Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/04/1989 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: March 31, 1989 1. - The City is receiving copies of various bankruptcy court notices involving Scottland Hotels, Inc. and Scottland, Inc. They are being forwarded (at the request of Mr. Coller) to Kress and Monroe for appropriate follow up in protecting the City's interest in any claims. For the most part the City's claims involve delinquencies in utility bills and storm water drainage bills. 2. Attached is a letter from Richard Marks, Secretary of the newly formed Shakopee Youth Building Committee, affirming their appointment and listing their officers. 3 . Attached is a memorandum from Gregg Voxland regarding utilities at the Youth Building. 4. Attached is a memorandum from Dave Hutton regarding the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Outlet Channel. 5. Attached is a memorandum from Barry Stock regarding the renewal of the Planning Intern positon. 6. Attached is the monthly calendar for April. 7. Attached is a newsletter from Springsted Inc. 8. Attached is the Business Update from City Hall for April. 9. Attached are the agendas for the April 6, 1989 meetings of the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment and Appeals. 10. Attached are the minutes of the March 9, 1989 meetings of the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment and Appeals. 11. Attached are the minutes of the January 23, 1989 meeting of the Cable Communications Advisory Commission. 12. Attached are the minutes of the January 18, 1989 annual meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority. DRK/jms Shakopee Youth Building Committee Lions Park Shakopee, Mn. 55379 March 28, 1989 Ms. Judy Cox City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Dear Ms. Cox; Per your request, we are affirming the appointment of the following members to the Shakopee Youth Building Committee, passed by the Shakopee City Council March 21, 1989. Lavern Johnson (Chairman-2 years) Ed Giesen (Vice Chairman-1 year) Richard Marks (Secretary-1 year) Gwen Solseth (Treasurer-2 years) Ruth Bayless (Scheduling and Supplies-2 years) The parentheses signify the offices each members has been assigned by agreement of all the members, and their terms. The committee thanks the City Council for their appointment, and the members will do their best to insure fair and equitable scheduling and maintenance for the use of the building. Minutes of the meetings of the committee are available to you upon the request of the city council. If you have any further questions, please contact any of the committee members. Thank you. Yours Truly, Richard G. Marks Secretary Shakopee Youth Building Committee a� 2 i,s9 GITY 0F SHAKOPEE. 3 TC): Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Utilities at Youth Building (Informational) DATE: March 29, 1989 Included in the bill list is a bill from U.S. West for installing a telephone at the youth building. The cost is $59.50 for installation and monthly service is $31.77. Long distance calls are blocked from the phone. This is brought to Councils attention because when Council agreed to pay for utilities (ie water, sewer, electric and gas), I don't know if the intent was to provide a telephone also. Ll MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City EngineerD�w� SUBJECT: Prior Lake-Spring Lake Outlet Channel DATE: March 30, 1989 INFORMATIONAL ITEM FOR COUNCIL Attached is a letter from the Prior Lake - Spring Lake watershed District updating the City on the proposed schedule for completing the necessary repairs to the outlet channel. '.. The project is divided into A parts: Schedules A, B, C and D. The plans for Schedules A and D have been approved by City staff and our consultant. Construction of these portions will begin as soon as possible, weather permitting. As indicated on the attached letter, additional easements are needed for Schedules B and C. Construction of these two portions of the channel will probably exceed the May 1 , 1989 deadline due to the easement negotiations. Per previous Council directive, staff is keeping Council informed on the progress of this project. DH/pmp 101 PRIOR LAKE-SPRING LAKE WATERSHED DISTRICT Don O. Benson Scott-Rice Telephone Bldg 4690 . staff coordinator 4690 Colorado St. S.E. (612) 447-4166 Prior Lake, MN 55372 i 13 March 17, 1989 Mr. Dave Hutton,P.E. City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 First. Avenue E. Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Prior Lake Outlet Channel Maintenance Dear Mr. Hutton: The Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District has reviewed the proposed easements for Schedule B and C of the above-referenced project. The Board has directed the staff to have the land appraised so an acquisition offer can be prepared and presented to the affected landowners. The next regular meeting of the District is scheduled for April 11, 1989, however if the acquisition offers can be prepared sooner, the Board will hold a special meeting to act on this matter. We feel that we are making progress toward successful completion of the outlet project. However it is becoming apparent that construction on Schedule B and C will probably not be complete by May 1, 1989. A delay in starting construction to late spring or early summer may be advantageous in that it is likely that little or no water will be running in the channel making it easier to complete the project and establish vegetation in the channel . I am enclosing a copy of the easement drawing for your information. We are ready to sign a contract with Mahoney Machine for Schedule A. When we receive your approval , we will be ready to proceed with that portion of the project. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 473-4224. Sincerely, JMd/Hickok, Consulting Engineers Engirieers for the District 6 0- , Kevin C. Larson, Engineer bt s. - .� MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Renewal of Planning Intern Position DATE: March 22 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Last fall City Council authorized the hiring of an intern for a six month period of time beginning 9/26/88 with the option to renew for an additional 6 months. Pursuant to Council action, Julie Kellerman was hired as planning intern. The initial 6 month period ends March 26, 1989. BACKGROUND• Since the initial 6-month period ends on March 26, 1989, staff has evaluated whether or not the position should be extended for the additional 6 months. In light of the fact that a City Administrator has not been hired at this time and the continued workload on the Planning Department, staff is proposing to extend the internship through July 26, 1989. Note that this a 4 month extension as compared to the additional 6 month renewal as approved by Council. The 4 month renewal is being proposed to coincide with Ms. Kellerman's delivery date. Following the completion of the 4 month renewal period, staff will be evaluating whether or not we should proceed in advertising for a new internship position. Upon evaluating the workload, the recommendation will be made to City Council. April 1989 UPCOMING MEETINGS SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SRT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4:30pm 7:00pm City 7:30pm Public Council Planning Utilities Commission 7:00pm City Council/ School/ County 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 7:45am Downtown Committee 5:30pm CDC 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 6:30pm 7:00pm City 7:00pm Shakopee Council Energy & Showcase Transp. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 5:00pm Community Recreation 30 March May S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 27 28 29 30 31 28 29 30 31 The Springsted Letter 7 Published by SPNINGSTED Incorporated, Public Finance Advisors Series 1989 March 1 Interest Rates The tax-exempt bond Trends year general obligation market has received a bonds is at 7.55%, up rough dose of reality in - - from 7.50% on December recent weeks, along with 31st, but up 28 basis other financial markets. points from the 1989 low zovenn.Az_exstn of 7.27% occurring on Hysteria over consumer 9 price index increases and January 26. The prime continuing concern for rate was increased 1/2 c en DA, um ecus percent t0 11.50% On the deficit has pushed m short-term rates 2 " February 23rd and the dramatically higher. The a federal discount rate was accompanying interest raised from 6.50% to rate table illustrates those 7.00%on February 24. changes thus far in 1969. 91 Treasuries have The municipal market's exploded to current 1988 new issue volume yields of 8.90%, their ', . , , , , was $105.7 billion, up highest level in more than 4.1% over 1987, two years. Short-term according to figures tax-exempt rates are up to current levels of compiled by The Bond Buyer, an industry 6.75% or higher for 7-day variables, compared publication. The 1988 increase was the first with 4.50% to 5.00% levels throughout most of since the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was enacted. 1988. Total volume in 1985 was $204.2 billion, $146.6 billion in 1986 and $101.5 billion in 1987. Long-term tax-exempt rates have been more stable. The current Bond Buyer's Index of 20- Arbitrage Reporting We're sure you're all sick of hearing about proposed service agreement for those issues. arbitrage reporting and rebate requirements. If you feel you have one or more issues which So are we Unfortunately, written regulations won't qualify for exemption from the rules, and are still not available after 28 months. After you dont receive our communication during repeated requests from many clients, the next 7-10 days, please call and we will Springsted has decided to enter the arbitrage check your issue($). monitoring business for its own clients. We have compiled a list of all issues sold by us for If non-clients wish to engage our services, or you since September, 1986, which we believe compare our service level and cost with some are subject to the new 1986 requirements, and other provider you may have retained, we you will be receiving an explanatory letter and would be pleased to send you the material. 85 East Seventh Place,Suite 100 251 Nodh Illinois Street,suite 1510 SW Elm Grove Road Suite 101 Saint Paul,Minnesota 551012143 Indianapolis,Indiana 462044942 EIm Grove.Wiscansn 53122003] 6122233000 31]23]3636 414-7828222 Selection of an Independent Financial Advisor Selection of an advisor for capital projects is a 3. Is the firm strongly staffed by critical but often underemphasized decision. professionals who work full-time as Springsted believes public agencies should ask advisors and have substantial experience four basic questions of firms proposing to in the capital financing of projects? provide financial advisory services: 4. Does the firm have substantial experience 1. Is the firm independent, or is it owned, in dealing with bond issues and projects controlled or directed in any way by which are similar to yours in scope and another firm or party engaged in the complexity? buying and selling of municipal bonds? If the answer to any of these questions is "no," 2. Is providing financial advisory services the we recommend you broaden your selection only service provided by the firm, or are process and consider Springsted. We would those activities only incidental to the be pleased to respond to a Request for primary business of providing Proposal and to arrange a no obligation accounting, legal or investment banking meeting for the purpose of discussing your services? needs. You may contact Springsted by calling Robert D. Pulscher, Chief Executive Officer, (612) 223-3022. Tax Increment Legislation Contrary to earlier predictions that the 1989 levy represented approximately 10% of the total legislature would not undertake major changes tax capacity rate in the community. This in tax increment financing, several bills have legislation would be retroactive to May 1,1988. been introduced which would, if enacted, have a significant impact on both the ability to H.F. 746 would require the payment to school project future increments and the reliability of districts for the same purposes but would apply future collections. only to housing districts. Since a housing district is only permitted for low and moderate H.F. 699 would require payment from an income housing, this loss of increment would increment to schools equal to the increase in make affordable housing more difficult to tax capacity rates authorized for both school provide. building programs and excess levy authorization. The latter will be most difficult to These changes may be desirable but we think factor in since the school district's future they should be viewed in a total context of what reliance on excess levy authorizations will tax increment shc::'d be in Minnesota, and not depend in large part on the level of future state enacted as isolated legislation. You may wish aid payments. to intervene in suggesting a delay in further consideration of these bills until a more In the one case we have examined, that of a comprehensive analysis can be made by the suburban district, the school district's excess legislature. Springsted's 1988 Work Efforts The firm was privileged to serve as advisor in This is the fourth successive year for 1988 on 192 separate issues for various Springsted's high national rankings and in purposes totaling $1,102,988,000, which again achieving them we take great pride as a made us one of the largest and busiest Minnesota firm in competing against some of advisors in the country. Nationally, the firm Wall Street's biggest investment banking firms was ranked by Securities Data/Bond Buyer as who also perform advisory work. Our success the number one advisor in both the number results from a dedicated, highly professional and volume of long-term education issues; first employee group and great client loyalty. in number and sixth in volume for long-term Without our strong historical client base we competitive municipal issues; first in number could not enjoy this success. and ninth in volume for long-term taxable If you arenl currently using Springsted as your issues; first in number and eighth in volume in advisor, maybe you should ask why so many long-term general obligation issues and third in others do. One of our Project Managers would number and eighth in volume for municipal be pleased to visit with you in a no-obligation water and sewer issues. meeting. The cost for implementing the program will be handled through the extra service coupon. In order for Shakopee residents to dispose of yard waste, they must attach an extra service coupon. The cost for an extra service coupon is $1. 10. A single coupon will be worth the disposal of three bags of yard waste and/or grass clippings. After January 1, 1990 State Law prohibits the disposal of yard waste in conjunction with regular refuse. Therefore, the City of Shakopee is getting a head start on what will be mandated next year. An education and marketing campaign outlining the parameters of the yard waste collection program will be implemented in the first week of April. On March 21st, the Council approved the plantings of annuals in the Downtown project area at a cost not to exceed $250. 00. The City Council endorsed the utilization of the Shakopee Cub Scouts to plant the annuals in lieu of their participation in a Spring clean-up activity. The Shakopee Cub Scouts will however be providing for the clean-up of Murphy's Landing in addition to the planting of the annuals in the Downtown area. COMMUNITY RECREATION (BCR) SCR has pulled out all stops making plans for the annual "Shakopee Showcase" scheduled to occur at Canterbury Downs Monday evening, April 17 , from 6:30-8:30 p.m. This is the annual gathering of all area service organizations, governmental entities, and leisure oriented local businesses. Its become quite a fun and educational show and you are invited to attend- no charge. This event is also the first opportunity for many local citizens to register for summer activities. Shakopee has a lot to offer. Come and take a look first hand! The entertainment taking place is worth the stop alone. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Staff is preparing plans and specifications for the reconstruction of 3rd Avenue between Shumway Street and Spencer Street. Included in this project will be the reconstruction of the following streets between 3rd and 4th Avenue: Spencer, Sommerville, Lewis, Fuller, Atwood and Scott. Scott Street will also be reconstructed between 2nd and 3rd Avenue. Staff is continuing to negotiate with the DNR and MPCA towards obtaining the permits to discharge the Upper Valley Drainage Channel into the Mill Pond. Optimism amongst staff runs high as there have been major breakthroughs in the negotiations. Hopefully, all permits will be obtained in the next several months. Good news for the downtown property owners. Staff is nearing completion on the special assessment calculations for the Downtown Project. Public hearings on the proposed assessments will be held within the next two months. BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL Vol. 3 No. 4 Dear Chamber Member: April 1, 1989 ADMINISTRATION In April, the City Council will be considering an amendment to an agreement between the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the City providing for the extension of the Minnesota River Valley Trail from its current end point (Shakopee Community Recreation) extending to the East through Murphy's Landing. If City Council approves the trail license agreement, City officials are optimistic that construction of the trail can be initiated this summer. Eventually the Minnesota River Valley Trail will be completed from the City of St. Peter along the Minnesota River to Fort Snelling. BUILDING The Youth Building is presently about 98% complete. There are fourteen organizations utilizing the facility who have had access to the building since February 19th. Landscaping will be completed in early spring. CITY CLERK On March 7th, Council appointed Julius A. Coller, II to continue serving as the City Attorney; and, appointed Krass and Monroe, Chartered to continue serving as the Assistant City Attorney. On March 7th, Council denied a request to vacate the alley North of Taco John's. On March 21st, Council approved a five year agreement with Minnesota Valley Restoration Project for the operation and management of Murphy's Landing, as well as committed $50, 000 towards the operation expenses for the calendar year of 1989. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT On March 21st, Council unanimously endorsed the provision of a yard waste collection program in Shakopee. In light of the scarcity of landfill space and State mandates regarding the disposal of yard waste, the City of Shakopee unanimously approved an amendment to the Shakopee Refuse Contract which will provide for the provision of weekly yard waste collection. The program as proposed will provide for the weekly collection and disposal of yard waste and grass clippings in Shakopee between April 15 and October 15. The refuse collection area will be split into two zones. Zone 1 (residents living west of Holmes Street) will be provided with Tuesday collection of yard waste and Zone 2 (residents living east of Holmes Street) will be provided with Friday collection. TENTATIVE AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, MN April 6, 1989 Chairman Forbord Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7: 30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of the March 9, 1989 Meeting Minutes 4. 7.30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider approval of a Planned Unit Development to allow for the construction of four mini-storage buildings. Applicant: Lester Koehnen Action: Recommendation to City Council 5.a. 7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit for assembly and outdoor storage of transportation equipment and fencing in excess of 6' high upon the property located at 8970 - 13th Ave. East. Applicant: Chris Anderson Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #559 b. Vacation of drainage easement Lot 1, Block 2, Valley Rich 1st Addition Action: Recommendation to City Council 6. 7,50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the keeping of horses on Lots 5 & 6 Kubes 2nd Addition. Applicant: Wes Hukriede & Donna Marturano Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #560 7. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider amendment to the Zoning Section of the Shakopee City Code Section 11.60, Subd. 12 Entitled Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control and Section 12.20 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Action: Recommendation to City Council 8. 8:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING• To consider approval of the proposed amendment to the preliminary plat of the Meadows Addition. Applicant: Gold Nugget Development Action: Recommendation to City Council 9. 8.20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING• To consider approval of the preliminary and final plat for Valley Park 8th Addition. Applicant: Jon Albinson, Scottland Inc. Action: Recommendation to City Council 10. Amendment to City Code Sections 11.24 through 11. 36 to govern the use of land for day care faciltites. Action: Recommendation to City Council 11. Vacation of drainage easement Clay's 1st Addition Action: Recommendation to City Council 12. Discussion: a. b. 13 . Other Business a. b. 14. Adjourn Douglas Wise City Planner NOTE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS• 1. If you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above items, please call Doug Wise on the Monday or Tuesday prior to the meeting. 2 . If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. TENTATIVE AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, MN April 6, 1989 Chairman Forbord Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2 . Approval Of Agenda 3. Approval of March 9, 1989 Meeting Minutes 4. Other Business a. b. 5. Adjourn Douglas R. Wise City Planner NOTE TO THE B.O.A.A. MEMBERS: 1. If you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above items, please call Doug Wise on the Monday or Tuesday prior to the meeting. 2. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. ld BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 9, 1989 Chrm. Forbord called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. with Comm. Stafford, Kahleck and Rockne present. Absent: Vice Chrm Allen, Comm. Czaja and Foudray. Also present: Doug Wise, City Planner; Julie Kellerman, Planning Intern; Dave Hutton, City Engineer. Stafford/Kahleck moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Rockne/Stafford moved to approve the February 9, 1989 meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING WALLACE BAKKEN Rockne/Kahleck moved to open the public hearing to consider a variance from City Code Section 11.05, Subd 11 G. 5 which requires the paving of access drives within recreational vehicle parks. Motion carried unanimously. City Planner stated that 50 sites of Jellystone Park exist currently. He stated that the applicant does not wish to pave some of the roads due to the fact that they are in the floodplain. The applicant also feels that gravel roads would be more natural and easier to maintain. The City Planner stated that the Building and Fire Departments have indicated the need for all weather roads and that the City Engineer said that he does not feel the affects on the life of the pavement from flooding justifies granting the variance. Wallace Bakken, Jellystone Park, stated that the Jellystone people would just as soon see it natural and that they do not have a problem with it. He added that there will be quite a bit of construction this fall and that the big trucks could damage the paved roads. He said his first request would be that he does not have to pave them at all, and his second request would be that if he has to pave them, that it be delayed at least until after construction. Comm. Kahleck questioned what the time limit Mr. Bakken was under and if he must have certain things done before he can open. The City Planner stated that the Building Dept. did state that they would not issue them another permit to open until completion of all items and paving of the roads was one of these items. City Engineer stated that he had no outside comments other than what was outlined in the memo. Proceedings of the Shakopee Board of Adjustment & Appeals March 9, 1989 Page -2- It was stated that all roads constructed in RV parks since the ordinance came into effect four years ago have been paved. Stafford/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Rockne/Stafford moved to deny Variance Resolution #558 for the following reasons: 1. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that apply to this property over which the applicant has no control. The applicant has no control over weather or not this project should be constructed in the floodplain. It has not been proven that paving roads within the floodplain will have detrimental effects. 2. The applicant knew of the flooding and of code requirements when the project was first begun. 3 . Approval of the variance would confer on the applicant a special privilege not enjoyed by owners of similar projects within the City. Motion carried unanimously. Chrm. Forbord advised the audience and the applicant of the 7 day appeal period. There was no other business. Rockne/Kahleck moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8: 03 p.m. /h SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 9, 1989 Chrm. Forbord called the meeting to order at 8:03 p.m. with Comm. Stafford, Kahleck and Rockne present. Absent: Vice Chrm. Allen, Comm. Czaja and Foudray. Also present: Doug Wise, City Planner; Julie Kellerman, Planning Intern; Dave Hutton, City Engineer. Comm. Kahleck moved to approve the agenda moving item #5 (Public Hearing on daycare facilities) to #4 (Continued public hearing- Heritage Development of Minnesota, Inc. ) Motion died for lack of second. Rockne/Kahleck moved to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously. Stafford/Kahleck moved to approve the February 9, 1989 meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimously. CONT PUBLIC HEARING - HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT OF MINNESOTA. INC. Rockne/Kahleck moved to Continue the public hearing to consider preliminary plat approval of Heritage Place 2nd Addition upon the property located South of Heritage Place Subd. and North of Vierling Drive. Motion carried unanimously. City Planner stated that the Commission had raised some concerns at the last meeting regarding the layout (i.e. jog in Onyx Drive and the closeness of the intersections on Heritage) . He stated that the new drawing resolves these concerns and that Ruby Lane for the park will be dedicated with he first phase. Park construction is to occur in 1990. He also stated the proposed name changes for streets recommended by staff. Comm. rockne questioned if the new plat meets with what was discussed at the last meeting. Chrm. Forbord stated that they have met all the criteria. Comm. Rockne questioned if the changes had any impact on the quantity of lots. Dan Parks, Heritage Development Engineer, stated that they lost three lots to make the changes. Comm. Rockne complimented the applicant on addressing all of the concerns. Kahleck/Stafford moved to close the public hearing. Motion - carried unanimously. Proceedings of the Shakopee Planning Commission March 9, 1989 Page Two Stafford/Rahleck moved to recommend to City Council the approval of the preliminary plat of Heritage Place 2nd Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney. 2. Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of required improvements: a. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. b. Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. C. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. d. Local streets and street signs shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e. The developer shall be responsible for payment in lieu of land dedication for park purposes. 3 . The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating that not more then 108 of the plat will be developed into twin homes. Twin homes will require separate utility connections and sites must be identified before installation of utilities. 4. The developer shall dedicate the right-of-way for Ruby Lane with the first phase of the final plat. A sidewalk shall be constructed along Ruby Lane connecting Vierling Drive with the park. 5. No lots will be allowed direct access onto Vierling Drive. 6. Heritage Drive East shall be named Heritage Drive on the final plat. Heritage Court shall be renamed Granite Drive, and Jasper Drive shall be renamed on the final plat. 7. Prior to approval of the final plat the developer shall reach an agreement with SPUC regarding extension of the water main along Vierling Drive and make the required changes to the preliminary design for the water system. Easements totaling 20 ' shall be shown on the final plat for any water lines to be constructed along side lot lines or across lots. Motion carried unanimously. I lr� Proceedings of the Shakopee Planning Commission March 9, 1989 Page Three PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENT OF CITY CODE SECTIONS 11. 24 - 11.36 Rockne/Kahleck moved to open the public hearing to consider amendment of City Code Section 11.24 - 11.36 to govern the use of land for daycare facilities. Motion carried unanimously. City Planner stated that this issue was first brought to the City's attention by a proposed daycare in an industrial park and that this subject is not addressed at all within the City zoning code. He stated that the proposed change would allow in-home daycare to be a permitted use in any home used as a residence with no other restrictions placed upon it. He added that the state requires that daycare facilities for 12 or less be permitted uses and that larger facilities would have to obtain a CUP. The two classes of daycare are; Class I, facilities providing care to 13 or more children and not located within a home. Class II, facilities providing care to children within the home of the daycare provider or daycare facilities licensed to care for 12 or fewer children. He summarized that in-home daycare would be allowed in any district including the business district. Not in-home daycare would not be allowed in the business district and daycare providers of 13 or more would be allowed in all districts with a CUP. Comm. Kahleck questioned why a business in the CBD with 5 or 6 employees could not have daycare when a business in the CBD with 500 employees could. City Planner explained that the CUP requirement is basically for larger facilities. He stated that they could split the classification. Comm. Rockne questioned what the parking requirements in the CBD are. City Planner stated there are none. Comm. Rockne stated that he does not feel that they can be any more stringent with parking requirements than the City is with parking in the CBD. He feels that parking requirements should be consistent. Chrm. Forbord stated that parking requirements could be a condition of the permit. Proceedings of the Shakopee Planning Commission March 9, 1989 Page Four Kathy Stafford, licensed daycare provider, stated that in 1984 the State created the subdivision of infants, toddlers, etc. based on age and that in 1985 licensing changed and the ratios changed. Betty Valiant, 968 South Shumway, licensed daycare provider of 14, stated that the letter that she received did not address daycare providers with 14 children. She questioned if in-home providers can have 14 children and if they can be categorized as in-home. City Planner stated that all in-home facilities are classified as Class II regardless of the number of children. Based on this proposal, any in-home daycare would continue to be a permitted use. Kathy Stafford asked if the Code could be made more specific in that in-home daycare be 14 or less. Discussion continued regarding parking requirements of Class I and Class II facilities. Kahleck/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Comm. Kahleck stated that she had problems with Class II not being separated regarding in-home daycare facilities. She suggested that Class II facilities should be a Conditional Use when not located within the home of a daycare provider. Chrmn. Forbord suggested that there seems to be some housekeeping items in terms of wording and feels it would be more appropriate for staff to rewrite the amendment and come back at the next meeting. Comm. Rockne suggested that they be somewhat stringent on state approved licenses/facilities. Chrmn. Forbord asked if staff could clarify regulations regarding parking for Class I. Kahleck/Rockne moved to table any action to the April 6, 1989 Planning Commission meeting so that staff may come back with the revisions. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - LESTER KOEHNEN Kahleck/Stafford moved to open the public hearing to consider approval of a Planned Unit Development to allow for the - construction of four mini-storage buildings. Motion carried unanimously. � G Proceedings of the Shakopee Planning Commission March 9, 1989 Page Five City Planner stated that the applicant proposes to build four mini-storage buildings on the same property as the City impound lot and Shakopee towing building in a mandatory PUD district. He explained that the storage buildings are similar to a series of single garages. He added that the proposed setback from the street right-of-way is 35' and that staff recommends an additional 22 ' to make the total setback 57 ' . Chrmn. Forbord questioned if the ordinance required the applicant to supply a landscaping plan. City Planner stated that the ordinance requires a development plan, including landscaping items. Cecil Clay, P & R Mini Storage, Inc. expressed his opposition to the proposed -mini storage buildings because he claims that the City did not enable him to complete his six building mini storage operation due to the fact that the City obtained a 160 ' easement on his property for a proposed drainage ditch. The proposed mini storage operation is right next to his and he feels it is unfair that a new operation could begin when he was unable to finish his. He claims that he is not against progress but that he feels that he should get to finish his before this one is approved. City Engineer and City Planner explained to Mr. Clay that neither of them were employed by the City at that time and that staff would have to research the situation to find out exactly what happened. City Planner stated that there are two separate issues here. One is the matter at hand in which the applicant has requested the approval of a PUD to construct a mini storage operation and the other is Mr. Clay's situation in which some research would have to be done. Kahleck/Rockne moved to enter Mr. Clay's letter into record. Motion carried unanimously. Della Clay, 2085 Austin Circle, stated that she is not in favor of this application. She feels that what is good for one citizen is good for the other and questioned why she and Mr. Clay had to plat when the applicant does not. She suggests that staff look into his property and find out why he does not have to plat. City Planner explained that there has been a PUD ordinance adopted since 1977 or 1978 when they first started their project and that is probably why they were required to plat. Della Clay claims that they had to replat just within the past two years and requested to see the ordinance. Proceedings of the Shakopee Planning Commission March 9, 1989 Page Six Commission members expressed the need for the Clay's to meet with staff to discuss their situation. There were no other comments from the audience. Comm. Rockne questioned what the 57 ' setback is set back from. City Engineer stated that it is from the existing right-of-way of 66' . Stafford/Rockne moved to continue the public hearing to the April 6, 1989 Planning Commission meeting because the applicant did not submit a landscaping plan and staff is not sure if prior landscaping is up to code. Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - JAMES AND JULIET MCNEARNEY Kahleck/Stafford moved to open the public hearing to consider a Conditional Use Permit to construct a funeral home in a B-1 Zoning District. Motion carried unanimously. City Planner explained that the applicant's proposed funeral home has a 200 person capacity requiring 50 parking spaces and that the applicant's plan shows 51 parking spaces. Comm. Kahleck asked if the facility faces only one street. City Planner stated yes. Comm. Stafford requested clarity on traffic flow and the openings of the driveways. James McNearney, applicant, stated that Dan Christiansen, the person who did the drawing is here if the Commission had any questions of him and that he would also be glad to answer any questions. Dan Christiansen explained the traffic flow to the Commission and stated that signs would indicate visitor and enter/exit for the funeral procession. He added that the visitor entrance is 25 ' wide. Brian Kanig, 1133 E. 3rd, stated his concern with parking and the sidewalk on 3rd. He feels that the sidewalk should be extended through to Naumkeg for residential pedestrians. Kahleck/Stafford moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Kahleck/Stafford moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution #557 to construct a funeral home in a B-1 Zoning / D Proceedings of the Shakopee Planning Commission March 9, 1989 Page Seven District subject to the following conditions: 1. Electric service shall be obtained, the agreement signed, and the fees paid as directed by the Utilities Manager. 2 . The driveways shall be no more than 25' wide and the drop off entrance must be one way only. 3. The property owner shall obtain approval of a lot split to correct the error in the original platting of this lot prior to issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. 4. A sidewalk shall be constructed along 3rd Avenue. 5. Park dedication fees shall be paid with the building permit. Motion carried unanimously. RECOMMENDATION - FINAL PLAT KUBES 2ND ADDITION City Planner stated that the proposed subdivision is located in the very Southwest corner of the City at the intersection of CR 72 and 79. The property is zoned R-1 and that Mr. Kubes has submitted the final plat for approval by the Planning Commission. City Engineer stated that the drainage is generally to the North and West and that at the time the building permit is requested for lots 1 and 2, the Engineering Department would review them for drainage conformance. Randy Kubes, 5284 Eagle Creek Boulevard, requested information on the eligibility requirements regarding horses on country lots. City Planner explained that the density requirement is 2 horses per 2-1/2 acres and would require a Conditional Use Permit in a R-1 district. Wes Hukriede, 766 West 128th Street, stated that he has a purchase agreement on two sites in the development. He claims that he is going to back out of the deal now because he did not know the requirements regarding horses. Comm. Rockne questioned if a Conditional Use Permit goes with the property or with the applicant. City Planner explained that it goes with the property. Rockne/Stafford moved to approve recommendation to City Council for approval of the final plat for Kubes 2nd Addition subject to the following conditions: Proceedings of the Shakopee Planning Commission March 9, 1989 Page Eight 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 CR 72. 4. Grading permits will be required for Lots 1 and 2 at the time the building permit is applied for. The grading permit shall include proposed culvert size and location along with storm water run off calculations in order to determine impacts of constructing driveways. 5. The final plat must contain a signature block for the City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION - EROSION CONTROL ORDINANCE City Engineer stated that City Council has directed staff to revise the erosion control ordinance. He stated that the memo is self explanatory but that he would be glad to answer any questions. He stated that the City Planner indicated that a public hearing is required because the proposed revisions affect the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code and requested that the Planning Commission set a date for the public hearing. Kahleck/Stafford moved to set the public hearing for April 6, 1989 and to notify any local developers of the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. _D_ISCUSSION - BAKKENIBUILDING DEPARTMENT City Planner stated that staff feels that items 1 - 3 of the memo regarding Wallace Bakken and Building Department procedures have been discussed enough. He stated that he would answer any further questions the Commission has regarding these items. Item No. 4 of Mr. Houser's memo needs to be discussed. City Planner explained to the Commission the current staffing for the Planning Department and its responsibilities. He added that the Planning Department has not had sufficient staff to do systematic zoning code enforcement. Chrmn. Forbord stated that since he has been on the Planning Commission this has always been an issue and said that he feels the City has a problem. /d Proceedings of the Shakopee Planning Commission March 9, 1989 Page Nine Discussion continued regarding that possibly Administrative personnel should reallocate the working hours of staff. Chrmn. Forbord stated that he feels the first step would be to meet with Council regarding this issue. He added that City Council/City Admin. should have a reallocation of staff for code enforcement because it is equally as important. Comm. Rahleck questioned again if a CUP is granted to the applicant or the property. City Planner stated that a CUP is issued to a particular property for that particular use. It must be used in the same manner and form if the land was sold. He added that if it is subdivided, one would be changing the use. Comm. Rockne said he seemed to recall that if the use is discontinued for a period of time the CUP becomes null and void. Chrmn. Forbord asked staff to research and give the Commission members a better understanding of a CUP. Chrmn. Forbord stated that he had talked to City staff regarding the City Council Liaison and that he agreed to be the liaison if all agreed. The Commission members agreed. Rockne/Stafford moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:39 p.m. Z- 8 8 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, MN January 23, 1989 Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:06 P.M. with Commissioners Davis and Harrison present. Commissioner Abeln was absent. Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant and Steve Stolen, United Cable Manager were also present along with the Chaska Cable Commission consisting of Commissioners Schmeig, Ingraham, Hawkos and Chairman Bunker. Davis/Harrison moved to approve the July 25, 1988 meeting minutes. Motion carried. SALE OF CABLE SYSTEM - EXERCISING FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL Mr. Stock explained that the City of Shakopee received correspondence from Zylstra/United Cable Television Company on 1/17/89 informing them that they have received a bid from another cable television company to purchase the Shakopee Cable System. Mr. Stock stated that if the City of Shakopee would be interested in purchasing the cable system, they must meet the price of the current offer or market value, whichever is less. The City is required to notify Zylstra/United Cable Company within 60 days of the desire to purchase the cable sytem or waive the right of first refusal. Mr. Stock expressed that he feels it is not in the best interest of the City of Shakopee to purchase the cable television system. However, he stated that the City may wish to utilize a consultant to review the feasibility of municipal operation with an approximate cost of $5,000.00 to do so. Mr. Stock explained that his reasons for refusal of the purchase are as follows: 1) A joint powers agreement between Chaska and Shakopee would be necessary before an acquisition of the system could be secured. 2) United Cable Corp. has been able to offer their subscribers discounts in their programming and royalty fees due to their large size. Chaska and Shakopee would most likely be subject to higher programming and royalty fees. 3) United Cable Television is self insured. It is doubtful whether or not Chaska and Shakopee would be able to obtain insurance. 4) The cable operator for Chaska and Shakopee has not had a . positive cash flow since beginning their operation in 1982. Mr. Stock went on to add that the City of Shakopee will have approval on the final sale. That is, they will have the 2 opportunity to inquire into the qualifications of the prospective controlling party and may condition said transfer of ownership upon such terms and conditions as it deems appropriate. Comm. Ingraham questioned why Nortel would want to purchase a cable company that is not making any money. Mr. Stolen stated that in 5 - 10 years there will be enormous growth. He also stated that operating costs could be consolidated with local entities such as Fridley, St. Louis Park, New Prague, Waverly and Jordan and that it could be a benefit in that it would be locally owned. Chrmn. Anderson asked if any other bidders were involved. Mr. Stolen stated that there were originally 6 bidders. Of the 6, 4 - 5 actually bid such as Leonard Comm. , Triax, King Video, Rogers/Houston Ind. and Star Cable Vision. Comm. Bunker questioned how the FMV is determined and stated that Chaska has nothing to base FMV on. He feels that the offer is incomplete and questioned whether or not they would have the right to make Chaska purchase two systems if Shakopee would decide not to make the purchase. Mr. Stolen stated that each would be handled separately. He also stated that programming costs would double or triple for Shakopee or Chaska and that they would have to negotiate with each channel on contracts and that designing the system for extentions would have to go to an outside consulting firm. Comm. Ingraham stated that he felt he needed more facts before he could present anything to council. Chrmn. Anderson questioned whether or not we want to take taxpayer money and put it at risk. Mr. Stock suggested that Chaska hire a consultant to get the answers to the types of questions they had and that the Chaska Cable Commission retire to a separate room upstairs with Mr. Stolen so that they may have the opportunity to discuss any other questions with him. Comm. Davis stated that he has been familiar with the cable system since 1980 and feels that Shakopee could not manage it or make any money at it. Harrison/Davis moved to recommend to City Council that the CIty of Shakopee waive their right of first refusal in acquiring the - Shakopee Cable Television System. Motion carried unanimously. 3 - 1988 ANNUAL REPORT Harrison/Davis moved to recommend to City Council the approval of the 1988 Cable Annual Report as written. Motion carried. PUBLIC ACCESS STUDIO CONTRACT Mr. Stock explained that the access studio agreement between New Frontier Productions, Inc. and the Shakopee Community Access Corp. expires on 4/17/89. He stated that it is necessary to solicit requests for proposals for the continued operation of the public access studio as the current contract does not provide for an extension. Mr. Stock also stated that he is satisfied with what they are doing. He feels that could be doing a lot more but they also could be doing a lot less. Chrmn. Anderson said that he doesn't hear anything about public relation efforts. Discussion was held regarding rental equipment use and that there is not much of it and that they will need new equipment soon. Davis/Harrison moved to recommend to City Council that the appropriate City officials be authorized to advertise for request for proposals for the operation and management of the public access studio using the same set of proposal specifications that were utilized in 1986. Motion carried. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Mr. Stock reported that the Public Access Report and the Cable Administrators Report will be put on the next agenda as Bill Lepley is not present and Steve Stolen is currently meeting with the Chaska Cable Commission. Discussion continued regarding the cable issue. Comm. Harrison questioned whether or not the schools in the co-op should be involved in the negotiations. He suggested that if Nortel buys the cable system that something should be put into the contract to inter-connect these cities. Chrmn. Anderson feels that United Cable System has done a good job on marketing. He expressed that if they do good the City does good and that they are partners with the cable company in that respect. Commission members expressed their feelings that Steve Stolen has - done a good job and that he is responsible for the turn around in the business. They feel that he, as management, has been good for the subscriber and good for the company. 4 - Harrison/Davis moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL MEETING OF _ THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY January 18 , 1989 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the quarterly meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority was held at the Ambassador Motor Hotel in the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, on Wednes- day, January 18 , 1989 , commencing at 6:30 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, William D. Schoell . 2. ROLL CALL: Bloomington John Pidgeon Brooklyn Park Graydon R. Boeck Circle Pines James Keineth Columbia Heights Edward Carlson Deephaven William D. Schoell Edina John Wallin Fridley John Flora Hopkins Gordon Anderson Minnetonka Robert DeGhetto Osseo Vernon Dehmer Robbinsdale Jerry Ruffenach Shakopee Gloria Vierling West St . Paul Bill Craig Also present were SRA attorneys, Glenn Purdue and Jim Strommen. 3 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the October 19, 1988 , meeting were read . It was moved by Mr. Boeck , and seconded by Mr. Craig, that the Minutes be approved. The motion carried unanimously. 4 . OFFICER'S REPORTS: Mr. Wallin presented the Treasur- er's Report, a copy of which is attached to these Minutes . He also distributed copies of the 1987 audit of SRA books performed by the George Hansen Company. The chair directed that a copy of the audit be sent to each of the Directors who were not in attendance at the meeting. Mr. Wallin requested direction as to the 1988 audit and the Board, by consensus, determined that the George Hansen Company should provide the audit. Mr. Carlson moved that the Treasurer' s Report be accepted. The motion was second by Robert DeGhetto and it carried unanimously. 5. SPEAKER: Chairman Schoell introduced Mr. Dirk deVries. Mr. deVries is a member of the Metropolitan Council. He 1 addressed transit problems in the metropolitan area. Mr. deVries stated that there are presently approximately seventy—three miles of freeways in the metro area which are classified as -severely congested• . In the next twenty years, Metropolitan Council expects this number to increase to two hundred miles. It is generally impossible to build new freeways because of lack of federal participation and local resistance to expansion. More fuel efficient cars result in lower gasoline tax revenues. Minneapolis complains that ten percent of its tax base has been taken for freeways. He concluded that we cannot build ourselves out of this crisis. The response has to be more effective use of the existing highways. This means more car-pool lanes, staggering work hours, metered ramps, more transit riders and car-pools, and more ramps for car-pools. There are an estimated 110,000 jobs in downtown Minneapolis. By the year 2010, it is expected there will be 150,000 jobs. About one-half ride the bus now. The fastest job growth is in the suburbs, but the corridor stretching from downtown Minneapolis through the University to downtown St . Paul has, by far, the largest employment. Mr. deVries made several points which favor the development of lightrail transit. While acknowledging that lightrail will not do much to lighten the freeway use, it encourages high density development along the rail lines, and is less labor intensive while presumably providing a higher quality ride than buses do. Mr. deVries ' comments provided the basis for a lively exchange of views between Directors and Mr. deVries. A discus- sion included opinions as to the appropriate agency which should Provide transit planning and oversight, the accuracy of projected costs and an apparent failure to include necessarybus feeders to LET stations, and the rs general lack of east-west transportation corridors, especially in the northern metropolitan area . 6 . ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Chairman Schoell reported that the executive committee had met as a nominating committee and that it offers the following slate of officers and executive committee members for the calendar year 1989. Chairman Robert DeGhetto, Minnetonka Vice-Chairman John Pidgeon, Bloomington Secretary-Treasurer John Wallin, Edina Executive Committee William Schoell, Deephaven Executive Committee Graydon Boeck, Brooklyn Center Executive Committee Francis Juker, Maplewood Executive Committee Gloria Vierling, Shakopee The chairman announced that the floor was open for addi- tional nominations. There being none, Mr. Ruffenach moved that the slate be elected by unanimous ballot, and Mr. Flora seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, and Chairman Schoell declared that the officers and executive committee members were elected. 2 7 . UNFINISHED BUSINESS: - a. Telephone Rate Reduction. Mr. Purdue introduced Jim Strommen and requested that he report on the status of SRA's efforts to reduce the metropolitan area tier system ratios in order to provide cheaper telephone service to SRA members. Mr. Strommen distributed a memorandum, a copy of which is attached to these minutes. He described the activities undertaken by SRA in recent years and concluded that SRA involvement has reduced telephone rates in member communities by approximately $1, 500,000 per year. This savings had come about because of the reduction of the ratios between charges to the central cities and the outlying suburbs. These savings have been achieved through SRA intervention in Northwestern Bell Telephone cases before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and in the Minnesota Court of Appeals. b. CSO Funding. Mr. Purdue reported that the executive committee had met and considered various information concerning new funding for combined sewer separation in Minneapolis-St . Paul and South St . Paul , which is necessary because of the withdrawal of federal funding. He reported that the chairman had sent a letter dated January 17th to each of the state representatives and 'i state senators who represent SRA cities, copy attached. Most SRA cities have passed a resolution as recommended by the SRA Board at its October meeting. These reso- lutions generally oppose the use of additional state funds for combined sewer separation. There followed a discussion as to a position which would be taken by SRA and the means by which SRA could take a position. Mr. Flora moved that the executive committee be authorized to spend up to $5,000 on lobbying as an interim mea- SII sure, and that the executive committee be encouraged to call a special meeting of the Board to determine what might be an appropriate lobbying effort when more information becomes known. Mr. Boeck seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 8 . NEW BUSINESS: Several members suggested that SRA should encourage membership growth. Counsel was directed to put together a packet of information which could be presented to prospective members and to provide the Directors with sufficient supplies. 9 . CLAIMS: Mr. Wallin presented claims in the amount of $650.00 from the George Hansen Company for the 1987 audit and in the amount of $13,174. 23 from LeFevere, Lefler et al for reim- bursement for expenses and professional fees. Mr. Anderson moved that the claims be paid as presented. The motion was seconded by Ms . Vierling and carried unanimously. 3 10 . ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Flora moved that the meeting be adjourned, Mr. Boeck seconded the motion which passed - unanimous-ly. The chair declared the meeting adjourned. Next regular meeting: April 19, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. Secretary Attest : Chairman Attachments : Treasurer Report NWB Memo CSO Letter 0060M102 .B18 4 TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 4 , 1989 Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding 11 Roll call at 7 :00 P.M. 21 Recess for H.R.A. Meeting 31 Re-convene 4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 51 .RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 6] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) 71 Communications: a] Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Bulletin regarding nominating committee and annual meeting b] Jonathan Clark, Mebco Industries, re: Tax Increment Financing Bonds c] Becky Kelso re: Spilling of sand and gravel on City Street d] John Bisek, Scott Soil and Water Conservation District, re: Erosion and sediment control in urbanizing areas e] Shakopee School Board re: Erroneous statements made by Mr. Scott 81 7: 30 P.M. Public Hearing - MEBCO Industrial Development Revenue Bonds 9] Boards and Commissions: Cable Commission: *a] Public Access Studio Contract 10] Reports From Staff: a] Shakopee Derby Days b] Minnesota River Valley Trail License Agreement *c] 1988-89 Labor Agreement for Shakopee Police Officers d] Hoist Quotations *e] Deferred Compensation Program (PEBSCO) f] Approval of the Bills in the Amount of $413 , 015. 10 g] Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District and Lower Minnesota Watershed District - Joint Powers Agreement TENTATIVE AGENDA Page Two April 4, 1989 101 Reports from Staff (continued) : h] 5th Avenue Extension - Fillmore to Market Street 1989-4 i] Sidewalk Replacement/Repair Policy j ] Market Street from 1st Avenue to 7th Avenue k] City Maps 1] Purchase and Erection of Swimming Pool Sun Shelter 121 Resolutions and Ordinances: a] Res. No. 3035, Ordering the Preparation of a Report on Drainage Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane *b] Res. No. 3033, Initiating Vacation of Utility and Drainage Easements in Lot 1, Block 2, Valley Rich 1st Addition *c] Res. No. 3034, Initiating Vacation of a 160 Foot Drainage Easement Lying within Lot 1, Block 1, Clay's First Addition 131 Other Business: a] b] c] 141 Adjourn to Tuesday, April 18, 1989 at 7: 00 p.m. Dennis R. Kraft Acting City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Session April 4, 1989 Chairman Gary Scott presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 2. Approve the Minutes of March 21, 1989 Meeting 3. Other Business a. b. 4 . Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 21, 1989 Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 9:20 with Comm. Vierling, Clay, Zak and Wampach present. Also present were Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; Douglas Wise, City Planner; David Hutton, City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney. Wampach/Vierling moved to approve Special meeting call. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of March 7, 1989. Motion carried unanimously. Dave MacGillivray, Springstead, reviewed the MEBCO Tax Increment Financing Application. Based on the development agreements for the bonds issued for Shakopee Valley Motel and the fact that that money was never used they are proposing a portion of that bond issue be used to finance the MEBCO project. They would have a development agreement guaranteeing that the City would not release any of the bond proceeds until after a substantial portion of the building is complete. Dennis Kraft said this is consistent with the policy and the City does have the money at this point. Vierling/Zak offered Resolution No. 89-1, A Resolution Relating to Minnesota River Valley Redevelopment Project #1; requesting the City Council to approve a modification to the redevelopment plan; and requesting the City Council to establish tax increment financing plan and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Comm. Wampach, Zak, Clay, Vierling Noes: Chairman Scott Motion carried. Vierling/Zak moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Dennis Kraft Executive Director Carol Schultz Recording Secretary CONSENT 7a, a ia 'on0' BULLETIN m p0 tc n municipalI es ,Ec oven MAR2 ='1969 March 21 , 1989 CITY OF SHAKOPEE TO: AMM Member Cities FROM: Vern Peterson, Executive Director RE: NOMINATING COMMITTEE - ANNUAL MEETING 1 . AMM ANNUAL MEETING - - WEDNESDAY, MAY 31 , 1989. The 1989 AMM Annual Meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday evening May 31 , 1989. The specific details have not been developed as yet but we will follow the usual format with a ' reception - social hour' starting about 5 :30 P.M. with a dinner and business meeting to follow. We will be commerating our 15 year Anniversary as the AMM and look for it to be an interesting time. Please mark your calendars now for this 15- Year AMM Anniversary Annual meeting. A detailed meeting notice will be mailed in early May. 2. NOMINATING COMMITTEE APPOINTED/NOMINATIONS SOUGHT: An eight member Nominating Committee was appointed by the Board of Directors on March 2nd. as required by the By-Laws. Members are: Neil Peterson, Chair, Bloomington Councilmember ; Linda Barton, Burnsville Manager , Jerry Dulgar , Crystal Manager , Barry Johnson, Woodbury Manager; Carol Johnson, Minneapolis Councilmember; Betty McCollum, North St. Paul Councilmember ; Carolyn Voss, Coon Rapids Councilmember; and Gene White, Prior Lake Councilmember. The offices of President, Vice-President and eight directors are up for election. We are asking for your help in putting forth strong candidates for the Director and Officer positions. If you know of an official who you would like to see considered for nomination, please forward his or her name and a brief resume of qualifications to the AMM office or to a member of the Nominating Committee by no later than April 7, 1989. (see item 3 for description of Board of Directors responsibilities. 183 university avenue east, st. paul�minnesota 55101 (612) 227-4008 3. BOARD DIRECTORS'S RESPONSIBILITIES/MEETINGS: The Board of Directors is responsible for the overall management and administration of the AMM staff and activities and exercises its responsibilities through the Executive Director. The Board is also responsible for the Annual Budget and Work Program and establishes the dues rate for member cities. The Board also establishes the Legislative Policy priorities on an annual basis. The Board normally meets once a month on the lat. Thursday evening of each month commencing at 7 : 00 P.M. Please contact Vern Peterson in the AMM Office should you desire more information with respect to Board activities and responsibilities. 4. PROPERTY TAX IMPACT ARTICLE: For the past several months Jim Prosser , Richfield City Manager and Larry Bakken, Golden Valley Councilmember have been co-chairing an Ad-Hoc Committee to develop an understandable and brief explanation of the 1987 and 1988 school aid and tax bills impact on 1989 property taxes. The result of this effort is a question and answer type article with graphs that the AMM is developing into a brochure to be sent to member cities. The Ad Hoc Committee is encouraging cities to reprint this article in local newsletters in hopes that homeowners will contact legislators. Therefore, along with the brochure we will provide a one page layout formated so that it may be directly copied for newsletters. This material will be sent to each city in the next 2 to 3 weeks. DISTRIBUTION NOTE: This Bulletin has been mailed to all member Mayors , Delegates, Managers and Administrators. We would ask the Managers and Administrators to distribute copies to other city officials in your city as you deem appropriate. Thank you. ACTION RECOMMENDED: Acknowledge receipt of a bulletin dated March 21, 1989 from Vern Peterson, Association of Metropolitan Municipalities regarding the upcoming Annual Meeting May 31, 1989 and asking for nominations for expiring offices. -2- ;.y A "2 91989 CITY OF SliAKOPEE MEBCO INDUSTRIES, INC. March 27, 1989 Oakview Business Industrial Center 1325 Eagandale Court Mr. Dennis Kraft Suite 110 City Administrator Eagan,Minnesota 55121 City of Shakopee, Inc. 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, M@ 55379 Dear Mr. Kraft: MEBCO Industries is very disappointed that Shakopee defeated our Tax Increment Financing Bonds for our proposed facility in Shakopee. The impact from this decision could be very strong. We have had offers from several other communities for the same type of TIF offering, but after evaluating all of our variables, we determined that Shakopee would best suit our development and expansion needs. The benefits of a company, such as ours, moving to a community like Shakopee are many. Losing a project like this can be detrimental to your communities growth. We would like to offer our point of view to the Shakopee City Council at the Tuesday, April 4th meeting. Please schedule a time for us to make, a presentation. Thank you. Best„1f @egarda, �. (�/than Clark 9ecutive Director JC:jc NOTE: To be considered in conjunction with MEBCO IDRB hearing. 612/456-1354 WATS 1/800-328-3775 FAX 1/612/456-5301 Minnesota 7G Becky Kelso House of Scott and C Representatives Scott and Carver Counties Committees: Education Health and Human Services,Vice Chair Economic Development and Housing Business Finance Subcommittee, Vice Chair Future and Technology March 21, 1989 Long Term Health Care Commission Dennis R. Kraft Acting City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 B. First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379-1376 Dear Dennis: Thank you for your letter regarding the spilling of sand and gravel on city streets. After discussing this issue with our research people, I would like to relay some of their advice for your discussion. I 'm told that, if trucks are not overloaded, sand or gravel should not spill from them even in the most extreme weather con- ditions. You may want to check to see if weight limits can be enforced more effectively. It may also be worthwhile to talk with your local businesses which are most likely to be involved in this type of hauling and request that they make a greater effort to cover their trucks and maintain weight limits. I am certainly willing to introduce legislaiton mandating covers, but I'm told trucking companies are bitterly opposed to the idea and that it would be very difficult to obtain passage of such legislation. In most situational I try to consider legis- lation as a last resort to problem solving. I will await your reply. S' c rely, Becky Ke o State Representative BKdp 3107 Reply b: 0329State Office Building,St.Paul,Minneema55155 0mte:(612)29E1072 0 151 S.Shamwn Drive,Shakopee,Minnesota 553]9 Home:(612)4456656 Scott Soil and Water 107 Water Street Conservation District Jordan, MN 55352 March 29, 1929 MAR' 01989 John Anderson - Atlmn CITY OF g;t KOP EE Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr . Anderson: The Scott Soil and Water Conservation District recently expanded its Urban Committee, adding five new members. New members include: Jon Westlake, Scott County P. I . E. Bruce Loney, City of Prior Lake Clarence Kaiser , Spring Lake Township Myles Mares, Credit River Township Darrell Jahn, Shakopee Basin WMO In addition to the new members of the committee, existing members are: Wally Wormer , Supervisor , Scott SWCD John Pascal , District Conservationist , SCS Peter Beckius, Soil Conservationist , Scott SWCD The purpose of this committee is to identify the role the Scott SWCD should play in erosion and sediment control in urbanizing areas. A meeting of this newly formed group was held March 10th at the SWCD office. From the discussion that took place at the meeting , it became clear that there is a need for an urban erosion and sediment control program in Scott County. Members present at the meeting cited several examples of projects which , due to poor planning and regulating , caused erosion and sediment damage to neighboring properties. The committee discussed maintaining a permanent staff person to assist governmental units. Types of service could include review of erosion and sediment control plans required on all construction projects, training on preparing erosion and sediment control plans, and site inspections on construction sites for compliance with the E & S plans. Scott County was contacted to see if they would fund this position. The County Fiscal Committee would not fund the entire position, but since Scott County has an interest in protection of its resources, they were willing to fund 1/3 of the position. This leaves it up to the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District and local governmental units to decide whether the balance of the funds can be obtained through a fee for service arrangement . A possible funding option was a base fee provided by each city and township with additional charges for each plat or E & S plan reviewed. (Cost of this to be passed on to developer . ) Another idea was to fund the service striclty with a fee for each plan reviewed . This idea does not provide a stable or reliable income to fund the position. In an attempt to better understand the needs countywide, the committee recommended a letter be sent to all cities and townships in Scott County to determine the interest in this program. Two questions we would like your governmental unit to answer are: 1 ) Are you interested in the Scott SWCD providing you assistance in erosion, sediment and runoff control on construction sites under your jurisdiction? 2) Are you willing to pay a fee to have this service available to you? Please give these two questions consideration and respond to the Scott Soil and Water Conservatin District , 107 Water Street , Jordan, MN 55352, as soon as possible. The committee will reconvene after we hear from you to decide where we go from here. Thank you for your time and consideration, if you have any questions, feel free to contact the Scott SWCD or a member of the committee. 1 Thank you. ' ncerely, I ohn F. Bi sek Chairman P.S. An Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook prepared jointly by the Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources and the Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts will be distributed to each city and township in Scott County within the next few weeks. l Shakopee Public Schools 7e Independent School District No. 720 Joan Lynch.Char District Office Suzanne Von Hout,Viw Chair 505 S. Holmes Street James Sorensen.Clens Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Janet Wendt,Treasurer (612)445-4864 Jane Corlson,Director James O'Brien.Director Gal F.Carruth.Ph.D..Superintendent of Schools Steven Johnson.Director Virgil S.Mears,Assistant Superintendent of Schools March 27, 1989 The Honorable Delores Lebens ^`'^ Mayor of the City of Shakopee Shakopee City Hall NW 2 910,89 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 CITY OF Se's\s<CPEE Dear Mayor Lebens: Please find enclosed a copy of a letter forwarded to Council Member Gary Scott by the Shakopee School Board. As Board Members, we are extremely concerned about recent erroneous statements made by Mr. Scott about the Shakopee School District. We, therefore, ask that you read the attached letter into the record at the next city council meeting. We simply believe the record must be corrected, so that only accurate information is conveyed to the public. We look forward to working with you and the City Council in the future. Sincerely yours, (24,40 J Lynch, .4 rp rrson Suzan Van Hout, ViceCtair ames Sorensen, Clerrk// Janet Wendt, Treasurer CULL' n Arain e Carlson, D rector ur�ZjamesX Brien, Director Steven Johnson, Director d'Xd UA Up,%(a'L4& *&&L' cc: Council Member Gloria Vierling 6 Council Member Joseph Zak Council Member Jerry Wampach Council Member Steve Clay Acting City Administrator Dennis Kraft A Tobacco-Free School District An Equal Opportunity Employer ---Shakopea Public Schools Independent School District No. 720 District Office " Joan Ween char 505 S. Holmes Street Suzanne Von Hour.Vice Chair Jamas Sorensen,c=_•R Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 �..--�-- Janet Wendt.Treasurer `+ (612) 445-4884 .E V Jane Carlson,DireCor '�'+,� :. James O'Brien.Director Goyaen F.Comm,Ph.D..Supermtencent of Schools - — Steven Johnson.Director Virgil S. Mears,Assistant Supenntencenf at Sci sr March 27, 1989 Mr. Gary Scott Member of Shakopee City Council Shakopee City Hall 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Council Member Scott: During the last two city council meetings you made incorrect and misleading statements about the salary of the Superintendent 'of the Shakopee School District. As members of the Shakopee School Board, we are concerned that erroneous statements be corrected. We believe that the public should always receive accurate information, particularly from a public official holding an elected office. At the meetings referred to above, you stated that the Shakopee Superintendent was paid a salary of $80,000 and that the Superintendent of either Bloomington or Richfield received a salary of $70,000. The entire statement is blatantly erroneous. The 1987-88 and 1988-89 base salaries of those superintendents are as follows: 1987-88 1988-89 Shakopee $ 66,200 $ 69,224 Bloomington 78,520 82,446 Richfield 78,800 81,640 Not only was the Shakopee Superintendent's base salary less than that of both the Bloomington and Richfield Superintendents during 1987-88, but her current 1988-89 salary is $9,000 less than that paid to the other two superintendents for the preceeding 1987-88 school year. Moreover, the Shakopee Superintendent's current salary is less than the Twin City Metropolitan average Superintendent's salary of $72,602 for 1987-88. A Tobacco-Free School District An Equal Opportunity Employer Council Member Gary Scott Page 2 The members of the Shakopee School Board strongly encourage you to check out and verify the accuracy of all information, before making future statements about the Shakopee School District. In addition, we ask you to discontinue making erroneous statements about the School District and that you publicly, at the next City Council meeting, correct your inaccurate statement and report the actual salaries outlined above. Any further erroneous statements made by you involving the Shakopee School District will no longer be ignored or tolerated. Sincerely yours, as Lynch, Ciarperson L4 Suzan? van Hout, Vice Chairperson Janes Sorensen, Clerk Janet Wendt, Treasurer 16 e Carlson, irector Dr� James . ,Brien, Director 7" t 96kknoan reJlla Bre /� 5444rn v Steven Johnson, Director L.�N.C1u4�f4L1z- },� cc: Mayor Delores Lebens Council Member Gloria Vierling Council Member Joseph Zack Council Member Jerry Wampach Council Member Steve Clay Acting City Administrator Dennis Kraft 8 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Industrial Development Revenue Bond Hearing for Mebco Industries, Inc. DATE: March 31, 1989 INTRODUCTION• On March 7, 1989 a Public Hearing was called for April 4, 1989 for the purpose of giving Preliminary approval to a project on behalf of Mebco Industries, Inc. for the purpose of considering the issuance of some Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (IRDB's) for the construction of a manufacturing operation in the City of Shakopee. BACKGROUND: The City Council has received a proposal from Mebco Industries that the City issue IDRB's to finance a portion or all of the cost of a proposed manufacturing facility in Shakopee as provided for under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469. 152-469.165. This project consists of the purchase of approximately 4.5 acres of land and the construction and equipping of an approximately 60,000 sq. foot building and related improvements. This manufacturing facility will be owned by Mebco Industries, Inc. , a Minnesota corporation. The maximum face value of the bonds to be issued is $2,300,000. Even though the bonds will be marketed as City of Shakopee Industrial Development Revenue Bonds, the adoption of the resolution authorizing these bonds shall not be deemed to establish a legal obligation on the part of the City or its City Council to issue or cause the issuance of such revenue obligations. The revenue obligations, if issued, shall not constitute a charge lien or encumbrance, upon any property of the City, except for the revenue specifically pledged to the payment thereof. The bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any Constitutional, Statutory, or Charter limitation. In other words, the City has absolutely no obligation to be responsible for servicing the debt on these bonds. If the borrower, Mebco Industries, were not to pay off the bonds, the City would have no obligation for servicing the bond debt. Mebco Industries has agreed that any and all direct and indirect costs incurred by the City in connection with this project will be paid by Mebco upon request. ALTERNATIVES- 1. Approve Resolution #3036 giving preliminary approval to a project on behalf of Mebco Industries for the purpose of building a manufacturing facility in the City Of Shakopee. 2 . Do not approve this resolution. RECOMMENDATION• It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution #3036. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to approve Resolution #3036 giving preliminary approval to a project on behalf of Mebco Industries, Inc. and its financing under the Municipal Industrial Development Act; referring the proposal to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development for approval; and authorizing preparation of necessary documents. DRK:jak RESOLUTION NO. 3036 RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF MESCO INDUSTRIES, INC. AND ITS FINANCING UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT; REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR APPROVAL; AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the City) , as follows : SECTION 1 Recitals and Findings 1. 1. This Council has received a proposal that the City finance a portion or all of the cost of a proposed project under Minnesota Statutes , Sections 469 . 152 through 469. 165 (the Act) , consisting of the purchase of approximately 4 1/2 acres of land and the construction and equipping of an approximately 60,000 square foot building and related improvements to be owned by Mebco Industries, Inc. , a Minnesota corporation (the Borrower) , and used as manufacturing facility (the Project) . The Project is located in the City's Minnesota River Valley Redevelopment Project No . 1 and its address will be 5010 Industrial Boulevard South , Shakopee, Minnesota. 1.2. At a public hearing, duly noticed and held on April 4 1989, in accordance with the Act and Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project, all parties who appeared at the hearing were given an opportunity to express their views with respect to the proposal to undertake and finance the Project and interested persons were given the opportunity to submit written comments to the City Clerk before the time of the hearing . Based on the public hearing, such written comments (if any) and such other facts and circumstances as this Council deems relevant, this Council hereby finds, determines and declares as follows : (a) The welfare of the State of Minnesota requires active promotion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce through governmental acts to prevent, so far as possible, emergence of blighted lands and areas of chronic unemployment, and the State of Minnesota has encouraged local government units to act to prevent such economic deterioration. - -4- (b) The Project would further the general purposes contemplated and described in Section 469 . 152 of the Act . (c) The existence of the Project would. add to the tax base of Scott County and the School District in which the Project is located, and would provide increased opportunities for employment for residents of the City and surrounding area . (d) This Council has been advised by representatives of the Borrower that conventional, commercial financing to pay the cost of the Project is available only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of constructing and operating the Project would be significantly reduced, but that with the aid of municipal borrowing, and its resulting lower borrowing cost, the Project is economically more feasible. (e) This Council has been advised by representatives of the Borrower that the Project would not be undertaken but for the availability of industrial development obligation financing . (f) This Council has also been advised by representatives of the Borrower that on the basis of their discussions with potential buyers of taxable and tax-exempt obligations, revenue obligations of the City (which may be in the form of a revenue note or notes) could be issued and sold upon favorable rates and terms to finance the Project. (g) The City is authorized by the Act to issue its revenue obligations to finance capital projects consisting of properties used and useful in connection with a revenue producing enterprise, such as that of the Borrower, and the issuance of the obligations by the City would be a substantial inducement to the Borrower to acquire, construct and equip the Project. SECTION 2 Determination To Proceed with the Project and its Financing 2 .1. On the basis of the information given the City to date, it appears that it would be desirable for the City to issue its revenue obligations under the provisions of the Act to finance the Project in the maximum aggregate face amount of $2,300,000 . 2 .2 . It is hereby determined to proceed with the Project and its financing and this Council hereby declares its present - intent to have the City issue its revenue obligations under the -5- Act to finance the Project . Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the adoption of this resolution shall not be deemed to establish a legal obligation on the part of the City or its City Council to issue or to cause the issuance of such revenue obligations. All details of such revenue obligations and the provisions for payment thereof shall be subject to final approval of the Project by the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development and may be subject to such further conditions as the City may specify. The revenue obligations , if issued, shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City, except the revenues specifically pledged to the payment thereof, and each obligation, when, as and if issued, shall recite in substance that the obligation, including interest thereon, is payable solely from the revenues and property specifically pledged to the payment thereof, and shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, statutory or charter limitation. 2 .3 . The Application to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development, with attachments, is hereby approved, and the Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to execute said documents on behalf of the City. 2 .4 . In accordance with Section 469 . 154, Subdivision 5 of the Act, the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to cause the Application to be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development for approval of the Project. The Mayor, City Clerk and the City Attorney and other officers, employees and agents of the City are hereby authorized and directed to provide the Department with any preliminary information needed for this purpose. The City Attorney and Dorsey 5 Whitney, bond counsel, are authorized to initiate and assist in the preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the Project, if approved by the Department. SECTION 3 General 3. 1. If the obligations are issued and sold, the City will enter into a lease, sale or loan agreement or similar agreement satisfying the requirements of the Act (the Revenue Agreement) with the Borrower. The lease rentals, installment sale payments, loan payments or other amounts payable by the Borrower to the City under the Revenue Agreement shall be sufficient to pay the principal of, and interest and redemption premium, if any, on, the obligations as and when the same shall become due and payable. -6- 3 .2. The Borrower has agreed and it is hereby determined that any and all direct and indirect costs incurred by the City in connection with the Project, whether or not the Project is carried to completion, and whether or not approved by the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development, and whether or not the City by resolution authorizes the issuance of the obligations, will be paid by the Borrower upon request. 3 .3. The Mayor and City Clerk are directed, if the obligations are issued and sold, thereafter to comply with the provisions of Section 469. 154 , Subdivisions 5 and 7 of the Act . Mayor Attest: City Clerk Approved as to form this 4th day of April, 1989. City Attorney The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember and, upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted and was signed by the Mayor, whose signature was attested by the City Clerk. -7- CONSENT 9a, MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Public Access Studio Contract DATE: March 28, 1989 INTRODUCTION• On January 23, 1989 the Shakopee Cable Commission moved to recommend to City Council that the appropriate City officials be authorized to advertise for request for proposals for the operation and management of the public access studio. The request for proposal deadline was March 15, 1989. On March 27, 1989 the Shakopee Cable Commission interviewed the two companies that submitted proposals for the operation and management of the studio. BACKGROUND; In conjunction with several amendments to the Cable Franchise ordinance which were approved in 1986, the City of Shakopee in cooperation with the Shakopee Access Corporation took over the operation of the public access studio. The first contract for the operation of the studio was let in March of 1986. The initial contract was awarded to New Frontier Productions and expires on April 17, 1989. The current contract does not provide for extension or negotiation. Therefore, it became necessary' for the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Access Corporation to solicit proposals for the operation and management of the public access studio. The City has received two proposals in response to the request for proposal advertisement. Proposals were submitted by Mr. Bill Lepley representing New Frontier Productions Inc. and from Mr. Mike Schmitt representing M.S. Enterprise. On March 27, 1989 the Shakopee Cable Commission and several members from the Shakopee Access Corporation interviewed each of the perspective providers. Following the interviews, the Cable Commission evaluated and ranked the proposals. Shown in attachment #1 is a copy of the evaluation criteria and ranking. The ranking system utilized assigned liability points to each of the evaluation criteria. Therefore, the lower the points the better the proposal. Upon ranking each of the evaluation criteria, the percentage ranking for each individual evaluation criteria was applied to the total liability point of each individual evaluation category to come up with a percentage point total. The seven evaluation category percentage point totals were then added up to come up with a percentage point grand total for each perspective provider. - Upon completing the analysis, New Frontier Productions ranked as the most favorable provider in the opinion of the Shakopee Cable Commission. Due to the length of the proposals I have not included them as attachments to this memo. If any of the Councilmembers wish to review the proposals, please feel free to contact me for a copy. The annual contract cost for studio operation and management is $17, 300. Funding for the program is provided through revenues generated by the City's 5% franchise fee. Based upon the results of the evaluation, the Shakopee Cable Commission is recommending that the City Council direct the appropriate City officials to negotiate an agreement with New Frontier Productions, Inc. for the provision of public access studio management and operation and recommend that the Shakopee Access Corporation enter into an agreement with New Frontier Productions Inc. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Direct the appropriate City officials to negotiate an agreement with New Frontier Productions Inc. , for the provision of public access studio management and operation and recommend that the Shakopee Access Corporation enter into an agreement with New Frontier Productions, Inc. 2. Request the appropriate City officials to negotiate an agreement with M.S. Enterprise and recommend to the Shakopee Access Corporation that they enter into an agreement with M.S. Enterprise. 3. Table action on this issue pending further information from staff. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REODESTED: Direct the appropriate City officials to negotiate an agreement with New Frontier Productions Inc. , for the provision of public access studio management and operation and recommend that the Shakopee Access Corporation enter into an agreement with New Frontier Productions, Inc. l � Attachment #1 Cable Studio RFP Analysis New Frontier MS Productions Enterprise Staffing 6 Management Plan (25%) Total Liability Points 1 2 Percentage Point Total .25 .50 Experience/Knowledge of Equipment (25%) Total Liability Points 1 2 Percentage Point Total .25 .5 Total cost of Service (15%) Total Liability Points 2 1 Percentage Point Total .3 .15 Marketing Plan (15%) Total Liability Points 2 1 Percentage Point Total . 3 .15 Maintenance Program (10%) Total Liability Points 1 2 Percentage Point Total .l .2 Revenue Generation (5%) Total Liability Points 2 1 Percentage Point Total .1 . 05 Understanding of RFP S Exceptions (5%) Total Liability Points 1 2 Percentage Point Total . 05 .1 Total Liability Points 10 11 Percentage Point Grand Total 1.35 1.65 100, MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Shakopee Derby Days DATE: March 30, 1989 INTRODUCTION• Since last Fall the Chamber of Commerce Derby Days Committee has been working hard to coordinate this year's Derby Days celebration. This year's celebration is being planned for the weekend of August 5th and 6th. The Derby Days Committee has requested that I share with City Council the major activities and events planned for this year's celebration and request Council 's consideration of several inkind contributions and the use of City property for the event. BACKGROUND: Last year was the first annual Derby Days Celebration. The event was held in Downtown Shakopee in the Gene Brown lot, City parking lot and on Lewis Street between First and Second Avenue. While last year's celebration was not an overwhelming success, it was definitely a step in the right direction to establish an annual community celebration. Last year's Derby Days Committee learned from their mistakes and are confident that this year's celebration will be much better in terms of events and attendance. The first thing that the Committee is proposing that is different from last year in terms of the celebration is a change of date. Last year's celebration was held in conjunction with the St. Paul Derby. This produced a minor traffic conflict. To resolve this problem, the Derby Days Committee has changed the date of the celebration to coincide with the Downtown Sidewalk Sale. Additionally, the Derby Days Committee is proposing that the location for the celebration be moved from the Downtown area to Lions Park. This location provides more than adequate parking and does not have an adverse effect on any businesses due to the closure of streets. Lions Park also electrical services, restrooms and shelter facilities readily available which will result in cost savings for the Derby Days Committee. Several of the major events planned for this year's Derby Days Celebration include an arts and crafts festival, family fun walk from the Senior High to Lions Park, a 16 team volleyball tournament, hot air balloon lift off, a gong show, on-going stage entertainment, diaper derby, toddler trot, an antique car parade, a beach party at the pool and an evening concert featuring Bob and Beachcombers. Food and refreshments will also be available . throughout the celebration. A beer garden staffed by the Shakopee Jaycees is also being proposed for the celebration. Section 7. 08 of the Shakopee City Code allows for the sale of goods upon public property with City Council approval. I would therefore like to request City Council to approve the Derby Days committee's request for the sale of goods by the arts and crafts vendors and food and refreshments vendors on public property during the Derby Days celebration. Because Bob and the Beachcombers is a fairly popular band in the Metropolitan Area the Derby Days Committee would also like to request that the City of Shakopee provide at least one police officer for the Bob and the Beachcombers concert on Saturday, August 6th. The Chief of Police has been contacted with this proposal and believes that staffing can be arranged. Finally, the Committee would like to request Council to consider authorizing the use of City park or maintenance crews to assist in preparing the site for the celebration and clean-up following the celebration. In attachment #1 is a copy of the 1989 Derby Days Budget. The Derby Days Committee will be soliciting sponsorships from businesses within Shakopee to off-set the costs of this year's celebration. We are confident that we will be able to operate a second annual Derby Days Celebration at a break even or small profit. We are also very pleased that we do not have to request any City financial assistance in this endeavor. (With the exception of inkind contributions. ) If the City feels that they would like to provide financial assistance in whatever amount, the Derby Days Committee would graciously accept it. SUMMARY If City Council has any suggestions or comments regarding the Derby Days Celebration, please feel free to bring them to my attention. Following is a list of the areas in which City assistance is being requested. 1. Permission for the sale of goods on public property. 2 . Permission to utilize City park or maintenance crews to assist in preparing for the celebration and to assist in clean-up following the event. 3. Provision of one police officer during the Bob and the Beachcombers concert on the evening of August 6th. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Move to approve the inkind contributions as requested by the Chamber of Commerce for the proposed Derby Days Celebration. 2. Do not offer any inkind assistance for the proposed Derby Days Celebration. 3 . Select those activities in which the City agrees to provide - inkind assistance for the proposed Derby Days Celebration. I D � 4. Move to approve the inkind contributions as requested by the Chamber of Commerce for the proposed Derby Days Celebration and contribute a financial amount towards the 1989 Derby Days Celebration. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to approve the Chamber of Commerce request for inkind assistance for the proposed Derby Days Celebration and grant permission for the following: 1. Provision of City park or maintenance crews to assist in set-up and clean-up of the area before and after the event. 2, Provision of a police officer on the evening of August 6th for the Bob and Beachcombers concert. 3 . Permission for the sale of goods on public property. Attachment #1 Derby Days Budget Expenditures Proiected Advertising $5000.00 Bob and the Beachcombers 2000.00 Family Fun Walk 1000. 00 Jordan Jam Concert 300.00 Stage Entertainment 500.00 Stage Sound & Lights 100.00 Clean-Up/Waste Disposal 500. 00 Derby Day Buttons 1200.00 Tent Rental 800.00 Stage Rental 700.00 Classic Car Parade 300.00 Diaper Derby/Toddler Trot 300. 00 Volleyball Tourney 300.00 Hot Air Balloon Race 300.00 Contingency 1000. 00 Total Estimated Expenditures $15,300. 00 Revenues Event Sponsors 4000.00 Corporate Sponsors 3000.00 Business Sponsors 2500.00 Chamber Retail Budget Transfer 1000.00 Vendor Contracts 100. 00 Arts and Crafts Booth Fees 1500. 00 Button Sales 2000.00 Beachcombere Admissions 500.00 Volleyball Entry Fees 200.00 Derby Sales 200.00 Misc. Revenue 300.00 Total Estimated Revenue $15,300. 00 EXCESS REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES $ 0.00 106 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Minnesota River Valley Trail License Agreement DATE: March 29 , 1989 INTRODUCTION• The Department of Natural Resources is preparing final plans for the extension of the Minnesota River Valley Trail to the East from the Shakopee Community Service's building through Murphy's Landing. In order for this section of the trail to be completed, the trail license agreement between the City of Shakopee and the State of Minnesota needs to be amended. BACKGROUND• In June of 1985 the City of Shakopee entered into a trail license agreement with the State of Minnesota which provided for the extension of the Minnesota River Valley Trail through City properties which rested within the proposed trail alignment. The 1985 trail license agreement inadvertently did not include the City's property within the Murphy's Landing area. The Department of Natural Resources is optimistic that the trail extension to the East from it's current end point can be initiated this summer. Prior to finalizing the exact trail alignment, the Department of Natural Resources is requesting that the trail license agreement be amended to provide for the extension of the trail through Murphy's Landing. Shown in attachment #1 is a copy of the proposed trail license agreement amendment. Prior to completing the trail through Murphy's Landing, Murphy's Landing officials will be contacted to verify and approve the actual trail alignment. The Shakopee City Attorney has approved the proposed trail license agreement amendment as to form. Staff is recommending approval of the trail license agreement as proposed. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the trail license agreement amendment providing for the extension of the Minnesota River Valley Trail through Murphy's Landing and subsequent City properties lying within the proposed trail alignment. 2. Do not approve the trail license agreement amendment. 3 . Amend the trail license agreement amendment and authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the agreement accordingly. tr° 4. Table this issue pending further information from staff. RECOMMENDATION- Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REOUBSTED• Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the trail license agreement amendment providing for the extension of the Minnesota River Valley Trail through Murphy's Landing and subsequent City properties lying within the proposed trail alignment. TRAIL LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of 19 , by and between the City of Shakopee of Scott County, Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "City" and the State of Minnesota, acting by and through the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources, hereinafter referred to as the "State." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the State is authorized under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 85.015 to acquire and develop the Minnesota Valley Trail, hereinafter referred to as the "Trail"; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Natural Resources has, under Minnesota Statutes 84.029, Subd. 2, the authority to enter into license agreements for the purposes of and upon conditions set forth below; and WHEREAS, the State seeks property to extend the Trail through property known as Murphy's Landing; and WHEREAS, the City desires to assist in the routing of the Trail and owns the property known as Murphy's Landing; and WHEREAS, there is currently a Trail License Agreement between the Department of Natural Resources and the City, dated June 18, 1985, for the purposes of the Trail (see Exhibit A); NOW THEREFORE, the City for and in consideration of the covenants and promises set forth in the original Trail License Agreement, dated June 18, 1985, hereby grants to the State the right to cross the property known as Murphy's Landing which is in the N 1/2 of Sections 4 and 5, T 115 N R 22 W, and in the S 1/2 of Section 32, T 116 N, R 22 W, as shown on the attached map (see Exhibit B) to develop, operate and maintain a section of the Trail in the City to wit: This agreement shall be subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The City hereby grants to the State all grasses, shrubs, trees and natural growth now existing on said premises or that may be hereafter planted or grown thereon; and the right to remove and use earth and other materials within the subject parcel of Land. 2. The City, for themselves, their heirs and assigns, do hereby release the State, its successors and assigns from all claims for any and all damages to the lands through and across which the land granted is located, by reason of the rights herein granted. 3. The City shall approve plans and specifications for construction of the trail and for any future modifications of the trail. 4. The State shall have the right: (a) To post such signs and posters along the subject premises deemed necessary and suitable to delineate the trail lands and locate the same for trail use; and (b) To make such improvements and installations as are neces- sary, convenient, and incidental to the full enjoyment and use of the rights and privileges granted. (c) To police and control the trail right-of-way to insure that the public uses the same in an authorized manner. 5. The City shall not construct any buildings, structures, or other improvements on the licensed premises, without the written consent of the Commissioner of Natural Resources except, the City may undertake construc- tion improvements which would destroy the trail, as long as the City, at no expense to the Department of Natural Resources, provides for the continuity and reconstruction of the trail. /d p 6. The City shall have the right to enter upon the leased premises t� for any lawful purpose provided there is not interference with State's use of the trail. 7. The license agreement hereby granted shall be perpetual, and may be terminated by either party only upon furnishing written notice to the other party at least five years written in advance of the desired termina- tion date. 8. It is agreed that the State shall, upon the termination of this lease, at its own cost and expense, as promptly as possible after the effective date of such termination remove all property and material which it has under this agreement erected, constructed or placed upon the subject premises. Should the State fail to so remove the property within 60 days after the termination, then the City shall have the right to place the premises in neat, safe, and proper condition. 9. This agreement and all of the terms and provisions hereof shall extend to, insure to the benefit and be binding upon the successors and assigns, of the parties hereto. 10. The City has the lawful right and authority to grant these rights and agrees that the State shall have the quiet enjoyment of the rights granted during the full term of this Agreement. It is understood that the terms of the Trail License Agreement, dated June 18, 1985, attached and made part of this agreement, shall remain in effect and shall control this agreement also. p IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have each caused this instru- ment to be duly executed as of the day and year first written above. CITY OF SHAKOPEE STATE OF MINNESOTA GRANTOR DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BY EY Mayor Title Date Date By APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION City Administrator By Date Title Date BY City Clerk Date EXHIBIT f1 �e -- TRAIL LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this p day of ,.A_ 155� by and between the City of Shakopee of Scott County, Minnesota, hereinafter called the 'City' and the State of Minnesota, acting by and through the Commissioner of the Departnent of Natural Resources, hereinafter called the "State," WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the State is authorized under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 85.015 to acquire and develop the Minnesota Valley Trail , hereinafter called the "Trail"; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Natural Resources has, under Minnesota Statutes S 84.029, subdivision 2, the authority to enter- into license agreements for the purposes of and ,upon the conditions set forth below; and - WHEREAS, the State needs property to extend the Trail through the City; and WHEREAS, the City desires to assist in the routing of the Trail and owns or has under its control certain lands that can be used for that purpose; NOW THEREFORE, the City for and in consideration of the covenants and promises made herein, hereby grants to the State the right to cross the - ---- -- hereinafter described lands to develop, operate and maintain a section of— --- -- - the Trail in the City to wit: -- - - - - - 16 A strip of land 20' wide and generally parallel to the Minnesota River within the following described property. The specific trail alignment to be by mutual agreement between the City and State. A. From Shumway Street to Sommerville Street on the levee. B. Through Huber Park. C. Across. the Bakken property as per easement with Bakken (see Exhibit "A"). D. Through Memorial Park. - The purpose and intent of this license is to give the State the right to establish, operate and maintain an all-season, recreational trail for biking, hiking, cross-country skiing and snowmobiling. This agreement shall be subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The City hereby grants to the State all grasses, shrubs, trees and natural growth now existing on said premises or that may be hereafter planted or grown thereon; and the right to remove and use earth and other materials within the subject parcel of land. 2. The City, for themselves, their heirs and assigns, do hereby release the State, its successors and assigns from all claims for any. and all damages to the lands through and across which the land granted is located, by reason of the rights herein granted:--- -- --- -- - -- - 3. The City shall approve- plans and specifications for - - construction of the trail and for any future modifications of the trail . 4. The State shall have the right: (a) To post such signs and posters along the subject - premises deemed necessary and suitable to delineate the trail- lands. and locate the same for trail use; and -- - - - -2- (b) To make such improvements and installations as are necessary, convenient, and incidental to the full enjoyment and use of the rights and privileges granted. (c) To police and control the trail ri.ght-of-way to insure that the public uses the same in an authorized manner. 4. The City shall not construct any buildings, structures, or other improvements on the leafed premises, without the written consent of the Commissioner of Natural Resources except, the City may undertake construction improvements which would destroy the trail , as long as the City, at no expense to the Department of Natural Resources, provides for the continuity and re-construction of the trail . 5. The City shall have the right to enter upon the leased premises for any lawful purpose provided there is no interference with State's use of the trail . 6. The license agreement hereby granted shall be perpetual , and may be terminated by either- party only upon furnishing written notice to the other party at least 5 years written in advance of the desired termination date. 7. It is agreed that the State shall , upon the termination of this lease, at its own cost and expense, as promptly as possible after the effective date of such termination remove all property and material which it has under this aareement erected, constructed or placed upon the subject premises. Should the State fail to so remove the property within 60 days - after the termination, then the City shall have the right to place the - premises in neat, safe, and proper condition. - - -- - ---- --- 8. This agreement and all of the terms an provisions hereof shall extend to, insure to the benefit and be binding upon the successors and assigns, of the parties hereto. - - -- - - -3- 1 9. The City has the lawful right and authority to grant these rights and agrees that the State shall have the quiet enjoyment of the rights granted during the full term of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have each caused this instrument to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF SHAKOPEE STATE OF MINNESOTA GRANTOR DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES GRANTEE mayor Date s/2 -.s-- Title C0bt;✓;33;0NER Date_ f S'— I y" APPROVED AS TO FOf34 AND EXECUTION By By I LAT Aom nls aior 13 —---- ---T- Title = c . N&S:k /YAy 1_ J Date C1.1— By k Date l -� S/::KV.9455 �I -4- EXHIBIT (3 t � 4 a. -7- -'r. ? Gra af'> l _�� a�`ps -.• -}<y r Fr v .C^t• � ;9e f. 47, c W Bwt 9. �• 1n u �j t E it' t•5! •l1 A �i'� Ott.� , 9 v.Ly~�r '�..2. ' iy �•�.._ ��-„_,c '; 4 —.n• I ).! 1•_+SFr �t~�+~ . � tt - �r •j - mW2PX`l�s L4�,p,e,G - KALE411 N 4< ®NSENT /D c Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acing City Administrator From: Marilyn M. Remer, Personnel Coordinator Re: 1988-89 Police Union Contract Date: March 31, 1989 Introduction Attached is the proposed contract for 1988-89 for the Police Union. Background Changes from the 1986-87 contract are as discussed at the March 21, 1989 executive session. Changes to Appendix A reflect a 3.58 increase in wages for each year. Article XVIII - Insurance reflects an additional $10 per month for each year in the City's contribution towards employee's health, life and long-term disability insurance. The union is agreeable to the changes as discussed. Alternatives 1. Approve contract 2. Further negotiations Recommendation Alternative #1. Action Reauested Move to authorize the proper city officials to execute the proposed labor contract for 1988-89 for the Police Union. LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND IAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES UNION LOCAL NO. 320 Police Officer Effective January 1, 1988 through December 31, 1989 /p G I N D E X Page ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT I ARTICLE II. RECOGNITION I ARTICLE III. DEFINITIONS 1 ARTICLE VI. EMPLOYER SECURITY Z ARTICLE V. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY p ARTICLE VI. UNION SECURITY 2 ARTICLE VII. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 3 ARTICLE VIII. SAVINGS CLAUSE 5 ARTICLE IX. SENIORITY 5 ARTICLE X. DISCIPLINE 6 ARTICLE XI. CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION 6 ARTICLE XII. WORK SCHEDULE 7 ARTICLE XIII. OVERTIME 7 ARTICLE XIV. COURT TIME 7 ARTICLE XV. CALL BACK TIME 7 ARTICLE XVI. WORKING OUT CLASSIFICATION 8 ARTICLE XVII. INSURANCE 8 ARTICLE XVIII. STANDBY 8 ARTICLE XIV. UNIFORMS 8 ARTICLE XX. LONGEVITY 8 ARTICLE XXI. HOLIDAYS 8 ARTICLE XXII. VACATIONS 9 ARTICLE XXIII. SICK LEAVE 9 ARTICLE XXIV. BEREAVEMENT LEAVE 9 ARTICLE XXV. SEVERANCE PAY 9 ARTICLE XXVI. INJURY ON DUTY 10 ARTICLE XXVII. WAIVER 10 ARTICLE XXVIII. DURATION 11 APPENDIX A. WAGES 12 !6 C, LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL NO. 320 ARTICLE I. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT This agreement is entered into as of January 1, 1988, between the City of Shakopee, hereinafter called the Employer, and the Minnesota Teamster Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320, hereinafter called the Union. It is the intent and purpose of this Agreement to: 1.1 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning this Agreement's interpretation and/or application; and 1.2 Place in written form, the parties agreement, upon terms and conditions of employment for the duration of this Agreement. ARTICLE II. RECOGNITION 2.1 The Employer recognizes the Union as the exclusive representative, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 179.71, Subdivision 3, for all Police Personnel in the following job classification: Police Officer 2.2 In the event the Employer and the Union are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of a new or modified job class, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation Services for determination. ARTICLE III. DEFINITIONS 3.1 UNION: The Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320. 3.2 UNION MEMBER: A member of the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320. 3.3 EMPLOYEE: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. 3.4 DEPARTMENT: The Shakopee Police Department. 3.5 EMPLOYER: The City of Shakopee 3.6 CHIEF: The Chief of the Shakopee Police Department. 1 3.7 UNION OFFICER: Officer elected or appointed by the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320. 3.8 INVESTIGATOR/DETECTIVE: An employee specifically assigned or classified by the Employer, to the job classification and/or job position of Investigator/Detective. 3.9 OVERTIME: Work performed at the express authorization of the Employer in excess of the employee's scheduled shift. 3.10 SCHEDULED SHIFT: A consecutive work period including rest breaks and a lunch break. 3.11 REST BREAKS: Periods during the Scheduled Shift, during which the employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.12 STRIKE: Concerted action in failing to report for duty, the willful absence from one's position, the stoppage of work, slow-down, or abstinence in whole or in part from the full, faithful and proper performance of the duties of employment for the purposes of inducing, influencing or coercing a change in the conditions or compensations or the rights, privileges or obligations of employment. ARTICLE IV. EMPLOYER SECURITY The Union agrees that during the life of this Agreement that the union will not cause, encourage, participate in or support any strike, slow-down or other interruption of or interference with, the normal functions of the Employer. ARTICLE V. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 5.1 The Employer retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower, facilities and equipment; to establish functions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure; to select, direct and determine the number of personnel; to establish work schedules and perform any inherent managerial function not specifically limited by this Agreement. 5.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this Agreement shall remain solely within the discretion of the Employer to modify, establish or eliminate. ARTICLE VI. UNION SECURITY 6.1 The Employer shall deduct from the wages of Employees who authorized such a deduction, in writing, an amount necessary to cover monthly Union dues. Such monies shall be submitted as directed by the Union. 6.2 The Union may designate employees from the bargaining unit to act as a 2 16 C, steward and an alternate and shall inform the Employer, in writing, of such choice and changes in the position of steward and/or alternate. 6.3 The Employer shall make space available on the employee bulletin board for posting Union notice (s) and announcement(s) . 6.4 The union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders, judgments brought or issued against the Employer as a result of any action taken or not taken by the Employer under the provisions of the Article. ARTICLE VII. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 7.1 Definition of a Grievance. A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this agreement. 7.2 Union representatives. The employer will recognize Representatives designated by the Union as the grievance representatives of the bargaining unit having the duties and responsibilities established by this Article. The Union shall notify the Employer, in writing, of the names of such Union Representatives and of their successors when so designated, as provided by Section 6.2 of this Agreement. 7.3 Processing of a Grievance. It is recognized and accepted by the Union and the Employer that the processing of grievances as hereinafter provided, is limited by the job duties and responsibilities of the employees and shall therefore be accomplished during normal working hours only when consistent with such employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved employee and a Union representative shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance is investigated and presented to the Employer during normal working hours provided that the employee and the Union representative have notified and received the approval of the designated supervisor, who has determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work programs of the Employer. 7.4 Procedure. Grievances, as defined by Section 7.1, shall be resolved in conformance with the following procedure. Step 1. An employee claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement shall, within twenty-one (21) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred, present such grievance to the employee's supervisor as designated by the Employer. The Employer-designated representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and appealed by Step 2 shall be placed in writing, setting forth the nature of the grievance, the facts on which it is based, the provision or provisions of the Agreement allegedly violated, the remedy requested and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the Employer-designated. representative's final answer in Step 1. Any grievance not appealed in 3 writing to Step 2 by the Union, within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 2. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the Employer-designated Step 2 representative. The Employer-designated representative shall give the Union the Employer's Step 2 answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer-designated representative's final Step 2 answer. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer-designated representative's final Step 2 answer. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 3. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the Employer-designated Step 3 representative. The Employer-designated representative shall give the Union the Employer's answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 3 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 3 may be appealed to Step 4 within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer-designated representative's final answer in Step.3. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 4 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Sten 4. A grievance unresolved in Step 3 and appealed to Step 4 by the Union shall be submitted to arbitration, subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Act of 1971, as amended. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the 'Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances' , as established by the Public Employment Relations Board. 7.5 Arbitrator's Authority A. The arbitrator shall have no right to smend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to or subtract from, the terms of this Agreement. The arbitrator shall consider and decide only the specific issue (s) submitted in writing by the Employer and the Union and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue not so submitted. B. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to, or inconsistent with, or modifying or varying in any way the application of laws, rules or regulations having the force and effect of law. The Arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days following close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the Employer and the Union and shall be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation of application of the express terms of this Agreement and to the facts of the grievance presented. 4 p C- C. The fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the Employer and the Union, providing that each parry shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. if both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally. 7.6 Waiver. If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered 'waived' . If a grievance is not appealed to the next step within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered settled on the basis of the Employer's last answer. If the Employer does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof, within the specified time limits, the Union may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step may be extended by mutual written agreement of the Employer and the Union, in each step. 7.7 Choi of R dv. If, as a result of the written Employer response in Step 3, the grievance remains unresolved and if the grievance involves the suspension, demotion, or discharge of an employee who has completed the required probationary period, the grievance may be appealed to either Step 4 or Article VII or a procedure such as: Civil Service, Veteran's Preference or Fair Employment. If appealed to any procedure other than Step 4 or Article VII, the grievance is not subject to the arbitration procedure as provided in Step 4 of Article VII. The aggrieved employee shall indicate in writing which procedure is to be utilized, Step 4 of Article VII or another appeal procedure, and signs a statement to the effect that the choice of any other hearing precludes the aggrieved employee from making a subsequent appeal through Step 4 of Article VII. ARTICLE VIII. SAVINGS CLAUSE This agreement is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota and the City of Shakopee. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provisions shall be voided. All other provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. The voided provision may be re-negotiated at the written request of either party. ARTICLE IX. SENIORITY 9.1 Seniority shall be determined by the employee's length of continuous employment with the Police Department and posted in an appropriate location. Seniority rosters may be maintained by the Chief on the basis of time in grade and time within specific classifications. 5 9.2 During the probationary period a newly hired or re-hired employee may be discharged at the sole discretion of the Employer. During the probationary period a promoted or reassigned employee may be replaced in his previous position at the sole discretion of the Employer. 9.3 A reduction of work force will accomplished on the basis of seniority. Employees shall be recalled from layoff on the basis of seniority. An employee on layoff shall have an opportunity to return to work in two (2) years of the time of his layoff before any new employee is hired. 9.4 Senior employees will be given preference with regard to transfer, job classification assignments and promotions when the job-relevant qualifications of employees are equal. 9.5 Senior qualified employees shall be given shift assignment preference after eighteen (18) months of continuous full-time employment. 9.6 One continuous vacation period shall be selected on the basis of seniority until March 15th of each year. ARTICLE X. DISCIPLINE 10.1 The Employer will discipline employees for just cause only. Discipline will be in one or more of the following forms: a) oral reprimand b) written reprimand c) suspension d) demotion; or e) discharge 10.2 Suspensions, demotions and discharges will be in written form. 10.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension and notices of discharge which are to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be read and acknowledged by the signature of the employee. Employees and the Union will receive a copy of such reprimands and/or notices. 10.4 Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at reasonable times under the direct supervision of the Employer. 10.5 Discharges will be preceded by a five (5) day suspension, without pay. 10.6 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless the employee has been given an opportunity to have a Union representative present at such questioning. 10.7 Grievances relating to this Article shall initiated by the Union in Step 3 of the Grievance Procedure, under Article VII. ARTICLE XI. CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION 6 /b G Employees shall have the rights granted to all citizens by the United States and Minnesota State Constitutions. ARTICLE XII. WORK SCHEDULE 12.1 The normal work year is two thousand and eighty hours (2080) to be accounted for by each employee through: a) hours worked on assigned shifts; b) holidays; c) assigned training; d) authorized leave time. 12.2 Holidays and authorized leave time is to be calculated on the basis of the actual length of time of the assigned shifts. 12.3 Nothing contained in this or any other article shall be interpreted to be a guarantee of a minimum or maximum of hours the Employer may assign employees. ARTICLE XIII. OVERTIME 13.1 Employees will be compensated at one and one-half (1 1/2) times the employees regular base pay rate for hours worked in excess of the employees regularly scheduled shift. Changes of shifts do not qualify an employee for overtime under this Article. 13.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable. 13.3 Overtime refused by employees will, for record purposes under Article 13.2, be considered as unpaid overtime worked. 13.4 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation, overtime hours worked shall not be pyramided, compounded or paid twice for the same hours worked. 13.5 Employees have the obligation to work overtime or callbacks if requested by the Employer, unless unusual circumstances prevent the employee from so working. ARTICLE XIV. COURT TIME An employee who is required to appear in Court during his scheduled off-duty time shall receive a minimum of two (2) hours pay at one and one-half (1 1/2) times the employees base pay rate. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for Court appearance does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hour minimum. ARTICLE XV. CALL BACK TIME 7 an employee who is called to duty during his scheduled off-duty time shall receive a minimum of two (2) hours pay at one and one-half times the employees base pay rate. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for duty does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hour minimum. ARTICLE XVI. WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION Employees assigned by the Employer to assume the full responsibilities and authority of a higher job classification shall receive the salary schedule of the higher classification for the duration of the assignment. ARTICLE XVII. INSURANCE Effective January 1, 1988 the Employer shall contribute up to two hundred thirty-six dollars and eighty-two cents ($236.82) per month per employee toward health, life and long-term disability insurance. Effective January 1, 1989 the Employer shall contribute up to two hundred forty-six dollars and eighty-two cents ($246.82) toward health, life and long-term disability insurance. ARTICLE XVIII. STANDBY PAY Employees required by the Employer to standby shall be paid for such standby time at the rate of one hours' pay for each on standby. ARTICLE XIX. UNIFORMS Employees will be paid a uniform allowance during January of each year. The allowance will be four hundred fifty dollars ($450.00) cash for calendar years 1988 and 1989. ARTICLE XX. LONGEVITY The following Longevity Pay Plan will be in effect: At the start of the fifth (5th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred five dollars and sixty-four cents ($105.64) per month additional. At the start of the eighth (8th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred thirty dollars and ninety-two cents ($130.92) per month additional. At the start of the eleventh (11th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred fifty-six dollars and eighteen cents ($156.18) per month additional. At the start of the fifteenth (15th) year of service, an employee shall receive one hundred eighty-three dollars and seventy-three cents ($183.73) per month additional. ARTICLE XXI. HOLIDAYS 21.1 All permanent employees and full-time probationary employees shall be eligible for eighty-eight hours of holiday pay (11 paid holidays). 8 /6 21.2 Any employee required to work on any of the eleven (11) paid holidays shall receive an additional one-half (1/2) times his/her base pay rate in addition to the regular holiday time off. 21.3 The Employer may, at his option, buy back from any employee so requesting in writing by November 1st of each calendar year any holiday time off earned but not used by the employee by December 31st of any calendar year. ARTICLE XBII. VACATIONS 22.1 Employees shall earn vacation as follows: 0 - 5 years of service 80 hours per year 6 - 10 years of service 120 hours per year Over 10 years of service 8 additional hours per year not to exceed 160 hours 22.2 No more than the amount of vacation leave earned in a calendar year can be carried beyond December 31st into a new calendar year, except as permitted by the City Administrator. An employee who is separated for any reason shall be paid for any accumulated vacation leave, provided however, that should an employee resign without given two (2) weeks written notice and except for reasons of ill health, he/she shall forfeit his right to accumulated vacation. ARTICLE XXIII. SICK LEAVE An employee shall accumulate sick leave at the rate of one day (eight hours) per month of service to a maximum of nine hundred sixty (960) hours. After nine hundred sixty (960) hours is reached, one day (8 hours) of sick leave per month shall accumulate to a sick leave bank. Any employee absent from work for fifteen (15) consecutive calendars shall have said sick leave deducted from the sick leave bank until such time as the sick leave bank is exhausted before deductions are made from regular accumulated sick leave. ARTICLE XXIV. BEREAVEMENT LEAVE Employees may receive three (3) days of bereavement pay for the death of members of immediate family which shall be charged to sick leave. Funeral leave benefits for the deaths of individuals other than members of the immediate family shall be charged to vacation time. ARTICLE XXV. SEVERANCE PAY 25.1 Any employee who is separated from his/her position by retirement, discharge or resignation shall receive severance pay of forty-five percent (45%) of a maximum of nine hundred sixty (960) hours of accumulated regular sick leave calculated on the basis of his/her current wage scale. Should any employee resign without giving two (2) - 9 weeks written notice, except for reasons of ill health, shall forfeit his/her right to all accumulated leave. 25.2 Employees hired after January 1, 1981 will be entitle to severance pay after five (5) years of service. ARTICLE PINI. INJURY ON DUTY 26.1 Employees injured while on duty, through no fault of the employee, shall be paid the difference between the employee's regular rate of pay and workers compensation benefits for a period not to exceed seventy- five (75) working days, in accordance with guidelines set forth in M.S. 176.021, Subd. 5, beginning with the sixth (6th) working day of such injury. Such time shall not be charged against the employee's sick leave, vacation or other accumulated benefits. ARTICLE XXVII. WAIVER 27.1 Any and all prior agreements, resolutions, practices, rules and regulations regarding terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, are hereby superceded. 27.2 The parties mutually acknowledge that during the negotiations which resulted in this Agreement, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals with respect to any term or condition of employment not removed by law from bargaining. All agreements and understandings arrived at by the parties are set forth in writing in this Agreement for the stipulated duration of this Agreement. The Employer and the Union each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives the right to meet and negotiate, regarding any and all terms and conditions of employment referred to or covered in this Agreement or with respect to any term or condition of employment not specifically referred to or covered by this Agreement, even though such terms or conditions may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both of the parties at the time this Agreement was negotiated or executed. 10 � oU ARTICLE XXVIII. DURATION This agreement shall be effective as of the first (1st) day of January, 1988 and shall remain in full effect until the thirty-first (31st) day of December 1989. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this day of , 19_ FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE FOR TEAMSTERS LOCAL NO. 320 Mayor Union Steward City Administrator Local 320 Representative City Clerk 11 APPENDIX A - WAGES A.1 Effective January 1, 1988 the Police Officer Salary Schedules shall be as follows: After 36 months $2,727.05 per month After 24 months (908 of Top Patrol rate) $2,451.64 per month After 12 months (808 of Top Patrol rate) $2,179.24 per month Start (758 of Top Patrol rate) $2,043.04 per month A.2 Effective January 1, 1989 the Police Officer Salary Schedule shall be as follows: After 36 months $2,819.39 per month After 24 months (908 of Top Patrol rate) $2,537.45 per month After 12 months (808 of Top Patrol rate) $2,255.51 per month Start (758 of Top Patrol rate) $2,114.54 per month A.3 The Employer agrees to pay one hundred dollars ($100.00) per month shift differential to any employee appointed or assigned by the Employer to act as an.Investigator/Detective. 12 MEMO TO: DENNIS KRAFT CITY COUNCIL FROM: JIM KAREANEN, PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: HOIST QUOTATIONS DATE: MARCH 22, 1989 INTRODUCTION: The Capital Equipment budget for the Shop division prove es $9500.00 for replacing the second hoist for the City Mechanic. BACKGROUND: Last year, we replaced the larger hoist in the mechanic's bay because of piston failure due to cathodic deterioration which is caused by the acidic quality of the surrouundding limestone. This hydraulic piston had a large hole in it, related metal parts and underground piping were completely rusted. We anticipate that the 2nd hoist will soon experience this same type of deterioration, and would like to replace it before the lift fails and someone gets injured. the mechanical Both vehicle hoists were installed by contractor as part of the original building contract, and to our knowledge, the hoist was installed properly according to the existing building codes in 1975. It has been relayed to ustby the hoist installers and our building department, current building codes still do not address this problem, but the installers strongly recommend protecting the und installation from the backfill with a fiberglass barrier that protects the metal parts from the mineral elements which create the cathodic deterioration. This fiberglass barrier,and now being will protect the underground installation, lations, and we are widely used for all of these typethis fibe glassnfor ontthe his hhoist oit rewhich plcemewe replacednt. We did lnlastl year, also. This hoist is considered essential for the City Mechanic's operation. He usually services staff cars, squad cars and pick- ups on this hoist, whereby the other hoist will accommodate the larger equipment and vehicles. This hoist is considered to be somewhat dangerous because it was installed at the same time that the other hoist, which failed, was put into service. The hoist that is being recommended for replacement is afull two post, aide by aide, inground frame contact, drive over, hydraulic lift with 8,000 lb. capacity. We have budgeted $9500 .00 for this hoist replacement, and the apparent lowest submitted price of $7528.00 will come under Our estimated amount.we Even if should stillwbe ableutoer an cover thatrcostn underground obstaclecle,, l ° We have received two valid quotations from reputable lift installers using specifications that require: 1 . Sawcut and breakout of existing concrete floor. 2 . Excavate and remove existing hoist. 3 . Excavate additional bedrock, pipe, backfill/compaction, and set new lift. 4 . Install fiberglass anodic barrier. 5 . Remove existing floor drain box and replace 2 floor drains. 6. Patch concrete floor. 7 . Fill lift with oil, assemble hoist, and place in service. If there are any underground utilities , conduits, or other unforeseeable obstacles which are encountered, then this work would be extra, and handled on a time and material basis. This is a standard request for this type of excavation. This cost would have to be taken from the original $9500.00 budget amount. Both installers have submitted current comparable quotations, and we submit these quotations for your consideration. Both bidders have bid a Rotary DTO-28H two-post side-by-side lift with factory fiberglassed cylinders, equalizer box and filled oil tank. Both installers are reputable, and had submitted quotations for last years hoist replacement project. Pump and Meter Service $ 7528.00 11303 Excelsior Blvd. Hopkins, Minn 55343 Westside Equipment Co. $ 8087 .00 902 Hwy. 55 (plus cost-plus for any Medina, Minn. 55340 unscheduled excavation) (Westside was the contractor who had the low bid last ,year) ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Accept the low quotation from Pump and Meter Service and authorize installing replacement hoist. 2. Reject both quotations and re-bid them. 3. Install different type of hoist. 4 . Reject both quotations and not install hoist. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1 . Accept the low quotation from Pump and Meter Service Co. to replace the defective hoist. If any unforeseen obstacles are encountered, we will try to keep the total cost of the project under the budgeted $9500.00. ACTION REQUESTED: Accept the low quotation from Pump and Meter Service Co. for $7528 .00 to replace a hoist in the Public Works garage. This hoist replacement is not to exceed $9500. —� PAGE NO. OF No. 3254 l 1 nnnt.n o.n� Maty, APAI/LCCr Inc. SERVICE • SALES a INSTALLATION 11303 EXCELSIOR BLVD. — (612)933-4800—HOMNS, MN 55343 (On Cry. Rd. 3 —Just West of Cry. Rd. 18) FAX (612) 939-0418 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO PHONE JOBPHONE DATE Ci of 445-2211 3-17-89 STREET JOB NAME 500 Caorman Hoist Replacement, Municipal Garage CITY STATE ZIP JOB LOCATION MN 55379 we HEREBY SUBMIT SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES FOR: (1) Rotary DIC) 28H twv-post side-by-side lift with factory fiberglassed cylinders, equalizer box and oil tank 1. Sawcut and breakout concrete floor. 2.- Excavate and re•nove existing hoist. 3. Set new lift, harmer Out additional bedrock, Pipe, backfill, and compact. 4. Wrap Pipe with RaSeal tape. 5. Relmve existing floor drain box and replace with (2) standard floor drains along side west and east side of hoist. 6. patch concrete floor. 7. Fill lift with oil, asseble hoist top, and place in service. EXCLUSIONS; It Any underground utilities, conduits, caazTnon system, etc, except for preplanned floor drain work vrould be extra to this proposal and handled on a time and material basis. ierc WE PROPOSE noted,to furnish mature.ane labor-complete in accordance With ado a scedflwrons for mesem of t Seven thousand five hundred twenty eight dollaz's and no/100--- 7528.00 Bonen R1 Payment to ge made as rolloWe Net 30 da en m"am" H euamt«d m a• p«In«.ell .d,a to a wleo alta In s WOrE- m.nnee m nn. ac re.« m e«NM .u.nnon «.Ln« a, "nor! a .mw e«cm«n«.1naPldap ems c«M.Ill«a«rat««Ir uo«wdnea o n a.n1 w«a..n.an mem.a«r.nd taut.to«nma..ell «r«e«t. an. Joseo b. Rade r iilq.m upon .via«, .oda«t.er«Int e.y«a m c mel. o.«r to c.m brut tomedd«a emu,n«ea«n I«urenc..our woduN ereimy co«nd m w«emm'. jmerem ey°merit noimM Prod Mtldn ens cum«mane.Imur««. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL wI'rine°ii ed`0j;Wirniiwili a"e°n`aee atnns a fllnait'aCoreLOry ane ve nereny accented.you ate autnormdmbo me °B I safe to Day on demand all Cons;and en«nsee Including legal and out Of PPCnm exyenees incurred In connection with the codeamn of amounts due under this contract. 1%%PER MONTH (18%PER YEAR) Interest will be added to uovera halance. Signature Dal of Mmpasnm Sig w. Pueling Systems — Elec ranic Gauging& Sel/Seru Equipment - Compressors Inventory Controls - Fiberglass Tanks & Pipe EPEE Auto Lifts& Parts — Service Station Pumps WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT COMPANY 902 HWy. 66 MEON& MK 66340 (612) 4789672 March 3, 1959 Page 1 of 2 SHAKOPEE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 500 Gorman Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Attn: Jim # 445-2211 SUBJECT: Lift Installation. 1- Rotary Mdl. DTO-28H two-post aide by aide inground frame contact, drive-thru, drive-over, full hydraulic lift. 8,000# capacity LIFT PRICE: S 3,447.00 OPTIONAL: (Strongly Suggested) Fiberglass coating Of underground lift componenet's and taping of underground piping and anode bag attached to help prevent corriaion. ADDITIONAL PRICE: S 840.00 INSTALLATION: • Removal and replacement of existing concrete flooring. . Necessary excavation. + Setting of lift components and backfilling with existing soil. . Piping of underground hydraulic and air linea to nearest wall or column. + Hoist Oil. • Lift assembled, tested, and put into operation. INSTALLATION PRICE: S 1,700.00 UNDERGROUND ROCK. Removal of underground rock required for lift installation along with its disposal and replacement. ADDITIONAL PRICE: B 2, 100.00 continued on next page. page 2 of 2 I CONDITIONS AND CLARAFICATIONS; • Taxes not included. • Freight included to site. • Area is to be free and clear of all obstructions; delays caused by others would be an extra charge on a time and material bases. * EXCAVATION CLAUSE: In the event of conditions such as; under- ground rock, debris, high water table, running soil, wet weather conditions, underground utilities, mud, and frost are in excava- tion area; such will be considered extra and will be charged on a time and material bases. • Excessively thick concrete flooring (over 8" thick) would be an extra charge on a time and materiel bases. TERMS OF PAYMENT: Ecuioment NET; 15 days from delivery; Instal- lation NET; 15 days from invoice date; Invoiced monthly on per- centage of work completed. Balance due 15 days from final in- voice date. A service charge of 1 112% monthly (18x annually) interest will be added to overdue balance. Proposal valid for 15 days. Signed: i ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL; The above prices, specifications, and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are au- thorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outline above. Date of Acceptance: Signature: Title: WESTSIDE EQUIPMEN7 902 HWY. 55 MEDIN 95 55340 4788-9572 , 6 0 Ry 01020 " 0 .Ertro-vaNe teafures Nat makeyvur�• •�• I!'� R 7 ft ' lm tb best buy'Pat17 Adapter Design•AMYILdc Lock- n-0evice -� •Indew.Ment super abuctures"roe roe i� DT-2 H)exfr the ! working extra wprkia"wers rmm for dsterMsierservice corrosion Pmtec'dan:Now all Rotary m- •Exclusive"Levy round lifts am available with an optional ker"rigid eQualiatg p Ot system saves im fiberglass mating that protects the jack stalla"..casts antl r casing against every form of corrosion And prvvidesdew.adabie r Rotary's pmteative fiberglass mating is dperahon r( 4 guaranteed—for l0 years V r MODEL DT028H Capacity:8000 his - SwWon6CFMalr@ 150PSImaimamedl ; I Etre. 72"(Floor level to tap at adapter x . tAm position)Plunger Diameter. 81h _ YpterHeights:4t1A", 6�" and 93¢". 2 (rlml floor level)Adapter Reach:48y <! nowum, 99%1.maximum. For further details contact your local Rotary Lift repre- sentative, or write.'Dover Corporation(Canada)Limited, Industrial Division, 31 Progress Court Unit 10, Scarborough, Ontario M1G 3V5, or Rotary Lift Division, Dover Corporation, P.O. Box 30205, Airport Station, Memphis, Tennessee 38130. Phone toll free 1-84IFT(5438). Inside Tennessee: 1) (901/345-295-2900. -WESTS&DE EQUIPMENT 9`02 HWY. 55 LLQ c I I MEDINA, MN 55340 Mo lDT028H 47R-gr-72 1�eommrem w�drea+am amen Natiwi SMMmE B�15at ¢(xrarct rwa pax @^.n,adm'aoav(n@son TTF -----------,__-- --- PEI_ ` CONSENT Oc Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Deferred Compensation Program (PEBSCO) CONSENT Date: March 29, 1989 Introduction The PEBSCO deferred compensation plan needs technical updating. Background The City has a deferred compensation plan with the U.S. Conference of Mayors. The plan has been updated with technical corrections. The corrections are necessary in order to keep the plan in compliance with IAC Section 457 regulations. Council needs to approve the updated plan. Action Requested Move to approve the updated deferred compensation plan with the U.S. Conference of Mayors and authorize the appropriate city officials to execute the necessary documents. L: = ' Y/0 rl ® O®e 0 P O a I ^ D ♦ i N O ryN N N� u F K obool le t^WW Y N W Y Y W S b�m a 0 0; 0 aJJOWP m T m 1 I i I i L �'J N J N! RN O• Pw� [w,b N P Y CR I a it ffr - K O P C 00 000 K m py y S TT I R OT f T 9AD y 41 O. S AA AARI! D WR _ S 4 m fl CK L. 0 i0 N22 n SP. O IR DDDDDf F K it I �@ 9 C, y j p q rf fff, O 1 s aT0 m y /1 III y ww PMTN u w < " y I c I i N N " 11 j I N I' j 0 p 1 1 • 'i. y P XQ D i Iy y y O le m v - I N Y Y Y Y IY V Y 'Y Y Y j i _ r � ui � ♦ �a I N I n V f I « V « 6 n W o I « f O u W J � J � L e N i a w m N � a Imo _._ ..- - - - —,;,-a , . zala� 4--- � •. _ . _ •. I I I m as P al m Z=�� Sgge u m u ♦ i MN fl _ N r, to i MMI ryNN N F I o . N I�ro ro li w Ire ti xCrom ro�lroro N N m > ' No b®0 tlOUP 1 9 i p m i i r ul u I m I I I � Im♦m♦ Glrom � ii ya ai uV e�'�ida G�-ry♦i�>ai m� -� i ee N Oe �� MN rAO r-llPu mm m0 � ]C >w i0 A P TATTi ' 0000 2P i9 it TT O O ! p --u bPIOG o yy � OI 3]2w2 ~ 0o. Zmm m � Y C0m001 I pp4M1 1 A < oo Fes€ s zzz b rw++ F a A oz g ]�$z zo o P YY ma S - I Al 99991 I n � i I e none I P 1 Imm . ro _C agmkR� e9__ i u u I i m m F yFj N W N Y N U U U m V Y i y �y V m � ^ I N M N O ^ , n U d m m m I Iy I J yJE 'I I. L' F W �O KIK J t I I0i F C a 0 U W a{ m F R r WO < f S �WY j J rZi S SZ u b F F , F F 6 w p ICS i FO O 0 iu W W iJ h I SY �YY 6 6 V = a I q PP mW 1'1 Y1 ' e O♦ 'rr Fr M e9d]9a ami I _ M1 fm- 2 n r e e N ala a a M In o e e M. o f i Y Y , u y N a e P S e � W 0 C i 0 r ♦ o a e O e n e o l N N o 0 a 0i V • m 0 0 a I o a m 0 r j e m m I g m l m � m m' amm m ronryn m � 1 i I P o i J s T I � I I I I Dx um roro ' i uu uu M_ o Y . NmJ NN NJ rrm YV J Vo pp 4J ryryr ' N arm 'm'm ao a oP o0 1 HUD is ro iia GYN as uP r�u'I I < n 2 = Z O D12S3 •1m C 0 4 � 222 m f it = D A I T D � Z YYYY C r D A z z P � y l A I I C i A OAIAa AAIB 1 i 9 f m f f lVl9I '� w D P b P 9 DD9DD A I I I I I e ro - o O yY JN' o - y _ I oIG II m i a I i I I I I I I i � I i a j I Uig � i I I a na I W m'oaE ( I I I i I q I I I a I x j I o «rvrvr j j LLLLCJ < I I I I WW z j I Ir � I m mmm m m m om r o ohm im m m -a m Y o 0 o a r w w r r rrr r r r rr r Y rnn r r r w w F r r r r a 0 W O\ D\ V)b 0 m m N W r Y W O Y �n vl N W NNN N N N r W O p p r N N N H H H w Y p H O r Y W Y m N 0 r -1 �1 O N O S r 0 VI O� O\ Y Y Y W O Y Y n r o 0 0 0 000 O O O Fo �o Ammo w 0 0 0 0 0 0p 0 H H H p n 00 00 0 00 00 00 00 0 0 0 Y 0 m m N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H Fr+ Fr+ Fr.• I n Y 0 0 0 0 000 O O O FO m w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H m H p a' � o 0 0 0 000 0 0 o Fo r r r o 0 0 0 0 0 o r r r r O Om r o o m m m m Y W w Y r Y Y Y r Y r r r r r . . r . Y W W F Y r r . H r r r Y Y Y Y Y r Y r Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y r r r r Y r Y Y 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 00 O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y Y r r r rrr r r� r p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 n 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 00 n n ro a n cn vl mm W I-H F N N N N W Y HZD 00 O N Fw i0 m N O Y Y w m t w vl O -1 O N m m 0 0 0 vl 0 0 F' � w 0 m 0\ O O O w 0 N �n O\ m 0 OFW N Y 0 000 - a n n M M M m y N n O O N L tD N N 3 3 E O tW O a y O L 3 3 3 3 9 2 3 b 3 a r„ Y, ry y M cr W N rt N b 3 ^] +] Ul d m C N 9 w UJ y N W 2 W W K N m K < M p '< W n H H M m la'• C d a y < a y < • a y r` a m M I m M N N 'nC m 0 < a n r � a N N N N N NNN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n -t F F F W w W W w w w w w W w W W N N N N N N N N N N Y N r 0 n H d ry� r = = Y n b r . C T. tJ 3 I-• CO 3 ?1 4 4 4 3 3 < O Y• O A 0!O-' Z < O W a N '� P• y a y 0 W W H m 3 n W O S m WZ W O O W Y O a 3 y lE O N Z r y 1* W hY Y r N a 0 m ryry�J I trl at M N N yn,• y R N O a m a a a• a ry car vo m c y y lD N to a n x -H r r O 0 H Y �D m V� Y N N N O\ vl w O Y Y W 0 O Q\ N O m F W � O N �n OO OO 0 F vi w 0 m Oyi 0 0 0 w 0 N �n O� m 0 N N Y 0 0 0 ' 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O T X N O O O O O) X X O E � G rl M U U m � N 0 Y U F 7 X O nj m A G y 9 m dl Y F F O E qi O > Y N b b ~m x O 07N N N U 3 Y H m " F x N , 0 b w S m > 4 _ O m w a G E dl Vl > U N A .] > 4 A W 5 h W h .i a w O A O�(en OOO O M�OOX w C � �f MSO v�M rl 'D w O w aD�0 m ao TSO N rlH MNOO O 0 0 U � m Y O pp pp m T O O O O O O O O O O O O T C {O{., .� C 0 0 � o 0 0 0 o o 0 O .O+ W Y mV; M H N O VJ m C m W f] ,H0 3 +E+ a GE m 3 0 ?a u > O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ow O F m Y W m G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U CO n) W W N N N N N N N N W O O H N N N N L—OJ m aD .0 O O O O H u F o O O pp N O O O O N N N N N w N N N N N N � O O O O in In in In in u� In v� M T T T .-1 H N rl N N rl N F I I M M X X X X X X X X Z P X X N N N N N N N N E A � � l09MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City A 'nistrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer tl SUBJECT: Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District DATE: March 28, 1989 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses the Outlet Channel from the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District. BACKGROUND: Attached is a letter from Mr. Russell Sorenson, President of the Lower Minnesota Watershed District and accompanying draft copy of a joint powers agreement between the Lower Minnesota and the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District (PLSLWD) . This joint powers agreement basically states the Lower Minnesota will assist the PISLWD in funding the outlet channel repairs if the PLSLWD agrees to withdraw their request for a boundary change. Three watershed districts, the PLSLWD, the Shakopee Basin WMO and the Credit River WMO have petitioned Scott County to revise the watershed boundaries, essentially eliminating the Lower Minnesota from having any jurisdiction in these watersheds. The Lower Minnesota has of course opposed any such boundary changes. Consequently, Scott County has directed all 3 watersheds to work out agreements with the Lower Minnesota which would address the concerns of all parties thereby eliminating the need for any boundary changes. This agreement that accompany's Mr. Sorenson's letter is the PLSLWD's attempt to comply with the County's order. Staff, along with the Assistant City Attorney, has reviewed this agreement and finds it generally acceptable. The agreement does not involve the City of Shakopee and therefore the City would not be held binding to any portion of this agreement in the future, after the City of Shakopee assumes maintenance of our portion of the channel. For the record, the Shakopee WMO has also been attempting to negotiate an agreement with the Lower Minnesota, but so far have not been able to agree on terms. The Shakopee WMO is prepared to pursue the legal boundary changes with Scott County if an agreement cannot be reached, even if the other two watersheds reach agreements. To further update Council on the progress of the channel improvements, staff has recently reviewed and approved of all plans submitted by the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District. Construction will commence on two of the four sections of ditch LG as soon as weather permits. The other two sections of ditch where repairs are needed may necessitate additional easements and the watershed district may be requesting City assistance in condemning these easements. Staff will continue to keep Council informed on the progress. Mr. Sorenson is formally requesting that the City of Shakopee review the proposed agreement and respond on its acceptability. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Find the agreement generally acceptable and respond to Mr. Sorenson on it. 2. Find the agreement unacceptable and request proposed revisions. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alterative No. 1. The Assistant City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and has indicated that it does not bind the City in any way to future stipulations. ACTION REQUESTED: Direct the appropriate City staff to respond to Mr. Sorenson regarding the proposed joint powers agreement between the Lower Minnesota Watershed District and the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District. DH/pmp 16 d Lower Minnesota River Watershed District ♦ eY `'"-- 151 Fest 126th Street BURN3VILLE. MINNESOTA 55337 I Russell A. Sorenson President Cyril H. Eas Vice President Mettill M. Madsen Treasurer Gilliam J. Jaeger, Jr. Secretary Jim A. Re`Sarc ,.anager Lawrence E. Saxsted Engineer Raymond A. Haik Attorney January 18, 1989 I Deloris Lebens, Mayor City Council City of Shakopee 129 East lst Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Re: Surface Water Drainage - Lower Minnesota River Watershed District and the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District Our File No. 1447-001 Dear Mayor Lebens and Councilmembers : We are enclosing for your review a draft of a proposed Joint Powers Agreement to be entered into between the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. The purpose for submitting this draft to you is to enable you to review the agreement and submit any comments you might have to the Boards of Managers of the respective watershed districts prior to any formal execution which is anticipated to occur during February 1989. The Board of Managers of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District has been working with representatives of the Board of the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District in an attempt to equitably apportion the responsibilities for repair and maintenance of a major drainage system flowing through both watershed districts and partially through the City of Shakopee. Our Board understands that this drainage system has become part of the municipal stormwater drainage system for the City of Shakopee and, as such will be taken over by the City of Shakopee in the near future in order that the City can assume responsibility for future maintenance once the watershed districts complete the now-required maintenance envisioned by the enclosed agreement. Deloris Lebens, Mayor 'b ' January 18, 1989 Page two Our Board wishes to satisfy itself that you have had an opportunity to review this agreement and concur with it generally and that you do intend to assume responsibility for maintenance of that portion of the outlet channel from Prior Lake to the Minnesota River passing through Shakopee. We would appreciate your confirmation of that intention in order that those who are benefitted by this surface water drainage system may actively share in the cost of future maintenance. Our Board is anxious to continue to work with not only the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District but the City of Shakopee in maintaining this entire surface water drainage system to serve all affected properties provided that equitable allocation of expenses are apportioned among those who are benefitted from this drainage system. We look forward to hearing from the City of Shakopee and maintaining our excellent working relationship with your community. If you have any questions regarding any of the details or history surrounding the drafting of the enclosed agreement and this district's intent to execute it at the next regularly scheduled meeting, please feel free to contact the undersigned, any one of the Managers or Mr. Larry Samstad of Itasca Engineering, the District' s consulting engineer, or Fred Richards, the District ' s legal consultant. V��yo s. Russell A. Sorenson President, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District SZSAM/14 Enclosure JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT / � U This joint powers agreement, effective this _ day of 1988 is between the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District ("Lower Minnesota" ) and the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District ("Prior Lake-Spring Lake") , political subdivisions of the State of Minnesota, duly constituted and active watershed districts under Chapter 112 of Minnesota Statutes (the "Watershed Act") . RECITALS A. Prior Lake-Spring Lake has made a request to the Scott County Board of Commissioners that it file a petition with the Minnesota Board of water and Soil Resources to extend the boundaries of Prior Lake-Spring Lake into territory presently within the boundaries of Lower Minnesota . Lower Minnesota has made a responsive proposal that in part calls for extension of its boundaries into the territory of Prior Lake-Spring Lake. B. The purpose of the request by Prior Lake-Spring Lake to extend its boundaries was to enable it to better manage surface water drainage over lands tributary to the outlet channel for its Prior Lake Outlet Project. Likewise, Lower Minnesota ' s counter- proposal was intended to enable it to better manage surface water drainage within the Pike Lake subwatershed. C. Operation of the Prior Lake Outlet and maintenance of the outlet channel within the boundaries of Lower Minnesota are now subject to a joint powers agreement dated June 2, 1981, between Prior Lake-Spring Lake and the cities of Prior Lake and Shakopee (the 1981 JPA) . Lower Minnesota is not a party to that agreement . D. The 1981 JPA, as relevant to this agreement, provides for acquisition by Prior Lake-Spring Lake of suitable easements with the cooperation and assistance of the City of Shakopee; original construction by Prior Lake-Spring Lake of the outlet channel; and maintenance of the outlet channel by Prior Lake-Spring Lake until Shakopee alters or otherwise makes use of the channel in connection with its overall drainage plan or in connection with the installation of public services and utilities, at which time Shakopee becomes responsible for maintenance of the channel within its corporate boundaries. E. Pursuant to arbitrators ' findings in a February 1988 proceeding between Prior Lake-Spring Lake and Shakopee involving the 1981 JPA, Prior Lake-Spring Lake is required to make certain repairs to the channel from Pike Lake northward. Prior Lake-Spring Lake has estimated the total costs of the repair project (designated as Project WD76-M88) at $157, 059 and in October 1988 levied a special assessment for its maintenance fund in this amount. The majority of the assessment will not be received by Prior Lake-Spring Lake until mid-1989 . 16 0 F. Prior Lake-Spring Lake has requested assistance from Lower Minnesota in repairing and maintaining the aforementioned channel . Accordingly, and until such time as Shakopee becomes responsible for maintenance of that portion of the outlet channel within Shakopee' s municipal boundaries, in accordance with the 1981 JPA, Lower Minnesota recognizes a responsibility to assist in the present and future repair and maintenance of that channel as it exists within the boundaries of Lower Minnesota and Shakopee. To that end, Lower Minnesota has agreed to provide such assistance and the parties desire to establish an equitable basis for allocating the costs between them, based generally on the respective contributions of water to the channel from the two watershed districts . G. While Lower Minnesota does not desire nor intend to involve itself in any way in any of the parties ' rights and obligations that bind and inure to the benefit of such parties to the 1981 JPA, the parties hereto desire to assist each other in managing the watershed areas that are tributary to the outlet channel from all areas tributary to that outlet channel to the Minnesota River and lie within their respective districts, both in regulating activities directly affecting the channel and in maintaining the channel itself . H. The parties each desire to be notified and have the opportunity to participate in the other' s permitting and regulation of development within the areas affecting the outlet channel from its initial outlet to the Minnesota River. I . The parties believe the foregoing aims can be accomplished without the need for formal changes in the boundaries of either watershed district. J. The parties have authority under Minnesota Statutes §112 .43, Subd. 1(2) , to contract with each other to effectuate the purposes of the Watershed Act and this Joint Powers Agreement . AGREEMENT Based on the foregoing recitals, the parties make the following joint powers agreement under Minnesota Statutes §471 . 59 . 1. General Puroosp. The general purpose of this agreement is to provide for mutual assistance in managing the areas tributary to the Prior Lake Outlet Channel , from its source to the Minnesota River . 2 . C_QntributlOna to Bp r_�RS7 MAiD.rgnAn�e— Project 75_-xI8• Prior Lake-Spring Lake will be responsible for completing its repair project WD76-M88 by preparing plans and specifications in accordance with the arbitration findings previously referred to, and contracting for, supervising and completing the necessary work. Lower Minnesota will contribute 30% of the total costs Of the project, not to exceed a total of $47, 100. The contribution of -2- Lower Minnesota will be paid to Prior Lake-Spring Lake as soon as is practicable after written request of Prior Lake-Spring Lake for all or part of the contribution herein agreed to. Prior Lake-Spring Lake shall be responsible for all costs over and above the amount Lower Minnesota has agreed to pay. If Prior Lake-Spring Lake lacks sufficient funds to pay currently its allocated costs of the project because of delay in collection of special assessments for the maintenance fund, but otherwise can provide adequate assurance that it will be able to obtain sufficient funds to pay its share of the costs, Lower Minnesota agrees to lend to Prior Lake-Spring Lake, upon written request, and upon terms and conditions, including interest to be paid and security to be given by Prior Lake-Spring Lake, satisfactory to Lower Minnesota, such sums as it has available and in its discretion chooses to lend, in return for a tax anticipation certificate executed by Prior Lake-Spring Lake in favor of Lower Minnesota providing for repayment of the loan as future assessments may be and are collected and remitted to Prior Lake-Spring Lake. 3 . Contributions to Continuing_MBintenance Obligations. Prior Lake-Spring Lake shall be responsible for necessary maintenance of the outlet channel in accordance with the 1981 JPA. For a period of three (3) years, Lower Minnesota agrees to contribute 30% of the total future maintenance costs of such repairs on the outlet channel running to the Minnesota River as are agreed or otherwise determined to be Prior Lake- Spring Lake's responsibility under the 1981 JPA, but unless otherwise specifically agreed by the parties, Lower Minnesota ' s contribution shall not exceed $4, 500 per year or a cumulative total of $13 ,500 for such three (3) year period commencing upon the completion of all repair and maintenance work (that is, to the extent not used by Prior Lake-Spring Lake in a particular year, the annual amount will be carried forward and remain available to Prior Lake-Spring Lake until the end of the three year period) performed according to paragraph 2 above. Prior Lake-Spring Lake will notify Lower Minnesota in writing of all proposed repairs and any meetings of its Board of Managers thereon. Lower Minnesota further agrees to provide reasonable assistance at the request of Prior Lake-Spring Lake in reviewing and commenting on proposed plans for the work. Lower Minnesota ' s contribution to the cost of continuing maintenance of the channel will be paid as soon as is practicable after written request from Prior Lake-Spring Lake to Lower Minnesota. 4 . Accounting for COntr utiQns of Lower MinP-e-Sg-ta-.—Prior Lake-Spring Lake will provide to Lower Minnesota statements of estimated and final project costs for maintenance and repair projects to which Lower Minnesota has agreed to contribute, and shall separately account to Lower Minnesota for its contributions. 5 . Exe- i.ae of Perm iting _a0d—RegtL1aJQrPow kr,. Both parties shall actively exercise their permitting and other regulatory powers under the watershed Act with respect to the areas tributary to the outlet channel . Copies of any permit applications with notice of -3- any hearings thereon, relating to any areas within each district and SII tributary to the channel will be promptly given by the watershed district receiving the application to the other watershed district. Each party will also promptly notify the other of any governmental proceedings of which it is aware that may materially affect surface i water management in all areas tributary to the entire outlet channel. Each party will monitor land development within its boundaries and promptly notify the other of current or proposed activity that, although no governmental proceedings have commenced, will likely have a material effect on surface water management in all areas tributary to the outlet channel or constitute action requiring the City of Shakopee to assume responsibility for maintenance of all or a portion of the outlet channel under the 1981 JPA. Whether requested by Prior Lake-Spring Lake or not, Lower Minnesota may provide reasonable engineering , legal and administrative assistance to Prior Lake-Spring Lake, any affected parties, or in any proceedings relating thereto involving surface water management matters affecting all areas tributary to the outlet channel running from Prior Lake to the Minnesota River. 6. Cp4peration Gene d13X• The parties agree to provide reasonable assistance and such information as they may have, upon request of one to the other, that may be necessary or helpful in furthering the purposes of the watershed Act, the 1981 JPA, or this agreement . Lower Minnesota agrees that its watershed management plan under the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act (1981 Laws of Minnesota, Chapter 509, as amended) shall confirm and be consistent with this agreement and its aims . 7. Indemnity. Prior Lake-Spring Lake shall indemnify and hold Lower Minnesota harmless from all liability, cost or expense arising out of or in connecton with the maintenance and repair of the outlet channel by Prior Lake-Spring Lake, except to the extent of Lower Minnesota' s monetary contributions provided for in this agreement; and will assume the defense of any actions arising therefrom in which Lower Minnesota is made a party defendant. B . Term. This agreement shall continue to be effective until expressly rescinded or terminated by either of the parties by the party intending to rescind and terminate this agreement by written notice thereby. 9 . AMgRdme_n_t . This agreement may be amended by a writing signed on behalf of each of the parties . 10. n' tr bution of ProDertY- In the event of rescission or termination of this agreement, all property or surplus monies acquired in performance of this agreement shall be returned to the contributing parties in proportion to their contributions after the purpose of the agreement has been completed. -4- 11 . Withdrawal of Boundary ChangR a es s. Upon the date this agreement becomeseffective, both parties will withdraw their boundary change requests made to the Scott County Board of Commissioners . Both parties further agree that no future requests will be made by either party to modify the boundaries of either party for as long as this agreement remains in effect. If Prior Lake-Spring Lake should terminate this agreement in accordance with paragraph 8 above, then and in that event, the party electing to terminate the agreement hereby agrees to immediately reimburse all monies previously paid by Lower Minnesota for any and all repair and maintenance work done to the outlet channel as provided for hereinabove. 12. Notices. Any notice required to be given under this agreement shall be duly given if delivered personally or if mailed to the parties as specified below, or to such other address as a party designates in writing . If To Lower Minnesota: Russell A. Sorenson, Chairman 151 West 126th Street Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 If to Prior Lake-Spring Lake Don O. Benson Staff Administrator 9690 Colorado Street Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this joint powers agreement effective the day and year first above written. LOWER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT By Its Board of Managers By Its and Its PRIOR LAKE-SPRING LAKE WATERSHED DISTRICT By Its Board of Managers By_ Its and Its -5- STATE OF MINNESOTA) /� U ) ss COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this _ day of 1988, the foregoing joint powers agreement was acknowledged before me by and the and the respectively, of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the District. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss COUNTY OF SCOTT ) On this _ day of , 1988, the foregoing joint powers agreement was acknowledged before me by and the and , the ` respectively, of the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the District . Notary Public 48ZSAM -6- oh MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Enginee-C W4?1J SUBJECT: 5th Avenue Extension Projrectt Fillmore Street to Market Street DATE: March 30 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Attached is a contract extension agreement from our consultant, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Assoc. , Inc. , for providing design services associated with the 5th Avenue Project for Council consideration. BACKGROUND: On February 27 , 1989 the City Council held a public hearing and ordered the plans and specifications prepared for the 5th Avenue Extension Project . This project consists of constructing 5th Avenue from Fillmore Street to Market Street, constructing Main Street from 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue , installing sewer and water in Market Street from 4th Avenue and 7th Avenue and paving 5th Avenue between Spencer Street and Fillmore Street. Staff had proposed to design this project "in-house" unless workloads dictated that our consultant needed to be utilized. On February 21 , 1989 the City Council authorized staff to utilize OSM to perform field surveying for this project. The extension agreement for surveying was for a not-to-exceed amount of $3,500 .00 . This field surveying has been completed. The Engineering Department is currently devoting almost all of staff time exclusive to the design of the 3rd Avenue Reconstruction Project. This design process is expected to consume staff time until around May 1 , 1989• At that time the construction season is nearing and staff will be concentrating most of our efforts on inspection. The other factor that needs to be considered is that this project requires additional right-of-way to be purchased before we can construct the street. This right-of-way acquisition process will take several months and may also involve condemnation proceedings. Therefore the final design of this project will not be able to be completed until later this summer. Therefore staff will be unable to complete the design of this project "in-house" as staff originally anticipated . Attached is a proposal from our consultant, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Assoc. to perform the design services for this project at a not-to-exceed fee of $16 , 800 .00 . This fee is approximately 7 . 5% of the estimated construction costs for this project. Staff has reviewed this fee and finds it to be generally acceptable using current engineering fee guidelines. Attached is a contract extension agreement covering the proposal for Council consideration. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve of the contract extension agreement. 2 . Deny the proposed agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a contract extension agreement with Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Assoc . , Inc . of Mpls . , MN to perform design services associated with the 5th Avenue Extension Project per the attached Scope of Services for a fee not-to-exceed $16 ,800 .00 . DH/pmp BAOrr P `VSchelen MayeNn& V Aisodate5,NG 2021 Fay[Hennepin Avenue Minneapolis,MN 55413 612-331-8660 March 27, 1989 FAx331-3806 Engineers Purveyors Planners City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Attn: Mr. David Hutton, P.E. City Engineer Re: Contract Extension Agreement 5th Avenue Project Dear Mr. Hutton: As per our Agreement for Professional Services with the City of Shakopee, Section 1-A - 3-b (Major Projects), this extension agreement is for the design of 5th Avenue from Spencer Street to Market Street, along with necessary sewer, water and storm facilities, and water and sewer mains in Market street from 4th Avenue to 7th Avenue. Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates agrees to accomplish the attached Scope of Services for a fee not to exceed $16,800. The City of Shakopee agrees to reimburse OSM for these services in accordance with Section IV of the Agreement for Professional Services. If this proposal meets with your approval , please sign below and return one copy to our office. We look forward to working with you on this project. Yours very truly, Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON CITY OF SHAKOPEE & A OCIATESI INC. Dolores M. Lebens , Mayor Robert D. Frigaard, E. Associate Dennis R. Kraft , Acting City Admin . tIoch'n P. Badalich, P.E. e President Judith S. Cox, City Clerk - RDF:mlj Attachment Equal oppommury Employer ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR STH AVENUE PROJECT FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SCOPE OF SERVICES A. DESIGN PHASE 1. Review and evaluation of the feasibility report prepared by the City 2. Necessary surveying work to complete final constructions plans (easement work will be extra) 3. Review testing program and evaluate borings (testing to be paid for by the City) 4. Final project design 5. Preparation of design plans, specifications and bidding documents 6. Preparation of detailed construction cost estimate 7. Prepare and submit necessary permit applications to regulatory agencies 8. Assist the City in advertising for bids and provide recommendations for award of contract B. CONSTRUCTION PHASE 1. Provide required construction engineering services as follows: a. Periodic observations of the work in progress (once a week - 4 hours) b. Preparation of supplementary drawings to clarify working drawings c. Review of shop drawings to determine compliance with plans and specifications d. Review of necessary testing done by testing laboratories e. Final inspection and report of completed project f. Completion of as-built plans for City records ivy MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineej�� SUBJECT: Sidewalk Replacement/Repair Policy DATE: March 24, 1989 INTRODUCTION: Staff has been directed by Council to formulate a sidewalk replacement/repair policy and to draft an ordinance establishing this policy. BACKGROUND: Currently, the City does not have a formal sidewalk repair program. Basically City staff keep an inventory of requested sidewalk repair locations and bids out a contract to complete the repairs City-wide. As the current "policy" requires that the property owner pay for all sidewalk repairs or replacement 1008, there is very little incentive for an owner to notify the City of any defective sidewalk. Consequently, the City has not bid a sidewalk repair contract for several years. Our insurance company, through North Star Risk Services, Inc. , has recommended that the City implement a sidewalk inspection and maintenance program. Attorneys for the League of Minnesota Cities have also indicted to staff that the most difficult sidewalk injury cases to defend are those where Cities do not have an inspection program and repair policy. Additional background information on this issue is contained in the attached memo from the previous City Engineer, Ken Ashfeld, dated December 10, 1987. Another inconsistency that should be mentioned is that if an entire street is reconstructed only 258 of the sidewalk is assessed, but if a single property owner requested that the sidewalk be replaced on its own, they would pay for it 1008. PROPOSED POLICY Staff is proposing the following sidewalk repair/replacement policy. 1. The Engineering Department would develop an annual inspection program to inventory defective sidewalks. The ideal would be to inspect all sidewalks annually, but staff limitations prevent that. Rather, the City would be divided into zones and each year a different zone would be inspected. b A/ 2. All defective sidewalks within each zone would be repaired or replaced during that year. 3. In addition to zonal repairs, a list of sidewalk complaints will be maintained and those deficiencies would be repaired first. 4. Funding for sidewalk repairs shall be as follows: a. Less than 5 years old. Sidewalks installed under a City Contract shall be replaced at no expense to the property owner. (100% City funded) . Sidewalks installed by the property owner shall be replaced at the property owners expense (100% property owner funded) . b. Older than 5 years Sidewalks older than 5 years shall be jointly funded 50% City and 50% property owner. The 50/50 split was arbitrarily selected. To be consistent with the reconstruction policy, Council may want to use a 25% property owner and 75% City split on sidewalk. C. If the sidewalk is damaged by the property owner or occupant of the property, the property owner shall pay 100% of the sidewalk replacement cost, irregardless of the age of the sidewalk or who installed it. 5. The City Engineer shall determine which sidewalks are defective and in need of repairs or replacement. In general, any defect in the sidewalk will justify repairs but the following criteria will be used as guidelines determining defective sidewalk: a. Sidewalks that pond water or ice b. Sidewalks that are cracked and heaved greater than 1/2" . C. Spalled sidewalk. (sidewalk that has developed numerous holes and pockets due to the aggregate chipping off) d. Cracked sidewalk. e. Sidewalk that has developed other hazards such as tree roots, water valves, etc. 6. The brick pavers downtown will be in included in the sidewalk inspection and repair program. f RECOMMENDATION: Staff is proposing that the City adopt the aforementioned policy by resolution or ordinance. Items that Council may wish to discuss is the funding proposal, which includes a 50/50 cost split and establishing 5 years as the cut off between the funding alternatives. Council may also want to add curb and gutter to this policy. Staff also feels that the City of Shakopee needs a Comprehensive Sidewalk Plan for the installation of new sidewalk. The current guidelines are inconsistent and subject determination by the Planning Commission or Council. Staff will be working with the consultant preparing the Comprehensive Plan Revisions to establish an overall sidewalk plan. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to direct the appropriate City staff to draft a resolution or ordinance establishing a sidewalk repair/replacement program. Note: The City Attorney may want to advise Council on whether this policy should be adopted by Resolution or Ordinance. DH/pmp MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer ko SUBJECT: Sidewalk Replacement/Repair Policy DATE: December 10 , 1987 INTRODUCTION: The City does not currently have a sidewalk replacement/repair policy but included $2 ,000 .00 in the 1988 budget in anticipation of a policy decision. BACKGROUND: I discussed the absence of a policy with attorneys for the League of Minnesota Cities. Apparently the number of cases as the result of injuries due to poor sidewalks are on the rise and the most difficult cases to defend are those where Cities do not have an inspection procedure and repair policy. Attached is a survey of how other cities are handling their sidewalk repair programs . It is evident that there is no consistency among the policies. It is my opinion that the City is in a much better position if periodic inspections are completed of the sidewalk condition and take "reasonable actions" to correct hazardous conditions. Reasonable action is somewhat ambiguous but to ignore hazardous situations can constitute negligence. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City take action to develop a sidewalk replacement/repair policy which would establish periodic inspections and funding mechanism. Inspections The City should provide for adequate staff support to accomplish annual sidewalk inspections. Sidewalks that pond water and ice should be programmed for systematic repair. Sidewalks that are cracked or heaved to cause an elevation fault between 1/2" and 1" should be programmed for systematic repair. Sidewalks that are cracked or heaved to cause an elevation fault in excess of 1" or those that cause an undue hazard due to other conditions should be repaired immediately. Sidewalk Policy December 10 , 1987 Page 2 Funding Policies Sidewalks that need repair that were installed under a City contract and less than 10 years old should be funded by the City. Sidewalks that need repair that were not installed under a City contract and less than 10 years old should be paid for by the adjacent property owner. Sidewalks that need repair that are older than 10 years should be jointly funded 50% City/50% adjacent property owner. REQUESTED ACTION: Move to direct City staff to formulate a sidewalk replacement/repair policy and draft an ordinance for Council review. KA/pmp SIDEWALK SIDEWALK REPAIR/REPLACEMENT POLICY SURVEY REGULAR INSPECTION COST CITY POLICY PROCEDURE RESPONSIBILITY St. Anthony No No City Crystal Yes Yes Shared Robbinsdale No No Property Owner Brooklyn Center No Yes City Bloomington No No City Columbia Heights No Yes Property Owner Champlin N/A Blaine N/A Apple Valley No No City Edina No No Property Owner Burnsville No No Shared Richfield No No City Austin No No Property Owner Fridley Yes No City Golden Valley No No City Brooklyn Park No No City Hopkins No No Property Owner Eden Prairie No No City Coon Rapids No No City c It is a winter day and Iris Smith is walling downtown to do some shop- ping. Suddenly she steps on slippery spot and fags. In another area of the city, Fred Jones is out on his daily walk. Suddenly, he stubs his toe on a _ crack m I sidewalk and fags. If they ,Q jj ya r ( r 'r�'1 S' '^-; were injured as a result of these falls, Kali 11 3 L3 there is a good chance that Mrs. Smith and Mr.Jones will bring claims against trouble free e the city for payment 11 their damages. a.� Nhen is a city legally responsible for damages when someone falls on the Ellett A. Longfellow, LMCIT Staff Attorne sidewalk? Is there anything that a city Y can do to reduce the risks of such fails or to reduce the possibility that the city will be responsible for those damages? Is the adjacent property owner ever responsible for the condition of the sidewalk? Minnesota law Under Minnesota law, the city has the duty to exercise reasonable care to keep its sidewalks in a safe condition. The sidewalks me in the city street _ _ t right-of-way and are the city's primary responsblity.The city is not an insurer _ of its sidewalks,however,which means that someone who sues the city must Prove that the city did something _ wrong or was negligent. In order to do this one must show that: there was a / "defect" in the sidewalk; that the city had actual or constructive notice of the defect; that after receiving such notice, the city failed to remedy the defect - within a reasonable time: and that the failure caused the person's injury. The defect - There is no law, rule, or case that has defined what constitutes a --- - "defect" in a sidewalk. In one case, �_. Brittain v. City of Mmmeapohs, the _.- court said a city is not liable for every 111 'mere inequality or irregularity in the surface of the way." Courts have looked at such factors as the size of the difference, its location, and if it is in a heavily traveled area in determining r- , :I - if there was defect. Similarly, in regard to ice and snow, there is a rule that says that a city is not responsible d a sidewalk is "merely _ slippery. ' There must be evidence ' that the snow and ice was uneven or rough or that there was a dangerous accumulation. Another consideration Trees in sidewalks can cause prob- lems unless a city uses a treatment such as the one at left. Photos by Brenda Piatz. 6 Minnesota Cities for liability for ice and snow is whether it was the result of natural or artificial to be found r city may be more likelyto befound responsible if it was created by artificial conditions rather than by natural weather conditions. Notice Actual notice exists when someone - told the city about the particular prob- lem before the fall. Constructive notice _s--- -- --�— exists if the city would have known about the problem if it had done reason- able inspections. eason-ablemspections. Failure to rem - edy the defect Asn the case the defect, there is no set figure as what constitutes - "reamnable time." In a recent case cvy`tt concerning ice and snow, Nremann v. Northwestern College, the court held that a reasonable time can begin after a snowstomn ends. The cause of the injuries Cracks around manhole covers and eroded areas in sidewalks could rause an Even if there was a defect and the accident and lead to suits against the city. city had notice of it and failed to correct it, the person still must show that the the sidewalk or shovel the snow, the 1. Determine what the city's cri- defect or the city's actions were the city will do it and charge back the cost teria are for repair and replace- rause of the injuries. on the owners property taxes. These went of sidewalks. ordinances are very helpful in creating a method for cities to pay for sidewalk In n unity maintenance. They do not, however, 2.Develop a sidewalk inspection In 1986, the Mumesom Legsislature remove the city's responsibility for the Program. ection passed an amendment to the Minnesota primary maintenance of the sidewalk. P program would involve city workers and officials Municipal Tort Liability Act which The city has a duty to the public at states that cities will not be liable for large to provide safe sidewa8cs and it actually walling the sidewalks and not- "any claim based on snow or ice con. cannot delegate that duty to the adja- nng any problems that they see. If the ditions on any . . . public sidewalk that cent property owner. city has a limited number of personnel, does not abut a publicly-awned bailing Adjacent property owners do have a it may want to focus first on well- or publicly-owned parking lot, except duty not to obstruct or create problems traveled areas such as downtown dis- when the condition is affirmatively in the public sidewalks. They may be tricts• In addition to formal inspections, caused by the negligent acts of the responsible in some claims if they cre- the city should tram employees who municipality.11 ated the dangerous condition or if the are in a position to observe the side- This does not take away the city's instrument that created the condition walks while performing other duties to responsibility for exercising reasonable was there for their benefit. For exam- note any problems with the sidewalks care for all sidewalks but does provide pie, claims have resulted when some- and to report them to the appropriate a basis for a dismissal of some snow one has tripped over a water valve personnel. and ice claims.The focus in these cases cover on the sidewalk. The water valve may be whether the city "affirmatively was serving the adjacent property 3. Keep inspection records. caused" the condition.In a case nvoly- owner so thew owner would be respon- City employees should date and sign ng snow on a street a court deter- sl for that, at the same time as the all inspection records. It is important meed that the immunity did not apply city was responsible for the sidewalk. that the city has records because by bemuse the city created the condition In some ice and snow cases, the con- the time someone makes a claim, the by plowing the snow into a pile. (Robin- dation is the result of water dripping employees may not be with the city son v. Hollatz) from spouts or awnings on adjacent any longer or may not remember. The Property owners buildings. This too records should also indicate what area could result in liability for the property of the city the employee inspected, any Adjacent property owner. problems he/she discovered, and what owners the city will do or did about the Many cities have ordinances which Reducing risks problem. require adjacent property owners to To reduce the risks of injury on construct and maintain the public side- sidewalks and at the same time reduce 4. Remedy any problems. walks. Such ordinances usually say that the possibility of successful claims, the The city could repair the problem if the property owner does not repair city should follow these steps. itself or send a notice to the adjacent May 1988 7 Jib � property owner telling him/her to Design and important to know who they were and repair it and stating that if the owner what the specific contract said. As with fails to do so within a certain time, the cons truction 1SSlll?S other contracts, the city should ensure city will correct the problem and charge Trees in sidewalks that there are hold harmless or indem- the property owner for the cost of the There have been many claims nify clauses in the sidewalk contracts. repair. If a condition presents an imme- against cities for falls related to grates, It is difficult for a city to have perfect diate danger to people, the city should curbs, and uneven areas around trees sidewalks and the law does not impose put a warning device over it. Employ- in sidewalks. Many options are avail- a standard of perfection. A city must ees should keep records of all repairs. able for the sidewalk areas surrounding exercise reasonable care. Implement- trees and the city should examine them ing sidewalk inspection and repair pro- 5. Develop a complaint policy. carefully before deciding on which to grams shows that the city is concerned The city should develop a policy on use. The city round should document and that it is malting an effort to how to respond to complaints about that it did consider different options maintain its sidewalks. sidewalk problems. This policy should and what factors were important in If anyone would like further informa- include making a record of the com- making its final decision. Such factors tion about what cities can do to reduce plaint and a procedure that the city will could be cost, maintenance, and advice their risks of liability for sidewalk falls, follow after receiving the complaint. from professionals such as landscape contact: The records should indicate who noti- architects. North Star Risk Services, fied the city of the problem, the date, Loss Control Division what the person said was the problem, Suite 550 Water valve covers and what the city did in response to 1401 West 76th Street the complaint. The city should inspect Another design issue that is the Minneapolis, Minnesota 55423 focus of many claims against cities is the problem area and decide if under the placement of water valve covers in (612) 861-8600 the city's criteria, the sidewalk would sidewalks. The adjacent property need any repairs. The record should League of Minnesota Cities include a note as to whether there is a owner may be held responsible for such Insurance Trust problem, and i[ repairs were nares- falls due to the covers or at least share 183 University Avenue East or if the city put a warning device the responsLtity with the city. If the St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Bary, over icity knows of specific problems or (612) 227-5600 reoccurring problems,it should attempt to remedy them as soon as possible. Supporting cases The city could also pass an ordinance Brittain v. City of Minneapolis, 250 or resolution stating that the adjacent Minn 376, 84 N.W. 646 (1957) property owner is responsible for the Hall v. City of Anoka, 256 Minn. maintenance of the valve cover. 1314, 97 N.W.2d 380 (1959) EXPERTS Robinson v. Hollatz, 374 N.W. 2d IN WATER Contracts and designs 300 (Minn. APP. 1985) TANK , The city should keep records of all Niemann v. Northwestern College, PAINTING & design and construction contracts for 389 N.W. 2d 260 (Minn. App. 1986) REPAIR sidewalk projects. In some cases, the Robinson v. Hollatz, 374 N.W. 2d Videotaped sidewalk problem may be the responsi- 300 (Minn. App. 1985) Inspections bitty of the engineer, architect, con- Stemitzke v. Donohuelewelers, 249 In Color tractor, or landscape architect and it is Minn. 514, 83 N.W. 2d 96 (1957) ■ •s"eeee ema tour mao..a •A W WA Memb •py,17 Pers e.Po­ •a.mra,.ow carr Ron .ownmen o"rPo.r •y,p aYalirp eM Gamtlnq WE PROVIDE EXPERIENCED LEGAL •rven Banoma eM S.0" REPRESENTATION TO CITIES EXPANDING THEIR MUNICIPAL • UTILITIES SERVICE TERRITORIES. P.o. Box 88007 Wagemaker Law Office Sioux Falls, SD 57105 106 South Ninth Street TELEPHONE: Olivia, Minnesota 56277 (605)336-6506 or(605)361-0137 Telephone: 612-523-2161 8 Minnesota Cities 10 • J MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer sUBJECT: Market Street, From 1st Aven to 7th Avenue DATE: March 23, 1989 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses the Market Street corridor between 1st Avenue and 7th Avenue. BACKGROUND: On September 20, 1988 the City Council directed staff to prepare a preliminary report regarding the extension of Market Street through the railroad tracks and also improving the street between 1st Avenue to 7th Avenue. Council further directed staff to discuss this item with the Planning Commission. On January 5, 1989 the Planning Commission discussed this item and recommended that the City Council initiate the street improvement by ordering the preparation of the feasibility report for Market Street between 1st Avenue and 7th Avenue. On January 21, 1989 Council ordered a feasibility report prepared for Market Street between 1st Avenue and 7th Avenue, including a new railroad crossing, by Resolution No. 3010. Since that action, several other developments have occurred which staff feels will have an impact on the feasibility of this project. First, 5th Avenue was ordered extended through to Market Street. Staff is currently preparing the plans & specifications for this project. This project as ordered also includes the installation of sewer and watermain on Market Street between 4th Avenue and 7th Avenue. The construction of 5th Avenue and the installation of utilities on Market Street will promote development in this neighborhood. Staff feels that the City should take a "wait and see" attitude regarding the extension of Market Street through the railroad tracks. Depending on the development that occurs and future traffic demands, a railroad crossing on Market Street may or may not be needed. Secondly, the consultant preparing the comprehensive plan update for Shakopee has recommended not upgrading Market Street to a collector street status but rather leave it as a local street. The consultant has also recommended not adding a railroad crossing on Market Street for that same reason. The Comprehensive Plan Task Force will be discussing this idea at upcoming meetings. Staff feels that any decision involving the extension of Market Street through the railroad tracks should be postponed until after the new comprehensive plan has been completed and adopted by the City Council. Based on the above discussion, staff feels that it is premature to prepare a feasibility report on Market Street at this time. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Concur with staff and postpone completing a feasibility report on Market Street until a future date or when the need arises. 2 . Direct staff to complete the feasibility report as previously ordered. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to direct staff to cease working on the feasibility report for street improvements to Market Street between 1st Avenue and 7th Avenue until such time as the Council determines the improvement to be necessary. DH/pmp Ick MEMO TO: Dave Hutton, City Engineer FROM: Steve Hurley, Engineering Tech III SUBJECT: City Maps DATE: March 30, 1989 INTRODUCTION: The Engineering Department has updated the City maps and they now need to be reproduced on mylar in various scales with appropriate overlays. BACKGROUND: Past procedure has been to update all maps and overlays on a yearly basis and have new composites created , i . e. a base map photographically merged with an overlay, such as our zoning maps. This was last done on an extensive basis in 1984 . Since that time ink changes have been made to the base maps and zoning maps have been printed on a yearly schedule but no other major printings have occurred to give us totally up to date base maps and composites. The current large base maps have been in use since 1979 and are in need of being replaced since these are the maps from which all others are created. Our large base map inventory includes three base maps, 42" x 56" ; one large, 3 piece base map and seven overlays. From various combinations of base maps with and without overlays we need to create originals and composites (Base + Overlay) in three sizes, 11 " x 17" , 24" x 36" , and 42" x 56". Plus the large three piece base map needs to be redone in a more manageable size , nine pieces each 24" x 36" . This will very probably be the last time such an extensive printing of maps will need to be done. The reason for this is because we currently have a digitized full City base map in our computer system. Updates and overlays can be added as time allows giving us the capability to print any scale map or portion of a map with any combination of overlays. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Print all maps and composites splitting the cost among Building, Engineering, Planning , and Public Works for a total cost of $1 ,711 .00 . 2 . Print only the Full City and Urban base maps and their appropriate composites for a total cost of approximatly $850 .00. jo K 3 . Print all maps and composites except for the 11" x 17" sizes and the 9 pieces urban base for a total of $1 , 165 .00. There are many combinations possible but the alternatives listed provide the most for the dollars spent. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Updated maps are vital to many departments in the City and to the general public since many are sold over the counter. Anything less than total updating would cause delays and added staff time when maps are needed that we don' t have. Recommend Alternative No. 1 . REQUESTED ACTION: Move to approve purchase of map printing services from Minnesota Blueprint for a total cost of $1711 .00. SH/pmp /o1. CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 F- Memo To: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator From: George F. Muenchow, Dir. - Shakopee Community Recreation Subject: Purchase & Erection - Swimming Pool Sun Shelter Date: March 31, 1989 Introduction A current capital amount of $ 6,000.00 has been budgeted for the purchase of a sun shelter to be erected over the concession area of the Shakopee Municipal Swimming Pool. This project needs to be accomplished prior to the beginning of the coming swimming season. Background A shelter approximately 40' x 24' is needed. A couple of years ago when this capital item was inserted into the five year capital improvement plan, we did not take into consideration that in 1989 Park Staff is too busy to take time to erect this proposed facility. As a result quotes have also been solicited for erection of the shelter in addition to the cost of the material. As a result the cost of the project is about $1,000 over the budget established. Staff recommends that this project be approved and that the capital budget be amended as appropriate from the General Fund. Quotes received: Flanagan Sales, Inc. . . . . . .$ 9,010.00 Minnesota Playground. . . . . . 7,054.52 Alternatives 1. Reject quotes since they are above the present $ 6,000 budget item. 2. Refer back to staff to secure costs for a smaller structure recognizing that a smaller structure is not particularly desireable. 3. Authorize purchase and erection of sun shelter as presented. Recommendation Authorize the purchase and erection of a 40' x 24' sun shelter from Minnesota Playground, Inc. at the cost of $ 7,054.52 to be erected in the concession area of the Shakopee Municipal Swimming Pool. The Heart of Progress VaJJey An Equal Opportunity Employer X105 r ... ' ,'��- _.u. +i:i.es�?Ca:: +.1.s •,::. .lir, -�© ., D.CONTEMPORARY PARK SHELTER Brown Steel U.S.Patent,Canadian Patent Sheller Style Sire No. tee The contemporary metal shelter that can be rise,]singly or in combinations for carports,drive-in restaurants,car n 24'x22' 3420 2420 dealers,gun clubs,Picnic areas,etc.'rhese sheltersei11 last for years and are rugged enough to withstand the seayresl ,---T— 24'x4/1' 3440 2440 abuse.Die formed, 10 gauge,bolt-together trusses Mount j 30"into concrete Piloting_Gsy kp enx-t,no lid,]welt I i ng required.Roof panels are self-lockingal lop to form water- TT-T 24'x60' 34611 2460 tight joint.Buy one shelter nowand add nl it in the future. -- - --- - --NO.2400 Series,Support Posts—hot-clipped galvanized TTTT 24'x 80' 3480 2450 after fabrication.NO.3400 Series,Support posts—haled-on brown Powder Cusuafter fabrication. TTT,'T 24'x 100' 3490 N10 • Decking is 3005 aluminum alloy,.032 thick,painted - r white ml the bottom and brown on the top. • Roof has a T fall in 10'and a live load capacity of 30 lbs. list:;wind load 20 Ills.psf I Iigher loads available. • Main supports are Ill gauge steel Llpered frnn016"In lOV' • All hardwaevandassembly instructions furnished. F. S FEL FRAME SHELTER sled f anis•shd4•n arc dvvignyJ to he duetbly and vandal - o"'I' a Illet'aresuitahk for eilyurisolated'el ing.. • Suplorling columns 6"x 6"x!4e^ tuhular.ateel with 1s..i brown Powder Coat Knish_ -. Coat • o un llish "x 111"t'/r"wbularsnv-0with brown l'�nvdrr (u❑finish_ • Roul de.king.,2"x 6"SOLIthern yrlluw pine with❑ 11gue t'•'.:. and groove tonsil nt tion. No. Size No. Size 5550 16x20' 8854 lol'x -11 _ 8851 20'x28' 8855 30'xb2' 8852 20'x 36' 8956 30's 60' P 8853 20'x44' Id MINNESOTA PLAYGROUND, INC. • P. O. BOX 27238 GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55427 QUOTATION QUOTE# 9080100 Mr. George Meunchow SHIP ZIP: 55379 3/21/89 Park & Recreaton Dept. 129 LeVee Drive Shakopee MN 55379 UNIT EXT. OTY ITEM # DESCRIPTION WGT. PRICE DISC. PRICE 1 3440 CONTEMPORARY PARK SHELTER 2445. 0 5647. 00 5647. 00 2445. 0 LBS SUB TOT: $5647.00 LESS DISC: 51129.40- FREIGHT: $436.92 TOTAL: $4954. 52 INSTALLATION OF SHELTER WITH CONCRETE FOOTINGS. . . . . 52, 100.00_ Signed: Note: Prices Quoted are Good for 30 DaYs Only_ Acceptance of this quote indicates Your agreement to abide by all Terms of Sales and other Conditions. Orders shipped within 30 days unless otherwise noted. Call (612)546-7787 / FAX (612)546-5050 MN WATTS (800)622-5425 CC . LOCAL: (612) 633-1906 FAX: 612-633-2019 rMis I FLANAGAN SALES, INC. Suppliers of Park Recreational Equipment 8 Site Amenities a RO.SOX 12886.ST.PAUL MN 55112 WATS MN 80G-362-3508 1980 W.CTY.RD.C.ROSEVILLE.MN 55113 OTHERSTATES 800-328-3557 r , DATE: __MarCh 1J_1989 _ Shakopee Community Recreation 129 East Levee DriveMr. George Muenchow Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 CONTACT PERSON,Mr. PROJECT: J TELEPHONE: 445-2742 In compliance with your request of March 3, 1989 far . price quotation on _ Shelters supplied by Quality Industries, Inc. , are wish to submit the following: Catalog Quantity Number Description Unit Price Extension 1 2234 42 ' x 24 ' Full-Season Shelter, galvanized 5,510.00 $5,510.00 legs and truss, with white deck Quotation in effect until: _____April 21 1989 SVb-Tata) $5,510.00 We quote you as ebaye F.Q.S. Jobsite Sales Tax exempt Shipment can be made in: 4 to 6 weeks ARO Freight allowed Terms: 30 Days Net Invoice TOTAL $5,510_00 IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR ORDERING: 1. Tbepurcheseomershouldbemedeoutl Quality Industries , Inc. .Theywillinvoiceyou upon shipment 2. Send the order to FLANAGAN SALES, INC. as shown above,thereby authorization can be completed before the order Is processed. 3. TO EIIPEDITESHIPMENT,mree itemsshould showonyourpumhese request taxexamption numth 111 exempt),ADDRESSFOR BILLING,end ADDRESS FOR DELIVERY. FLANAGAN SALES, INC. "7 Bye, B a J. Flanagan YW IAIIVM1 CC , LOCAL: (612) 633-1906 FAX: 612-633-2019 'b rmiI FLANAGAN SALES, INC. Suppliers of Park Recreational Equipment 8 Site Amenities e RQ BOX 12886.ST. PAUL,MN 55112 WATS MN 800362-3508 1460W CTY.RD.C.ROSEVILLE,MN 55113 OTHERSTATES WO-328-3557 r March 15, 1989 Shakopee Community Recreation DATE: _-- — _ 129 East Levee Drive CONTACT PERSON:Mr. George Muenchow Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 PROJECT. — J TELEPHONE: 445-2742 L March 3, 1989 Installation of Shelter In compliance with Your request of to, a Price tuofafion on ---- supplied by Flanagan Sales, Inc. we wish b submit the follosh,: Catalog Description NumberDescription Unit Price Eztm eion Complete installation of #2234 Quality 3,500.00 $3,500.00 Industries Shelter on existing concrete slab. Quotation in effect unt - __April-21 1989 Sub-Total $3,500.00 We there You as above F.O.B. — Sales Tea Shipmsrd can W made in: — — Freight — — Terms: 30 Days Net Invoice TOTAL $3,500_00 IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR ORDERING: Flanagan Sales, Inc. .They will involcoyou upon shipment 1. Thephrch•soorderahouldbemadaomt 2. Sana the ordorto FLANAGAN SALES, INC. ea shown Seem,thereby authoNzetion can be completed before the order Is processed. 3. TO EXPEDITE SHIPMENT,threellem•shouldshowon yourpurch•aeretuest taseaomptlon number ilea•mpt),ADDRESSFOR BILLING,and ADDRESS FOR DELIVERY. FLANAGAN SALES, INC. By r1.a J. 'la gen Ila MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer SUBJECT: Boiling Springs Lane + DATE: March 29 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Staff has received a citizen request to solve a drainage problem in the Boiling Springs area. BACKGROUND: Mr . Reed Otterblad of 9186 Boiling Springs Lane has contacted staff about a drainage problem near his residence. Basically, his house is situated at the lowest point in the surrounding area and during rainfalls or snowmelt the water ponds around his house substantially. Mr. Otterblad has requested that the City correct this situation. For your information, Mr. Otterblad is a mute- deaf and is sometimes difficult to communicate with. This area has developed into 2 .5 acre lots over the years. Some of the homes were built when this area was part of Eagle Creek Township and some were built after the City of Shakopee annexed the township. Apparently, each lot developed on its own rather than as a subdivision, hence there was little thought given to drainage. Please refer to the attached map showing the area and specifically Mr. Otterblad' s lot. Boiling Springs Lane (originally 16th Avenue and 90th Street) was constructed as a gravel road prior to the City assuming jurisdiction. The road was constructed several feet higher than the surrounding areas. The general drainage in this area is west to east, although there is a substantial area at the same elevation that does not drain. The construction of the gravel road essentially created a dam ponding all of the water west of Boiling Springs Lane, centered on Mr. Otterblad' s lot. Shortly after the area was annexed , Mr. Otterblad applied for a building permit to construct a house. At that time, the Building Inspector informed Mr. Otterblad that this area was unusually low with inadequate drainage and that the soils were also bad. City staff apparently recommended against constructing a home in this area. Mr. Otterblad chose to build anyway, and raised the elevation of his first floor several feet above the surrounding land. In 1982 , several property owners in this area petitioned the City to pave the road and in 1983 the road was paved. As part of that project, an "equalizing culvert" was installed at elevation 735 to allow the ponding water to equalize on both sides of the road , rather than pond all on one side of the road. The feasibility report for this project discussed constructing a drainage ditch easterly to Eagle Creek as one alternative, but the Council did not order this as part of the project at that time. Staff has done a preliminary investigation of the drainage problem in an attempt to respond to Mr. Otterblad. It is quite apparent that the only outlet for this standing water is to construct a ditch east to Eagle Creek. The easterly 500 feet of this ditch would be in the City of Savage. Permanent drainage easements would need to be acquired from several properties , including one property in the City of Savage . The construction of the ditch would not eliminate all of the standing water but it would reduce the depth of the water to approximately 1 foot during major storm events. The ditch would be approximately 3 feet deep and 1100 feet long. The cost to construct the ditch has been roughly estimated at $9 ,000 .00 . A 30 foot permanent drainage easement would need to be acquired for the ditch. The easement acquisition costs are estimated at $6 ,000 .00. The total project costs would be in the $15 ,000 - $20 ,000 range. To adequately study this situation, a Feasiblity Report should be prepared. Per the current Storm Sewer Utility Policy , 25% of the costs would be assessed to the area directly benefiting from the improvement as a Special Benefit Cost. The remaining costs would be funded from the Storm Sewer Utility Fund. Mr. Otterblad has requested that the City Council review this situation and take action on it. Mr. Otterblad was notified of the Council meeting and was informed that he might want to send a representative to the meeting. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Direct staff to prepare a feasibility report on the project. 2 . Determine that this is a private drainage problem and take no action. RECOMMENDATION: While it may be true that this situation could be considered a private drainage problem which existed prior to the development of the area and was not corrected during development, the fact remains that there is a severe ponding situation in this area and the Council must decide if the City has any obligation to correct it. Staff believes that if the City doesn ' t construct the improvements, they probably won' t get done and the problem will continue to exist. Staff also feels that the Storm Sewer Utility Fund was created to handle situations such as these. The City Council cannot expect property owners to pay an annual Storm Sewer Utility fee while periodically being subject to flooding. Staff recommends ordering a feasibility report on this project. The feasibility report would address the proposed improvements , project cost estimates, area that would directly benefit by such improvements , funding and any assessments . As part of the report, the City of Savage would be contacted regarding a joint powers agreement to complete the project. Attached is Resolution No. 3035, ordering the preparation of a feasibility report. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3035, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of a Report on Drainage Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane and move its adoption. DH/pmp OTTERBLAD I J 16th qVE. � r MAXIMUM WATER DEPTH 2.3 FTr �\ . 1 \ Ram, 077-Ck&4D < _ F A N L (� Ol C 3 RESOLUTION NO. 3035 A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A Report On Drainage Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Boiling Springs Lane by drainage facilities 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 Mutton, 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 `3"ONSENT 116 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting C ' y Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Vacation of Easements Wit 1n Lot 1, Block 2, Valley Rich 1st Addition DATE: March 28, 1989 INTRODUCTION• The attached resolution sets a public hearing for May 2, 1989, to consider the vacation of utility and drainage easements lying within Lot 1, Block 2, Valley Rich 1st Addition. BACKGROUND: There is a drainage easement within Lot 1, Block 2, which encompasses approximately 2/3 of the lot, making the lot unbuildable. In addition there is a 20 foot utility and drainage easement which runs along the lot lines of three of the sides of the lot. the owner of the lot would like the existing easements reduced so that the lot would be buildable while retaining easements necessary for the City's utility and drainage needs. The easement to be vacated is shown in attachment A. The easement to be conveyed by the property owner back to the City is contained in attachment B. Attachment C shows the 20 foot utility and drainage easement lying along the lot lines of said lot. The property owner is asking that this utility and drainage easement be reduced to 10 feet, except where is abuts the easement the owner is conveying to the City. Attached is a memo from the City Planner to the Planning Commission which will provide additional information regarding the proposed development of this lot. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3033, setting a public hearing for the vacation. 2 . Do not adopt Resolution No. 3033 . 3 . Table the request for vacation and ask for additional information. RECOMMENDATION• Alternative No. 1, Adopt Resolution No. 3033 . RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 3033 , A Resolution Initiating the Vacation of Utility and Drainage Easements in Lot 1, Block 2 , Valley Rich 1st Addition, Scott County, Minnesota, and move its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 3033 A RESOLUTION INITIATING THE VACATION OF UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS IN LOT 1, BLOCK 2, VALLEY RICH IST ADDITION SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, a petition has been received signed by the property owner of Lot 1, Block 2, Valley Rich 1st Addition, requesting the vacation of a 160 foot drainage easement within said lot, as well as the vacation of a 20 foot utility and drainage easement lying along the property lot lines; and WHEREAS, existing easements within said lot make construction upon the lot impossible; and WHEREAS, the property owner would like the easements reduced in size and is willing to convey to the City the easements necessary for utilities and drainage; and WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council that part of the existing said easement .serves no public use or interest; and WHEREAS, a public hearing must be held before such action can be taken and two weeks published and posted notice thereof must be given. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that a hearing be held in the Council Chambers on the 2nd day of May, 1989 at 7: 30 p.m. or thereafter, on the matter of vacating drainage and utility easements within Lot 1, Block 2, Valley Rich 1st Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that two weeks published notice be given by publication in the Shakopee Valley News and posted notice be given by posting a copy of such notice on the bulletin board on the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse and the bulletin board in the Shakopee City Hall. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 4th day of April, 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1989. City Attorney MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Vacation of Drainage Easement Lot 1 Black 2 Valley Ridge 1st Addition DATE: March 30, 1989 INTRODUCTION• Mr. Chris Anderson has submitted a petition for the vacation of the drainage easement on Lot 1 Block 2 Valley Ridge First Addition. The City Council will be setting a public hearing for the vacation for their May 2, 1989 meeting. The Planning Commission should review the proposed vacation and indicate to the City Council whether or not the vacation is in conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND: In 1979 the City received a preliminary and final plat application for a subdivision containing two lots located on a private roadway South of 13th Avenue near the East end of Shakopee. At the time, the City Engineer had recommended to the Planning Commission .and City Council that the plat not be approved because the street shown on the plat did not connect with a dedicated public street and because the developer had not provided a detailed drainage plan for the site. The City Planning Commission and City Council approved the plat with the conditions that a drainage easement be dedicated on Lot 1, Block 2 and that a 20' drainage and utility easement be provided around the perimeter of the lot. The plat as signed and recorded dedicates the drainage easement as shown in attachment A. In the Fall of 1988, Mr. Chris Anderson decided to proceed with the purchase of the property to construct a building for his business on the property. Since that time, Mr. Anderson has submitted a conditional use permit for the construction of his business on the property (see agenda item Sa. ) . Mr. Anderson approached the City staff regarding the drainage easement on the property and the procedure for vacating a portion of the drainage easement in order to allow him to construct a building in that area. The City staff informed him that he would have to supply the City with a detailed drainage plan including calculations for the site. Mr. Anderson has had an engineering firm submit the drainage plan which has been approved by the City Engineer. Mr. Anderson has also submitted a petition for vacation of the existing drainage easement and signed an easement agreement to grant the City a new drainage easement in conformance with the drainage plan (Attachment B) . In reviewing the easements that were dedicated with the property Mr. Anderson discovered that a drainage and utility easement of 20' was dedicated around the perimeter of the property. Since the City presently only requires a 10' drainage easement he has also included in his petition a request to reduce the perimeter easement to 10' where it does not abut the new dedicated drainage easement (attachment C) . The City Engineer has reviewed the request for reducing the perimeter easement and will be recommending to the City Council that the perimeter easement not be reduced from 20' to 101 . The Engineer feels that the 20' may be needed along Maras Street in order to accommodate future reconstruction of the street. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The Planning Commission can offer and pass a motion finding that the vacation of the drainage easement does not conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan and recommend to the City Council that the vacation of the drainage easement should be approved subject to the granting of a new drainage easement in conformance with the drainage plan, and that the 20' perimeter drainage and utility easement be retained by the City. 2. The Planning Commission can offer and pass a motion finding that the vacation of the easements as requested by the applicant do not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and therefore should be approved by City Council subject to the granting of the new drainage easement in conformance with the drainage plan. 3 . The Planning Commission can offer and pass a motion finding that the vacation of both easements is in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and therefore should not be approved. RECOMMENDATION• The staff recommends alternative $1 . ACTION REOUESTED: Offer and pass a motion as outlined in alternatives 411, 2 or 3 above. ATTACHMENT "A" EASEMENT TO BE VACATED � T ssa NC SCALE n N C9_4/"3P E a • °o \9 � ♦ o v \ C 2 0 S .♦ ,o \ O fix?. a ` u ` � Z � a a La sr 2, Z V � N 1avNf m Pc- cF br, J �✓G'Sf' Slo7.�o�r Z"� I Hensen Thorp -� -� Pellinen Olscn Inc. ATTACHMENT "B" PROPOSED DRAINAGE EASEMENT ti T NO SCALE `30 14 x) ed 8 1/ Q - m 16 4 N ° ° tl g ' " Vi W N n 8 n ra � � cent /Sa.n �• V Jatilh ARLt OP(eY/ N - The n°Nh /:ne eF rh< .reuN+ nk4 � tart West 567. 6¢ Hansen Thorp .� Pe!Iinen Olson Inc. NII jl �' ATTACHMENT "C" - IV REDUCE EASEMENTS ALONG PERIMETER OF Imo+ LOT LINES TO 10 FEET, EXCEFT ABUTTING EASEMENT TO BE CONVEYED TO CITY ti SS• x0 SCALE y2 ILI �Q R� d 6 NAL fS� ,-7� La es/ E B tr t\ O a n ` V � V 0 �Oy 4 � l 1 n "I• �� n u O W N Z ` 3 ° v o 0 a P P 8 lJQ.77 ° TT nerve, /•ne F ��/ N V 10(/N .30 FOGY Of ' TTe zo nline ei +h< a°uN+ M ke' of !rr f hest SG7. 6¢ 1,7Hensen Thorp 1 P=llinen Olson Inc. VALLEY RICH IST ADDITION JIB Ih ,r' r"�• . °rO^e sa��02rN B 2Rg B 66'aMo�k- {— o a � s66•� \ a E• I °,r _3a E UJ ttl _ N :- .Z c ?n a G `AGE fA M d N 3 Q 1 230.62 6e.0O 2<032 CONSENT Hc. MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting Cit�;t Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk �r RE: Vacation of 160 foot Drainage Easement Within Lot 1, Block 1, Clay's lst AdditionV DATE: March 28, 1989 INTRODUCTION: The attached resolution sets a public hearing for May 2, 1989 on the vacation of a 160 foot drainage easement lying within Lot 1, Block 1, Clay's 1st Addition. BACKGROUND: The City has received a petition from Mr. Cecil Clay for the vacation of a 160 foot drainage easement lying within Lot 1, Block 1, Clay's lst Addition. (See attached memo from the City Planner to the Planning Commission for additional background information. ) Mr. Clay has agreed to provide the City with a temporary easement during the construction of the Upper Valley Drainage Project. This 100 foot temporary easement will permit the City to intrude upon the property to perform minor grading which will allow the property to drain into the new storm water drainage system. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3034 setting a public hearing. 2. Do not adopt Resolution No. 3034. 3 . Table the request for vacation and ask staff for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative No. 1, adopt Resolution No. 3034 setting a public hearing. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 3034, A Resolution Initiating the Vacation of a 160 Foot Drainage Easement Lying Within Lot 1, Block 1, Clay's 1st Addition, and move it's adoption. JSC/tiv CLAY'S 1ST ADDITION _ x M uxC_w M muaw M w a iia u rnr 160' drainage easement to be vacated. 8 8 :a 1 �I IN .F a � 1 ^I I I agba xl 1: �%8a gi OG� ii !: V ei J �! 1 TMC fpRM I I I I a — 1 3 I I I dv 1 I ' �Me swn uxz or�ssc.ain¢z Z `y$ � � y m xc,n ux wttc eusss— '= ' -; : I ( C-- RESOLUTION NO. 3034 A RESOLUTION INITIATING THE VACATION OF A 160 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT LYING WITHIN LOT 1, BLOCK 1, CLAY'S IST ADDITION, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, a petition has been received from the property owner requesting the vacation of a 160 foot drainage easement lying within Lot 1, Block 1, Clay's 1st Addition; and WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council that said easement serves no public use or interest; and WHEREAS, a public hearing must be held before such action can be taken and two weeks published and posted notice thereof must be given. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that a hearing be held in the Council Chambers on the 2nd day of May, 1989 at 7:40 p.m. or thereafter, on the matter of vacating the 160 foot drainage easement lying within Lot 1, Block 1, Clay's 1st Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that two weeks published notice be given by publication in the Shakopee Valley News and posted notice be given by posting a copy of such notice on the bulletin board on the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse and the bulletin board in the Shakopee City Hall. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 4th day of April, 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1989. City Attorney ill MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Vacation of Drainage Easement Clay's First Addition DATE: March 30, 1989 INTRODUCTION• Mr. Cecil Clay has applied for the vacation of a 160' drainage easement dedicated with the platting of Clay's 1st Addition located north of Eagle Creek Boulevard. The City Council will be setting a public hearing on the vacation request for their May 2, 1989 meeting. The Planning Commission should review the proposed vacation and determine whether the vacation is in conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND: In 1978 Mr. Cecil Clay applied to the City for approval of a preliminary and final plat for Clay's First Addition located North of Eagle Creek Blvd. and East of Marschall Road. In approving the final plat for Clay's First Addition, the City required the dedication of a 160' drainage easement along the North side of the property. The City required the drainage easement at the time because the proposed Upper Valley Drainageway was to be constructed through this area and the exact site for the drainageway had not yet been determined. This drainage easement allowed the City the flexibility to locate the drainageway on the rear portion of this property. Since approval of the plat in 1978 the design for the Upper Valley Drainageway has been completed and the drainageway will be located just to the North of Clay's First Addition. Because the drainageway will not cross this property, the Engineer has determined that there is no further need for a permanent drainage easement within the plat. The Engineer is recommending that the drainage easement be vacated in exchange for the granting of a 100' temporary drainage easement allowing for the City to regrade and construct the drainageway adjacent to this property. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The Planning Commission can offer and pass a motion finding that the vacation of the drainage easement does not conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan and should be approved by the City Council subject to the granting of a temporary 100' drainage easement to the City. 2. The Planning Commission can offer and pass a motion finding that the vacation of the drainage easement is in conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan and therefore should not be approved. RECCMSgNDATION- Staff recommends alternative $1. ACTION REOUESTED• Offer and pass a motion as outlined in either alternative 41 or i#2 listed above. lav TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Sewer Bill Adjustments DATE: April 4, 1989 Introduction Staff is receiving requests for adjustments to sewer bills due to fall lawn watering. Background The new sewer billing amount appeared on residential sewer bills (SFUQ sent out last Friday. Many sewer bills are increased due to fall• lawn sprinkling after the drought and subsequent reseeding in late summer/fall. Sewer bills are based on water usage from about September 15 to March 15. The policy for adjusting sewer bills does not provide authority for staff to adjust bills due to lawn watering between September 15 and March 15. Staff has received several requests for adjustment due to lawn watering last fall. The attached letter is one such request. The author of the letter had the sewer bill go from $8.49 to $19.88 due to lawn watering in the fall. Of course, water that goes on the lwan does not go down the sewer. Alternatives 1. Status Quo - no adjustment in bills or any adjustment has to have separate Council action. 2. Authorize staff to make adjustments to sewer bills due to fall 1988 lawn watering and treat this authority as a temporary exception to the policy. Recommendation Alternative number 2. Action Recuested Move to authorize staff to make adjustments to residential sewer bills due to fall 1988 lawn watering. c O /� I/ oC, �...Sw•-tee�aWc$�v. Ent_ - 1Yt r✓ic� / 9 Y9 IAJ4 a�fi�es-..Ax i2LA•.�F-� ??b ac�cQ•,?n •c o' V�-� a !/NQ da ` d �S'e• eiL�a-aac� o� �c ��•oS�n-Q3 �1`L`G�n-86, 17 44 U / , MR. RALPH C, LENZMEIER 311 W. STH AVE SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 x CITY OF SHAKOPEE • INCORPORATED 1870 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE,SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 553741376 (612)"5-3650 ,1 April 3 , 1989 Shakopee City Council 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mayor Lebens & Councilmembers: In 1978 the Shakopee City Council established by ordinance the Community Development Commission. The duties assigned to the Commission consisted of maintaining an ideal industrial and commercial climate in the City. This past year the Community Development Commission recognized that economic development in terms of new industry was not occurring in Shakopee. At that time, the Community Development Commission surveyed other communities who compete with Shakopee for industrial prospects to ascertain why developers were not locating in our community. The findings of the survey revealed that Shakopee' s competitors for industrial development including the cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Lakeville were aggressively promoting industrial development within their communities. Additionally, these communities were offering development incentives to businesses who located within their community. In response to the lack of industrial growth within our community and the competitive factors which became obvious as a result of the survey, the Community Development Commission proposed that the City of Shakopee adopt an industrial development incentive policy. The Commission proposed that the industrial development incentive policy simply allow Shakopee to compete with our neighbors to lure qualified industrial prospects to our community. Last October, the Shakopee NRA unanimously endorsed an economic development incentive policy which provided City officials with the tools necessary to attract businesses to our community. Unfortunately, in order for Shakopee to grow in terms of our tax base we must offer incentives which are comparable to our competitors. Growth in Shakopee's industrial tax base is necessary in order for us to reduce the tax burden on Shakopee residents. In addition to the increase in tax base which was one of the primary development criteria for development prospects eligible for the City's industrial development incentive policy, a minimum of 50 full time job equivalents had to be guaranteed by the prospect. The Community Development Commission would like to point out that an increase in tax base is not the only benefit derived from a new industrial facility in our community. Jobs The Heart Of Progress Valley AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER and the acquisition of homes by employees of an industrial factory in our community also have a positive impact on our community's tax base and economic picture. For the past four months City officials have been aggressively working to lure Mebco Industries to Shakopee. After lengthy negotiations, Mebco Industries decided that they would locate their industrial plant in Shakopee providing that the City would agree to provide tax increment financing and industrial revenue bond assistance as setforth in the City's policy. Mebco Industries exceeded the development criteria standards setforth in the City's industrial development incentive policy in all areas. Mebco Industries is a fast growing company with 50 current employees. upon locating in Shakopee the employment base would be increased to 80 employees with the possible expansion to 500 employees within the next five years. On March 21, 1989 the Shakopee City Council decided that they would not offer the tax increment financing assistance to Mebco Industries as provided in the City's industrial development incentive policy. The Shakopee Community Development Commission would respectfully request the Shakopee City Council to reconsider their action. The Community Development Commission strongly believes that in order for Mebco Industries to select Shakopee as the site of their new facility, industrial revenue bonds and tax increment assistance as setforth in the industrial development incentive policy is essential. The Community Development Commission recognizes that in light of the current tax situation many residents have a negative perception of tax increment financing. The Community Development Commission recognizes the need for tax increment financing and is totally convinced that if tax increment assistance and industrial revenue bond financing is not provided to Mebco Industries they will proceed with their building plans elsewhere in the Metropolitan area. We would also like to remind City Council that no new tax increment bonds will have to be sold for this project. Bond proceeds are available due to the closure of the Shakopee Valley Mall Project. Additionally, the proposed project will be attributing tax dollars to the School District per the City's agreement with the School District. The negative perception perceived by the development community as a result of City Council's action on this issue may also be devastating for Shakopee's community image. With highway projects planned for completion within the next ten years, Shakopee may become an attractive site for industrial development. However, until such time that these highway projects are complete, we must maintain a proactive and positive stance on attracting development to our community. If you do not feel that it is necessary for us to compete with our fellow - neighbors in offering development incentives, then Shakopee's tax base will not grow in terms of industrial, residential and commercial development. Hence, we will continue to see an increase in residential property taxes in our community. The Community Development Commission is extending an offer to share with City Council any facts about what our neighbors are offering in terms of industrial development incentives. We are also very knowledgable of Mebco Industries development plans and would be pleased to share with the City Council the positive aspects that Shakopee would attain if Mebco Industries were to locate within our community. We would request that the Shakopee City Council reconsider their decision on Mebco Industries at their first meeting in April. Sii c erry J s, hairperson Shakopee Community Development Commission cc: Shakopee Valley News MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Confidential Memorandum DATE: March 31, 1989 Enclosed is a confidential memorandum from Mr. Krass. If there is a desire to discuss it, please contact Mr. Kraft and an executive session can be set for discussion, sometime in the near future. lar offices Phillip R K ass-undo - K 71 ,� S(-I LachlanJames B Muir Dennis L.Monroe j�t(/�11\J�\J James e Cron Barry K Meyer & Colleen M.7lende Jay D.Goldberg MON ROE POrn D atricia A. TNmler rcvor R.Walsten Mark J.Maness- rn""d Kam A.Carlson.GPA. Diane M.Carlson .czn,flw cmimaspamr i Robert J.Walter CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM 's1of°m°10 inf1tlon1a +Nan Mmlo J nbuou kY TO: Mayor and City Council City of Shakopee DATE: March 22, 1989 RE: Bridge and Mini-By-Pass Project File No. 1-1373-220 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Enclosed please find my response to Mr. Howe's March 7, 1989 letter to David Hutton. I believe my response is in conformity with the directions you have given staff in the past with respect to the issues involved in the parking lot acquisition. As I understand your direction, staff is to take actions necessary to accomplish the construction of the -mini-by-pass- while at the same time seeing to it that property owners who may have An interest in the parking lot property through assessments they have paid are protected. The state has indicated they intend to acquire this property only from the city and they do not at this point recognize the interests of property owners in the public parking lot. Mr. Howe's opinion to that affect came after his consultation with Assistant Attorney General David Phillips, whom I have dealt with before on municipal matters. Mr. Howe understands, however, that it is not a decision to be made exclusively by the State of Minnesota. The Scott County Dietrict Court will ultimately decide whether or not the assessed property owners have any rights in that parking lot. Keep in mind that after the Scott County District Court makes its ruling, it is certainly possible for some party to appeal. The trial and/or appeal of this issue does not have to delay the project in that the city can give a temporary construction easement to the state to commence construction while any appeal is occurring. As I indicated to Mr. Hove, both Mr. Hutton and I would recommend such a course of action by the city council. If I am mistakened in my understanding that the city council's policy is to do this project while making certain that the issue of assessed property owners' rights are brought to the court's attention and a ruling made, then perhaps we might wish to consider scheduling an attorney/client meeting. Very truly rs ERASS 0 CHARTERED hi ip Eras. PRE:mlw Reply to: Marschall Road Business Center 327 Marschall Road.F.O.Bar 216. Shi lmpec.Minnesota 55379 Telephone:(612)445-5080 FAX(612)445-7640 Southpoim Center.Suite 1100.165011'est 82nd Street. Bloomington.MinnmM 55431 lblephone:(612)885-5999 FAX(612)885-5969 amm�r� Philln,,.:"F:rMnft K R A S S I James M Cron Iknnis h Mnnnre 1K`((.���\l U\ .lames 8.Cron Barry K Meyer & Gdlmn M.'Itrnde J.m_.D CnMherg MON ROE Orlin h 7P vvu Br R.Holsten Patricia i\Ni-Her Mark J.Momess, ceannra Frnt A Carlson.CRA Diane M.CarKnn .r rw cmim,isp.,.mi ..un.wonw.o om.ou kbtrerl J.Waller *.Im.wmn�m ma�.im wma March 22, 1989 Mr. E. R. Move District Right of Vey Engineer Minn. Department of Transportation District 5 2055 North Lilac Drive Golden Valley, MN 55422 Re: S.P. 7009 (T.M. 169) Bridge and Mini-By-Pass Project Our File No. 1-1373-220 Dear Mr. Rowe: Thank you for taking the time to discuss the above-referenced project with me. As I explained to you our city council is most anxious that property rights involved in the city owned parking lot be protected, and if such rights exist, the appropriate owners of those rights receive just compensation. As I explained, both the acquisition and improvement of the parking lots in question was assessed to approximately 100 property owners located in the central business district. You have informed me that the Minnesota Department of Transportation policy and procedure with respect to the acquisition of the city parking lot will be followed and that procedure mandates that the state will obtain and submit to the city an appraisal shoving fair market value. If the city declines to accept the amount of the appraisal, the state will institute an action in eminent domain to condemn the property rights in question. You have informed me that condemnation action will be against the city government of the City of Shakopee. I indicated to you that I expected the city council would probably reject the appraised value, not so much in dispute of the amount in question but because of the city council's concerns over whether or not the assessed property owners do in fact have rights with respect to that parking lot. I further informed you that when the state commenced its action against the city to condemn the parking lot, I fully expected the city council to direct its legal staff to take such legal action as is necessary to bring this issue before the court for a determination as to whether or not the assessed property owners have property rights in this parking lot. If a court determines such property rights do exist, Replym: Marschall Road Busmess Cemer.327 Marschall Road P.O.Bot 216 Shakopee.MinnemU55379 '@lephone:1612)445-5080 FA%(612)445-7640 Southpoint Center.SuimlID0.1650HEst82nd Street. Bloomington Minnesota 55431 'Rlephone:(612)885-5999 FAX(612)885-5969 Page -2- March 22, 1989 I would expect the court to order the state to include those property owners as respondents in your action for eminent domain. If a court determines no such property rights exist, then the state will have included the only appropriate property ower, that being the City of Shakopee. Please understand, Mr. Hove, that the city is not attempting to make this project difficult or more expensive. The city council is on record supporting this project and the official map designating the right-of-vay for this project has been adopted. The city wishes to cooperate in every way it can with the state and the only concern being raised here is the issue of property rights for the assessed property owners. Should the state need a temporary easement for construction purposes while the legal decisions respecting this issue are being made, I would certainly recommend the granting of such temporary construction easement, as would our City Engineer, David Hutton. You may wish to consider allowing some room in your acquisition timetable to address this issue. Please do not hesitate to contact myself or Mr. Hutton if you believe this matter needs some additional clarification. Thank you again for your cooperation and consideration. Very truly yours, KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED Phillip R. Kress PRK:mlw cc: David Hutton, City Engineer The Honorable Mayor Delores Lebens City Council Members Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator ,%0E rs Minnesota "o Department of Transportation District 5 � 2055 No. Lilac Drive (OF ra�' Golden Valley. Minnesota 55422 (612)593- 8510 March 7, 1989 Mr. David E. Hutton City Engineer 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55422 Re: S.P. 7009 (T.H.169) Bridge and Mini-by-pass Project Dear Mr. Hutton: This is in response to your January 30, 1989 letter regarding the proposed acquisition of a city owned parking lot. I have reviewed with the Attorney General's Office, the acquisition of the city owned parking lot that was financed through assessment of the Central Business District. The Department of Transportation will proceed to acquire the parking lot from the fee owner, which in this case happens to be the City of Shakopee. The D.O.T. will pay the City the fair market value for the property. What the City does with the payment for the property is their decision to make. Sincerely, 6 a-� 12 E. R. Howe District Right of Way Engineer An Equal Opportunity Employer