HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/17/1989 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: January 12, 1989
1. Attached is a copy of a letter dated December 5, 1988 Mayor
Lebens sent to the Federal Highway Administration Office
requesting a Design Hearing.
2. Attached is memorandum from Judy Cox regarding the unsigned
Ordinance and Resolution and Mayor Lebens' concern about
leaving town without fear of them being signed.
3. Attached is a memorandum from Dave Hutton regarding
correspondence from the Minnesota Historical Society to
Mn/DOT regarding the historical significance of the existing
bridge.
4. Attached is a memorandum from Dave Hutton regarding the
Shakopee Bypass (T.H. 101) .
5. Attached is a copy of a letter from Judy -Cox to the Scott
County Administrator submitting the name of Fred Corrigan
for consideration for appointment to the Prior Lake/Spring
Lake Watershed District.
6. Attached is a copy of a letter to Tom Brownell from Dale W.
Bohlke, Director of Emergency Services at St. Francis
Regional Medical Center congratulating Officer Terry Doyle
for his actions in preventing the death of an infant on
December 7, 1988.
7. Attached is a copy of a letter to Tom Brownell from Dana
Gantriis expressing her appreciation to Sergeant Poole for
his help is recovering stolen property.
8. Shakopee Area Catholic Schools has applied for renewal of
their raffle license. They meet the requirements of the
City Code.
9. Attached is the Building Activity Report for the month of
December, 1988.
10. Attached is the Revenue and Expenditure Report as of
December 31, 1988.
11. Attached is the Billing Summary for October, November, and
-
December, 1988 from Krass and Monroe.
12. Attached is the bi-monthly newsletter from Ehlers and
Associates, Inc.
13 . Attached are the minutes of the December 14, 1988 meeting of
the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee.
14 . Attached are the minutes of the December 14, 1988 meeting of
the community Development Commission.
15. Attached are the minutes of the January 3 , 1989 meeting of
the Shakopee Coalition.
16. Attached are the minutes of the November 7, 1988, December
5, 1988 and January 5, 1989 meetings of the Shakopee Public
Utilities Commission.
17. Attached is a memorandum from Barry Stock regarding notice
of potential sale of cable television system.
18. Attached is a copy of Scott County Res. No. 88116 which
establishes the County policy regarding the use of tax
increment financing.
19. Attached is a letter from the Government Finance Officers
Assn. advising us, once again, that our recent annual
financial report qualifies for a Certificate ofAchievement
for Excellence in Financial Reporting.
DRK/jms
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE.SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 553791376 (612)4453650
Mayor' s office G •::1f � '
r _l
Mr Charles E Foslien, Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration Re: MN No. BRF005-2
Suite 490 Metro Square Bldg REY]UEST' FOR DESIGN H1EARING
St Paul, MN 55191
Dear Mr Foslien:
At a meeting last August with Mssrs Friesen and Baylor of your office I presented
an alternate design plan for the above project. Mr Friesen observed that all too
often inferior plans are adopted because of public indifference. He also stated
that he had no authority to hold up Federal funding on the basis of design. But
he did suvest that I raise my statutory conflict on the parking lot at the
final hearing later in December, and if that were not resolved satisfactorily
he would indeed withhold funding.
Upon inquiring last Friday of Mr Baylor as to the scheduling of said hearing
and discussing a few of the discrepancies in the project report, he suggested
that I make a formal request to you for a design hearing, and outline my concerns.
Let's just look at two for example: the off-street parking references and the
Levee Drive situation. -
MINNESOTA RIVER CROSSING DOWNTOWN SHAKOPEE APPROACH -by Barton Aschman, Inc.
page 65, Sec 5.15.2 Parking Analysis
par. 1 , line 3 - . .development of a streetscape for the area is nolo occurring
which will increase parking in the study area through creation of diagonal pkg."
par. 2, line 2 - "There is presently a surplus of 233 (parking spaces) based
on data from the Downtown Revitalization Plan".
par. 2, line 6 - "The CBD mini bypass is not anticipated to have a significant
impact on parking because only surplus spaces will be taken."
It should be noted that the streetscape as constructed actually reduced the number
of on-street parking spaces because of the large nodes. Furthermore, on-steet
parking could never substitute for off-street parking for all the residential users
in the areal for overnight parking is prohibited on the streets because of snow
removal activity.
The Henrt Of Progress Valley
• -*f 2-_
ardin the second statement the _
2--
Regarding 4 e downtown revitalization plan referred to
shows a gain of but 76 spaces, not 233 as represented in the environmental
assessment. (see page 21 ) . But the results don't bear that out.
As for surplus spaces, let it be understood that the zoning ordinance in force
at the time of contruction of those lots required 140 spaces for the than existing
businesses serves by the lot in question. There were 52 private off-steet spaces
surveyed, which left a need for 88 spaces - exactly the amount in the lot as
built. But the present ordinance would require 152 off-street spaces for the same
businesses as surveyed in 1967, so it can be said we're already short even with
keeping the lot in tact. Construction of the mini bypass as planned, along with
new development anticipated as a result, would create a serious crisis in parking
which could cost the taxpayers millions.
MINNESOTA RIVER CROSSING _—
page 45, Sec 5.10 Lands (Alternate 7A)
par. 1 , line 3 - "Under alternate 7A, a four-lane bridge would be
constructed over the future eastern extension of the trail corridor.
Levee Drive would be carried under the bridge tangent to the existing
-.. alignment in a manner that would'provide adequate vehicle clearance."
The plans as presented for-.my approval recently do neither. The clearance
actually provided on the bridge design is about 51,ft - just enough to
become a serious nuisance instead of an asset.
There are many other discrepancies in the environmental report, along with
legitimate concerns of many citizens that have never been properly addressed,
so I feel at least one more hearing before the City Council:is warranted to
safeguard these interests.
Sincerely,
Dolores M Lebens, Mayor _
tel 445 1532 445 3188
Dated this fifth day of December, 1988.
MEMO TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Unsigned Ordinance and Resolution
DATE: January 9, 1989
On January 6, 1989 Mayor Lebens asked me to contact Mr.
Krass, Assistant City Attorney, to ask if in light of the action
taken Thursday, by Judge Menke, she could leave town without fear
of the ordinance and resolution being signed.
It is the opinion of Mr. Coller and Mr. Krass that the
responsibilities of the Acting Mayor are:
1. To act at the request of the Mayor.
2. To act when the Mayor is gone for an extended period of
time.
3 . To act in an emergency-death of Mayor.
On January 5, 1989, Judge Menke heard arguments from Mayor
Lebens and Rod Krass, Assistant City Attorney, regarding the
signing of the ordinance and resolution and ordered the matter be
set on for hearing.
It is the opinion of both Mr. Coller and Mr. Krass that the
Mayor may leave town in order to go shopping or visiting and need
not fear that the ordinance and resolution will be signed during
her absence.
JSC/tiv
3
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Enginee
DATE: January 12, 1989
INFORMATIONAL ITEM FOR COUNCIL
Attached is correspondence from the Minnesota Historical Society
to Mn/DOT regarding the historical significance of the existing
bridge. As you may recall, the entire project has been on hold
since October, 1987 to allow the Historical Society to review the
existing bridge.
i
As indicated in the letter, the bridge is eligible for inclusion
in the National Register and is one of four surviving bridges of
its type in the state.
Consequently , Mn/DOT has informed staff that there will be no
alterations of this bridge as part of the
project. Originally,
it was proposed to be used as a pedestrian walkway by removing
the old decking and constructing a smaller pedestrian bridge.
Mn/DOT has indicated that it could still be utilized as a
pedestrian bridge by leaving it in place.
Once the new bridge and minibypass are completed, Mn/DOT will
probably go through the lengthy documentation process necessary
for removing historic bridges and then the decking could be
removed.
� 3
_ MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
FOUNDED1� 1849 Fm Sm41a,1 . a Paul %1.%ii11 • 151'17261171
December 28, 1988
2
✓ANc��'D 3
Mr. Clem Kachelmyer c,PrelI1 1g89�
ineer
612H1minary rTransporttaat on ign Build ng R G�°j� 4
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 0
i S
Dear Mr. Kacrelmyer:
Re: Proposed MnDC)T S.P. 7009-52, T.H. 169 Replacement of Bridge 4175 over the
Minnesota River and Central Business Business District Mini-Bypass in
Shakopee, SoOtt County
[RIS Referral File Number: AA-211
Thank you for providing the additional information about the above-referenced
project in the memo of October 1988 prepared by Minnesota Trunk Highway
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey staff member William Yourd. It has been
reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given the State Historic Preservation
Office by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 according to 36 CFR
Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties, the regulations of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation governing the Section 106 review process.
It is our opinion that the procedures employed to identify historical
properties were sufficient to final any significant properties that may be
affected by the project. Based on the results of the survey and inventory
work completed for this project to date, we reach the following conclusions:
On Blocks 2 - 6, parts of which will be affected by the project, two
properties are of interest and may be eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places. They are located at 125 First
Avenue Fast and 213 1/2 First Avenue Fast. Bath retain early facades
oriented tcmard the river and recall the early history of the city.
Because both are outside the construction limits, and because their
early historic setting has been greatly altered by more recent
development, it is our opinion that the proposed construction will have
no effect on these properties.
The limestone piers in the river left from the 1880 Lewis Street Bridge
do riot neet the criteria for listing on the National Register. The
bridge's significance resided principally in its engineering
characteristics, long gone with the bridge's removal in the early j
decades of this century. The piers themselves do not possess arty
unusual significance as engineering achievements.
Bridge 4175 meets the criteria for eligibility contained in the multiple
properties documentation form for Historic Iron and Steel Bridges in
Minnesota, 1873-1945. It is one of four surviving examples of its type
in the state.
December 28, 1988
Mr. Clan Kachelmyer
MHS Referral File #AA-211
Page two
Based on available information it is difficult to assess the eligibility
of the Shakopee Flouring Mill for listing on the National Register of
Historic Places. For purposes of this review we conclude that the mill
ruins are not eligible for listing on the National Register, leaving the
possibility open that additional information on the mill ruin integrity
could change our evaluation. The ruins are deeply buried, and
apparently will not be disturbed by the proposed work.
The only unresolved issue at this point is the disposition of Bridge No. 4175.
Otherwise the project as currently planned will have no effect on properties
listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places
Thank you for your careful attention to the identification of historic and
archaeological properties that may be affected by the proposed work. we also
appreciate the large forimt black-and-white negatives and prints of the
Shakopee Pet Hospital. !
If you have questions regarding this matter, please contact Ted Lofstrom at
the address and telephone number on the letterhead.
Sincerely,
Dennis A. Gimrestad
Deputy State Historic Preservation officer
DPG:dfib
cc: Les Peterson, Minnesota Trunk Highway
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Fort Snelling History Center, St. Paul, MN 55111
Carl Hoffstedt, Minnesota Department of Transportation
2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, MN 55422
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Shakopee Bypass (T.H. 101 )
DATE: January 9 , 1989
INFORMATIONAL ITEM:
Mn/DOT has had the T.H. 101 Shakopee Bypass scheduled in their
construction program for some time now, but the project is
currently programmed for paving two lanes initially with the
additional two lanes being paved several years later. District 5
of Mn/DOT has been attempting to get the additional two lanes of
pavement programmed into the project through their central office
for several months now. Staff has just received word from
District 5 that the central office has rejected their request to
program the additional two lanes of pavement for the project.
Consequently, this project will be initially constructed as a two
lane bypass. District 5 has indicated that they will continue to
request and promote the additional two lanes of pavement and
depending on the amount of funding available every year from the
legislature, the two additional lanes may still get added before
the project is under construction.
Staff wanted to update Council on this development.
DH/pmp
LANES
CITY OF SHAKOPEE •
INCORPORATED 1870
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE,SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 563M1376 (612)445-38,50
,
January 6, 1989
Mr. Joe Ries
Scott County Administrator
428 South Holmes
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Ries:
I am writing in response to the letter from Jane F. Hansen
dated December 6, 1988 regarding the Board of Commissioners
upcoming appointment of two Managers to the Prior Lake/Spring
Lake Watershed District.
At their regular meeting on January 3, 1989, Council
directed staff to contact residents within the watershed district
and submit for consideration the names of interested residents.
I have been in contact with Mr. Fred Corrigan, 8075 East
Martindale Drive, Prior Lake, MN 55372, and he is interested in
the appointment. Mr. Corrigan's name was also submitted two
years ago.
Please advise the Board of Commissioners that the City of
Shakopee submits the name of Fred Corrigan for consideration for
appointment to the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District.
Sincerely,
n
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
JSC/jms
cc: Richard Mertz, Commissioner of 3rd District
Shakopee City Council
The Heart Of Progress Valley
AN EQUAL OPPONNN,IY EMPLOYER
[o
SOP THE 4y0
2 m
6J C
ST. FRANCIS (612)445-2322
REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER 325 West Fifth Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
January 4, 1989
Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
Shakopee Police Department
476 Gorman Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Officer Terry Doyle
Dear Chief Brownell:
I would like to pass on somewhat belated information
applauding Officer Terry Doyle in his successful management
of a young infant by the name of Nicholas Schmieg on the
evening of 12/7/88. This infant was in respiratory arrest
and near death until Officer Doyle arrived and saved the
baby' s life.
Because of Officer Doyle's rapid response and the actions
taken by him, this infant's death was prevented. With such
knowledgeable and calm first responders, our care in the
Emergency Department is made much easier and the citizens of
Shakopee will continue to receive the best possible
emergency care available.
Sincerely,
le W. Boh ke,4M D —�/
Director, Emergency Services
/nb/6
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
A membe,of the senedictine Health system
January 3, 1989
Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
Shakopee Police Department
Shakopee Mn, 55379
Dear Chief Brownell
I am writing this letter to express my appreciation
for the fine job Sgt . Poole did in helping to recover a
carburetor stolen from my snowmobile.
On January 2 I had occasion to call the Shakopee
Police Department regarding this theft. Before the day was
over the part was recovered and an agreement was reached with
the individual to repair the machine.
Thanks again to Sgt . Poole for a job well done.
�Si/nuc/c rye ly ,
Dana Gantriis
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
PERMITS ISSUED
December, 1988
Yr. to Date Previous Year
Number Number Valuation Number Valuation
No. Ytd.
Single Fam-Sewered 3 79 5,562,737 2 43 3,525,600
Single Fam-Septic 1 14 1,450,000 3 18 2,224,000
Multiple Dwellings - 3 276,800 - 8 4,570,500
(# Units) (YTD Units) (-) (7) - (-) (129) -
Dwelling Additions 4 53 278,813 - 61 320, 117
Other - 7 225,995 - 16 354,300
Comm New Bldgs - 4 612,200 - 5 1, 125,000
Bldg. Addns - 8 643,000 - 5 339,000
Industrial-Sewered - 1 915,000 1 2 775,000
Ind-Sewered Addns - 1 575,000 - - -
Industrial-Septic - - - - - -
Ind-Septic Addns - - - - 2 167,475
Accessory/Garages 1 33 242,036 1 34 215,217
Signs & Fences 4 67 130,510 2 62 103,320
Fireplaces/Wood Stove 1 11 28,802 - 7 18,100
Grading/Foundation - 6 223,700 - 8 61,500
Remodeling (Res) 2 28 115,780 2 35 212,305
Remodeling (Inst) - - - - - -
Remodeling (Comm/Ind) 7 32 489,220 4 39 522,056
TOTAL TAXABLE 23 347 11,769,593 15 345 14,533,490
TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - - - - -
GRAND TOTAL 23 347 11,769,593 15 345 14,533,490
No. Ytd. No. Ytd.
Variances - 10 - 18
Conditional Use 1 23 2 17
Rezoning - 3 - 1
Moving 1 4 - 3
Electric 30 300 19 254
Plbg & Htg 27 302 18 284
Razing Permits
Residential - 3 - -
Commercial - - - -
i
Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction
permitted to date. . . . . . .4,285
Cora Hullander
Bldg. Dept. Sec.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN DECEMBER, 1988
8047 Joseph Miller Const. 2800 Jade Circle House $139,000
8048 Earl Weikle Const. X287 Marschall Rd. Alt. $ 21,000
8049 Bob Imker 1830 Marschall Rd. Addn. $ 6,000
8050 Robyn Lee 1097 Van Buren Addn. $ 400
8051 Robert Suel 112 E. 6th Addn. $ 24,000
8052 Void
8053 Novak-Fleck 1109 Minnesota House $ 60,350
8054 Homeplace Bldrs. 1136 Jackson St. Fireplace $ 1,200
8055 Alan Theis 1051 Eastview Cir. Alt. $ 750
8056 Larry Link 1226 E. 4th Ave. Alt. $ 10,000
8057 Ed Jeurissen 3751 Co. Rd. 79 House $ 40,000
-1i iii to
8058 Philip Hvidsten 110 E. 1st Ave. Alt. $ 14,000
8059 J.B. Swedenborg One Valleyfair Dr. Alt. $ 86,000
8060 Gardner Brothers y1897 H/erit ge Dr. � K'House $ 62,096
8061 LeRoy Houser 32021 Marschal d. Alt. $ 2,000
8062 Signs of Quality 206 Scott St. Sign $ 550
8063 Signart Co. 327 Marschll Rd. Sign $ 1,980
8064 Attracta Sign 612 E. 1st Ave. Sign $ 3,500
8065 Eagle Creek Plaza 489 Marschall Rd. Alt. $ 5,000
8066 Ed Jeurissen 3751 Co. Rd. 79 Stg. Bldg.$ 7,800
8067 Art Gesswein 133 W. 1st Ave. Sign $ 480
8068 Douglas Snell 906 E. 4th Ave. Alt. $ 1,000
8069 Jasper Homes 1257 Marschall Rd. Alt. $ 10,000
8070 Void
8071 Bruce Novak 338 E. 1st Ave. Alt. $ 1,000
'r.
� e -.•lfcxd:a:s:iE �i n i
ccpq'ee :s
S 'cr'•-^ -
ete e 2 E e
s
3n ° c ai
['.: . . B
cegi3be S
_ . ssRRd.�EA R"}GAE RFi i R i ..•... . nF .
�rorvmmrvN ___esu u_w r -
m .ice o
m . co b
w is am
m'm s r
N Aii N m
m `" im mm A mm
m N mm
s
-Nunes - -mro4-w - m
- ro
a-
J M M J o o e oe u aeee.N rgOeJN�eJ w.Nml n ee....Y.be
Z C
ry JN4Vu N _
- - N ry N -MN>NYOOgbwY eNOb-u
eAJJwY ONe-w4roP
NVNeNeeeeeaaou
0 o n o 0 o e oe a 000eeeeeeeaeeebbe000e o eeeeeeeeee =K
P - � A4YYwUwYNro moN�uwN aryNOlMee A I
Ll
JVmJww-le- Am_N-IeJroJJa
- NYeONJmieas O-NIPmN n
a a a a e o N oN m mobanNrvwN--nuJA J-JlooYw m ue-NeMu>Ja Cm T
-A-
Y'A$CieNw.NiiYwau:m
n n o n ry ry ...Nau.Jubu -4w ;........ N
Y za i
.,z
�z
Sz
11
KHASS & MONHWE CfiAHI,-IitU
327 SOutn Plar,cna, 1 Roan
Shakauee, MN
City U4 Shakopee HILLING UAiE 10-.51--8xi
129 E_ ist Ave.
tihakupee, PIN SS:/9 C L 1 t N I _i U M M A H Y
Account Number RE. Line(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billinqs Received Balance
18-11373002-1 General
$107.44 $757.00 $IU7.44 S7S7.00
18-11373i58-1 c/o James Lochart at Pophim Hack
Law #irm
Racetrack bond issue
(Bill applicant) James Lochart
$405.20 $85.00 8405.20 $85.00
18-11373210-1 Storm Drainage Easements_
Bill 'rro_iect.
`b 22.27 8514 .00 $722.27 $$114.00
lb-ii373212-1 Vieriing Danqerous house
$128.00 $O.UU $128.00 50.00
iu,, i375236-1 Westwood Hlanrung Cuntract
$34.00 $0.00 $54.00 $0.00
18-11375217-1 Vierlinq Drive West Condemnation
$0.00 $30.00 $0.00 530.00
18-11373219-1 V. Don & Lorraine Parrott
$22i .00 $0.00 $221 .00 10.00
Pr•rr. 2
l-ll.y Ut unaKUOee NOJ1 BILLING With I0-.;i b1i
1<9 t_ tsi Hve. 1 ' 1=.r1�
Sh,tkt.tp¢4•, MN b_i3%9 i. I.. i F. Iv 1 Gi it M Pi H it i
C.;Tr
(jc, uun t 7vumur_-r Re. L t nr l s 1
Pr evtous Ne. Payment Current
Dai ante Bit 11"(41- Received Balance
19-i3137311-1 Prosecutions
44 ,517..00 $4,991 .00 $4,542.00 1,64 ,991 .00
18-13731778-1 Shakopee L.UltlUer Co. Appeal
$17.50 CR so.()U 80.00 877.50 CR
18-13732100)-1 Scherber Storm Drainaqe Easements
8111 Project
$0.00 $78.6U •D0.00 $78.60
18-13732108-1 Upper Valley Drainage Project Scott
$12.20 CR 8111 .00 s0.00 $98-80
18-13732100--1 Out let Permit Problem
$391 .00 $.192.44 $391 .00 8392.44
18-1373310D-1 Upper- Valley Drainage Project
Biuu.jnq
60.00 $466. 78 $0.00 $466.78
18-51373201-1 Minnesota Valley Restoration
Pr of ec i
$tiSU.UV $82.44 $55U.VU 402.44
18-51373213-1 General Matters
80.00 $68.00 $0.00 1-68_00
----------------_.--------------------------------------------
iUfHL $6,981 .21 $7.576.26 $7,0/0.91 87,486.:;6
KRASS & iMUNROE CHARTERED
327 South Marschall Road
Shakopee, MN 55379 - r
I988
Cil`l Q rAKOPEE
City of Shakopee BILLING DATE 11-30-99
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE Line(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
18-11373002-1 General
$757.00 $1 , 156.00 $0.00 $1 ,913.00
18-11373117-1 Prior Lake Spring Lk Watershed Dist
$0.00 $195. 12 $0.00 $195. 12
18-11373158-1 c/o James lochart at Popham Haik
Law firm
Racetrack bond issue
(Bill applicant) James Lochart
$85.00 $0.00 $E5.00 $0.00
i8-11373200-1 Eminent Domain
(Perry - BILL PROJECT)
$0.00 $26.00 $0.00 $26.00
18-11373210-1 Storm Drainage Easements.
Bill Project.
$514.00 $156.00 $0.00 $670.00
16-11373217-1 Vierling Drive West Condemnation
$30.00 $0.00 $0.00 $30.00
PLEASE INCLUDE ACCOUNT NUMBER FOR. FROPER CFED -,
PAYMENTS RECEivED AFTER DiGVE`bER 3V.H CREDIT=_ IHE F...�_C(vi F<C- :`1C:VTH
YNOE
City of Shakopee BILLING DATE 11-30-88
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE Line( s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
-------- -------- -------- -------
18-11373220-1 By Pass Ordinance (445-3650)
$0.00 $524.00 $0.00 $524-.00
19-13137311-1 Prosecutions
$4,991 .00 $3, 196.00 $0.00 $8, 187.00
16-13731778-1 Shakopee Lumber Co. Appeal
$77.50 CR $0.00 $0.00 677.50 CR
18-137321OA-1 Scherber Storm Drainage Easements
Bill Project
i
$78.60 $755.00 $0.00 $833.60
18-137321OB-1 Upper Valley Drainage Project Scott
$96.80 $0.00 $0.00 $98.80
18-137321OC-1 Outlet Fermat Problem
$392.44 $451 .00 $0.00 $243.4=
16-1373210D-1 Upper Valley Drainage Project -
Bidding
$466.78 $0.00 $0.00 $466. 76
18-51373201-1 Minnesota Valley Restoration
Project
s62.44 $0.00 $0.00 $62.44
iB-51373213-1 General Matters
$68.00 $0.00 so.Ov s68.00
----------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL $7,4^06.56 $6,459. 12 $65.00 $13,660.66
F:F.S_3 s MOPriDE CHf ATERED
327 South Marschall Road
SnakoFee, MN 55379
City of Shakopee - BILLING DATE 12-31-58
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55-375 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE Line(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
18-11373002-1 General
$1 ,913.00 $154.00 $1 ,913.00 $154.00
18-11373117-1 Prior Lake Spring Lk Watershed Dist
$195. 12 - $209.00 $195. 12 $209.00
18-11373158-1 c/o James lochart at Popham Haik
Law firm
Racetrack bond issue
(Bill applicant) James Lochart
$0.00 $0.00 $85.00 $85.00 CR
18-11773200-1 Eminent Domain-
(Perry - BILL PROJECT)
$26.00 $13.110 52b.0J $0.00
18-11373210-1 Storm Drainage Easements.
Bili Project.
$670.00 $65.00 $670.00 $65.00
18-11373217-1 Vierling Drive West Condemnation
$30.00 $0.00 $30.00 $0.00
PLEASE INCLUDE ACCOUNT NUMBER FOR PROPER CREDIT
REi:ElbEC APER LECENEER 31TH. C^EDIIE!i THE �(:T-
dhakoGee, isPi ::...�. C L 1 E M T `. _i M 1-1 . f
Acco-_:nt N.�,roar RE Linr. , s>
Balance Boling" Received Baa lance
l a'-1 )373_2.:20., Pa Ordinance ( 445-3650)
. -
ss 4.00 $556.00 $5?4.00 s5,76.00
14-133137311-1 -Prosecutions
.' $8, 187.00 $3,400.00 $8, 187.00 $3,400.00
18-1"731778-1 Shakopee Lumber Co. Appeal
$77.50 Ca s0.00 -17.50 'FO.00
16-1"73210A-1 Scherber Storm Drainage Easements
Bill Project
$833.60 - S0.00 $833.60 $0.00
18-13732108-1 Upper .Valley, Drainage Project Scott . _ ..
$59.80 $O.CO s>B,BG. $V.GC.
18-1 73?i .ic-1 Outlet P�r..it Problem
18 i3. . .
S466.7e $0.00 $466.78 $0 Av
18-513732,01-1 Minnesota Valley Restoration
Project
$32.45 $V.00 582.44 50.00
18-51373213-1 General Matters
$38.00 sO.00 s68.00 $0.00
- -----------------------------------_________________
Til)A.- i1.',., -(.0.68 :4,5. .. s1;,415.09 b4 . 4::9.4:
l�
Ehlers and Associates,Inc.
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
NEWSLTTER
1
1%.10
OFFICES IN MINNEAPOLIS AND WAUKESHA • 507 Marquette Avenue • Minnea Delis, MN 55402-1255 - 612339-8291
VOLUME 34, NUMBER 1
FILE: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates, Inc.
Please distribute to governing body members
JANUARY, 1989
The management and staff of Ehlers and Associates wish you all another happy and successful solar
orbit. We congratulate those who continue to serve the public and those newly entering public
service. Have a good one!
MUNICIPALITIES MAKE PROGRESS
This starts our thirty-fifth year building better communities through finance, and the changes are
remarkable. Tax-exempt interest rates in the early 1950s were around 2.5%, while home mortgages
(taxable) were about 5%. The total tax-exempt bond market was about $6 or $7 billion per year. A
million dollar issue was considered a "King Size" issue. Hundreds of towns had no sewer systems, or
had collection systems without treatment. Dirt streets and rudimentary water systems were common.
The Midwest had an inordinate number of Baa and Be bond ratings. Some Communities didn't dare ask
for a bond rating, but after tens of millions of dollars of financings, now have complete sewerage,
water, storm sewer systems, streets, city halls, hospitals and A, A-1, and Aa bond ratings. There are
also those who say it couldn't be done, but if progress sometimes seems slow, we need only to look
back and see the accomplishments. Local government works -- and we are proud to have been
instrumental.
ARE TAX- EXEMPT BONDS SAFE?
The shape of change can be seen. While the Supreme Court changed the Constitution allowing federal
taxation of interest on state and municipal borrowings, we don't see Congress launching a full attack
on local governments. Rather we see tax exemption offered only to those financings that go to the
heart of state sovereignty - up blit infrastructure and operating capital. One hopes that Congress will
clean up the mire it created so that investors will know simply, whether interest on their bonds is
tax-exempt. With a smaller supply and a cleaner market, long term tax-exempt interest rates might
well drop below 6%. The efficiency of tax-exempt financing will have been restored.
FUTURE CREDIT MARKET CRISIS?
Many are worried about the rising sea of corporate leveraged buy outs and federal debt. Credit is a
finite resource which, if we allow, won't be available for the real business of America. Historically
overextension of credit has resulted in inflation, high interest rates and, sometimes, massive
failures. In some crises the government has had to ration credit. 7% veg&
Robert L. Ehlers
IS MUNICIPAL BOND INSURANCE WORTHWHILE?
Is bond insurance worthwhile? You bet - sometimes. Getting issues qualified(whereby the successful
bidder on the bonds decides if the insurance is to be purchased and pays the premium) greatly
enhances their marketability and usually results in lower interest costs. The bidder on the bonds
decides on the sale date if the insurance is purchased. If purchased, the bidder pays the premium. In
other cases it makes economic sense for the issuer to simply pay the premium and offer insured
bonds. For some issuers insurance makes little economic sense. What's best for your issue? The
answer will depend on such factors as current financial market conditions, the terms and type of
bonds, the issuer and the modeling of the various financing options.
C/Carolyn Druddee
FmHA LOANS: DISCOUNT PURCHASE PROGRAM
The Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) is required to discount existing loans to eligible
communities commencing January, 1989. We think that the program will be similar to the 1988
program which included the following features:
I) Depending on the interest rate and maturity, the discounted community loan prices can be
50% or less than the amount of the loan outstanding.
2) Tax-exempt refinancing is permitted.
3) A community may discount one or all of its loans.
4) Communities who declined the past program can still participate.
Each community with an F mHA loan should determine whether to refinance. At no obligation, Ehlers
and Associates will perform a detailed analysis and, once the guidelines are official, we will update
the analysis and report back. Allow enough time to plan and discuss this complex undertaking. Those
who participated previously benefitted greatly. _
Steve Emerson
PERSONAL NOTE OF THANKS
I want to extend a sincere "thank-you" to all the clients, friends, and business associates in Iowa and
Minnesota for the flowers, phone calls, and written notes of sympathy 1 received following the recent
death of my husband, Charles Vanda. The expressions of sympathy and concern are deeply
appreciated.
Jeanne Frederick
We look forward to seeing you at:
NAHRO MID-WINTER CONFERENCE -- January 18-20.
MINNESOTA SCHOOL BOARDS CONVENTION - January 20-21.
ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA COUNTIES - January 22-24.
MINNESOTA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY OFFICERS - February 14-17.
MASBO WINTER WORKSHOP AND MEETING - February 16-17.
Reprinted from
Credit Markets
THE FIXED-INCOME SECURITIES WEEKLY
Monday.May 23, 1988
FORUM
Essav
Clearer Tax Laws, Supply Constraints
Needed to Reduce Tax-Exempt Rates
By Robert L. Ehlers
Interest rales, especially tax- Clearly, for one taxed at top would be restored.How might we
exempt rates, continue a[ a his- state and federal rates, tax-ex- do that?in two ways:Clarify the
tonically high level for reasons empt bonds should be the In. tax laws and reduce the supply
even economists cannot fathom. vestment of choice. So why are of tax-exempts.
Most attribute the high rates to they so cheap? Why don't tax-
inflation or fear of Inflation — exempts drop to a 5% yield to Clarifying the Tax Laws
after all, "only" 4% Is a 4% an- compare with net taxable yields?
nual loss of value. There are two main reasons:Un- The tax laws could be im-
Then there are taxes. Put the certainty about tax exemption proved in four ways to remove
two together.and even 8V.%tax. and an oversupply of bonds. major uncertainties:
able Interest Is unrewarding. p large part of the reason be- •State clearly that bonds issued
First, assume interest.income hind high tax-exempt rates is from for things public po everything
is taxed prospectively at 33%by thaI=Congressthe Treasury,and °°I�to r bort` `uhgohu[
the federal government and at their staffs have an contused thefully P
9% by a state. In this case Min- market that many participants regard
ar°, Itwhether financing I facility
newts. This results In a corn- da not know what bonds are tax- anteed b nvate indust If
blued tax of 42%. exempt or when they might be- the facility Is to be owned b a
come taxable. They are unsure n[. Its financing ought
The tax: reduces the effective whether a given bond is subject governme
return on a bond yielding 8V2%to to the alternative minimum tax, to be tax-exempt.
about 5% — the formula Is whether banks may deduct their s Drop the 810 million per issuer
0.085 x 0.58 = 4.93%. The In- carrying costs. or whether some per year limit on bank-eligible
vestment return Is further erod- future action or failure to act on tax-exempt bonds.
ed by 4% inflation. making the the part of the Issuer might make ,Do not threaten the Investor
the net reward less than 1%.One a bond taxable. with future tax penalties be-
wonderswhylnvestorsaresails- cause an Issuer violates arbi-
fled with a gross yield of only This may have been the design trage rebate provisions.
8%% on long-term U.S. govern- of the tax law. and. If W. it has s pass legislation prohibitingret-
ment bonds. succeeded In wrecking the tax- roactiveg
taxation of municipal
The fact that Japan does not exempt market. Now. some bonds.
tax Interest on savings explains Treasury officials say tax-ex- These corrections would large.
why that country buys about empt borrowing is anineffi- 1 restore confidence In the[ax-
one-fourth of all U.S.debt issues tient" subsidy, the Implication exem t bond market and dra-
- with their comparatively lib- being that no Interest rates maticall reduce state and local
eral yields should be exempt from federal y
taxation. borrowing costs. What else may
Still, municipal bonds have be done?
been neglected, even though bo- It surely 1s Inefficient now,but Reducing the Supply
nanza tax-exempt interest rates only because a series of tax acts.
are In excess of 90% of taxable including the Tax Reform Act of This might appear strange, in
rates. Twenty-year tax-exempts 1986, have robbed the states view of the statement above
yield almost 8%, but the only re- and their subdivisions of almost about the federal tax laws,but it
duction In return comes through all of the advantages.If we could Is necessary that those laws fur-
4% Inflation. leaving a 4% tax- get tax-exempt yields down to ther reduce the supply of tax-ex-
free yield. four times the net about half the gross rates on tax- empt bonds.
yield on taxables. able bonds, great efficiencies The oversupply Is just as re-
sponsible as the tax laws for mutual funds, to lower-tax rate The two causes of high Inter-
high tax-exempt Interest rates. Investors at yields high enough est rates are not cumulative.
And new Ideas on how to expand to compete with other In. Thus, oversupply alone causes
the Issuance of tax-exempts — vestments. high interest rates, and uncer-
such as ways to Issue tax-ex- Some might suppose that If tainty alone causes high Interest
empt federal bonds that allow re
ane remedy or the other is adopt- rates. Corcttngonlyoneprob-
private accumulation of funds ed, at least part of the reduced lem would still leave a compel-
far college lIs exac- tax-exempt Interest rates might ling cause for high rates and
erbatlng thea problem.
robproblee m.. be achieved.Could we reduce the would not bring about a signifi-
A serious result of "creative" supply and get most of the re- cant Improvement.
tax-exempt financings Is that duced Interest rate?Or might we
the demand for tax-exempt in- correct the tax law in remove In- Mr. Ehlers is/ounder and president
vestments Just could not keep up vectors' uncertainties and real- emeritus of Ehlers and Associates
with the supply. and many tax- Ize some of the projected Inc, financial advisers hared in
exempts had to be sold, through savings? A intimpolis-
SUMMARY OF AREA BOND SALES
Bond
Met Buyer
Mount Matumt Rate Imex Rating
Municipal itV Gate Type of Bonds _-Y
IOMa
Coludms Junction 10/11/88 G.O. Balls f 80011 1989-2003 1.04 1.53% M
7. 10/17/88 Sever Revenue Bonds 600, 1989-2003 7.001 1.52% M
Nest union 10/24/88 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds 44CH 1990-2001 6.93% 1.45% M
Fairfield 10/24/88 G.O. Llprovement Bonds 1,440, 1990-1999 6.63% 7.45% Al
Denison 11/01/88 G.O. Airport laprovement Bonds IDM 1989-19% 1.15% 7.36% A
Denison 11/01/88 G.O. Corporate Bonds 1,01511 1989-2M4 6.8n 1.36% A
Johnston 11/14/88 G.O. Llprovenent Bonds 1,35M 1990-2008 1.22% 7.44% A
Clarinda 11/15/88 Seger Revenue Bonds BOM 1989-2004 1.29% 7.441 M
Clarinda 11/15/88 G.O. Lgrovement Bonds I,000M 1989-2003 7.00% 1.441 M
Sioux City 11/21/88 G.O. Llprovment Bonds 2,200M 1991-2001 6.15% 7.501 Re
,incesota
Brainard 10/03/88 G.O. IWM- ent Bonds 315M 1991-2000 6.85} 7.64 A
Edina 10/03/88 G.O. Recreational Facility Bonds 2,410M 1992-2009 7.26% 1.641 Aal/M
Edina 10/03/88 G.O. Utility Revenue Bunds 3,160, 1990-1999 6.68% 7.641 MI/M
Edina 10/03/88 G.O. Taxable Tax Increlent Bands 5,I00M 1995-2009 9.60} 1.641 041/,
Edina 10/03/88 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 10,115, 19954009 7.26% 7.641 Aal/M
Lim Lakes 10/03/88 G.O. Lgroverent Bonds 2,09011 1990-1997 6.841 1.62% Baal
Lim Lakes 10/03/88 G.O. Teiporary, Bonds 6104 1991 6.43% 7.62% Baal
St. Paul Park 10/03/88 G.O. Im.,nent Bonds 680" 1989-2000 6.891 7.641 Baal
Karlstad 10/04/88 G.O. Teeporary Llprove ent Bonds 660M 1989 6.311 7.45% M
East Grand Forks 10/04/88 G.O. Llprovement Bonds 125, 1990-2004 7.331 7.64 Baal
Hennepin County 10/05/88 G.O. Liprovenent Bonds 20,50DM 1989-2003 6.801 1.64 Aaa/AM
Bass Brook 10/11/88 G.O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds 1,530M 1990-2000 7.01} 1.53% Baa
N1 toilet County 10/11/88 G.O. Drainage Bonds 195, 1989-1998 6.44%60% 1.53% A
Stewartville 10/11/88 G.O. Grant Mtid pati. Certs. 1,11M 1991 6.dK 1.531 M
Lester Prairie 10/11/88 G.O. Llprovenent Bads 45M 1989-1998 6.88} 7.53% M
I.S.D. 8716 10/17/88 G.O. Aid Antic)patim Certificates 610H 1989 6.20% 7.52% M
(Belle Plaine)
Forest Lake 10/17/88 G.O. La,mvenent Bonds 3104 1991-2000 6.95} 1.52% Baal
.hint Parrs Dist. 46011 10/11/86 G.O. School Building Bonds 3,9251 1990-2009 1.42% 7.52% Baa
(State of Minnesota)
Burnsville 10/17/88 G.O. bprovement Bonds 4,65M 1990-2004 6. 1.52% A
Al
Nilkin County 10/19/88 G.O. Capital In mvenent Bonds 45011 1990-1999 6.IM 11 7.521
Bo
Wilkin County10/19/88 G.O. Natershed Llprovement Bons 25M 1990-2004 1.01%55% 1.52%% M
Minn. Higher Ed. Fac. 10/19/88 Mortgage Revenue Bonds 4,250M 1998
1.5.0. 9332 (Mora) 10/24/88 G.O. School Building Bonds 390M 1993-1988 6.681, 1.45% A
Park 10/25/88 G.O. Tax Increnent Binds 4,50011 1991-2008 1.26% 1.45% Baa
Nate
Witsin 10/25/88 G.O. imr venent Bonds I,SIM 1990-2004 6.941 7.45% Real
ChanpScott County 10/25/88 G.O. LWrpverent Bads 8,50M 1989-2010 7.19% 7.45% Aea/PPA
Anoka County 10/25/83 G.O. Bridge Bonds 6,30011 1990-2009 1.16% .45%% Al
7
Minneapolis Sp. S/D a 10/25/88 G.O. School Building Binds 5,ISM 1991-2000 6.101 1.45% Al
Brans Valley 10/26/80 G.O. Grant 4 Loan Antic. Bonds 1,125, 1991 6.46% 1.45% M
I.S.D. ,917 11/01/88 G.O. School Building Bonds 3,19011 1991-1996 6.341 1.361 Al
(Dakota County) 2,25, 1991-2009 ].131 1.361 A
Ralabinsdale 11/01/88 G.O. I. Imrenent Bonds
Bottonwmd I1/01/88 G.O. Taxable lax Imrenent Bads 804 1991-1998 9.60% 7.36% M
Isle 11/01/88 G.O. Grant 4 Loan Anticipation Bads 665M 1991 6.38% 7.36% M
GM Sanitary District I1/01/83 G.O. Grant 8 Loan Mticipatim Bonds B6M 1991 6.39% 7.36% M
(Stearns County)
Nest Concord 11/02/88 G.O. 5tom Ser proveeent Bonds /5, 1990-1939 1.16} 1.361 M
orTx
/Vale Valley II/03/88 G.O. Refunding 4 Lryrovenent Bands 2,89011 1989-2005 6.54 7.36% A
pl,.th 11/07/88 G.O. Taxable Tax Imrerent Bonds 1,050H 1992-1998
1989--1998 6.62% 1.33% Aaa/MA
Chanhassen 11/07/88 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds
Chanhassen 11/07/88 G.O. Tax Imrenent Bonds I,OISM 1990-1997 6.641 1.331 Aaa/PAA
Chanhassen 11/07/88 G.O. to rovelent Bads 4,185, 1990-2002 6.62% 1.33% Aaa/AAA
Keewatin 11/09/80 G.O. Grant Anticipation Bonds 99011 1991 6.57% 7.33% M
Coon Rapids 11/09/88 G.O. Byrovenent Bads 5,00011 1990-2010 6.99% 1.33% Aea
Faimmnt 11/14/88 G.O. lnprovenent Bonds 395, 1990-2003 6.96% 7.441 Al
Fai moot 11/14/38 G.O. Sorer Revenue Bonds ISOM 1990-2009 7.12% 7.441 Al
Monticello 11/14/88 G.O. Nater System Bonds 1,10011 1990-2004 6.9% 7.441 A
Bond
Net Buyer
Runkle lltY gate Type of Bonds Amount Nate Rate Index Rat1 n0
Vadmis Heights 11/15/80 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment ends 3,070M 1992-20110 9.38% 1.44% A
Nev Ulm 11/15/87 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 1,67511 1992-2012 7.19% 7.44% Al
hurray 11/15/88 G.O. Urai nage Ditch Bonds 7" 1990-20041 1.01E 7.44% Baal
Shakopee II/15/88 G.O. Tax Increment Bands 1,01511 1990-2001 6.83% 7.44L A
Carlton County 11/15/88 G.O. Capital Improvement Bands 33M 1990-M 1.04% 1.44% A
Stearns County 11MMS Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Bonds AIM 1991-1998 9.35% 1.44% A
Stearns County 11/15/88 G.O. Orai.9e Ditch Bonds 4MM 1989-2008 l.OTL 7.44% A
Oakdale 11/16/88 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 3,200M 1992-2004 9.54% 7.44% A
Oakdale 11/16/88 G.O. Improvement Bads 2,22511 1990-1999 6.58L 1.44% A
Lakeville 11/16/88 G.O. Immprove aot Bonds 2,40@1 1990-2010 /.AIL 7.44% A
Wrthimptm 11/17/68 G.O. Grant Anticipation Bunds 2,88511 1991 6.69% 7.44L Baal
Wrthington 11/17/88 G.O. Tax Incremmnt Bads 41M 1991-1998 11 7.44% Baal
Wrthington 11/17/88 G.O. Improvement Bonds 28511 1990-%4 6.93% 7.44% Baal
Wrthingtom 11/17/88 G.O. Serer Revenue Bads 16th 1990-1998 6.66% 1.44% Baal
Nagle Grove 11/11/88 G.O. laprovement Bonds 5,4001 1991-1995 6.46% 1.44% Al
Chaska 11/21/88 G.O. Improvement Bonds 3,3001 1990-1999 6.19% 1.50% Baal
Chaska 11/21/88 G.O. Tax Increment Bands 3,9101 1995-2001 1.11% 7.50% Baal
Chaska 11/21/88 G.O. Taxable Tax Increment Bads 2,3401 1995-2000 9.72% 1.SOL Baal
Lake Park 11/21/88 G.O. School Building Bads 1,20011 1990-M 7.23% 1.50% Nt
North Mankato 11/21/68 G.O. E9uipment Certs. of Indebt. 2501 1989_1993 6.36% 7.50% A
North Mankato 11/21/88 G.O. Improvement Bunds 415th 1990-1999 6.12% 1.50% A
Borth Mankato 1121/88 G.O. T. increment Bads 525H 1991-1998 6.68% 1.50% A
Mmrlawd 11/21/88 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 1,450M 1991-2009 1.20% 1.50% A
Moorhead 11/211M G.O. IMArovement Bonds 9201 1990-2004 6.94% 7.50% A
I.S.D. #194 (Lakeville) 1122/88 G.O. School Building Bonds 4,10011 1993-2002 1.06% 1.50% A
I.S.D. All 11/28/88 G.O. school Building Bads 1,5311 1993-2000 7.05% 1.581 Baal
(Cartridge-Isanti)
I.S.D. #549 1129/88 G.O. School Building Bads 4,0001 1991-2005 1.31% /.581 Baa
(Perhao-0ent) '1
I.S.D. 6130 11/29/88 G.O. School Building Bonds 1,1001 1990-2008 1.54 1.56% Baa
(North Branch)
Wright County 11/29/88 G.O. Capital Lprovement 3,80011 1990-2009 /.3D% 7.58% A
Plan Bonds
I.S.D. #13B 11/30/88 G.O. Refunding Bonds 3,51511 1991-2010 7.62% 7.58% MM
(Wldingford)
I.S.D. 22 11/30/89 G.O. School Building Bonds 4,2001 1990-2010 1.62% /.58% Baal
(Detroit Lakes)
Wisconsin
Balsam Lake 10/03/80 G.O. Refunding Bads 145M 1989-2003 1.2916 7.64% Mt
Madison Metro S/D 10/03/88 G.O. Prooissory Notes 3,1301 1991-1994 6.30% 1.64% Aaa
West Milwaukee 10/04/88 Taxable G.O. Promissory motes 1101 1995-1998 9.58E 1.64% Baal
Wst Milwaukee 10/04/88 G.O. Promissory Notes 3301 1997 7.09% 7.64% Baal
Saukville 10/12/88 G.O. Promissory Notes 11011 1993-1996 6.841 7.53% Baal
Altoona 10/17/88 G.O. Promissory Wtes 67M 1989-1998 6.841 1.521 an
Beloit10/11/88 G.O. Anticipatim motes 3,10011 1989 6.38% 7.52% Ml
Brown County 11/14/88 Corporate Purpose Bonds 4,90011 1989-2008 7.11% 7.44% b
Brookfield 11/15/08 G.O. Promissory Wtes 9301 1989-1998 6.50E 1.44% MI
Brookfield 11/15/88 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bads 4,0101 1989-2008 7.Ill 1.441 Aal
Iladism I1/15/80 Taxable G.O. Promissory Notes 3,50011 1993 9.06% 7.44% M
Delavan 11/15/86 Wterworks System Mort. Rev. Bads 2,7/SM 1991-2010 7.11% 1.44% M
Saukville 11/16/88 Wterworks System Mort. Rev. Bonds 6" 1990_2008 I.W% 7.44% M
Cumberland 1122/88 Severage System mortgage 1,1501 1989-2001 1.35% 1.50% M
Revenue Refunding Bonds
Sussex 11/30/88 G.O. Promissory Nolen 1,21511 1990-1998 6.84% 7.58% A
morth Dakota
Fargo Public School 10/25/88 Certificates of Indebtedness 3,50011 1989 6.23% 7.45% NR
District 01
RamNmy County 11/01/88 Temporary Improvement Bonds 665M 1991 6.23% 1.%% M1
Ramsey County I1/01/89 Refunding Improvement Bonds 67M 1989-2001 1.11% 7.36% A
Fargo 11/07/88 Refunding Improvement Bonds 4,5511 1989-2006 6.841 1.33% WM
13
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
Regular Session City Council Chambers Dec. 14, 1988
Chairman Laurent called the meeting to order at 7:45 A.M. with
the following persons present: Gary Laurent, Mary Keen, Melanie
Kahleck, Bill Wermerskirchen, Terry Forbord, Jim Stillman, and
Jerry Wampach. Also present were Mayor Dolores Lebens, Barry
Stock, Administrative Assistant, Dennis Kraft, Community
Development Director, and Dave Hutton, City Engineer. Absent
were Harry Koehler, Ruben Ruehle, and Sheila Carlson.
Forbord/Kahleck moved to approve the agenda of the December 14,
1988 meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Wermerskirchen/Stillman moved to approve the minutes of the
November 9, 1988 meeting as kept. Motion carried with Comm.
Forbord abstaining.
Mr. Stock stated that Mayor Lebens has requested to appear before
the Downtown Committee to explain her opposition to the proposed
mini bypass. He stated that she would like to propose to the
Downtown Committee several alternatives which would alleviate
many of her current concerns regarding the proposed plan.
Mr. Stock noted that in November the City of Shakopee formally
moved to make the downtown mini bypass a part of the official
map. Mayor Lebens has refused to sign the necessary legal
documents to make this action official. The City of Shakopee is
now in litigation to secure legal authorization to proceed with
the official mapping of the mini bypass.
Mr. Stock stated that he has met with Mayor Lebens and that she
is opposed to the mini bypass for the following reasons:
1. The Mayor is opposed to the elimination of the parking
lots behind City Hall. She believes that since the parking lots
were assessed, they cannot be removed unless they are relocated
in there entirety. She does not believe that the addition of on
street parking constitutes the replacement of the parking stalls
lost in the event of the mini bypass construction.
2. The Mayor believes that provisions should be made in the
final bridge design to allow for the future extension of Levee
Drive to the east.
3. Mayor Lebens believes that the City should not provide
more funding for the bridge than MNDOT.
4. Mayor Lebens is convinced that with the completion of
the southerly bypass, much of the traffic on First Avenue would
1
be eliminated and thus the need for the mini bypass may not be
justifiable in terms of the cost impacts on the City at this
time.
Mr. Stock then reviewed two alternatives proposed by the Mayor.
The first alternative involved moving the bypass further to the
south. Mr. Stock stated that the pros for this alternative
included possible cost savings as a result of not having to
acquire Brambilla's property. Another positive result would be
that the parking lots would be preserved. And finally,
alternative #1 would eliminate blighted buildings presently
located on Block 3 and 4. Mr. Stock stated that the cons for
alternative #1 included MNDot's contention that this alternative
would constitute a complete redesign and the process would have
to start over. Another con of alternative
#1 is that the
historical buildings would be lost on Blocks 3 and 4.
Mr. Stock then reviewed the Mayor's second alternative.
Alternative #2 maintained the current bridge alignment but
demolished the buildings located in Block 3 and 4. The pros for
this alternative included the approximate cost savings of
$135,000 as a result of not having to construct the retaining
wall and alley currently proposed for construction as a result of
the mini bypass. The second alternative would also create an
open area where parking stalls lost as a result of the mini
bypass could be relocated. Another pro for alternative #2
included the creation of developable area as result of the
demolition and finally the elimination of blighted buildings on
Block 3 and 4. The cons related to alternative #2 as perceived
by staff included the fact the City Hall operations would be
displaced and alternative space would have to be rented until
such time that a new City Hall could be constructed. Secondly,
costs would be incurred by the City to acquire the subject
property and replace the parking lot as proposed by Mayor Lebens.
And finally, all historical buildings would be lost on Blocks 3
and 4 .
Mr. Stock stated that alternative #3 is staff's proposal which
maintained the current bridge alignment with the partial
demolition of Blocks 3 and 4. The pros related to alternative #3
are the same as alternative #2 with one additional positive
result which preserved some of the historical buildings on Block
4. The negative to alternative #3 primarily involved additional
costs that would be incurred by the City to acquire the subject
property.
Mayor Lebens stated that she would like to see MNDOT raise the
bridge to preserve the future extension of Levee Drive to the
east. Mayor Lebens further stated that the mini bypass
enbironmental assessment worksheet called for the preservation of
the future extension of Levee Drive to the east. Mr. Hutton
stated that MNDot has looked at shortening the bridge span which
2
l�
would reduce the bridge depth. He stated that this would reduce
the bridge depth from 6 to 3 feet. He also stated that MNDoT is
providing for the construction of the bridge piers so that they
are deep enough to accommodate the extension of Levee Drive to
the east. He noted that Levee Drive would still need to be
lowered to meet MNDOT's bridge clearance specification of 14.5
feet given these two considerations. He went on to state that it
was his understanding that the bridge clearance height could be
reduced if Levee Drive was extended as a local street in the
future. He stated that MNDOT has informed him that if we
construct Levee Drive at this time we would have to adhere to
their standards. He also noted that this would necessitate
additional historical review of the property to the east of the
proposed bridge head.
Mr. Hutton stated that in order to maintain the MNDOT clearance
of 14.5 feet the elevation of Levee Drive would have to be
lowered approximately 4 to 5 feet. This would put the elevation
of Levee Drive in the 100 year flood plain. Mr. Hutton stated
that this can be done if the City of Shakopee can withstand an
occasional flooding of this street. Mr. Hutton went on to state
that if the City of Shakopee extends Levee Drive as a local
street in the future and does not have a problem with limiting
access to the street to no truck traffic, the elevation of the
bridge could be reduced to approximately 12 feet. Comm. Forbord
questioned whether emergency vehicles would be able to fit under
a 12 foot clearance. Mr. Hutton stated that he had not done any
investigation of that issue. Comm. Wermerskirchen questioned
where Levee Drive would connect if it were extended to the east.
Mayor Lebens stated that Levee Drive is proposed to connect with
Bluff Street to the east and would connect with First Avenue
somewhere to the east perhaps at Hardees or Perkins.
Comm. Kahleck stated that she was concerned about extending Levee
Drive to the east until such time that an analysis of the area to
the east could be done to determine what uses were appropriate
for that area. She questioned whether or not the City had any
plans for that area. Mr. Stock stated that much of the land
within Huber Park is in the flood plain which limits it's
development potential. He also stated that the City of Shakopee
has not done any analysis of the development potential of that
area. Comm. Kahleck questioned whether there was any price
difference in the currently proposed bypass versus the proposal
to reduce the bridge span and clearance. Mr. Hutton stated that
there was essentially no difference between the two proposals and
it was his understanding that MNDoT was designing the bridge to
provide for the increased clearance.
Chrmn. Laurent questioned how often the river has flooded to the
100 year flood level. Mr. Hutton and Mayor Lebens both stated
that to the best of their knowledge it has never flooded to that
level.
3
Comm. Wampach questioned what the proposed bridge clearance would
be for the new bridge in comparison to the bridge clearance on
the existing bridge. Mr. Hutton stated that he thought the
current bridge clearance at Levee Drive was approximately 14.5
feet.
Comm. Kahleck stated that she would like to see what the traffic
flows were on First Ave. after completion of the mini bypass
before proceeding with the extension of Levee Drive. Comm.
Wampach stated that the extension of Levee Drive would enhance
development potential of property to the east of the bridge head
if it were extended. Comm. Stillman questioned how much lower
the new bridge would be than the current bridge. Mr. Hutton
stated that he was not sure. Mayor Lebens stated that she
thought the bridge clearance under the proposed plan was
approximately 5.5 feet. Mr. Hutton stated that the actual height
differential between the current bridge and the proposed bridge
is about 3 feet in terms of elevation.
Chrmn. Laurent questioned whether or not the Committee should
reach agreement on the Levee Drive issue before proceeding.
Comm. Forbord questioned what we were talking about in terms of
the Levee Drive issue, the height of the bridge or the elevation
of Levee Drive? Comm. Forbord summarized the Levee Drive issue
as follows: 1) The height of the bridge and the elevation of
Levee Drive and 2) whether or not Levee Drive should be extended.
Chrmn. Laurent questioned to what extent Mayor Lebens was
proposing that Levee Drive be included in the currently mini
bypass plan at this time. Mayor Lebens stated that she wanted to
have it made clear in the plan that Levee Drive can be extended
in the future. Mr. Hutton stated that he is comfortable that
MNDoT is accommodating the future extension of Levee Drive even
though it does not actually show up on the plan. Chrmn. Laurent
stated that he is having a problem with this issue because the
Downtown Committee had talked about this very same issue over two
months ago and they went on record in support of providing for
the bridge to provide for the extension of Levee Drive at a later
date.
Comm. Forbord stated that he would like .the Committee to keep in
mind that over the past several years, the Downtown Committee has
never intended to have truck traffic on Levee Drive. He noted
that the whole purpose of the downtown plan was to make the
downtown a more pedestrian friendly environment. He went on to
state
that one of the majoroals of the downtown own mini bypass and
the southerlyb was to
ass YP keep truck traffic out of the
downtown area. He stated that the bridge g clearance at Levee
Drive is a moot point when it comes to truck traffic but is
crucial when it comes to emergency vehicles. He stated that the
records will show that this has been the discussion on the
clearance of Levee Drive over the past years.
4
>3
Comm. Forbord then stated his feelings regarding this matter. He
stated that Mayor Lebens has not supported the Committee and she
has in fact used intimidation tactics on several of their
members. He felt the Mayor was trying to use the Downtown
Committee as another stalling tactic to delay the bridge downtown
redevelopment and the mini bypass. Comm. Forbord stated that he
did not think it was appropriate for the Commission to be
hoodwinked by the Mayor's actions to delay the bridge. He stated
he felt the Committee should proceed as they always have and
accomplish what this City needs and not be intimidated by someone
elses personal beliefs for their own personal gain. He suggested
that the Committee make a decision to leave things alone and to
work with MNDOT in a cooperative manner.
Mayor Lebens stated that she disagreed with Comm. Forbord in
entirety and that she was looking toward the future of this
community. She went on to state that she has often been tempted
to let the mini by pass go through as proposed. She stated that
she would like to see Levee Drive go through but that it will not
benefit her one bit. She stated that she is only interested in
the City of Shakopee's future. She stated that she has the
support of many persons in Shakopee regarding her stance on the
mini bypass. Mayor Lebens stated further that she has funding
support from individuals in the community to fight this issue all
the way to the Supreme Court and that she will never sign the
document. Mayor Lebens stated that she has two letters from
officials in other communities who had parking lots created in
the same manner that we had. She stated that the letters support
her position regarding the replacement of the lots. Mayor Lebens
stated that she cannot release the names of the persons who sent
her the letters because she may be using this information in
court. Mayor Lebens questioned how other property owners in the
downtown area would feel if the City owned parking lots across
from their establishment were removed. Mayor Lebens stated that
when the parking lots were constructed 20 years ago that property
owners were opposed to the assessments. At that time they were
assured that the parking lots could never be removed. In fact,
several of the property owners at that time requested that their
names be placed on the deed to ensure that the parking lots be
replaced. At that time, property owners were ensured that state
statutes would protect their rights and the parking lots would
not be for any other purpose except parking. Mayor Lebens stated
that if the parking lot issue is taken all the way to the Supreme
Court it will delay the project. She stated that if the parking
lots are replaced in like and kind this would eliminate her
concerns. She stated that you cannot replace any parking on
street because that parking was always there. Mayor Lebens
stated that she did not care to come before the Downtown
Committee but at the request of Mr. Stock she agreed to come and
answer questions from the Committee. But, if the Committee was
not willing to hear her responses she felt it was time for her to
5
leave.
Chrmn. Laurent stated that he appreciated Mayor Lebens attendance
at the meeting and the concerns that she is expressing. Comm.
Forbord said that he did not want Mayor Lebens to leave and that
was not the point of what to said. He noted that what he said
was a part cf th3 �f£icial records of the City and that he
disagrees with Mayor Lebens but he did not want her to leave.
Comm. Kahleck stated that she thought the purpose of Mayor Lebens
visit here today was to come to some kind of compromise that is
workable to everyone and that will not delay the project. She
stated that she agreed with Comm. Forbord regarding the
Committee's position on Levee Drive and that they have always
supported and gone on record in support of providing for the
construction of the bridge in such a fashion to allow for the
future extension of Levee Drive.
Kahleck/Keen moved to go on record in support of the Downtown
Committee's earlier position regarding the construction of the
bridge and bypass in such a fashion to provide for the future
extension of Levee Drive to the east. Motion carried
unanimously.
Chrmn. Laurent stated that he felt that the Mayor and the
Committee were in agreement that Levee Drive should be extended
at some future time and that it should be provided for in the
construction of the new bridge and bypass. Mayor Lebens stated
that if the extension of Levee Drive is not provided for as a
part of the currently proposed mini bypass plan she doubted that
it would ever be constructed.
Comm. Stillman questioned if it were possible for MNDoT to
include on the plan in detail the. elevation of Levee Drive and
the 14.5 foot clearance. Mr. Hutton stated that he would talk
With MNDoT to see if that could be included on the final plan.
Comm. Keen questioned whether or not the retaining walls would
have to be preserved in alternative #2 or alternative #3 . Mr.
Stock noted that at the present time if alternative #2 or 43 were
pursued the area in Blocks 3 and 4 could be filled which would
eliminate the need for a retaining wall.
Discussion then ensued on the amount of parking that would be
lost if the mini bypass were constructed. Comm. Wermerskirchen
stated that he concurred with Mayor Lebens regarding her position
on the replacement of the parking stalls that would be lost.
Comm. Forbord stated that the City of Shakopee has legal opinions
from both of our City Attorneys and the League of Minnesota
Cities stating that it is possible to remove the parking lots.
Mr. Stock stated that while this is true, there is presently no
case law on this issue and that it could potentially end up in
the Supreme Court if someone is willing to pursue it. Comm.
6
/ 1
Wampach questioned if an individual could pursue this issue in
court or whether it would have to proceed as a class action suit
since a number of people were assessed for the parking lots?
Staff stated that they did not have an answer to this question
but that it would seem likely that an individual could pursue the
issue had they been assessed for the lot. Comm. Wermerskirchen
stated that a number of stalls were created in the Second Avenue
parking lot and that this lot was not assessed to the property
owners. He questioned whether or not the creation of this
parking lot would replace the stalls lost in conjunction with the
elimination of the City Hall lot if the mini bypass were
constructed? He went on to state however that he did believe
that the downtown area was in need of additional parking. Comm.
Stillman questioned what process would be involved to condemn the
parking lots within the mini by-pass alignment. Mr. Hutton
stated that it would involve reverse condemnation and that
appraisals would be necessary and that the persons responsible
for paying the assessments 20 years ago would be reimbursed in
some form.
Comm. Forbord stated that the individual performing the
Comprehensive Plan update is proposing that a parking ramp be
constructed somewhere in the downtown area. He went on to state
that it would be possible for the City to initiate an analysis
and identify proper sites for additional parking lots. Comm.
Forbord felt that this process could be completed prior to it
being litigated.
Chrmn. Laurent stated that he felt it might be appropriate for
the Downtown Committee to proceed in an effort to avoid the
inevitable conflict that may exist regarding the removal of the
parking lot and at the same time provide a benefit to the
downtown area. Mr. Hutton stated that an analysis of the Mayor's
proposal to relocate the lost parking stalls could be going on
conjunction with the mini bypass final design. He stated that
the Mayor's second alternative did not have an impact on the
alignment. Chrmn. Laurent stated that this fits in with the
Committee's goals and objectives. He noted that the Committee is
proposing to complete a property inventory analysis which would
identify sites for redevelopment which could include the
provision of parking lots.
Kahleck\Stillman moved to recommend to City Council that the
relocation of the parking stalls lost as a result of the mini
bypass be relocated in kind in the downtown area at a location to
be determined upon further study and analysis. Motion carried
unanimously.
Chrmn. Laurent questioned whether or not the Committee should
continue the meeting or table the Downtown Committee goals and
objectives until the January meeting. Mr. Stock stated that
initially the Downtown Committee was to report back to the City
7
Council before the end of the year regarding their goals and
objectives. However, due to the unforeseen issue that was
presented to the Downtown Committee today, staff felt City
Council would understand and would not be opposed to receiving
the Downtown Committee's goals and objectives at their second
meeting in January. It was the consensus of the Committee to
table this Downtown Committee's goals and objectives until their
first meeting in January.
Mr. Stock informed the Committee that a survey was being
distributed to the property owners in phase I part II of the
downtown project area to determine their satisfaction with the
project. The survey is similar to the one that was distributed
last fall to the property owners in phase I part I.
Keen/Wermerskirchen moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 A.M.
Motion carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
8
� y
Minutes of the
Community Development Commission
City Council Chambers
Shakopee, Mn
December 14, 1988
Vice Chairperson Koopman called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
with the following members present; Al Furrie, Jane DuBois, Mark
Miller, Terry Joos and Donald Koopman. Chairman Keane arrived at
5:50 p.m. Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant and Dennis
Kraft, Acting City Administrator were also present.
DuBois/Miller moved to approve the minutes of the November 9,
1988 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock stated that in order for the City to maintain star City
designation, the City of Shakopee must annually update the One
and Five Year Work Plans. At the last meeting of the Community
Development Commission discussion ensued on the goals, objectives
and strategies for the 1989 One and Five Year Work Plans. Mr.
Stock noted that he has taken the items that were discussed at
the Commission's last meeting and incorporated them into the One
and Five Year Work Plans. Mr. Stock noted that the Downtown
Committee's Goals and Objectives have also been incorporated into
the one and Five Year Community Development Commission Work
Plans. Commissioner DuBois questioned whether or not there were
any buildings in the downtown area that were listed on the
Historical Society National Register. Mr. Stock stated that
there were no buildings in the downtown presently on the
historical register. Commissioner DuBois questioned whether or
not the City's housing enforcement officer was systematically
inspecting the buildings in the downtown area. Mr. Stock stated
that the housing inspector was currently in the process of
inspecting all of the residential rental units in the downtown
area. Mr. Stock also noted that the housing enforcement program
was being proposed to be expanded to all residential units within
the community. Mr. Stock stated that he did not know when this
program would be initiated on a City wide basis. Mr. Stock did
note that the proposed program was based on a certificate of
occupancy approach. Commissioner DuBois noted that several
senior citizens have stated concern over the proposed housing
inspection program especially in regard to cost implications.
Commissioner Miller commended the Downtown Committee on the work
that they have done in developing their goals and objectives. He
suggested that the Community Development Commission put their
goals and objectives in a similar format to make them more
understandable. Commissioner Miller stated that he felt that one .
of the key objectives of the Community Development Commission was
to collect information and disseminate it to Shakopee residents
1
in an understandable format. He noted that several of the
Community Development Commission's goals and objectives were
related to a primary objective of collecting and disseminating
information. It was the consensus of the Committee to have staff
reassemble the Community Commission's One Year Work Program in a
format that was comparable to the Downtown Committee's Goals and
.Objectives.
The Commission then reviewed the primary goals as set forth in
the One and Five Year Work Plans. Commissioner Miller suggested
that more subgoals be added to promote residential development
that will increase the population base of the City. He suggested
that perhaps the Commission could embark on a more extensive
marketing and education campaign which focused on residential
developers and real estate persons. Discussion ensued on several
of the issues that affect residential development in our
community. Commissioner Joos noted that transportation access
into our community and taxes are a negative issue with persons
considering Shakopee for development. Commissioner DuBois
suggested that perhaps the City should get into more speculative
development. She questioned if it would be appropriate for the
City to extend streets and services to currently undeveloped
areas in an effort to spur more residential development. Mr.
Stock stated that he was under the impression that most
communities did not extend roadways and services unless
development was pending in that area. He stated that the City
would incur significant costs if we were to extend roadways and
services in the hope of eventually attracting residential
developers. It would be quite a risk for the City to incur.
Chairman Keane stated that the normal process was for the City to
extend streets and assess the improvements back to the abutting
property owners. He doubted whether property owners would be
willing to pay the assessments on land that may be developed in
the future. Commissioner Miller suggested that the City allocate
more long range planning time to identify executive type
residential development areas. Chairman Keane stated that he was
aware of several residential projects that were of the executive
class that were constructed in open corn fields. He noted that
some communities have expended funds to incorporate landscaping
design features that can make former corn fields attractive
executive developments. He also noted that this type of
development takes a strong commitment from the City in terms of
planning, engineering and often times financial assistance.
Commissioner Furrie suggested that the CDC consider developing a
policy that is similar to the industrial development incentive
policy which focuses on residential development. Commissioner
Keane suggested that the City of Shakopee should keep in mind
that the Prior Lake interceptor currently bisects the land East
of the industrial park. He stated that the area East of the
interceptor is currently zoned I-1 and is outside of the MUSA .
line. He suggested that the City of Shakopee include in their
Five Year Plan a comprehensive look at this area and possible
2
q
rezoning of it for residential purposes. He noted that this area
is a high amenity area and would be suitable for executive
housing development.
Chairman Keane stated that the Dean's Lake area would be very
condusive for executive housing assuming that dredging of the
lake occurred. Mr. Keane noted that the current condition of
Dean's Lake is comparable to what many of the Minneapolis Lakes
looked like in the early 19001s.
Discussion then turned to the encouragement of tourism
opportunities in Shakopee. Commissioner Keane suggested that
rather than focusing on new entertainment attractions, the City
should develop accessory services to feed off of the present
attractions. For example, he suggested that Shakopee might be a
prime location for specialty retail shops that may be attractive
to the tourists currently driving through our community.
Commissioner Furrie stated that he felt that the majority of
commercial development that will be occurring in Shakopee will be
focused towards the tourism industry and the patrons currently
attending the attractions. Commissioner Furrie stated his belief
was that if anything is to occur in the downtown area it will
have to have some tie to the tourism industry. He stated that he
believed that any other type of commercial development in
Shakopee would occur at the intersections of the proposed
southerly by-pass.
Miller/Joos moved to direct staff to revise the One and Five Year
Work Plans incorporating several of the objectives discussed at
this evenings meeting and also to put them into a format
comparable to the Downtown Committee's Work Plan. Motion carried
unanimously.
Discussion then turned to the goals and objectives of the
Downtown Committee. Commissioner DuBois questioned whether or
not the location of a City Hall in the downtown area was an
objective of the Downtown Committee. Mr. Stock responded in the
affirmative. Commissioner Joos stated that he felt strongly that
if a new City Hall were to be constructed that it be done so in
the downtown area. It was the general consensus of the Community
Development Commission that Downtown Shakopee would be the best
site for a new City Hall. Discussion ensued on the City Hall
siting process that was done in 1987 and the flaws in the
balloting process.
Joos/Furrie moved to approve the Downtown Committee Work Plan
with special emphasis added to their preference for locating a
new city hall in the downtown area. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock then gave a brief review of the Downtown mini by-pass .
status and a proposal that was made by Mayor Lebens to the
Downtown Committee which would alleviate many of her concerns
3
regarding the proposed by-pass. The CDC suggested that Mayor
Lebens be requested to appear before their committee and review
her concerns and proposed alternatives.
Mr. Stock then gave a brief economic development update on
several businesses that are currently interested in locating in
Shakopee.
Furrie/DuBois moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:50 P.M. Motion
carried unanimously.
Barry Stock
Recording Secretary
4
/ 5
SHAKO_PEE_COALIT_ION
MEETING_MINUTES___JANUA2Y_3,_1989
The meeting was called to order at 4:45 PM by Chairman Brian
Norris in the Citizens State Bank Community Room.
Members Present: David Hart (Extension Service), Eileen Moran
(Scott County Human Services), Debra Bates
(Shakopee Community Education), Claude Kolb
(Knights Of Columbus), Judson Keup (1ep) S. C. D.
Community Action), Bill Nevin (Rotary), Sister
Esther Wagner (SACS), Mary Keen (Ministerial
Aeon. ), Brian Norrie (Citizens State Bank), and
George Muenchow (Shakopee Community
Recreation).
All members introduced themselves.
Judson shared that the Food Shelf, needing more room, is moving
to a different area of the Community Action Council Building.
They are busy. The Holiday Project went well. This year they
also received many toys from Channel ll/Marine Corps effort.
Well organized.
Eileen brought to the group's attention the problem of a lack of
transportation for many in the County. There are many that would
benefit if a system was in place. It was felt that a centralized
data base would be beneficial to bring together components now
lying idle at various times. Everyone agreed that a person to do
the job is also needed. If service clubs could come up with some
cash this might be able to be accomplished. Eileen will bring
back some figures and other information at the next meeting.
Possibly a Town Meeting could be held on the subject.
Judson informed that the Community Action Agency is coordinating
a three county conference on "Homelessness" January 25 or 31.
This topic in quickly becoming a major problem everywhere. In
Scott County the problem is not so much with drifters as in the
central cities, but the poor of the county who are living one
paycheck away from eviction from their housing. Many are
housesharing in unsatisfactory conditions. It was estimated that
there are 500 families in Scott County living under these
conditions.
There was much discussion on these serious questions and the 5:30
adjournment time quickly came upon us. The topic will be
continued at the next Meeting February 7 (Tuesday) at 4:30 PM in
the Citizens State Bank Community Room. All members are
encouraged to be present.
Ree_ pectfu-4 , Submitted
Georg F. Muenchow, Secty.
MINUTES
OF THE
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular
session on November 7, 1988 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting
room.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Cook, Kephart and
Kirchmeier. Also Liaison Wampach, Manager Van Rout and Secretary
Menden.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart that the minutes
of the September 12, 1988 adjourned regular meeting and the Oct.
3, 1988 regular meeting be approved as kept. Motion carried.
BILLS READ:
City of Shakopee 20,032.00
A T & T 137.57
ABM Equipment and Supply 1,327. 18
Auto Central Supply Co. 24.99
AutoCon Industries, Inc. 177. 34
Bentz Construction, Inc. 902.00
Border States Electric Supply 1,715.00
Burmeister Electric Co. 2,714.80
Business Outfitters, Inc. 175.68
City of Shakopee 481.92
City of Shakopee 215.34
City of Shakopee 819.10
Clay's Printing Service Inc. 459.45
Communication Auditors 75.00
Ditch Witch of Minnesota, Inc. 33. 13
Dressen Oil Company 46.40
Feed Rite Controls, Inc. 1,707.11
Glenwood Inglewood 18.25
Graybar Electric Co. , Inc. 4,103.43
H & C Electric Supply 652.42
HD Electric Co. 68.84
Hennen's ICO 24.50 _
Kirby A. Kennedy and Associates 270.00
Krass and Monroe Chartered Law Office 364.22
Leef Bros. , Inc. 32.25
Locators and Supplies 194.76
Minnegasco 361 .92
Minnesota Municipal Utilities Assoc. Safety Inst. 240.00
Minnesota Municipal Utilities Assoc. 140.00
Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories 27.20
Motor Parts Service of Shakopee 89.70
Northern States Power Co. 308,246. 19
Northern States Power Co. 808.65
Northern States Power Co. 664.64
Northwest Mechanical Inc. 11052.89
Office Products 690.00
Eugene Pass 138.00
Reynolds Welding Supply Co. 13.42
Schilz Ornamental Iron 15.00
Shakopee Ford Inc. 11.91
Shakopee Postmaster - 2,500.00
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 266.53
Shakopee Services, Inc. 52.00
Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. 506.00
Southwest Suburban Publishing 164.52
Starks Cleaning Services, Inc. 68.00
Stemmer Farm and Garden Supply, Inc. 48.00
Total Tool 419.45
U.S. West Communications 290.31
United Compucred Collections 198.00
Valley Industrial Propane, Inc. 34.08
Lou Van Hout 206. 14
Viking Steel Products 92.50
Voss Electric Supply Co. 799.20
Water Products Co. 51.44
Westinghouse Electric Supply Co. 1,720.21
Wild Iris Inc. 34.00
Woodhill Business Products 60.00
Yarusso's Hardware Co. 24, 99
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to make final payment on the
remodeling of Pumphouse k2 with payment being held until approval is recommended
by our Engineering firm of Schoell and Madsen.
A communication was asknowledged from John Anderson, dated October 24, regard-
ing the request by City Council at their October 18, meeting of information from
the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. Manager VanHout reported that information
on two of the three items had been sent already and that files were being gathered
on the remaining item.
Liaison Wampach was present to give the Liaison report. Liaison Wampach
questioned Manager VanHout regarding trenching for the new Community Youth Building.
The trenching was done by SPUC employees who donated their own time to get the
installation done. The new Youth Community Building will be charged for electricity
and water as the Boy Scout Building was in the past, and as all City buildings are.
Dave Hutton, City Engineer and Jeff Stewart from HNTB the design consultant
for the minibypass for the City of Shakopee were present to discuss the relocation
of an existing watermain which is located directly in the path of the new bridge and
minibypass. Three alternatives were given by Mr. Stewart as solutions to the
relocation of the watermain.
/6
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kirchmeier that recommendations be made to the
City Engineer to investigate the abandonment of the well rather than the relocation
of the watermain but to: maintain effective water service to the existing buildings
located North of 1st. Avenue; and not to endanger the insurance rating on the
Senior Citizen Highrise or the downtown area with the abandonment of the well; and
that future development of that area would not require the need of that well; and
to investigate the possibilities of the well being converted to a residential size
well and deeded over to the City so as to supply the Community Recreation Office
with maintenance being by the City, similar to Memorial Park.
Mr. Ken Adolf from Schoell and Madson was present to discuss the possible needs
for a new well to be constructed for 1989 and alternate sites for the construction.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart that the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission engage the firm of Schoell and Madson to begin an engineering study on
the construction of a new well to alleviate the problems encountered in 1988 with
flows and look into the suitability of a location adjacent to existing Well $2.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to authorize the firm of Schoell
and Madson to begin a scope analysis of the watermains for the Shakopee Public
Utilities Commission to be tied in with the City Comprehensive plan. Motion carried.
A street light request for the end of Harrison 13th. Avenue was authorized by
the City Council as per a memo from John Anderson and was installed by the Shakopee
Public Utilities at a cost to the City of $600.00 approximate.
Manager VanHout informed the Commission of the need for an Engineering study
for the underground electric also affected by the minibypass being constructed.
The Manager will get a proposal from Henningson, Durham and Richardson Engineers
who have done electrical engineering work for SPUC previously, for cost and scope
and will report back to the Commission.
A recommendation, preparedbyTechnical Assistant, Terrill Roquette, for the
award of transformers to the low bidders was given to the Commission. Motion by
Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier, to award based on low evaluated annual cost to Border
State at a cost of $926.00 each for 8-15 KVA transformers, to Lanick and Liljegren at
a cost of $896.00 each for 15-25 KVA transformers, to Lanick and Liljegren at a cost
of $915.00 each for 15-37.5 KVA transformers, to Graybar Electric Supply Co. at a
cost of $1,147.00 each for 12-50 KVA transformers and to Graybar Electric Supply Co.
for a cost of $1,503.00 each for 2-75 KVA transformers. Motion carried.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to award the bid for the lawn
sprinkling system for the Utilities building to Aqua Engineering for a total cost
of $4,139.00 including the center island. Motion carried.
Manager VanHout reported to the Commission that a lineman was hired, but chose to
return to his previous position. We will be readvertising in the near future for the
lineman position.
Manager VanHout gave a report on the annual fall meeting of the Minnesota Mini--
cipal Utilities Association.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook that the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
donate the materials necessary for service to the new Community Youth Building that
would be appropriate and that they waive all charges associated with the installation.
Motion carried.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook that the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission commend the three employees, Ray Piiedges, Marvin Athamnn, and Gene Pass
for donating their time to the installation of underground wiring for the Shakopee
Community Youth Building. Motion carried.
There were no new plats for the month of October, 1988.
There were no lost time accidents for the month of October, 1988.
The next regular meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will b .
held on December 5, 1988, at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities Meeting Room.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier, that the meeting be adjourned.
Motion carried.
Barbara Mender}, Commission Secretary
I
/6
MINUTES
OF THE
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular
session on December S. 1988 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting
room.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Kephart, Cook and
Kirchmeier. Also Liaison Wampach, Manager Van Hout and Secretary
Menden.
BILLS READ:
City of Shakopee 20,032 .00
ABM Equipment, Inc. 32.70
A T & T 18. 57
AmericanCasting and Mfg. Corp. 745.97
American Water Works Association 59.00
Aqua Engineering, Inc. 4, 139.00
Auto Central Supply 19. 55
Bentz Construction, Inc. 712.00
Border States Electric Supply 308.20
Burmeister Electric Company 303.67
Business Outfitters, Inc. 2,438.38
Chanhassen Lawn and Sports 191 .51
City of Eagan 833.00
City of Shakopee 721 . 94
Clay's Printing Service 67.65
Davies Water Equipment Co. 144.42
Ditch Witch of Minn. , Inc. 123.89
Dressen Oil Company 25.00
Duling Optical 23.50
Ray Friedges 103.26
General Office Products Co. 141 .55
Glenwood Inglewood 9,27
Gopher State One-Call, Inc. 234. 35
Graybar Electric Supply Co. , Inc. 139.24
Grommesch Sod Service 724.25
H & C Electric Supply 1,598.28
Mennen's ICO 22. 50
Kress Chartered Law Office 1,229.17
Lano Equipment, Inc. 241. 13
Leef Bros. , Inc . 23.50
Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories 27.20
Motor Farts Service Co. , Inc. 47.88
Northern States Power Co. 291, 582.07
Northern States Power Co. 332.32
Northern States Power Co. 862.68
National Information Data Center 29.95
Otter Tail Power Company - 285.63
Pitney Bowes 94.50
Porcelain Products Co. 85.09
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 427.93
Shakopee Services, Inc. 26.00
Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. 460.00
Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 244.44
Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 47.04
Star Tribune 303.62
Starks Cleaning Service 102.00
Systems Service Co. 26.34
U.S. West Communications 316.13
Unisys Corporation 4, 129.65
Valley Glass, Inc. 198.25
Lou Van Hout 465.49
Van O Lite, Inc. 230.34
Voss Electric Supply Company 152.14
Westinghouse Electric Supply Co. 1,155.22
Wheeler Lumber Operations 2,535.00
Yarusso's Hardware Co. 98.03
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart that the bills be
allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried.
A joint meeting with the Council was tentatively set for
January 10, 1989. Liaison Wampach was aakd to take the request
to Council .
Manager Van Bout presented a rate settlement from Northern
States Power Co. The settlement is titled "Final• although
future adjustment is still possible. j
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to approve the
10/28/88 rate settlement and to pass the additional rate savings
on to our customers through the power adjustment on the monthly
utility bills. Motion carried.
An explanation will be included in with the monthly utility
bills .
A proposal from H.D.R. Engineering, Inc. for engineering
services for the installation of a new 13.8 KV feeder at the
Blue Lake Substation was acknowledged.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to accept the
engineering proposal from H.D.R. Engineering Inc. for
installation of the new feeder bay at the Blue Lake Substation.
Motion carried.
A second proposal from H.D.R. Engineering, Inc. for
engineering services for Downtown Shakopee underground system
to accommodate the State Highway 169 downtown bypass.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Cook to accept the proposal
from HDR Engineering, Inc. for the engineering on the overall
l6
plan for the downtown starting at the substation located by
Well tl in conjunction with relocation requirements for
construction of State Highway 169 Downtown bypass. Motion
carried.
The 1989 budget was presented by Manager Van Hout.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to approve the
1989 budget as presented. Motion carried.
The 1989 wage discussions will be held at the January
meeting.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook to open a position
for a laborer/meter reader to be filled in the near future.
Motion carried.
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kirchmeier to change the
awarding of a bid for 12 50 KVA transformers from Graybar/
Dowser Co. to Westinghouse due to the wrong loss data being
supplied by the first low bidder. Westinghouse in now the
low bidder for these transformers. Motion carried.
Several resolutions previously passed regarding the trunk
water charge for specific subdivisions will be published on a
summary basis upon approval for such from Jac Coller, City
Attorney.
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kirchmeier to authorize payment
to the State of Minnesota of an amount specified in their audit
and upon approval from our attorney. Motion carried.
Bids for a small bucket truck for service work will be going
out in the near future.
?hv_c> wn_ca nn naw plats for November, 1988.
There were two fire calls for a total man hours of 50
minutes for the month of November, 1988.
There were no lost time accidents for November, 1989.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to adjourn to
a special meeting to be held on January 5, 1989. Motion carried.
The next regular meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission will be held in the Utilities meeting room on Jan.
9, 1989.
Lk, I �� 1 y✓
Barbara Menden, Commiasion Secretary.
/6
MINUTES OF THE
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in special
session on January 5, 1989 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities
meeting room.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Cook, Kirchmeier and Kephart.
Also Manager Van Hout and Secretary Menden.
Commissioner Cook opened the meeting with a discussion on the
items open for discussion at the January 10, 1989 joint meeting
with the City Council.
A discussion followed.
The 1989 wages were discussed briefly. This item was tabled
until the January 9, 1989 regular meeting.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the meeting be
adjourned. Motion carried.
Barbara Menden, Commission Secretary
ATTEST:
LOU V)kb Hout, Manager
-7
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Notice of Potential Cable Television System
DATE: January 13, 1989
INTRODUCTION and BACKGROUND:
On January 13, 1989 I received a correspondence from Mr.
Steve Stolen, United Cable Television Manager informing the City
of Shakopee of a potential sale of the cable television system in
Shakopee and Chaska. (See attachment #1)
The Cable Franchise Ordinance does set forth a process in
which the City may respond to the sale of the cable system.
Section 12.01 of the Ordinance grants the City of Shakopee first
right of refusal to acquire the system.
I have scheduled a meeting for the Cable Advisory Committee
to review this issue on January 23, 1989. At that time, the
Commission will make a recommendation to City Council regarding a
position on the City's right of first refusal. If the City of
Shakopee waives their right of first refusal, the cable company
may then continue negotiations with their perspective bidder.
Before the sale can be finalized, the City of Shakopee must agree
to the transferof ownership. The Cable Franchise Ordinance sets
forth a process in which the City may inquire into the
qualifications of the perspective controlling party. The City
may also condition said transfer upon such terms and conditions
as it deems appropriate.
Assuming the City of Shakopee waives their right of first
refusal, I do not expect that we will begin reviewing the
perspective controlling parties qualifications for several
months. when we reach that point in the process, the Cable
Communications Commission will again be meeting to review the
perspective controlling parties experience and operating plans
for the cable system.
If you have any questions in regard to this issue, please
feel free to call me. You may also be interested in attending
the January 23rd Cable Commission meeting. In any event, I will
keep you apprised of this issue as new developments occur.
Attachment No. I
UN/TED CABLE TELEVISION
OF CARVER/SCOTT COUNTIES
13 Evv FTN Avm
5hakc ,ltimesaa553]9
(612)445-6151
(612)445-2369
January 13, 1989
Mr. Barry Stock
City of Shakopee
129 E First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Stock:
I am writing to you to inform you that a possible sell of the local cable
system is possible. United Cable Television has been contacted by other
cable operators expressing an interest in purchasing the cable operation
in Shakopee, Chaska and Carver. At this point in time United is reviewing
the bids that have been submitted to our corporate office in Denver, Colorado.
In following with the cable ordinance section 12.01 paragraph A, United Cable
Television will be sending to you a letter outlining Uniteds position, as
well as, a copy of the potential bid that may be accepted. These items
should be in your hands by January 17, 1989 for your review. After you
have had time to look over this material, please contact me so that we can
schedule a meeting with the Shakopee cable regulatory commissions.
If you have any questions that I can answer please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
KK
Steven Stolen
General Manager
SS:kh
' IBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Page 1 of 3
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Date December 20, 1988 Resolution No. 88116
Motion by Commissioner Bohnsack Seconded by Commissioner Roniarski _
RESOLUTION NO. 88116; ESTABLISHING THE SCOTT COUNTY POLICY
AND PROCEDURES REGARDING THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
BY AUTHORIZED ISSUERS WITHIN SCOTT COUNTY; DIRECTING THE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO DISTRIBUTE COPIES OF THE POLICY AND
PROCEDURES TO ALL SCOTT COUNTY AUTHORIZED ISSUERS AND OTHER
INTERESTED GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES AND ISSUERS.
WHEREAS, the Scott County Board of Commissioners has a continuing
interest in the economic development and vitality of the County and its
cities and townships, and
WHEREAS, tax increment financing (TIF) has been used by cities in
Scott County to assist in the development of the County, and
WHEREAS, the level of use of TIF used within the County has reached a
degree of significance which requires more thorough attention by the
County, and
WHEREAS, the June, 1988 Mill Rate Study performed by Springsted, Inc. ,
the County's financial consultant, indicates that the current level of use
of TIF within the County has a net effect of increasing the mill rate of
the County by approximately 3.1 mills, which in turn has a negative effect
on the perception of persons interested in siting businesses or other
development within the County, and
WHEREAS, although counties may only comment on the use of TIF, Scott
County's commentary has in some instances resulted in the restructuring or
abandonment of the use of TIF for a project when such use was ill advised,
and
WHEREAS, the lack of timely and useful information undercuts the
ability of Scott County to effectively communicate its comments and
concerns regarding the use of TIF for a project, and
WHEREAS, Scott County has a continuing concern about the increasing
use of TIF by Scott County jurisdictions undercutting the financial
flexibility of a jurisdiction to raise revenue for other public purposes.
Page 2 of 3
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Date December 20, 1988 Resolution No. 88116
Motion by Commissioner Bphnsack Seconded by Commissioner Koniarski
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners in and for
Scott County that the following policy and procedures regarding Scott
County's comments on the use of tax increment financing (TIF) by Scott
County issuers be and are hereby adopted:
1. That an issuing authority submit its plan to the County for comment at
least forty-five (45) days prior to the public hearing upon the plan
rather than the statutory minimum thirty (30) days.
2. That all tax increment financing proposals by Scott County
governmental units include an executive summary of the proposal
setting forth a brief statement of the purpose of the proposal, the
effect on other taxing jurisdictions such as the projected five to ten
year impact on general, student and prisoner populations and the level
of social and other services provided by the County and other local
governmental service providers, the duration of the project or
district, the type, size, majority of debt issue, interest and
valuation assumptions, projected captured assessed value, projected
County administrative costs for new or expanded districts which costs
shall be obtained from the Scott County Administrator, an explanation
of how the TIF proposal is in concurrence with, and is in furtherance
of the comprehensive plan of the issuing authority, and other
pertinent information.
3. That the TIF proposal include the estimated costs of county highway
improvements from the project, which cost estimates shall be obtained
from the Scott County Highway Engineer.
4. That the body of the proposal include a detailed map of the geographic
area affected by the proposal.
5. That all tax increment financing proposals submitted to the County
include a summary of the financial feasibility of the plan, which
summary is submitted to the County at the same time as, and along with
all other relevant documents.
6. That in any instance where the full faith and credit of the issuing
entity is pledged to the repayment of tax increment financing bonds
that any excess increments generated be applied to debt reduction in
the interest of: a) increasing the security of the outstanding bonds;
b) reducing the likelihood that the issuing entity's taxpayers would
be burdened by increased taxes should the project fail; and c)
providing for the return of captured value to the tax roles more
quickly.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA Page 3 of 3
pate Decenber 20, 1988 Resolution No. 88116
Motlonby Commissloner Bobarmck Seconded by Commlinloner Konrazski
]. That Scott County encourages cities and other authorized users of tax
increaser financing to limit the us of tax increaser financing to two
percent (10%) or less of their taxable valuation.
S. That, except in case. involving demonstrated unique opportunities,
Scott County expresses its intent to discourage the we of tax
increment financing which results in gore than ten percent (102) of a
city's or other authorized issuer's taxable valuation being captured
through tax increment financing.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Scott County Adainistrator be and
hereby is directed to forward a copy of the Tax Increment Financing Policy
and Procedures to all Scott County authorized Issuers and other interested
governeental entities and parties.
YES NO
Koniarskl X Konlaraid
Bohnsack X Bohnsack
Mil X Mertz
Stminwall Absent Stmmyeall
Casey x Casey
State of Minnesota
cwnl ..-n 1
I,Jw,sym .onise nw,caO,Weli.'stl xting CW IY PEminbtralw lorlMCWn1yM 5Co11.am16 of MlnwfOlY eo aereby
C nt 1na111uvecwnpar9oitol n9.Mi ne a.a iNir �t� _20tglnal minVlw p111a pIWNEln9n wlMaeVeW
Cpice.a wn afc nera,5mmetGn1almeae cwr lcwWkn MM MIM 2Qh Ory ply der 19 B8 nMmllle in my
plezWeness my saeIM9amalp sealmShanmexlcwyl this
28th December, 1988
Wilnaa9 my same aM 011 ficial gall al SaaFppea,Mlnw]ola,laza Urypl
mem-moa UUU
w
w..wrr.ow...
December 29, 1988 GOVERNMENT FINANCE
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
The Honorable Dolores M. Lebens 1B0N01T1"^c"G""'AVM"
$U 900
Mayor ar77-97WNas aoao,
City of Shakopee 3W3 M77i8o
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mayor Lebens:
We are pleased to notify you that your comprehensive annual financial
report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1987 qualifies for a
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting . The
Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition in
governmental accounting and financial reporting , and its attainment
represents a significant accomplishment by a government and its
management.
When a Certificate of Achievement is awarded to a government, an Award of
Financial Reporting Achievement is also presented to the individual des-
ignated by the government as primarily responsible for its having earned
the certificate. Enclosed is an Award of Financial Reporting Achievement
for:
Gregg M. Voxland , Finance Director
The Certificate of Achievement plaque will be shipped under separate cover
in about six weeks . We hope that you will arrange for a formal presenta-
tion of the Certificate and Award of Financial Reporting Achievement, and
that appropriate publicity will be given to this notable achievement. A
sample news release is enclosed . We suggest that you provide copies of it
to the local newspapers and radio and television stations . In addition,
enclosed is the 1987 Certificate Program results representing the most
recent statistics available.
We hope that your example will encourage other government officials in
their efforts to achieve and maintain an appropriate standard of excel-
lence in financial reporting . If you have any questions regarding this
matter, or if we may be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate
to contact us .
Sincerely,
GOVERNMEEN'T'�FFINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
Frederick G. Lantz
Assistant Director/Technical Services Center
FGL/ds
Enclosures
WASWNGTCNGfflCE.SURE200.17W0 ST UNW.WASM TG DC.2000E-202/420.2750.fA%.202/42 -2755
NEWS RELEASE GOVERNMENT FINANCE
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
RE: CITY OF SHAKOPEE
SUITE SM CH1C G0 MICH[GA"nv["uE
Is Awarded
AIGHEST AWARD IN FINANCIAL REPORTING 312,977-97Wiuwas 6WI
W
EAX.31M77 aA
(Chicago) --The Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial
Reporting has been awarded to:
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and
Canada (GFOA) for its comprehensive annual financial report (CAFR) .
The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition in the
area of governmental accounting and financial reporting , and its
attainment represents a significant accomplishment.
When a Certificate of Achievement is awarded to a government, an Award
of Financial Reporting Achievement also is given to the individual
designated as primarily responsible for its having earned the certificate .
This Award of Financial Reporting Achievement has been presented to:
GREGG M. VOXLAND, FINANCE DIRECTOR
The CAFR has been judged by an impartial panel to meet the high
standards of the program including demonstrating a constructive "spirit
of full disclosure" effort to clearly communicate its financial story
and motivate potential persons and user groups to read the CAFR.
The GFOA is a nonprofit professional association serving 11,500
government finance professionals . The association produces a variety of
technical publications in various fields of governmental finance, and
represents the public finance community in Washington, D.C . The
association provides numerous training opportunities, and conducts an
annual conference attended by 5, 000 public finance professionals .
For more information, contact Fred Lantz at 312/977-9700.
WASHNG„N C.FZ,SUITE 2 C'� 17_3 1_l2Ed NW A. k SCa�C 0 ,6.202/42S27 .. 2=U2_ 2f:>
/ 9
PRESENTATION OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT PROGRAM AWARDS
The Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting
is the highest form of recognition for state and local governments. The
Certificate program thereby advocates that recipients be formally recog-
nized for their outstanding accomplishments . If you would like a formal
presentation of your award, you should contact your Government Finance
Officers Association state representative. Your representative 's
mailing address and phone number is as follows:
Dale Eggenberger
Director of Finance
City of Minnetonka
14600 Minnetonka Boulevard
Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345
612/933-2511
0
z
>7 QJ R
IT
H
o ti ➢� � O
nqq mx
io' � n nr
� o� 3 M ^ S n
aq
ao ,c _
Cn a
x
G � T 1ST
n 3 C
inCO3 °
TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 17, 1989
Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding
1] Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M.
2] Reading by Mayor Lebens of City's Non-Discrimination Policy
3] Res. No. 3007, Extending Appreciation to Tim Keane
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. )
*71 Approval of Minutes of January 3, 1989
8] Communications:
a] Steve Rose, DNR, re: update on the trail project -
verbal
*b] W. Michael Everist, North Star Risk Services, Inc.
re: sidewalks
*c] Association of Metropolitan Municipalities re: 1989
Dues Statement
9] PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a] 7:30 P.M. - Proposed sanitary sewer and watermain
improvements to 3rd Avenue between
Harrison St. and Highway 169
b] 7:45 P.M. - Proposed improvement to the alley located
between Scott and Atwood Streets and
between Shakopee Avenue and 10th Avenue
101 Boards and Commissions:
Planning Commission:
a] Preliminary Plat of Kubes 2nd Addition, seven lots
located in the NE corner of the intersection of CR-79
and CR-72
b] Amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square Planned Unit
Development - Res No. 3011
c] Setbacks for Industrial Buildings Abutting A Railroad
Spur
TENTATIVE AGENDA
January 17, 1989
Page -2-
101 Boards and Commissions continued:
Downtown Committee:
d] One Year Work Plan
Community Development Commission:
e] Star City One Year Work Plan
f] Star City Five Year Work Plan
11] Reports from Staff:
a] O'Dowd Lakes Chain Ass'n. Request for Payment of
Insurance Costs - tabled 1/3/89
b] Lease with O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association
*c] Building Equipment Maintenance Contract
*d] Vierling Drive Change Order No. 3, Project 1987-12
*e] Contribution to Scott County Transportation Coalition
f] Parking Restrictions Near Scott County Courthouse .-
tabled 12/20/88
g] Highway 101 Shakopee Bypass (Southerly) - Design
Services
h] Appointments to Boards and Commissions
i] City Attorney Compensation for 1989
j] Purchase of Trucks for Engineering and Inspection
Departments
*k] Purchase of Administrative Pool Car
*1] Interfund Transfers
*m] Worthless Check Prosecution Agreement
n] Approval of Bills in Amount of $1,541,800.37
o] Adopting Council Meeting Procedures for 1989
p] Setting Dates for Additional Meetings
*q] Sidewalk Snow Removal
*r] Mileage Reimbursement Policy
12] Resolutions and Ordinances:
a] Res. No. 3011, Ordering Feasibility Report for
Improvements to Market St. Between 1st and 7th
133 other Business:
a]
b]
c]
14] Adjourn to Tuesday, January 31, 1989 at 7: 00 p.m.
Dennis R. Kraft
Acting City Administrator
NOTICE
Policyof Non-Discrimination on the
Basis of Handicapped Status
The City of Shakopee does not discriminate on the basis of handi-
capped status, race, color, religion, sex, national origin,
age, marital or veteran status or medical condition in the admission
or access to, or treatment of employment in its programs or
activities.
Gregg Voxland has been designated to coordinate compliance with
the nondiscrimination requirements of section 51. 55 of the revenue
sharing regulations implementing section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, as amended. If any person feels they have been
excluded from participation in, been denied the benefits of,
access to or been subject to discrimination under any City program
or activity theyshouldcontact Mr. Voxland at 445-3650 between
the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday thru Friday.
The City of Shakopee recognizes that the Shakopee City Hall
is not handicapped accessible at this time. If any person cannot
achieve access to programs and/or activities within this facility,
the City of Shakopee will make arrangements to relocate or restruc-
ture the delivery of programs and/or activities upon request
from said person.
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk_:(
RE: Resolution of Appreciationito Tim Keane
DATE: January 9, 1989
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND:
On December 20, 1988, Council accepted the resignation of
Tim Keane from the Community Development Commission, with
regrets. Council directed staff to prepare a resolution of
appreciation. I have prepared the attached resolution pursuant
to Council's request.
RECOMMENDATION•
Offer Resolution No. 3007, A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO
TIM KEANE, and move its adoption.
JSC/tiv
A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO TIM KEANE
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council did create an Industrial
and Commercial Development Commission in August of 1978; and
WHEREAS, the name of the Industrial and Commercial
Development Commission was subsequently changed to the Community
Development Commission; and
WHEREAS, Tim Keane was appointed to the Community
Development Commission and served as a member from January 22,
1985 until Council acceptance of his resignation on December 20,
1988, and
WHEREAS, Tim Keane served as Chairman of the Community
Development Commission from March 11, 1987 until his resignation;
and
WHEREAS, Tim Keane was instrumental in the City of Shakopee
receiving the Star City designation; and
WHEREAS, Tim Keane has played an instrumental part in
developing policies and programs that have improved Shakopee's
commercial, industrial and residential base as well as the
development of an Industrial Development .Incentive Policy; and
WHEREAS, Tim Keane has given unselfishly of his time during
the last four years while serving on the Community Development
Commission.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City Council,
on behalf of the residents of Shakopee and on behalf of the
Community Development Commission, that the Shakopee City Council
does hereby extend to Tim Keane the deep appreciation of the City
for his years of civic interest and dedicated service to the
community.
Adopted in Adjourned Regular Session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 17th day of January,
1989.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this _
day of , 1989.
City Attorney
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 3, 1989
Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl.
Vierling, Clay, Wampach, Zak, and Scott present. Also present
were Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator; Julius A. Coller
II, City Attorney; Doug Wise, City Planner; David Hutton, City
Engineer; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk.
Wampach/Zak moved to recess for a Housing and Redevelopment
Authority meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to reconvene to City Council at 7:15 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Liaison reports were given by councilmembers.
Scott/Zak moved to support Mr. Houser in his efforts in trying to
get the State to remove the old buildings at the former women's
prison. Motion carried with Cncl. Clay opposed.
Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who
wished to address anything not on the agenda. There was no
response.
Vierling/Wampach moved to approve the consent business with Dec.
6, 1988 minutes being withheld.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried
Wampach/Zak moved to approve the December 6, 1988 minutes.
Motion carried with Cncl. Clay and Vierling abstaining.
Vierling/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of December 20,
1988. (Approved under consent business) .
Dave Brown, O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association, said they are asking
the City to pay for the liability insurance for the aerators on
O'Dowd Lake and Thole Lake. He said last year the insurance was
$1,700 and this year it is $1,470. Last year the City paid one-
half of the premium and this year they are asking the City to pay
the full premium because their funds are limited and they feel it
is a very worthwhile project.
Vierling/Wampach moved to table the request,to pay the liability
insurance cost, by the O'Dowd Lake Chain Association until
January 17, 1989. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved to amend the notations in the November 1, .
1988 minutes to reflect the fact that Resolution No. 2978 and
Ordinance 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. Motion carried with Mayor
Lebens opposed.
Proceedings of the city Council
January 3, 1989 Page 2
Vierling/Zak moved to open the public hearing on amending the
Comprehensive Development Plan to include the 150 acres, recently
annexed, within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) .
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the amendment to the City's
Comprehensive Plan allowing for extension of the Municipal Urban
Sewer Area line to include the newly annexed area south of the
High School. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the
audience who wished to address this issue. There was no
response.
Clay/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Zak offered 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,
and move its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Engineer reviewed the status of the vacation of 6th
Avenue east of Main Street. He said there were certain property
owners who objected to the vacation of 6th Avenue until questions
regarding sewer and water availability, surface water drainage
and driveway access were addressed. A feasibility report has
been completed, however, the public hearing on whether or not to
extend 5th Avenue to Market Street has not yet been held. The
City Engineer is recommending that decision on vacating 6th
Avenue be tabled until the public hearing on improving 5th Avenue
has been held. He explained that if 5th Avenue is extended and
public improvements are constructed, the objecting property
owners would have no problem with the vacation of 6th Avenue East
of Main Street.
Wampach/Zak moved to table the vacation of 6th Avenue East of
Main Street until the public hearing for the extension of 5th
Avenue has been held. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved to remove Municipal Parking Lot Leases
memorandum from the table. Motion carried unanimously.
Mrs. Gail Anderson, property owner, questioned why she was paying
so much taxes on her property while Mr. Brambilla can lease
parking spaces in the municipal lot for only $12/space/year.
Jack Brambilla said he feels that the parking lot is still not
being used to its potential. He leases 37 spaces from the City
and could get by with 20 except for some months. He would rather _
rent 37 spaces than be short when he really needs more than 20
spaces.
Scott/Wampach moved to authorize and direct proper city officials
to enter into an agreement with Jack Brambilla and Bergsted
Properties for a municipal parking lot permit for 1989 for the
Proceedings of the City Council
January 3, 1989 Page 3
Black Arrow parking lot at $12.00 per parking space. Motion
carried with Cncl. Vierling opposed.
Wampach/Vierling moved to 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.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach moved to appoint Barbara Potthier a part-time
permanent employee of the City of Shakopee. (Approved under
consent business) .
The City Engineer reviewed the County Road 17 Underpass which is
proposed on County Road 17 (just South of Country Village
Apartments) associated with the trail system and the Upper Valley
Drainage Project. He said that because of the upgrading of
County Road 17 to a four lane highway with access ramps to the
Shakopee bypass, the highway will carry a lot of traffic and it
would be extremely difficult and dangerous for pedestrians to try
and cross CR-17 at grade. He explained that in conjunction with
the County approving the necessary permit for the underpass, they
are requiring that it be well lighted for pedestrian safety and
that the City indemnify the County against any claims or damages
arising from the use of the underpass. Discussion ensued on the
issue of liability and if the County should share in the cost
since this is a County road.
Zak/Vierling moved to have the City Engineer and the City
Attorney meet with the County to see if there is room for
negotiation in the permit agreement for the construction of an
underpass on CR-17 just South of Country Village Apartments.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Engineer reviewed the outlet channel for the Prior
Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District. He said an arbitration
panel ruled that the 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. He said the Watershed District has
not completed any of the repairs and the deadline has expired.
They are requesting that the deadline be extended to July 1st.
Cncl. Clay said he would like to have them submit a detailed
construction schedule and also submit monthly progress reports.
If they fall behind schedule the agreement would then become null _
and void. Cncl. Vierling said she would like to move the
deadline up from July 1 to May 1.
Vierling/Scott moved to approve the Prior Lake/Spring Lake
Watershed District's request for an extension of the deadline
for completion of all repairs to the drainage channel, deadline
Proceedings of the City Council
January 3, 1989 Page 4
to be negotiable by the City Engineer for as early as possible,
suggesting May 1, 1989. Motion carried unanimously.
Scott/Vierling 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.
Vierling/Wampach moved to designate the Shakopee Valley News as
the official newspaper for the City of Shakopee for the year
1989. (Approved under consent business) .
Zak/Vierling moved to nominate John Schmitt and Melanie Kahleck
for the Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Zak moved to nominate Al Furrie, Jane DuBois, Elmer Otto,
Debra Amundson, and Jon Albinson for the Community Development
Commission. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to nominate Elmer Otto, Donna Roman, and
Melanie Kahleck for the Energy and Transportation Committee.
Motion carried unanimously.
Zak/Vierling moved to nominate Bill Anderson and Lillian Abeln
for the Cable Communication Advisory Commission. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to nominate Randy Laurent and Jim Link for the
Housing Advisory and Appeals Board. Motion carried unanimously.
Zak/Vierling moved to nominate Randy Laurent and Jim Link to the
Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Clay moved to nominate James Cook and Gary Scott to the
Shakopee Public utilities Commission. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Zak moved to nominate Robert Tomczik and Frank Houser to the
Shakopee Community Recreation. Motion carried unanimously.
Zak/Vierling moved to nominate John Roepke to the Police Civil
Service Commission. Motion carried unanimously.
There was discussion on the Councilmembers taking turns monthly
for Planning Commission liaison, and in the alternative on a .
Planning Commission member attending Council meetings on some
items.
Vierling/Zak moved that l) a City Council member be notified by
the Planning Commission Chairman if and when they want a City
Council member to attend a meeting, 2) that a Planning Commission
Proceedings of the City Council
January 3, 1989 Page 5
member attend a Council meeting on items of relevance or extra
significance, and 3) that a Planning Commission member attend a
Council meeting for all appeals from Planning Commission
decisions. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach nominated Cncl. Clay for Acting Mayor for 1989.
Zak/Mayor Lebens nominated Cncl. Scott for Acting Mayor for 1989.
Vierling/Zak moved that nominations be closed. Motion carried
unanimously.
By paper ballot, votes were cast for Acting Mayor:
Cncl. Clay: Wampach, Vierling, and Clay
Cncl. Scott: Zak, Scott, and Mayor Lebens
Because of the tie vote, discussion followed on whether or not
Mayor Lebens should be able to choose or whether another vote
should be taken.
Consensus was to table liaison appointments to the Downtown
Committee and the Community Development Commission until the City
knows what their plans are.
Vierling/Wampach moved to nominate Cncl. Clay as the liaison to
the Shakopee Community Recreation. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved that nominations be closed. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Cncl. Clay
as Council liaison to Shakopee Community Recreation. Motion
carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to nominate Jerry Wampach as liaison to
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved that nominations be closed. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Jerry
Wampach as Council liaison to Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission. Motion carried unanimously.
Zak/Wampach moved to nominate Cncl. Vierling to the Purchasing
Committee.
Vierling/Wampach moved to nominate Cncl. Zak to the Purchasing
Committee.
Vierling/Zak moved that nominations be closed. Motion carried
unanimously.
Proceedings of the City Council
January 3, 1989 Page 6
Vierling/Zak moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Cncl.
Vierling and Zak to the Purchasing Committee. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to nominate Cncl. Clay, Wampach and Scott for
the Sewer Backup Claims Committee.
Vierling/Zak moved to close nominations. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Council
Clay, Wampach and Scott to the Sewer Back-up Claims Committee.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved to nominate Cncl. Clay for Shakopee Valley
Convention/Visitors Bureau.
Vierling/Wampach moved to close nominations. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Cncl.
Clay to the Convention/Visitors Bureau. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved to nominate Cncl. Scott for Ad Hoc Liaison
to Police and Fire Departments.
Clay/Vierling moved to close nominations. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Cncl.
Scott for Ad Hoc Liaison to the Police and Fire Departments.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Clay moved to nominate Cncl. Scott to Murphy's Landing
Committee.
Vierling/Clay moved to close nominations. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Clay moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Cncl.
Scott as Council liaison to Murphy's Landing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach offered 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 moved _
for its adoption. (Approved under consent business) .
Vierling/Wampach moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$166,591.50.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Proceedings of the City Council
January 3, 1989 Page 7
Vierling/Wampach moved to establish an amount of $4,470.00 per
month as compensation for the Acting City Administrator for
calendar year 1989.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Zak moved to direct staff to call eligible residents to
see who would be willing to serve as a Manager to the Prior
Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District and to submit any names to
the Scott County Board. Motion carried unanimously.
Paper ballots were cast for a second time for Acting Mayor which
resulted in a tie:
Cncl. Clay: Wampach, Vierling, and Clay
Cncl. Scott: Zak, Scott and Mayor Lebens
Cncl. Scott said that he wished to withdraw his name from
nomination for Acting Mayor; therefore, Cncl. Clay is the Acting
Mayor for 1989.
Vierling/Wampach moved to remove Resolution No. 2996 from the
table. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2996, A Resolution
Appointing the commissioner of Transportation as the City of
Shakopee's agent for Federal Projects, and moved for its
adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Clay offered 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
moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3003, A Resolution
Receiving a report and Calling a Hearing on Improvements to 5th
Avenue from Fillmore Street to Market Street, Project No. 1989-4
and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Zak/Scott offered Resolution No. 3004, A Resolution Designating
Director and Alternate to Suburban Rate Authority, and moved its
adoption. Director will be Cncl. Vierling and alternate will be
Cncl. Wampach. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3005, A Resolution Amending
the City of Shakopee Personnel Policy Adopted by Resolution No.
1571, and moved for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous _
Noes: None Motion carried.
The City Attorney explained that he is drafting the lease
agreement between the City of Shakopee and MVRP. He asked that
anyone who has anything they wish included in the agreement to
get in touch with him by January 6, 1989.
Proceedings of the City Council
January 3, 1989 Page 8
Cncl. Scott said he would like to know the Downtown Committee's
plans, what they are going to do and when they are going to do
it. He also commented on Mr. Forbord's taking the Mayor to task
at the last Downtown meeting.
Scott/Zak moved to adjourn to Tuesday, January 10, 1989 at 7:00
p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
J d
C t Clerk
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
STATE OF
lt�
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
PMONENO. 296-2553 1200 Warner Rd. , St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 FILE NO
January 10, 1989 .jfiQ 1 ,
CITY OF 5ti i� rtc'
Mr. Barry Stock
Assistant City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Barry:
I would appreciate an opportunity to give a brief status report on the
Minnesota Valley Trail at your next city council meeting on January 17,
1989. The report would be an informational update, and would take only a
few minutes of the council's time. If it is possible to be put on the
agenda for the nest meeting, please give a call to confirm. Thank you.
Sincerely,
c)fw
Steve Rose
Minnesota Valley Trail Specialist
SR116:lk
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
gO,
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: DNR Trail/Sweeney Property Update
DATE: January 11, 1989
INTRODUCTION and BACKGROUND:
In the January 3, 1989 Council agenda packet I included an
informational item which updated the Council on the status of the
DNR Trail and the negotiation process between the Department of
Natural Resources and Mr. Bob Sweeney.
In December, the Department of Natural Resources assembled
and submitted a final proposal to Mr. Bob Sweeney regarding the
extension of the trail through his property. Steve Rose
representing the Department of Natural Resources has requested to
appear before the City Council at their January 17, 1989 meeting
to give a brief report on the current status of the negotiations
with Mr. Sweeney and the pending extension of the DNR Trail.
It is my understanding that upon finalizing the agreement
with Mr. Sweeney, the Department of Natural Resources is prepared
to extend the trail to the East from the Slfakopee Community
Services Building through Murphy's Landing. In addition to
securing the necessary agreements with Mr. Sweeney, the DNR will
also be working with Mr. Wallace Bakken on the relocation of an
easement through his property. The DNR will also be requesting
the City of Shakopee to amend their current trail license
agreement to allow for the extension of the trail through
Memorial Park and Murphy's Landing. The issue of vacating
Minnesota and Market Streets North of Bluff Ave. also has to be
resolved before proceeding with the trail extension.
CONO" EN I b
North Star
Risk Services, Inc
December 5 , 1988
Mr. Dennis Kraft
Acting Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Kraft:
A routine loss control survey was recently conducted concerning the
premises and operations for the City. This is in conjunction with
the City' s participation in the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance
Trust Property and Casualty Program. We sincerely appreciate your
efforts and assistance in completion of this loss control survey.
This letter will review my meeting with your City Engineer, Mr. Dave
Hutton, on November 9, 1988. At that time we had the opportunity to
review the current City sidewalk maintenance and upgrade program. I
was specifically asked by your agent to review the new brick
sidewalks being installed in the downtown area. From my meetings
and a partial tour of your sidewalk area, I have come up with the
following recommendations:
R-20-88 It appears from the review and partial inspection of some
of the brick sidewalk that the installation of the sidewalk
was done in an efficient manner. I would like to point out
that the City engineer says that his brick sidewalk will be
set up on an annual inspection and maintenance program. I
highly recommend that this inspection and maintenance
program be put into effect to make sure that no bricks
start sinking and cause an uneven walkway.
R-21-88 A partial review of the City sidewalks shows that the
sidewalks directly in front of the City Hall need to be
replaced. I am also aware that service utilities in this
area may be replaced in the near future. Unfortunately,
that doesn't reduce the liability situation incurred by
the City. It has been shown that it is very difficult to
defend the City with respect to sidewalk maintenance when
the accidents may occur directly in front of City Hall.
The upgrade and/or maintenance of these sidewalks should
be done as soon as economically possible.
1401 West 76th Sueet, Suite 550 0 Minnmpohs, Minnesom 55423 0 (612) 861-8600 0 FAX (612) 861-8643
Mr. Dennis Kraft
City of Shakopee
December 5, 1988
Page Two
R-22-88 It is my understanding that the City of Shakopee has a
sidewalk ordinance mandating that affronting property
owners are required to not only remove snow and ice, but
also maintain the sidewalks. I would like to stress that
the City should be enforcing this sidewalk maintenance
program. Therefore, I would like to recommend that a
sidewalk inspection and maintenance program be put into
effect. Affronting property owners with sidewalk
maintenance problems should be adequately informed in
writing and a follow-up maintenance program put into
effect. Some cities have elected to take care of part of
the sidewalk removal and/or part of the cost of sidewalk
replacement. The City of Shakopee can review any or all
of those different areas with regards to who is going to
pay for sidewalk replacements and additions.
During my visit Mr. Hutton pointed out a situation where
some property owners had built sidewalks themselves and
that there were gaps in the sidewalk system in a block
because of this situation. A review of this by the legal
department at the League of Minnesota Cities shows that
the City would most likely be responsible for accidents of
individuals who were injured walking across the areas
where there was no sidewalk. For that reason, the City
should look into inspecting and documenting these areas
and having them filled in as soon as economically possible.
The exact status on who will pay to fill in these areas I
leave up to the City, but I would like to point out that
by not filling in these areas, the City leaves themselves
open to a liability situation. I am enclosing some
information that the League of Minnesota Cities reviewed
with regards to this situation for your City Engineer to
review.
R-23-88 A review of sidewalk slip and fall losses shows that the
Engineering Department is not informed on any details with
regards to slip and fall accidents. When it comes to
engineering and specifications of sidewalks, the
Engineering Department should be involved in at least
being alerted having to do with slip and fall accidents
and/or problems. By doing this, they can help address the
budgeting situation having to do with maintenance and
inspection of City sidewalks.
Mr. Dennis Kraft
City of Shakopee
December 5, 1988
Page Three
PLEASE RESPOND WITHIN 60 DAYS OF YOUR RECEIPT OF THIS LETTER
REGARDING THE STATUS OF YOUR HANDLING OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.
For your convenience, enclosed is a self-addressed envelope. Feel
free to make your reply on a copy of this letter and return it in
this envelope.
Thank you for your continued efforts in the interest of loss control.
We look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
W. Michael Everist
Loss Control Consultant
North Star Risk Services, Inc.
WME/cp
Enclosures
cc: Capesius Agency, Inc.
These recommendations are made for risk improvement purposes only.
They were not made for the purpose of complying with the require-
ments of any law, rule or regulation. We do not infer or imply in
the making of these recommendations that there are no other hazards
and exposures in existence. The purpose of the recommendations is
to assist in improving the risk exposure and to assist you with your
loss control program.
ACTION REQUESTED
Receive the letter dated December 5, 1988 from W. Michael Everist
of North Star Risk Serives, Inc. and direct the City Engineer to
prepare recommendations on how to address the issues contained in
the letter.
183 University Ave.East
St.Paul,MN 55101.2526
League of Minnesota Cities (612)227.5600(FAX:221-0986)
TO: City officials
From: Pete Tritz
Re: LMCIT loss control visits
The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust is a cooperative
organization through which cities jointly self-insure their
risks. To put it another way, LMCIT is a way for cities to
jointly use their own funds to pay their losses. The ultimate
cost to cities is therefor determined by the losses the member
cities have. Every loss that can be avoided represents money
that remains in the cities' hands.
For this reason, LMCIT places a great deal of emphasis on loss
control and prevention. That effort has paid off. Over the
past couple of years, LMCIT's member cities have succeeded in
reducing losses well below past levels. This has made it
possible for the LMCIT property/casualty program to stabilize
and reduce rates, and to return over $4 million of surplus funds
to the cities in 1987. Much of the credit for this achievement
must go to the cities' own efforts to reduce losses, with the
help of the loss control representatives employed by LMCIT's
administrators, EBA and North Star Risk Services.
An important element of loss control is the on-site visit by the
loss control representatives. The purpose of these visits is to
help the city identify conditions and practices which present a
hazard, and to help find ways to reduce or eliminate those
hazards.
The best way to think of the loss control representatives is as
consultants there to help the city. Their expertise is in
recognizing conditions that tend to create injuries, claims, and
losses, and in proposing techniques to control those hazards.
They are there to make that expertise available to cities.
Of course, you should also keep in mind that because LMCIT is a
cooperative self-insurance organization, all of the member
cities have an interest in making sure that no one city is
contributing an unreasonable amount of risk to LMCIT. After
all, if one city's premises and operations are exceptionally
hazardous, all of LMCIT's other member cities will potentially
have to help pay for the losses that result. The loss control -
visits help assure all of the cities that they are not
subsidizing someone else's unsafe practices.
(OVER)
N O T E T O F I L E
DATE: December 5, 1988
FROM: W. Michael Everist
SUBJECT: City of Shakopee
A loss control visit was made to the City of Shakopee after a letter
was received by the agent for the City of Shakopee with regards to
the current brick sidewalk installation program. A review of the
sidewalk brick installation program shows that a competent
engineering and construction program is in effect with regards to
the brick sidewalk. The brick currently being installed is an
abraded, non-slip type brick. The bricks are laid on a very
substantial base with a sand grouting. The sidewalk is designed to
have an annual inspection and maintenance upgrade program to level
any bricks which may sink during the year.
During this review it was noted that an upgrade needs to be done on
the current sidewalk inspection and maintenance program for the
whole city. It was noted during this visit that the previous city
administrator, Mr. John Anderson, has left and has been temporarily
replaced by Mr. Dennis Kraft.
WME/cp
Lust CON ROL
GrGV 1 ' 1988
183 University Ave.East
St.Paul,MN 55101.2526
League of Minnesota Cities (612)227.5600(FAX:221.0986)
November 14, 1988
Mike Everist
North Star Risk Services, Inc.
1401 West 76th Street
Suite 550
Minneapolis, MN 55423
Dear Mr. Everist:
LMCIT received an inquiry as to a municipality's responsibility for
sidewalks, built by private property owners, parallel to the street,
where the public sidewalk would be if a public walk were built. The
problem posed occurs when the sidewalk does not extend the length of
the whole block. Perhaps a number of property owners have built
similar sidewalks, but some have not, and gaps exist in the sidewalk
thus created along the block.
The general rule is that the duty of keeping a sidewalk in a
reasonably safe condition for travel is upon a city or municipality,
not on the abutting owners or occupants. Sternitzke v Donahue's
Jewelers, 249 Minn. 514, 519 (1957) A sidewalk is part of a street
and a municipality, which is given exclusive control of the streets or
sidewalks, is required to exercise reasonable care in keeping them in
a safe condition. The municipality is liable to any person who is
injured as a result of want of such care. Id. at 520.
[T]he duty . is placed on the city and is not on
abutting owners or occupants unless they created the
defect or dangerous condition or were negligent in
maintaining in a dangerous and defective condition
facilities erected on the sidewalk for their convenience
or for the benefit of their building.
Sternitzke v Donahue's Jewelers, 249 Minn. at 519-20.
The city's duty of reasonable care includes a duty of reasonable
expection.
To impose liability, however, for injuries resulting from a defect,
the city must have had actual or constructive notice of the defect.
Smith v. Village of Hibbing, 272 Minn. 1 (1965) The city must have
had knowledge of the condition, or the condition must have existed for
a sufficient length of time so that the city should have known of it,
Page 2 of 4
yet failed to take steps to remedy it. Scott v. Village of Olivia,
260 Minn. 346 (1961) What constitutes a sufficient length of time
depends upon the facts of the particular case. Hall v. Ci tv of Anoka,
260 Minn. 188 (1961) . The plaintiff has the burden of proof that the
city knew of the defect, or that the defect existed for a sufficient
length of time so that it should have been discovered and corrected by
the city. Id.
If a private property owner constructs a sidewalk in the place where
public sidewalks are usually built, but where the municipality has,
for whatever reason, chosen not to build a sidewalk, is the
municipality liable for defects or lack of maintenance which results
in injury to a user? The answer seems to be -yes.- In Graham v.
City of Albert Lea, 48 Minn. 201 (1892) , a property owner abutting a
public street built a sidewalk parallel to the street along his
property. The city had acquiesced in the owner's action and built
crosswalks over the sidewalk constructed by the property owner. A
passerby was injured on the sidewalk and brought an action against the
city. The city disclaimed responsibility for the existence of the
sidewalk, as well as for its maintenance and repair.
The Court held that the city authorities so acted in reference to this
walk as to hold it out to the people as a public thoroughfare. The
city therefore assumed the duty of keeping it in repair. Id. at 205
The court said that where a sidewalk is placed in the street to be
used by the public as a part of it, and is permitted by the
municipality to remain and be so used, the -city has a duty to see that
it is in a safe condition for such use. Id.
[Where] a municipality permits a private citizen to build
a sidewalk in front of his premises, and the same is to be
used by the public, the duty devolves upon the corporation
to see that it is kept in repair.
Graham v. City of Albert Lea, 48 Minn. at 206
In succeeding cases, the Supreme Court of Minnesota has said that when
the owner of adjacent property constructs a sidewalk which replaces or
completes a public sidewalk, even without the city's express
authority, the municipality must exercise a reasonable supervision
over such construction and must seasonably remedy any defects.
Stellwagen v. City of Winona, 54 Minn. 460, 463 (1893) , Blyhl v.
V111age of Waterville, 57 Minn. 115 (1894) .
On the other hand, in Holmwood v. City of Duluth, 134 Minn. 137 (1916)
the owner of adjacent property built a sidewalk along the street front
of his building where no sidewalk had existed. There was no evidence.
that the authorities had ever approved either the construction or the
manner in which it was done. The city never made any attempt to
assume control of the sidewalk, or repaired or maintained the
sidewalk. When a user was injured because of an alleged defect in the
Page 3 of 4
sidewalk, the user sued the city for damages. The Court held the city
was not liable because there was no evidence that the city had ever
assumed control of that particular stretch of sidewalk. However, the
Court said that the rule might be different had the city, in fact,
assumed jurisdiction of that part of the walk and treated it as part
of the public thoroughfare. Id. at 139 (emphasis added) .
The actual result of Holmwood is probably irregular, despite the pains
the Court took to point out that the city had not assumed control.
The prevailing attitude seems to be that permitting a privately built
sidewalk to exist where a public sidewalk would be expected to exist
is sufficient to constitute assumption of control.
The basis of liability in these cases seems to be the -invitation
principle.- Cased, Street and Sidewalk Safety: The Scope of the
Municipal Duty in Minnesota, 45 Minn. L. Rev. 333, 355 (1961) . The
essence of the principle is that, if a private walkway runs along the
same place a public walk would run, if there were one, an invitation
to the traveler is implicit in the existence of the walk. This
invitation is the invitation of the city, not of the private owner.
Id. The reason is that the traveler would not suspect that the walk
had been provided by a benevolent private party rather than by the
city. Id.
Similarly, if a walkway runs from the public walk to a private house,
the traveler would normally think that the walk had been provided by
the private owner, not the city. The invitation implicit is that of
the owner. The owner is responsible for injuries on that connecting
walk.
To lessen the burden of its duty, a city may, by ordinance, require
property owners to maintain and repair sidewalks that are adjacent to
or abutting their property. However, if the abutting owners neglect
their duty under the ordinance, the city is responsible. In such
cases, the city must do the necessary maintainence and repairs, but
may charge the costs to the property benefitted. Minn. Stats. 412.211
and 412.221 subd. 6. Cities may also, by ordinance, establish
sidewalk improvement districts and have authority to defray all or
part of costs of construction and repair of sidewalks therein by
apportioning costs to all the parcels located in the district on a
direct or indirect benefit basis. Minn. Stat. 435.44 subd. 1.
Thus, if in a particular neighborhood, where the city had not laid
sidewalks, but some of the private property owners did, the city may
pass and ordinance requiring the whole neighborhood to have sidewalks,
thereby filling in any gaps. Costs could be assessed according to the
provisions of 435.44.
If a city chose neither to incur this cost itself, nor to pass the
cost to the benefitted properties by assessment, it would still be
liable for maintenance and repair of the sidewalk thoroughfare that
Page 4 of 4
was created by the property owners, as the case law outlined above
indicates. Therefore the city would want, at a minimum, to insure
that any gaps in the sidewalk were not abrupt. The ends of the
sidewalks should be graded to meet the unfinished sidewalk area.
I am sending you copies of the applicable ordinances and a copy of a
1986 LMC research memo on local improvements. The memo relates to
improvements under Minn. Stat. 429 but also refers to Minn. Stat.
435.44 (on page 7) . Cities should always consult with their attornies
and other responsible officers or officials before pursuing a
particular course of action. I hope this has been of help.
Sincerely,
Allen Jacobson,
LMCIT Research Asst
Enclosures
CC: Doug Gronli, GAB
Bob Weisbrod
Dave Drugg
Doug Holm
rdONSENT VC'
14.11
4: 1
association of
Board of Directors metropolitan
President municipalities
.a'..denim
Moron od
Vice President December 29, 1988
.air,P.pehe,
goLtmsdale Mr. Dennis Kraft
Past President City Administrator
B.il r,.pideraon 129 E. 1st. Ave.
Bloomington Shakopee, MN. 55379
Directors Dear
Mensor nddicks,Jr. Mr. Kraft:
Minneapolis
It is my privilege as President of the Association of Metropolitan
F.r.n Anderson Municipalities (AMM) to write this letter to transmit your 1989
Minnetonka Dues Statement. This is the AMM' s 15th, year of service to metro
Larn•Bakk.n area cities and I am proud of its record of success and
Golden Valle, accomplishments over this period of time.
Mark Bempa,dso^
.no We must remain alert, however, in our efforts to maintain and
Edward fiepal enhance the ability of cities to satisfy the needs of our
.,idle, constituents in the most effective and responsive manner. The AMM
Ke.in fnae�l is a leading force in lobbying to preserve local control and
Mendou neigh. decision making as well as serving as a vehicle for sharing the
costs of providing necessary information and services which would
caroidonnaon be too expensive on an individual city basis.
.Inn....In.
Sharon nlumpp We look forward to working with you and your Mayor and
Dakdai. Councilmembers during 1989 as we seek common goals. Your
Mord c.Long participation and financial commitment are necessary if we are to
$spam succeed. I am happy to report that the AMM Board limited the dues
increase to 4% to be consistent with the limitations placed on
Diene L.L,na" cities for calendar year 1989. Together the AMM works!
M.Pam
Gerald Marshall sine /odCouncilmember
Gerald n pan
Donald Xam,tad
Maple Grove
wnliam Baed y AMM President
,nee,Do. ii.,pM, Maple
Henry D.sm
new Bnemon ACTION REQUESTED
Leslie D.Turner 1. Approve 1989 dues, in the amount of $2,119.00, for
Mark membership in the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities.
Glona Vierling 2. Move to appoint Gloria Vierling as delegate and Dennis Kraft
BBakopee as alternate delegate to the Association of Metropolitan
Executive Director Municipalities for 1989. (This is agreeable to the Mayor,
Vern penerson Gloria Vierling and Dennis Kraft)
183 university avenue east, at. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-4008
ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES
183 University Ave. , East
St. Paul , Minnesota 55101
C_
DUES STATEMENT
FOR
1989
Shakopee
City
183 University Avenue, East St. Paul , Minnesota 55101
By action of the Board of Directors, the 1989 dues
schedule for membership in the Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities has been set at the city' s 1988 AMM dues amount
plus 4% (total rounded to the nearest dollar) or $100,
whichever is greater .
The membership dues in the Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities for the year beginning January 1 , 1989 and
ending December 31 , 1989 are $ 2.204 for the City
Of Shakopee_ ( 1988 dues $ 2,119 x 104%) .
I declare under the penalties of law that the foregoing amount
is just and correct and that no part
part of it has bb�'een paid.
EY
Vern Pet /rExecutive Director
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
The records indicate that Gloria Vierl na is the
designated delegate and D nn+ K of
is the designated alternate to the Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities from your city. Please inform us if our records
are incorrect or if your city desires to make a change in your
designated delegate/alternate status .
9e?-
Amendment to Feasibility Report
for
3rd Avenue West
Sanitary Sewer & water Improvements
Attached is a response from SPUC in regards to the proposed sewer
and water on 3rd Avenue , west of Harrison. As stated in the
memo, they are requiring this watermain to be looped.
This estimated. costof -the aArL;t.+.nna_J .w-"Y.rr..main ---L.- i�lrv��.• -
Construction Costs $65,000.00
10% Contingency 6 ,500 .00
25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 16 .000 .00
$87 ,500 .00
The assessments for this additional watermain can be divided up
using several alternatives.
1 . Add the $87 ,500 .00 into the overall project cost and
assess to all properties equally on a per acre basis.
2. Add the entire $87 ,500 .00 into the assessment for
O.T.B. , Inc. j
3• Request that SPDC and the property owner O.T.B. , Inc. ,
reach an agreement to share in this additional cost.
The rationale for this is that some of the watermain
required is solely for the purpose of completing the
loop , which benefits the overall watermain system
rather than any one individual property.
Staff recommends that Alternative No. 3 be explored to assess the
additional watermain changes.
Attached is a map showing the additional watermain required , a
detailed cost estimate and a preliminary assessment table based
on Alternative No. 1 above.
DH/pmp
AMEND
r a � rfl
PROPOS zz
gD WATERM - _
i - Stijl, _
1
ft
ly_yi
IL.
�
R�L�R{ 1VERVIEW
1• PARK
",! r
All
AV
apQ _ \ fith r
i la
V .
iAV 1 'Air
ri
//.
431
/ 177
i. I —. j� c - it •.J!! t ,�,
IN
fJ/
�J M.
IN
lCtA
/ 160
.,S - 199 . 193
_
12
168LUTm
--I
CHUB
� k _
4_ y
r�20B
33-
ADDITIONAL NATERMAIN COST ESTIMATE
UNIT
ITEM QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL
1 . 8" D. I.P. 1 ,600 L.F. $ 22.00/L.F. $35,200.00
2. 8" Gate Valve 2 EA. $ 450 .00/EA. $ 900.00
3. Hydrant 3 EA. $1 ,600.00/EA. $ 4,800.00
4. Rock Excavation 500 C.Y. $ 40 .00/C.Y. $20 ,000 .00
5. 10th Ave. L.S. $3,500 .00 $ 3,500 .00
Restoration
(C&G, Bituminous
Class 5 , Etc. )
6. Seed, Mulch & 0 .75 AC. $1 ,200 .00/AC $ 900 .00
Topsoil
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS $65,3DO.00
9 �-
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
3rd Ave W. Sanitary Sewer & Water Improvements
13-Jan-89 1 ALT. 1 ASSESSABLE COST: :ALTERNATIVE IIALTERNATIVE
%291 ,000.00 1$1 ., 131 .7690 :%10,809.2509
ALT. 2 ASSESSABLE COST: per acre 1 per acre
$2339,5333.00
Proposed Proposed
PID i Property Owner !Acreage! Assessments I Assessments
_______________________________________________________________________________-
27-015013-0 :Lawrence Link 1 .27 1 $16,677.35 1 $13,727. 75
: 1400 3rd Ave. W.
!Shakopee, MN 55379
27-015015-0 !Paul Sullwold & Wm Jirik 2.26 1 $29,677.80 I $24,428.91
11420 3rd Ave. W.
!Shakopee, MN 553379
27-015014-0 !Helen C. Link; 1 4.54 : $59,618. 23 1 $49,074.00
112831 Link Drive
!Shakopee, MN 55379
27-112025-0 1O.T.S. Inc. 1 12.82 1 $168,349.26 ! $138,574. 60
1119 S. Lewis St. I
!Shakopee, MN 55379
27-911016-1 !Cletus J. & Helen L. Link 1.27 1 $16,677.35 ! $13,727. 7=
112831 Link Drive
!Shakopee, MN 55379
! 1 22. 16 1 $291 ,000.00 $239,533.00
ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS
Cost per acre = Total Project Cost/Total Acreage
_____________________________________________________
Alternative 1:
Cost per acre = $291 ,000/22. 16 = $13, 131.7690 per acre
_____________________________________________________
Alternative 2:
Cost per acre = $239,533/22. 16 = $10,809.2509 per acre
/ Gl.
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator(
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer � \ 1
SUBJECT: 3rd. Avenue Between L7�
Harrison Street & Highway 169
DATE: January 9 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3009 for Council consideration which
Orders Plans & Specifications for 3rd Avenue Sewer and Water,
Between Harrison Street and Highway 169 .
BACKGROUND:
On August 16, 1988 City Council received a petition for sanitary
sewer and water improvements to 3rd Avenue between Harrison
Street and Highway 169 and ordered the preparation of a
feasibility report by Resolution No . 2937 . The feasibility
report was distributed to Council on December 20 , 1988 and
subsequently a public hearing was scheduled for January 17 , 1989 .
The proposed improvements consist of installing sanitary sewer
and watermain on 3rd Avenue between Harrison Street and
Highway 169 . Staff will give a short presentation on the
feasibility report for the street at the public hearing.
At the conclusion of the public hearing if Council wishes to
proceed with the project, Resolution No. 3009 which orders the
preparation of the plans & specifications for the project is
attached for Council consideration.
ALTERNATIVES:
Depending on the testimony received at the public hearing ,
Council has the following alternatives:
1 . Determine that the project is not in the best interest of
the City and do not proceed any further with the project.
2. Determine that the project should proceed and order staff to
prepare plans & specifications for the 1989 construction
season.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 2, to proceed with the project
and order staff to prepare plans & specifications for the 1989
construction season.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3009, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement
and the Preparation of Plans & Specifications for Sewer and Water
on 3rd Avenue Between Harrison Street and Highway 169 , Project
No. 1989-2 and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
HEM3009
1 °'/
RESOLUTION NO. 3009
A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And
The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For
3rd Avenue Between Harrison Street and Highway 169
Project No. 1989-2
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2998 adopted on December 20 , 1988 ,
fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of
3rd Avenue between Harrison Street and Highway 169 by sewer and
water; and
WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through
two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the
hearing was held on the 17th day of January 1989 , at which all
persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be
heard thereon.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter
described:
3rd Avenue between Harrison Street and Highway 169 by
sewer and watermain installation.
2. David Hutton, City Engineer is hereby designated as the
engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and
specifications for the making of such improvement.
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
9_-City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 3008
A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And
The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For The
Alley in Block 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition
Project No. 1989-3
WHEREAS , Resolution No. 3002 adopted on January 3 , 1989 ,
fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of
the Alley in Block 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition; and
WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearingthrough
two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the
hearing was held on the 17th day of January 1989 , at which all
persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be
heard thereon.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter
described:
Construction of Bituminous Pavement to the Alley in
Block 7 of the Jasper and Smith Addition located
between Scott and Atwood Streets and Shakopee and 10th
Avenues.
2. David Hutton, City Engineer is hereby designated as the
engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and
specifications for the making of such improvement.
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
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer V jY-L
SUBJECT: Alley in Block 7
of the Jasper & Smith Addition
DATE: January 9 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3008 Ordering an Improvement and the
Preparation of Plans & Specifications for 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 was distributed to Council on
January 3 , 1989 and subsequently a public hearing was scheduled
for January 17, 1989 .
The proposed improvements consists of paving the alley with 2
inches of bituminous concrete placed on a 6 inch gravel base .
Staff will briefly go over the feasibility report at the public
hearing.
At the conclusion of the public hearing, if Council wishes to
proceed with the project, Resolution No . 3008 is attached for
Council consideration.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Determine that the project should proceed and order staff to
Prepare the plans & specifications by adopting Resolution
No. 3008.
2. Determine that the project is not in the best interest of
the City and do not proceed any further with the project.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3008, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement
and the Preparation of Plans & Specifications for the Alley in
Block 7 of the Jasper & Smith Addition, Project No. 1989-3 and
move its adoption.
DH/pmp
low
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Preliminary Plat of Kubes 2nd Addition
DATE: January 11, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
At their meeting on January 5, 1989, the Planning Commission
held a public hearing and reviewed a preliminary plat submitted
by Mr. Randy Kubes for 7 lots located on the Northeast corner of
the intersection of County Roads 72 and 79. Following the public
hearing, the Planning Commission offered and passed a motion
recommending to the City Council that the preliminary plat be
approved subject to conditions.
BACKGROUND:
Mr. Randy Kubes submitted an application for preliminary
plat approval to subdivide 43.98 acres into seven lots ranging in
size from 3.8 acres to 10 acres. The proposed subdivision is
located in the very Southwest corner of the City at the
intersection of County Roads 72 and 79. The property is zoned R-
1.
Mr. Kubes has another plat named Rubes 1st Addition on
record with the Scott County Recorder. Although the first plat
is not located in the City of Shakopee, the County does not allow
the recording of more then one plat with the same name. The City
Clerk has indicated that she is not opposed to having the plat
entitled Kubes 2nd Addition.
The following is a brief review of the major issues
regarding this plat discussed at the Planning Commission meeting:
1. Mr. Kubes has proposed seven lots each with direct access
onto County Roads 72 and 79. Both County roads are gravel
roads handling a minimum of traffic. Of the two, County
Road 79 carries the most traffic and has the greatest
potential for future upgrading. The County Engineer has
recommended tgat the City minimize the number of accesses
onto County Road 79. The Planning Commission is
recommending a condition be placed on the plat which would
allow only two accesses onto County Road 79.
2. Drainage from this property currently flows to the West via
two culverts located under County Road 79. One culvert is
located about mid-point along the West property line, the
second culvert is located immediately to the North of the
property. The City staff has been contacted by both the
property owner to the West and to the North, these property
owners have indicated their concern that the development of
this property not alter the existing drainage and increase
run-off onto their property. The property owner to the West
/ 6CL_
appeared at the public hearing and requested that the County
consider enlarging the existing culverts to allow for
faster drainage of water which would hopefully eliminate
flooding problems which now occur on his field.
Currently, the culvert just North of the property carries
the greatest amount of water and the Northwest corner of the
property does retain water when a heavy rain occurs. The
property owner to the North is particulary concerned that
the owners of Lots 1 and 2 not alter or eliminate the
existing retention area located on the Northwest corner of
this property. Normally with lots of this size the
alterations to the topography is very minimal, the property
owner usually only regrades the area immediately surrounding
the building site. The Planning Commission has recommended
a conditions addressing the drainage issue.
3 . The developer has done a soil test for each of the lots.
Percolation test results range from 12 - 22 minutes per
inch. This result indicates good soil absorbtion rates for
on-site sewage treatment systems. The soil borings,
however, do show mottling occurring at depths between 2 - 3
feet on some of the sites. This may necessitate the use of
mound type on-site sewage treatment systems on some of the
lots. The City staff does not foresee any problem with the
installation of on-site sewage treatment systems that can
not be resolved by changing the location or design of the
system.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. The City Council could offer and pass a motion approving the
preliminary plat for Kubes 2nd Addition subject to the
conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
2. The City Council could offer and pass a motion approving the
preliminary plat for Kubes 2nd Addition subject to
conditions different then recommended by the Planning
Commission.
3. The City Council could not take action on the preliminary
plat for Rubes 2nd Addition at this time and direct staff to
provide additional information to the City Council regarding
unresolved issues.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At their meeting on January 5, 1989, the Planning Commission
offered and passed a motion recommending the approval of Kubes
2nd Addition, subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
2. Payment in lieu of land dedication for park purposes is
required.
3. Each lot will be allowed only one access, access permits
shall be required from the County Engineer. Lot 3 shall
only be allowed access onto County Road 72.
4. All existing drainageways must be maintained.
a. Final plat must contain a grading plan.
b. Tile drains must be identified on the plat and
provisions for maintenance be incorporated.
C. Grading permits will be required for construction of
driveways on Lots 1 and 2 for the purpose of
recognizing and minimizing the impact on the water
retention basin.
5. Secure determination of wetland status from the DNR and the
Army Corp. of Engineers.
6. Petition the County for drainage review.
ACTION REODESTED:
Offer and pass a motion approving the preliminary plat of
Kubes 2nd Addition subject to conditions.
lob
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Amendment to Shakopee Valley Square PUD
DATE: January 11, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
At their meeting on January 5, 1989, the Planning Commission
offered and passed a motion recommending to the City Council that
the Shakopee Valley Square Planned Unit Development (PUD) be
amended to allow a water ski show to be conducted on the
Minnesota River. The Planning Commission also recommended
conditions of approval.
BACKGROUND:
Mr. Wallace Bakken previously received approval from the
City for a PUD which includes expansion of the existing Shakopee
Valley Motel, a restaurant and a campground complex. He is
presently requesting an amendment to the PUD to allow Lynch
Enterprises to conduct a water ski . show on the property (see
enclosed proposal) .
The proposed water ski show would be conducted throughout
the summer season with two shows per day being offered. Maximum
seating capacity for the shows would be 250-500 people with a
proposed parking facility capable of accommodating 63 cars. The
proposed amendment would reallocate space previously designated
for the campground and future lodge facilities for use by the
water ski show. The water ski show area along the river bank
would include the construction of bleachers, a stage, concession
stands and rest rooms. The water ski show would also include
construction of a parking lot located Northeast of the existing
motel building on the upper bluff level. The water ski show
would utilize a horse drawn people mover to transport people from
the parking lot to the show area.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment and
opened a public hearing at it's meeting on December 8, 1988. The
hearing was then continued until the Commission's January 5, 1989
meeting, after which the Commission took action to recommend
approval of the amendment.
For additional background information and a discussion of
the key issues involved in this project please refer to the
attached staff report prepared for the December 8, 1988 meeting,
the follow-up memo prepared for the January 5, 1989 meeting, and
the bound proposal submitted by the applicant.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. The City Council could offer and pass Resolution #3011
approving the amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square
Planned Unit Development and Development Agreement
containing the conditions for approval recommended by the
Planning Commission.
2. The City Council could offer and pass Resolution #3011
approving the amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square
Planned Unit Development and Development Agreement after
changing conditions of approval outlined in the Development
Agreement.
3 . The City Council could not take action at this time on the
amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square Planned Unit
Development and direct staff to provide additional
information to the City Council on any unresolved issues.
4. The City Council could offer Resolution #3011 and then vote
to deny the amendment to the Planned Unit Development, and
then indicate the reason for denial.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.
At their meeting on January 5, 1989 the Planning Commission
offered and passed a motion recommending to the City Council
approval of the amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square PUD
subject to the conditions outlined in the attached development
agreement (alternative #1) .
ACTION REOUESTED•
Offer and pass Resolution #3011 approving the amendment to
the Shakopee Valley Square Planned Unit Development and
development agreement. -
II
Ib
RESOLUTION NO. 3011
A Resolution Approving the Amendment to
the Final Plan and Development Agreement for
Shakopee Valley Square First Addition
Planned Unit Development
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did
approve amendments to the Final Plan and Development Agreement
for Shakopee Valley Square First Addition Planned Unit
Development on January 5, 1989 and has recommended its adoption:
and
WHEREAS, all notices of hearing have been duly sent and
posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given
an opportunity to be heard thereon; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all
things.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the Final Plan and Development
Agreement for the Shakopee Valley Square First Addition Planned
Unit Development, hereby is amended with the requirements
contained in the Development Agreement Amendment, attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk and
the same are hereby authorized and directed to execute said
approved Plan and Development Agreement.
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
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
This agreement made and entered into this day of
, 1989, by and between the City of Shakopee, a
municipal corporation organized under and pursuant to the Laws of
the State of Minnesota and located in the County of Scott and
State of Minnesota hereinafter called "City" and Shakopee Valley
Square Properties hereinafter called "Owner".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Owner has made application to the City Council
for approval of an amendment to the Planned Unit Development
(PUD) known as Shakopee Valley Square First Addition within the
corporate limits of the City of Shakopee to be known as Shakopee
Valley Square First Addition legally described in Exhibit "A"
hereto attached and made a part hereof.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the approval by the City
of the amendment to the PUD above referred to and other good and
valuable consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged, it is hereby agreed that the approval of
said amended PUD shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. The Development Agreement for the previously approved PUD
entered into on December 1, 1987 by the City of Shakopee and
Shakopee Valley Square Properties, and all conditions
contained therein, shall remain in effect except for
condition $16 which addresses road width requirements. One
way access roads shall be a minimum of 20' as required by
the Uniform Fire Code, the 25' width requirement for two-way
roadways will remain in effect.
2. Prior to the issuance of a final certificate of occupancy
for the camp ground and water ski show:
a. All items listed on the August 5, 1988 and December 22,
1988 letters to Mr. Bakken from the City Building
Department must be completed.
b. Construction of a second entrance road must be
complete.
C. No temporary permits are to be issued for the camp
ground or water ski show.
d. The Planning Commission shall be notified of compliance
and issuance of the final certificate of occupancy.
3 . All structures for the water ski show must be removable and
be removed each fall at the end of the season and prior to
any flooding. Electrical service for the structures must
have a safety shut off located outside the floodplain and
wires shall not be located in a manner that will obstruct
flow of possible flood waters.
4. Parking
a. The applicants shall limit the number of cars parking
in the parking lot for the water ski show to 63. No
parking for the show will be allowed on the street or
in other parking lots.
b. The parking lot must be constructed to include at least
63 spaces in addition to the parking spaces required
for the first phase of the Shakopee Valley Square PUD
previously approved.
C. Dust control measures will be required on an ongoing
basis.
5. Evening shows shall not begin before 8:00. Afternoon shows
shall not begin after 4:00 and within one hour of the
opening of Canterbury Downs.
6. Approval of this amendment to the PUD does not include
Shakopee Planning Commission approval of the future lodge
buildings to be constructed Northeast of the existing Motel
shown on the previously approved PUD. Prior to construction
of either of these buildings an amendment to the PUD must be
approved by the City. In approving such an amendment
request, the city shall determine that adequate parking for
these buildings can be provided on the site. The owner
shall submit to the city a new plan removing the lodge
buildings and showing the other changes approved by this
amendment prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
7. The applicant shall furnish copies of all permits required
from the DNR, Health Department and Water Patrol prior to
issuance of the final certificate of occupancy.
8. This amendment to the PUD incorporates approval of a
conditional use permit for the Western Star Water Ski Show,
excluding successors and assigns without previous approval
from the Planning Commission. The method of operation shall
be as outlined in the applicant's Request for Permit
booklet, Section 5. The booklet should be adjusted to read
63 parking spaces.
9. After conclusion of the first season of the water ski show,
the Planning Commission shall review the land uses approved
by this amendment to insure compliance with the above
conditions.
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED that this agreement will bind both
parties hereto and successors and assigns of said parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Owner have caused this
agreement to be duly executed on the day and year first above
written.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BY
Mayor
BY
Acting City Administrator
BY
City Clerk
IN THE PRESENCE OF
BY
Wallace D. Bakken, Partner
BY
Lyle A. Bakken, Partner
E%H:E"° F /6 4-
Lot 1, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof,
Scott County, Minnesota.
That part of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning
at the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence northeasterly along the northerly
line of said Lot 2, and Lot 3, a distance of 198.00 feet; thence southeasterly
parallel with the easterly line of said Lot 2 to the southerly line of said Lot
3; thence southwesterly along said southerly line a distance of 150.00 feet;
thence deflecting at an angle of 48 degrees 54 minutes to the right to the
westerly line of said Lot 2; thence northerly along said westerly line to the
point of beginning.
That part of Lot 3, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded
plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the following described
line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 3; thence southwesterly
along the southerly line of said Lot 3 a distance of 150.00 feet to :the point of
beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly at right angles a
distance of 150.00 feet to the northerly line of said Lot 3 and there
terminating.
That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded
plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, lying southwesterly of the following
described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 2; thence south-
westerly along the southerly line of said Lot 2, a distance of 126.00 feet to
the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence deflecting at an
angle of 48 degrees 54 minutes to the right to the westerly line of said Lot 2
and there terminating.
Lot 4, Black 1 , Halo Second Addition, -according to the recorded plat thereof,
Scott County, Minnesota.
i
Together with that part of Government Lots 4 and 5, Section 6, Township 115,
Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the
northeast corner of Lot 4, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota; thence southeasterly along the
easterly line of said Lot 4 to a point 310.00 feet northwesterly of the north
right of way line of First Avenue and parallel with Naumkaeg Street; thence
North 79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds East parallel with said First Avenue to a
line 73.00 feet westerly of and parallel with the east line of said Government
Lot 5; thence North 0 degrees 10 minutes 51 seconds East parallel with said east
line a distance of 63.30 feet; thence North 71 degrees 57 minutes 51 seconds
East to the east line of said Government Lot 5; thence North 0 degrees 10 min-
utes 51 seconds East along said east line to the waters edge of the Minnesota
River; thence westerly along said waters edge to the intersection with a line
described as follows: Commencing at a point on the east line of previously men-
tioned Naumkaeg Street 889.00 feet northerly of the southwest corner of Block
31, East Shakopee, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence
North 79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds East, parallel with the previously men-
tioned First Avenue 601.20 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be
described; thence North 11 degrees 03 minutes 07 seconds West, parallel with
said Naumkaeg Street to the waters edge of said Minnesota River and there ter-
minating.
Thence South 11 degrees 03 minutes 07 seconds East along the last described line
to the point of beginning of said line; thence South 51 degrees 41 minutes 07
seconds East to the intersection with a line 100.00 feet westerly of and
parallel with the .east line of said Government Lot 4; thence South 0 degrees 04
minutes 06 seconds West along said parallel line to the northwest corner of Halo
First Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence South 68 degrees
20 minutes 48 seconds East along the northeasterly line of said Halo: First
Addition to the intersection with a line described as follows: Commencing at
the northeast corner of said Lot 4, Block 1, Halo Second Addition; thence South
79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds West along the northerly 'line of said Lot 4 a
distance of 366.35 feet; . thence North 9 degrees 36 minutes 05 seconds West a
distance of 244.75 feet; thence South 81 degrees 45 minutes 03 seconds West a
distance of 365.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described;
thence South 6 degrees 35 minutes 19 seconds West to the northeasterly line of
said Halo First Addition and there terminating.
Thence North 6 degrees 35 minutes 19 seconds East along the last described line
to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 81 degrees 45 minutes 03
seconds East a distance of 365.00 feet; thence South 9 degrees 36 minutes 05
seconds East to the northerly line of said Lot 4, Block 1, Halo Second Addition;
thence easterly along said northerly line to the point of beginning.
Together with that part of Outlot A, Halo First Addition, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the following
described line: Commencing at the east corner of said Outlot A; thence westerly
along the southerly line of said Outlot A distance of 66.00 feet to the point of
beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly to a point on the
northeasterly line of said Outlot A lying 120.00 feet (as measured along the
northeasterly line of said Outlot A) northwesterly of the east corner of said
Outlot A.
Together with that part of Government Lots 4 *and 5 described as follows:
Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 4, Block 1, Halo Second Addition,
according to the recoreded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota; thence south-
westerly along the northerly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 366.35 to the
point of begindino of the land to be described; thence North 9 degrees 36 min-
utes 05 seconds West a distance of 244.75 feet; thence South 81 degrees 45 min-
utes 03 seconds West a distance of 365.00 feet; thence South 6 degrees 35 minutes
19 seconds West to the northeasterly line of Outlot A, Halo First Addition
according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota; thence
southeasterly along said northeasterly line to the east corner of said Outlot A;
thence northeasterly along the northerly line of said Lot 4 to the pointof
beginning.
Except that part of said Government Lot 5, described as follows: Commencing at
the northeast corner of said Lot 4, Block 1, Halo Second Addition; thence south-
westerly along the northerly line of said Lot 4, a distance of 366.35 feet;
thence South 79 degrees 23 minutes 47 seconds West a distance of 55.05 feet to
the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence North 10 degrees 39
minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 189.87 feet; thence South 79 degrees 17
minutes 35 seconds West a distance of 117.28 feet; thence South 10 degrees 33
minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 177.60 feet; thence South 18 degrees 56
minutes 02 seconds West to the northerly line of said Lot 4; thence
northeasterly along said northerly line to the point of beginning.
. CITY OF SHAKOPEE
- INCORPORATED 1870 AGENDA 170. 5
S,
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: December 8, 1988
RESOLUTION NO. :
PREPARED BY: Douglas K. Wise
APPLICANT
APPLICABLE PROVISIONS: Section 11.40, Subd. 6, 11.24, Subd. 3 G,
11.29, Subd. 3 M.
PROPOSAL: Amendment to the existing Shakopee Valley Square PUD to
allow a water ski show.
LOCATION: 1251 E. First Ave.
APPLICANT: Lynch Enterprises Inc. & Wallace Bakken
SITE DATA.
ZONING: Bl & Ag
ACREAGE: 29.6 acres
MUNICIPAL UTILITIES : yes
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N- Ag/Minnesota River
S B-1
E- B-1 & Ag
W- B-1 & Ag
CONSIDERATION•
1. Mr. Wallace Bakken previously received approval of a Planned
Unit Development (PUD) from the City. He is requesting an
amendment to the PUD to allow Lynch Enterprises to conduct a
water ski show on the property (see attached proposal) .
Because the proposed commercial recreation activity requires
both an amendment to the existing PUD and a Conditional Use
Permit, the most restrictive requirement shall apply.
It is staff's interpretation that the PUD requirement is
more restrictive than the Conditional Use Permit because the
PUD requires the submission of more information, approval by
the Planning Commission and City Council, and execution of a
development agreement.
2 . Mr. Bakken received approval from the City for the PUD which
included several phases. The first phase was construction
of a campground facility followed by subsequent phases
including expansion of the motel and construction of a
restaurant and future lodge facilities. To date, Mr. Bakken
has partially constructed the campground facility. The
portion for which construction has occurred includes
approximately 50 RV pads plus construction of a shower
building and a. small temporary check-in building. Mr.
Bakken has not yet started rehabilitation of the former
treatment buildings for the campground nor has he begun
construction on the remainder of the campground facility.
In the summer of 1988 Mr. Bakken requested from the Building
Department a temporary certificate of occupancy to allow him
to open the portion of the campground which has been
constructed. On August 5, 1988 the Building Department
issued a conditional certificate of occupancy listing a
number of items that must be completed, as well as requiring
deposit of a check for $7500 to insure completion of these
deficiencies (see attached letter) . The Building Inspection
Department has indicated that many of these items have not
yet been completed. One item has been completed by the
Shakopee Public Utilities, that is the improvements to the
fire hydrant North of the motel. This improvement was made
and will be charged toward the deposit check because the
fire hydrant was not in usable condition and posed a fire
safety hazard.
3 . As noted in the Building Department letter the existing
roadways constructed within the campground facility do not
meet either the conditions of approval of the PUD or Fire
Code Standards. The City Fire Chief has recommended that
the proposed water ski show not be allowed to commence until
such time as the roads have been constructed to Fire Code
Standards. The Fire Chief has indicated that the existing
roadways within the campground facility can not accommodate
emergency vehicles and need to be improved both in terms of
compaction and width. A second roadway as shown on the
approved PUD in to the campground facility also needs to be
constructed.
4. In reviewing the proposal the City Engineer raised concern
about the impact of the additional traffic on the existing
roadway system within the immediate area. After further
review and discussion with the applicant the Engineer has
determined that if the attendance is limited to 250 persons
and starting times are staggered to not conflict with other
major commercial recreation activities in the area and rush
hour traffic, the proposed use will not have a significant
impact on the surrounding traffic systems.
5. The proposed water ski show will also require permits from
the Minnesota Department of Health, the water patrol, the
DNR, and possibly a license from the City. The applicant
has spoke to all of these agencies and permitting procedures
will be undertaken as required.
6. People attending the proposed water ski show will park in a
parking lot containing 73 spaces located NE of the existing
motel. People leaving their cars in this location will then
be taken to the show site by way of a people mover.
Although the City Code only requires one space for each
eight seats for theatres and athletic fields, the City staff
feels that this would not be adequate parking. The staff is
recommending that one parking space for each four seats as
required for churches and auditoriums be included as a
condition of approval. This would necessitate a total of 63
parking spaces designated specifically for the water ski
show based on a maximum capacity of 250. The previous
approval of the PUD required 30 parking spaces to serve the
campground buildings and a proposed miniature golf facility,
some of this parking was to be located in the same area as
the proposed parking lot. Staff is recommending that the 63
spaces required be in addition to those required by the
previous PUD plan approval.
7 . The applicants stated in their application that they are
requesting a variance from the paving requirement for
parking lots. The paving requirement in the City Code for
parking and driveway facilities applies only to RV parks.
Parking facilities serving other commercial recreation
facilities are not required to have paved parking.
Therefore, staff's interpretation is that paving of this
parking lot to serve the water ski show specifically would
not be required making a variance unnecessary. If the
Commission feels that paved parking is necessary to protect
the public safety and welfare, the Commission could
recommend such a condition for approval.
8. The applicants also included in their proposal a request for
a variance to allow them to attach signage for the water ski
show to the existing Shakopee Valley Motel sign. The
current zoning code allows for up to a 150 square foot free
standing sign for properties with excess of 150 feet of
frontage on the street. Because the existing Shakopee
Valley Motel sign has only 78 square feet, it is staff's
interpretation that a variance would not be required to add
additional signage. If it is determined that the proposed
signage does not comply with the existing sign code, the
City staff is recommending that the applicants apply for a
separate sign variance prior to planned construction of the
sign.
9. In their review of the proposed water ski show the DNR has
recommended that conditions be added requiring that all
structures to be constructed for the water ski show be
removal and that they must be removed prior to any flooding.
The DNR has also recommended that the electrical service to
the facility have a main shut off located above the flood
plain so that electricity may be shut off prior to any
flood occurring. Wires should also not be strung in a
manner that could obstruct any floating debris should
flooding occur. The DNR also has expressed concern
regarding the use of the river for water skiing and that the
structures in the river be located in such a way that
pleasure boating up and down the river may take place at the
same time as the show without interference from the show.
Staff's understanding is that this will be regulated through
a permit issued by the water patrol.
FINDINGS•
According to Section . 11.40 of the City Code regarding
approval of PUD's the City shall make the following findings when
approving a PUD: -
1. The proposed development is consistent in all respects with
the City Comprehensive Plan.
FINDING: The City staff has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and
found no areas in which the proposal is inconsistent
with the plan. The plan addresses the safeguarding of
flood plain areas in which the proposed use will be
located. Based on the plan the City developed a flood
plain protection ordinance which the proposal is in
conformance with. The proposal is also in conformance
with the requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance
which was developed to implement the Comprehensive
Plan.
2. Where variances are requested, greater compatibility with
surrounding land uses warrants the granting of variances.
FINDING: The proposed amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square
PUD does not require any additional variances.
16 1�-
3. The open space gain warrants the use of PUD to grant
variances.
FINDING: The original PUD was approved in conformance with this
criteria. The proposed amendment will not
significantly alter the open space within the PUD.
4. The final development plan is in substantial conformance
with the approved preliminary development plan.
FINDING: It is the conclusion of City staff that the proposed
amendment to the PUD is not a substantial alteration of
the plan or the proposed uses previously approved for
this site.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. The Planning Commission could pass a motion recommending to
the City Council approval of the amendment to the Shakopee
Valley Square PUD subject to conditions.
2. The Planning Commission could pass a motion recommending to
the City Council that the requested amendment to the
Shakopee Valley Square PUD not be approved. If this
alternative is selected the Commission should state the
reasons why the proposed amendment is not in conformance
with the above findings.
3. After opening the public hearing and taking comment from the
public, the Commission could determine that additional
information is necessary before making a recommendation on
this request. In that case the hearing could either be
continued to the January meeting or the hearing could be
closed and action postponed until the January meeting
allowing for submission of additional information.
RECOMMENDATION•
Based upon the above findings, staff recommends alternative
$1.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square PUD to the City Council,
staff recommends that the following conditions be included in the
recommendation:
1. All conditions attached to the approval of the previous
PUD shall remain in effect.
2. Prior to issuance of either a conditional or final
certificate of occupancy for the water ski show and
structures, all items listed on the August 5, 1988
letter to Mr. Wallace Bakken from the City Building
Department must be completed.
3. All roadways serving the campground facility and the
water ski show area must be constructed to conform with
the requirements of the approved PUD and Fire Code
requirements prior to issuance of either a temporary or
final certificate of occupancy. This shall include
construction of a second entrance road.
4. All structures for the ski show must be removable and
be removed each Fall at the end of the season and prior
to any flooding. Electrical service for the structures
must have a safety shut off located outside the flood
plain and wires shall not be located in a manner that
will obstruct flow of possible flood waters.
5. Attendance for any one show shall be limited to 250
persons.
6. Evening shows shall not begin before 8:00. Afternoon
shows shall not begin after 4:00 and within one hour of
the opening of Canterbury Downs.
7. The parking lot must be constructed to include at least
63 parking spaces in addition to the parking spaces
required for the first phase of the Shakopee Valley
Square PUD previously approved.
8. Approval of this amendment to the PUD does not include
approval of the future lodge buildings to be
constructed NE of the existing motel. Prior to
construction of either of these buildings an amendment
to the PUD must be approved by the City. In approving
such an amendment request the City shall determine that
adequate parking for these buildings can be provided on
the site.
9. The applicant shall furnish copies of all permits
required from the DNR, Health Department, and water
patrol prior to issuance of the final certificate of
occupancy.
10. This amendment to the PUD incorporates approval of a
conditional use permit for the water ski show.
11. After conclusion of the first season of the water ski
show, the Planning Commission shall review the land
uses approved by this amendment to insure compliance
with the above conditions.
ACTION REOUESTED:
Offer and approve a motion as outlined in either alternative
#1, #2 or #3 listed above.
16 �✓
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870 I
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE,SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379.1375 (612(A45.1550 ~
August 5, 1988
Mr. Wallace Bakken "
1251 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Building Permit No. 7922
Dear Mr. Bakken:
This letter will serve as a temporary certificate Of occupancy
subject to the following conditions:
1. Raise sewer standpipes above
infiltration. "grade to prevent any water
2. Regrade and compact all roads for emergency vehicles (20 '
wide minimum) .
3. Trim trees to allow 15 ' clear above roadway for emergency
vehicles -
4. Furnish 2 complete conies of as-built plans for sewer,
water, shower building, roadways, boat land-Ung,
dimensions tied _ _ c etc. with
registered land surveyoProperty-
ope -y lines or described by a
5. Replace top section of catch basin on Bluff Avenue damaoed
curing construction. -
6. Obtain final electrical inspection. -
7. Obtain final State Denartnent of Health inspection and
approval. -
8. Make shower buildings handicapped accessible:
a. Provide one parking spot
shower building. (properly signed) at each
-
b. Make buildings accessible with smooth paths 6 ' minimum
width.
C. Toilets - grab bars provided per code.
This is a partial list becausebuildings are not complete;
see Minnesota State Building Code "Facilities For The
Handicapped" attached. -
The Heart Of Progress Valley
."Eli._
9. Raise hydrant north of motel per Shakopee Public Utilities
approval.
10. Secure area with water meter and backflow preventer with 6 '
high minimum fence and lockable gate.
11. Remove all debris and brush from campground.
12. Repair water connection area to
Commission ' s approval. Metropolitan t4zste Control
13. Complete roadways so that two way roads will measure 25 ' ,
one wav roads will measure 16 ' , an 8 ' stacking lane on
entrance road will measure 100 '-150 ' .
14. Complete 5, 9 '-20 ' parking stalls.
15. Complete adequate turning radius at dumb station.
16. Replace broken section of
sewer line. the valve controlling the main
17. Repipe the meter/backflow preventer area per SPDC
regusrements .
16. Remove brush and debris from campground.
19. Install telephone for emergency use on shower building.
21, Apply„or burning permit to allow use of burning rings.
durable posts to protect sewer standpipes.
Your check for 57, 500 wits until
items are completed. yn the held the above mentioned
work wit'' two weeks, Went you fail to accomplish this
any costs incur the C' -y complete
incurred. _ the work -and deduct
Before finai certi_` 'iczte of occupancy is issued:
a• Pave all roads or
b• Install 25 ' receive variance from Citv.
C. Fwide second entrance road.
urnish copies of all permits from DNR,
and other regulatory agencies.
e• CDept. of Health
d• Furnish two copies of campground rules and re
omply with Section 11. 051 Subd. 11- regulations
1Code
dealing with R.V. Parks. o the
She temporary certificate .of occupancy will exp+
this season.
-re at the end of
A permanent certificate of occupancy will be recuired
1989 season..
to open the
MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Amendment to Shakopee Valley Square PUD
DATE: December 28, 1988
INTRODUCTION•
The City has received an application for an amendment to the
Shakopee Valley Square Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow
the conducting of a water ski show upon the property. At their
meeting on December 8, 1988 the Planning Commission opened the
public hearing on the request and continued the hearing until the
January 5, 1989 meeting.
CONSIDERATIONS•
1. At the December meeting, the Planning Commission instructed
staff to meet with the applicant and furnish the Commission
with a status report regarding items listed on the August 5,
1988 letter from the Building Department. The Building
Department met with Mr. Bakken and performed an inspection
of the property. Attached is a copy of the inspection
report regarding completion of items outlined in the August
5, 1988 letter. The letter indicates that a number of items
have been completed. The letter also indicates items which
yet need to be completed and indicates that Mr. Bakken will
not be allowed to reopen the facility in the Spring until
these items have been completed.
2. At the last meeting the Planning Commission raised a
question regarding the code requirement for seasonal RV
parks to be completely cleared of vehicles from November 1
to March 31. City Code Section 11.05 Subd. 11 I states:
"All seasonal RV parks shall be totally cleared of all
vehicles for the period from November 1 through March 31,
unless separate conditional use permit has been issued for
outside storage." Based on the language in this provision,
staff feels that a determination must be made as to whether
or not the RV park is a seasonal facility or a year around
facility. Although no definition exists in the Code for
seasonal RV parks, staff would interpret a seasonal RV park
as being one that does not provide year around services and
facilities to the campsites.
The Minnesota Department of Health does not license seasonal
and year around RV parks separately. However, the
Department of Health has indicated that they do not allow RV
parks to operate during the winter if they do not have sewer
and water facilities available to the sites during the
winter season. Although it is not a requirement of the
Department of Health, they also strongly encourage RV park
owners to insulate and heat toilet and shower facilities for
winter use. The Department of Health indicated to staff
that Mr. Bakken's RV park is not presently equipped for
winter camping.
Because the water meter/back flow preventor was not
installed according to SPUC requirements, the meter has been
removed and there is currently no water service available to
the campground. In addition, the shower and rest room
facilities in Mr. Bakken's campground are not insulated or
heated. Based upon these factors, it is staff's
determination that Mr. Bakken has a seasonal RV park and
therefore the facility may not be used during the November 1
- March 31 time frame. Under normal circumstances, Mr.
Bakken would be able to reopen on or after April 1, however
due to the attached letter from the Building Department, Mr.
Bakken will not be allowed to reopen until he has complied
with the requirements outlined in the December 22, 1988
letter.
3 . Also attached is a letter from Lynch Enterprises indicating
how they plan to limit attendance at the shows. Lynch
Enterprises intends to limit the number of cars entering the
parking lot because they feel it will be easier to control
customers at this first point of entrance, rather than later
at the ticket booth. It is also their contention that this
will result in less frustration for the customers planning
to attend these shows.
4. As pointed out in the letter from the Building Inspection
Department, the Uniform Fire Code requires 20' wide fire
apparatus access roads. The approval of Mr. Bakken's PUD
required one way access roads to be a minimum of 16' and two
way access roads to be a minimum of 251 . Section 11.05
Subd. 11 of the City Zoning Code which lists requirements
for RV parks, requires one way roadways in RV parks to be
12' in width and two way access roads to be 22' in width.
It is staff's interpretation that the Uniform Fire Code
takes precedence over the Zoning Code and requirements of
the PUD approval, and therefore, one way roadways must be a
minimum of 20' in width.
Mr. Bakken asked the staff why the 25' minimum width was
required based on the PUD approval by the City when the
Code only requires a minimum width of 22' for two way roads.
Staff indicated to Mr. Bakken that it was the option of the
City in approving a PUD to place more restrictive
requirements on the development if they felt it was
warranted. Staff indicated that the widths contained in the
conditions of approval for the PUD were based on the drawing
Mr. Bakken submitted which showed one way roads being 16' in
width and two way roads being 25' in width. Mr. Bakken has
requested that the City reconsider the condition placed on
the previous PUD requiring two way roads to be 25' in width,
and allow the roadways to be constructed the 22' width
required by Section 11.05 of the City Code.
Mr. Bakken has asked that he not be required to pave access
roads in the park. Section 11.05 of the City Code requires
that RV parks have paved access roads. To date the staff
has not received any formal requests from Mr. Bakken for a
variance from this requirement of the Code or any
information explaining to the City why paving the roads
would prove a hardship. If Mr. Bakken desires a variance
from this provision of the City Code, staff is recommending
that he submit a separate variance request indicating the
reasons why it would prove a hardship for the facility to
pave the roads. A separate hearing and ruling on this
variance would then have to be made by the Board of
Adjustment and Appeals.
FINDINGS•
For findings on this request please refer to the staff
report prepared for the December 8, 1988 meeting (agenda item
#5) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Based upon the findings contained in the staff report for
the December 8, 1988 meeting, staff recommends approval of the
proposed PUD amendment subject to conditions.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square PUD to the City Council,
staff recommends that the following conditions be included in the
recommendation:
1. All conditions attached to the approval of the previous PUD
shall remain in effect except for Condition #16 which
addresses road width requirements. one way road access
roads shall be a minimum of 20' as required by the Uniform
Fire Code, and two way access roads shall be a minimum of
22' as required by Section 11.05 of the City Zoning Code.
2. Prior to issuance of either a conditional or final
certificate of occupancy for the water ski show and
structures, all items listed on the August 5, 1988 and
December 22, 1988 letters to Mr. Bakken from the City
Building Department must be completed.
3. All roadways serving the campground facility and the water
ski show area must be constructed to conform with the
requirements of the approved PUD and Fire Code requirements
prior to issuance of either a temporary or final certificate
of occupancy. This shall include construction of a second
entrance road.
4 . All structures for the water ski show must be removable and
be removed each fall at the end of the season and prior to
any flooding. Electrical service for the structures must
have a safety shut off located outside the floodplain and
wires shall not be located in a manner that will obstruct
flow of possible flood waters.
5. The applicants shall limit the number of cars parking in the
parking lot for the water ski show to 63. No parking for
the show will be allowed on the street or in other parking
lot.
6. Evening shows shall not begin before 8:00. Afternoon shows
shall not begin -after 4:00 and within one hour of the
opening of Canterbury Downs.
7. The parking lot must be constructed to include at least 63
spaces in addition to the parking spaces required for the
first phase of the Shakopee Valley Square PUD previously
approved.
S. Approval of this amendment to the PUD does not include
approval of the future lodge buildings to be constructed NE
of the existing Motel. Prior to construction of either of
these buildings an amendment to the PUD must be approved by
the City. In approving such an amendment request, the City
shall determine that adequate parking for these buildings
can be provided on the site.
9. The applicant shall furnish copies of all permits required
from the DNR, Health Department and Water Patrol prior to
issuance of the final certificate of occupancy.
10. This amendment to the PUD incorporates approval of a
conditional use permit for the water ski show.
11. After conclusion of the first season of the water ski show,
the Planning Commission shall review the land uses approved
by this amendment to insure compliance with the above
conditions. -
ACTION REOUESTED:
Offer and approve a motion recommending to the City Council
approval of the amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square PUD
subject to conditions.
CIT` ' OF SHAKOPEE -I
INCORPORATED 1870
41 1
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 553791376 (612)445-3650 ��;✓
December 22 , 1988
Mr. Wallace Bakken
1251 East lst Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Building Permit No. 7222 -
Valley Square Campground Facility
Dear Mr. Bakken:
This letter will serve to review the on site meeting/inspection
we conducted last week.
The status of the above referenced project will be summarized
based upon the temporary C.O. letter of August 5, 1988, (see
attached copy) .
1. The sewer standpipes were raised where necessary last
summer and fall. However, because grading work was
being done simultaneously, a few are low and must be
raised in spring.
2 . Roads must be regraded when frost goes out in the
spring. The Uniform Fire Code (Sec. 10.207) , requires
20' wide fire apparatus access roads. Those sections
of roadway now less than 20' must be widened
accordingly. Compaction tests, conducted by a soils
engineer, or an equivalent roller test, will be
required to verify compaction of roadways.
3. Additional tree trimming must be done to maintain 15'
clear area above and full width of roadways.
4 . Done
5. Done
6. Done
7. Done
8. A handicapped parking space, with proper signs, must be
provided at each shower building.
The Heart Of Progress Valley
AN FOWL OPPORTONRY EMPLOYER
9. Done
10. Secure backflow prevention/meter- connection or enclose
with building project.
11. Complete removal of brush from east end of campground.
12 . Done
13 . The Building Department requires 20' wide minimum fire
apparatus access road.
The Planning Department requires that all two way roads
measure 251 , and one way roads 161 .
Therefore, the one way roads must be widened as
necessary to 20' and the two way roads must be widened
to 25' .
14. Five 9' x 20' parking stalls must be completed per the
Planning Department.
15. Done
16. Done
17. Repipe the water meter/backflow preventer to SPUC
requirements when reinstalling in spring.
18. Complete removal of brush.
19. Install telephone for emergency use on shower building
or check-in building.
20. Secure burning permit from Fire Department/MPCA to
allow use of burning rings.
21. Done
Also; the following Planning Department requirements must be met:
A. Pave all roads or receive a variance from the City.
B. Install 25' wide second entrance road.
C. Furnish copies of all approved permits from the DNR and
Department of Health.
D. Furnish two copies of campground rules and regulations.
E. Comply with Section 11.05 Subd. it of the City Code
dealing with R.V. Parks.
The balance of your $7, 500.00 deposit in the amount of $7, 017.41
will be forwarded to you shortly. $482 . 59 was deducted to pay
Shakopee Public Utilities for the hydrant extension work on the
north side of your motel. (See copy of invoice enclosed)
All items above must be satisfied before a final certificate of
occupancy is issued for opening in the spring of 1989 . Another
temporary or conditional C.O. will not be issued for this part of
your project.
If you have any questions, do not hheessittaatte� to call.
ncerely
Si(/ ' +
Fulton Schleisman
Building Inspector
FS:cah
Enclosures
cc: Doug Wise, City Planner
l�>
CITY OF SHAKOPEE •
INCORPORATED 1870
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE.SHAKOPEE.MINNESOTA 553791376 16121443650 ^
August 5, 1988
Mr. Wallace Bakken f .
1251 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Building Permit No. 7922
Dear Mr. Bakken: -
This letter will serve as a temporary certificate of occupancy
subject to the following conditions:
1. Raise sewer standpipes above grade to prevent any water
infiltration.
2. Regrade and compact all roads for emergency vehicles (20 '
wide minimum) .
3. Trim trees to allow 15 ' clear above roadway for emergency
vehicles.
4. Furnish 2 complete copies of as-built plans for sewer,
water, shower building, roadways, boat landing, etc. with
dimensions tied to property lines or described by a
registered land surveyor. -
5. Replace top section Of catch basin on Bluff Avenue damaged
during construction.
6. Obtain final electrical inspection.
7. Obtain final State Department of Health inspection and
approval.
8. Make shower buildings handicapped accessible:
a. Provide one parking spot : (properly signed) at each .
shower building.
b. Make buildings accessible with smooth paths 4 ' minimum
width.
C. Toilets - -grab bars provided per -code.
This is a partial list because buildings are not complete;
see Minnesota State Building Code Facilities For The
Handicapped" attached.
The Heart Of Progress Valley
IM EOUPL OOnpq)Uq.ryFM✓LOYEP
16
9. Raise hydrant north of motel per Shakopee Public Utilities
approval.
10. Secure area with water meter and backflow preventer with 6 '
high minimum fence and lockable gate.
11 . Remove all debris and brush from campground.
12 . Repair water connection area to Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission' s approval.
13 . Complete roadways so that two way roads will measure 25 ' ,
one way roads will measure 161 , an 8 ' stacking lane on
entrance road will measure 100'-1501 .
14. Complete 5, 9 '-20' parking stalls .
15. Complete adequate turning radius at dump station.
16 . Replace broken section of the valve controlling the main
sewer line.
17 . Repipe the meter/backflow preventer area per SPDC
requirements.
18. Remove brush and debris from campground.
19 . Install telephone for emergency use on shower building.
20 . Apply for burning permit to allow use of burning rings.
21. Install durable posts to protect sewer standpipes.
Your check for $7, 500 will be held until the above mentioned
items are completed. In the event you fail to accomplish this
work within two weeks, the City will complete the work and deduct
any costs incurred.
Before final certificate of occupancy is issued:
a. Pave all roads or receive variance from City.
b. Install 25 ' wide second entrance road.
C. Furnish copies of all permits from DNR, Dept. of Health
and other regulatory agencies .
d. Furnish two copies of campground rules and regulations.
e. Comply with Section 11. 05, Subd. 11 - of the City Code
dealing with R.V. Parks.
The temporary certificate of occupancy will expire at the end of _
this season.
A permanent certificate ofoccupancy will be required to open the
1989 season.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call.
Since
Fulton Schleisman
Building Inspector
FS:cah
iakopee, Minn., I November 15 . 1985 �a
To PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Dr. city of Shakopee for
, I Jellystone Campground
'Fovember 15. 1988
124" extension for %rB 67 hydran 992100 ( 124" ext . hcd. 222 '.
. 00 hr. 100 00 1 labor I '
truck 3 hrs . 10 . 00 hr 30100 1 truce I i
Dean Smith trenching 921-00- D.Smit trenc iin
operating nut in io I oper. n 1
21 84 I valve 21
I �
TOTAL 482 59 I TOTAL 482
PLEASE RETURN THIS STUB
WITH PAYMENT
City of Shakopee for
Jellystone Campground N2 4917 ^5 ` No 4917
129 E. 1st. Avenue 1`
Shakopee, MN 55379 I -
Interest will be charged at IYa% on the unpaid balance
- -�
�epog. T/ er� �''3DD_ LJ�
�ws�ExN S��
December 21, 1988
�9T-eeSKI $4,0
Mr. Doug Wise
City Planner
City of Shakopee
1251 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Wise:
At the last Planning Commission meeting the questions arose
concerning limiting parking for the proposed Western Star Water Ski
Show.
In lieu of the fact that automobile parking is a concern, Western
Star proposes to limit the parking to a maximum of 63 cars (the
planned parking lot maximum) .
The enforcement of this attendance limitation will be managed in
two effective ways. First off, Western Star will implement a
portable sandwich-type sign which will be placed adjacent to
Highway 101 reading something to the effect of "Sorry
Today's/Tonight's Show Performance Sold Out. Our Next Performance
Is At " This should eliminate people from even thinking
of parking elsewhere. Using this method of control is the same as
when a hotel has a sign "No Vacancy" . People do not insist a hotel
let them in when the don't have room without a reservation.
Secondly, Western Star will have parking attendants assisting in
directing parking so that when the parking lot is full they will _
use a portable barricade to block off the lot with a sign stating
"Sorry Today's Show Performance Is Sold Out. Please Join Us For
Our Next Performance".
By controlling cars at the point of entry, we can minimize people's
frustration, rather than having them get unloaded only to find out
we cannot accommodate them.
We do not perceive that this problem will actually occur based on
our previous operating experience. However, by having this plan
and materials on hand, we will be able to handle the situation
should it arise.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Mark D. Laughlin
Western Star Water Ski Show
/oc'
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Setbacks for Industrial Buildings Abutting a Railroad
Spur
DATE: January 11, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
At their meeting on January 5, 1989, the Planning Commission
passed a motion recommending to the City Council that the current
City Code requirements for a 30' rear yard setback in I-1 and I-2
Zoning Districts be amended to allow a 20' rear yard setback for
buildings abutting a railroad spur.
BACKGROUND:
At their meeting on October 4, 1988, the City Council heard
the appeal of Bush Lake Industries regarding the Conditional Use
Permit approved by the Planning Commission for location of the
70' storage tanks. After taking action on the appeal the City
Council directed the Planning Commission to review the City Code
to determine if setback requirements adjacent to railroad tracks
need to be changed.
Currently in the I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts of the City
Code, side yard setback requirements for buildings are currently
0' when abutting a railroad track. This provision is not
included for rear yard setbacks which require a setback of 30' .
Following the City Council meeting the City staff contacted
several other communities to see what their setback requirements
are from railroad tracks in industrial zones. The cities
contacted did not have any special provisions for setbacks from
railroad spurs in their industrial districts.
The City staff researched the reasoning for the current
building setbacks in the City Code by looking at City Zoning
Ordinances that were in effect prior to when the current
ordinance was adopted. The ordinance that was adopted on April
1, 1966 states that there is no side or rear yard required when a
railroad loading facility is needed. That ordinance was in
effect until April 1, 1978. In May of 1977, Douglas Reeder
presented a proposed Zoning Ordinance which was to replace the
Shakopee and Eagle Creek Zoning Ordinances. The previous Eagle
Creek Ordinance had a minimum rear yard depth of 30' while the
Shakopee Ordinance still allowed a 0' setback when abutting a
railroad. Staff feels that the change may have taken place
inadvertently at this time because the side and rear yard
requirements were separated.
/6 C-
In addition to the Bush Lake Industries building, one of the
Shakopee Valley Printing buildings is also setback 20' from the
rear lot line (see enclosed drawing) . The other building was
setback 40' . This was done to allow a layering of service spurs
off of the main spur line. The main spur line is actually
located in a 25' wide corridor not contained within the rear
portion of the abutting lots, but owned by the railroad company.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
proposed amendment to the Ordinance at their January 5, 1989
meeting. Following the public hearing the Planning Commission
passed a motion recommending to the City Council that the rear
yard setback in the I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts for buildings
abutting a railroad spur be reduced to 201 .
ALTERNATIVES•
1. The City Council could offer and pass a motion directing the
City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance amending
the City Code to allow a 20' rear yard setback in the I-1
and I-2 Zoning Districts for buildings abutting a railroad
spur.
2. The City Council could offer and pass a motion to not amend
the City Code and continue requiring a 30' rear yard setback
in all cases.
3. The City Council could offer and pass a motion directing the
City Attorney to draft the appropriate ordinance amending
the rear yard setback in the I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts
allowing a different rear yard setback than referred to
above.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer and pass a directing the City Attorney to draft the
appropriate ordinance amending the City Code to allow a 20' rear
yard setback in the I-1 and I-2 Zoning Districts for buildings
abutting a railroad spur.
O `
� �W
x
// Wy
1Aj 0
>q�yn
to
/ iZ// o0
¢ /([
z/k
4 3 / zn 02 w "f
7-6
OHO 4
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Downtown Committee Goals
DATE: January 11, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
At the request of City Council, the Downtown Committee has
developed a set of goals and objectives for Council's
consideration. (See attachment #1) .
BACKGROUND:
In October, the Shakopee City Council directed the Downtown
Committee to prepare a work plan identifying two or three major
goals and objectives for completion. City Council also requested
that cost estimates for the goals be forwarded to them for their
review. Finally, City Council requested that dates for
completion of the goals and objectives be identified by the
Downtown Committee and reviewed by the Community Development
Commission.
On January 11, 1989 the Downtown Committee approved the
Work Plan as set forth in attachment #1. The Community
Development Commission also reviewed and recommended Council
approval of the Work Plan on January 11, 1989. Please note that
each of the objectives have been assigned a proposed completion
date. I should also note that none of the objectives proposed by
the Downtown Committee will result in an expenditure on the part
of the City unless the City Council wishes to further pursue
recommendations made by the Downtown Committee and Community
Development Commission that may involve potential City
expenditures. Basically, the implementation of the plan as set
forth by the Downtown Committee will require the level of City
staffing currently being provided to the Committee. (158 of the
Administrative Assistant's time) . Several of the objectives
proposed by the Downtown Committee could also be handled by
interns.
The Downtown Committee and Community Development Commission
are recommending approval of the Work Plan as submitted.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Move to approve the Downtown Committee's Work Plan as
submitted.
2. Amend the One Year Work Plan as submitted by the Downtown
Committee and move it's approval.
3. Refer the Work Plan back to the Downtown Committee for
further refinement.
4. Do nothing.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REODESTED:
Move to approve the Downtown Committee Work Plan as
submitted.
Jo J"
Attachment #1
Downtown Committee
Work Plan
Mission Statement
To improve the economic vitality of the Downtown Area by
developing a pedestrian friendly atmosphere which is attractive
physically and commercially in terms of facilities and services
offered.
Goal #1 - Identify parcels that play a key role in the overall
development of the Downtown Area.
Obiectives
1. Develop a Downtown Property Inventory Schedule by 3/1/89 -
Centralized list of parcels and prices.
2. Utilize the property inventory to complete a prioritized site
listing by 5/15/89 which identifies parcels for possible
acquisition, demolition and/or rehabilitation.
3. Develop a comprehensive Downtown property acquisition,
condemnation, demolition, rehabilitation plan by 7/15/89.
Goal #2 - Identify project development activities which will
enhance the Downtown Area as a commercial/retail/
service center.
Objectives
1. Utilize market studies that are presently available to
identify viable commercial/retail/service needs of the
community which might be conducive to a Downtown location
by 7/15/89
2 . Develop a Request for Proposal that is site specific and
incentive specific that can be used to attract developers
to Downtown Shakopee by 2/1/90.
3. Utilize the property inventory to identify a site for a new
City Hall and/or Community Center downtown by 7/15/89 .
4 . Complete a parking analysis of the Downtown area by 7/15/89
to determine if adequate parking exists.
5. Review all Downtown development request that utilize City
assistance programs to make sure that they are compatible
with the overall Downtown Development plan.
Goal #3 - Develop policies and programs which will compliment and
facilitate Downtown Development that maintains the
historic river town theme.
Objectives
1. Develop Downtown Design Standards which could be incorporated
into city ordinance by 3/15/90.
2. Develop an acquisition/condemnation policy to be used in
acquiring properties in the Downtown Area by 12/15/89.
3. Develop a development incentive policy by 10/15/89 which will
stimulate Downtown Redevelopment.
4. Investigate alternative funding sources which can be used to
establish a facade improvement/revolving loan program by
11/15/89.
l0e
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Star City One Year Work Plan
DATE: January 12, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
In order to maintain Star City designation, the City of
Shakopee must annually update the One Year Work Plan. In the
past, this plan has been based on a fiscal year. The Community
Development Commission is recommending that the One Year Plan be
updated at this time and placed on a calendar year basis.
BACKGROUND:
On January 11, 1988 the Community Development Commission
approved the goals, objectives and strategies as set forth in the
attached One Year Work Plan. (See attachment #1) .
The One Year Work Plan outlines the goals and objectives of
the Community Development Commission and Downtown Committee. The
Community Development Commission is requesting Council approval
of the One Year Work Plan as submitted.
ALTERNATIVES• _
1. Move to approve the City of Shakopee One Year Work Plan as
submitted.
2. Amend the One Year Work Plan as submitted and move it's
approval.
3. Table action on the One Year Work Plan and request the
Community Development Commission to make further
refinements.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REOUESTED:
Move to approve the City of Shakopee One Year Work Plan.
Community Development Commission (CDC)
Shakopee Economic Development
1989 One Year Work Plan
Mission Statement: To create new jobs, increase the local tax
base, retain and assist existing business,
attract new businesses and capitalize on the
existing area development potentials.
Activity/objective: To encourage the implementation of an ongoing
economic development program for the City of
Shakopee stressing job retention, job
creation, downtown redevelopment and the
tourism industry.
Budget: CDC Budget $93,110 ($66,000 Convention and
Visitors Bureau)
Time Frame: Ongoing. from January 1989.
Projected Results: 54 Increase in local tax base.
2.54 Increase in population.
2.54 Increase in employment base.
104 Increase in the number of residential
building permits issued.
Attraction of at least one new
commercial business in the downtown.
Attraction of at least one new
industry into the industrial park.
Attraction of at least one elderly
residential development.
54 Increase in tourists at the recreational
facilities in Shakopee.
Committee/organization Chairpersons:
Shakopee City Council - Mayor Dolores Lebens
Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority - Steven Clay
Convention and Visitors Bureau
Shakopee Community Development Commission - Tim Keane—
Shakopee Downtown Committee - Gary Laurent
Chamber of Commerce - George Muenchow, President
Tourism Committee - Marilyn Hagermann
Scott County Transportation Coalition
Planning Commission -
City of Shakopee - Staff
City Administrator
Community Development Director - Dennis Kraft
Administrative Assistant - Barry Stock
City Planner - Douglas Wise
City Engineer - Dave Hutton _
-1-
16 _Q_
Goal #1 Provide for the improvement of the transportation
system and to enhance local and regional transportation
objectives.
Obiective Assigned To Completion Date
1. Work with Mn DOT to complete City Council Nov. 1989
the mini-bypass final design Dave Hutton
2. Work with Mn DOT to pursue the City Council Dec. 1989
bypass bid letting. Dave Hutton
3. Work with Mn DOT to complete City Council Sept. 1989
the Hwy 169 Southerly by-pass Dave Hutton
final location design.
4. Complete the Third Ave. City Council Sept. 1989
Rehabilitation Project Dave Hutton
5. Continue to support the Scott City Council On-Going
County Transportation Coalition Dave Hutton
in their efforts to improve
transportation process to Scott
County.
Goal #2 Encourage downtown redevelopment which will promote a
vital commercial/institutional district
Objective Assigned To Completion Date
1. Develop a Downtown Property Downtown April 1989
Inventory Schedule and Comm/CDC
centralized list of parcels Gary Laurent
and prices.
2. Utilize the property inventory Downtown May 1989
tocomplete a prioritized site Comm/CDC
listing which identifies Gary Laurent
parcels for possible acquisition,
demolition and/or rehabilitation.
3. Adopt a comprehensive property Downtown July 1989
acquisition, condemnation, Comm/CDC
redevelopment plan. City Council
4. Develop an acquisition/condem- Downtown Dec. 1989
nation policy to be used in Committee/CDC
acquiring properties in the City Council
Downtown Area.
5. Develop a development Downtown Oct. 1989
incentive policy which will Committee/CDC
stimulate Downtown Redevelopment City Council
-2-
6. Utilize the property inventory Downtown July 1989
to identify a site for a new Committee/CDC/
City Hall Downtown. City Council
7. Investigate alternative funding Downtown Nov. 1989
services which can be used to Committee
establish a facade improvement Gary Laurent
reducing program.
8. Complete a parking analysis of Downtown July 1989
the Downtown area to determine Committee
if adequate parking exists. Gary Laurent
9. Attract one new service, one Downtown Ongoing
new retail and one new office Committee
type business to the downtown Gary Laurent
each year.
10. Utilize market studies that Downtown July 1989
are presently available to Committee/CDC
identify viable commercial/ City Council
retail/service needs of the
community which might be
conducive to a Downtown location.
11. Develop a Request for Proposal Downtown Dec. 1989
that is site specific and Committee/CDC
incentive specific that can City Council
be used to attract developers
to Downtown Shakopee.
Goal #3 Initiate planning and marketing concepts that will
increase residential development interest in the
community.
Obiective Assigned To Completion Date
1. Create an annual development CDC July 89
brief that can be distributed Barry Stock
to the development community
hi-lighting the economic
activity occurring in Shakopee.
2. Work with the City's Planning June 1989
consultant to complete an Commission
update of the City's Doug Wise
Comprehensive Plan.
3. Encourage the completion of City Council June 1989
need assessments for Elderly HRA
Housing in the community. Dennis Kraft
-3-
/6
4. Develop and adopt a policy on CDC/City Council Oct. 1989
senior housing development
assistance.
5. Initiate a monthly Issues and CDC Sept. 1989
Answers cable television Tim Keane
series to be broadcast on the
Public Access Channel.
6. Encourage throughout the Comp. CDC Dec. 1989
Plan process emphasis on Park dim Keane
Development.
Goal #4 Encourage new industrial development and the expansion
of existing industries in the City.
Objective Assigned To Completion Date
1. Update the data base of CDC June 1989
vacant commercial industrial Tim Keane
properties.
2. Work with the Chamber to CDC Feb. 1989
set up an on-going program Tim Keane
that encourages monthly
breakfast meetings with
business persons in the
community.
3 . Prepare a Request for Proposal Community Nov. 1989
that targets developers who Development
have experience in redevelop- Commission
ment. The proposal would Tim Keane
simply direct developers to
the prime areas for development
in Shakopee.
Goal #5 Encourage the development of support services such as
schools medical facilities and public facilities which
provide for a good free standing growth center.
Obiective Assigned To Completion Date
1. Promote the location of CDC Nov. 1989
a large day care center Tim Keane
complete with sick care
facilities in Shakopee. -
2 . Work with St. Francis Hospital CDC Oct. 1989
and Scott County to facilitate Tim Keane
the construction of ancillary
services in the Institutional
Area.
\ -4-
3. Prepare a preliminary financing CDC Sept. 1989
and construction plan for a new Tim Keane_
City Hall and/or community
center to be located Downtown.
Goal #6 Develop an organizational structure and staffing
program which will promote economic development.
Objective Assigned To Comnleticn Date
1. . Investigate 501-C designation CDC Dec. 1989
of the Shakopee Development Tim Keane
Corporation or the creation of
an Economic Development Authority.
2. Complete the 1990 One Year City Council Jan. 1990
Work Plan.
3. Encourage Council to budget CDC Sept. 1989
for a Planner II in 1990. Tim Keane
4: Complete the Business CDC Nov. 1989
Retention and Expansion Survey Barry Stock
5. Complete the Shakopee Labor CDC Aug. 1989
Survey Barry Stock
6. Update the City's promotional CDC Dec. 1989
video.
7. Develop an informal survey CDC Feb. 1989
technique that CDC members Tim Keane
can utilize to solicit input
from new businesses.
S. Develop a survey technique CDC April 1989
to solicit input from Tim Keane
developers/consultants and
brokers doing business in
Shakopee.
9. Complete the Annual Community CDC Feb. 1989
Profile
10. Update the Community Fact Book CDC Oct. 1989
Tim Keane
-5-
�6 -j�-
Goal Y7 Support and encourage a community focus on tourism
opportunities emphasizing year round activities.
Objective Assigned To Completion Date
1. Work with the Shakopee Visitors CDC Ongoing
and Convention Bureau and Chamber Barry Stock
of Commerce on marketing and
special events which will attract
tourists to the area.
2. Promote year round use of the CDC Ongoing
hospitality and tourism industry Barry Stock
-6-
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Star City Five Year Work Plan
DATE: January 12, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
In order to maintain Star City designation, the City of
Shakopee must annually update their Five Year Work Plan. The
Community Development Commission is recommending Council approval
of the Five Year Work Plan.
BACKGROUND:
On January 11, 1988 the Community Development Commission
approved the goals and objectives as set forth in the attached
Five Year Work Plan. (See attachment ql) .
The Five Year Work Plan outlines the goals and objectives of
the Community Development Commission and Downtown Committee. The
Community Development Commission is requesting Council approval
of the Five Year Work Plan as submitted.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Move to approve the City of Shakopee Five Year Work Plan as
submitted.
2 . Amend the Five Year Work Plan as submitted and move it's
approval.
3 . Table action on the Five Year Work Plan and request the
community Development Commission to make further
refinements.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative ql.
ACTION REOUESTED:
Move to approve the City of Shakopee Five Year Work Plan.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE FIVE YEAR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Mission Statement: To encourage the balanced development of
residential, commercial and industrial
opportunities and to enhance the City's
status as a free standing growth center.
Primary Goals (In order of priority)
1. Provide for the improvement of the transportation system and
to enhance local and regional transit objectives.
2. To encourage downtown redevelopment which will promote a
vital commercial/institutional district.
3. Initiate planning and marketing concepts that will increase
residential development interest in the community.
4. Encourage new industrial development and the expansion of
existing industries in the City.
5. Encourage the development of support services such as
schools, medical facilities and public utilities which
provide for a good free standing growth center.
6. Develop an organizational structure and staffing program
which will promote economic development.
7. Support and encourage a community focus on tourism opportunities
emphasizing year round activities.
-1-
lode
Q
City of Shakopee Five Year Economic Development Plan
Goal $1 - Provide for the improvement of the transportation system and
to enhance local and regional transit objectives.
Obiective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
1. Complete the Third Ave.
Rehabilitation Project.
Third Avenue (Spencer -
Shumway and Scott, Atwood,
Fuller, Lewis, Sommerville
and Spencer Streets) 3rd -
4th Ave. X
2. Construct Phase II of the
Downtown Redevelopment
Project. lst Ave. (Atwood-
Sommerville) X
3 . Work with Mn DOT to
complete the mini by-pass
final design. X
4. Work with Mn DOT
to pursue the mini
by-pass bid letting. X
5. Work with Mn DOT during
the construction of the
mini by-pass to minimize
the impact on the
Downtown area. X X
6. Work with Mn DOT to
complete the Hwy 169
southerly by-pass final
location design. X
7. Extend 13th Avenue to open up
more residential land for
development. . (Phased
Extension) X
8. Continue to work with the X X X X X
Scott County Transportation
Coalition to improve
transportation access into
our community.
-2-
Goal #2 - Encourage downtown redevelopment which will promote a
vital commercial/institutional district.
Objective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
1. Attract one new service,
one new retail and one new
office type business to the
downtown each year. X X X X X
2. Encourage a developer to
construct a movie theatre or
enclosed mall in downtown
Shakopee. X
3. Solicit restaurant franchises
and encourage them to locate
in downtown Shakopee. (i.e.
Red Lobster, Ground Round, etc) X
4. Solicit and encourage the
development of specialty shops
in the downtown. X
5. Complete a comprehensive
redevelopment plan for the
Downtown area which
targets specific buildings
and/or blocks for demolition,
redevelopment, new development
or expansion. X
6. Develop Downtown Design Standards
which could be incorporated into
city ordinance. X
7. Develop an acquisition/condemnation
policy to be used in acquiring
properties in the Downtown Area. X
8. Develop a development incentive
policy which will stimulate Down-
town Redevelopment. X
9. Utilize market studies that
are presently available to
identify viable commercial/
retail/service needs of the
community which might be
conducive to a Downtown
location. X
-3-
Obiective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
10. Develop a Request for
Proposal that is site
specific and incentive
specific that can be used
to attract developers to
Downtown Shakopee. X
11. Utilize the property inventory
to identify a site for a new
City Hall/Community
Center downtown X
12. Complete a parking analysis
of the Downtown area to
determine if adequate parking
exists. X
13 . Develop a Downtown Property
Inventory Schedule. X
14. Utilize the property inventory
to complete a prioritized site
listing which identifies parcels
for possible acquisition,
demolition and/or .
rehabilitation. X
15. Complete a parking analysis of
the Downtown Area to determine
if adequate parking exists. X
Goal #3 Initiate Planning and Marketing concepts that will
increase residential development in the community.
Objective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
1. Complete the City's
Comprehensive Plan Update X
2. Create an annual development
brief that can be dis-
tributed to the development
community hi-lighting the
economic activity occurring
in Shakopee. X
3 . As a result of the Comp
Plan update, comprehensively
amend the Shakopee Zoning
Ordinance in order to
facilitate sound economic
development in a timely manner. X
-4-
Obiective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
4. Encourage the completion of
need assessments for Elderly
Housing in the community. X
5. Initiate a weekly question
and answer series in the
local newspaper to be
written by City Council
members and/or staff. X
6. Initiate a monthly Issues and
Answers cable television
series to be broadcast on the
Public Access Channel. X
7. Encourage throughout the Comp.
Plan process emphasis on Park
Department. X
8. Adopt a policy on senior housing
development assistance. X
Goal #4 Encourage new industrial development and the expansion of
existing industries in the City.
Obiective 1959 1990 1991 1992 1993
1. Update the data base of
vacant commercial industrial
properties. X
2 . Work with the Chamber to
set up an on-going program
that encourages monthly
breakfast meetings with
business persons in the
community. X
3. Prepare a Request for Proposal
that targets developers who
have experience in redevelop-
ment. The proposal would
simply direct developers to
the prime areas for development
in Shakopee. X
4. Solicit and encourage the
construction of a major motel/
convention center in Shakopee
(is. Holiday Inn, Radisson, Etc) X
-5-
/big
Obiective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
5. Solicit developers to
renovate the Old Stage Coach. X
6. Encourage developers to
pursue a major riverfront
project incorporating housing,
commercial and recreational
characteristics. X
7. Develop and implement a
marketing strategy for attracting
incubator businesses to the
community. X
8. Develop and implement a
marketing strategy for
attracting distribution
facilities to the Community. X X
9. Review and recommend a
Comprehensive amendment to
the City's Planned Unit
Development Ordinance. X
Goal #5 Encourage the development of support services such as schools
medical facilities and public facilities which provide for a
good free standing growth center.
Objective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
1. Investigate bringing a branch
or extension facility of the -
U of M or St. Thomas into
Shakopee for evening course
offerings. x
2. Work with St. Francis Hospital
to attract a large day care
center complete with sick care
facilities. X
3. Work with St. Francis Hospital
and Scott County to facilitate
the construction of ancillary
services in the Institutional
Area. X
4 . Prepare a preliminary financing
and construction plan for a new
City Hall and/or community
center to be located near the
institutional area or Downtown. X
-6-
Goal #6 Develop an organizational structure and staffing program
which will promote economic development.
Objective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
l. . Investigate 501-C designation
of the Shakopee Development
Corporation or the creation of
an Economic Development
Authority. X
2. Complete the 1990 One Year
Work Plan. X
3. Encourage Council to budget X
for a Planner II in 1990.
4. Update the Community Fact Book X
5. Update the City's promotional
video. X X X
6. Complete the annual
Community Profile. X X X X X
7. Complete the Business
Retention and
Expansion Survey. X X X X X
8. Complete the Shakopee X X X X X
Survey
9. Develop an informal survey
technique that CDC members
can utilize to solicit input
from new businesses.
10. Develop a survey technique
to solicit input from
developers, consultants and
brokers doing business in
Shakopee. X
Goal #7 support and encourage a community focus on tourism
opportunities emphasizing year round activities.
Obiective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
1. Work with the Shakopee Visitors
and Convention Bureau and Chamber
of Commerce on marketing and
special events which will attract
tourists to the area. X X X X X
-7-
/6
Objective 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
2 . Promote year round use of
the hospitality and tourism
industry. X X X X X
-8-
Julius A. COLLEE, 11
J Iesa isso w ATLOENEY AT LAw c a2 44s-1244
SHAEOPEE.MINNESOTA
55379
V
To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrtor
From: Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney
Date: January 12, 1989
Re: Paying all or part of the insurance costs for aerators in O'Dowd Lake
The Save O'Dowd Lakes Chain Association is a non-profit orgainization
established mainly by sportsman in an effort to conserve the wildlife in
and about O'Dowd Lake and in the furtherance of their aim they have secured
aerators which in turn have been installed by them in the lake. O'Dowd
Lake is partially surrounded by private property and a great part of it is
bordered by park land belonging to the City of Shakopee. To protect the
City and the Association the Association has secured liability insurance.
The premium on this type of policy is very expensive and the question is:
Can the City pay the insurance premium or a part thereof?
In view of the strategic location of the lake and the use of it made by the
citizens of Shakopee and the gneral public it does become almost mandatory
that the City and the Association and any other interested parties be
covered by liability insurance and in view of the use and location of the
lake it is my opinion that expending money for insurance premium is expending
money for a public municipal purpose providing the City of Shakopee is named
as an additional insured on the policy.
Just how much of the policy premium should be paid by the City is a matter for
the City Council in the exercise of its reasonable and good judgment to decide.
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 O'Dowd area
and continued support would be much appreciated.
THANK YOU! ! !
l
Sincerely,
Off-Qi�y.a
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 Assn. 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:
C��yyv 0q) 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.
i
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk I
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
P 'yo IS35 Rm uv. §N� � " s r
GENERAL LEASE
This is a lease.This Lease is dated . 19—. It is a legal agreement between the Tenant and the Landlord
to rent the property described below.The world LANDLORD as used in this Lease means City of Shakopee
and the Landlord's address is 129 East First Avenue Shakopee MN 55379
The word TENANT as used in this Lease means Save 0'Dowd Lakes Chain Association
This Lease is a legal contract that can beenforced incourt against the Landlord or the Tenant ifeitherone of them does not comply with
this Lease.
I. Description of Property.The Property is located at Shakopee Minnesota
in the County of Scott ,State of Minnesota,on propeny described as follows:
So much of Lots M, N and 0 inclusive, Registered Land Survey No. 45, Scott County,
Minnesota, necessary to erect, maintain and service a pole or poles for the purpose
of supplying electric energy to operate three aerators in O'Dowd's Lake off the
South shore of the above described property together with all necessary wires and
guides to extend from a point on County Road 79 to a point on the shore of D'Dowd's
Lake across said lands for a distance of approximately 200 feet together with the
right of ingress and egress for the purpose of serving said lands.
2. Term of Lease.This Lease is for a tern of two years beginning on January 28. , 19 S9 ,
subiect however to cancellation by either party giving the other party 30 days notice
in writing and may be cancelled in any event should the lessee fail to keep the
insurance in force with the City named as a beneficiary or in the event the City is ,
3. Rent. required to pay any part of the operating costs for the aerators.
a. Amount.The rent for the property is One Dollar and other good and valuable _ Dollars
consideration.
(3 1.00 )xxr
b. Payment.The rent payment for each month most be paid before N/A
at Landlord's address. Landlord does not have to give notice to Tenant to pay the rent
4. Quiet Enjoyment.lfTenant pays the rent and complies withall otherterms of this Lease,Tenant may use the Property for the term
of this Lease.
S. Right ofEntry.Landlord and Landlord's agents may enterthe property at reasonable hours to repair or inspect the Property and
perform any work that landlord decides is necessary. In addition,the Landlord may show the Property to possible or new Tenants at
reasonable hours during the last 60 days of the Lease term. Except in the case of an emergency, Landlord shall give Tenant
reasonable notice before entering the Property.
6. Assignment and Subletting.Tenant may not assign this Lease,lease the Property to anyone else(sublet),sell this Lease or permit
any other person to use the Property without the priorwritten consent of the Landlord.ILTenant doesany of these things.Landlord may
terminate this Lease. Any assignment or sublease made without Landlord's written consent will not be effective. Tenant must get
Landlord's permission each time Tenant wants to assign or sublet Landlord's permission is good only for that specific assignment or
sublease.
7. Surrender of Premises.Tenant shall give Landlord possession of the Property when this Lease ends. When Tenant moves out,
Tenant shall lease the Property in as good a condition as it was when the Lease started,with the exception of reasonable wear and tear.
6L£SS NN as ollegs
(MpPV)
snuand 7sl Is M TIZ
(aweN)
:AS O31 Vd(I StlM 1N3W(INISNI SUL
(1--d uo 21111)
(iww28po[mouHoy Sm.4EI uovad Jo wnaeuStS)
Act
61 ' Jo,Sep stye aw woJaq pa8palmoujl sem ivawwtsw SusoBasoJ ayi
KaaTO 6.;T� 3O AINOOJ
sanavu5- szTao In tl1OS3NNIW dO 31d1S
Ag r5 P g d aoyealsTuTwpV A1>:J
o CR t
uoTzaT3ossy uTgqo SBAVII Pn TEs
,lxvN31 :G do-lQNtll
'p2u5)sse st as aryl wollm w uovad,Sus pug p.iolpuel to iuguai Jo sannelu=udw le8al
to snay hue of A[dde Dale aserl styt Jo suuai ay,I'plolpusl pue lueuai ayl of Aldds aseal nyl Jo swsal agi suSlssv pus snaH '01
'Auadwd leumad ayi Jo lu!wdssp loJ iusuai of alquil aq lou[Igys pio[puel 'iadwd%sKulgl Puo[pu�l agi ieyt
Tamm Sueut,Suadoid[¢uovad ayi Jo awdnp uagl dew plolpuel-pauopuege uaag angq osle w,Suadwd ayl m io uo Auadoid leuovad
s,lusual,lapssuoa Agar paolpuel uayl 'Auadowd ayi Jo uoins d vanooas plolpuu l uayM•Auadwd leuovad pauopuegtl "6
'M21 Syl Jo uonglotn 12E[10 Aug 10J IUgnai lama pug Meal
stgt aleutvuat Ons Aew pso[puel'lueuai usw to areal ssyi aigutuual lou saoP PsolPuel Pug areal styl Jo oval g sateJosn tueual JI
'saa)sdawone pug moo unoa gutpn[ous'piolpuel ayi Sq pled s adxa
ayi snid lueual mau ayi wolf plolpuel Aq panuaas•Aug n'ivas Jo lunowe ayi Pug a -j sigi lapun lueuai Aq parvo tuns Jo iunows
ayi uaamtaq aau=jji.payl SwAed aoJ algssuodsw aq pet's iueuai* s -jstyi lapun samo iueualslunowsAue.wd of puooM Pugduadwd
ayi Suuuws ioJs uadxas,plolpuel,Sgdoiivspasnagpegs Sunuw-asoglaoJplolpue'l Sgpo,%! a luw.Suy'Mlaauoawosoi.ivadwd
ayi iva ,(m plolpuel ayi vows uottsu ug Suuq.Sew piolpuel'ino snow lou scop tusuaiJl Auadwd ayi Jo uoissassod ayes Sew
yolpuel•Msa'l stye us tuaw=ffu.Sue saiu[oia tueuai p to anp uaye slunowe layto io tual ayi Sed iou scop iueuai Jl•llneJaO 'S
PbN8ENT / Ic
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official
RE: Building Equipment Maintenance Contract
DATE: January 4, 1989
INTRODUCTION
We have contacted qualified companies to service City building
equipment.
BACKGROUND
Each year we have accepted building equipment maintenance
proposals on an hourly rate basis. I contacted qualified
companies and only one replied, Associated Mechanical.
Associated Mechanical for $1,920.00
plus $46.00/hr for service calls plus parts
The maintenance contract will be absorbed by the Building
Maintenance Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Accept the proposal of Associated Mechanical for the maintenance
contract.
ACTION REQUESTED
Authorize proper City officials to execute the maintenance
contract with Associated Mechanical for $1,920.00, and the rate
of $46.00 per hour for all repair work completed on call plus
parts for work done not in conjunction with normally scheduled
maintenance checks, for the 1989 operational year.
LH:cah
Attachment
CALENDAR YEAR 1989
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE CONTRACT WITH
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
TYPE OF EOUIP14ENT
All plumbing, heating and air conditioning.
LOCATION
Attached to, or located upon, or in all City property and/or
buildings.
SCHEDULED CALLS PER YEAR
Three (3) or on notice of defect.
IN CONSIDERATION OF PAYMENT OF $1.920.00 PER YEAR
A) Will inspect all air conditioners and heating units three
times per year at intervals of four months.
B) Lubricate all motors and bearing housings.
C) Adjust all pulleys and belts.
D) Furnish labor for installation of all parts necessary for
proper operation at time of scheduled service call.
E) All work under this agreement is to be completed within the
normal eight hour working day. Any overtime work done upon
of or with the approval of the City of Shakopee will be
subject to overtime charges of 1 1/2 times per hour.
F) It is further provided that the date on which service will
be rendered each period will be determined by the service
man's itinerary. However, all possible arrangements will
be made to render such services as close to the date most
convenient to the owner.
G) The City of Shakopee will pay for all parts and materials.
H) This agreement does entitle the City of Shakopee to emergency
service calls.
I) All repair work completed on "call" or done not in conjuction
with normally scheduled maintenance checks will be billed out
at the rate of $46.00 per hour, plus parts.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE CONTRACTOR
BY
Mayor
BY BY
City Administrator Associated Mechanical
BY
City Clerk
C
SSOCIATED
mechanical contractors, inc.
1257 Marschall Road,Suite 104•Shakopee,MN 55379- Phone:6121445-5100
December 23, 1988
City of Shakopee
120 East let Avenue -
Shakopee, MN 55379
We propose the following Maintenance Contract for the year 1989
as follows:
A. Will inspect all air conditioners and heating units three times
per year at intervals of four months.
B. Lubricate all motors and bearing housings.
C. Adjust all pulleys and belts.
D. Furnish labor for installation of all parts necessary for proper
operation at time of scheduled service call.
E. All work under this agreement is to be completed within the
normal eight hour working day. Any overtime work done upon
or with the approval of the City of Shakopee will be subject
to overtime charges of lk times per hour.
F. It is further provided that the date on which service will
be rendered each period will be determined by the service man's
itinerary. However, all possible arrangements will be made
to render such services as close to the date most convenient
to the owner.
G. The City of Shakopee will pay for all parts and material.
H. This agreement does entitle the City of Shakopee to emergency
service calls.
I. All repair work completed on "call" or done not in conjunction
with normally scheduled maintenance checks will be billed out
at the rate of $46.00 per hour, plus parts.
All the above for the sum of one thousand nine hundred twenty and
00/100 dollars, ($1,920.00)
To be billed as follows:
Spring Check Up, May $1 ,152.00
Fall Check Up, September $ 384.00
Winter Check Up, January $ 384.00
Sincerely,
0,� .n�
os ph M. Sand, Jr.
President
- 24 HOUR EMERGENCY SERVICE -
CONSENT NJ
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft , Acting City Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineerl L; ^
SUBJECT: Vierling Drive, Project No. 1987-12
DATE: January 9 , 1989
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND:
According to the existing change order policy, Council consent is
needed for change orders less than 1 % of the contract. Attached
is Change Order No. 3 in the amount of $1x350 .00 (0 .2% of
contract) for S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. , for the above referenced
project.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve of Change Order No. 3 and authorize the appropriate City
officials to execute this change order in the amount of $1 ,350 .00
to S .M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. , P.O. Box 212, Shakopee, MN 55379 •
DH/pmp
CO
CHANGE ORDER
Change Order No.: 3 Project Name: _13th Ave. (Vierlina Dr.)
Street Improvements
Date: January 5. 1989 Contract No.: 1987-12
Original Contract Amount $ 527.758.56
Change Order(s) No. 1 thru No. 2 $ 147.159.70
Total Funds Encumbered Prior to Change Order $ 674.918.26
Description of Work to be (Added/Deleted):
Trash Guards on Storm Outlets
The above described work shall be incorporated in the Contract, referenced above, under the
same conditions specified in the original Contract as amended unless otherwise specified
herein. Any work not so specified shall be performed in accordance with the Standard
Specifications adopted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota.
The amount of the Contract shall be increased $ 1 .350.00
The number of calendar days for completion shall be (increased/decreased) by 0
Original Contract Amount $527,758.56
Change Order(s) No. 1 thru 1 $ 148.509.70
Total Funds Encumbered $ 676.268.26
Completion Date: Same
The undersigned Contractor hereby agrees to perform the work
specified in this Change Order in accordance with the
specifications, conditions and prices specified herein.
Contractor: NI, / - � 1.,.. REVIEWED:
By: - Shako
-��-- pee Public Utilities Cc®ission
Title
Manaw
Date: c-_, jcc�Z (
APPROVED AND RE ID:
City Engineer Date
APPROVED: City of Shakopee
By: Approved as to form this
Mayor Date
day of 19
City Administrator Date City Attorney
City Clerk Date
CONSENT
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer W10
SUBJECT: Scott County Transportation Coalition
DATE: January 9 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
This memo addresses the annual donation to the Scott County
Transportation Coalition.
BACKGROUND:
For the last several years, the City of Shakopee has contributed
$10 ,500 .00 to the Scott County Transportation Coalition to assist
in lobbying for various new transportation projects.
In the 1989 budget, an amount of $10 , 500 .00 has again been
allotted for contribution to the Scott County Transportation
Coalition. Council action is needed to submit this money to the
Coalition.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Approve of the budgeted amount and direct staff to submit a
check to the Scott County Transportation Coalition of
$10,500 .00 .
2. Approve a lesser amount than what was budgeted in the 1989
budget and authorize staff to submit this amount to the
Coalition.
3 . Deny any contribution to the Coalition at this time.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to direct the appropriate City staff to submit a check in
the amount of $10 , 500 .00 to the Scott County Transportation
Coalition.
DH/pmp
COALITION
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Parking Restrictions Near Scott County Courthouse
DATE: January 10, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
This memo is a follow-up to an earlier Council discussion
regarding the request from Scott County to implement two hour
parking restrictions on those City streets in the vicinity of the
Scott County Courthouse.
BACKGROUND:
On December 1 , 1988, Mr. Jim Slavik of Scott County submitted a
letter to the Acting City Administrator requesting that the City
Council implement two hour parking restrictions on those streets
in the vicinity of the Scott County Courthouse. On December 20,
1988 the City Council directed the Chief of Police and the City
Engineer to review the request and submit a recommendation to
Council on January 17 , 1989.
Attached is the original letter from Scott County as well as
staff's December 14, 1988 memo to Council to provide additional
background information for Council.
During the week of January 3rd through January 6th, the parking
situation around the courthouse was monitored by staff. During
that week, between 8:00 A.M. and 8:30 A.M. the number of vehicles
parked on Holmes Street, Fuller Street, 4th Avenue and 5th Avenue
around the Courthouse ranged from 77 to 97 vehicles. At the same
time the number of vacant spots in the parking lot between the
Courthouse and the hospital ranged from 49 to 54.
Clearly, this indicates that there are not enough vacant parking
stalls in the parking lot to accommodate those vehicles currently
parking on the street . Implementing two hour parking
restrictions around the courthouse would in effect "push" those
vehicles parking on the street further out into surrounding
residential neighborhoods since the parking lot cannot
accommodate the demand for parking.
The main objective of the County' s request is to provide for
additional parking for those persons visiting the Courthouse on
business, closer to the entrances. While the implementation of
2-hour parking restrictions would accomplish this purpose, it
would move the on-street parking problem out to adjacent
residential neighborhoods. Both the Chief of Police and I do not
recommend this course of action.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Post the area along the west side of. Holmes Street in the
Courthouse Block for 2-hour parking.
2. Post the north side of 5th Avenue in the Courthouse Block
for 2-hour parking.
3 . Restrict parking to two hours for all streets as requested
by Scott County.
4. Implement 2-hour parking on any other combination of streets
as desired by Council.
5 . Make no changes in the parking restrictions around the
Courthouse.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Chief of Police and I do not feel adding a 2-hour parking
restriction on Homes Street would adversely impact the
surrounding neighborhoods and would provide additional on street
parking for visitors. (Alternative No. 1 )
In addition, 5th Avenue abutting the Courthouse has experienced
some problems with vehicles obstructing driveways, according to
Chief Brownell. To alleviate this problem a 2-hour restriction
could be placed on this block, which would also create more
visitor parking. (Alternative No. 2)
It appears that adequate excess parking exists in the parking lot
to handle the number of vehicles parking on-street for the above
two alternatives.
Two-hour parking restriction on those streets does not guarantee
that those vehicles will use the parking lot rather than move
farther out into residential neighborhoods.
One other option for the County to obtain additional visitor
parking is to relocate all employee vehicles in the small lot
near the west entrance to the main parking lot and convert this
smaller lot to exclusively visitor parking. Still another option
would be for the County to find an alternative location for the
parking of the fleet vehicles. Both of these options would be an
internal policy decisions made by the County, rather than a City
Council decision.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Discuss the overall request of the County for 2-hour parking
restrictions around the courthouse and move to direct the
appropriate staff to implement those restrictions decided on by
Council and to notify Scott County of that decision.
7G
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Request from Scott County on Parking Limitations
on Streets in the Vicinity of the Scott County
Courthouse
DATE: December 14, 1988
Introduction
The attached letter was received from Mr. Jim Slavik, the Central
Services Director for the County of Scott. Mr. Slavik is
requesting two hour parking time limits on various streets around
the Scott County Courthouse.
Background
Parking problems have been perceived in the vicinity of the Scott
County Courthouse. Apparently some people, such as County
employees, are parking all day on streets in the vicinity of the
Scott County Courthouse. This results in inconvenience for
visitors to the Courthouse. These people must either park in the
adjacent off street parking lot or park on streets at locations
farther from the Courthouse.
This matter was discussed with the Chief of Police and he
indicated that he thought it reasonable that two hour parking be
posted for the west side of Holmes Street in the Courthouse
block. However, Chief Brownell expressed some concern about
restricting parking along the south side of 4th Avenue, the north
side of 5th Avenue, the East side of Fuller Street and around
Block 57 which is the parking lot located between the Courthouse
and St. Francis. The Chief specifically indicated that he
thought there is not an over abundance of off street parking in
that parking lot and that the introduction of an extensive amount
of two hour parking would perhaps result in people moving farther
out into the residential areas in an attempt to find parking.
The matter was also discussed with City Engineer Dave Hutton. It
was Dave's recommendation that the City restrict parking on the
west side of Holmes Street in the Courthouse block and that a
study be conducted of the impact of restricting parking to two
hours in the other areas requested by Scott County.
Alternatives
1. Post the area along the west side of Holmes Street in the
Courthouse block for two hour parking.
2. Restrict parking to two hours for all of the areas requested
by Mr. Slavik.
3 . Make no changes in the parking restrictions around the
Courthouse until a study could be conducted on the impact of
this parking.
4. Study the impact of two hour parking restrictions on the
streets requested by Scott County and report back to the
City Council at the January 3rd meeting.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council restrict parking to two
hours along the west side of Holmes Street in the Courthouse
block and that they direct the City Engineer and the Chief of
Police to evaluate the impact of parking restrictions in the
other areas requested by Scott County.
Action Requested
1. Move to post the west side of Holmes Street in the
Courthouse block for two hour parking.
2. Move to direct the City Engineer and the Chief of Police to
evaluate the impact of posting two hour parking restrictions
on the south side of 4th Avenue in the Courthouse block; the
north side of 5th Avenue in the Courthouse block; the east
side of Fuller Street in the Courthouse block, and on the
west side of Fuller Street in Block 57.
DRK/jms
SCOTT COUNTY
CENTRAL SERVICES
or COURTHOUSE B6
JSHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1398 (612)445-7750, Ext 157 /
December 1, 1988
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Att: Mr. Dennis Kraft
Acting City Administrator
129 First Avenue E.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Scott County Courthouse Parking Plan
Dear Mr. Kraft:
A Parking Plan Revision has recently been completed for the
Scott County Courthouse parking lots. As part of this revision,
we wish to also address the parking on city streets surrounding
the Courthouse building.
Please consider this as a formal request to provide posted two
(2) hour parking limits for on-street parking around the
Courthouse Square block.
The following streets would be effected by this change:
A. Courthouse Block, West side of Holmes Street
B. Courthouse Block, South side of Fourth Avenue
C. Courthouse Block, North side of Fifth Avenue
D. Courthouse Block, East side of Fuller Street
E. Block 57, West side of Fuller Street (parking lot west
of Courthouse)
I have already talked with Chief T. Brownell, Shakopee Police
Chief, and Ray Ruuska, of the City Engineering Department; and
the request meets with no resistance from their standpoint. In
addition, if the City wishes to carry the parking limits onto
further City streets, I would recommend that this be done at the
same time.
Please call me, at your earliest convenience, to arrange a
meeting to discuss this project, to further address any
questions or concerns that may exist.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Page Two
Courthouse Parking Plan
Thank You for your immediate attention to this request by Scott
County. Please contact me at the above address or telephone
number (612) 496-8114.
Sincerely,
S
J m Slavik
C ntral Services Director
JRS/js
cc: Cliff McCann, Deputy County Administrator
Fleet Management Team Members
File:FLEETMGT
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City EngineeK�.kwa
SUBJECT: Highway 101 Shakopee Bypass (Southerly)
DATE: January 12, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
This memo addresses the contract extension for Orr-Schelen-
Mayeron for performing drainage design services associated with
the State T.H. 101 Bypass Project.
BACKGROUND:
On August 2 , 1988, Mn/DOT requested that the City of Shakopee
utilize the 1 .0 million dollar commitment to provide design
assistance for the Shakopee Bypass Project. At that meeting,
City Council authorized staff to notify Mn/DOT that the City will
provide design assistance .
The design assistance was divided into three areas:
1 . Roadway design for 6 crossroads.
2. Bridge design for the same 6 crossroads.
3 . Drainage design.
In November, 1988 the City Council authorized the execution of
the agreement with Barton-Aschman Assoc. for a total amount of
$280 ,769 .89 for the purpose of designing the 6 cross roads
associated with the Shakopee Bypass. In December, 1988 Mn/DOT
has awarded the bridge design work to two consultants. The cost
of this design service has not been decided upon yet. Regarding
the drainage design portion , in August of 1988 a contract
extension was signed with Orr-Schelen-Mayeron in the amount of
$31 ,500 .00 to perform preliminary analysis and drainage design
for the Shakopee Bypass. At that time, Council was informed that
once the preliminary design was completed the consultant would
then be able to prepare an estimate for the contract extension to
provide detailed drainage design plans for the bypass.
Attached is a letter from Orr-Schelen-Mayeron indicating that
their estimate for completing the final design services for the
Highway 101 Bypass drainage improvements is estimated at
$115,000 .00. OSM is requesting a contract extension to perform
these services with a "not to exceed" fee of $115 ,000 .00.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Approve of the contract extension to OSM for $115,000 .00 to
perform final design services associated with the Shakopee
Bypass drainage improvements as described in the attached
Scope of Services.
2. Deny the request.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the
attached contract extension agreement with Orr-Schelen-Mayeron &
Assoc. for the purpose of providing design services associated
with the T.H. 101 Shakopee Bypass storm drainage improvements at
a cost not to exceed $115,000.00.
DH/pmp
CONSULTANT
O
RL[en
Associates,uic /�
2021 East Hennepin Avenue /
Minneapolis.MN 55413
January 9, 1989 612-331-8660
FAX331-3806
Engineers
stnveyo
rs
PLanne
Planners
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Attn: Mr. David Hutton, P.E.
City Engineer
Re: Contract Extension Agreement
Mn/DOT Trunk Highway 101 Bypass
Storm Drainage Improvements
Shakopee, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Hutton:
As per our Agreement for Professional Services with the City of Shakopee, Section
i-A - 3-b (Major Projects), this extension agreement is for the Mn/DOT Trunk
Highway 101 Bypass storm drainage improvements. -
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. agrees to accomplish the attached Scope of
Services for a fee not to exceed $115,000.
The City of Shakopee agrees to reimburse OSM for these services in accordance with
Section IV of the Agreement for Professional Services.
We look forward to working with you on this project. If this proposal meets with
your approval , please sign below and return one copy to our office.
Yours very truly,
ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON - CITY OF SHAKOPEE
& ASSOCIATES
n,^/INC
. _ 4
W ` \ may/
Robe t D. Frigaar .E.
Associate
John . Badalich, P.E.
Vice President
RDF/JPB:mlj
Enclosure
ENGINEERING SERVICES
Mn/DOT TRUNK HIGHWAY 101 BYPASS
STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. DESIGN PHASE
1. Prepare preliminary alignment maps for right-of-way acquisition
2. Set up soil testing program and evaluate borings (testing to be paid for
by the City)
3. Determine final alignment based on City and State reviews of the
preliminary alignment being completed by OSM as part of the hydrologic
study of the Upper Valley Drainage system
4. Necessary survey work to prepare final construction plans (easement work
will be extra)
5. Final project design
6. Preparation of design plans, specifications and bidding documents
7. Preparation of detailed construction cost estimate
8. Prepare and submit necessary permit applications to regulatory agencies
9. Assist the City in advertising for bids and provide recommendations for
award of contract
B. CONSTRUCTION PHASE
1. Provide required construction engineering services as follows:
a. Periodic observations of the work in progress (once a week - 4 hrs.)
b. Preparation of supplementary drawings to clarify working drawings
c. Review of shop drawings to determine compliance with plans and
specifications
d. Review of necessary testing done by testing laboratories
e. Final inspection and report of completed project
f. Completion of as-built plans for City records
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Appointments to Boards and Commissions
DATE: January 13, 1989
Introduction
Nominations have been made to various boards and commissions to
fill terms expiring January 31, 1989. It is appropriate at this
time for appointments to be made.
Background
Terms on various boards and commissions are expiring on January
31st. If appointments are made at the January 17, 1989 Council
meeting, these appointees can be seated at the respective
February meetings.
Appointments to boards and commissions will become effective at
the first meeting in February (except that the SPUC appointment
becomes effective at their first meeting in April. ) There is
sufficient time between the appointments and the first meetings
for appointees to receive an agenda packet and become familiar
with the material prior to the meetings.
I have received an application from Jim Moline who is interested
in serving on either the Planning Commission or on the Community
Recreation Board, or any other board. If he is not appointed to
either the Planning Commission or the Recreation Board, I would
recommend that he be appointed to the Energy and Transportation
Committee since they will continue to be short members.
If Council wishes to nominate Mr. Moline, they should dispense
with the rules and make the nomination, since nominations were
closed at the last Council meeting.
Mayor Lebens has advised me that Councilman Scott has advised her
that he is withdrawing his application for appointment to
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.
At the January 3rd Council meeting, Melanie Kahleck was nominated
to the Energy and Transportation Committee. She has already been
appointed and is currently serving a term expiring January 1,
1991 on the Energy and Transportation Committee. Therefore,
there is no need to appoint her again.
To expedite the balloting, I recommend that the first ballot be
completed early on in the Council meeting so that the ballots can
be tallied before the appointments come up on the agenda.
No balloting is necessary where there is only one candidate for
an opening.
Nominees Action Recommended
John Schmitt 1. Move to appoint to the
Melanie Kahleck Planning Commission/Board of
James Moline Adjustment and Appeals for a four
year term expiring January 31, 1993.
John Roepke 2. Move to appoint John Roepke to the
Police Civil Service Commission for
a three year term expiring January
31, 1992.
Jim Cook 3. Move to appoint Jim Cook to the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
beginning April 1, 1989 for a three
year term expiring April 1, 1992 .
Elmer Otto 4. Move to appoint Donna Roman,
Donna Roman and (if candidates remain-
James Moline ing) to the Energy and Transportation
Committee for three year terms expiring
January 31, 1992.
Bill Anderson 5. Move to appoint Bill Anderson and
Lillian Abeln Lillian Abeln to the Cable Communica-
tions Advisory Commission for three
year terms expiring January 31, 1992.
Robert Tomczik 6. Move to appoint to Shakopee
Frank Houser Community Recreation Board for a two
James Moline year term expiring January 31, 1992.
Randy Laurent 7. Move to appoint Randy Laurent and Jim
Jim Link Link to the Housing Advisory and Appeals
Board for three year terms expiring
January 31, 1992.
Randy Laurent 8. Move to appoint Randy Laurent and Jim
Jim Link Link to the Building Code Board of
Adjustment and Appeals for three year
terms expiring January 31, 1992 .
Al Furrie 9. Move to appoint and
Jane DuBois to the Community Development Commission
Elmer Otto for three year terms expiring January
Debra Amundson 31, 1992.
Jon Albinson
lo. Move to appoint to the
Community Development Commission
to fill the unexpired term of
Tim Keane expiring January 31, 1991.
FIRST BALLOT SECOND BALLOT
Planning Commission
(Vote for 1) Board or Commission
_ Melanie Kahleck _
James Moline _
John Schmitt
Community Development Commission
(Vote for 3)
_ Jon Albinson
Debra Amundson
Jane DuBois
Al Furrie
Elmer Otto
Community Recreation Board
(Vote for 1)
_ Frank Houser
_ James Moline
Robert Tomczik
11,4'
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: City Attorney Compensation
DATE: January 12, 1989
Introduction
Council has not accepted the proposal for legal services from Mr. Collar
for 1989 nor have they established an annual retainer amount for 1989.
Back rg ound
The City Attorney's retainer was set by the Pay Schedule in prior years.
It was not on the Pay Schedule for 1989 because of the proposal process and
Council had not selected who was going to provide services for 1989. Also, I
feel it is more appropriate for Council to accept a proposal for the City
Attorney for the retainer than to set by the Pay Schedule.
The current Asst City Attorney charges on a billing basis versus the City
Attorney being compensated on a retainer basis. Since a City Attorney has not
been selected (or a different one selected) , Council needs to determine the
compenstion for Mr. Coller for work in 1989.
Alternatives
1. Monthly compensation the same as 1988 ($2,335.66) .
2. Monthly compensation 3.58 more than 1988 ($2,417.41) .
3. Monthly compensation as the rate in Mr. Collar's proposal ($2,491.67) .
4. Other arrangement.
Recommendation
Alternative number 3.
Action
Move to compensate Mr. Coller as City Attorney at the rate of $2,491.67
per month for 1989 until such time that Council makes other arrangements for
the provision of legal services.
Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director VVV
Re: Purchase of Light Truck
Date: January 9, 1989
Introduction
The 1989 Budget contains the provision for the purchase of a pickup for
the Engineering Dept, and a pickup for the Inspection Dept.
Backeround
The 1989 budget for the Inspection Division contains $10,300 for the
purchase of a new pickup. This is a replacement for the 1982 (56,300
miles) Dodge Aries that LeRoy Houser drives. The Dodge was passed down
from Tom Brownell. A 1984 GMC pickup was purchased new for LeRoy in
March 1984 and that is now being used by the Assistant Inspector. It
currently has 62,300 miles on it with an annual rate of 13,000 miles per
year.
The 1984 GMC is a 1/2 ton, two-wheel drive full-size pickup with power
steering, power brakes, air conditioning and a six cylinder engine. As I
recall, LeRoy asked Council for the A/C at the time of purchase with
Council approval and the full size is for higher ground clearance. The
1989 truck would be similarly equipped except for LeRoy's request for a
cloth seat for which the dealer said there is no extra charge.
The Hennepin County bid for full-size 1/2 ton pickups went to Thane
Hawkins Polar Chevrolet at a price of $9,562 for the above unit.
The 1989 budget for the Engineering Dept, contains $10,500 for a new
pickup. As far as I know, Engineering has never purchased a new vehicle.
This one would be driven by the Engineering Coordinator and the 1982
Dodge Aries used by the seasonal inspectors (passed down from John
Anderson) would be sold. The Engineering Coordinator currently drives a
1982 S-10 pickup with 63,500 miles on it and puts on about 5,500 miles
per year. This will be cycled down for other departmental employees to
use.
The truck proposed for purchase under the Hennepin County contract is a
1989 S-10 pickup with power steering, power brakes, automatic
transmission, AM radio, short box (61) , four cylinder engine and 2 wheel
drive. The truck as specified is $7,849 including manuals.
During budget time, the Equipment Committee reviewed the 5-year Equipment
List and discussed whether or not to put air conditioning in Engineering
Dept. vehicles (City Engineer excepted) and decided not to include that
feature. Accordingly, A/C was not in the specifications for a new truck.
The City Engineer reported to me that he contacted the Equipment
Committee regarding adding A/C to this truck. The dealer quoted a price
of $650-699 over and above the bid price to add A/C. Reportedly, the
Equipment Committee concurred with the request to add A/C. Note: The
dealer may have made an error in quoting $650 and may insist on $699
(same as full size truck).
Alternatives
A. Inspection Truck
1.) Buy as per above ($9,562)
2.) Do not buy this year
3.) Rebid on hour own
B. Engineering Truck
1.) Buy as per above without air conditioning ($7,849)
2.) Buy as per above with air conditioning ($8,548)
3.) Do not buy this year
4.) Rebid on our own
Recommendation
A. Alternative no. 1
B. Alternative no. 1 or 2
Action Recuested
Move to purchase from Thane Hawkins Polar Ghevrolet one-half ton pickup
in the amount of $9,562 for the Inspection Department and one compact
pickup in the amount of $ with/without air conditioning for the
Engineering department.
GV:mmr
CONSENT
Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Purchase of Administrative Pool Car
Date: January 9, 1989
Introduction
City Hall has had one car available for general use for many years. This
past summer Community Development "reserved" the car for the use of its
employees. The car in question is a 1982 Fairmont with 83,300 miles on
it. Many employees consider it unreliable for use out of Shakopee.
Background
Accordingly, the 1989 budget has $9,000 in the Community Development
department budget for the purchase of an additional car for true "pool"
use so that there is a reliable car available for general staff use. It
is planned to buy a newer used car from National or Avis under the
Hennepin County contract ($500 below book) or from North Star Auto
Auction. The Police Department has bought cars from North Star for
several years. The auto would be a standard type intermediate or compact
car. The 1982 Fairmont would stay as a Community Development car for
local use by staff, possible including the Housing Inspector.
Alternatives
1.) Do not buy.
2.) Obtain quotes for Council action (car may be sold before Council can
act.)
3.) Authorize staff to purchase a car.
Recommendation
Alternative No.3
Action Requested
Authorize the Finance Director to purchase an intermediate or compact
type car at a cost not to exceed $9,000 including tax and license. Said
car to be used for general administrative or pooled used by all
departments.
GV:mmr
CONSENT
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting Administrator /I
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Interfund Transfers
DATE: January 11, 1989
Introduction
-------------
Request Council approve of the following transfers. They have been made in
accordance with the 1988 Budget as amended and previous Council action.
Background
To the General Fund
From Capital Equipment for equipment purchases
Administration
Automobile Coon Rapids Chry. $9,073.00
Automobile Ziebart 60.00
Automobile Deputy Registrar 604.13
Finance Dept
Copier Deavney 11,470.00
Workstation Quest 1,414.00
Textware Software Mkt Intl 1,995.00
Desktop Publisher Egghead 636.50
80meg hard drive Quannon 2,132.00
Fire Dept
Hose Smeal 1,050.00
Hose Midcentral 1,925.95
Hazardous Material Suits Conway 3,294.00
Air Paks Midcentral 30,139.04
Mack Refurbish Smeal 52,037.20
Police
Automobile Lichtsin Motors 6,660.00
Automobile Deputy Registrar 420.35
Radar (2) Kustom Elect. 3,560.00
Computer Printer Computer Exercise 604.90
Computer Computer Exercise 2,536.58
Computer Computer Exercise 2,536.58
Radios Motorola 1,596.94
Engineering
Video camera Nat'l Camera 1,163.00
VCR Nat'l Camera 299.00
Television Nat'l Camera 538.00
Street Dept
Street Flusher GMC 11,331.00
Street Flusher Ruffridge 27,580.00
Street Flusher Deputy Registrar 705.61
Street Flusher Malkerson 285.00
Pickup Valley Sales 13,682.15
Pickup Ziebart 80.00
Pickup Deputy Registrar 843.80
Pickup Carb 6 Turbo 740.25
Pickup Malkerson 254.00
Sidebroom Scott County 12,500.00
Tamper Boyum 1,986.56
Fail mower Carlson Tractor 2,269.00
Park
Pickup Viking GMC 9,930.00
Pickup Ziebart 80.00
Pickup Deputy Registrar 619.27
Pickup Carb 5 Turbo 740.25
Pickup Malkerson 254.00
Packer Boyum 14,800.00
------------
234,427.06
To the Debt Service Fund #32
from the surplus track offsite projects funds 248,497.92
To the Capital Imp. Fund
from the 1976 Imp. Fund to close the fund 364,346.34
from the 1977A Imp. Fund to close the fund 78,099.01
from the 1977C Imp. Fund to close the fund 383,978.25
Action Requested
Move to approve of the following interfund transfers;
from Capital Equipment to the General Fund $234,427.06
from Track Offsite to Debt Service #32 248,497.92
from 1976 Imp. Fund to the Capital Imp. Fund 364,346.34
from 1977A Imp. Fund to the Capital Imp. Fund 78,099.01
from 1977C Imp. Fund to the Capital Imp. Fund 383,978.25
0- ENT
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Worthless Check Prosecution Agreement
DATE: January 5, 1989
Introduction
The Scott County Attorney's Office is offering to prosecute all
worthless check charges occurring with the City of Shakopee.
Background
Scott County has entered into an agreement with the National
Corrective Training Institute, Inc. (NCTI) to have NCTI operate a
prosecution diversion program for worthless check offenders. As
a part of this program and as an assistance to local businesses,
the Scott County Attorney's Office is making this program
available to all cities in Scott County. The program would be
operated at no cost to the City.
The program has been discussed with both the City Attorney and
the Assistant City Attorney and each strongly endorses the City
entering into this agreement. The prosecution of worthless check
charges consumes a fair amount of time and results in the City's
attorneys taking time away from other projects of greater
importance to the City.
The attached letter explains the program in greater detail. Also
attached is a prosecution agreement which is to be signed if the
City Council decides to enter into this program.
Alternatives
1. Enter into the worthless check prosecution agreement with
Scott County.
2. Do not enter into this program and have the City Attorney or
Assistant City Attorney prosecution worthless check charges.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1 is recommended.
Action Requested
Move to enter into a prosecution agreement with the Scott County
Board of Commissioners and the Scott County Attorney for the
-
purpose of having Scott County prosecute all worthless check
misdemeanors for the City of Shakopee.
DRK/jms
THE OFFICE OF THE
SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY
COURTHOUSE 206
. �h. SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1380 (612)-496-8240
JAMES A.TEP W ECO
County Attorney
January 2, 1988
Shakopee City Administrator
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Worthless Check Prosecution Agreement
Dear Mr. Craft:
Scott County has entered into an agreement with National
Corrective Training Institute, Inc. (NCTI) to have NCTI operate
a prosecution diversion program for worthless check offenders.
The goals of the program are to deter the passing of worthless
checks and to increase the amount of restitution for the victims
of worthless check offenders. In order to promote these goals
and to help all businesses in Scott County which lose money due
to worthless checks, we are making this program available to all
cities in Scott County. We invite your City Attorney's Office
to participate in this program at no cost to your city.
I have already had an opportunity to discuss the program
with your city attorney, and I believe that your city has given
its preliminary approval to the proposed program. I will
summarize for you how the program works.
Businesses and individuals who receive worthless checks will
first mail notice of nonpayment or dishonor to the offender
pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 609.535 Subd. 3. If they
do not receive payment they will refer the matter to NCTI.
NCTI, acting under the authority of the Scott County Attorney,
will mail a letter to the offender which gives the offender an
opportunity to avoid prosecution. The letter will state the
offender can avoid prosecution by making restitution and paying
a service charge. The letter will also state that if there is
no response within a stated time, the offender will be required
to take an 8-hour training class or face prosecution. If there
is no response a second letter will be mailed demanding
Criminal Civ Civil o;". uyem1a CIV ViCfiTNvtres.
Thanes J.Harbinson, Jay L.Ameson Peggy A.Flail Ae.immnrn
First Assistant Sian A.Nasi Anita A.Sealing Jim W.Petersen
Waren A.Korhis Paralegal
Susan K MCNellis i
Nei G.Nelson
Kathryn A.Santalmann aures
W.R.Gla"mr. 16
Special Assistant
An Equal Opportunely Employer
1%W 'Ifte
ftp
restitution, payment of the service charge, and enrollment in
the training class. If there is still no response the matter
will be referred to the Scott County Attorney for prosecution.
If your City desires to participate in this program and have
the Scott County Attorney handle the prosecution of your
worthless check misdemeanor cases, then please have your City
Council approve the enclosed Prosecution Agreement at its next
meeting. Please return the signed Prosecution Agreement to my
office.
If you would like me to address the next meeting of your
City Council to answer any questions regarding the program,
please call my secretary, at 496-8240 to schedule my appearance.
Sincerely
JAMES A. TERWEDO
SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY
PROSECUTION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the
Scott County Board of Commissioners and the Scott County
Attorney, hereinafter referred to as "Scott County" and the
City of Shakopee, hereinafter referred to as "City".
WITNESSETH THAT:
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 487.25, Subdivision 10 has been
amended to authorize a municipality to enter into an agreement
with the County Board and County Attorney to provide prosecution
services for any criminal offenses;
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council at its meeting
on , requested that Scott County prosecute all
worthless check misdemeanors for the City;
WHEREAS, Scott County wishes to enter into an agreement with
the City for the prosecution of all worthless check
misdemeanors;
WHEREAS, Scott County has entered into an agreement with
National Corrective Training Institute, Inc. (NCTI) which
provides that NCTI will attempt to collect on worthless checks
prior to prosecution;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants
contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:
I. TERM
The term of this contract is from January 1 , 1989 through
December 31 , 1989, the date of signature by the parties
notwithstanding, unless earlier terminated as provided herein.
II. TERMINATION
This agreement may be terminated by either party at any time
upon not less than thirty (30) days written notice delivered by
mail or in person to the other party. Notice to Scott County
shall be delivered to the County Attorney, Scott County
Courthouse, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379. Notice to the City
shall be delivered to the City Administrator, 129 E. 1st Avenue,
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379.
III. SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED BY SCOTT COUNTY
Scott County through Scott County's Attorney's Office agrees
to provide prosecution services for any misdemeanor worthless
check offense occurring within the city limits of the City of
Shakopee. Pursuant to its contract with NCTI, Scott County will _
accept referrals of worthless check offenders to its worthless
III
check collection program.
IV. COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES
The City agrees that the City's portion of fine proceeds
pursuant to Minnesota Law for providing prosecution of offenses
for cases prosecuted by Scott County pursuant to this Agreement
shall be paid over to Scott County as compensation for services
rendered herein.
V. RATIFICATION
The City, in binding itself to this Agreement, hereby agrees to
and ratifies all actions taken by the Scott County Attorney's Office
under this Agreement in its prosecution of worthless check
misdemeanors for the City for the period of time covered by this
Agreement.
VI. AMENDMENT
This Agreement may be amended at any time when expressed in
writing and duly signed by the parties.
Dated: SCOTT COUNTY
John (Jack) F. Casey, Chairman
Scott County Board of Commissioners
ATTEST:
Joseph F. Ries
Scott County Administrator and
Clerk of the Board
Dated: SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY
James A. Terwedo
Dated: CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Mayor
City Administrator
ATTEST:
.. mmm �l... .mmeme a mm ml Wmmmml m
A
_ YIJ
o am OJJrv-m eo w e o mN� JawmeD
,
00000 m
z CCCC'Mw
CCCCC >frr A
rYT~99TTT T_ o Wmm
W mmmmmmWWm mlm mmPW m: A
CC CSC CCCC CCAS
mrffff rfff frrr v 9 f
�J............�..
f!:
... m
'" mWPmeWwawe�m mW Wmm m
. JJJJJ i ' II
m -
a .
TT M
t
;`si
_ I
I
.e -
mllry ry I I I
I i j I I
I I
I
01
rrr
e
xx x rr 0000
`
00 le z. nn= ry n
mm M. oo
~ x s
K i o00 Dose mry -
a a'a'sm
0o a o9 _ s
m x
mx m y 2z 0 4y4 « <
x
I
y
- - euMU -va -
i sij =
I
m I -
m� I
•
� 1 1
y F x IA u
M
b b (
m m �
. Y y Y Y Y
-
IT -
uundary - ; a
I I
IN
0000
m..
W »>; wwwwWw .w"' d ...
10
.a...a All ....
I
lvlllll�l "I
It
" o e °eeee°° evosoo --- e eeee e o 0
II _ � . °°°eeee eveooe e°e e . eeee e e o
22-2 2
2 2
I
Wp pR p)m e Y i.
CCC
noon nnnnnnn mm q o
n YYmmc
EE
ww bbmW non
n b y
p p
I
v c C CCccCCC CCCC
�v0• wm 1�1
cp' CC O 999
Y 4444444 O _
YY444 III
m9r----r__r-- fffY rfr w
a9 4 ppY0 ir rv
bWw mwbwWmw 'c mwmm Y mmm
I Y i e
I
m
• i o _ i --a�aTI • 4:;Faa Ax _'aix a5al:as -.. �,
u p
u ps
s p l
e • q I
I � �
_
' I� r�Ygla- mn q pR
TT
Ell
nhFbhFFF _Y WYtl�YrrrWdtlwgtl
tl nnRnRRin Y4 _ Rn nRRR�nR 1 •j• •I���,i�w
111111 � I��1111
I O WJJJWJJJJJJJmJJ
I jJJJ WW WW_WW
m WWWWw
u t iSiii Liii
'I. u
iiii
li m mm uu uu u
[Zi V_ Y
oil :111;
moa
® W ossa aS
its am y 6e S ...o.o o.....
I
e o6 0 e
m o
m
w W W . m W m H —Him
_
x _
. o
FFi
- - - - - - Fl
i
I
o ........ w w
T mmm H
m m wo:moue r
ri
_TM w _
mw m m
0
--- - m _
- - w ♦ m - n ♦ W:p�Y m ♦ <
J - • o u o - ww SII �� � s Y
i w I
SII it � • ^ n
I Fl
1
i
I
I
I
i sa<JFe
I i I
"
a aaa � � 4�..4LLa.4.LL I j j I
° ooze °
yam-
o 0 0o to o y m m m m m m m d>mm
Y r rr r r r w r r r r r Y rrr
F K KK K t W F K F F F F F KKF � r
O N O O Y r W �O W �1 y W r Y mN0 y
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
4
w N vl N Y r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
M W
w D\ Yy Y r O O O O O p Op O O 000 C
w N N N �Y0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M
mm�l0 '+1 0 0 00 O O y m m m m m m m mmm 0 �C
I i l l O r
i+ O Or 0r Y0 0r 0r 0r Y0 r0 0r 0 Y0 0Y Y0 000 00
cromO r Yrr
nwmm o 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
�bN
E 7 H
Y 0 N N Y
F r
H 7 1
w� rn yr �pp w o Y N N Fm� o.
O O� W m W m O O W VI W W y R
N F O\N O O m r m o O N 0
o 0 o VI lO r o 0 0 0 oow O
c
ti
b h] = C = 0 ?1 01 a ZI N Tl 51 y
M P cf O N N m N A R m N m A N N N m N a
p
N N N N 9 N h[ry�]1 m m y N w m H Imo+ w
w A O Ul Y N N 00 H ry a 9 H O
W W
y Y O r W W n O 0 r Y H
N KKO\y S O O
w om
mVl V�vl N A Im
w00�
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNN 0
m m prom N N N -yi N -yi N
0 0 00 m mmm
ommm �
M O i+ ?I trl m 3 A c1
H M < d M O K a A 2 O
0 0 O W '1
Y0+ M
0
O N H b I
O O O
v ro
m m
m m
n
Y yJ a
Y r Y m W W F' w rr
lo
O O w 0 VI Vl �n m O
o mwmwmoow " �
X00 0 0 0 " Ym O O O 0 w
c Z Z
v44v444 D> »ZD Z Zi Ds F
v444v44 _ O Z Z D
>DDD>D»>)DDDsas
f 21222
ATITSIT 41
so 1: U12MAZ Assizz
SiMM
HOW
loss
Mii
v rrfffffl'fffffffffff Z
M.
AMM >29A2 MAAZA MW
IMIT 01=0011 n m m; A
971 T
THAM
F Fl 44 A A Fl Fl Fl A 4 4 4 Z
Y Yy YFYYYY
wit A - PNNN
F Y A F A A
m x
d
YLL
o LLLLLL ` uu
w cwwmaw w w wnw mm n w w w w
a mmmmmm m m mm0 mm m m m m m
• ii
I
i s
N m N n m o n
d
2
OSJ
O
Y _ _
26<m ..
u OF26POf ebWrle-Ywowab6
s JJJJJJIJJJJJJJJJJJJ
00000
geenNNeeeeWeooNonne n
WeOnWaeeaNnoaowervan a
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
tl n Wun q
u a
IH 10 o F '
N �O W WW W Y N
Y O r Y r Y Y r 0 a i
O O r n 4
VYI w o o o r O r w W
r w 0 0 0 r O Y r K
aril w o o o o r w H
O W y YO n `G
NYO '] O N r F Y
C O o Y r r O
O O o r0 0 0 Y A .�
m m a Y r r r r r r r o m m
m m m O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K w
n E P H Im
M m m a
o vl N O 0.
�p O N w O Y � O
O O O N F a
O O O O �n 0 0 O
n D O o
C
N
n n b a a
Y a O H O H m N A
fPr
0 0 n m s
vri doh �
Frrr m ]. m
O
P
�p-l0 �0„
,1.00 N
I
0 0 0
0
-Ni o� o m
0 0 0
O �O Z
c 7 a w m W 0m C < v
r, c
< r m L
m n m d m o
K o ro �
N m
0
ro
3
o 0 r m F m p3i
N p c'
N
3 �
Z
r
� a
1! 0000 " OV
o!-' b O
-O O O N O VI b O
� O
MEW) TO: Mayor and City Comcil
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Council Meeting Procedures
DATE: January 13, 1989
Introduction
At the beginning of each year, Council has been reviewing their worksession
materials on Council procedures. What's your reaction looking over the last 12
months? This is a good opportunity to take stock and fine tune the procedures
from previous years if you have good suggestions.
Review of 1988 pmarhn'es
1. Haw Councilmeimbers get items on the agenda. Call and ask staff to place a
note about the item under Other Business on the upcoming agenda. After
discussing the item with other members of Council, a motion can be made to
take whatever action is appropriate.
2. Stopping time is 10:30 p.m. or 11:00 p.m. when there is a HRA agenda.
3. The Chairman will comment on issues last and try to facilitate discussion.
4. ane Chairman will make an informal effort to "go around the table" for
ccuments.
5. There should be a self imposed limit of two cmmnents per item.
6. Counciimcmhcrs are urged to use "Boa to Aid Discussion by Asking the Right
Questions" (attached and in plastic cover also at council table) (Also
attached is a list of motions in order of precedence to move the discussion
along to canply with 42 above. Council has also asked the City
Adm;nistrator to use the same tools to help move discussion along.)
7. Procedures for Public Hearing:
a. Mayor announces and emphasizes public hearing rules:
1) Citizen give name and address before speaking.
2) Everyone speaks once before a second chance to speak is given.
3) Citizens speak to Chair or Council ' not other members of the
audience (to avoid back and forth discussions) .
b. Council discusses issue before opening up to the audience.
c. Open discussion up to the audience.
S. All item to be acted on should be on the agenda with completed staff work.
9. Staff's role and responsibilities for completing staff work for agenda
items:
a. What a good staff report should accomplish.
1) Introduction
2) State problem or issue
3) List alternatives with pros and cons
4) Make recomwendation
5) State "Action Requested"
b. The staff report process. All information on an agenda item should be
presented to all Co uncilmembers in the staff report. (problems arise
when information is not in the agenda packets and therefore not
available to all Councin"e"iers.)
c. Calls to City staff - the 20 minute rule of thumb means any requests to
staff requiring more than 20 minutes to handle should be handled under
No. 1 above.
d. When to ask questions about agenda items - Monday or Tuesday before the
meeting whenever possible.
e. when to ask staff to follow-up on miscellaneous items - for e>m ple:
potholes, junk cars, etc., should be covered when first received by
Camcilmember, not ,saved" for the Council meeting. This insures a
quick response to the citizen's request.
f. Responses to citizens' complaints about City staff handling of a
problem, etc. Council's response should normally be, "I'll check into
it and call you back". Avoid "taking sides" until all the facts are
known.
g. What to do when staff comes to Cou cijmembers about a problem or item
on the agenda. Request that the staff persons take their concerns
through the staff report process (see 9b) .
10. Use of Council worksessions (i.e. committee meetings) •
Stmmoar
The ability of City council to effectively cake decisions at public Council
meetings depends in large part on how Council conducts its meeting and how the
information necessary to make those decisions is provided to all Council-
mmbera. The meeting procedures and the staff memo system outlined above will
play a key role in determining the effectiveness of the Council. If you have
questions about the material in this memo or would like to suggest changes
please plan to do so on Tuesday.
Action Recueste3 _
Move to accept the Council meeting procedures for 1989 as outlined in the
Council memo regarding the subject dated January 13, 1989.
Mwims
HOW TO AID DISCUSSION
BY ASKING THE RIGHT QOESPIONS*
To Define Problems:
1. As I understand it, the problem is.... does anyone have additional
information on the issue?
2. Would aruyone care to suggest facts we need to better understand the issues
involved?
To Broaden Participation:
1. We've heard from some of you. Would others who have not spoken like to add
their ideas?
2. Hod do the ideas presented so far sound to those of you who have been
thinking about them?
3. What other issues related to this problem should we discuss?
To Limit Participation•
1. (To a dominating participant) We appreciate your ideas but perhaps we
should hear from others. Would some of you who have not spoken care to add
your ideas to those already expresseO
2. You have made several good comments and I wonder if someone else might like
to ask a question or make a statement?
3. Since all of the group has not yet had an opportunity to speak, I wonder if
you would hold your comments until a little later.
To Focus Discussion:
1. Where are we in relation to the decision we need to make?
2. Would you like to have me review my understanding of what's been said and
where we are?
3. That's an interesting comment. However, I wader if it relates exactly to
the problem that's before us?
4. As I understand it, this is the problem... . Are there additional comments
before we come to a decision?
To Move The Meeting Alora•
1. I wonder if we've spent enough time on this and are ready to move along
to. .. .?
2. Have we gone into this aspect of the problem far enough so that we could
shift our attention to.. ..?
3. In view of the remaining agenda items (or time we've set to adjourn) would
it be well to go on to the next question before us?
to
To Help The Grour Evaluate Where It Is:
1. Do any of you have the feeling we are at an inpasse on this issue?
2. Should we look at our original objective for this discussion and see how
close we are to it?
3. Now that we are nearing the end of the meeting would anyone like to suggest
how we might improve our next meeting?
To Help Reach A Decision:
1. Do I sense an agreenent on these points. ...?
2. We seen to be moving tward a decision that would.... (Chairperson
describes decision) Should we consider what it will mean in.terms of.. ..
if we decide this way?
3. What have we a=vplished up to this point?
4. Would someone care to sum up or discussion on this issue?
To Provide Continuity:
1. At our last meeting we discussed this issue. Would someone care to review
what we covered then?
2. Since we will not omplete this discussion at this meeting, what are some
of the issues we should take up at the next meeting?
3. Would someone care to suggest additional information or issues we need to
consider before our next meeting?
* Adapted from "Working with Groups", Lizette Weiss, Director of Public
Affairs, Association of Bay Area Governments, Berkeley, California.
DIAGRAM OF PARLSAME14TARY MOTIONS
IN ORDER OF A2E®INCE
(Except for Incidental Motions, which have no rank
among themselves)
Fix
time to
Adjourn
Adjourn
PP=IF7® Take Recess MITIONS
Question of
Privilege
Call for orders
of the Day
Appeal
Division of Asseably
Division of a Question
Filling Blanks
Objection
INCIDENTAL Parliamentary Inquiry MORONS
Point of Information
Point of Order
Read Papers
Suspend the Rules
Withdraw a Motion
Lay on the Table
ThePrevious Question (Close Debate)
Limit or Extend Debate
Postpone to a Definite Time
SUBSIDIARY Refer to a Committee MOTIONS
Amend the
it
Anen dment
Postpone Indefinitely
MAIN or PRINCIPAL MOTION
Miscellaneous motions after action has been take on Main or Principal
Motion:
Take from the Table (undebatable)
Rescind (debatable)
Reconsider (debatable)
Ratify (debatable)
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Additional Meetings
DATE: January 13, 1989
Introduction
The City Council needs to set meeting dates for a number of items
which will not be handled during regular Council meetings.
Housing Code Program - Earlier this month the City Council
deferred action on the discussion of the Housing Code Enforcement
Program. It is recommended that the City Council hold a special
meeting on Tuesday, January 31st at 7: 00 p.m. for the purpose of
discussing the Housing Code Program.
Goals and objectives session - Annually the City Council has a
Goals and Objectives Session where major projects that the
Council wants to consider during the year are discussed. It is
suggested that this meeting be held on Tuesday, February 14th.
During the past years the City Council has sometimes held the
meeting in conjunction with a dinner and other times has held the
meeting in the evening. If the City Council wants to hold it in
conjunction with a supper it is suggested that the meeting start
at 4:30 or 5:00 p.m. If this were to happen Councilmembers would
be able to cover all items involved and still adjourn at a
reasonable time. The Council should decide what format they want
for this meeting and inform the Acting City Administrator.
City Attorney Interviews - A couple of months ago the City
Council advertised for proposals for the position of City
Attorney. Six proposals were received and the information was
distributed to City Councilmembers. It is suggested that the
City Council establish a time for conducting interviews with the
six law firms. Thursday, February 16th or Tuesday, February 21st
are two dates which could be set aside for interview purposes.
Once decisions have been made on the above mentioned items the
scheduling will take and accommodations will be made as required.
Action Requested
Move to set the date of at p.m. for
a meeting to discuss the Housing Code Program.
Move to set the date of at P.M. for
the purpose of conducting the annual Goals and Objectives
Session.
Move to set the date of at p.m. for
the purpose of conducting interviews with the six law firms who
submitted proposals for City Attorney.
DRK/jms
CONSENT
MEMO TO: City Council
FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official
RE: Sidewalk Snow Removal
DATE: January 10, 1989
INTRODUCTION
The present snow removal ordinance is too difficult to work with
and requires too much staff time to administer.
BACKGROUND
I would like to suggest that Council consider amending the City
Code to read, "If sidewalks are not cleared 24 hours after a
snowfall, the City of Shakopee will have the snow removed and
bill the property owners. " Research on personnel, additional
liability and cost should be conducted before a final decision is
made '
A resident of the mentally handicapped facility was just about
run over on County Road 17 on Sunday because he had to walk on
the street because the walks were not shoveled.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Leave the ordinance as is.
2. Amend the ordinance.
3. Look into alternatives and cost to change code.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend we look into alternatives.
ACTION REQUESTED
Direct staff to research and suggest alternatives to changing the
City Code relating to snow removal.
LH:cah
CONSENT Ili
Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Mileage Reimbursement
Date: January 13, 1989
Introduction
The city currently reimburses employees for the use of their personal car
for city business at the rate of $.225 per mile.
Back rg ound
The IRS has issued revised regulations on the use of vehicles and revised
the mileage allowance to $.24 per mile. Therefore, staff recommends that
the City set the reimbursement rate for business use of personal cars at
$.24 per mile effective February 1, 1989. The rate of $.24 is the cutoff
set by IRS. Several things are accomplished by keeping the rate within
IRS guidelines.
1.) The city does not have to compute and pay FICA on any overage.
2.) The City saves the staff work involved in sorting through the
vouchers for employee travel and subsistence reimbursement.
3.) The employee is saved the trouble of having to file the extra forms
with their income tax return documenting business use of their car
and avoids any question of the necessity of keeping a log of
business miles for their personal car.
Alternatives
1.) Keep mileage reimbursement rate at $.225/mile.
2.) Set mileage reimbursement rate at $.24/mile
Recommendation
Alternative No. 2
Action Reauested
Move to set the mileage reimbursement rate for the use of personal
vehicles for City business at $.24/mile effective February 1, 1989.
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer .
SUBJECT: Market Street Corridor
DATE: January 9, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3010, Ordering a Report Prepared for
Improvements to Market Street, Between 1st Avenue and 7th Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
On September 20 , 1988 the City Council directed staff to prepare
a preliminary report regarding the improvement of Market Street
between 1st Avenue and 7th Avenue, including an extension of the
street through the railroad tracks. Council further directed
staff to submit the report to the Planning Commission for their
discussion and recommendation.
The report submitted to the Planning Commission is attached for
Council review . At the conclusion of the report , staff
recommended that the formal proceedings for improving Market
Street from 1st Avenue to 7th Avenue be initiated by ordering a
feasibility report prepared.
On January 5 , 1989 the Planning Commission discussed this item
and concurred with staff ' s recommendation . The Planning
Commission moved to recommend that the City Council initiate the
street improvement by ordering a feasibility report prepared.
Staff is requesting that Council discuss the overall merits of
improving Market Street and adopt Resolution No. 3010 , which
orders a feasibility report prepared for this project.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3010.
2. Deny Resolution No. 3010.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3010 , A Resolution Ordering the Preparation
of a Feasibility Report for Improvement to Market Street Between
1st Avenue and 7th Avenue and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
MARKET
MEMO TO: Planning Commission
FROM: David Hutton, City Enginee6�
SUBJECT: Market Street Corridor
DATE: November 16 , 1988
INTRODUCTION:
On September 20 , 1988 the City Council directed staff to prepare
a report regarding the improvement of Market Street , including
the possible extension of the street through the railroad tracks.
Council further directed staff to submit the report to the
Planning Commission for their discussion and recommendation.
BACKGROUND:
The concept of extending Market Street through the tracks and
making this street a major collector street has been discussed
and planned for a number of years. Up to this point in time
though, there has been no definite direction by the City in
addressing the Market Street corridor.
Staff has researched the files and various reports in an attempt
to bring together all available information on Market Street to
assist the Planning Commission in their discussion.
Comprehensive Plan
The 1981 Comprehensive Plan indicates that Market Street is a
designated collector route. Attachment A is a excerpt from the
Comprehensive Plan (Page 64) which discusses Market Street.
Also, enclosed is a copy of the map from the Comprehensive Plan
showing the major transportation routes in Shakopee.
(Attachment B)
1984 Traffic Study
In 1984 , the City of Shakopee hired Westwood Planning &
Engineering Company to evaluate the existing street system in
Shakopee , as well as future needs . The report further made
recommendations on upgrading several traffic corridors to
accommodate future traffic needs in the City of Shakopee. One of
those corridors discussed was the Market Street corridor.
Attachment C is various excerpts from that traffic study report.
Page 18 from the report (and accompanying map ) discusses the
Market Street corridor in detail. Page 24 from the report makes
several recommendations regarding railroad crossing improvements,
one of which is to close the Minnesota Street crossing and-
relocate it to Market Street. Page 26 from the report makes a
recommendation on street improvements to Market Street, by
extending Market Street all the way to 1st Avenue.
Market Street 19-4O
November 17 , 1988
Page 2
Municipal State Aid Street
Market Street, from 10th Avenue to 1st Avenue has been designated
as a Municipal State Aid Street (MSAs) . Attachment D is a copy
of the state aid map for this portion of the City.
A state aid street must begin and terminate at either another
state aid street, a County state aid highway or' a trunk highway.
If Market Street does not extend all the way to 1st Avenue, the
City will have to redesignate another street as a state aid
street and remove Market Street from state aid designation (at
least the portion from 1st Avenue to 4th Avenue) .
FAU Street
Market Street, from 10th Avenue to 1st Avenue, is also designated
as a Federal Aid Urban (FAU) street. Attachment E is a copy of
the FAU street system for Shakopee.
An FAU designation means that in addition to state aid funds ,
federal funding is also available for improving this street.
History of Proposed Improvements to Market Street
I. 2nd Avenue to 4th Avenue
In 1986 , a petition was received to improve this portion of
Market Street and a feasibility report ordered. In April of
1987 , the report was completed and a public hearing was
scheduled .
Basically , the report estimated the costs . for improving
Market Street two ways . The first estimate was for
constructing Market Street to state aid standards for a
collector street (44 feet wide) . The total cost estimate
for this alternative was around $80 ,000 . The second
estimate assumed a 36 foot wide local street and the total
cost estimate was $74,000 . The report further recommended
constructing Market Street to the 44 foot wide section and
assessing the abutting properties "according to appraised
benefit value" up to the costs associated with a 36 foot
wide street.
Attached is a copy of the complete feasibility report.
In May, 1987 a public hearing was held on the improvements."
At the hearing, the property owners affected were opposed to
the high cost of the assessments. Council directed the City
Engineer to obtain "benefit appraisals" of the properties
Market Street
November 17 , 1988
Page 3
using a realtor market analysis approach . The public
hearing was continued at a later date.
Attachment "F" is a copy of the real estate appraisal
summary. As indicated, based on the existing market value
at the time, the properties affected would benefit by around
$2 ,000 - $4 ,000 per lot. According to the cost estimates,
the assessments for this two block area would be around
$7 ,500 per lot, if assessed equally to all lots.
At the continuation of the public hearing, the potential
assessments versus the increase in market value of the lots
was again the main point of discussion. Staff recommended
that all benefitted lots be assessed $3 ,000 and to hold an
assessment hearing prior to awarding the construction
:contracts. Council could then reject all bids if any of the
assessments were challenged.
At the conclusion of the public hearing to determine the
feasibility of this project, though, Council decided against
ordering the project. -
Since that time there has been no further discussions
regarding the improvement of Market Street.
II. 1st Avenue to Railroad Tracks
Several times over the past years there have been attempts
to develop the properties just north of the tracks on Market
Street . Due to this -portion of Market Street being
unimproved and the uncertainty regarding the overall status
of Market Street, the development-'has not occurred.
In 1986 , a petition was received and a feasibility report
order for improving Market Street from 1st Avenue to the
tracks. Apparently, this feasibility report was never
- - completed either due to the development plans falling
through or the inability of the City to order the project
for Market Street from 2nd Avenue to 4th Avenue.
There was a cost estimate done on this portion of Market
Street, though. Attachment "G" is a copy of this estimate .
This estimate is only for installing sewer and water and
placing a gravel base on Market Street. It does not include
pavement , curb & gutter or sidewalk. The estimate was
$50 ,000 , which included $36 ,000 for construction costs and-
$14 ,000 for contingency and administrative fees.
0-�
Market Street
November 17 , 1988
Page 4
Again in 1988 , a possible development brought this issue
back before Council and consequently generated this report.
The owner of the property just south of Kennedy
Transmissions was denied a building permit due to the road
not being improved ( Note : A gravel road is the minimum
required for issuing building permits) . Subsequently, City
Council agreed to issue the building permit contingent upon
entering into a developer' s agreement with the City covering
the construction of the road to "minimum accepted
standards. " The agreement has been sent to the developer,
but to date there has been no attempts to follow up on it
and pursue the development.
III. 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue
In May , 1988 a petition was submitted to the City for
improving this portion of Market Street by pavement, curb 8
gutter and sidewalk. A feasibility report was prepared and
the City Council ordered the project.
In September, 1988 the bids were opened for this project.
The low bid was $45 ,677 .50. The City Council subsequently
rejected all bids because they were substantially higher
than the estimate of $33,600 .00. The main reasons for the
higher bids were 1 ) this was an extremely small project
with low quantities, and 2) it was fairly late in the year
to be bidding .
Staff recommended rejecting all bids and adding this street
to another larger project and rebidding in 1989 . Council
concurred. -
Railroad Crossing Status
I have had some recent conversations with both Chicago and
Northwestern Railroad officials and Hn/DOT officials regarding
the possibility of adding a new crossing at Market Street.
As far as the railroad is concerned they will oppose the City of
Shakopee on any requests for additional crossings due to the high
number of existing crossings . In addition , the railroad is
extremely disappointed in the City regarding two recent Council
decisions.
The' first consisted of the City failing to vacate the Apgar
Street crossing after agreeing to do so. The second decision
involved not closing any of the 8 crossings downtown. This issue
came up again last summer and Council reaffirmed their decision
of several years ago to keep all those crossings open.
Market Street
November 17 , 1988
Page 5
The railroad has indicated that if the City chooses to close
other crossings, they may be persuaded to allow a new crossing at
Market Street but they would not agree to a new crossing without
the City first closing other crossings.
In speaking with Mn/DOT officials, they indicated that Mn/DOT
must also approve all new crossings. The City must first obtain
the approval of the railroad and enter into a • formal agreement
with them.
If the railroad is opposed to the crossing, but the City still
desires one, the issue must go through the administrative hearing
process . The Commissioner of Transportation has the final
Jurisdiction in this matter and after both sides present their
case, he would make a ruling.
If the City pursues the installation of a new crossing at Market
Street, staff recommends that one or more of the crossings at
Naumkeg , Minnesota or Apgar (again) be considered for closing.
Due to the general feeling I got from talking to the railroad , it
may take the closing of more than one existing crossing to obtain
a crossing at Market Street.
A new crossing at Market Street would require signals with
flashers. New signals can cost anywhere from $80 ,000 - $120 ,000
depending on the complexity of the system . This would be
entirely a City cost unless (a) the City can agree to get the
railroad to pay for part of it or (b) the City can prove an
increased safety benefit, in which case the Federal government
would pay anywhere from 50-100% of the costs. Without closing
any additional crossings , it would be extremely difficult to
prove any safety benefit.
The actual crossing itself would be rubberized . The cost for
installing a rubberized crossing is approximately $200 per lineal
foot or for a 44 foot wide road about $9,000 . If the rubber were
extended through the sidewalks the cost would be around
$13 ,000 .00.
2nd Avenue Corridor
In conjunction with Market Street, an analysis is also being done
on the 2nd Avenue corridor. Council has directed staff to review
this corridor and also submit a report to Planning commission for
recommendation to Council.
Market Street
NOvember 17 , 1988
Page 6
If the Minnesota Street crossing is closed to open up Market
Street, 2nd Avenue will also need to be upgraded between these
two streets. At first glance, one way coupler streets on each
side of the tracks appear to be one viable option.
The 2nd report will address this situation as well as the entire
2nd Avenue corridor east of downtown.
To promote development in the Minnesota/Market Street area, the
future upgrading of 2nd Avenue will need to be addressed.
Traffic Signal on Hwy. 101
Staff has received a request to contact Mn/DOT regarding the
installation of a traffic signal at Minnesota Street and
Hwy. 101 . At this time, Mn/DOT has indicated that a signal is
not warranted at this intersection.
In the 1984 traffic study by Westwood, they indicated that if
Market Street is opened up, a signal at Hwy. 101 may be warranted
in the future, based on traffic projections. The 1984 traffic
counts indicate the existing traffic volumes on Market are over
1 , 000 vehicles per day south of 4th Avenue , but drop off
substantially at 4th as traffic "jogs" east or west.
Alternative Routes
Market Street is the only north-south street between Spencer
Street and Marschall Road that has adequate dedicated right-of-
way all the way from 1st Avenue to 10th Avenue . It is the
logical place to make a north-south collector street.
The difficulty may be in obtaining a railroad crossing. If this
is the case, another alternative would be to upgrade an existing
street that has a crossing to collector street status. This may
involve purchasing additional right-of-way.
The only street that could be used as a north-south collector
instead of Market, would be Minnesota Street. Unfortunately ,
additional right-of-way would be needed to connect the two
portions of this street through the old railroad track area, as
well as purchasing additional right-of-way the whole length to
obtain the 80 feet width needed for a collector road, versus the
existing 60 feet right-of-way . To further compound the
situation, there are existing structures built right up to the
current right-of-way allowing no room to expand the right-of-way. .
Also, at the Shakopee Avenue intersection , the two legs of
Minnesota Street are offset substantially.
Market Street
November 17 , 1988
Page 7
Minnesota Street is not recommended as a viable alternative to
Market Street.
In reviewing the existing street system between Spencer and
Marschall Road , no other streets are available as alternatives
for a north-south collector.
Assessment Options
In the past , the City of Shakopee has normally assessed new
street construction back to the property owners 100% ( up to 36
feet wide) and reconstruction of streets 25% , irregardless if it
is a state aid street or not.
In this case, due to the high assessment costs and the fact that
Market Street is actually a side street to many of the affected
properties, a different assessment approach may be needed.
Some assessment options are as follows:
1 . Assess all costs up to a 36 foot wide street completely back
to only those properties abutting Market Street (either by
front foot or per lot) .
2 . Assess only those costs above and beyond the state aid/FAU
funding back to abutting properties.
3 . Assess all costs on an area-wide basis since there may be
some benefit to other properties in the area besides those
directly abutting Market Street.
4 . Assess a set amount to those abutting properties based on a
benefit appraisal.
5 . Assess only 25% of the costs by defining this project as
reconstruction , rather than new street construction.
6 . Assess no costs.
Staff feels that the assessment issue is important and
undoubtedly the main reason the project was not ordered
previously. The methodology that will be used for assessments
should be discussed and resolved early on in the planning process
if this is to be a legitimate project.
o✓
Market Street
November 17, 1988
Page 8
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff offers the following recommendations:
1 . Market Street, between 13t and 10th Avenue should be defined
as a collector street. Staff is requesting that the
Planning Commission concur with this definition and to
recommend to the City Council that they take whatever
appropriate action in necessary to improve this street to
minimum state aid standards.
2. As an attempt to negotiate a new railroad crossing with the
railroad, the City of Shakopee should offer to close the
Naumkeg Street crossing. If an additional crossing is
needed to be closed to appease the railroad , staff
recommends either Minnesota Street or Apgar Street, with
Minnesota getting a higher priority due to the recent
controversy over Apgar Street.
Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission go on
record as supporting this recommendation.
3. Staff also feels , th.at the issue of potential assessments
should be discussed, with a recommendation going to Council.
Staff recommends that all abutting property owners be
assessed an amount based on actual benefit appraisals with
all remaining costs being paid for by State Aid, FAU or City
funds.
This deviates from the normal special assessment policy for
new street construction but may be more advisable due to
extenuating circumstances . ( i . e . mainly a side street,
federal and state funding available, etc. ) . ; This would also
conform to Minnesota State law which restricts assessments
to the amount of increased value of the property.
4. That portion of Market Street from 4th to 7th also needs
upgrading to provide curb and gutter, sewer and water, new
pavement, sidewalks, etc. and to correct some sight distance
and grade problems. Staff recommends that this portion of
Market Street be upgraded at the same time as the portion
from 1st to 4th is constructed. Staff is requesting that
the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council
initiate these improvements as well. Since this would be
considered reconstruction, only 25% of the street costs
•would be assessed. 100% of all new sewer, water, sidewalks,
etc. could be assessed.
Market Street
November 17 , 1988
Page 9
ACTION REQUESTED:
Discuss the overall status of the Market Street corridor,
including the four points recommended by staff above and to
recommend to Council that they formally initiate the proceedings
for improving Market Street from 1st to 7th Avenues by first
ordering a feasibility report prepared , hold public hearings and
finally ordering plans and specifications for the' project for the
1989 or 1990 construction season.
DH/pmp
PLAN
RESOLUTION NO. 3010
A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A
Report On An Improvement To
Market Street From 1st Avenue to 7th Avenue
WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Market Street from 1st
Avenue to 7th Avenue by sewer, water, curb & gutter and pavement
and to assess the benefitted property for all or a portion of the
cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 429.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be
referred to David Hutton, City Engineer for study and that he is
instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed
advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the
proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best
be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement,
and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,
19_.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this _
day of 19
City Attorney
13rt.
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk `.C_
RE: Releasing an Obligation of gorothy Olson
DATE: January 17, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
The attached resolution authorizes the appropriate City
officials to sign a Quit Claim Deed for Dorothy H. Olson, which
deed releases a financial obligation which she has fulfilled.
BACKGROUND:
In 1982 a sanitary sewer improvement was installed along
Bluff Avenue and assessed to abutting property owners. At the
time of the special assessment, Dorothy Olson owned two lots. On
one lot was located the pre-school known as "Dorothy's Daily
Discovery" and on the adjacent lot was a playground which was
required by the State in order for her to hold a license. At
Dorothy Olson's request, the City Council did not assess the
vacant lot. Instead, Dorothy Olson signed an agreement with the
City stating that she would pay the sanitary sewer fee at such
point in the future when a building permit was applied for. Ms.
Olson is in the process of selling her property and she has paid
the City the amount contained in the agreement for the sanitary
sewer improvement. She is also requesting that the agreement,
recorded at the courthouse, explaining the encumbrance, be
released. The appropriate release for this kind of an agreement,
is the conveyance of a Quit Claim Deed addressing the agreement.
Mr. Coller has prepared the attached resolution and Quit Claim
Deed for Council's approval.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 3012, a resolution authorizing the
making and delivery of a Quit Claim Deed - Lot 3, Block 23, Plat
of East Shakopee, on file and of record in the office of the
County Recorder of Scott County, Minnesota and move it's
adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 3012
A Resolution Authorizing the Making and Delivery of Quit Claim Deed
Lot 3, Block 23, Plat of East Shakopee, On File and Of Record in the
Office of the County Recorder of Scott County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, On the 19th day of November, 1982, an Agreement was made and
entered into by and between Dorothy H. Olson and the City of Shakopee, which
said Agreement was filed for record on the 30th day of November, 1982 in the
office of the Registrar of Titles as Document No. 24841,and
WHEREAS, Said agreement impressed certain obligations for the payment
to the City of $1,237.56,and
WHEREAS, payment above specified has been made to the City of Shakopee
and that Dorothy H. Olson, her heirs and assigns are entitled to be released
from said agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Shakopee City Council in meeting
assembled, that the City make, execute and deliver to Dorothy H. Olson, her
heirs and assigns, a Quit Claim Deed releasing all of the City's charges,
lien rights or otherwise, and that proper City officials are hereby authorized
and instructed to make, execute and deliver to the said Dorothy H. Olson a
Quit Claim Deed to Lot 3, Block 23, Plat of East Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that said officials are empowered to do all things
necessary and proper to carry out the terms and purposes of this Resolution
and to make, execute and deliver said Quit Claim Deed.
Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council held this
day of 1989.
ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Shakopee
City Clerk
Prearedyn^and appropv/ed_/atessto form this 12th day of January, 1989.
LF6ti rP_�1J
Crty Attorne
���
Penn No. 30-M. Mill-Davi,Co.. Minnca,oli,
Min . Coil—C---.. Bh.k,(R-i-d I93'
13 On`
19bis Inbtnture, Blade this.............._.._...._........... ......._.._........._.da of...................................
between............C;Lt.y of Shakopae_..a municipal-corporation,..........................................................................
a corporation under the laws of the State of.Minnesota ................................. party of the first part, and
ZorathyH.....Olson....................................................... ...............................................................................
............................................................ ..................................................
of the County of Shakopee ................... and State of .........................................
Part....y....... of the second part,
Witnetsetb, That the said party of the ftrat part, in consideration of the sum of
....one Thousani Two RURAry d._T.hizSy-.5.P..Y.grx gad 5.6j.1.0.0 ($-I,..Z3.7_5 0ZLdRS,
to it in hand paid by the said part...........Y.-of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,
does hereby Grant, Bargain, Quitclaim, and Convey unto the said part y.......of the second part hat............
heirs and assign, Forever, all the tract panel............of land lying and being in the County of
-a, to-wit:
...._......_Scott........_...._. . . .. .............................and State of 311nnesota, described as follows,
Lot 3, Block 23, Plat of East Shakopee, according to the plat on file and of record
in the Office of the Scott County Registrar of Titles
The purpose of this Quit Claim Deed is to release the above described from any
and all claims arising out of or created by or on account of said Agreement
between Dorothy H. Olson and the City of Shakopee, dated November 9, 1982 and
filed for record in the office of the Registrar of Titles of Scott County, Minnesota
on the 30th day of November, 1982 as Document No. 24841.
To 30abc anb to 30olb the kame, Together with all the hereditaments and appurtenances them-
unto belonging or in anywise appertaining, to the said part...Y............of the second part...............her
....................
heirs and assigns, Forever.
Phillip R.Fra% 2(i t.a JI 1 \Rl !VV
lachlan H Muir
Dennis L.Monne James R Croft
Barry K Meyer & Colleen M.71ende
Jay ia COWlmrg /ION ROE ' Onin 7h
7hvnr R.W,dsmn rim Patricia
A Wier
Mark J.Mamess- eh.111 r4 Ftnt A Carlson.C.P.A.
Diane M.tarKon
•U..CMI 9Y15pt yXN
Ribert J.Walter January 11 , 1989snmmueemausm.
♦.W MmItW IO SwN db1B
City of Shakopee
Mayor, Council and Acting -.
Interim Administrator
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, 14N 55379 `
Re: City Administrator Position
Our File No. 1-1373-2
Mayor, Council and Acting Interim Administrator:
I have been requested by the City to render an opinion concerning the
possible liability which the City of Shakopee may face if it elects to fill the
vacant City Administrator position with an applicant who does not meet the adver-
tized minimum requirements for the position.
Specifically, the City advertised for an applicant with a "minimum of
five to ten years' city administrator or assistant administrator experience in a
larger city". This is one of a number of specifically outlined minimum require-
ments for employment in this position.
It is our opinion that the City of Shakopee would create significant
exposure to liability in the event that it hires a job applicant who does not
meet what is advertised to be a minimum requirement of employment (i.e. five
years' experience as a city administrator or assistant).
The City is, of course, an equal opportunity employer. If a job appli-
cant, who is protected under state laws from discrimination on the basis of sex,
race, religion, etc., applies for the advertised position and is refused the job
in favor of an applicant who is not within a protected category and who does not
meet the minimum advertised job requirements, it may appear as if the City did
not provide the protected job applicant an equal opportunity for employment.
This situation may give rise to an argument that the City acted in a discrimina-
tory manner in filling the position.
In light of this exposure, it is our opinion that the City should con-
sider emending its minimum experience requirements with an advertisement that
either reduces or eliminates minimum requirements so as to conform with appli-
cants or potential applicants which the City believes to be qualified and would
WPIV m: Marschall Road Business Cenmr.327 Marschall Road.P.O.Bos 216, Shatope.e.Minnesota 55379 1[Wcphone:(612)445-5086 FXX(612)445-7640
SouthpointCenwr.Suite11O0.1650 West 82nd Street. Bion risen.Minnesma 55431 7hlephone:(612)885-5999 PAx(612)885-5969
Page 2
January 11, 1989
hire for the position. In other words, if the City is willing to consider and
hire applicants with less than five years' experience and/or experienced in an
area other than as a city administrator or assistant city administrator, then
the advertised requirements for the position should conform.
Should you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, please
call.
Very truly yours,
RR�ASSIMONRO'E CHARTERED
' Ti/�rd" R. Walsten
TRW:ph
i