk Minnesota Wall (612/=-7609 or Minnesota toB free 800/652-9719). " Presented in conjunction with the League a Minnesota Cities'Newly planed Con(crena(January 28). age • • • • • o '9.gW ^TR -.;R � c i�' % m3a ; a7o e� c ° : d9 jA C nam iol Wa d � S3p. xR Fs `vn gn3, l .'l ; 7. $m $. na. ZU3anag e40 ' u o 0 3 w' 3.a w3R m3 >j' ? a ° 'w& 1 TV mm . ,, PA ° � " m" ' ST- w Q mx'.zss= a ° 0 p0� ^ � � AmR A �miR 71 � .� E9 ^.3 p� Rv�". on 3s cmc cN OR, 84 e° , o ° y��9 e'J.q{R9 A a '4.L RB o m m 2 33 " _ § O " 2a 33 3 a � Ve e '�' m a°c9 ' d79 mg7 c- 3 � 0 0703 �c ? fin paR3a "g8 3 = 3 = m aLo mea = 26� � a baa 1n�':"�_ a ° o °, �. A q � � • • • • � 3voR o3 � o n m ma 3 = 3 ^ _ S Sal = a = n'g n ^ xaam S moCgo'R' R a .Q. = o' sa '$ 7 ' ill 30� to no n _ a m a c c �. R$ _'g & x a o ^ 7.6 7 vI t�$n$ Z a P ^ m e t I C 7 ' ^° a'3 �- a m - _' m .`a.Q o`e $ �' a �z''19R .. m 4 goo aei ja - " ;aE7 - Rd. "9—Kam= w - 5.° c °� O & � u a 390 _,s 8 ° O ° Vi ryd �Yav $ 1;1Ra =� oAp3 = 2y -�e E _ �.an- P1. l3 x 4 n P� m - .j` 9 rn = _ a ` a < O.Hm WA3 ;— _ n ¢¢a�^ Eg" �d>g>, �g!_. ° ;c o ga ° a R x° m .., _059 . ' 3 y� m�R n'Ee a �8l3 s . Nva - - a ` °eff " aR g a ' cW 'o A3 � "it m o c z =ea 2 cE0a ag� a. 7a5 a2 m a &RW. e AAO z ,y S a A 7 e Cm e 9 a 67 � w � :r N U ~ d CI 0. O N O r W C O T v O o Q O N p m � � go m E V1 O y i •+PC j O C .° ° 0 ,o w ,� xra O .� � Yoo, y " R ^� m z .0.. api 7V •u � -aue mE a d d 'o -O E ° " a m d9 $'Nn o •' u to C ` Fy x uj 6E 1 �2I}il a 7, WF-Y ms n = � = y�ynz 8 � Wy eqqQpR o • v .+ Pt§ � d 2 d�=e A „ y vim .. c•m m o.o m e s 3 It •�o $c A V ® 8,`o pp` 0304' `o ,Zoy3CF7 W u c y 3 =c•�U y U _ u oY o u o » 9� 3 `eE eo� o •°.,c$. m - c E �Cu N Z,� p w o ° F� 3•- s o °� om'� � v � u E °p ° i - u -0 SSS `o yW O0. di" u voN � mSr=� G °°-vow u uace a• m � w�'ce L ° 8 ° C no ° II m m 3 3 3 B d . yy . . p fades :; � mr x _10 a n10 O � � Bov, a x1 3� E 5Yg2o O. NSo. .zee ooA ^ ° y 7C c El m �'?ort 'ry 'sw y3.s re ° o �� ae c�^• R m nynr�n F• ,� 256't°0o �C .Q'm•.B ° .� 3 0 . Qn " oE. •mCm VJ Q � '"' °•e O m ? ���25m aFH � � � me X'� �• .°. YC' a1' " e � o ° � o e n2 mn -0e oy � 02. �n °. >w Nc m R oPV � S e'a B m o ti 0�0 2 • n a. tp - L�'?.m .^. m c A C e. o7 go. = ' ^ 3' 0 To a o. w W -3 to W o o ^ o m O za �.� m 6 Pio • � a 2 .m. -1 ° ry �° F aaW° n �g 8 . . . b . .. 0-Q- c OC]r QCm � 8O88 ,Q8 88 0sp WW. QyAO°i ^ R '°" 1pJm q A "" Om 7 ON8P' .'°-. •^T C..... y n �^p S 6 R O toy01 1y O ° Sf � E 3. g ° ° o m e 127 pr 10 w +,o ^ c January 1989 q UPCOMING MEETINGS SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SRT 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 City Hall 7:00pm City 7:30pm Closed Council Planning Commission 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 4:30pm 7:00pm City 7:45am Public Council/ Downtown Utilities SPUC Committee 5:30pm CDC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 City Hall 7:00pm City Closed Council 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7:00pm 7:00pm Cable Energy & Commission Transp. 29 30 31 December 1988 February 1989 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 910 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 26 27 28 /D BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL Vol. 3 No. 1 Dear Chamber Member: January 1, 1989 BUILDING The downtown inspection program is in full swing - we have uncovered many substandard, hazardous conditions which are in the process of being abated. The Shakopee Youth Building is 858 complete thanks to the labor force supplied by the Shakopee Lions and scouting parents. This will be a beautiful facility which will satisfy the needs of all structured youth activity groups. CITY CLERK On December 6th City Council adopted resolutions of appreciation to Rahr Malting Company and Inland Container Corporation for recent corporate foundation grants to the Shakopee Fire Department. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT On December 20th the Shakopee City Council formally adopted a combined refuse/recycling program to be implemented in the City of Shakopee in either March or April. In order to comply with State mandates and the Scott County Solid Waste Disposal Ordinance, the City of Shakopee was forced to come to grips with the solid waste disposal dilemma. Shakopee's refuse/recycling program will require single family dwelling units and rental units up to and including four-plexes to comply with the provisions set forth in the new program. The new program will require the city's refuse hauler (waste Management Inc. ) to supply a 65-gallon refuse cart and 20-gallon recycling container to each household in the City of Shakopee. When the program is implemented, recycleables (paper, glass and beverage cans) will be picked up on the same day as refuse collection. Costs will increase approximately 40% as a result of the expanded service and increased landfill rates. The City of Shakopee is proposing to provide persons who recycle with an annual recycling credit. The annual credit which will be given to persons who participate in the recycling program is estimated to be approximately $10.00. The annual credit will vary with the amount of materials collected and the market for the recycleable materials. Under the provisions of the Scott County Solid Waste Disposal Ordinance, haulers collecting from commercial establishments will also have to provide recycling services. The Scott County ordinance which impacts commercial units will not go into effect until July 1, 1989. Commercial establishments will also see a significant increase in their refuse rates in 1989 as a result of State mandates and reduced landfill capacity. The City of Shakopee's refuse/recycling contract does not include service to commercial establishments. COMMUNITY RECREATION (SCR) Outdoor ice skating is a popular activity in wintertime and the City of Shakopee maintains skating rinks in five strategic neighborhood locations including heated supervised shelter buildings. Shakopee Community Recreation administers the operation of these facilities in Lions Park, Stans Park, Holmes Park, Hiawatha Park and the Junior High School playground. For further information call the SCR office at 445-2742. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Engineering staff is preparing reports and plans and specifications for possible 1989 contruction projects. A feasibility report for 3rd Avenue sewer and water improvements west of Harrison was presented to Council at their December 20th meeting. Staff plans to hold public hearings for 5th Avenue extension from Fillmore to Market Street and 3rd Avenue reconstructionproiect from Spencer to Shumwav in January or early February of 1989. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota December 8, 1988 Chrmn. Rockne called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with Vice Chrmn. Foudray, Comm. Schmitt, Allen, Czaja, Forbord and Stafford present. Also present: Doug Wise, City Planner, Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant, and Julie Kellerman, Planning Intern. Foudray/Czaja moved to approve the agenda as presented. City Planner stated that the Fox public hearing has been withdrawn. If the Fox's place their fence at least 30 feet back; the setback for the house, a variance is not needed. The Fox's have decided to do that. Motion carried. Czaja/Stafford moved to approve the November 3, 1988 meeting minutes. Motion carried. Foudray/Forbord moved to approve the Board of Adjustments and Appeals schedule for 1989. Motion carried. There were no other comments from the staff. Foudray/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:33 p.m. SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota December 8, 1988 Chrmn. Rockne called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. with Vice Chrmn. Foudray, Comm. Schmitt, Allen, Czaja, Forbord and Stafford present. Also present; Doug Wise, City Planner, Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant, and Julie Kellerman, Planning Intern. Czaja/Stafford moved to approve the agenda with the addition of the Vacation of Market Street added under Other Business at Comm. Forbord's request. Motion carried. Foudray/Allen moved to approve the October 6, 1988 meeting minutes. Motion carried with Comm. Forbord abstaining. Czaja/Stafford moved to approve the November 3, 1988 meeting minutes. Motion carried with Vice Chrmn. Rockne abstaining. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED - LAND DEDICATION FEES Czaja/Allen moved to continue the public hearing to consider amending Shakopee City Code, Section 12.07, Subd. 6 to increase the required cash contributions in lieu of land dedication for park purposes for new subdivisions. Motion carried. City Planner stated that City Staff recommends that park dedication fees be increased. City Staff has established a methodology for the increase. He stated that regarding the Commission's concern with industrial/commercial land fees, staff did make some adjustments to their recommendations. Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant, outlined Attachment #5 .for the Commission which showed prior park dedication fees and current dedication fees. He added that in the 1988 column of Attachment #5 the $52,000 figure is inaccurate and should be $10,000 for contributions received YTD. This would change the Total Revenues Projected to $41,000. Comm. Forbord questioned if there were any comparisons done with other cities that are similar to Shakopee, i.e. based on the number of building permits issued, etc. He felt that of the six cities used in the comparison only three were similar to Shakopee. Comm. Schmitt stated that according to the figures on Attachment #5, in five years there would be a deficit. He also stated that $1,500/acre fee for industrial/commercial land is approximately 3% and not very much. He feels that 5% is more realistic because it would be approximately $2,500/acre fee. Barry Stock explained that the value of the land is based on the assessed value. The cost of an acre is based on the assessor's estimate. Shakopee Planning Commission December 8, 1988 Page Two Discussion was held as to what exactly the ordinance says regarding this. Comm. Schmitt recommended that a figure of measurement that is consistent should be used. A per acre value not the assessed value. City Planner stated that the code reads that Fair Market Value is defined as Market Value of land . . . as determined by the City Assessor. Comm. Czaja questioned the per acre value in regards to marshy low land or land that is undevelopable. Comm. Schmitt stated that they would pay when the land was platted and a building permit was required. There would be no fee for undevelopable land. Comm. Forbord expressed that it is important to remain competitive. We shouldn't over compare ourselves with Minnetonka and Plymouth because they have thousands more people and different needs than Shakopee. He asked if Staff could get Chaska's numbers for comparison. Comm. Schmitt suggested that any further discussion be held until the audience has had a chance to comment. There were no comments from the audience. Schmitt/Allen moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried with Comm. Forbord opposed. Schmitt/Allen moved to recommend to City Council that Shakopee City Code, Section 12.07, Subd. 6 be amended increasing the required cash contributions in lieu of land dedication for park purposes for new subdivisions in accordance with the dwelling unit density methodology. The increases are as follows and include that these fees are due and payable upon application for a building permit secured by the property. Cost Per Unit S.F. $400 (3.2 x 125) Duplex (2-3 units) $380 (2.7 x 125) Townhouse (4-6 units) $312.5 (2.5 x 125) Apt. (more than 6 units) $250 (2.0 x 125) Commercial/Industrial $2,500/acre Discussion continued that the completion of the Comprehensive Plan is approximately 1 year away and that park dedication Shakopee Planning Commission December 8, 1988 Page Three fees will be looked at again at that time and that if needed, further adjustments can be made. Motion carried with Comm. Forbord opposed. PUBLIC HEARING - LYNCH ENTERPRISES. INC. Schmitt/Czaja moved to open the public hearing to consider amending the Planned Unit Development for Shakopee Valley Square Properties to allow for a Western Star Water Ski Show. Motion carried. City Planner stated that the Shakopee Valley Square PUD was approved approximately one year ago and that the plan consisted of phases in which the first is a campground and subsequent phases include an addition to the motel and construction of a restaurant and lodge facilities. He stated that Mr. Bakken proposes to use the parking area northeast of the motel for the viewers of the water ski show and that a people mover/shuttle service would transport them to the show. Comm. Schmitt questioned why staff elected not to follow through with the two week completion period given Mr. Bakken to comply with the 21 unfinished items as outlined in staff's report. City Planner stated that the Shakopee Public Utilities completed the improvements to the fire hydrant north of the motel. He stated that this improvement would be deducted from the $7, 500 check from Mr. Bakken. Discussion was held as to why a letter like that would have been sent out and not be followed up on. City Planner stated that the Building Department decided to give Mr. Bakken some additional time to complete the items and that a permanent certificate of occupancy is needed to open the 1989 season. Wallace Bakken, applicant, stated that he has done some compaction of the roads but he doesn't know if it is enough. He also said that there are some discrepancies as to how wide the roads are to be. One says 22 feet and another says 25 feet. He stated that highways are not 25 feet wide and that 25 feet is too large. Comm. Schmitt suggested that the list be referred to the appropriate staff for comments/clarification and come back at the January 5, 1989 commission meeting. City Planner stated that the code does not require paving the lot for commercial uses, but that the RV code does. He added that Shakopee Planning Commission December 8, 1988 Page Four the original PUD did not specify anything regarding paving but that the applicant is required to pave unless a variance is approved. He also added that staff recommends no approval for two proposed lodge buildings because the water ski show will utilize parking designated for these buildings. Mark Laughlin, Western Water Ski Shows, proposed a 2 show a day schedule of 1:00 and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and 3:00 and 8:00 p.m. on weekends. He added that they want to offer an alternative to the horse races and offer the people in hotels something to do at night. He claimed that the shows are strictly good family entertainment. Comm. Allen questioned him about the permits needed and if the show would interfere with boat traffic. Mark Laughlin stated that the DNR does not require a permit but that Scott Co. Water Patrol does. He has talked to them already regarding the permit. He explained that there is only one boat in the show and that buoys are placed so that traffic can continue. He also added in response to a question of how he proposed to limit the show to 250 people that he does not propose to limit the people but to limit the cars at the point of entry, for traffic purposes. He claimed he could put a sign on Hwy. 101 saying "Sorry We're Full" once the parking lot is full. Kim and Tim Lynch, owners and founders of Western Water Ski Show, stated that the average show attendance in past experience was about loo - 150 people per show. They claim that their show is very small. They explained that they could state in their advertising brochures that there is limited capacity and that reservations are required. Bill Hauer, owner of the land next to Mr. Bakken's said that he did a good job and would like to see this thing go through. Discussion was held and members agreed that they were comfortable with the issue, but also agreed that the property owner must show performance. Schmitt/Forbord moved to direct applicant and staff to meet prior to the January 5, 1989 meeting and provide the commission with a status report on the list, and to also provide further detail on control of the traffic. Motion carried. Schmitt/Czaja moved for a five minute recess. Motion carried. Shakopee Planning Commission December 8, 1988 Page Five PUBLIC HEARING - J.L. SHIELY COMPANY Schmitt/Allen moved to open the public hearing to consider amending Shiely's CUP to allow the construction of a 60' storage bin and a 90' bucket elevator upon the property located at 6896 Highway 101. Motion carried. City Planner stated that the applicant proposes to construct a bin and elevator in the processing yard adjacent to their quarry. He explained that they have three existing 60' high bins and that this would add a fourth. He stated that screening is provided around the property and that the facilities are not adjacent to Hwy. 101. Jeff Tromp, Project Engineer, J.L. Shiely Co. , stated that the reason for the additional construction is the demand for the product in this area has increased. He stated that the company mines four months of the year and that there would be no noise increase. The new bin would be capable of being used 24 hours a day, 365 days a year because it is a new automated system. He added that it would generate very little additional traffic. Chrmn. Rockne questioned if this would have any impact on the crushing operation. The Project Engineer said no, There were no further comments from the audience. Foudray/Forbord moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Foudray/Stafford moved to approve the amendment of Conditional Use Permit #473 to allow the construction of a 60' storage bin and a 90' bucket elevator upon the property located at 6896 Highway 101 subject to the following: 1. All conditions placed on previously issued permits for the property shall remain in effect. 2. Adequate measures must be taken to prevent and control dust and noise to insure that they will not constitute a nuisance. 3. Safety lighting shall be attached to the structure. Motion carried. Chrmn. Rockne advised the applicant and audience of the seven day appeal period. Shakopee Planning Commission December 8, 1988 Page Six PUBLIC HEARING - SHAKOPEE SCHOOL DIST 0720 AND CARVER-SCOTT DIST. #930 Schmitt/Czaja moved to open the public hearing to consider a conditional use permit for the building at 1257 Marschall Road to house classroom space for secondary/pre-school children. Motion carried. City Planner stated that the building to be used is immediately south of the junior high school and north of Country Village Apts. He stated that the City Attorney indicated that the use is permitted by Conditional Use Permit in the B-1 zoning district. He added that the applicants will utilize 1600 sq. ft. immediately with an additional 2000 sq. ft. available for the future. The class size would be 20 - 30 students from 8:00 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. and that there is limited parking on site. He also stated that staff visited Shakopee Jr. High during school hours and an entire parking lot was empty. Virgil Mears, spokesperson for the Shakopee School District stated that the information provided to staff is comprehensive, but that he would answer any questions if necessary. James Hinck, spokesperson for Carver-Scott District stated that the building would be used for drop-out students who can't handle a regular curriculum. They would be offered a different program. Vice Chrmn. Foudray questioned how temporarily permanent this was. Mr. Mears stated that he was unsure. Maybe 3-5 years. Comm. Schmitt asked if some students would have motor vehicles. Mr. Hinck stated that the morning students are bussed, but that the afternoon students will drive. Their hours would be 3:30- 9:30 p.m. for those who work. He also added that they can control parking by requiring students to park in the Jr. High parking lot. Comm. Schmitt questioned why there is no access to the building to the north where we encourage parking. All the south entrances should be closed. Mr. Hinck stated that a door is being put in towards the north and that the south doors will be fire exits. He added that the building does have a sprinkler system. Czaja/Foudray moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Allen/Forbord moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution Shakopee Planning Commission December 8, 1988 Page Seven #551 to allow the building at 1257 Marschall Road to house classroom space for secondary/pre-school children subject to the following: - 1. The dropping off of students arriving by bus and student parking must occur in the adjacent Junior High School parking lot. 2 . The building must meet all Codes including the Uniform Fire Code and Life Safety Code prior to occupancy by students. 3 . The school use of the building shall not be interiorly connected to the other portions of the building. Comm. Schmitt voiced his concerns to ensure that condition #1 is conformed with and feels that a commercial facility is not the right environment for a classroom. Comm. Foudray called for the question. Motion carried. Motion carried with Comm. Schmitt opposed. Chrmn. Rockne advised the applicant and audience of the seven day appeal period. £oudray/Schmitt moved to approve the Planning' Commission Schedule for 1989. Motion carried. DISCUSSION - Market Street Corridor City Planner stated that City Council directed staff on 9/20/88 to prepare a report for the Planning Commission regarding the Market Street Corridor. He stated that Market Street is designated as a North/South collector street. He stated that a major issue involved is the RR crossing. He said that the RR would agree to another crossing but only if two other crossing were eliminated for the one. Comm. Forbord stated that the RR is angry because City Council chose to renege on an agreement. He feels that the environment was created by the City itself. Discussion continued as to why the City Engineer recommends Naumkeag as a possible closing; why not Minnesota? The suggestion to defer until the City Engineer could be present was made. Czaja/Stafford moved to table. Motion carried. Shakopee Planning Commission December 8, 1988 Page Eight DISCUSSION - Setbacks in Industrial Districts Abutting RR City Planner stated that staff did more research regarding RR spurs and found that the past ordinance, adopted in 1966 contained no side or rear setback. In 1977, the rear setback of 0' was dropped from the ordinance. He stated that in addition to Bush Lake, Shakopee Valley Printing's Buildings use spurs, in which the first building has a setback of 20' and the second building has a setback of 401 . This allows for the spur tracks to be layered. Foudray/Forbord moved to set a public hearing for the January 5, 1989 meeting to amend City Code to allow a twenty foot rear yard setback when abutting a railroad spur. Motion carried. DISCUSSION - Setbacks along First Ave. in the B-1 District Schmitt/Forbord moved that the study of setbacks in this area be incorporated into the updating of the Comprehensive Plan. Motion carried. Other Business Comm. Forbord stated that it is in the best interest of the city to find out why they are vacating Dakota and Market Streets. He feels that we need to know what is planned for the site and suggested that an explanation for the use of any vacation be made a part of the application process because once vacated its vacated. Comm. Schmitt stated that Comm. Forbord did an admiral job to argue the point to Council. He feels that the City Council was never told what the Commission was trying to do. Foudray/C2aja moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:55 p.m. TENTATIVE AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, MN January 5, 1989 Chairman Rockne Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7: 30 P.M. 2 . Approval of Agenda- 3 . Approval of December 8, 1988 Meeting Minutes 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. TENTATIVE AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, MN January 5, 1989 Chairman Rockne Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of the December 8, 1988 Meeting Minutes 4. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider preliminary plat approval of Kubes 2nd Addition, 7 lots located in the NE corner of the intersection of County Road 79 and County Road 72 in a R-1 Zoning District. Applicant: Randy Kubes Action: Recommendation to City Council 5. 7:40 P.M. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: To consider amending the Planned Unit Development for Shakopee Valley Square Properties to allow for a Western Star Water Ski Show. Applicant: Lynch Enterprises, Inc. 10214 Mississippi Blvd. Coon Rapids, MN 55433 Action: Recommendation to City Council 6. 7:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider amending City Code Section 11.32, Subd. 4 and 11.33, Subd. 4 to allow a 20' rear yard setback when abutting a railroad in the I-1 and I- 2 Zoning Districts. Action: Recommendation to City Council 7. Discussion: - a. Market Street Corridor b. Day Care - Continued 8. Other Business 9. Adjourn Douglas Wise City Planner TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA. JANUARY 3, 1989 Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding 1] Roll call at 7:00 P.M. 2] Recess for H.R.A. Meeting 3] Re-convene 4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 5] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 6] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) *7] Approval of Minutes of December 6th, and 20th, 1988 8] Communications: a] Dave Brown, Save O'Dowd Lakes Chain Assn. re: Insurance Costs b] 9] Public Hearings: a] 7:30 P.M. Public Hearing on amending the Comprehensive Development Plan to include the 150 acres, recently annexed, within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) 10] Boards and Commissions: No recommendations at this time 11] Reports from Staff: (Council will take a 10 minute break around 9:00 P.M.) a] Vacation of 6th Avenue East of Main Street - tabled 12/6 b] Municipal Parking Lot Leases - tabled 12/20 - bring item 10m from 12/20 agenda C] Al DuBois/Jim Hauer. Dispute - Vacation of Austin Street *d] Lease with O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association *e] Secy/Receptionist - Completion of Probation f] County Road 17 Underpass g] Prior Lake - Spring Lake outlet Channel *h] Designating Official Newspaper i] Nominations to Boards and Commissions j] 1989 Liaison Appointments *k] Easement for Lots 6 & 7, Block 22, OSP 1] Approval of the Bills in the Amount of $166,591.50 TENTATIVE AGENDA January 3, 1989 Page -2- 11] Reports from Staff (continued) : m] Salary for Acting City Administrator - 1989 n] Abandoned Women's Reformatory o] Appointment of Managers to the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District 12] Resolutions and Ordinances: a] Res. No. 2996, Appointing commissioner of Transportation as the City's Agent for Federal Projects - tabled 12/20- bring item lie from 12/20 agenda b] Res. No. 3002, Receiving A Report and Calling A Hearing on Improvements to the Alley in Block 7, Jasper & Smith Addition 1989-3 c] Res. No. 3003, Receiving A Report and Calling A Hearing on Improvements to 5th Avenue from Fillmore Street to Market Street 1989-4 d] Res. No. 3004, Designating Director and Alternate to the Suburban Rate Authority e] Res. No. 3005, Amending the City's Personnel Policy 13] Other Business: a] b] c] 14] Adjourn to Tuesday, January 10, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting January 3, 1989 Chairman Steven Clay presiding 1. Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M. 2 . Approve the Minutes of the December 20, 1988 Meeting 3 . Election of Officers 4 . Statement of Interests Real Estate 5. Shakopee Valley Square TIF Project 6. Other Business a. b. 7. Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ADJOURNED REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MN DECEMBER 21, 1988 Chairman Clay called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. with Comm. Vierling, Zak, Scott and Wampach present. Also present were Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; Judith Cox, City Clerk; David Hutton, City Engineer; Julius Coller II, City Attorney; and Mayor Lebens Wampach/Zak moved to approve the minutes of December 6, 1988. Motion carried with Cncl. Vierling abstaining. Dennis Kraft reviewed the Shakopee Valley Square Tax Increment Project. He explained that at the last meeting the contract was terminated between the HRA and the Shakopee Valley Square Partnership but the letter of credit was not drawn upon. Scott/Wampach moved to direct the Executive Director and the City Director of Finance to determine the amount due the BRA by the Shakopee Valley Square Partnership and to provide a summary of these costs to the HRA for action to draw upon the $50,000 letter of credit at the January 3, 1989 BRA meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Dennis Kraft reviewed a letter drafted to the Bergquist Companies saying that the City will provide approximately $375,000 in tax increment assistence, provided that the project have value to justify this amount. Discussion followed on whether to remain at the $325,000 TIF as initially proposed, or to increase the amount. Vierling/Zak moved to send the letter to Bergquist Company as presented authorizing up to $375,000 in TIF assistance. Motion carried with Commissioner Scott opposed. Vierling/Zak moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:21 p.m. Dennis Kraft Executive Director Carol Schultz Recording Secretary -$€ S MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive Director RE: Shakopee Valley Square TIF Project DATE: December 28, 1988 INTRODUCTION• At the meeting of December 20, 1988 the HRA passed a motion directing that the $50,000 letter of credit posted by Shakopee Valley Square Partnership be drawn upon in an amount sufficient to cover out of pocket costs experienced by the BRA relative to TIF Project No. 6. BACKGROUND: In the summer of 1986 the BRA entered into an agreement with the Shakopee Valley Square Partnership for the purpose of promoting certain development activities in the project area associated with the Shakopee Valley Motel. After a number of extensions on the project and contract modifications the HRA ultimately terminated the contract because of non compliance with contract provisions on the part of the developer. As a part of the agreement between the developer and the HRA, a $50,000 letter of credit was posted which was intended to cover additional costs incurred by the BRA and not paid by tax increment. An analysis by the Finance Director has indicated that the total out of pocket costs incurred by the HRA total $16,372.61. Which would result in an amount of $33, 627.39 being available to the Shakopee Valley Square Partnership. Below is a recapitulation of those costs incurred by the BRA. 1986 Out of Pocket Costs $1,261. 00 - Krass and Monroe $5,813.90 - Springsted $3,534.44 - O'Connor and Hannan $5,177.27 - O'Connor and Hannan $ 500.00 - Norwest Bank Subtotal $16,286.61 1987 Out of Pocket Costs $ 55.00 - Krass and Monroe S 31.00 - Krass and Monroe Total Out of Pocket Costs $16,372.61 RECOMMENDATION and ACTION REOUESTED: Move to direct the Executive Director to draw on the $50, 000 letter of credit in the amount of $16,372.61 and return the remaining $33,627.39 to the Shakopee Valley Square Partnership. OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DECEMBER 6, 1988 Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Wampach, Scott and Zak present. Also present were Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator; Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; and Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney. Cncl. Vierling and Clay were absent. Wampach/Zak offered Resolution No. 2993, A Resolution of Appreciation to Rahr Malting Company and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak offered Resolution No. 2994, A Resolution of Appreciation to Inland Container Corporation and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Wampach moved to recess for HRA meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Wampach moved to reconvene to City Council at 7:10 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Liaison reports were given by Councilmembers. Zak/Wampach moved to look further into the use of rainchecks that local businesses seem to be issuing for merchandise that is advertised. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address anything not on the agenda. There was no response. Zak/Wampach moved to approve the consent business. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Zak/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of November 1 and November 15, 1988. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to approve the Dial-A-Ride bid specifications and authorize the appropriate City officials to proceed accordingly. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2992, A Resolution Authorizing the City of Shakopee to enter into a Service Contract with the Regional Transit Board to Provide Public Transportation Service in Shakopee for Calendar Year 1989. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to direct the appropriate City officials to solicit an audit of Murphy's Landing from George Hansen and Associates for an amount not to exceed $3,000. (Approved under consent business) . Proceedings of the City Council December 6, 1988 Page -2- Wampach/Zak moved to table discussion on the Murphy's Landing Request until December 20, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Wampach moved to set a public hearing for January 3, 1989, to consider the amendment of the City Comprehensive Plan to include the proposed annexation area Within the MUSA. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to direct staff to refund to Canterbury Downs the $5, 000 provided to the City to comply with the conditions of the administrative waiver issued for temporary horse stalls. (Approved under consent business) . Dennis Kraft reviewed the Community Youth Building project. He said once the building is constructed the intent would be to turn it over to the City and then lease it to community youth organizations for $1.00 per year. It has since been determined that its contrary to SPUC policy to provide electricity at their expense. They are asking for assistance in funding the cost of the electrical system for this structure, which is about $7,500. The total cost of this project is over $120,000. Scott/Zak moved to have the City pick up the $7,500 shortage plus the electrical/sewer bill. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Zak/Wampach moved to authorize proper City officials to execute a City towing contract with Shakopee Towing, Inc. , effective January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1990. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to authorize the appropriate city officials to execute the electrical contract with Terry Krominga for the 1989 operational year. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to _purchase two squad cars from Viking Southdale Ford in the amount of $26,226 per Hennepin County Contract No. 9524. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to direct the City Administrator to send a letter to Scott County indicating acceptance of the resolution of the 1989 tax settlement issues and the T.I.F. assessed value issues for 1986-1988 as drafted (DOC #CC-161) . (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Scott moved to table the employee group insurance bid until the next Council meeting on December 20, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak moved to approve the bills in the amount of $218,946.86. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Proceedings of the City Council December 6, 1988 Page -3- Zak/Wampach moved for approval of Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $204.75 to Holst Excavating, Inc. , P.O. Box 36, Prescott, WI 54021 for the 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project No. 1988-2. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved for approval of Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $2,009.87 to Hardrives, Inc. 7200 Hemlock Lane No. , Maple Grove, MN 55369 for the 11th Avenue Street and Storm Sewer Construction Project No. 1988-5. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to direct staff to notify the representative of Stans Foundation that the irrigation systems plans were never - submitted to the City and that the City never approved of the location of the underground sprinkler system, therefore the City does not feel obligated to pay for the cost of relocating the sprinklers. The representative of Stans Foundation should be informed that the City feels that the architect consultant was remiss in failing to obtain approval for the sprinkler system. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to authorize the proper City officials to execute an agreement with Scott County for the prosecution of gross misdemeanors. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to approve the reduction of the letter of credit for Prairie Estates 1st Addition to $31,000.000, upon receipt of a one year warranty bond and upon payment of the completed work by the developer to the contractor in the amount of $274,039.76. (Approved under consent business) . Zak/Wampach moved to approve refunding $2,542. 19 to the developer of Prairie House 2nd Addition, upon receipt of a one year warranty bond, and upon payment of the completed work by the Developer to the contractor. (Approved under consent business) . Wampach/Zak moved to authorize the proper City officials to enter into an equipment rental agreement with Peter Link Co. , of Shakopee, MN, for contractual assistance under emergency conditions, as directed by City officials. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Wampach/Zak moved to authorize the proper City officials to enter into an equipment rental agreement with S.M. Hentges & Sons, of Shakopee, MN, for contractual assistance under emergency conditions, as directed by City officials. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Wampach/Zak moved to open the public hearing on Proposed Project for Celebrate Minnesota 1990. Motion carried unanimously. Proceedings of the City Council December 6, 1988 Page -4- Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant reviewed the Celebrate Minnesota 1990 grant program. He said he is hoping to raise private contributions from local and civic organizations and businesses to pick up as much as he can. He said they are proposing to extend a trail through Huber park all the way out to Memorial Park. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no response. Zak/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak moved to direct the appropriate City officials to submit a grant application to the Department of Trade and Economic Development for funding under the Celebrate Minnesota 1990 grant program. Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Zak moved for a 10 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Scott moved to reconvene at 7:50 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Wampach moved to open the public hearing on a variance Request from the Parking Restrictions by Donald and Soloma McElderry, 1831 W. 6th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the request received from Donald and Soloma McElderry to exempt their property from the requirements of City Code Section 9.30 regarding the parking of trucks on property in residential districts. They said when they bought this property the realtor did not tell them of any City code restrictions on parking trucks in residential areas. The parking of trucks on their property is essential to their livelihood. They said they would build a garage to house the trucks in to keep them out of sight. There was a concern from neighbors on the noise that the diesels _make while warming up, especially in cold weather. There was discussion as to whether or not the applicant should investigate the possibility of taking legal recourse against the realtor who sold them property. Mr. Larry Link, 1819 6th Avenue West, presented a petition in opposition to the request containing 19 signatures. Mr. Link also presented pictures of the property as seen from Longview Estates. He said he believed that if the Council granted the request it would devalue his property. Gene Brown, Realtor, said he believed it would be wrong to allow semi-truck parking in a residential area. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone else from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no response. Proceedings of the City Council December 6, 1988 Page -5- Wampach/Scott moved to deny the request to allow the parking of trucks on the property located at 1831 West Sixth Avenue. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Zak/Wampach moved to open the public hearing on the vacation of 6th Avenue East of Main Street. Motion carried unanimously. Dennis Kraft reviewed the request to vacate 6th Avenue from Main street to the east. Mr. and Mrs. Dean Smith voiced concern on the limitation of access to their property from the west. They also expressed concern- about the provision of water and sewer service, not only to the property where their house is located, but also additional property which they own to the north of their house. The City Engineer looked at the possibility of the City providing sanitary sewer access to the property. Another alternative would be to provide sewer along Market Street from the top of the hill down to 4th Avenue. This is the alternative preferred by the City Engineer and would allow the entire undeveloped area on both sides of Market to be developed. Mr and Mrs. Smith saw no advantage to them to vacate this portion of 6th Avenue other than to add more land so the petitioner could develop property for twin homes. Cheryl Bannerman, 541 E. 6th, said she objects to additional twin homes in the area. She would recommend lots platted for single family homes. Mrs. John Theis, owner of the property that abuts 6th Avenue on the south and north, said she has owned this property for 30 years and now has a sale contingent upon 6th Avenue being vacated. This is why she has requested the vacation. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone else present from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no response. Zak/Scott moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Zak moved to table the vacation of 6th Avenue East of Main Street until January 3, 1989, when the City Engineer could be present to address various engineering related concerns. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak offered Resolution No. 2991, A Resolution Declaring Adequacy of Petition and Ordering Preparation of Report for 5th Avenue Street Improvements, Between Fillmore Street and Market Street, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak offered Resolution No. 2989, A Resolution Adopting the 1989 Budget and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Proceedings of the City Council December 6, 1988 Page -6- Wampach/Zak offered Resolution No. 2988, A Resolution Authorizing Redemption of General Obligation Tax increment Bonds of 1980, and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Wampach/Zak offered Resolution No. 2990, A Resolution adopting 1988 Budget Amendment and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. There was some discussion with City Attorney on the legal opinion of the relationship between SPUC and the City Council. - Scott/Zak moved to adjourn to December 20, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:32 p.m. WthCidrk Carol Schultz Recording secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL ART. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DECEMBER 20, 1988 Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Clay, Wampach, Vierling, Zak and Scott present. Also present were Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator; Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; David Hutton, City Engineer; Judith Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney. Wampach/Zak moved to recess for a Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling moved to reconvene to City Council at 7:21 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Liaison reports were given by councilmembers. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone present who wished to address anything not on the agenda. There was no response. Clay/Wampach moved to approve the consent business. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None. Motion carried. Wampach/Zak moved to endorse the appointment of Gloria M. Vierling as Commissioner of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission for District 13/14. Motion carried with Cncl. Vierling abstaining. Scott/Clay moved to accept the resignation of Timothy J. Keane from the Shakopee Community Development Commission, with regrets. Motion carried unanimously. Dennis Kraft reviewed the letter submitted by Scott County Central Services Director Jim Slavik regarding his request that two hour parking restrictions be placed on five different streets in the vicinity of the courthouse. Cncl. Scott had a concern over the amount of reserved parking spaces by the courthouse. He felt that the back lot should be open for public parking. It was the consensus of the Council to have this issue further looked into before making a decision. Clay/Wampach moved to table the issue on parking restrictions around the courthouse until January 17, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock reviewed the City's park dedication fees. He said he reviewed several communities in the Metropolitan area and that Shakopee appeared to have lower park dedication fees than surrounding areas. He believes that Shakopee's fees should be comparable to those charged by other surrounding cities. Discussion followed. Proceedings of the City Council December 20, '1988 Page -2- Vierling/Wampach moved to take no action on changing the city's park dedication fees until the completion of the comprehensive plan. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock explained the refuse collection fee increase to be effective January 15, 1989. He said the City's current refuse hauler will be charged a $2.00 per gate yard surcharge for the dumping of refuse which is the reason for this increase. Vierling/Scott offered Resolution No. 3001, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2987 Adopting the 1989 Fee Schedule Providing for an Increase in the Refuse Collection Rates, and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Barry Stock reviewed the refuse/recycling program which will begin March 1, 1989. He said each resident will be furnished a special garbage can plus a separate box for recyclables. The refuse hauler will haul the recyclables away each week with the garbage. Cncl. Scott had a concern regarding the Scouts recycling and asked if this would interfere. Mr. Stock replied that the Scouts were not opposed to this plan. He said that if the Scouts preferred to quit the recycling business and work with the City in a City clean up day in the spring then the City would give them $1500 which would come from revenues generated from the sale of the recyclables under this contract. This will be limited to residential single family up to four plex units. The question was raised about garbage that would not fit into the can provided. Mr. Stock replied that any extra garbage could be placed in bags and set next to the garbage can. They would be picked up for an additional charge of $1. 00 per bag. Scott/Vierling moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the garbage and refuse collection contract. Roll call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Scott/Clay moved for a 10 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Vierling moved to reconvene to City Council at 8:40 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Dennis Kraft reviewed the question of operating assistance for Murphy's Landing and the entering into a five year operating contract with the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project. He said there is no contract at the present time with MVRP to run Murphy's Landing. The letter (from Mr. Pistulka, M.D. , dated 11- 23-88) is calling for a five year contract which would give MVRP Proceedings of the City Council December 20, '1988 Page -3- stability knowing that they have support for five years. There is a provision in the letter asking for $50,000 a year for three years for operating assistance. Mayor Lebens said she felt $50,000 was a little steep and would like to see it go for more of a loan type program. Cncl. Scott said he would like this issue tabled until after a meeting can be held with SPDC to determine how much money the City may have available. Cncl. Vierling said she would not like to commit any amount for more than 1 year, but she does agree with the five year operating contract. Dr. Pistulka, President of the Historical Society, said MVRP definitely needs $50,000 just to get going, and that he would like a three year commitment better. He said that a museum director will cost at least $36,000 per year. They also need some kind of bookkeeper type person who would probably take care of the rest of the $50,000. He said MVRP would like to go after grants and in order for MVRP to fill the criteria they need support from the City. Mr. Manahan said he does not believe it would be in the best interest of Murphy's Landing to go by way of a loan from the City. Ms. Henderson said she prefers a five year contract because it would give them more stability because they are in a growth pattern. She said they cannot go after any grants until they have a contract. Clay/Vierling moved to direct City Attorney to prepare an operating contract between the City of Shakopee and Minnesota Valley Restoration Project for a period of 5 years. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to direct acting City Administrator to work with the MVRP Executive Director to find someone to conduct the artifact inventory. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Zak said he would like to make himself available to help with the inventory. Cncl. Scott said he would like to give them $25,000 now and give them an additional $25,000 later after the meeting with SPDC to see what is available. Vierling/Zak moved to table appropriating $50,000.00 for development of the Murphy's Landing site. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Scott moved to authorize the purchase and erection of playground equipment by Earl F. Anderson and Associates Inc. , to be placed in Holmes and Hiawatha Parks. With funding for this purchase to come from the park Reserve Fund with the cost totaling $19,923.00. Roll call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Wampach, Zak, Vierling and Scott Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried. Proceedings of the City Council December 20, '1988 Page -4- Clay/Wampach moved to authorize the Police Department to purchase one IBM PS/2 model 30 computer, IBM 3278 Emulation Board, IBM 3270 Emulation software, monitor, IBM PC Network Card, DOS 3.3 operating software, and termination cable from Ameri-Data Systems, Inc. at a cost of $3137.00 including installation and 90 day on-site warranty. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to approve Change Order No. 9 in the amount of $7,286.23 to Hardrives, Inc. , 7200 Hemlock Lane No. , Maple Grove, MN 55369 for the Downtown Streetscape Project 1987-2. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to authorize payment of Partial Estimate No. 9 for 13th Avenue, Vierling Drive Street improvements, Project No. 1987-12 in the amount of $44,951.97 to S.M. Hentges and Sons, Inc. , P.O. Box 212, Shakopee, MN 55379. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Wampach moved to authorize payment of Partial Estimate No. 4 for Vierling Drive, Project No. 1988-1 in the amount of $12,270.20 to Northdale Construction Co. , Inc. , 14450 Northdale Blvd. , Rogers, MN 55374 . (Approved under consent business) . Scott/Zak moved to authorize the City Engineer to utilize Allied Testing Company to obtain preliminary soil borings and analysis of the Mill Pond area with a maximum amount of $3,000.00. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Zak moved to direct staff to notify Scott County that the City will be utilizing our own crews to eliminate the bump on Gorman Street, rather than County forces. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak moved to fund the City portion of the traffic signals (at Marschall Road and Gorman Street) , estimated at $21,400.00 (25$) , out of the General Fund Contingency and inform the Finance Director of the decision. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Zak and Wampach Noes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Scott and Mayor Lebens Motion fails. Discussion ensued on where the money should come from for funding the City's portion of the traffic signal at intersection of Marschall Road and County Road 16. Cncl. Scott said he would like to know exactly where it is coming from before he commits to any money. Mayor Lebens said she would rather see the City go out for bonds. Proceedings of the City Council December 20, 1988 Page -5- Vierling/Zak moved to fund the $21,400 from the Capital Improvement Fund for the City portion of the traffic signals at Marschall Road and Gorman Street. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Scott and Zak Noes: Cncl. Wampach and Mayor Lebens Motion carried. Vierling/Clay moved to change the vacation schedule for non-union employees by providing one additional day of vacation per year after 20 years with a maximum of 25 days. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved to increase the sick leave for non-union employees from 800 to 960 hours and keep the increased rates the same at 33 1/3 for the severance pay. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Wampach and Mayor Lebens Noes: Cncl. Zak and Scott Motion carried. Discussion ensued on overtime hours worked by exempt employees and the impact on comparable worth. The Finance Officer explained that 75% of the Cities contacted compensate their exempt employees in some way. He said one way is to give exempt employees, who do work overtime, an extra five days of vacation. This would equal less than a 2% increase in their salaries. Cncl. Vierling stated that she would like to treat all exempt employees the same. Vierling/Wampach moved to give five extra days of leave to actual exempt employees who qualify by fairly consistently working more than 40 hours per week. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Wampach and Mayor Lebens Noes: Cncl. Scott and Zak Motion carried. Vierling/Zak moved to authorize the proper City officials to execute the appropriate documents awarding the life and long term disability bid to Principal Mutual at an annualized cost of approximately $9,291 for long term disability and $61,876 for life and accidental death and dismemberment and awarding the health insurance bid to Blue Cross/Blue Shield at an approximate annualized cost of $108,912. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Clay/vierling moved to approve the bills in the amount of $3,626,196.10. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Scott moved to reconsider the consent agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Proceedings of the City Council December 20, 1988 Page -6- Vierling/Zak moved to remove item IOM, Municipal Parking Lot Leases, from the consent agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Zak moved to table 10M, Municipal Parking Lot Leases, until January 3, 1989. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved to approve the consent items. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved to authorize the City Clerk to issue cigarette licenses for 1989. (Approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to authorize appropriate City officials to enter into a 1989 contract with Municipal Ordinance Codifiers, Inc. at $90.00 per hour for council, $50.00 per hour for codifier, and $25.00 per hour for typing revision pages for updating the Shakopee City Code. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Wampach, Zak, Vierling Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried. Cncl. Scott was absent for roll call. Vierling/Wampach moved to accept the reimbursement of 358 of the defense costs incurred from the International Surplus Lines Insurance Company in conjunction with the Scott County Lumber Company versus City of Shakopee lawsuit. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 2999, A Resolution Adopting the 1989 Pay Schedule for the Officers and Non-Union Employees of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Zak, Wampach and Mayor Lebens Noes: Cncl. Scott Motion carried. Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3000, A Resolution Authorizing the Appropriate City Officials to Submit a Final Application and Execution of Subsequent Grant Project Agreements to Develop East-Side (JEJ) Park under the Provision of the Stated Bonded Fund and moved for its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Vierling/Mayor Lebens moved to table Adoption of Housing Code to a January worksession. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Mayor Lebens moved to table discussion on the Fee Schedule for the Housing Code. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling moved to table the Minnesota Department of Transportation Agency Agreement appointing the Commissioner of Transportation as the City of Shakopee's agent for Federal Projects. Motion carried unanimously. Proceedings of the City Council December 20, 1988 Page -7- Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2998, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvement to 3rd Avenue West between Harrison Street and Hwy. 169, and moved for its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2997, A Resolution Declaring Adequacy of Petition and Ordering Preparation of report for Alley Improvements to Block 7 of the Jasper and Smith Addition, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Clay/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk aalak,d. Carol Schultz Recording Secretary v in. December 30,1988 O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association 736 Tyrol Lane Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Ms. Judy Cox City of Shakopee 129 1st Ave. Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Judy, The O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association is a nonprofit organization in the Shakopee area. The main purpose of the organization is to improve the water quality in the O'Dowd Lakes area with an aeration. system. Naturally, the operation of the system costs a substantial amount of money and liability insurance is one of the system's major costs. Since we are a nonprofit organization, we raise funds by soliciting individuals and organizations . We are asking the City to help with the cost of insurance because we need it. Funds raised from other sources are earmarked for all the other expenses of the system. Your vital support in the past has helped our organization become the success that it is. The citzens of Shakopee benefit greatly from the improved water conditions in the 0 Dowd area and continued support would be much appreciated. THANK YOU! ! ! Sincerely, Dayswol Dave Brown Insurance Committee O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Save O'Dowd Lakes Chain Ass'n. Aerators Insurance DATE: December 30, 1988 INTRODUCTION: The Save O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association has submitted the attached letter asking the City Council for some financial assistance to pay the premium for their liability insurance. BACKGROUND: The City leases a small part of land, on Lake O'Dowd, to the Association for operation of two aerators. A condition of the lease is that the Association carry liability insurance in the amount of $200,000 per person and $600,000 per incident and to also name the City as an additional insurred. The Department of Natural Resources requires insurance in a lessor amount, $500,000 per incident. Last year Council approved paying $984.98 toward the insurance premium. I understand that this was about one-half of the total cost. The Association also has an aerator on Thole Lake in Louisville Township. The City has not budgeted for this expenditure. The Finance Director advised me that the money could come from the General Fund Contingency, if Council desires to pay any portion of the 1989 insurance premium. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Pay total premium - I do not know the exact figure, but I understand that it is less than last year's. 2) Pay some portion of the premium - it could be shared by the City of Shakopee, Louisville Township, and the Association. 3) Pay no part of the premium. The Association would have to raise the necessary money or they could ask other non profit organizations for financial assistance (possibly organizations who have a pull-tab license) . 4) Other RECOMMENDATION: After discussion, determine if and how much the Council wishes to pay towards the 1989 insurance premium for the Save O'Dowd Lake Chain Association for the operation of aerators. LAW OFFICES V 6 KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED Phillip R.Krass Marschall Road Business Center Dennis L Monroe 327 Marschall Rm Barry K.Meyer P.O. Boz 216 Jay D.Gold6er9 Shakopee.Minnesota 55379 Trevor J. Mozoess R.N W n Telephone(612)445-5080 Made Diane M. Carlson FAX(612)4457640 Robert J.Waker Lachlan B.Plus James B.Croft Col.M.Trende Odin D.Te Shm Patrice A.Weller Kent A.Carlson.CPA December 20, 1988 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Minutes of November 1, 1988 City Council Meeting Our File No. 1-1373-220 Dear Mayor and Council Members: In preparing the Mandamus action I was directed to do involving the signing of Resolution 2978 and Ordinance No. 258, I have reviewed your council minutes for the evening of November 1. I note in those minutes that a vote on the Resolution was taken first and according to the minutes had four "aye" votes, those being from Council Members Clay, Vierling, Zak, and Vampach. Mayor Lebens voted -no" and Councilman Scott abstained. The minutes indicate "motion fails due to lack of majority. " Such however is not the case. A resolution generally requires a majority vote of those voting, with some exceptions, such as a resolution adopting a Chapter 429 public improvement project.- Having received four affirmative votes, this Resolution did in fact pass. The minutes go on to indicate that when Ordinance 258 was voted upon, the voting occurred in exactly the same manner as on the Resolution and again the minutes reflect that the motion to adopt the Ordinance failed due to a lack of majority. Again I believe these minutes to be in error. An ordinance for any statutory city requires an affirmative vote of an absolute majority of the council. An absolute majority of the Shakopee council is four votes and since there were four affirmative votes, I believe that Ordinance passed. I am bringing this up only due to my concern that subsequent to the minutes reflecting that these two motions to adopt failed due to a lack of majority, there were subsequent motions made to reconsider both votes. However, those motions to reconsider were made in each case by Councilman Vierling, who was, according to the minutes, on the side which did not prevail. Motions to reconsider can only be made by an individual whose position was sustained The Honorable Mayor and City Council Page Two December 20, 1988 initially. I therefore believe the motions to reconsider to be invalid, but I consider the Ordinance and Resolution to have been properly adopted as a result of the first vote in each case. Since I do not wish to have this matter brought up in the litigation as a possible reason the Resolution and Ordinance need not be signed. I am requesting that the City Council by motion amend the notations in the November 1 minutes to reflect the fact that the Resolution and the Ordinance were both adopted properly on the first vote and that, therefore, the motion to reconsider and the second vote was unnecessary and therefore a nullity. I would appreciate it if you would forward me a copy of the minutes which reflect the amendment to the November 1 minutes. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. Very truly yours, - ERASS E MONROE CHARTERED Phillip R. Brass PRR:mlw ACTION REQUESTED: Move to amend the notations in the November 1, 1988 minutes to reflect the fact that Resolution No. 2978 and Ordinance No. 258 were both adopted properly on the first vote and that, therefore, the motion to reconsider and the second vote was unnecessary and therefore a nullity. i r x _ . w�O i'Fo 1Rti`i':�O7f-sItaM' _ . Q k` , 9rej�at Ho. 1417 S. . <.Jiot�on Carr SaQ,--UnanYfoua Wampach/Vierling moved to set a date ofNovember 15 . for discussion on the Upper Valley Drainage Project. Discussion will be held in the Executive Session. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved to receive and file the letter from the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission regarding the Establishment of a Future System Charge for Costs Associated with the Improvements of Valley Park Drive, Project No. 1986-11, Resolution No. 2967 . Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer reviewed the concept of a systems charge saying the whole idea was to spread the costs of the Valley Park Drive improvements over the area that would benefit should a frontage road ever be constructed. Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2967 , A Resolution Establishing a Future System Charge for Those Costs Associated with the Improvements of Valley Park Drive from Trunk Highway No. 101 Northerly for Approximately 350 feet Project No. 1986-11, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2977, A Resolution Authorizing Execution of a zero percent Loan Agreement with the Metropolitan Council, and moved its adoption. (Motion approved under consent business) . The City Engineer reviewed the Preliminary Layout for the T.H. 169/101 Bridge and Mini-Bypass Project. Mayor Lebens had a concern on signing this agreement because the bridge goes over a dedicated city parking lot which is against the law. The City Administrator read the letter received from the League regarding the bridge assessments and whether or not it would be legal . Cncl. Clay asked what recourse the Council would have if the Mayor refuses to sign something that the Council has authorized. The City Attorney replied that they would have to issue proceedings to get her to sign or have the court declare it an authorization without her signature. Clay/Vierling offered Resolution 2978, A Resolution Approving the Preliminary Layout (Layout No. 2A) for the Trunk Highway 169/101 Bridge and Minibypass Project State Project No. 7009-52 and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Zak and Wampach Noes: Mayor Lebens, Cncl. Scott abstained. Motion fails due to lack of majority. Clay/Wampach approved Ordinance No. 258, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, adopting an Official Map for the right- of-Way and Temporary Easement for the Highway 169-101 Bridge and f wm .. DlinDypaai - in th••^ci e'E'_ '- - Roll Call: A er. cncl, cla Y::. one, •rll `Zaks Noes: Mayor Lebena,- Cncl. Seott"ebatain•eY:,. Motion fails due to lack of majority. < Discussion ensued with Cncl. Scott saying that he was reluctant to vote if the City would have to bring the Mayor to Court just to get an answer to this issue. He said he wants to be assured that this is a legal action for the City to take before he actually makes a move. The City Attorney assured him that this was a legal action for the City to take. Vierling/Wampach moved to reconsider Resolution No. 2978. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2978, A Resolution Approving the Preliminary Layout (Layout No. 2A) for the Trunk Highway 169/101 Bridge and Minibypass Project State Project No. 7009-5002, and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Scott, Zak, Wampach Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried. Vierling/Zak moved to reconsider Ordinance No. 258 . Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Zak offered Ordinance No. 258, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, adopting an Official Map for the Right- of-Way and Temporary Easement for the Highway 169-101 Bridge and Mini by-pass in the City of Shakopee. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Scott, Zak, Wanpach Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried. It was decided that the Worksession with Gerald Garski and Steve Hurni from the State Dept. of Revenue referencing Scott County Assessing Report, be held on November 29, at 7: 00 p.m. Vierling/Zak offered Resolution No. 2976, A Resolution of Appreciation to the City Administrator, John K. Anderson for Outstanding -Service to and For the City of Shakopee, and moved its adoption. Mayor Lebens read the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Gregg Voxland, Finance Director gave an update on the 1989 Local Government Aid, He said the local government aid has been increased by $111, 168. Vierling/Clay moved to reconsider Resolution No. 2958 , A Resolution Approving 1988 Tax Levy, Collectible in 1989 . Motion carried unanimously. ! N MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Annexation Area DATE: December 22, 1988 INTRODUCTION• At their meeting on December 6, 1988 the City Council was informed of the Metropolitan Council's approval of the amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan allowing for extension of the Municipal Urban Sewer Area (MUSA) line to include the newly annexed area south of the High School. At that meeting, the City Council set a public hearing for the January 3, 1989 meeting. Following the public hearing, the City Council needs to make a decision regarding approval of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. BACKGROUND• For background information on this item please refer to the memo contained in the packet for the December 6, 1988 meeting (agenda item #12C. ) . ALTERNATIVES• 1. After holding a public hearing the City Council could offer and approve Resolution No. .2995 amending the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan to include the annexation area in the MUSA. 2. After holding a public hearing the City Council could pass a motion to not approve Resolution No. 2995 amending the Comprehensive Plan and direct staff to make changes to the amendment. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REOUESTED: Offer and pass Resolution No. 2995 amending the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan to include the annexation area within the MUSA and designate the area for single family development. RESOLUTION NO. 2995 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SHAKOPEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE THE ANNEXATION AREA WITHIN THE MUSA AND DESIGNATE THE AREA FOR SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the property located south of the High School and west of County Road 79, described on attachment A, was officially annexed to the City on July 30, 1987 by resolution of the Minnesota Municipal Board and subsequently a ruling by the District Court and State Court of Appeals upholding the decision of the Minnesota Municipal Board; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared an amendment to the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan including said property within the Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) and designating the area for single family residential development; and _ WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has approved said amendment to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan has been approved and recommended by the City Planning commission; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on said amendment and considered the suggestions and objections of citizens; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota that the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to include the parcel described in Attachment A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said area; as shown on revised maps numbered 9, 11, and 31 0£ the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan; is hereby designated for single family development. Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1989_ City Attorney o- Attachment A The South one-half of the Northeast one-quarter of Section 12- 115-23, except approximately 10 acres thereof which 10 acres are legally described as follows: That part of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 12, Township 115, Range 23, described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of Jasper and Smith Addition to Shakopee, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Scott County Recorder; thence South on the extended east line of said Addition 382.2 feet; thence East parallel with the South line of Tenth Avenue 1416.3 feet to the east line of said South Half; thence North along said east line 232.95 feet to the northeast corner of said South Half; thence Westerly along the north line of said South Half 1424.9 feet more or less to the point of beginning. Together with the North one-half of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 11-115-23. MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer 0 SUBJECT: 6th Avenue, East of Main Street DATE: December 28, 1988 INTRODUCTION: A public hearing was held on December 6 , 1988 to consider the vacation of 6th Avenue from Main Street to the east. Council tabled any action on the proposed vacation until the January 3, 1989 meeting at which time staff was instructed to have the 5th Avenue feasibility report completed and presented to Council. BACKGROUND: This item has been brought before Council on several occasions. At the last public hearing held on December 6 , 1988 , certain property owners objected to the vacation of this portion of 6th Avenue until certain questions relating to sewer and water availability, surface water drainage and driveway accesses were addressed. At the same meeting, Council accepted a petition and ordered a feasibility report prepared for proposed improvements to 5th Avenue, from Fillmore Street to Market Street. Because the two issues are inter—related, Council tabled any action on the 6th Avenue vacation until the 5th Avenue feasibility report was completed and directed staff to submit this report to Council on January 3 , 1989 . The public hearing was closed prior to tabling any action. The feasibility report for 5th Avenue has been completed . Special assessment procedures (Chapter 429) require that the City Council hold a public meeting on the feasibility report to determine if the project should be ordered . Therefore , the feasibility report will be going to Council on January 3 , 1989 by a resolution, which accepts the report and sets the date of the public hearing. To briefly summarize the feasibility report, it concludes that the entire area could be served if sewer and water were installed in 5th Avenue and Market Street. The report also concludes that surface water drains on Main Street and 5th Avenue would be adequately handled by constructing 5th Avenue completely to Market Street. In short, any potential problems caused by vacating 6th Avenue east of Main Street would be resolved by extending 5th Avenue to Market Street. In staff' s original memo to Council for the December 6th public hearing, it was recommended that 6th Avenue east of Main Street not be vacated unless 5th Avenue were extended to Market Street. _ fJ � The feasibility report confirms that fact. If 5th Avenue including utilities were extended to Market Street, 6th Avenue is not essential for development and theoretically could be vacated. The developer who petitioned for vacating 6th Avenue is also aware that prior to any development occurring, proposed sewer and water extensions must be submitted and approved by the City, building permits obtained and an agreement should be executed with the City to address the restoration of the vacated 6th Avenue . Staff has previously recommended that this portion of 6th Avenue not be vacated until the developer has completed all the above mentioned requirements. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Deny the request for the vacation of 6th Avenue East of Main Street. 2. Direct staff to prepare the appropriate vacation resolution for Council consideration. 3. Table the request for vacating this portion of 6th Avenue until after the public hearing on 5th Avenue. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 3 , to table the request for the 6th Avenue vacation until after the public hearing on 5th Avenue. In addition, the developer who petitioned for the vacation should be instructed to submit development plans showing the proposed sewer and water extensions and execute a formal agreement covering those items as well as the costs of restoring vacated 6th Avenue, prior to any Council action for vacating 6th Avenue. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to table the proposed vacation of 6th Avenue east of Main Street until: a) After the public hearing is held on extending 5th Avenue to Market Street and the project is ordered and b) The developer submits formal plans showing the proposed sewer and water extensions on Main Street and executes a developer ' s agreement with the City addressing all concerns. DH/pmp 6TH MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engines 7a�a� SUBJECT: Al DuBois/Jim Hauer Dispute DATE: December 29, 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses the Al DuBois/Jim Hauer situation. BACKGROUND: On December 5 , 1988 , this case was heard before the District Court in conciliation court. On December 6 , 1988, a judgement was issued to all parties (copy of judgement attached) . Basically, the court found the co-defendants ( i.e. the City of Shakopee and Jim Hauer) jointly and severably liable. Jim Hauer was found liable for the full amount, $1 ,463.33, while the City of Shakopee was found liable for $800.00 of that amount. The defendants had until December 27 , 1988 to fill an appeal. Mr. Hauer has filed an appeal. The City did not appeal. The City Attorney has recommended the following action: 1 . The City should pay Mr. DuBois the $800.00 and deduct that amount from what the City owes Mr . Hauer , (which is $2,306.00) . 2. The remainder of the money owed Jim Hauer should be filed with the District Court since the case is going through the appeals process. If Mr . DuBois receives judgment in the appeals court, he would then receive his award of damages from the court. The above action would remove the City of Shakopee from this matter completely and leave it up to the court system to resolve. ACTERNATIVKs: 1 . Concur with the above action recommended by the City Attorney and authorize the appropriate City staff to make the necessary payments. 2. Discuss the matter and authorize a different course of action. � i C�- RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate City staff to submit a check to Mr. Al DuBois, 1982 Davis Court, Shakopee Minnesota in the amount of $800.00 and to submit the remainder of the amount that the City owes Jim Hauer, $1 ,506.00, to the District Court to hold since the case is still in litigation. DH/pmp STATE OF MINNESOTA IN DISTRICT COURT 1 COUNTY OF SCOTT CDURT HOUSE 212 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 . 612 496-8200 (OR) 612 445-7750 EXT. 200 hIQIICE ��;n �0 CASE NUMBER 88-10764 TO: CITY OF SHAKOPEE PLAINTIFF -DU BOIS, ALBERT 129 E. IST AVENUE vs, SHAKOPEE MN =9 DEFENDANT - CITY OF SHAKOPEE BE ADVISED THAT AN ENTRY OF JUDGMENT DATED DECEMBER 6, 1988, WAS FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR ON DECEMBER 6, 19M, AND A COPY (IF SAID JUDGMENT IS APPENDED HERETO. GREGORY M. ESS COURT ADMINISTRATOR I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE 9AM ADDRESS BY FIRST CLASS U.S IL ON 88-12-07. ' DEPUTY CLERK UCF-9B(9-88) �~ V Juagmeni and Notice of Judgment euslNEss srcososcouvovAnoN Mlrvrvsso.F Con.Ct. R. 1.14 z State of Minnesota Conciliation Court p COUNTYOF NO. NAME AND AWAIDES NAMEANDAOCNE3S PLAIN IFF L /_ VLA Ni FF n Fr up ZIP V3 V5 jl EANDADDaESS .NPNE AND ADDPE55 /7, / i DEFENDANT 11 / J OEFEMMIr/ , ZIP ZIP Appearances: O Plaintiff 10—Defendant 13 Neither Party 0._Co t�feated ❑ Default Upon evidence received,IT IS HEREBY ORDERED IT IS &ERS3Y ORDERED: 1. That the defendants are jointly and severahly liable. 2. The Plaintiffs total damages are $1463. 33 ORDER 3. The City of Shaco.ee's liability is linited to $800.00 FOR :;Fl.1tVes Hauer is liai Ve-7fai- the full anount of Wedlejudgment against the JUDGMENT / i/ h in the sum of ON cults AND A CO1NTER plus filing fees of$ / ¢ �•^^d disbursements of$ ter a tmal of$ cults / / Dated: / (A Judge: /`r✓l r'- �/ Pursuant to the Court's Order for Judgment herein,IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED:that the _ have and receive from the in the sum of$ plus filing fees of$ and disbursements Of$ for a total of$� r" �� JUDGMENT Court Administrator Dated: - ':� ,� Deputy The Parties are hereby notified that J u d,5tnent has been entered m indicated above,but the Judgment is stayed by statute until +' -p.M.(to allow for an appeal/removal if desired). Dace i. / Time NOTICE Notice: If the cause is removed to district court, the Court may, in its discretion, allow the prevailing party to re- 01 cover from the aggrieved party an amount not to exceed$50 as costa if the prevailing party on appeal is not the aggrieved JUDGMENT party in the original action. Court Administrator Dated: ' Deputy I certify that the above is a Correct transcript of the TRANSCRTT re Judgment ndered in this Court. CourtAdministrator o,'JUDGMEm Dated Deputy — Read reverse aide for important instructions DEFENDANTS COPY _. How Do You Pay a Judgment? • Payment may be made directly to the party that wins the case (prevailing party) or payment may be made through the Conciliation Court. • If the prevailing party is paid directly, obtain a statement of payment from the party (satisfaction of judgment)and file this with the.Court. Special forms for this procedure are available at the Conciliation Court office. • If the Court is not properly notified of payment,you will have an unsatisfied judgment on your _ record and your credit rating may be affected. How Do You Collect a Judgment? Although a case is decided in your favor,a Conciliation Court judgment does not create a lien against the debtor's property unless the procedure outlined below is followed. You can try to collect the judgment yourself if it has not been paid within the required 20 day period,and if the other party has not filed an appeal.The judgment is good for 10 years and may be renewed for another 10 years.If the party is declared bankrupt following a judgment,you may receive part of your payment if assets are divided among the party's creditors, or the debt may be discharged and you cannot collect. The following information may help you in collecting the amount of the judgment: • In order to collect on your judgment you must obtain a transcript(record) of your judgment from the Conciliation Court and file it in District Court together with an Affidavit of Identification. The judgment will then be "docketed". There is a $5 fee for obtaining that transcript. • Upon docketing,you may Obtain an Execution from the Court Administrator.An Execution is legal paper authorizing the sheriff to levy (collect) on a debtor's assets. The most common assets that can be levied upon are bank accounts and wages. You must be able to provide detailed information regarding the assets before the sheriff can make a levy.The fee for an Ex- ecution is$5. Fees expended for the Execution process may be recovered from the Debtor. • If you do not know what assets the judgment debtor has,you may request the Court to order the debtor to tell you what those assets are.You can make that request only if: 1. The judgment has been docketed for 30 days. 2. You have not received payment of the judgment amount. 3. You and the debtor have not agreed to some other method of settlement. If those provisions can be met,the Request for Order for Disclosure form can be obtained from the Court Administrator.A fee is requi red.If the request is granted,the debtorwill be ordered to complete and mail to you a listing of his assets within 10 days. Once you have that informa- tion,you can give the Execution to the sheriff,advise him of the debtor's suets and ask him to collect your judgment. Now Do You Appeal a Judgment? • Any party who was not present at the trial,and who has good reason for not having been pre- sent, may apply to the Court, not later than the date indicated on the "Notice of Judgment' (on the front of this form)for permission of the Court to re-open the case for anothertrial.If the Court grants another trial,the judge may require payment of costs to the other party,absolute or conditional,not to exceed$25. • Any party who belives this judgment to be incorrect may appeal to the District Court for a completely new trial,by a different judge or by a jury if desired,The statutory requirements for such an appeal must be complied with not later than the date on the "Notice of Judgment" (on the front of this form).Such requirements are time-consuming and it is suggested that such inquiries be made well in advance Of the date indicated. MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Lease with O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association DATE: December 19, 1988 Introduction The Save O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association is asking that their lease be renewed. Background For the past seven years the City has provided the Association - with a lease for the purpose of providing easement for electri- cal power and operation of aerators. The attached lease is identical to the expiring lease, other than the dates. Mr. Muenchow, Community Services Director, and Mr. Karkanen, Public Works Superintendent, have been contacted regarding renewing the lease and neither have any problems with it. Alternatives 1. Approve 2. Deny 3 . Amend lease Recommended Action Authorize the proper City officials to enter into a two year lease with Save O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association for the purpose of providing easement for electrical power and operation of aerators. JSC/jms Jeal put luom a!gtuosew;o uondwxo ayl 1111m•pavers ana-!ay1 uaym sem u n uowpuoO a poog se m.ivadold aql areaj pegs lueual 'wo sasow lutual u2yM 'spua ase-1 mq1 uaym fvadoid a111;o uo!ssassod p1o!puwl an®Heys lueual xa Mead;o iapuannS Y asea!gns io luawubrsse agnads ley]ao;n!uo poo8 n uo!ss!uuad s,plo!pue; la)gns to u8!sn of Vusm lueual awn 112¢2 uolm.=ad s,pao1put7 lag lsnw weual 'ann=jj2 2q lou fpm lumuaa uanum s,piolpurl inogl!m apm asea!gns 10 wawuPrsse 6uv 'Ona-! ngl alewuual .iew pIo!pue-!•sgu!yl asayl;o hue scopmeual;! plo!puelayl;olumuoauanumjouda1111nogii ivadojdaipawnofuosladngiohue puuad io asza-!ng1 pas'(ia!gns)as!a mMue w Rvadold aql asta!•asea-I mil uSim lou ntw lueual•Su!ua!gnS pus luawustwv 'g Rvadold 2111 guuOlua aso;aq 2mlou a!gtuoseal meual anlg Heys p1o!pue7`.iauaglawa us;o 2n3 ayl w ldzoxg '=2i ase-!ayl)o sStp 09 lse!ayt Suunp slno11 a!gsu mu 1t swtual mau uo a!q!smd of Avadoid aql mot's few yo!pue'10111 vop!ppe u!'.Less oau s sapuap plo!puul iugl liom Aue uuoyad putfivadold a41 p2dsu!jontdw olslnoy a!geuonw lt,(vadadaglralua,Cew sluagtsryo!pue;put plo!puul'kj1u3JolgS!u 'S -am-j 5!111;0 oval aylao;Fvadmdayl asn ftw weual`ana�s!yl;o suuauaylo llt4l!m sagdwoO puelua aylsried weualy 7uaw.Cofu31>!na 'b -lux a4l,red of weual of wilou alS w aneq lou s p P101puul s PPe s.Pjo!Pue'1 le N mo;Oq p!ed>q lmw ywow yaea aol luaw.fed lu m ayl•IuandIld 'q aaa( 0�S) •uoTleaaplsuo0 VERO(] sTgtnTtn put POOR aag10 put ae1ToO aup s,6uadoad ayl.lo;1=2111•lulwwV 'e •saoleaae eq-4 ao; slso0 SuTleaado eq-4 ;o land hue fed o1 paalnbaa luau E ' ST A41D ag1 Juana aq1 uT ao AavTojj9u9q u se paumu 117 ag1 g11M 8020; uT 60ueansuT 9111 aa>( 01 TT?; aassaT aq1 pinogs Juana Aut uT paTTaout0 aq Avilz Hua zuTITa uT ooFlou s ep of A412d aag10 241 ZUjATS_R4_a_?d 1ag1Ta Aq uoFltTTaaueo 01 aananog laa qns 69 61 • g--•�asnuer uo Su!uu�aq saaa 011 10 uual t 101 n Mal s!gl'>m>7 Jo mal 'Z •spueT pTes SuTnaas ;o asodand aql ao; ssaaSe put ssaaguT 10 14811 ag1 g1TM aaglagol laa; OOZ fTaltmlxoadde ;o eouelsTP a ao; SPURT pTes 5s023e a>(e7 s,pnoO,O ;o aaogs aql uo 1u1od a 01 6L peog flun00 uo 1UTOd a moa; pualxa 01 sapins pue sa1TM faesss3au TTe g1Tn asglagol flaadoad paglaosap anoge aql ;o aaogs glnog aq1 ;;o a4vi s,pnoa,O uT saoleaat aaagl aleaado 01 fgaaue DTal3319 gulfTddns ;o asodand sq-4 ao; saTod ao sTod a aolnaas put uTeluTem •10aaa 01 faeseaJau 'elosauuT!y •f1un00 11O3g •gV •oN fananS purl peaalsTgau •anTsnTouT 0 put N `N 9lo7 ;o g0nm og s. ono;n pagpO p Ailadoid to'elosouw!.11;o alt1S' 41O3S 10.S1unoJ alp w el0sau IIN -aackoAeqS le Palt2o!s!.Cuadwd 2111•duadoad Jo uogdpa U - aVlaq ngl ylum 6!dwoOlou saupwayl;o auO aayl!ap lutualayl ao p1o!puel agl lsu!ege unoau!paalq!ua aq ucaleyl latnuoa!eaa!e s aseap nql uoTltTaossy u1eg0 saMe1 pnoO,0 a_S meaty ana-I s!y1 w pasn n 1NVNal paom 2q1 6LES5 NW as oKtgS anuany 1sa1d 15Eg 6ZT w!n Ppe s•Pao!Pue'1 alp Pull as oO!egS ;° 710 sutbw ase-! s!yl w PORI n ON0l4NVl pPom agl'mo!aq paquOsap 6uadold alp lura of pio!put, age put lutual ayl uaamlaq luawaaage!egai e n 11 '—61 ' palup m anal mU,asea!e n s!ql 3sv3I IvH3N39 .q•.nr„•ons-•,�.�.<� ,aon wxai ••a HSI'^A""oi 8. Default.If Tenant does not pay the rent or other amounts when due or if Tenant violates anv agreement in this Lease,Landlord may take possession of the Property.if Tenant does not move ouL Landlord may bring an eviction action.The Landlord may rent the Property to someone else.Any rent received by Landlord for the re-renting shall be used first to pay Landlord's expenses for ro-rentingthe Propertv and second to pay anvamounts Tenant owes under this Lease.Tenant shall be responsible for paying the difference between the amount of rent owed by Tenant under this Lease and the amount of rent,if any,received by Landlord from the new tenant plus the expenses paid by the Landlord,including court costs and attorneys fees. If Tenant violates a term of this Lease and Landlord does not terminate this Lease or evict Tenant Landlord may still terminate this Lease and evict Tenant for any other violation of this Lease. 9. Abandoned Personal Property.When Landlord recovers possession of the Property, then Landlord may consider Tenant's personal property on or in the Property to also have been abandoned.Landlord may then dispose of personal property in any manner that the Landlord thinks is proper. Landlord shall not be liable to Tenant for disposing of the personal property. 10. Heirs and Assigns.The terms of this Lease apply to the Tenant and Landlord.The terms of this Lease also apply to any heirs or legal representatives of Tenant or Landlord and any person to whom this Lease is assigned. LANDLORD: TENANT: $av ovd Lakes Chain AssociationMayor " Au City Administrator thorized Signature STATE OF MINNESOTA 99, COUNTY OF t City Clerk The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ' 19— by 19— by (Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgement) (Title or Rank) THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Julius A. Colley TT_ (Name) 211 West 1st Avenue (Address) Shakopee, HN 55379 CONSENT 84/ MEMO TO: DENNIS KRAFT - ACTING ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JIM KARKANEN - PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: SECY/RECEPTIONIST - COMPLETION OF PROBATION DATE: DEC. 22 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: BARBARA POTTHIER was hired June 22nd, 1988 as Secy/Receptionist for the Public Works Dept. BACKGROUND: A 6 month probationary period has been successfully completed as required in her hiring/selection process. Termination of her probationary period is requested as per hiring guidelines . RECOMMENDATION: Appoint Barbara Potthier a part-time permanent employee of the City of Shakopee. ACTION REQUESTED: Appoint Barbara Potthier a part-time permanent employee of the City of Shakopee. i� MEMO T0: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Ad inistrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: County Road 17 Underpass DATE: December 23, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Staff desires Council action on a proposed pedestrian underpass on County Road 17 associated with the trail system for the Upper Valley Drainage Project. BACKGROUND: The Upper Valley Drainage Project includes a trail system. At the point where this trail crosses County Road 17 , some provisions must be made to allow pedestrians safe access across this road. The trail and drainageway crosses County Road 17 just south of the Country Village Apartments. At the point where the trail crosses County Road 17 , there will be no future street intersection and therefore no traffic signals or crosswalks. The current design for the drainage project includes a pedestrian underpass at County Road 17 to provide for safe crossing at this point. Staff concurs with this proposed underpass and has requested that the City' s consultant submit formal application to the County for a permit to construct this structure. Attached is a letter from Scott County responding to our permit application . They have reviewed our drainage plans and pedestrian underpass and are concerned about two issues with the underpass. The first is pedestrian safety and the second is potential liabilities. In regards to pedestrian safety, the County is requesting that sufficient lighting be installed in and around the pedestrian underpass . . In regards to legal responsibilities and liabilities, the County is requesting that the City of Shakopee agree to a condition in the permit that the City shall indemnify the County against any claims or damages arising from the use of the pedestrian underpass. The City Attorney has reviewed the County' s request and agrees with their request to provide adequate lighting for the underpass. The Attorney has also indicated that the City should not absolve the County of all liability associated with damages arising from the use of this underpass. Because of the proposed upgrading of County Road 17 to a four lane highway with access ramps to the Shakopee Bypass, this highway will carry a large amount of traffic. For pedestrians to attempt to cross this highway at grade without an intersection or the benefit of traffic signals and crosswalks would be extremely difficult and dangerous. Although a pedestrian underpass also proposes certain safety concerns, staff and the City' s consultant �+ feel that this would be a much safer way to cross County Road 17 than at grade. Staff is also recommending that adequate lighting be provided around and in this underpass to reduce the likelihood of incidents. Staff is requesting that the City Council discuss the overall pros and cons on a pedestrian underpass and to prepare the final Upper Valley Drainage Project plans according to Council desires. If Council concurs with staff that a pedestrian underpass would be the best approach to this project, a formal response to the County's letter would be in order. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve of the current design plans calling for an pedestrian underpass at County Road 17 which will also include lighting and agree with the City Attorney that the City should not assume any increased liability for this underpass. 2. Instruct staff to modify the design to eliminate the pedestrian underpass from the project. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff is recommending Alternative No. 1 , to concur with the proposed pedestrian underpass at County Road 17. Staff is also recommending that the County be notified that the City will not be assuming any increased liability as a result of this project. ACTION REQUESTED: Discuss the overall pros and cons of the proposed underpass and move to concur that the underpass be included in the plans for the Upper Valley Drainage Project. Staff should also be instructed to notify the County that the City will not agree to assume any liability as a result of this underpass, but that adequate lighting will be provided. DH/pmp UNDERPASS JULIUS A. COLLER,If co uca ATrOHNEY AT LAw sit-445-1x44 V X16 sep ie4o ii wssr i nv 2rvus SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 553ZO December 14, 1988 Mr. Dave Hutton City Engineer Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN. 55379 Dear Mr. Hutton: in re: Pedestrian Underpass CSAR 17 I have your memo of November 15, 1988 and the letter from Bradley J. Larson, P.E., County Highway Engineer, dated November 10, 1988 regarding the pedestrian underpass under County State Aid Highway No.17. In the first place I seriously question the City's authority to enter in to any such broad and all inclusive guarantee and in addition to the ability to enter into such a broad agreement I question the advisability Certainly, an underground passageway should be illuminated and I would have no objection to the City undertaking the responsibility for doing so short of the broad terms of the guarantee suggested. On the other hand, I believe it is the County's responsibility to furnish safe pedestrian crossing over a highway and I do not feel that such safe crossing is the primary or even secondary responsibility of the City. I have no hesitancy in meeting and discussing this further with you and the County or anyone else who you so wish. Very truly yours, J ins A.nAttomey Shakopee JAC/nh SCOTT COUNTY ' HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST JORDAN, MN 553529339 (612)496-8346 BRADLEY J.LARSON Highway Engineer DANIEL M.JOBE Amt.Highway Engineer DON D.PAULSON November 10, 1988 Asst.Highway Engineer Mr. Dave Hutton City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Pedestrian Underpass CSAH 17 Dear Dave: We have reviewed the Upper Valley Drainage plan submitted with your Utility Permit application. We have no problems with the proposed storm sewer work . However, the proposal for a pedestrian underpass of CSAR 17 raises these concerns: 1) legal responsibilities and liabilities and 2) pedestrian safety. In light of these concerns, we have approved the Utility Permit for all work except the installation of the pedestrian underpass. This subject should be handled through a separate permit application. Our County Attorney's office and Risk Management have reviewed the pedestrian underpass concerns and have indicated the installation of the pedestrian underpass is acceptable if the following language is included as conditions of approval. 'The City of Shakopee shall install and maintain sufficient lighting in and around the pedestrian underpass site for the safety of individuals making use of the CSAR 17 pedestrian underpass. In accepting this approval, the City of Shakopee shall save and protect, hold harmless, indemnify and defend the County of Scott, its commissioners, officers, agents, employees and volunteer workers against any and all liability, causes of action, claims, loss, damages, or cost and expense arising from, allegedly arising from, or resulting directly or indirectly from the use by any individual of the CSAR 17 pedestrian underpass." An Equal Opportunity Employer Mr . Dave Hutton Re: Re: Pedestrian Underpass November 10, 1988 Page 2 If you wish to pursue this, please submit a Utility Permit Application including appropriate lighting, related plans and certified acceptance of the above condition of approval to this office. - If you have any questions or would like any further information, please contact this office. S Bradley J. Larson, P.E. County Highway Engineer BJL/kmg cc: Joe Ries, County Administrator Brian Nasi, Assistant Co. Attorney MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator II� FROM: Dave Hutton, City EngineetZPA'p' SUBJECT: Prior Lake - Spring Lake Outlet Channel DATE: December 23, 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses the outlet channel for the Prior Lake- Spring Lake Watershed District. BACKGROUND: In February, 1988 an arbitration panel ruled that the Prior Lake- Spring Lake Watershed District was required to perform certain maintenance items and repairs to the drainage channel prior to the City of Shakopee assuming the responsibility for that portion of the channel that was agreed to in the joint powers agreement. In addition to outlining the repairs necessary for the channel, the arbitrator ruled that all work must be completed by November 30, 1988. Prior to any work starting on the channel, plans were required to be submitted to the City for review and comment. The watershed district has not completed any of the repairs and since the deadline has expired, the Assistant City Attorney has applied to the district court for confirmation of the arbitration award. The watershed district has now submitted plans and specifications to the City for review and comment on repairing two of the four sections of the channel . In addition they have requested that the City Council extend their deadline for completing the repairs to July 1 , 1989. Attached is a letter from the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District outlining their proposal. The Assistant City Attorney has indicated that an extension of the deadline will not affect the current proceedings involving the arbitrator' s award of damages. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve of the watershed district ' s request for an extension of the deadline for completing all repairs to the drainage channel. 2. Deny the request. RECOMMENDATIONS: Since no construction can be done on this channel until next spring and since it will not affect the court proceedings in progress , staff does not see any problems with extending the deadline and recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Move that the appropriate City staff notify the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District that the City of Shakopee approves of their request to extend the deadline for completing repairs to the drainage channel until July 1 , 1989• DH/pmp CHANNEL PRIOR LAKE-SPRING LAKE WATERSHED DISTRICT I! r Don O. Benson Scott-Rice Telephone Bldg. Staff Coordinator 4690 Colorado St. S.E. (612) 447-4166 Prior Lake, MN 55372 • 13 December 16 , 1988 Mr. David Hutton Shakopee City Engineer 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379-1376 RE: Repairs to Prior Lake Outlet Channel Dear Mr. Hutton: This letter is written at your request relayed to our board of managers through the District's engineer, E.A. Hickok and Associates, to confirm certain aspects of your recent discussions with members of the engineering firm. we understand that you have met as recently as December 13 with Sill Wiedenbacher, Jim Mahady, and Kevin Larson regarding the status of the work ordered by the arbitrators, and that the engineers for Shakopee and the District agree the status as to each item is as follows. Schedule A. The District has accepted a bid for the work from Mahoney Machine. Mahoney apparently began work without a contract or notice from the engineer to proceed. Work was ordered stopped and a notice to proceed will not be given until Shakopee has approved the plans. You have indicated the plans will be approved when certain additional information is provided by Hickok. Schedule D. The work was advertised for bids according to plans previously submitted to you. The low bid was by Sheryl's Construction, but no contract has been awarded. You have made comments on the plans, to which Hickok will promptly respond. However, you have told the Hickok representatives that you do not see a problem with the District proceeding to award the contract. Schedules s and C. The final plans will shortly be submitted by Hickok to the District's board of managers, to be discussed at a meeting on December 19 . if those plans are approved by the managers, they will be immediately submitted to you for review. if Mr. David Hutton Page 2 December 16, 1988 The final plans will include statements of the easements needed, and to the extent they exceed the easements now in favor of Shakopee and the District, you have indicated that Shakopee will entertain consideration of exercising its "quick-take" powers (which a watershed district does not have) to acquire any addi- tional easements that cannot be negotiated with the landowners. Last and perhaps most important, we understand that you are in agreement that it is reasonable to change the deadline for completion of repairs from the end of November, 1988, to July 1, 1989. Please convey this to the City Council as a formal request of the Prior Lake-Spring Lake watershed District. We hope the recent meeting has given you sufficient assurances that this District is and has been diligently pursu- ing the repair work ordered by the arbitrators and that our engi- neering firm will move as quickly as possible to resolve any remaining issues on the plans at staff level. Yours truly, PRIOR LAKE-SPRING LAKE WATERSHED DISTRICT Marvin Oldenburg, Pres dent cc: Board of Managers Don O. Benson E.A. Hickok and Associates Phillip R. Krass, Esq. Huemoeller & Bates , CONSENT /.�. MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk CZ/ u RE: Official Newspaper DATE: December 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION: One of the actions which needs to be taken at the first Council meeting of the year is the designation of the official newspaper for the City of Shakopee. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to designate the Shakopee Valley News as the official newspaper for the City of Shakopee for the year 1989. JSC/t1V SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING 327 Mnascmu.ROAD,SMKOPEF MN 55379-PO Box 8- (612)445-3333 December 20, 1988 CEC- 2 _ i988 Cl+.I OF SHAKOPEE Ms.Judith Cox City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN, 55379 Dear Ms. Cox, please consider our request for appointment of the Shakopee Valley News as official newspaper for the City of Shakopee during 1989. Enclosed you will find a guide outlining our procedures and rates, as well as a copy of the form sent to the Secretary of State certifying our renewed status of being qualified to carry your legal notices. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you in the past. We hope you will see fit to continue that relationship in the coming year. Sinc®Rolrud Stan Publisher SR:tI enclosure Carver Coanty Herald•Eden Prairie News •Shakopee Valley News Jordan Independent• Prior Lake American • Chanhassen Villager FILE AFTER OCTOBER 1, 1988�XND ON OR BEFORE DECEMBER 31, 1988 APPLICATION FOR 1989 LEGAL NEWSPAPER STATUS NAME OF NEWSPAPER SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS MAILING ADDRESS Post Office Box 8, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 ADDRESS OF KNOWN OFFICE OF ISSUE 327 So. Marschall Rd. , Shakopee, Mn. 55379 COUNTY Scott PHONE 445-3333 I have attached the following documents pursuant toM.S. 331A.02, Subd. 1, and certify that I meet all of the qualifications of a legal newspaper under the statute: 1. XX A published copy of the U.S. Post Office 2nd Class Statement of Ownership and Circulation; OR, a published copy of the Statement of Owner- ship and Circulation verified by a recognized independent circulation auditing agency. 2. XX A filing fee of $25.00, made payable to the Secretary of State. *NOTE: You must comply wi and 2 above. ignature of Publisher Stan Rolfsrud AUTHORIZATION TO SERVE AS A LEGAL NEWSPAPER IN MINNESOTA I, Joan Anderson Growe, Secretary of State do hereby certify that the above listed publication has met the filing requirements of a legal newspaper for the year 1989, and may act as such as long as they shall fulfill the require- ments set forth in M.S. 331A.02 Subd. , 1. Joan Anderson Growe A INFORMATION FOR GOVERNMENTAL BODIES AND INDIVIDUALS USING THE LEGAL NOTICES SECTION OF THE SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS Deadlines: Notices to be published must be received in the office of the Shakopee Valley News by noon the Friday preceding each publication date. This deadline must be observed to ensure accurate and timely publication of important notices. Affidavits: One sworn affidavit of publication will be provided, upon request, without charge for each legal notice. Additional affidavits are available at $3.50 each. Additional clippings are available for $1.00 each. Late Fee: Urgent legal notices which do not arrive at the Shakopee Valley News office before the specified deadline may be accepted, at the publisher's discretion, but will have a late fee or surcharge of 25 percent added for special handling. Publication Requirements: Most specifications for legal notice publication,including the number of times o notice is to run, are set forth by statute. Interpretation of the statutes is the responsibility of the customer and its legal counsel,not the publisher. Guidelines for governmental bodies, prepared by the Minnesota Newspaper Association, are available upon request. Kill Fee: Publication of scheduled notices may be stopped,depending on how for the printing process has advanced. If a legal notice is killed before the initial publication date, the customer may still be liable for a special typesetting fee, not to exceed 30 percent of the cost of the published notice. The customer must pay on a pro data basis, for that part of a series of publications that have been completed before interruption by the customer. Errors: Publisher assumes no responsibility for errors in typesetting or scheduling of legal notices. In all cases, publisher's liability shall be limited to a "make good"of o defective notice if it can be demonstrated that the error was made by the publisher and that as a result of the error the legal notice was rendered invalid. Rates: Effective January 1, 1985, the Minnesota State Legislature authorized legal newspa- pers to charge for legal notices in the same manner in which they charge their best commercial display classified customers. That means that legal notices are billed by the column Inch, not by the "legal fine.' The law also restricts rate increases exceeding 10 percent per annum. SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial user..............................$7.13 per column inch Legal advertising/first Insertion.........................................................$5.30 per column inch Legal advertising/subsequent insertions..........................................$3.39 per column inch MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Nominations to Boards and Commissions DATE: December 29, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Some terms on City boards and commissions are expiring on January 31, 1989. Advertisements appeared in the Shakopee Valley News on November 24th, December 1st, and 22th inviting interested residents to consider serving on a board or commission and to submit an application. Letters were also sent to the Lions Club, Rotary Club, Jaycees and Chamber of Commerce. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the City's guidelines for appointments to boards and commissions, the interviewing committee interviewed thirteen candidates who applied for appointment to a board or commission. The committee, as reported to me by Dennis Kraft, is recommending the thirteen candidates for nomination: Randy Laurent, Debra Amundson, Jon Albinson, Frank Houser, Elmer Otto, Bill Anderson, John Roepke, John Schmitt, Jim Cook, Al £urrie, Jane DuBois, Lillian Abeln and Bob Tomczik. Two applicants were unable to attend either of the days when interviews were held, but are willing to attend at another time. They are Melanie Kahleck and Donna Roman. Melanie is on the Energy & Transportation Committee and the Downtown COmmittee. According to the City's rules, one can only serve on two committees at a time. Melanie would prefer to be on the Planning Commission over the Energy & Transportation Committee and over the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee. She would be willing to resign from either or both if appointed to the Planning Commission. Due to the resignation of Tim Keane from the Community Development Commission, there are three openings on the CDC. Two 3-year terms and one unexpired term ending January 31, 1991. Gary Scott has advised me that he would like to submit his name as applicant for the opening on the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. Any applications received between now and Tuesday will be placed on the Council table. ( Application from Jim Link received Friday) . Boards and commission and the number of vacancies occurring are as follows (names marked with an asterisk are incumbents) : PLANNING COMMISSION - one vacancy John Schmitt* Melanie Kahleck I 'c' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - three vacancies Al Furrie* Jane DuBois* Elmer Otto Debra Amundson Jon Albinson ENERGY & TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE - three-six vacancies Elmer Otto (or CDC) Donna Roman* CABLE COMMUNICATION ADVISORY COMMISSION - two vacancies Bill Anderson* Lillian Abeln* HOUSING ADVISORY & APPEALS BOARD - two vacancies Randy Laurent* Jim Link BUILDING CODE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS & APPEALS - TWO VACANCIES Randy Laurent* Jim Link SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION - one vacancy James Cook* Gary Scott SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY RECREATION - one vacancy Robert Tomczik Frank Houser POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION - one vacancy John Roepke* Pursuant to the City's guidelines, Council shall make nominations at their first meeting in January and make appointments at their second meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Make nominations to boards and commissions 2) Determine if and when the interview committee wishes to interview any nominees who have not yet been interviewed. I I �" MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk--,c-- RE: lerk"-camRE: 1989 Liaison Appointments DATE: December 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION• The attached lists the Council liaison appointments made in 1988. Council should consider and make appointments for 1989. In addition a Councilmember should be appointed to serve as an ex officio member on the Shakopee Valley Convention/Visitors Bureau. The Bureau meets on the 3rd Tuesday of the month from 8:00 to 9:00 or 9:30 a.m. Resolution No. 2667 adopted on December 16, 1986 provides that an employee may request a hearing before an appeal committee. The committee shall be comprised of two Councilmembers and the City Attorney. The Councilmembers names shall be drawn by lot on a case by case basis. There is no request for the establishment of this committee at this time. ACTION REOUESTED: 1. Appointment of Acting Mayor for 1989. 2. Make liaison appointments to: Shakopee Community Recreation Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Planning Commission Purchasing Committee Downtown Committee Sewer Backup Claims Committee (3 members) Shakopee Valley Convention/Visitors Bureau Ad Hoc Liaison to Police and Fire Departments JSC/tiv 1988 COUNCIL LIAISON APPOINTMENTS Vice Mayor Joe Zak Shakopee Community Recreation Gary Scott Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Jerry Wampach Planning Commission Joe Zak Purchasing Committee Gloria Vierling Joe Zak Downtown Committee Jerry Wampach Sewer Backup Claims Committee Jerry Wampach Steve Clay Gary Scott Shakopee Valley Convention/Visitors Bureau Steve Clay Ad Hoc Liaison to Police & Fire Departments Gary Scott CONSENT // k MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Easement for Lots 6 & 7, Block 22, OSP DATE: December 30, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is an easement agreement granting a property owner use of city right-of-way for as long as the existing building continues to stand, for property located at 118 So. Holmes. BACKGROUND: Attached is a letter from Mr. Steven Olson explaining that his building extends one foot into city right-of-way. He is proposing to renovate the building at 118 So. Holmes and has applied for a loan through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. In order to obtain the loan, Mr. Olson mustclear up the problem that his. building is located partially on property not owned by him. There are two alternatives that can be considered to accommodate Mr. Olson's problem. One is to vacate that part of gib-- ayar mtd rb &he ctrlxr±=-e is located. The other is to grant an easement to the property owner permitting the use of the property for as long as the building stands. The City Attorney has advised me that vacation is not the proper procedure, because the City has no need to vacate the area. The City has had s—2S ,h-2 situ�;.icxs tixSt�isti Chat csmmtu�:r the_ tvst, Tha second alternative, to grant an easement, has been used to resolve previous situations. It is my understanding that this alternative is acceptable to Mr. Olson. Mr. Olson has provided the City with the legal description of the area upon which the building protrudes into the alley. Mr. Collar has prepared the attached easement for Council's consideration as well as the resolution authorizing its execution - will be placed on Council table Tuesday. ALTERNATIVES: 1] Grant an easement to Mr. Olson 2] Vacate part of the alley - a public hearing must be held 3] Do nothing - Mr. Olson will not be able to obtain financing from Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and will therefore not be renovating the building RECOMMENDATION: Alternative No. 1, grant an easement to Mr. Olson. ACTION RECOMMENDED: Offer Resolution NO. 3006, A Resolution Authorizing the proper city officials to execute an easement for part of the alley in Block 22, original Shakopee Plat, and move its adoption. STEVEN D. OLSON 7947 COLLEEN CIRCLE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346 S Nl QTo pe r'� y 2� a - � Ua, IHA � Ir HAL r ' xTl©M P s 18 A Y - i ,KS 3CH A OOL i rr Ilk RESOLUTION #3006 A Resolution Authorizing the Making of an Easement Herein Described BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL in meeting assembled that the City of Shakopee, upon request, does hereby grant an easement to Steven D. Olson and Brenda Olson, husband and wife, over and across the Northerly 1.5 feet of the Esterly 120 feet of the alley in Block 22 adjacent to the South Half of Lots 6 and 7, Block 22 for such period of time that the brick structure on part of said alley remains thereon and when the structure is destroyed or otherwise removed, all rights granted hereby shall cease and terminate. . The proper City officials are hereby authorized and directed to make, execute and deliver said easement in conformity herewith. Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council held this day of 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 30th day of December, 1988 Attorney GRANT OF EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE Made this day of , 1989 by and between the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation, party of the first part, and Steven D. Olson and Brenda Olson, husband and wife, parties of the second part, WHEREAS, The party of the first part is a municipal corporation in the County of Scott and State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, According to the Plat of Shakapee City, Block 22 has an alley running through the center thereof from east to west; and WHEREAS, About 1880 a brick building was constructed on the south part of Lots 6 and 7 of said Block 22, which structure extends into the alley by 1.5 feet; and WHEREAS, The said parties of the second part have requested an easement over said northerly 1.5 feet of said alley. THEREFORE, The parties hereto do covenant, agree and grant as follows: In Consideration of $1.00 paid by said second parties to first party, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, said first party grants to said second parties, their successors, heirs and assigns, an easesment over and across the northerly 1.5 feet of the alley in Block 22 immediately adjacent to and south of the South Half of said Lots 6 and 7, Block 22, excepting therefrom the following described tract, to-wit: Beginning at a point on the northeast comer of the South Half of - said Lot 6; running thence West 30 feet; thence South 20 feet; thence East 30 feet; thence North 20 feet to the place of beginning. The purpose of said easement is to grant permission to the parties of the second part, their heirs, successors and assigns, to occupy said property for the support and location of their two-story building on the South Half of Lots 6 and 7 as above described and extending into the alley adjacent to said property and in particularly described as: The northerly 1.5 feet of the easterly 120 feet of said alley for such period of time as said structure or any part thereof rests on said land. Whenever said structure is destroyed or otherwise removed, all rights and permission granted shall cease and terminate. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said first party executes this agreement by Dolores Lebens, Mayor, Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator, and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk, by authority of the Shakopee City Council; and the said second parties Steven D. Olson and Brenda Olson, husband and wife, do execute this agreement all as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF SHAKOPEE - By Mayor By Acting City Administrator By City Clerk Steven D. Olson Brenda Olson STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this _ day of 1989 by Dolores Lebens, Mayor, Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk, on behalf of the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Notary Public, Scott County, MN STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 1989 by Steven D. Olson and Brenda Olson, husband and wife. Notary Public, Scott County, MN. IlL msw m ® m mmm m mm m m m m ti m i m y _ N uNW _ r nnn i . w mW m m m m m m m m mmm e w w w ww w ww w w w m w m msF s ww n : w a c $ • u -a w am a s y W u W W m m mm m m m mmmmm m m m m m Npm N ~ CCTT7T CCCCC r V NNje o'000eoo s m x i � � m s:'sc iii o OAn� y� W < = Po W SO O r rOm �O M qm �n mm � om:m Ho owoommmmmmmmmmmmmw 4 C' W F F N F FFFX F F F F F F FFF F W W W W F F F F F a �O Y W W W �O w w W N �O �O �O ♦O �O �O M W N w Y r r r N o w w Y r O N 0000 �p p N N N W NNN N w W w H N N Y Y N M N r 0 0 0 VI 0000 Y r W y y Y . . . Y r Y r r . . OO N N O O y P, r i0 �p 0 0 0 0 000 O O O O p O O �n vl O 9 O O N N O O W"� W r r 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m O O 0 0 Y r O o r W N r Y Y O O o 0 000 O O O O O O o w m O n 0 O O N N O O y Y Y y �O �p O O O O p O O O O o 0 0 0 0 F F 0 M O O N N O O win�nw Y r 0 0 0 0 000..0 O O o 0 0 0 r r 0 a 3 V N H m m o o m m w00w 0 0 m "m m m mmm m m m m m m m vmi vmi m n Y r Y r Y r Y Y Y Y r Y Y r Y r Y r r Y Y Y r Y Y r Y r Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H Y Y r r Y r r r r r r r r r Y Y Y r r r Y r Y Y r r r r A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a '0 n a r w a • IF {6 � H N y vl y�O w F Y F N m 9 m 0 0 W tHv W m W F Y �D Y y y F F F F r �O N N O O m vl O F Y O N my Y w F m O\ VI y F�y Y m �n VI F O W �n y V1 C O �O O N m y 0 F N y vl 0 0 r tW O vl " r� N O O F N w �n O Ot y F 0 W�* O* �, vl O vl m O O W�, Y m W o 0 Y N O a y 0 O y �O Y o w r Y W �O 0 F r 0 0 0 0 r N O O O vl O W y 0 0 0 n 0 -3 m ro = 4 r of = = . m = 0 m a1 x www:v m 0 n 0 n - N o o . ry� a N H H a N C o N M O 0 0 0 C m 0 5 m '.1 W H W a W a C1 a a a F-1 M FI Qq W W W W ro N3 y 0 G A Y a O.�< 9 y O 0 9 H H a H 0 O O � O 3 O N y < G 9 N N N N N N N N N N N IO N N M N N NNN N N N N N N N N N N O y y y y y y yyyy y y y y y y yyy y y y y y y y y y y F m Vml m W N m 0000 m N m w F www N N o b m N 0 X W 2 0 a a C O a m _ O O M [+J pJ tl W W O O a '< a 3 Z N O a a 0 a M 0 a a a m lv N a a s O H a U 0 O S c m IN N h n m o az aZ o Ir H 0 a 3 x a y O Y a a a S Y Y S a 'l.' N a •< F` ca! a a a a M R' b0 a F 1 I N T. O Cy t^ a C] O a C N m a y Y N A O µ a a M 3 a 9 < N M m r a a a - ti r N 9 0 W F m y o 0 � m VI O F r 0 0W F m O\ N y m r m VI VI F O w VI y vl O � O N m y 00 O O r W O m N O O X N F Y O �O W O Q\ y F O W 0 0 O m O VI m O 0 W m W O O Y r m �O N O y 0 y i0 Y 0 F r 0 0 r N 0 0 0 vl O W y 0 0 J G Y U S TIi t y J 7 sI 0 COI �I c c c b s - �' C N N 0.300 W �DN� Il�00 � Hf O U V C O W Y •i I .I Y � v C ]p Y W W W Pi N E O O Gow F 4 N H O T V O V W D\Y W b N E O .i W O+ W N E 4l I I I I I U ZW Opp New A V 6 Y G A4 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Salary for Acting City Administrator - 1989 DATE: December 29, 1988 Introduction The City Council adopted a pay plan on December 20, 1988 for the calendar year 1989. Subsequent to this action the Personnel Coordinator asked what the 1989 salary should be for the Acting City Administrator. Background I was appointed Acting city Administrator on Step 6 of the City Administrator's position with a monthly salary of $4,470. 00. The new pay plan does not have any step with a monthly amount of $4,470.00. Therefore, if the City Council wants to take some action for calendar year 1989 relative to the salary of the Acting City Administrator this action should be taken at this time. Alternatives 1. Make no change in the existing salary. 2. Change the salary from $4,470.00 per month to the nearest step (Step 5) on the 1989 pay plan and reduce the monthly salary to $4,452. 00. 3. Have the position remain on Step 6 of the 1989 pay plan at a salary of $4,689.00 per month. 4. Increase the salary by only the standard cost of living increase of 3.5% which was granted other non-union employees which would result in a salary of $4, 626.00 per month. Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council discuss this issue and make a determination for the salary rate for the Acting City Administrator for calendar year 1989. Action Recommended Move to establish an amount of $ per month as compensation for the Acting City Administrator for calendar year 1989. Memo to: Shakopee City Council From: LeRoy F. Houser, Building Official Subject : Abandoned Women' s Reformatory Date: 12/29/88 Introduction As you are aware, I have attempted to bring to a head the final disposition of the abandoned women' s prisons. i Background This facility has, for all practical purposes, been abandoned and is in a state of disrepair. It is what is commonly referred to as an "attractive nuisance" . It has the potential because of abandonment, of being further vandalized or being torched which in either case , will be a drain on the Shakopee tax payers. Contrary to what Chief Brownell was quoted in the Shakopee Valley News, it is not secured, neither the building or the site. What I reported is an accurate depiction of the condition existing on site. There are broken windows hanging in the sash which could very easily pose a hazard to adventuresome young people in the area. Access to this building in its present state could easily be obtained from ground level . I , personally was on site both on 12/23/88 and 12/28/88 in the evening without being challenged either by prison officials or the local police. Is that secured? Irrespective, the present conditions of the buildings are a attractive nuisance, a fire hazard and detrimental to the property values of the properties in the immediate area and is a blight on our community as a whole. I have been contacted by both the Attorney Generals office and Senator Ramstad's office. The AG' s office wanted to know if we would accept a stipulation agreement whereby they would have the .building secured until the 1989 Legislature would appropriate the funds to have the building demolished. I told them that was a political decision that I could not make and it would be up to Council . Senator Ramstad's aid said the Senator was very disappointed with the State for letting this facility fall into this state of disrepair. They want to know how the community would feelaboutrehabilitating the facility, bringing it up to code and use it for a maximum security juvenile detention center. I also informed him that also was a political decision Council has to make. After 2.5 years , I think we will see something finally done Council , page two. with this problem if, Council wants something done. I personally believe we can present a good enough case in court if need be to have the building raised. I would suggest we proceed under MSA 463. 15. It is a State statute which regulates the use , maintenance, repair and demolition of substandard buildings. I can not imagine the State of Minnesota being exempt from their own laws. I am a little concerned with Chief Brownells newspaper comments, it may very well jeopardize our position in court and/or with the legislative finance committee as he does represent the law enforcement agency in Shakopee which understandably has more credibility then the Inspection Dept. Council should decide what action is most responsive to the tax payers and community needs, (1) Status quo, (2) Proceed with condemnation, (3) accept a stipulation ag eement with the AG's office, (4) Support Senator Ramstad's proposal on rehabilitation of the facility for juveniles which, will meet a need, provide jobs, save the State tax payers a considerable amount of money vis-a-vis constructing a new facility for juveniles and provide more jobs in the City. Action requested/Alternatives/suggestions I am not requesting any action in view of the difference of opinion between Brownell and myself. It is a political decision Council should make, my dept. has layed the ground work for four possible alternatives. Please advise on the course of action you decide on. f it STATE OF MINNESOTA I ( 'hl/OE c. o! THR ATTOHSRY GRSHR.\1. ADDRESS REPLY TO : a1100 RREMER TOWER HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, III sT. PAUL 55155 SE Pmm M AN aMiNNESOTA ST. ATTORNEY GENERAL December 29, 1988 TELEPHONE:161215949112 Mr. LeRoy Houser Building Official City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 Dear Mr. Houser: I am writing to you as a result of our telephone conversation on December 28, 1988, and in response to your December 22, 1988 letter to Jacqueline Fleming. We discussed the authority of the City of Shakopee (the "City" ) to make the request that it did in its letter. You indicated that the request was made pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 463. 15 (1986) . We then discussed an alternative to the commencement of abatement proceedings. I indicated to you that the Department of Corrections intends to ask at the upcoming legislative session for money in its next budget sufficient to allow it to raze and remove the old prison structures. You indicated that if the Department agreed to make this request and in the interim agreed to board up those buildings, the City would not feel obligated to commence abatement proceedings. I indicated to you that I would present these options to Commissioner Pung and would communicate with you as soon as I receive his response. This I will do. Very truly yours, A"tact� Assistant Attorney General RLV,Jr:ddj cc: Mr. Orville B. Pung Commissioner Department of Corrections Ms. D. Jacqueline Fleming Superintendent Minnesota Correctional Facility Mr. James B. Zellmer Director Institution Support Services Department of Corrections V.Cp8 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER .® ,sI January 2, 1989 $1.50 per issue, $15 per s ® I • CRAIN'S NATIONAL NEWSPAPER OF PUBLIC BUSINESS & FINANCE e Entire contents copyright 1989 by Crain Communications Inc.All rights reserved. 22 e - e r The Minnesota Department of Corrections says it will ' ask the Legislature for monev to tear down the old Shakopee woman's prison, which the city of Shakopee threatens to condemn. The old tour-building prison has been vacant since 1986,when the state aban- doned it and opened a new correctional facility for women across the street. The city wants the buildings torn down within 30 days, and claims the old prison is a dangerous nuisance,reduces property values in the area and attracta vandals.Assistant Corrections Commissioner Dan O'Brien said the state has made an effort to dispose of the old prison buildings,trying unsuccessfully to sell the property to Shake- pee hako-pee and Scott County.Mr.O'Brien said the department will continue trying to sell the buildings, but also will ask the Legislature, which convenes Jan. 3, for money to remove the buildings. He estimated it - would cost about$200,000 to $250,000 to tear them down and grade and sod the land. Compiled and written by City&State staff with contributions from United Press International. IID MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Appointment of Managers to the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District DATE: December 29, 1988 Introduction The Scott County Board of Commissioners will be considering the appointment of two managers for the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District. If the City Council would like to submit any recommendations for appointments a decision should be made at the meeting of January 3, in that this item will be on the County Board agenda for January loth. Background If the city Council desires to place someone on this Board for the three year term which expires in March of 1992 this is the appropriate time for this recommendation. Alternatives 1. Submit a name to the Scott County Board for membership on the Watershed District. 2. Take no action on this item. Action Requested Move to appoint to be considered for appointment to the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District for a three year term expiring March 3, 1992. DRK/jms SCOTT COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 7A COURTHOUSE 109Nd I V SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1382 (612)997-614 496-8100 JOHN F.CASEY,District 5,Chairman R.E.MERTZ,District 3,Vice Chairman WM.KONIARSKI,District 1 DALLAS BOHNSACK,District 2 MARK H.STROMWALL,District 4 December 6, 1988 To: All Government Jurisdictions in the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District - Cities of Savage, Shakopee and Prior Lake; Spring Lake Township, Sand Creek Township From: Jane FCo. Hansen - Scott unty R ording Secretary Subject: Appointment of Managers pursuant. to Minnesota Statute 112.42, the Board of Commissioners for Scott County will be considering appointments for two Managers of the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District following the recent resignation of Harold Gustafson and the upcoming expiration of the term of Marvin Oldenburg on March 3, 1989. No person shall be appointed who is not a voting resident of the watershed district, and none shall be a public officer of the County, State or Federal government, except that a soil and water conservation district supervisor may be appointed as a manager. The appointments are for 3-year terms which expire March 3, 1992. The Board of Commissioners requests that you submit your recommendations for appointments for Manager as soon as possible, since this item will be on the Board agenda on January 10, 1989. Please contact your Commissioner, or submit your recommendation to the County Administrator's Office. Thank you. cc: Chairman of the Board PL/SL Watershed District Liaison Co. Attorney Co. Administrator File: PL/SL Watershed District An Equal Opportunity Employer lib MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineee�`J�'1�.. SUBJECT: Alley in Block 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition DATE: December 23 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3002, Receiving a Report and Calling a Public Hearing on Improvements to the Alley in Block 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition. BACKGROUND: On December 20 , 1988 City Council accepted a petition and ordered the preparation of a feasibility report for improvements to the alley in Block 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition by Resolution No. 2997 . The feasibility report has been completed and thereportis attached for Council review. Attached is Resolution No. 3002 receiving the feasibility report and calling for a public hearing on the proposed improvements. The resolution sets the date of the public hearing for January 17, 1988 at 7: 45 P.M. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3002 and hold a public hearing on the proposed improvements on January 17 , 1989. 2. Do no adopt Resolution No. 3002. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3002, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvements to the Alley in Block 7 of the Jasper and Smith Addition, Project No. 1989-3 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3002 RESOLUTION NO. 3002 A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing On Improvement To The Alley in Block 7 Of the Jasper h Smith Addition WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2997 of the City Council adopted December 20 , 1987 , a report has been prepared by David Hutton, City Engineer, with reference to the improvements of the Alley in Block 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition by Bituminous Pavement, and this report was received by the Council on January 3 , 1989 . 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 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition 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 $10 ,395 .00 . 2 . A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 17th day of January 17 , 1989 , at 7: 45 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 1989-3 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 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF ALLEY IN BLOCK 7 JASPER h SMITH ADDITION CITY OF SHAKOPEE MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my diect supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of _ Minnesota. (\'� /J I / C c7F +�'tu `»Ni Date 4, 7eR� Registration No. 19133. DECEMBER 1988 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 INTRODUCTION The City Council of the City of Shakopee has received a petition for improvements of the alley in Block 7 of the Jasper and Smith Addition, and ordered the preparation of a feasibility report by Resolution No. 2997 on December 20, 1988. BACKGROUND The alley under study is in Block 7 of the Jasper and Smith Addition, which is bounded by Atwood Street, Scott Street, 10th Avenue and Shakopee Avenue. City Council received a petition for improvements and ordered a feasibility report prepared via Resolution No. 2997 on December 20 , 1988 . The petition was signed by 11 of the 16 abutting property owners. The existing alley is gravel, with no other street improvements. There are no underground City or utilities in this alley There is an overhead power line running along the west edge of the alley. There are concrete approaches at both ends of the alley. The area on both sides of the alley is zoned R-2 , Urban Residential. None of the abutting properties are in the flood plain. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The requested improvements by the petitioners is to pave the alley. The recommended improvements by this report would consist of 2 inches of bituminous concrete placed on a 6 inch gravel base. Some grading will be necessary to provide a uniform grade with proper drainage. An inverted crown in proposed to direct the water down the alley towards 10th or Shakopee Avenue. The alley presently drains generally from the south to the north. Staff also anticipates replacing the concrete approaches at each end of the alley. 1 ESTIMATED COSTS The estimated costs for the proposed improvements are detailed in _ the Appendix and are summarized below: Total Construction Costs $ 7,560.00 Plus 10% Contingency 756 .00 Plus 15% Engr. & Legal Fees 2.079 .00 Total Estimated Project Costs $10,395.00 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 $9 .24 per front foot, based on the estimated project costs. The assessment costs for each property are summarized in the Appendix. According to the Finance Director, the funding for this project L. could come out of the General Fund or the Capital Improvemment Fund or the next improvement bond issue which includes 3rd Avenue L Reconstuction- and C.R. 17 sidewalk since the project costs are 100% assessable. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The alley in Block 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition 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 50%) 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 I� APPENDIX Subject Location 1 — Estimated Project Costs 2 Assessment Calculations 3-4 I �% } \ � / Ev�" ij \ \ \ , 1 Ilk- 29 -- m ����\ 2 k ��_q��� --4 81 Etc ,0 I SUBJECT ALLEY 10 ESTIMATED COSTS ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL Common Excavation 400 C.Y. $ 3 .00 $1 ,200 .00 Fine Grading, Clearing L.S. $ 500.00 $ 500 .00 Remove Cone. Approaches 100 S.F. $ 1 .00 $ 100 .00 Class 5 Gravel Base 370 TON $ 6 .50 $2,405 .00 2" 2341 Bit. Wear 135 TON $ 23 .00 $3 ,105 .00 8" Cone. Approach 10 S.Y. $ 25 .00 $ 250 .00 Total Construction Costs $7 ,560 .00 Plus 10% Contingency $ 756 .00 Plus 25% Engr. , Legal Fees $2 ,079 .00 Total Estimated Project Costs $10,395 .00 _ 2 ASSESSMENT TABLE y 1 ! 1 FRONT 1 PROPOSED PID ! PROPERTY OWNER 1 DESCRIPTION 1 FOOTAGE 1 ASSESSMENT i I i i 27012041-0 !Donald J. & Esther L. Weickert I ! 1 1906 S. Atwood Street !Lot 1 , Blk. 7 1 70 i $646 .70 !Shakopee, MN 55379 27012042-0 (Roger R. Bench 1912 S. Atwood Street [Lot 2, Blk. 7 1 70 ! $646 .74 !Shakopee, MN 55379 i i I ! 27-012043-0 (William E. Menden & Wife ! I 1926 Atwood Street (Lot 3 , Blk. 7 1 70 i $646 .71 (Shakopee, MN 55379 ! I I I i 27-012044-0 !Einar C. & Joann M. Odland i 1934 S. Atwood Street !Lot 4, Blk. 7 1 70 I $646 .7L !Shakopee, MN 55379 1 ! I I ! 27 012045-0 !Daniel L. & Elaine C. Hier ! I _ 1940 S. Atwood Street !Lot 5 , Blk. 7 1 70 I $646 .7L !Shakopee, MN 55379 - 1 i i ! I ! ! 27 012046-0 !Brian S. & Kathleen H. Benz 1952 Atwood Street !Lot 6 , Blk. 7 1 70 ! $646 .74 !Shakopee, MN 55379 ! i 27L012047-0 !Gilbert J. Delbow & Wife I ! i 1962 Atwood Street !Lot 7 , Blk. 7 1 70 ! $646 .74 !Shakopee, MN 55379 ! ! ! 27=012048-0 !Grace M. Gibson 1308 Walnut !Lot 8 , Blk. 7 1 72 .55 1 $670.3C !Chaska, MN 55318 ! I ! ! ! ! ! ! ` 3 ASSESSMENT TABLE I � i ! i FRONT 1 PROPOSED PID 1 PROPERTY OWNER I DESCRIPTION 1 FOOTAGE i ASSESSMENT 27312049-0 ;Randall J. Weckm an 1907 S. Scott Street ]Lot 9 , Blk. 7 1 70 ! $646 .74 ]Shakopee, MN 55379 27-012050-0 !Robert J. & Rebecca A. Snell 1915 Scott Street !Lot 10, Blk. 7 1 70 ! $646 .74 IShakopee, MN 55379 ! ] ] 27-012051-0 ]Walter C. Goetz & Wife ! I ] 1923 S. Scott Street !Lot 11 , Blk. 7 1 70 ! $646 .74 IShakopee, MN 55379 ] ] 27-012052-0 !Stanley J. VonBokern & Wife 1933 S. Scott Street ]Lot 12, Blk. 7 1 70 1 $646 .74 - IShakopee, MN 55379 ! 27 312053-0 !Jerome F. Hennen & Wife ] - 1943 S. Scott Street (Lot 13 , Blk. 7 1 70 ! $646 .74 IShakopee, MN 55379 I 1 1 271012054-0 (James P. Hennen & Wife ! ! ! 1951 S. Scott Street ILot 14, Blk. 7 1 70 I $646 .74 !Shakopee, MN 55379 ] ! 1 ! ! 27012055-0 !Eldred J. Menden & Wife 1963 S. Scott !Lot 15, Blk. 7 1 70 ] $646 .74 !Shakopee, MN 55379 ! 1 1 i 27=012056-0 !Lawrence A. Vierling & Wife I ! I 1971 S. Scott Street !Lot 16, Blk. 7 ] 72.55 ] $670.30 !Chaska, MN 55318 ] I ! ! ] ] ] ! ! $10,395.00 Assessment Computations Assessment Rate = Total Estimated Cost Total Frontage _ $10,395.00 = $9 .24/FT. 1 ,125. 10 FT. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 3003 A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing On Improvement To 5th Avenue From Fillmore Street to Market Street WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2991 of the City Council adopted December 3 , 1988 , a report has been prepared by David Hutton, City Engineer, with reference to the improvements of the 5th Avenue between Fillmore Street and Market Street by sewer , water, curb & gutter and pavement, and this report was received by the Council on January 3 , 1989 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . The Council will consider the improvement of 5th Avenue between Fillmore Street and Market Street 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 $353 ,400 .00 . , 2 . A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 7th day of February, 1989 , 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 1989-4 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 1,2, � MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: 5th Avenue from Fillmore Street to Market Street DATE: December 23 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3003 Receiving a Report and Calling for a Public Hearing on Improvements to 5th Avenue between Fillmore Street and Market Street. BACKGROUND: On December 3 , 1988 City Council accepted a petition and ordered the preparation of a feasibility report for improvements to 5th Avenue between Fillmore Street and Market Street by Resolution No. 2991 • The proposed improvements consist of sewer, water, curb & gutter and bituminous pavement. The feasibility report has been completed and the report is attached for Council review. Attached is Resolution No. 3003 receiving the feasibility report and calling for a public hearing on the proposed improvements. The resolution sets the date of the public hearing for February 7 , 1989 at 7:30 P.H. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3003 and hold a public hearing on the proposed improvements on February 7 , 1989 • 2. Do not adopt Resolution No. 3003 • RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3003 , A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvements to 5th Avenue from Fillmore Street to Market Street, Project 1989-4 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3003 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF 5TH AVENUE BETWEEN MARKET STREET AND FILLMORE STREET IN SECTION 6 RANGE 22 TOWNSHIP 115 — SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, 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 Minnesota. �} � >> Date Registration No. 19133• DECEMBER 1988 TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. Feasibility Report Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-2 Sanitary Sewer Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 2-7 Watermain Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-12 Street and Storm Sewer Analysis . . . . . . 13-15 Right of Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Recommendations & Conclusions . . . . . . . 16-17 Special Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-19 5th Avenue Spencer to Fillmore . . . . . . . 20-21 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Appendix Location Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -2 Cost Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8 — Petition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 _ Cl/ INTRODUCTION The City Council of the City of Shakopee ordered the preparation of a feasibility report by Resolution No. 2991 on December 6 , 1988 for street improvements to 5th Avenue between Market Street and Fillmore Street in Section 6, Range 22 , Township 115 in Scott County, Minnesota. BACKGROUND A petition was received and accepted by the City Council on December 6 , 1988 for street improvements to 5th Avenue, between _ Fillmore and Market Streets. The requested improvements consist of sewer, water, curb and gutter and bituminous pavement. The proposed 5th Avenue is situated in an unplatted area of Shakopee, but is bounded on the west by the Original Plat of Shakopee and to the south by Wermerskirchen' s 2nd Addition. Currently , this portion of 5th Avenue is unimproved with very little development in the immediate vicinity. The terrain is mostly meadow with relatively flat slopes draining generally to the north and east. An abandoned railroad bed runs diagonally through the area from northwest to southeast. No right-of-way has been obtained by the City of Shakopee either by purchase or dedication for this portion of 5th Avenue. The area is zoned R-2, Urban Residential. None of the affected properties are within the flood plain. - SCOPE This report investigates the feasibility of extending 5th Avenue from Fillmore to Market Street. In evaluating the preliminary design for the sewer and water in 5th Avenue it was necessary to expand the report to include additional utilities in portions of Main Street and Market Street. Several sewer and water options were analyzed which in turn created several roadway options. Cost estimates were developed for all alternatives. ` 1 This report makes a recommendation on the overall preferred option to adequately extend 5th Avenue and complete the sewer and water systems according to City design criteria. An estimated assessment roll was prepared based on the recommended alternative. In addition, that portion of 5th Avenue between Spencer and Fillmore Streets is currently a gravel road. To extend 5th from Fillmore to Market without addressing the block just west of _ Fillmore would result in all of 5th Avenue being completely upgraded except for that one block section. This report was expanded to include the feasibility of also upgrading 5th Avenue between Spencer and Fillmore. Since this portion was not included in the original petition, Council would need to order this project. SANITARY SEWER ANALYSIS Design Criteria and Alternatives: The existing sanitary sewers in the immediate area are shown on the following diagram. Basically, the existing sewer terminates on 5th Avenue at Fillmore Street and at 6th and Main. There are no sewers in Market Street between 4th and 7th. A preliminary design of the proposed sewer on 5th Avenue was done in accordance with the City of Shakopee Standard Design Criteria. It is proposed that an 8 inch PVC sanitary sewer will be required to serve this area . The minimum depth allowed for a sanitary sewer is 9 feet. Due to the topography and depth of existing sewers , it is impossible to design the sewer completely in 5th Avenue and have it flow in one direction. From approximately Main Street, the sewer must flow both east and west in order to maintain a depth _ of 9 feet. To construct the sewer on 5th Avenue from Main Street east, it will be necessary to construct a sewer on Market Street from at least 5th Avenue to 4th Avenue. Eventually, the sewer in Market Street will need to be extended south to 6th Avenue to serve the area. A separate report is being prepared to address the upgrading of Market Street but in order to complete this report, the sanitary sewer in Market Street needed to be included. Several options were developed to adequately complete the sewer system as shown on the following diagrams. Option No. 1 is the preferred option , because then the entire area would have sanitary sewer service available. Option No. 2 is the minimum 2 C/ I � needed to complete 5th Avenue through to Market Street. Option No. 3 is available if 5th Avenue were only constructed from Fillmore Street to Main Street. To adequately provide sewer service to Lots 1 and 2 of Block 30, of Wermerskirchen' s 2nd Addition, a sewer extension will also be required from 6th and Main north to the alley just north of 6th Avenue. This sewer is being proposed by a private developer and is not included in this report. — Cost Estimates• The estimated costs of the various sanitary sewer options are as follows: Option No. 1 Construction Costs $ 92 ,600.00 Plus 10% Contingency 9,300.00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 23 .100.00 Total Cost Estimate $125,000.00 Option No. 2 Construction Costs $ 67,600.00 Plus 10% Contingency 6,800.00 ` Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 16.900.00 Total Cost Estimate $ 91 ,300.00 Option No. 3I Construction Costs $ 18,600.00 Plus 10% Contingency 1 ,800.00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 4.500.00 Total Cost Estimate $ 24,400.00 Detailed cost estimates for each sanitary sewer option are found in the appendix. Special Assessments: It is proposed that all benefited properties be assessed for the sanitary sewer on an area wide basis. Each proposed alternative benefits a different area. Although Option No. 1 has the highest cost, it also benefits the largest area. A rough comparison of each sewer assessment can be calculated as follows: 3 Option No. 1 Total Cost Estimate = $125.000 .00 = $10 , 113 .27 per acre Total Benefited Area 12 .36 Acres Option No. 2 Total Cost Estimate = $ 91 .300.00 = $9 , 148.27 per acre Total Benefited Area 9 .98 Acres _ Option No. 3 Total Cost Estimate - _ $ 24.400 .00 = $6 , 100 .00 per acre Total Benefited Area 4 .0 Acres A final assessment roll will be prepared at the conclusion of this report based on the recommended alternative for each phase. _ q �. s EXISTING SANITARY SEWER Z 8 5 z A 3 s a _ g _ ( - I telly I io £r �£ Q4 HIAWATHA _ PAaIT x C - � 5 3 I IT - � iil ! 1 ! 1 1 . --- / cn N c „ W a i O • z P z m � 0 y m _ c Sao ■ �I iP. m a O c 1 N c//. V�� � m u' ■ p L ST. ?ay o L tl:RKST 1-■■■■■■■■■■■■ 1I _ LO lv1. N m P = - W L w w- _ n u - y � z O N N m K -- � i L _ . L MARKET ST- — N T ~ I j Lw _ L .. N m �' �' W � � m ? ➢ �1 a a n a m. LrA' N 2 ST x 17,e0` W T T � W - ➢ -- L MARKET ST N it �p 7 � o D l2'ri wATERMAIN ANALYSIS Design Alternatives: The existing watermains in this area are shown on the following diagram. The proposed watermain is designed in accordance with the Shakopee Public Utility Commission Design Criteria. Basically, their criteria requires the completion of a watermain grid system and avoiding "dead-end" mains. A 6 inch ductile iron watermain is proposed in 5th Avenue. In order to satisfy the looping requirement of SPUC, the proposed watermain in 5th Avenue must connect to another proposed watermain in Market Street between 5th and 4th. This watermain in Market Street will be needed anyway to serve properties along Market Street that are currently on well system or 1 112 inch copper lines. Eventually, the watermain should be extended completely on Market Street from 4th to 7th Avenues. A separate report is being prepared to address the upgrading of Market Street to include utilities, but to adequately complete the loops they are also addressed in this report. The cost estimate for any watermain installed in Market Street includes street restoration. In addition, a watermain should be installed in Main Street to complete that loop. A portion of that watermain is proposed to be installed by a private developer. Refer to the following drawings for the proposed watermain options. Again Option No. 1 is the preferred option in order to provide the entire area with available City water. Option No. 2 is the minimum needed to complete 5th Avenue to Market Street. Option No. 3 is for completing 5th Avenue to Main Street only. Cost Estimates• The estimated cost of each watermain option is as follows: Option No. 1 Construction Costs $ 68,700.00 L Plus 10% Contingency 6,900 .00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 17 .200 .00 � Total Cost Estimate $ 92,800.00 L E _ U — Option No. 2 Construction Costs $ 29 , 100 .00 — Plus 10% Contingency 2 ,900 .00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 7 .300 .00 Total Cost Estimate $ 39,300.00 Option No. 3 Construction Costs $ 19 ,300.00 Plus 10% Contingency 1 ,900 .00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 4 .800 .00 Total Cost Estimate $ 26,000.00 Detailed cost estimates for each watermain option are found in the appendix. Special Assessments: It is proposed to assess all benefited properties on an area wide basis. Any oversizing costs or costs associated strictly with looping the system are typically absorbed by SPUC and not — assessable. The cost estimate for each option below will be slightly less than shown once the "looping" costs are deducted. Each option benefits a different area. Although Option No. 1 has the highest costs, it also benefits the largest area. — A rough comparison of each watermain assessment can be calculated as follows: Option No. 1 - Total Cost Estimate = $ 92 .800 .00 = $7 ,278 .43 per acre Total Benefited Area 12 .75 Acres _ Option No. 2 Total Cost Estimate = $ 19 ,300 .00 = $5,654.68 per acre Total Benefited Area 6 .95 Acres Option No. 3 _ Total Cost Estimate = $ 26 .000 .00 = $5 ,416 .67 per acre Total Benefited Area 4 .8 Acres A final assessment roll based on the preferred option is included at the conclusion of this report. - 9 I Ie. l I EXISTING WATERMAIN o 0. A /L _ 0 I I 6fft,o E f� I Q cl 9 IJ 6 h HIAWATHA _ PARK '117 �Qv r 5 3 3 3 3 zo l I ^� =a N rQ on Magi P M:. N i 'L x N 7CO W� n z I f/:kKET 5T. ro i _ yQyr�'� ; +•••��,.•�!i�l� moi. La w -` Z O r r � ` MARKET ST - L N n n v va 'n r I L -- - - ti u m.' n n r ML N ST. �7•e�° _ iy s N N— n 5 ! z No Go r so I ' r LIFAkKET ST. - . I - � tn 1 12 � n STREET AND STORM SEWER ANALYSIS Design Alternatives: The proposed street will be designed in accordance with Standard City of Shakopee Design Criteria. It is proposed that a 7 ton, local street should be constructed to a standard pavement width of 36 feet. Standard B618 curb and gutter is proposed . According to current design criteria, sidewalk is not required and none is proposed. Preliminary calculations indicate that the proposed street should drain from west to east. There is existing storm sewer in Market Street. It is proposed that the storm sewer in 5th Avenue would connect to the storm sewer in Market Street. Several alternative street alignments are proposed as shown on �— the following diagram. The proposed street options are based on providing adequate sewer and water systems as discussed earlier in this report as well as proving adequate storm water drainage. Option No. 1 is to construct 5th completely from Fillmore to Market Street and also Main Street from 5th to the existing street north of 6th Avenue. Another option would be to omit that portion of 5th between Main Street and Market Street. The reason for considering this opt-ion is based on the sewer and water options. If sewer and water are installed in this segment, they must also be installed in Market Street. Option No. 1 is the preferred option based on the preferred sewer and water options. Cost Estimates The estimate costs for each street option is as follows: Option No. 1 Street Costs $ 52,000.00 Storm Sewer Costs 17.400.00 Total Construction Costs $69,400.00 Plus 10% Contingency 6,900 .00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 17 .300.00 Total Cost Estimate $ 93,600.00 Option No. 2 Street Costs $ 29,100.00 Storm Sewer Costs 14.600.00 Total Construction Costs $43 ,700.00 ` Plus 10% Contingency 4,400.00 Plus 258 Engr. & Admin. Fees 10.900 .00 Total Cost Estimate $ 59,000.00 .3 l Special Assessments: Street costs can be assessed on a per foot basis or on an area wide basis , with the usual method being on a per front foot basis. Storm sewer costs are assessed on an area wide basis, per the Special Assessment Policy. This policy also states that 100% of storm sewer laterals will be assessed. The proposed storm sewer in 5th Avenue is defined as a lateral, based on design standards. To simplify the special assessments for this portion of the project, it is proposed to assess all benefited properties on an area wide basis for both the storm and street costs In addition, the storm sewer is mainly a function of the street. In other words, without the street a storm sewer would not be needed. A rough approximation of each street and storm assessment can be calculated as follows: Option No. t Total Cost Estimate = $ 93 ,600 .00 = $13 ,970 . 15 per acre Total Benefited Area 6 .7 Acres Option No. 2 Total Cost Estimate = $ 59.000.00 = $13 ,258.42 per acre ` Total Benefited Area 4 .45 Acres A final assessment roll will be prepared at the conclusion of this report based on the recommended alternatives for each phase. ` 14 : : •:;•; St:; rlJ n rr: O rn V - f N N ::q„•irr::r:+ten:,rtd:: 5:5l.:±i:C .n _NO �•c M:RKET N I W CD . N N z rn L ST • � N cA W J11 r LW.RKET ST. .7 RIGHT OF WAY To extend 5th Avenue from Fillmore to Market Street additional street right-of-way will need to be obtained by the City of Shakopee, either by purchase, dedication or condemnation. An 80 ft. right-of-way is proposed to be consistent with the existing right-of-way in this area. From Main Street to Market Street the City has already obtained 60 ft. of right-of-way. Normally, 60 feet is adequate for local streets but all other streets in this portion of the City are constructed on 80 ft. right-of-ways. It is proposed to obtain 20 additional feet of right-of-way for this portion of 5th Avenue. The estimated cost to purchase the right-of-way is as follows: Right-of-Nay purchase $32,500 .00 Appraisal Reports 1 .000 .00 $33,500 .00 Plus 25% Condemnation Costs 8.500 .00 Total Estimated Right-of-Way Costs $42,000.00 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS Discussion• 5th Avenue has had numerous discussions and reports regarding the upgrading of this street. In 1972,. a petition was received to upgrade 5th between Fillmore and Market but no action was taken. In 1974 and 1982 a petition was received to upgrade 5th between Spencer and Fillmore, but again no action was taken. In 1982, the Council ordered a feasibility report for that section between Fillmore and Main, but due to drainage problems associated with _ constructing only 1 block of this street it was determined to be "technically not feasible." The report indicated that if the feasibility report were expanded to included all of 5th Avenue to Market Street it would probably be feasible. Council chose not to expand the report, so it was determined to not be feasible. The current petition that is addressed in this report is only for that portion of 5th Avenue from Fillmore to Market . To adequately install sewer and water in 5th Avenue, portions of Main Street and Market Street would also need sewer and water as discussed in this report . Since those portions were not petitioned, Council would have to order those portions of the project. 16 This area has been undeveloped for many years with little , development activity. Completing 5th Avenue as well as all associated utilities would greatly promote development in this area. Alternatives: There are several alternatives at this point. 1 . Construct 5th Avenue all the way to Market Street as well as install any necessary utilities in Main and Market Streets. 2. Construct 5th Avenue only from Fillmore to Main and also Main Street from 5th and 6th. 3 . Conclude that the project is not feasible as petitioned for. In order to complete the sewer and water systems, complete the _ transportation system and promote development in this large tract of undeveloped land amid a residential neighborhood, this report recommends Alternate No. 1 . This would require the City Council ordering those portions of the project not covered in the petition. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Based on the recommended alternative, a special assessment roll was prepared using the estimated project costs. Due to the numerous options and combination of options , additional assessment rolls were not included in this report but could be easily prepared. The following table summarizes the proposed assessments and impacts on the adjoining properties of this project. Special Assessment Calculations Summary of Project Costs Sanitary Sewer Construction Costs (Option 1 ) $ 68,6 00.00 Watermain Construction Costs (Option 1 ) ,700.00 Street/Storm Sewer Construction Costs (Option 1) 69.400 .00 Total Construction Costs $233,000 .00 700-00 Plus 108 Contingency Plus 258 Engr. & Admin. Fees 57 ,700.00 Plus Right-of-Way Costs 42.000 .00 Total Project Costs $353,400.00 17 The assessments are broken down by sewer, water and street costs. A complete assessment table follows. A property location map showing areas is found in the appendix. 18 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 5th Ave. Improvements (Market to fillare) 12127/88 i Cost to be Assessed: SEWER 1 NATER ! STREET TOTAL _ i $353,40 I ' $10,113.27 1 $7,27B.43 1 $20,238.81 1 Proposed I ---_--------—_------------------------------- per acre 1 per acre 1 per acre 1 Assessments 1 PID Property Owner !Acreage; ,_______________________ ,__z___,__________ ____________ ____________,___________ 27-01016-0 !Eugene A b Esther N. Brown 1 0.74 1 57,483.82 1 $5,386.04 1 $!4,976.72 1 $27,846.57 1 11661 N. 6th Ave. ;Shakopee, MN 55379 27-010017-0 ;Associates Industrial Loan ! 0.32 1 $3,236.25 1 $2,329.10 1 $6,476.42 ; $12,041.76 1 11 Thomas A. Egan 1143M Nicollet Cart :Burnsville, MN 55331 I 27-010023-0 !John A. 5 Ione A. Theis 1 0.20 1 1 $1,419.29 1 1 $1,419.29 1 1447 Market St. !Shakopee, MN 55379 1 ' 27-010024-0 !John A. $ Ione A. Theis I 0.20 1 1 $1,419.29 1 1 $1,419.29 1 1447 Market St. !Shakopee, MN 55379 27-906036-0 111orothy Jane Ten Eyck 1 1.85 1 $18,709.55 1 $13,465.10 1 $37,441.79 1 $69,616.44 1 1502 E. 4th Ave. !Shakopee, AN 55379 21-906117-0 !Dean A. $ 9eraa F. Smith 1 2.07 1 $20,934.47 1 $15,066.35 1 ; $55,632.46 1 1606 S. Market St. 1 0.97 ! i 1 $19,631.64 1 !Shakopee, MN 55379 lletreet) 27-906132-0 16ordon Gelhaye 1 1.00 1 $10,113.27 1 57,270.43 1 1 $24,880.06 1 11933 Spring Lake Road 1 0.37 1 1 1 $7,488.36 1 ;Prior Lake, MN 55372 !(street) 27-906133-0 :Gordon Belhaye l 0.25 1 $2,528.32 ; $1,819.61 1 1 $6,776.58 1 12933 Spring Lake Road 1 0.12 1 1 $2,426.66 1 !Prior Lake, AN 55372 Ilstreet) 27-906134-0 !Gordon Belhaye - 1 0.16 1 $1,618.12 1 $1,164.55 ! $3,238.21 ! $6,020.88 ! 12933 Spring Lake Road !Prior Lake, MN 55372 ' 27-906144-0 !RJ Gregory - Property Mgat 1 217 1 $21,945.79 1 $15,794.20 1 $43,918.21 1 $81,658.20 1 1547 W. Jackson Blvd 1PO Box 6205 !Chicago, IT. 60680 27-097203-0 !Shakopee HRA 1 0.67 1 $6,775.69 1 $4,876.55 ! : $11,65244 : 1129 E. 1st Ave. !Shakopee, MN 55379 27-906135-0 :John A. $ lone A. Theis 1 0.93 ; $9,405.34 ! 56,760.94 1 ! $16,174.28 ! 1447 Market St. :Shakopee, MN 55379 19 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT'S 5th Ave. Improvements (Market to Fillmore: 12/27/88 Cost to be Assessed: SEVER 1 NATER , STREET TOTAL $353,400 $10,113.27 1 $7,278.43 1 $20,238.81 l Proposed ------------------------------------'------- per acre 1 per acre : per acre ! Assessments 1 PID i Property Burner lAcreagel ;___________—_________-____;_____=;___=_=____I======__=_==;=====---=- 2-=======-1 27-906043-0 !Edward R. Siebenaler 1 O.B2 1 $8,292.88 1 15,968.31 1 1 $14,261.19 1322 E. 5th Ave. II :Shakopee, MH 55379 27-90611" 1W. J. N Julia McSoldrick 1 0.69 1 $6,976.16 1 $5,022.12 1 1 $12,000.27 l 15716 Blake Rd. :Edina, MN 55436 27-906116-0 lHil mer J. 6 Linda L. Carlson : 0.69 1 16,978.16 1 $5,022.12 1 1 112,000.27 1 :3675 CA 140 !Chaska, HN 55318 Sanitary Sewer 12.36 :$125,000.00 1 $125,000.00 l Natermain 12.75 $92,800.00 , $92,800.00 Street 6.70 $135,600.00 $135,600.00 ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS Total Assessable Cost $353,400.00 $353,400.00 Total Cost --------------------------------------- 1125,000.00 San. sewer cost 12.36 Total Acreage (sin. sewer) $10,113.27 Cost per Acre (san. sewer) $92,800.00 Matermain cast 12.75 Total Acreage (watermain) $7,276.43 Cost per Acre twatermain) a $135,600.00 6.70 Total Acreage (street) $20,238.81 Cost per Acre (street) a Includes R-O-N cast 19a 5TH AVENUE BETWEEN SPENCER AND FILLMORE While this portion of 5th was not included in the original petition some mention of it is necessary in this report. This portion of 5th is currently a gravel street. Utilities are installed, but there is no curb and gutter or sidewalk. ` If 5th Avenue between Fillmore and Market is constructed, then the only block of 5th Avenue that would not be completely improved is that portion between Spencer and Fillmore. All other segments of 5th Avenue would be improved. Cost Estimate• A cost estimate for upgrading this block of 5th Avenue by pavement and curb & gutter has been prepared, as follows: _ Construction Costs $16,200.00 Plus 10% Contingency 1 ,600.00 Plus 25% Engr. and Admin. Fees 4 .000 .00 Total Estimated Costs $21 ,800.00 Special Assessments: It is proposed that the abutting properties be assessed for this project per the front foot method. The approximate assessment rate is calculated as follows: Total Estimated Costs = $21 .800 .00 = $38 .79 per front foot Total Front Footage 562 L.F. A complete assessment table follows. A property location map is found in the appendix. - Recommendation and Summary This portion of 5th was not petitioned and therefore it would need to be ordered by Council. A gravel street is a large maintenance item, creates a dust control problem and is generally a detriment to a neighborhood . Adding in the fact that 5th Avenue east of Fillmore is addressed in this report, it is _ recommended that if 5th between Fillmore and Market is ordered, some consideration should be given to upgrading 5th between Spencer and Fillmore at the same time. 20 344MI:119 SHA Wict"z: )narlR SS "W—We - i&G.2&F"= 9dJ ni b"4!1991 3911 "v e.j ' to nA.t.83eq z� tL, , I .3ugs� ei :i1 as Y14 n zi 't 3o nol$oax V" p4a zap. its zsSiti4vu .409438 Esys't& s a , 1s8 lO ifz.—kpu si:1?' .. . iswbiE ^.e 4x3348 bas 4,%ue ;in ai visM dud r,eiiJ ,bsd�:t-tu000 at J9Afa11 bas. 94aa1Ii4 a+5ai494 ounsAA niC 'ii. 9iefaa0 94 10 P. blucv. Jand ®u�iOVA d3? 10 d - nA btiS. 7y1€:o 11A .940mlti8 bag 4.9GA er_Wj+d •ois-mq swu auftjWTq" .b*VQ,74*1 se E1494 9umaVA dde to -i un„ :'. Ilse IQ ADO-d atd3 gati a^:Hq lot s3saf3zs JEQ'a 4, :eaoii,ol as 16514Q-r7q Rand ear, 4e34us $-t1 a els. 44 9:t r . s .3fl8. t Fan Vi �3nn� s' as 00,LI a saa+I . n,t Wm .In3 #>al SiAk - y u0.RS:8,tsS amaoa �:�sat e� 4o b9%aoa4s _e z9tJ4sgo,6q gat:'J„3a gel IgvU bsai ojq +5 .esuae9zaa slam, X 1g.{r. 9A .bofitsm loo'! JaQ41 91ja lik. :avci i.>l as -tbaa a ufs 4sa: --cc? 4no43 4118 QF. Bd s 9 _ � aJSEd �1r at A .awollo.; 9 "l R:J 3aslte3a”. x34ssgrgt islJ 15 an40 X311ma h" u rr,k Ji s4a'Za49:1J bas bo"!Ji4aq lea Raw t12Ll 1,0 W 7*q asillf% - 5�r%sS s at J55-Ile Isua4a A .Itsnuo:� V, �s49 b•1'a s1J�._as X391: rix-aasA si bas a�tdo4q io3'aea Raub S "Uo4a ,0sA-i 8�1tl,�gsrt�i g . .f€l ? .'• 613 Jo53 911: it gaillbA .lig�dlitd,7gied a of J1lsi t•t} a*. z ' 91 . 34uga-t stdJ nt bsaaelsb4s a! *sam:ti3 lu , o.�9bto ei J-69isM bao *, omII18 nsvwJ9d Ata 11 sadd n_isw398 d$2 Aatba4go4 a: nsri8 ee 1)1410da aoi3alubt#kg9 .5m13 safe , ads 3a 94omi:.14 �}c SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 5th Ave. Improvements (Market to Fillmore) 12/27/88 | Cost To Be Assessed: | | $38.79 | | $21 ,800 | | Front Foot | | | | Cost | | | Front | Proposed I PID | Property Owner !Footage: Assessments | � .~~-~~~~~~~~-~-~~~--~~~~~~_~~~~_~_-'^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~.-^~ 27-601385~0 !Edward R Siebena]er 90 | $3 491 10 | R. � ^ | 322 E. 5th Ave. | | | !Shakopee, MN 553/9 | | | | | | | ! 27~001386~0 :Edward R. Siebenaler | 90 | $3,491. 10 | 1322 E. 5th Ave. | | !Shakopee, MN 55379 | | < � | 27~801388-0 !Cornelius W Furst & Wife 68 | $2,327. 40 | � . 427 E. 5th � | !Shakopee, MN 55379 | | | | 27~801389-0 :Richard & Cindy Kechely 52 1 $2,017"08 | ! 1435 E. 5th Ave. | | | »� !Shakopee, MN 553/9 � | | | 27-801580~0 !Associates Industrial Loan | 30 i ¢1 , 163. 70 | Thomas A Egan | | | i 114300 Micollet Court Burnsville, MN 55337 | | | � � | 27-0o1581-0Craig Stieg 60 1 $2,327.40 | / 1430 E� 5th Ave� | � | i m° !Shakopee, MN 55379 27-001582~0 !William F� Duepke & Wife i 60 1 $2,327.40 | 1420 E. 5th Ave. | ( | � Shukopee, MN 55379 | | �~ � | 27~001583~6 !Edward R. S ebenaler | 60 | $2,327.40 | 1322 E. 5th Ave. | | | !Shakopee, MN 55379 | | | ~~ 27^001584~0 :Ester B. Johnson | 60 | $2,327.40 | |404 E. 5th Ave. | | : Shakopee, MN 553/9 | | | | | | | | | 562 | $21 ,900.00 | | � �~ ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS $21 ,80O.00 Total Cost 562 Total Front Feet $38.79 Front Foot Cost � � � � � 21 C'� SUMMARY The test for a proper and legal special assessment is such that it is fair, consistent and is not in excess of the increased property value. In order to determine the actual increased property value a benefit appraisal should be done. Without doing a formal benefit appraisal, an analysis of a recent subdivison being developed in Shakopee was done to determine the impact of street improvements to the raw land. The raw land was purchased for around $0.61 per sq. ft. The developed lots are selling for $2 .19 per sq. ft. , but after deducting improvements, marketing, interest, legal, etc . , the net cost per lot is around $1 .25 per sq. ft. This represents an increase of 100% over the cost of the raw land and is a good approximation of the increased property value. This report concludes that 5th Avenue between Fillmore and Market is feasible. This report also recommends that the utilities in Market Street and Main Street be added to the project and ordered. This report also recommends upgrading 5th Avenue between Spencer and Fillmore be added to the project and ordered. 22 APPENDIX � q S 5th AVE. IMPROVEMENTS - ' - 5o PROPERTY LOCATION MAP ST Y F I I j t °; � 5 \ - _ 209 = - WERNEH MarnER 3 6 ` . '1 3 1o97oo�1-qIy 2 ZO gObl32-Da —._— 01 1 I 5 �HAYE 11 . .. 1 906036-0 �ro gal 1 906135.0 ! 7 1.65 1 > c;o d = 1 TE%E'T r � �^ I r9 2 6 — �^e �4 1 \_ 10 Li W I r M owoW'0 I gabu► o I I �0��Z'� t ' a ]EAN SMITH IIi C 1—�9060 t /pB5B-l 5-03 o o."3t,4G` 6TH y"p i E0. F. S.ESENALER wE CERT. 6257 L y 6 i 7 6 L _ 302 �- T4 29 Z PFFN I 3 2 1 3 4 5 ` t i s 4 5 Imo_ 2 L N n P 7TH ST T _ 2918 � i 3103 i �, �� �S 8 - 305 _meq � '�- - T i 5th AVE. IMPROVEMENTS ° `I PROPERTY LOCATION- MAP_ 7 5 ' 91 ' \ 9 i SEWER OPTION NO 1 _TEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT ANITARY SEWER 1 4" PIPE SEWER, EXTRA HEAVY CAST IRON L.F. $19.70 1 .240 $24.428.00 _ 2 8" PIPE SEWER, EXTRA HEAVY CAST IRON L. F. $21 .50 40 $860.00 3 INSTALL 4" OUTLET WYE EACH $57.75 31 $1 .790 .25 4 INSTALL 6" OUTLET WYE EACH $80.80 1 $80.60 5 INSTALL CONNECTION TO EXIST. EACH $158.00 1 $158.00 _ SERVICE LINE (4° OR 6-1 6 B" PIPE SEWER, 0-8 L.F. $25.DD 1 .300 $32.500.00 7 B" PIPE SEWER, 8-10 L. F. $26.50 275 $7.287 .50 B CONSTRUCT MANHOLE, SHAKOPEE STD. EACH $1 ,258.00 5 $6.2SO.00 8 ROCK EXCAVATION C.Y. $50.00 140 $7.000.00 SANITARY SEWER TOTAL $80 ,334.35 -ARKET STREET RESTORATION 1 CLASS 5 _ TON $6.75 700 $4,725.00 2 BITUMINOUS PATCHING TON $30.00 250 $7,500.00 TOTAL $12.225.00 GRAND TOTAL OPTION NO. 1 $92,619.35 _ 3 SEWER OPTION NO 2 ITEM UNIT N0. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT SANITARY SEWER 1 4" PIPE SEWER, EXTRA HEAVY CAST IRON L.F. $13.70 S80 $17,336,00 2 INSTALL 4" OUTLET WYE EACH $57.75 22 $1 ,270.50 3 B" PIPE SEWER, 0-8 L.F. $25.00 1 ,000 $25,000.00 4 8" PIPE SEWER, 8-10 L.F. $26.50 175 $4,637.50 5 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE, SHAKOPEE STD. EACH $1 ,258.00 4 $5,032.00 6 ROCK EXCAVATION C.Y. $50.00 140 $7,000.00 SANITARY SEWER $60.276.00 MARKET STREET RESTORATION 1 CLASS 5 TON $6.75 420 $2,835.00 2 BITUMINOUS PATCHING TON $30.00 150 $4,500.00 TOTAL $7,335.00 GRAND TOTAL OPTION NO. 2 $67,811 .00 SEWER OPTION NO 3 TEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT ANITARY SEWER 1 4" PIPE SEWER, EXTRA HEAVY CAST IRON L.F. $19.70 400 $7,880.00 2 INSTALL 4" OUTLET WYE EACH $57 .75 10 $577.50 3 8" PIPE SEWER, 0-8 L. F. $25.00 300 $7,500.00 4 S" PIPE SEWER, B-10 L.F. $25.50 30 $795.00 5 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE, SHAKOPEE STO. EACH $1 .258.00 1 $1 .258.00 6 CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL DEPTH IN MANHOLE L.F. $91 .00 1 $91 .00 GRAND TOTAL OPTION NO. 3 $18.101 .50 4 WATERMAIN OPTION NO 1 p- v - ITEN UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 6" DIP L. F. 612.00 2.460 629,520.00 2 6" G.V. EA. 6450.00 8 $3,600.00 3 HYDRANT EA. 61 ,400.00 5 67,000.00 4 3/4" COPPER PIPE L.F. 610.00 2,440 624,400.00 5 3/4" CORPORATIONS EA. 630.00 40 61 ,200.00 6 3/4" CURB STOP EA. 675.00 40 63,000.00 OPTION NO 2 WATERMAIN TOTAL $68,720.00 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 6" DIP L.F. 612.00 1 ,160 613.920.00 2 6" G.V. EA. 6450.00 4 61,800 .00 3 HYDRANT EA. 61 ,400.00 2 62,800.00 4 3/4" COPPER PIPE L.F. 610.00 840 68,400.00 5 3/4" CORPORATIONS EA. 630.00 21 6630.00 6 3/4" CURB STOP EA. 675.00 21 61 ,575.00 WATERMAIN TOTAL 629,125.00 OPTION NO 3 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 6" DIP L.F. 612.00 830 68,960.00 2 6" G.V. EA. 6450.00 3 61 ,350 .00 3 HYDRANT EA. 61 ,400.00 1 61 ,400 .00 4 3/4" COPPER PIPE L. F. 610.00 520 65,200.00 5 3/4" CORPORATIONS EA. 630.00 13 6390.00 6 3/4" CURB STOP EA. 675.00 13 6975.00 WATERMAIN TOTAL 619 .275.00 5 STREET OPTION NO 1 'TEN UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT OADWAY 1 CLEARING EACH $200.00 12 $2.400.00 2 GRUBBING EACH $130.00 12 91 ,580.00 3 COMMON EXCAVATION C.Y. $5.50 2.400 $13.200.00 4 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 (6") TON $6.75 1 .465 $3,888 .75 100 % CRUSHED 5 BIT. MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE (5%) TON $163.00 19 $3,097.00 6 BASE COURSE MIXTURE (1 1/2"1 TON $11 .75 375 $4,406.25 7 BIT. MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE (6%) TON $163.00 19 $3,097.00 8 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (1 1/2"1 TON $13.00 375 $4,875.00 9 CONCRETE CURB 6 GUTTER DESIGN 8-618 L.F. $5.25 1 ,820 $9,555.00 STREET TOTAL $52,079 .00 STREET OPTION NO 2 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT ROADWAY 1 COMMON EXCAVATION C.Y. $5.50 1 ,375 $7,582.50 2 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 (6") TON $6.75 885 $5,975.75 100 % CRUSHED 3 BIT. MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE (5%) TON $153.00 12 $1 ,956 .00 4 BASE COURSE MIXTURE (1 1/2") TON $11 .75 225 $2,643.75 5 SIT. MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE (6%) TON $153.00 14 $2,282.00 6 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (1 1/2") TON $13.00 225 $2,925.00 7 CONCRETE CURB S GUTTER DESIGN 8-618 L.F. $5.25 1 ,100 $5,775.00 STREET TOTAL $29,118.00 6 STORM SEWER COSTS FOR STREET 1 ,TEN UNIT N0. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT -;TORN SEWER 1 12" B. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L.F. $28.20 100 $2.820.00 2 15" B.C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L.F. $29.60 20 $592.00 3 18" B. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L.F. $31 .70 180 $5,706.00 4 CATCH BASIN WITH CASTINGS EACH $1 ,050.00 5 $5,250.00 5 STU. MANHOLE EACH $1 ,000.00 3 $3,000.00 STORM SEWER TOTAL $17,368.00 STREET 2 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEN UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT STORM SEWER 1 12" B. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L.F. $28.20 60 $1 ,692.00 2 15" B.C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L.F. $29.60 40 $1 ,164.00 3 18" B. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L.F. $31 .70 175 $5,547 .50 4 CATCH BASIN WITH CASTINGS EACH $1 ,050.00 4 $4,200.00 5 STU. MANHOLE EACH $1 ,000.00 2 $2,000.00 STORM SEWER TOTAL $14,623.50 - 7 RIGHT-OF-WAY ESTIMATE I r Area Needed for Acquisition = 40 ,600 Sq. Ft. or 0 .93 Acres Approximate Cost per Sq. Ft. = $0 .80 per Sq. Ft. Estimate for Acquisition of Right-=of-Way 40 ,600 Sq. Ft. x 0 .80 = $32 ,500 .00 Appraisal Reports 2 Parcels @ $500 .00 each = $ 1 .000 .00 Subtotal $33 ,500 .00 Add 25% for Condemnation and Admin. Costs 8 .500 .00 Total Estimated Right-of-Way Costs = $42,000 .00 _ 8 I L q Date //- 2 - yf IV We, the undersigned, owners of the following described real property, abutting on the proposed improvement and benefitted L thereby, hereby petition the City Council of the City of Shakopee, for the following public improvements: LOpening Sth Ave. beteeen F'ilmore and market Streets and improve ;with installation of sewer, water, storm sewer, curbing and bituminous on Street/Avenue, between Street/Avenue L and Steet/Avenue, and request that the sane be made during the year Iqqq n 1989 In making this petition the undersigned understands that the City of Shakopee, its agents or employee cannot guarantee the amount of an assessment until a feasibility study of the improve- ments has been prepared and accepted by City Council in accordance with MSA Chapcer 429. ! PETITIONER LOT BLOCK a7_ej7_0 0V ane pcir-t7 A 2 c ' iw L d' . .�•w.%Ud�w%U •Q See% 4,Sive/�ifrtm%fc 22 E»f f I h e e""-ds L L i. I, hereby, verify that I circulated the above petition and that the above sicnatures of the property owners and petit i.oners were Laffixed in my presence. Lireu�eor fi Approved this /90 day of �/py , 1989 L ,ator:,..v — - -- Tbie inc;rvment prepared R drafted by: 'p.. R. pier - -_ Avec::e 9 iz d MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk CE- RE: Appointments to Suburban Rate Authority for 1989 DATE: December 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION• It is necessary to designate the director and alternative director from our community to the Suburban Rate Authority for 1989. Last year Gloria Vierling was designated director and Jerry Wampach was designated alternate. Prior to 1988 the Mayor and City Administrator were designated as the director and alternate director. ACTION REOUESTED: 1. Insert into the attached resolution the desired names. 2. Offer Resolution No. 3004, Designating Director and Alternate to Suburban Rate Authority, and move its adoption. JSC/tlV RESOLUTION NO. 3004 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows: is hereby designated to serve as a director of the Suburban Rate Authority and is hereby designated to serve as alternate director of the Suburban Rate Authority for the year 1989 and until their successors are appointed. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this _ day of 1989. ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Shakopee City Clerk Approved as to form this , day of 1989. City Attorney CONSENT Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator From: Marilyn Ramer, Personnel Coordinator Re: Amendments/Additions to Personnel Policy Date: December 28, 1988 Introduction Council action of December 20, 1988 granted some changes/additions for non-union employee benefits. Background Pursuant to the changes/additions that Council enacted at the December 20, 1988 meeting, the Personnel Policy must be amended to accurately reflect those actions. Resolution No. 3005 amends the Personnel Policy as follows: 1.) SECTION 8. VACATION LEAVE WITH PAY, Subd. 1 has been amended to provide one additional day ( 8 hours) of vacation leave per year after 20 years with a maximum of 25 days (200 hours) . 2.) SECTION 8. VACATION LEAVE WITH PAY, Subd. 6 has been added to give five extra days (40 hours) of leave to exempt employees who qualify by fairly consistently working more than 40.0 hours per week. 3.) SECTION 10. SICK LEAVE, Subd. 1 has been amended to increase the sick leave maximum accrued from 800 hours to 960 hours. 4.) SECTION 17. SEVERANCE PAY. has been amended to include the maximum sick leave cap of 960 hours for the calculation of severance pay. Attached are the appropriate pages from the Personnel Policy showing the changes made. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 3005, A Resolution Amending the City of Shakopee Personnel Policy Adopted by Resolution No. 1571, and move its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 3005 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 conditions 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 8. VACATION LEAVE WITH PAY, Subdivision 1. Amount of the City of Shakopee Personnel Policy is hereby amended to read: All part-time and full-time employees shall accrue vacation leave on a bi-weekly basis in accordance with the following schedule: (For part- time employees this shall be computed on the basis of time actually worked.) 0-5 years of employment 80 hours annually 6-15 years of employment 120 hours annually 16-20 years of employment 160 hours annually 21 years of employment 168 hours annually 22 years of employment 176 hours annually 23 years of employment 184 hours annually 24 years of employment 192 hours annually 25 years of employment 200 hours annually When a full-time employee begins his/her sixth, sixteenth, twenty- first or subsequent year of employment, who was part-time during part or all of his employment, for purposes of figuring vacation, his/her anniversary date may be adjusted to reflect full-time service; however, if the employee should leave before he/she has benefited for what has been adjusted, he/she shall receive severance pay for the earned unused vacation. and that SECTION B. VACATION LEAVE WITH PAY, Subdivision 6 Leave for Exempt Employees is hereby added: Forty (40) extra hours of leave shall accrue on a bi-weekly basis for exempt employees who qualify by fairly consistently working more than 40 hours per week. (i.e. those employees who routinely are required to attend Council meetings, Planning Commission meetings or other Committee meetings and/or those employees whose job duties/functions require working more than 40 hours per week on the average.) Effective January 1st of each year, the City Administrator shall determine which exempt employees are eligible for the extra 40.0 hours of leave. AND; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that SECTION 10. SICK LEAVE, Subdivision 1. lye Amount- is hereby amended to read: All part-time and full-time employees shall be entitled to sick leave with pay at the rate of eight (8) hours for each month of full-time service accrued on a bi-weekly basis. For part-time employees, this shall be computed on the basis of time actually worked. Sick leave may be accumulated to a maximum of 960 hours. AND; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that SECTION 17. SEVERANCE PAY, is hereby amended to read: Any permanent employee who is separated from his/her position by retirement, discharge, or resignation shall receive a lump sum payment to include compensation for all accumulated unused vacation leave, plus an amount equal to one-third the value of accumulated sick leave up to a maximum of 960 hours, calculated on the basis of his/her current salary or wage scale. Provided that should any employee resign without giving the required two week or thirty day written notice, except for reasons of ill-health, he shall forfeit his right to all accumulated leave. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this _ day of 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1989. City Attorney ATTACHMENT Note: Deletions are shown by - - - - - and additions are underlined SECTION S. VACATION LEAVE WITH PAY Subdivision 1. Amount All-Part-time-and-full-time employees shall earn accrue vacation leave on a bi-weekly basis in accordance with the following schedule: (For part-time employees this shall be computed on the basis of time actually worked. ) 0-5 years of employment 10-days 80 hours annually 6-15 years of employment 15-days 120 hours annually 16+-20 years of employment 20-days 160 hours annual 21 years of employment 168 hours annually 22 years of employment 176 hours annually 23 years of emplovment 184 hours annually 24 years of emplo"ent 192 hours annually 25 years of emol,ymt 200 hours annually When a full-time employee begins his/her sixth, sixteenth, twenty- first or subsequent year of employment, who was part-time during part or all of his/her employment, for purposes of figuring vacation, his/her anniversary date may be adjusted to reflect full-time service; however, if the employee should leave before he/she has benefited for what has been adjusted, he/ahe shall receive severance pay for the earned unused vacation. SECTION 8. LEAVE WITH PAY Subdivision 6 Leave for Exempt Employees Forty 1401 extra hours of leave shall accrue on a bi-weekly basis for xe t e to --S -ho ualif b fain consistently workingmore than 40 hours r ek (i e. tho a emato ses wno routine are re red to attend Council eetin s Plannin Comm' ;sion meetings or other Committee meet"n s and or those em to ees whose lob duties/functions recuire�rking more than 40 rhours rekn the er )Effective Januaryst of each ethe City Administrator halld tema hi h exempt a pl e s r el' 'bl f r th extr 40 0 ho rs f 1Al II c eit ve Ja ua 1st of each ear, the hours of leave. Cit Adm'ni tr t ve shall det . which exem t e to ees are eligible for the extra 40.0 SECTION 10 SICK LEAVE; Subdivision 1. Amount All part-time and full-time employees shall be entitled to sick leave with pay at the rate of one-day eight (8) hours for each month of full-time service accrued on a bi-weekly employees, this shall be computed on the basislsof time tactually worked. Sick leave may be accumulated to a maximum of 100-days 960 hours. SECTION 17. SEVERANCE PAY: Any permanent employee who is separated from his/her position by retirement, discharge, or resignation shall receive a lump sum payment to include compensation for all accumulated unused vacation leave, plus an amount equal to one-third the value of all accumulated sick leave up to a maximum of 960 hours. calculated on the basis of his/her current salary or wage scale. Provided that should any employee resign without giving the required two week or thirty day written notice, except for reasons of ill-health, he shall forfeit his right to all accumulated leave.