Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09/19/1989
MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: September 15, 1989 1. The Shakopee Area Catholic Schools have asked that 6th Avenue between Sommerville and Lewis be blocked off on Saturday, October 7th between 8:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. They will be conducting their annual walk/bike marathon on this day. They have discussed their route with Gerald Poole, at the Police Department. John DuBois, Acting Chief of Police has oked the blocking of 6th Avenue during this time. 2 . William Krueger, Centennial Investment Corporation, has requested a refund of five months portion of the 6 month liquor license fee paid in June, 1989 for the on-sale liquor licenses at Canterbury Inn. You will remember that Council recently amended the City Code to allow for monthly proration of on-sale liquor licenses, and made it retroactive to July 1, 1988. Pursuant to Council policy, therefore, staff is processing the request and will issue the appropriate check in the amount of $4,487.50. 3 . At the Council meeting on September 5th the question was raised as to whether or not the Conditional Use Permit for Superamerica restricted truck parking. The answer is no. For your information a copy of the CUP No. 438 is attached. 4 . At the Council meeting on September 5th the question was asked whether or not there would be an annual review of the shopping Venter income status (Eagla Creat: ^laza) . The answer is yes, the income will be reviewed annually. 5. Mr. Coller has advised that an Ordinance changing Councilmembers salaries can be adopted any time prior to January 1 when the new Council is seated. The ordinance, however, may not take effect until the new Council is seated. He will be preparing the appropriate ordinance for Council consideration at the next Council meeting. 6. Attached is a letter from the Minnesota Department of Health with results of a pesticide analyses conducted on water samples collected from City Well No. 6. 7 . Attached is a letter from Jon Albinson, Valley Industrial Realty, regarding commercial and industrial property taxes. S. Attached is the monthly Building Activity Report for August, 1989 9. Attached is the Revenue and Expenditure Report as of August 31, 1989. 10. Attached is the Community Development Commission agenda for September 20, 1989. 11. Attached is the Energy and Transportation Committee agenda for September 20, 1989. 12. Attached are the minutes of the July 19, 1989 meeting of the Energy and Transportation Committee. 13. Attached are the minutes of the August 15, 1989 meeting of the Community Development Commisstion. 14. Attached are the minutes of the August 9, 1989 meeting of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. 15. Attached are the minutes of the August 29, 1989 meeting of the Police Civil Service Commission. DRH/jms 3 CONOISIONAL U56 PaflNZT RESOLVTZON NO. 438 WHEREAS, Su rAl11Er]Ca having Od Z Y as filed an application for a Condrtlonal Use Perms[ dated 1 2 under the provisions of the Shakopee Zoningasrfollowe, Section 11.04 Subd. 6 CUP to reconstruct a motor fuel station. and WHEREAS, the present zoning for the parcel on which the Conditional Use Peandt is being requested is designated as: B-1 WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being and vds is described as: - 1195 E. First venue WHEREAS, WHEREAS, upon hearing the advice and recommendation of the City Planner and upon considering the suggestions and objections raised by the affected property owners within a radius of 350 feet thereof in a public hearing duly held thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAAOPEE PLANNING COISSION OF THE CITY OF SHAROPEE, MINNESOTA, that the aforementioned MM Conditional Use Permit application be and is hereby: Approved as follows: - 1) A landscape plan must be submitted for approval by the _ .- City Planner pr or to issuance o a ui ing perm t. 2) Cano v li htin must be diracted downward. g roducts. - 3. Applicant shall agreeto not conduct outdaoi Stora a of p I BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Shakopee City.Code, Section 11.04, Subd. 6C-12, if an approved Conditional Use Permit is not utilized within one year. from datehereinapproved or by _ November 7th 19 86 it shall become null and void.. Adopted in regular session of the Shakopee Planning Commission of de City of Shakopee, Minnnes%ta held this ..7th `-day of November - Chairman of he P a Ing Commissron - ATTEST: - -cci Planner - - -- - -- 1° 11/84 b minnesota department of health 717 5.0.delawara at. Po.box 9441 mimwapolis SS40 August 29, 1989 O 012)Q33 Shakopee City Council c/o Ms. Judith Cox, Clerk City Hall 129 East First Avenue CITY Cr Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Council Members: This letter is to inform you of the results of pesticide analyses conducted on water samples collected on July 13, 1989, from City Well No. 6. The sampling was performed as part of the routine monitoring of your water supply conducted by the Minnesota Department of Health. As indicated by the attached pesticide test results, atrazine was detected in the well water. This Department has utilized available health risk informa- tion to establish recommended allowable drinking water limits for exposure to this chemical. Listed below are the level at which the chemical was detected and the currently recommended allowable limit. Recommended Level Detected Allowable Limit Chemical (micrograms per liter) (micrograms per liter) atrazine 0.04 3.0 The concentration of this chemical is below the currently recommended allow- able limit. Based on the concentration of pesticide detected and the available health risk information, this Department offers the following recommendations or comments: 1. There is no need to limit the use of the well due to the presence of atrazine as long as the concentration of atrazine remains below the recommended allowable limit. 2. This Department will continue to monitor the pesticide levels as a part of our routine public water supply surveillance program. If you have any questions, please contact me at 612/623-5227. Sincerely yours, Richard D. Clark, P.E. , Supervisor Public Water Supply Unit Section of Water Supply and Well Management RDC:TAH:ter Enclosure cc: Greg Buzicky, Minnesota Department of Agriculture Art Young, Water Superintended an equal opportunity employer ` X29<567 q Or g,for s.FTT MJlKBCTA C©ARM. NT CF l A rH rN T�!J�l „G Cheau+l l+ecrtaries Vct:dn �;Z RECERYED . f>•G C:panic Cl+e+utry Unit n w$$f;� „ Nte Collschd: J af��2120 Eta` txTER Mw_TSE"a ON_T orL To: Date Receird::ZZ, � (; Crain Field Collected by' en �n ILnk R Cut lady e: L+o Field - Cont+tner - ttnaer µ-re; Vaale 0et_ription MueOer Tape d H . di I I I Analysis fsdw t 00tic.-t 91 a.a ' d WLATILE K +6t %;MATILE l9L W 464 I iz 463 I W4L �MATILZ K. by LT7T, IT FQfiCICES, CRA 576 s 420 RE37ICICES, CH-MISATEO Ce:E Ff3TICI0E3. V-Sk FVIM& STI SPECIAL SkVLE HOLM$ S60 Field Hotel: Lab Ibt" 571. ! MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Date CMEMICAL LABORATORIES Reported: 8-2-89 PESTICIDES IN WATER (CONCENTRATION IN UG/L) QUANTITATION; LIMIT 8912288 E9igee 84'1-2 0 Alachlor 0. 02 Atrazine < 0. 02 0. 04 Butylate < 0. 02 Chlorpyrifos < 0. 01 Cyanazine 0. 1 Dialiate < 0. 05 EPTC < 0. 01 Fonofes 0. 01 Linuron 0. 5 Methyl Parathion < 0. 01 Metolachlor < 0, i Metrihuzin < 0. 05 Phorate 0. 05 Propachlor < 0. 01 Simazine 0- 05 Trifloraiin 0. 05 Date Collected: _i3l-S9-_-71.3-89 7-13-8 . Date Receiv?d7,131---9 7-13-89 7-13-89 Date Extracted, 7-17-SQ 7-17-8/ 7-17-89 Date Analyzed * 7-25-89 7-25-89 7-25-89 FIELD BLANK: NONE NONE NONE QUALITY CONTROL SPIKE QUALITY CONTROL DUPLICATE MATRIX: NONE i MATRIX: NONE FOUND TRUE UG LIG % REC. Alachlor 0. 0 ' Atrazine 0. 0 Butylate 0. 0 : Chlorpyrifos 0. 0 1 Cyanazine 0. 0 ' Diallate 0. 0 EPTC 0. 0 Fonofos 0. 0 Linuron 0. 0 Methyl Parathion 0. 0 ' Metolachlor O. O t Metrihuzin 0. 0 I Phorate 0. 0 Propachlor i. 0 ' Simari ne 0. 0 i I ri0. 0 1\( • 7 VIR VALLEY INDUSTRIAL REALTY September 11, 1989 Mr. Dennis Kraft City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Commercial and Industrial Property Taxes Dear Dennis: In a recent conversation with a real estate broker doing site search analysis for a perspective manufacturing business which is considering Shakopee for its operations he pointed out that he had done a variety of research on commercial/industrial property taxation for numerous cities throughout the metro area. His client wished a comparison of property tax cost for the municipalities they were considering as locations for their new corporate plant. The broker contacted city assessors and requested information on 1989 commercial/industrial property taxes payable per $100 of estimated market value. The results of his research provides a better understanding of how the commercial/industrial property taxation for the City of Shakopee stand in comparison to other municipalities around the area. We provided the following information for whatever purposes you may choose to use it for. We hope you will find it of value for distribution to the City Council and other interested parties. We will be forwarding a copy of this to the Commmunity Development Commissioners for their information. Please consider the following: COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY TAXES Per $100 of Estimated Market Value Shakopee 6. 19 Chaska 5.25 Eagan 5.01 Plymouth 5.10 Bloomington 5. 17 Maple Grove 5.50 Eden Prairie 5.28 Chanhassen 5.28 As is evident from the above information, Shakopee does not fare well in the level of commercial/industrial property taxation as compared to other municipalities around the metropolitan area. These figures are for the total tax bill 1244 Canterbury Rd..P.O.Box 509,Shakopee,MN 55379•Bus.:612-445-3242 Res.:612-472-7925 l September 11, 1989 Page 2 that would include county, city, school district, fiscal disparity and other tax district items. We hope you find this information of use as it may relate to the current research being done by a variety of groups in the Shakopee area. Thank you for your interest in this matter. Respectfully, LLEY INDUSTRIAL REALTY Jon R. Albinson Broker C.C. Brian Brennan, Allianz Investment Corporation Barry Stock CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT PERMITS ISSUED August, 1989 - Yr. to Date Previous Year Number Number Valuation Number Valuation No. YTD. Single Fam-Sewered 9 66 4,750,615 12 50 3,609,711 Single Fam-Septic 2 6 734,000 1 10 1,071,700 Multiple Dwellings - 2 222,000 - 2 216,800 (# Units) (YTD Units) (6) (6) - (-) (4) - Dwelling Additions 11 63 258,671 3 42 196,713 Other 2 9 184,590 1 5 61, 595 Comm. New Bldgs 1 6 1,122,700 1 2 300,000 Bldg. Addns 1 1 1,000 1 8 643,000 Industrial-Sewered 1 1 1,445,000 - 1 915,000 Ind-Sewered Addns 0 2 102,990 - 1 575,000 Industrial-Septic 1 1 172,000 - - - Ind-Septic Addns 1 1 10,000 - - - Accessory/Garages 9 28 184,165 1 17 124,986 Signs & Fences 5 52 61,041 10 49 90, 185 Fireplaces/Wood Stoves 1 5 15,900 1 6 20, 000 Grading/Foundation 1 11 1,407,920 - 1 500 Remodeling (Res. ) 3 18 112,890 2 20 96, 550 Remodeling (Inst. ) 0 1 97,230 - - - Remodeling (Comm/Ind. ) 3 28 2,150,019 - 15 204,000 TOTAL TAXABLE 51 300 12,945,501 33 231 8, 125,740 TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL 1 1 97,230 - - - GRAND TOTAL 51 301 13,042,731 33 231 8, 125,740 No. YTD. No. YTD. Variances 2 4 1 8 Conditional Use 3 16 3 15 Rezoning - _ 2 �.. Moving - 1 3 Electric 29 229 37 203 Plumbing & Heating 30 255 28 192 Razing Permits Residential 0 1 1 3 commercial - - Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date. . . . . . . . 4,357 Jeanette Shaner Building Department Secretary CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN AUGUST, 1989 8329 Hardrives, Inc. 6898 E. Highway 101 Addn. $ 20, 000 8330 Edman Builders 1788 Marschall Road Addn. $ 10, 000 8331 Brad Haugdahl 1021 Eastview Circle Garage $ 6, 000 8332 Associated Mechanical 1257 Marschall Road Alt. $ 8,000 8333 Jewel Ericson 2401 Emerald Lane Alt. $ 7,500 8334 KMart 1200 Minn. Valley Mall Alt. $ 1,000 8335 Greg Sundem 1901 Heritage Drive Deck $ 960 8336 Donald Schleicher 1043 Pierce Street Stg Bldg $ 400 8337 Met Con Metro 7077 Highway 13 Alt. $ 88,350 8338 Novak-Fleck 1165 Minnesota Street House $ 89, 000 L 6 B 2 Meadows 1st 8339 Greystone Construction 1803 Eagle Creek Blvd. Comm. $ 110, 000 8340 Dave Klein 2046 Heritage Drive Deck $ 1,020 8341 James Stocker 831 Bluff Alt. $ 20, 600 8342 Ken Cryer/Greg Ries 122 East 1st Avenue Alt. $ 100,000 8343 M. Chris Anderson 1428-1444 Maras Street Comm. $ 170,000 8344 Henry Groen 119 East 7th Avenue Addn. $ 1,700 8345 FoxDel Construction 2000 Marschall Road House $ 112, 000 18 115 22 8346 Charles Ritchart 2287 Eagle Creek Blvd. Addn. $ 1, 000 8347 David Broderson 1174 Monroe Street Addn. $ 11, 000 8348 Monnens Custom Bldrs. 812 East C.R. 78 Garage $ 18,000 8349 Michael Doric 1146 Minnesota Street Deck $ 500 8350 Ken Berg 222 East 1st Avenue Sign $ 160 8351 Void t 8352 Robert Jasper 1109 Legion Street House $ 85,000 L 12 B 2 Prairie Estates 8353 J.V.K. Quality Homes 595 Main Street House $ 79,900 Wermerskirchen Addn. 8354 Bill Henning & Co. 5010 Valley Ind. Blvd-S. Comm $1,455,000 8355 Kurimchak Bldrs. 2457 Onyx House $ 110,000 L 13 B 5 Hauer's 4th 8356 Rick Fjelstad 2581 Emerald Lane Deck $ 500 8357 On The Level Inc. 2423 Onyx Drive House $ 72,000 L 14 B 5 Hauer's 4th 8358 B & D Development 2547 Onyx Drive Addn. $ 3,600 8359 Landmark Home Corp. 601 Main House $ 73, 000 Wermerskirchen Addn. 8360 Vincent Loesch 1125 Minnesota Street Deck $ 1,000 8361 Gary Lilienthal 514 West 4th Avenue House $ 86,000 L 7 B 60 City 8362 Joe DuPont 923 S. Spencer Addn. $ 2,500 8363 Joseph Klehr Const. 235 East 7th Avenue Garage $ 4,000 8364 Randy Hennes 1015 E. Shakopee Avenue Deck $ 1,000 8365 John DuBois 601 Main Grading $ 1,200 8366 Logeais Homes 2028 Murphy Avenue House $ 55,000 L 5 B 5 Heritage Place 8367 Stan Pint 1292 Emerald Lane House $ 80,000 L 6 B 3 Hauer's 4th 8368 Michael Pedersen 2101 Eaglewood Circle Garage $ 8,000 8369 Brian Dose 1286 Limestone Fireplace $ 3,000 8370 Dorothy Clausen 804 West 5th Avenue Garage $ 9,600 8371 Mn. Valley Fence 628 West 5th Avenue Fence $ 350 8372 Art DuBois 601 Main Street Fence $ 250 8373 Associated Properties 511 C. R. 72 House $ 90, 000 L 4 B 1 Kubes 2nd 8374 H. R. Spurrier 1717 Presidential Lane Remodel $ 5,000 8375 Philip Selenak 327 West 6th Avenue Deck $ 720 8376 James Klemenhagen 2117 Bridge Crossing Stg Bldg $ 2, 700 8377 Attracta Sign 122 East First Avenue Sign $ 1,200 8378 Viking Fence Co. 3549 Eagle Creek Blvd. Fence $ 12 , 000 8379 Donald Walen 2017 West 12th Avenue Garage $ 7, 000 8380 B & D Development 2710 Jade Circle Porch $ 3 , 000 Y........ �WWW�WWWWW -------- FNNO DC Nrr r�-NNNNU WY WWYWW rrr rr �-- r rrr r rr 0000 NAPWWNNNNN m WWWWWWWYrrrrr�-000 NNr OZ m WAWNrOWmJW a OrOJNpWNrO • WOO�OmJWNPWNNOWN�-OmmV t OO �O maNDamTwD< w 0D0 Naa2rN r �03wNmN£3aWa0WW00-i00 H ap C_ r0i wrnN�22ZOD Z OO�w000(�D O NON<0m£�0Cw002TpWDWW m ONZ � -� rymmD000„O ti DOCWDrr3 T ZA2 w-IwwTD-� T O ODTOTr23rrAOZCrOrP MO' � G 2N NZ 2SZT A m-1rT00Nrm Zf rT 1.a DWO O Om TSTT N D m OATmSATGNT O y➢SmZmmnOW OT 2000~w¢mwZZDYPw TTDT OrT Nfll aT TDATID m 'y.SEwNDO. N OTC 00 mOWOWwV.0r9A0D O< 0sm m NOZOOrr2 Ai-r TOO<A-10<D 22NOaD£3D mL>m wDDOC tiw< N T=O'Em.. m Tti0T3wti ~ti ¢ Wm mZrtiVrmmmr3Nm00Na Xaa yf D "MMM mmmAOZ< f M N 3a NHUN2N0 NmTNm= O DmNmOZma ,Mom 0 ZO _Zm 0 -Z- N T ti0 NGOT < A O f awm y T y y y T-1A NT Nti WZ O O D N 0 N „NN N NNr y ON NTN C m O '� n Z ti N C w D N T ~ N O m N 1 m z c mo c A N P A A A mA N m A N rJmr O O m N mPNNOm NN W W D2 m WOVAmNA A P N mO.P WW O O yy < p0000000m0 O 0000000000 PW OOOOOOOOWNNOOOOOWN00 JOO C m 0000.00000 0 0000000000 00. 00.0N0000000P000 r r00 r3 Z O C Z m y <2 A D D a Z O O m A ti W mWW J '-N U 0 U NO ti OPNWNO NO O Nmrm rNN NNO PNOO N.A OO00NWM 0. 0. 00N000J .000 000000 O OOOOO00000 0000 < 00000 0 0 00000 0 00 00 . A 0000000000 O 0000000000 0 00000000000000000000 0O 000 000 Z 0000000000 0 0000000000 0 00000000000000000000 m N J N D Qperry PJJ JNNNN UWm A I AWWNWrNWA 0 J m.W ... D AVmm WIOOAN A OWA NmOOOm..WO W owJ,N Omm W O N ANA N �. -10 0 00Jm 0ONOVOOV N 0000000..0 OO OOONNUWOU 000.0..NO r mm C N Oo N V. OOOOOOONOO J OOOOOOOONAOOOOOOr000 P rPm D0 n m 0ONrr ANJ t'W rrN.OYI W r W J NJ.NN N < NON 00 Wpr.r V. W N�PmOWm0. D� ANO.WOOUJ . AO ONOOOW W NrpNWJm r'-m t- N mt'O !O NNmm W OONJNVOrY . 00 O.OPJN OONrrrWW . Wt'Nf0'-0 t' � ➢ 0ONW.6N00N N 00000000.0OOOOONNUO.NOOOWOpNNO m r0 Z OONmNONOWN ' OOOOOOOm00 1 OOOOOOOOmW000000.000 m � i m T JPNmmV W. N rN. m t'. 1 mNNN WN0rW0 OY N O WWm . 0. OprJoa.r r Wrmm m U e y r WW m.... W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW T WWWWNNNNNNNNNNNNUNN ➢C r0 mNNNr W NNNNAAppWWWWNNNNNNr (')$ • 00 • ONr00 • O • AWNOWNYOmWNYVWAWYOJ 00 b '� 9'-I � Mn.T yM O n n �TAA�yDNEmV3nTy$9yZ C � A Omaz O O x xmmr�EOm ar�OYO�yr-ic zm zp D CD y yZZry C Cs D yynTNr3Dy.T Cy2AAyWQpy yY y N pN T pAymA y y m t D0yn3YNmm2nnNTnr£� \ C T nT r r Hy O%0 O T2m OT m rT N2 O NOyyOJ02 TO m OT r W N T T y NH $nn yDT9N W TT NT OT Om$OOpOyrrmO�A mE O zn T N yN m my My T $ S.T pYO 2MNrTrODTEO N C N T pz nG NrmypON yl-�22ySA<T �n x O W C CZ .G N N Mr+'v9 Sm nyODNSDT 9D D C N yN nmOYNTT ¢¢TITNyrT yr x O y y oo<yOo0y V .9mA y v m p m➢nOON yT 0 OT y y r0 OZrozr � yrTO z 9 G ACT my DSAr <$ $ S O 22y zo O Wyp Tr O y Cy � y yN T N m N y A G z C m0 C N N N A W O O A A A m N W W N J V J m� WYVWNYIPJVAr WN ➢Z m N N A A O NNYrmmJpmN p < N O 00 m Po0000 0 0 W00000.VNONJOOPo000 Cy m O O 00 P P0000 m m Po OOOpOOrWmOONbOOr000 D � r3 $ O C 2 m y <2 .T D a v z n o m A y y 0 Pm N mANOW�-'OW N ~ W W WO ON O O O N p r 0000.000 OW m m0 O O O O O O N 0000000000000 00 A A p p0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000 00 < 0 0 00 0 oo000 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 z 0 0 00 0 00o00 0 0 0 00000000000000000.o c m2 P n O O m O O O WVYA mY0N0 A W P O N U00. NrJY.ANr Y D A A p VN p yNJ.PoW.JJm NO py y O 00 ONOOm AOONYNOOOwOOJJmO CO O W o 00 w mopov N N m NomwooPoN000WJoswmyo n ro n y Y r0 m NObm YW000N mmYW am WO JNO WOwNNpO m O OO N W O Y W PoWAWNmO�-WNOO A O 00 U �000Y O UOONrNOObPoOmNJmO Z O 00 P OOOW NO NOOPoNOOOAVOmNmNO m D O NOAON.PmW NN mAYUYYJNYm mPo m N r- m U W m m . rOmWmmmVVw OJ O tj P A A0P n 0000 Pp.Ap00 PpA0APPp0 r•P-r•A-A rFrr•P-gin T J FAN OWWWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNN O wrwbwmVgNWNNYYYOWWNrr yNNPPPpWWNrO OZ x N x O • qrm • wrNr000000YOwgONNONNO • NrOWNYOrOONO OO w 9 -i ti 9 O OO9 N „0300mCr9-1499r9NTW3yy CEZ99990yY 0y C „ oo➢ C9 CTCOT-12AATOm.=S COCC T ZOTTTTT<DZGD 20 N D .9 29A NAAT22YNYDry 000DCr- .m A TAD222'.OTrGTf' tiY ti Z 3 �"� TMO 9 OAOym-ir C2GT-{ �mrr�OT9 y oJCryNN D'A DD.9D \ < ti y y D '� A-12 N fT2 NM9tiT9➢ 90ADr O m'�r Nr JAr~N TO O -1 T m D D➢ 2D4A 1Z, SOJ yO 0r 2 2000 r T D 9 r y T r12 T YZZ OT•a9y032TTT 02 222 3TOmT yT 2 2 3. T y D ON2 TOOIFZ OrrDDOm N molal TN N 9T 0. O y y T 9T 2CYC0 yT T ZrOti•x 3 3 Oc r T X AOO 1k TNyWT PN NNZr23rD m TOI'399 1iWTT 2 y A 9 OC9 OmTyy C ZDZ-a�Nm 20rmr- m 4CC 9D D m C 0 9W 41r0 w '1. - > 3Jnll 1, 0 D Z 9W y0 �4 Cy IN2 W.9 G 9m0> 9m0�r O Z O TTr S W�+ mN -� O' 0 3J O9 9 N < D 9N y T .9 f D O p �+D -�ti ZC m +1 -I 22r A 0 -� T m Cr T 322A 9TMM Z C O m Z NT y< 0 Wy y yNT mZ O A m N Y T 00 SZ D A CC T N Z y N ZO O m0 y y yy A ON D 2Z Z 00 mm y D O 9 a 1 O ZO C Y A X q YO W P Y Y r V NUb 0 T 9 m b AYNmNWyWr m WNOAWgJ N J00NV.W WY T yNONNJgwNVN Om wwOYwq NWOOrwq JO D2 y A WNNwJWWNOwW wNWNWO PAOOwAw w yy 2 O O O O Ow 000 J NOwDONAOYOWmy00rmWPNy OOWNOYJNw ONO C O O O O O Oq0 WOJOOrmOJgNNgOYmJAWVN m OOJNOYbANOgV I3 Y O ti z C <x m D D A Z 0 T T 9 O 9 n m ti ti D NNWONYY mNJVWWY m� VN Pw 9 W Yq q NWmwVNJVW - - - WUbA AW A0 O O g J Po 00 J OONgwPwWwNOWVOW VVpw q YYgOwO P Nr 9z O O V O J O ONWO Awm Y NOOJOYWNOW O JgJNOJO w w „ O O w O 00 O O OUNUOONONN000000000 P OWOOPJ O 00 ➢ O O O O O 000 O 000000000000000000000 O 000000000000 ti O O O O O 000 0 000000000000000000000 O 000000000000 O Z< p O ➢ m NYYY AYYYm w AV O A qJ wwWNYPPbNN AWgyO WwrNUmYN q UN N JVmNNgJ wY NOONWmggUbVW .M Y 0 0. Np Dti J W YP A O w PNmOVWgWmmwWYUwW Vm✓ mJVwgNw O N p 0 0wN q bOYmgYNNmWUbYWbJUYNmP YOVNOOmwwWNN CO O O O O O N OON O OOAPOVOwWNJmONWOYWWgN b NOYVOOyYPOOw r0 D � pY N NOgNwYmYN WyNWONY O aYY PNYq Ym GT w N NO O NgJWANOWr-JmYWbYONyN q wmJ gUWq JU p OwN •- NNJwJwJNYYNgmgPJUNw Oq mqm m�j0 q0 A N OJmOPmIDNrmWYYggmpWW JNYW OgpO D J V O 0 OPN A YOwWAmmNYw00YgOJIDmJOU F YONVOOrwWWmP Z O O O O w OON O OOwgOWOwJNWNOmVOwJVaN NOwWOOUYmOOY m m Q0 p mrWWNNWgPgUgmYUJpOP O mwOOwW , N JO m m O D N qq U Y OmNpVOWpVNY Yr-OV•-YqN N NYVOJp O wU y r b DC ro 02 OO W OO C O O_ O_ zo w yw y y \ C w O 2 2 m0 O O L1 NT T m oz T 2 Z Am N C O O w 2 2 C C 9D D O yr S O y OT 9 O zc m y 2 m D O r N a 9 O D O 20 C X O A A DZ A Z W O O Cy O r O O D r3 w O y 2 c y A G2 m D ➢_ A n m O 0 A D A O 9 V A A A O O D O O O O O O O Z< D A n ay N n a n -.0 0 o m ➢ ro w m <T n n N A A 2 m n /o Note Meeting Time: 5:00 P.M. TENTATIVE AGENDA Community Development Commission City Hall Council Chambers September 20, 1989 1. Call to order at 5:00 P.M. 2. Approval of the minutes - August 16, 1989 3 . Economic Development Update: (Verbal) a. FMG b. Bergquist C. 4. Subcommittee Reports (Verbal) a. Downtown Committee b. Transportation Coalition C. Park Development d. Business Appreciation e. City Hall Siting 5. Discussion Items a. Hazardous Waste Facility Ord. b. Park Dedication Fees C. Comm/Retail Development Incentive Program d. CDC Residential Newsletter 6. Informational Items: a. Business Update from City Hall b. Comp Plan Update (Verbal) C. Downtown Traffic Flow (Verbal) d. Staffing (Verbal) e. Commercial & Industrial Property Taxes f. Tax Increment Seminar 7 . Other Business a. Next Meeting - Wed. , October 18, 1989 - 5:00 PM City Council Chambers b. 8 . Adjourn Barry A. Stock Administrative Assistant CITY OF SHAKOPEE TENTATIVE AGENDA Energy and Transportation Committee Shakopee, Minnesota September 20, 1989 Chrm. Ziegler Presiding: 1. Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 2 . Approval of Minutes - July 19, 1989 3 . Met Council Grant Application a. Can Crusher Demonstration Program b. Yard Waste Bag Program 4 . Refuse Collection Ordinance Amendments 5. Informational Items a. Dial-A-Ride Monthly Report b. Dial-A-Ride Saturday Service Report C. Van Pool Monthly Report d. Business Update from City Hall e. Recycling Report f. Recycling Door Hanger g. Val Pac Van Pool Coupon 6. Other Business a. Next Meeting-Wed. , October 18, 1989 - 7:00 PM b. 7. Adjournment Barry A. Stock Administrative Assistant CITY OF SHAKOPEE Z , Energy and Transportation Committee Regular Session Shakopee, MN July 19, 1989 Chairman Ziegler called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Comm. Otto, Drees, Amundson, Roman, and Ziegler present. Commissioners Prudoehl and Spiotta were absent. Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant, Mike Burkopec, Waste Management, Jim Kemp, Waste Management, Norb Schmitt and Bill Schmitt representing Shakopee Services were also present. Roman/Amundson moved to approve the minutes of the June 21, 1989 meeting minutes as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Amundson/Drees moved to open the public hearing on the proposed refuse collection/recycling ordinance amendments. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock stated that at the direction of the Energy and Transportation Committee staff has set a public hearing tonight to solicit comments from Shakopee residents regarding proposed amendments to the City's Refuse Collection Ordinance. Mr. Stock noted that in March the City of Shakopee implemented a volume based refuse collection program. In order to effectively administrate the new program several changes to the City's refuse ordinance are necessary. Mr. Stock noted that the City's current refuse collection ordinance allows Shakopee residents to either select the City's contracted refuse hauler or the private hauler of their choice. The fact that our refuse program is not a closed system has allowed a number of customers to drop our contracted refuse collection service. Mr. Stock noted that generally most cities under contract with a private refuse hauler provide for the collection of refuse from all dwelling units up to and including four plexes in the community being served. Mr. Stock then reviewed the rationale adhered to by those cities operating under a closed system. Mr. Stock noted that a closed system insures that all refuse is disposed of in a manner which protects the health, safety and welfare of the residents. A closed system also limits the number of garbage trucks that are traveling on City streets and thereby increases the life expectancy of said streets. A closed system also insures uniformity of collection and disposal methods providing for a more aesthetically pleasing refuse disposal program. A closed system also stream- lines the complaint process and makes it easier for city officials to monitor and enforce State and local mandates. Additionally the closed system will help insure the lowest long term possible rates for the collection and disposal of refuse and will reduce the potential for illegal dumping since all households are provided with refuse collection. 1 Mr. Stock stated that the current contract provides for the collection of all residential units up to and including four plexes within the refuse collection service area which is defined as all areas North of the proposed Southerly By-Pass within the Shakopee City Limits. Mr. Stock stated that he is aware of several households in the City that have no regular trash collections. It is unknown what happens to this refuse but one might conclude that it is being deposited in commercial dumpsters used by area businesses, City park receptacles or along road sides. Mr. Stock then reviewed the proposed amendments to the current City Refuse Collection Ordinance. Mr. Stock stated that the proposed ordinance provides for a closed refuse disposal system. Upon adoption and enactment all Shakopee residents would be mandated to go with the City's refuse contractor. Mr. Stock stated that he is proposing to grandfather all residents who are currently contracting with private haulers until such time that the residential unit is sold or until the expiration of the City's current refuse contract (January 14, 1992) which ever comes first. The proposed ordinance also addresses recycling, the type of refuse container to be utilized and an anti-scavenging provision. Commissioner Ziegler asked if there was any one in the audience who wished to comment on the proposed ordinance amendments. Mr. Norbert Schmitt, 963 Atwood St. , Shakopee, stated that people in Shakopee pay taxes and they should have the right to select whom ever they choose to pick-up their refuse. Mr. Schmitt stated that if the City would place the cost of refuse collection on the tax roles he would not be opposed to the program. Mr. Schmitt stated that this is a free enterprise country and that he has a right to pick-up from those people who request his service. Mr. Schmitt stated that he provided service to Hauer's Addition when the City didn't want to. He felt that he had a right to service this area. Mr. Schmitt stated that right now the City does not provide utility service to the Hauer area and they would have to increase rates approximately $.14 to cover the cost of billing. Mr. Schmitt stated that other Shakopee Public Utility customers would have to pay for these increase costs on their regular monthly utility bill. He did not think this was fair. Bill Schmitt from Shakopee Service questioned what Mr. Stock meant by unlimited collection. Mr. Stock stated that he was referring to the unlimited pick-up of refuse and yard waste by private haulers at this time. Mr. Schmitt stated that the term unlimited is not totally accurate because Shakopee Services provides the same collection services as the City's contractor with the exception of yard waste. The term unlimited sounds like Shakopee Services customers are getting a much better deal then customers utilizing the City's contractor. Mr. Stock also noted that the refuse hauler will pick up as much residential refuse as put out. The City simply picks up the refuse that is deposited in the refuse cart and additional refuse is paid for with an extra service coupon. 2 Mr. Schmitt then questioned why four plexes would be included in the closed contract if it is pasted. Mr. Stock stated that it is common for cities who operate under a closed system to include all residential units up to and including four plexes. Mr. Stock stated that the current contract also states that the City will provide collection to all residential units up to and including four plexes. This is why he is recommending that four plexes be the cut off point in the proposed close system. Mr. Schmitt stated that four plexes should be considered commercial because they are collecting revenue from the tenants and are operating the property for profit purposes. Bill Schmitt also stated that the City's argument increasing the life of City streets by eliminating refuse trucks is ridiculous. He stated that there are many other service trucks running on City streets that weigh more then garbage trucks. He felt that if the City was going to place restrictions on garbage trucks they should also do it on other trucks operating within the City limits. Mr. Schmitt stated that he felt that as an option the City should allow other haulers into the Shakopee service area if they can provide service at the same price as the City's contractor. Mr. Schmitt stated that he did not feel it was the responsibility of the City Council to guarantee the lowest possible rates. It was however the City's responsibility to protect the health, safety and welfare of Shakopee residents. Commissioner Amundson stated that the main reason for the Committee's consideration of this issue was to provide for the health, safety and welfare of Shakopee residents. This ordinance would insure that all refuse is picked-up from residential units within the refuse collection service area. Bill Schmitt stated that at the present time they are currently providing services to only approximately 12 households within the refuse collection service area. He stated that any customers that has switched to them because of the new program was primarily for the reason of unlimited yard waste collection as opposed to the City's volume based program. He noted that effective January 1, 1990 all refuse haulers will have to provide for separate collection of yard waste. At that point in time their service would not be any different then the contracted haulers. Chairman Ziegler asked if there were any other comments from the audience. Roman/Amundson moved to close the public hearing. Motion Carried unanimously. Mr. Stock stated that Mr. Schmitt is philosophically opposed to the closed system concept. Commissioner Roman questioned Mr. Schmitt's account on number of households served by Shakopee Services within the refuse collection service area. Mr. Stock stated that he could 3 not verify or deny Mr. Schmitt's count of number of households that he is presently serving. Mr. Stock stated that the City of Shakopee does provide utility service to Hauers Addition. The City may not be providing electrical service but they are still providing sewer and water service and this is considered a utility. Commissioner Drees questioned why the City's refuse is being billed on the utility bills. Mr. Stock stated that it was purely a matter of convenience and economics. For the City to have the refuse hauler do the garbage billing would add an additional $1.00 per month to the City's refuse collection fee. Mr. Stock stated that he has discussed this issue with the refuse contractor and we are considering having them take over billing in the future. Mr. Burkopec stated that Waste Management is not opposed to taking over the billing. However, they were concerned about collection from delinquent accounts. Mr. Stock noted that at the present time if a customer does not pay their utility bill, the City simply shuts off the service or adds the amount payable on the residents taxes. Commissioner Drees suggested that the issue of billing be brought up when the bids for the next contract are drafted. He suggested that a bid be taken with billing services provided by the City and a separate bid for billing services provided by the contractor. Mr. Drees also suggested that the entire City limits be included in the next bid. He suggested that perhaps the City could be broken down into two service zones. Chairman Ziegler questioned if the other haulers are providing recycling services. Mr. Stock stated that it is mandatory for refuse haulers in Scott County to offer recycling services to their customers if requested by the resident. Chairman Ziegler stated that he wanted to point out that this program is not limiting competition because the contract is renewable every three years. Amundson/Roman moved to recommend to City Council that the proposed Refuse Collection Ordinance Amendments be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock reported that in the past we have experienced a problem with Dial-A-Ride service to the Southwest Metro Service Area. He noted that Morley Bus Co. has recently been certified as a Metro Mobility provider in this area. Mr. Morley intends to utilize this vehicle to pick up the passengers who are currently utilizing the City of Shakopee Dial-A-Ride to get to the Southwest Metro Service Area. This should resolve our problem. The City will then be operating under our original policy which states that the Shakopee Dial-A-Ride vehicles will not provide service outside of the City limits. Mr. Stock noted that a new policy on this issue is not needed at this time. Mr. Stock then reviewed the recycling program reports with the Committee. He noted that revenues increased during the month of 4 June. This was primarily due to the recycling of more aluminum cans. Mr. Burkopec stated that Waste Management will be proposing the addition of tin cans to the recycling program in September. He noted that the tin cans (soup and vegetable) can be placed in the same paper bag as aluminum and steel cans. Mr. Stock noted that the County has also increased their perc for recycling to $16.00 per ton for all recyclables. Previously the perc was $16 for paper and $8 for aluminum, steel and glass. Mr. Stock then reviewed the transit monthly reports with the Committee. Roman/Drees moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock Recording Secretary 5 13, MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION City Council Chambers Shakopee, MN August 15, 1989 Chairman Joos called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with the following members present: Commissioners Jon Albinson, Charles Brandmire, Jane DuBois, and Terry Joos. Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant, Christen Converse, Executive Director of Shakopee Chamber of Commerce, and Joe Zach, City Council member, were also present. Commissioner Furrie was absent. Albinson/Miller moved to approve the minutes of the July 5, 1989 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock reported that he has heard positive comments from Bergquist regarding a possible fall ground breaking for phase 1 of their facility. He noted that phase 1 will include a 22,000 square foot warehouse facility. Mebco is not asking for Tax Increment Financing for phase 1 of their project. Phase 1 does not meet the minimum criteria as set forth in the City's Industrial Development Incentive Program. Mebco is however asking for an additional 30 feet of right-of-way along Research Boulevard. They are requesting this right-of-way so that they can provide for a boulevard entrance into their plant. Mr. Stock noted that the major problem with the project at this time is the dead-end road that will serve as access to their facility. City Code requires that no cul-de-sac be in excess of 500 feet within the urban area. Mr. Stock stated that since Mebco is intending to construct a boulevard the City may be able to justify a variance for the road. Eventually, Mebco intends to split off a portion of their property and make it available for sale to other developers. When the property is platted, the City will require that the roadway be dedicated so that the cul-de-sac can be eliminated. Council member Zak questioned if there was anything the Community Development Commission could do to stimulate Mebco's move. Mr. Stock stated that at this time no official plans have been submitted to the City and the City has not received a formal request for the additional 30 feet of right-of-way along Research Boulevard. Therefore, it would be premature for the Community Development Commission to take any action at this time. Mr. Stock stated that the developer's agreement for the Mebco project has been approved by City Council. Mebco Industries held their ground breaking on Monday. The plant is scheduled to be completed by the end of the year. Mr. Stock reported that Mr. Wallace Bakken requested Tax Increment Financing for the Jellystone Campground. City Council denied Mr. Bakken's request because it did not meet the criteria as set forth in the City's Industrial Development Incentive Program. At that time, the City Council recognized that commercial/retail businesses 1 would not qualify for the Industrial Development Incentive Program and directed staff to begin preparing a commercial/retail incentive policy. Mr. Stock reported that the Downtown Committee has completed the property inventory. They are focusing on two blocks in the downtown area for potential development/redevelopment activities. Block 4 (City Hall block) and Block 24 (Pell Hem Hotel block) are the two blocks that are undergoing further evaluation. Eventually, the Community Development Commission hopes to develop requests for proposals for the redevelopment of these two blocks. What type of redevelopment might be incurred on these blocks is still in question. Whether or not the development activity will involved condemnation/demolition and/or redevelopment is still being discussed. Prior to mailing the requests for proposals to potential developers, it is imperative that the commercial/retail development incentive policy be in place. Mr. Stock stated that he is currently meeting with prospective developers to get their ideas and thoughts on what might be suitable for these two blocks. Commissioner Albinson questioned the time-line for completing the requests for proposal process. Mr. Stock stated that the Committee hopes to complete the commercial/retail development incentive policy by the end of October. They then hope to have the requests for proposals drafted in final form by December. Requests for proposals will then be mailed out the first part of January with responses due by the first part of March. Hopefully, prospective developers will be ready to begin construction next year. Mr. Stock stated that this is an ambitious time schedule, but he felt it would be possible to complete the commercial/retail development incentive policy and requests for proposals by year end. Commissioner Albinson stated that the Transportation Coalition was very upset with the state's decision to only construct two lanes of roadway for the southerly bypass. State Representative Relsal and Senator Schmitz voiced their concerns to Governor Perpich. At the last Transportation Coalition meeting District 5 Commissioner stated that he would have the necessary funds secured to complete the roadway as originally planned. The Transportation Coalition is optimistic that this will indeed occur. Commission Miller reported that he has not officially established a subcommittee to investigate park needs at this time. He stated that he is having a difficult time securing information regarding parks in Shakopee. He also stated that the park inventory and equipment list is inaccurate. Commission DuBois stated that she has also had a difficult time getting information regarding parks in Shakopee. She also stated that much of the equipment in the parks is outdated and dangerous. She stated that in her conversations with George Munchow, it seems that the primary problem is the lack of funding. Commission Miller stated that the Comprehensive Plan addresses park dedication fees. He stated that he would like to have the park dedication fees as proposed by the 2 / 3 Comprehensive Plan consultant placed on the next agenda and that the fees that were discussed by the Community Development Commission recommended to City Council also be placed on the agenda to compare the two. He hoped that following the completion of the Comprehensive Plan, the Community Development Commission could have a recommendation ready for the city Council to implement a new park dedication fee schedule. Discussion then ensued on the negative impact an increase in park dedication fees might have on potential business prospects. Commissioner DuBois stated that Shakopee's park dedication fees are so low at this time that an increase is in order. Commissioner Miller stated that an increase in park dedication fees combined with other financing options such as a bond referendum might be the solution. Discussion then ensued on the relationship between the School Board and the City of Shakopee regarding Shakopee Community Services. Mr. Stock stated that it was his understanding that there was one year remaining in the agreement between the City of Shakopee and school District for the joint program. Mr. Stock hoped that the park development subcommittee would eventually develop a recommendation to forward to the Community Development Commission on the organization of a park development department to be under the guidance of the City of Shakopee. In conjunction with that recommendation Mr. Stock stated that he felt a parks advisory board would be in order to provide citizen input regarding park development, acquisition, and redevelopment. Commissioner Albinson reported that the business appreciation breakfast meetings have been going well but that attendance has not been the greatest. He reviewed some of the concerns that have been raised by business persons at past meetings. He noted that there is a great deal of misunderstanding out there among the owners in the industrial park regarding such issues as tin buildings and fiscal disparities. There was also an overtone felt in the industrial park that the city is not interested in new business expansions for certain businesses. Commissioner Albinson stated that much of the concerns raised by the persons in attendance at the meetings are answered by the Community Development Commission members. He felt that the business breakfast meetings were very important to continue to educate business owners in our industrial park regarding the tax issues and zoning ordinance requirements in Shakopee. Mr. Stock reported that the City Council did not have a problem with the Community Development Commission establishing a City Hall Siting Committee. Therefore, it would be appropriate for a member of the Community Development Commission to volunteer to serve as the chair of the City Hall Siting Committee. Commissioner DuBois stated that she would be willing to chair the City Hall Siting Committee. Mr. Stock stated that Terry Forbord is interested in serving on the Siting Committee. Discussion ensued on how the subcommittees were to attract members to their committees. Mr. Stock stated that it was simply up to the subcommittee chair to 3 identify interested persons in the community to serve on their subcommittees. Discussion ensued on increasing the membership of the Community Development Commission. Commissioner DuBois stated that she felt the commission needed more members to adequately handle all the interests that are being expressed. Mr. Stock stated that he would attempt to again contact Mr. Furrie to obtain his resignation from the Community Development Commission. This would open up one seat for filling. Discussion ensued on what would be a reasonable number of members on the committee. Mr. Stock stated that any increase in committee membership would have to be approved by the City Council as an ordinance amendment. Commissioner DuBois moved to recommend to City Council that the membership of the Community Development Commission be increased to no less than six nor more than twelve members. The motion died for the lack of a second. Commissioner Miller stated that he felt that once Commissioner Furrie's seat was filled it would relieve some of the burden on the Community Development Commission members. He stated that if we had more members it would probably be difficult to adequately handle all the business that needs to be handled at a regular meeting. He stated that he hoped the subcommittees would prepare a recommendation and that the Community Development Commission would not have to debate the subcommittees' recommendation at great length. He also suggested that when the subcommittees are finalizing their recommendation, that all the Community Development Committee members be invited to that subcommittee meeting in order to expedite the final approval of the subcommittee's recommendation when it gets placed on the Community Development Commission agenda. Mr. Stock reported that at the last meeting the Commission requested that staff investigate the establishment of a hazardous waste facility ordinance. Mr. Stock stated that several communities do have ordinances which regulate hazardous waste facilities. He was not aware of any cities that simply forbid hazardous waste facilities. Commissioner Brandmire stated that one of the problems with hazardous waste facility ordinances was the broad definition of what constitutes a hazardous waste. Commissioner Albinson stated that he felt it would be very difficult to ban hazardous waste facilities, but that to regulate them was proper. He suggested that this item be placed on the next agenda and that the ordinances from other communities be distributed to all the Community Development Commission members for their review. Mr. Stock stated that the committee requested staff to investigate a business license ordinance. The purpose of the ordinance would be to keep track of what new businesses are entering into the community. Mr. Stock stated that Vadnais Heights did have a business license ordinance which required all new businesses to obtain a license. The fee for the license was $10.00 per year. Mr. Stock stated that he felt that this type of ordinance would 4 place another restriction on new businesses. He stated that the time needed to monitor a program would be more of a hassle than it what it would be worth. Albinson/Miller moved to drop the idea of establishing a business license ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock that the City Council directed staff to prepare a commercial/retail development incentive program. Mr. Stock stated that the format of the policy would be very similar to the Industrial Development Incentive Policy. He stated that at the last downtown committee, the committee discussed potential criteria for inclusion into a new program. Mr. Stock requested that the Community Development Commission brainstorm on possible criteria for inclusion into the policy prior to staff's development of a preliminary draft. Commissioner Albinson stated that he felt retail sales was a very difficult measure to accurately support. Mr. Stock stated that he included this item as a potential criteria because he felt it was important to establish a measure of the business's impact on the community. He stated that most commercial/retail businesses would not be able to meet a 50 full- time job equivalent measure. Mr. Stock did agree, however, that retail sales were very difficult to measure and could be very easily inflated by prospective developers. Commission Miller questioned whether or not the program would be available for attracting new businesses. Mr. Stock stated that he felt the program should be available just for new construction and new business expansions. Mr. Stock stated that businesses that would like to have a facade improvement would be handled under a rehabilitation program to be established later next year. Discussion ensued on a revolving loan program or interest write- down program for rehabilitation. Mr. Stock stated that earlier this year he was unsuccessful in getting either a revolving loan program or an interest write-down program approved by City Council. Commissioner Brandmire suggested that staff review some of the guidelines under the old UDAG program for possible inclusion into the policy. The committee felt that it was important that the market value ratio increase be approximately 10 to 1. Mr. Stock stated that he was also considering a graduated level of financing assistance based on the total project value. Mr. Stock also stated that the downtown committee was concerned that any project that was developed in the downtown area be consistent with the objectives as set forth in the Downtown Revitalization Plan. Mr. Stock stated that he would prepare a preliminary draft for the committee's review at their next meeting. Commissioner DuBois stated that she would like to discuss the issue of downtown traffic. She noted that last year the City Council considered eliminating parking on the north side of First Avenue. She felt that this issue should be brought up for reconsideration at this time. She also stated that left-hand turn lanes for westerly bound traffic should be eliminated at Lewis and Holmes Streets. Commissioner Albinson stated that he did not think the 5 City Council would be in favor of eliminating parking on the north side of First Avenue at this time. Commissioner Miller also stated that he was opposed to making a recommendation to City Council on something that he did not think they were willing to approve. Commissioner DuBois also stated that signage should be improved for parking in the parking lots on the north side of First Avenue. DuBois/Miller moved to recommend to City Council that left-hand turns for westerly traffic be eliminated at Lewis and Holmes Streets between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock then reviewed the business update from City Hall. He also noted that the Comprehensive Plan meeting scheduled for next Monday night had been cancelled. Commissioner Albinson stated that the Comprehensive Plan Committee was hoping to have a final draft ready for the City Council's approval in October. Mr. Stock reported that the Chamber of Commerce is working on developing a marketing brochure. He stated that when they have completed a design it will be reviewed by the Community Development Commission and the Chamber of Commerce Board, and that a possible joint funding might be in order. Mr. Stock stated that the City Administrator position has been filled. He noted that the Community Development Director position was now vacant and that two candidates from within the City of Shakopee have applied for the position. He expected that interviews would be taking place within the next two weeks. He did not know whether or not either of the two candidates would be appointed to fill the position. He hoped that a recommendation could be made to City Council at their first meeting in September. Mr. Stock noted that the next meeting of the committee was on September 20, 1989. Miller/DuBois moved to adjourn the meeting at 7: 10 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock Recording Secretary 6 � y Minutes of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee City Council Chambers Shakopee, MN August 9, 1989 Chairperson Keen called the meeting to order at 7:45 A.M. with Commissioners: Laurent, Kahleck, Forbord, Ruehle, Stillman, Keen, and Fonder present. Commissioner Wermerskirchen and Roehrich were absent. Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant was also present. Laurent/Kahleck moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Kahleck/Laurent moved to approve the minutes of the June 21, 1989 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock reported that at our last meeting, the Downtown Committee reviewed preliminary data that had been gathered regarding the buildings in the Downtown area. At that time, it was the consensus of the Committee to narrow the focus of the evaluation to a more targeted area which included Blocks 3, 4, 23, and 24. It was the consensus of the Committee that these four blocks were the key blocks in the downtown area pending the completion of the downtown mini by-pass. Mr. Stock stated that in reviewing the parcels within these four blocks it became apparent That the Pellham Hotel block and the City Hall block were the two key blocks to focus on. Mr. Stock noted that the majority of the buildings in the First National Bank block were in good to excellent condition. With the rehabilitation of Arnie's Bar, the block will be generating a significance tax base. Mr. Stock noted that the Downtown Committee must decide which would be the best course of action for Blocks 24 and 4. Mr. Stock noted that the City Hall block (Block 4) had more historical significance then Block 24. He also noted that the facades of the buildings were in fair condition as opposed to the buildings in Block 24. Mr. Stock stated that he felt that Block 4 would be more suitable for rehabilitation. Block 24 (Pellham Hotel Block) was more suitable for demolition and new construction. Mr. Stock stated that the worst building in the four block area was located in Block 24. Mr. Stock noted that there were also two cinder block buildings which were in excellent condition located on this block but they did not have much historical integrity. Mr. Stock suggested that perhaps Block 24 would be more suitable for preparing a request for proposal. He noted that proposals could be developed to include requests for demolition of the majority of the block or inclusion of those buildings that the Downtown Committee felt were worth saving. Mr. Stock noted that the majority of the businesses in Block 24 were 1 viable businesses for a downtown retail area. He suggested that perhaps the current tenants could be incorporated into the leasing plans of the developer who would be awarded the project. Commissioner Forbord stated that the historical significance of all the buildings in this four block area had previously been determined by an independent group. He questioned whether staff had reviewed this information. Mr. Stock stated that he was not aware of the whereabouts of this information. Commissioner Forbord stated that in 1985 a group of college students worked up a concept plan for this area. He suggested that staff attempt to determine the whereabouts of this information. commissioner Forbord also stated that there had been a cad three dimensional design incorporating the Pearson building and automotive garage for Block 24. He questioned whether or not staff had access to that drawing. Mr. Stock stated that he was not aware of the location of this drawing but he would attempt to find it. Commissioner Fonder questioned where we were going with the information that we had obtained. Commissioner Forbord stated that the Committee was attempting to identify an area in the downtown area which might be suitable for a request for proposal. Mr. Stock stated that the parcel must be large enough to attract the interest of a developer. The request for proposal would also include a financial assistance plan for the prospective developer. Commissioner Fonder stated that he felt that the City Hall block should be of immediate importance to the Committee. He noted that while the facades of the buildings in this block were in good condition the backs of the buildings were horrendous. He stated that this is what people will see when they are entering into our community off the mini by-pass. Commissioner Forbord stated that he agreed with Commission Fonder but that any buildings on the North side of First Avenue would be difficult to deal with until the mini by-pass is complete. He stated the prospective developers would not begin any rehabilitation or development on the North side of First Avenue until the entire mini by-pass is complete. He noted that the elevations would have to be identified before a project could be designed. Therefore, he felt that it would be logical to proceed with a closer evaluation of Block 24 and the possible development of a request for proposal for that block. Commissioner Fonder stated that he felt that the South half of Block 24 would be best utilized for parking. He stated that he felt one of the key elements in a successful downtown was the availability of parking. He noted that if a project is developed for that entire block it would place a severe burden on current parking availability in the downtown. Discussion ensued on how the properties would be assembled for a request for proposal. Mr. Stock stated that if a developer were interested in the development of a project on Block 24, the City 2 would assist in assembling the properties. The City would first attempt friendly condemnation. If that was not successful it is likely that we would have to pursue eminent domain. Commissioner Keen questioned whether or not staff had surveyed business owners regarding their willingness to sell. Mr. Stock stated that he had not talked to any of the property owners at this time. He felt that once a particular block had been targeted, he would then talk to some of the property owners. Discussion ensued on the parking problem in the downtown area. Commissioner Fonder stated that it might be easier for property owners to agree to fixing up their facades if they knew there would be adequate parking available for their patrons. Discussion ensued on the potential for a parking ramp. Mr. Stock stated that in the request for proposals that may be developed, we could include the request for the construction of a parking ramp or parking facilities. Commissioner Laurent suggested that staff speak with some developers to determine their interest and any ideas that they might have for the redevelopment of Block 24. He felt that their perceptions on what might work and what type of project would be most suitable for this block would be very helpful in preparing the request for proposal specifications. It was the consensus of the Committee that staff should pursue speaking with developers to gather their input and ideas. Commissioner Forbord stated that the Wampach property on Block 32 was also a very attractive site that the Downtown Committee may want to develop a request for proposal. He stated that this area was very attractive for a senior housing project. once we have taken proposals for Block 24, he suggested that we might look at Block 32. Mr. Stock stated that one of the Downtown Committees objectives in 1989 was to develop a commercial development incentive policy. Mr. Stock noted that on August 2, 1989 City Council directed staff to begin working on a commercial/retail development incentive policy. Prior to initiating a first draft, staff stated that he would like to have a brainstorming session with both the Downtown Committee and Community Development Commission on possible criteria that might be incorporated into the draft. Mr. Stock stated that he felt that the commercial/retail incentive policy would be drafted in much the same format as the industrial development incentive policy. Mr. Stock shared with the Committee a preliminary list of potential criteria. Mr. Stock noted that he hoped this would stimulate discussion on this issue. Commissioner Laurent questioned whether or not we should have retail sales or a minimum retail sales figure included in the criteria. Mr. Stock stated that since the majority of the 3 commercial projects will not have many full time employees, he listed retail sales as a criteria in lieu of full time employee equivalents. Mr. Stock did admit that it would be very difficult to get an accountable figure for retail sales. Commissioner Forbord stated that if there was one thing that the Committee could keep in mind that would be most important in developing this policy it would be competitiveness. He stated that we have to have a policy that allows us to compete with our competitors. Without a competitive policy we would be wasting our time. Commissioner Forbord stated that the policy should require developers to meet the goals and objectives as stated in the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. Commissioner Kahleck stated that she liked the loan program or interest buy down program as an element to be included in the policy. Commissioner Fonder stated that he hoped that the policy would allow a number of small businesses to jointly come together for a tax increment project that might allow them to improve their facades. Mr. Stock stated he would contact several other communities that are pursuing downtown redevelopment to determine what type of assistance policy they have established. Mr. Stock stated that he hoped to have a draft policy ready for the Committee's review at their next meeting. Commissioner Laurent questioned what policy the City Council adopted for residential properties in the downtown assessment area. Mr. Stock stated that residential properties assessments would be deferred with interest for 10 years or until the property was converted to a commercial use whichever came first. Commissioner Forbord stated that he felt that the policy that the City Council had arrived at for residential properties was a fair one. Commissioner Forbord also stated that when the City of Shakopee pursues projects that may be extended over a long term period that the credibility of the Committee members, staff and City Council members are often in jeopardy due to the change over in Councils. He hoped that in future projects we could accurately convey information to residents throughout the entire project and not jeopardize any ones credibility. Kahleck/Forbord moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 A.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock Recording Secretary 4 � 7 POLICE CHIEF The City of Shakopee, MN (pop. 12,000) , a growing freestanding city within the seven county metro area, is seeking qualified applicants for a Chief of Police responsible for a 18 member police force with a total of 21 employees. Minimum qualifications include: sworn and licensed police officer in Minnesota, two-year degree or completion of all post requirements, and ten years of previous police experience involving an increasingly responsible position including supervision. Salary range $37,489-$49,986/yr. , starting up to $44,987 DOQ. Completed city application form deadline 9/29/89. Applications/resumes will be accepted by: Police Civil Service Commission Attn: Marilyn Remer, Personnel Coordinator Shakopee City Hall 129 East 1st Ave. , Shakopee MN 55379 612-445-3650 EOE/AA Published: Shakopee Valley News - Sept. 7th, 1989 The Mint - Sept. 11th Mpls. Sunday Tribune - August 27 8 Sept. 10th St. Paul Pioneer Dispatch - August 27th 8 Sept. 10th Mpls. Spokesman/St. Paul Recorder Sept. 6th Posted: Police Dept. - Aug. 22, 1989 City Hall Mn Police 8 Peace Officers Magazine 0_t' 525 Park St. , St. Paul , MN 55103 /O° O`'`' Attn: Dennis Flahery, Suite 207 ersonn Coor inator 21J Esrw.aM.. 706 x SundilY," 27 1 689 POLICE CHIEF TM illy W SMtW,L MN W pro, ;�' . WNBeW .w..dYw.w wunm,M».» b '�ieg` `Rev.:"rot.�;- IIIq,W11uMi1w tWCI,rM Y N PWIu pmq pen{IW Ie1, a S: Nbmgl}1 ,mgoY»{~Mlnl- S m puYllce,bn{ IMNbe' Y �'� ,MMcen»lpoluONl- . wwMIwo- Wr» comp,erbn aC ill u l W{r Ipulr.nxnla, p MI MUM .vbpu{Mllu.iu- v �YPoI�,om^IY l..bn " PM{onul'C�n Eln,ly � 0 SIU Rome MN/,S UYf EOE/AA 15 SHAKOPEE POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING DATE: August 29, 1989 3:00 P.M. CITY HALL, SHAKOPEE COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Dan Steil, Virgil Mears and John Roepke COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Greg Voxland and Sgt. Jerry Poole The meeting was called to order by Chairman Steil at 3 P.M. Motion by Roepke and seconded by Mears to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried. Chairman Steil handed out an agenda and reviewed the ad that was placed in the papers for Chief of Police. He also passed out an application form. Motion by Mears and seconded by Roepke to have Marilyn Ramer open, date, stamp, and log in all applications. Further, she will make three piles of the applications; First one ---- where the applicant clearly meets the criteria Second one --- those who clearly do not meet the criteria Third one ---- those who fall into a gray area and some interpretation needs to be made. The Employment Data Record will be removed by Ms. Remer and kept on file at City Hall. Motion carried. A discussion of the profile of the Chief of Police was held. , Sgt. Poole reported on the hiring progress of the two patrolmen. Process should be wound up by September 15. / Lo The next meeting will be held on September 8', 1989, at 3x00 p.m, in the City Hall. Discussion will center on the Executive Session and the written and oral exams. Motion by Roepke and seconded by Mears that the meeting adjourn. Motion carried. Submitted by: Virgil Mears, Secretary POSITION DESCRIPTION - Position Chief of Police Department: Police -� Accountable To: City Administrator Primary Objective of Position To provide personal and professional leadership for law enforcement which will command the respect and confidence of department personnel and citizens. Plan, develop and supervise the department of trained law enforcement officers to enforce the laws and ordinances for the protection of life and property and to maintain law and order. Examples of Work Plans, organizes, directs and reviews all operations of the department; plans methods and procedures to meet operating needs; prepares and monitors department budget, reviews and approves recommendations for staff organization and assignments, departmental procedures and record systems. Supervises work - assignments, traffic control, crime prevention, investigations and training programs. Meets with citizens concerning complaints, activities of the department and other matters of public interest which are important in the development of good public relations. Desirable Knowledge Skills and Abilities Thorough knowledge of the -principles and practices of modern police administration, police methods and the criminal justice system. Thorough knowledge of scientific methods of crime detection and criminal identification. Hires, disciplines and directs employees in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Civil Service Commission and personnel policies of the City. Thorough knowledge of federal, state and local laws and ordinances which are enforced by the police department. Thorough knowledge of types and uses of firearms, communications and automotive equipment used in modern police work. Ability to plan, evaluate and direct the work of all members of the department. Desirable Experience and Training Must be -licensed by the State of Minnesota as a Peace Office and obtain continuing law enforcement training as required by the Peace Officers Standards and Training Board and the Police Department. - Must have a minimum of a two-year degree or completion of all post requirements. Ten years of previous police experience involving increasingly responsible positions including adminstration and supervision. TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 19, 1989 Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding 1] Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 21 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 31 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 41 Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) *5] Approval of Minutes of September 5, 1989 6] Communications: *a] Daniel Steil, Marquette Bank Shakopee, re: 125th anniversary of the bank *b] Al Furrie re: resignation from the Community Develop- ment Commission c] J. Scott Abernethy, Keewaydin Real Estate Services, Inc. re: request for indication of economic incentives offered to corporations locating their facilities in Shakopee 7] Public Hearings: None 8] Boards and Commissions: Planning Commission: a] Final Plat of Heritage Place 2nd Addition lying North of Vierling Dr. , West of Hauer's 4th and South of Heritage Place 1st Addition - Res. No. 3117 9] Reports From Staff: a] $44,000,000 Sports Facility Revenue Bonds - memo on table b] Shakopee Community Youth Center c] Shiely Private Roadway d] Corp-Tool, Inc. Intoxicating Liquor Licenses - tbld 8/15 TENTATIVE AGENDA September 19, 1989 Page -2- 9] Reports From Staff continued: *e] Request for Deferment of Special Assessments f] Parkridge Drive Connection Charge/Assessment g] 2nd Avenue from Scott to Atwood h] Unsigned Resolution No. 3114 i] Approve payment of bills in amount of $772 , 668. 35 10] Resolutions and Ordinances: None 11] other Business: a] b] c] 12] Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL Regular Session Shakopee, MN September 5, 1989 Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. , with Cncl. Wampach, Scott, Vierling and Clay present. Late: Cncl. Zak. Also present: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator; Judith Cox, City Clerk; Dave Hutton, City Engineer and Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney. Vierling/Wampach moved to recess for the HRA meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved to reconvene the City Council meeting at 7: 30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone in the audience who was not scheduled on the agenda, who wished to speak. There was no response. City Administrator reported on the Governor's Tax proposal. He also reported on the Joint committee meeting with the school district. He questioned if the City is willing to contribute additional funds to complete the county tax study, pending contributions from other entities. Vierling/Wampach moved for the City to contribute an agreed amount, dependent upon other contributions, to complete the joint tax study. Roll Call: Ayes - Wampach, Clay, Vierling, Zak Noes - Lebens, Scott Motion carried. Vierling/Clay moved to approve the consent business with the deletion of the August 1, 1989 meeting minutes. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion carried Clay/Wampach moved to approve the meeting minutes of August 1, 1989. Motion carried with Cncl. Vierling abstaining. Vierling/Clay moved to approve the meeting minutes of August 15, 1989. (Approved under consent business. ) Vierling/Clay moved to renew the City of Shakopee's membership with the National League of Cities in the amount of $665. Roll Call: Ayes - Wampach, Zak, Vierling, Clay, Lebens Noes - Scott Motion carried. Vierling/Clay moved to receive and file the communication from the State of Minnesota Department of Revenue, dated August 21, 1989, regarding the Eagle Creek Plaza Partnership. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to send a letter of appreciation to Mr. Joe Ries, County Administrator, for the work performed on the Scott County 1990- 94 Capital Improvement Plan. Motion carried unanimously. Proceedings of the September 14, 1989 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Clay/Zak moved to open the public hearing on the request to refinance the commercial development revenue note for the Shakopee Shops Shopping Center. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Clay stated this resolution is a legal necessity and requested by the Shakopee Shop Shopping Center for reduced interest rates. This does not change the obligation of the City of Shakopee from their original agreement. Mayor Lebens asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Clay/Vierling moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/vierling offered Resolution No. 3106, A Resolution Relating to Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (Shakopee Shops Shopping Center Project) ; Giving Preliminary Approval and Authorizing Preparation of Necessary Documents, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on proposed public improvements to Bluff Avenue between Marschall Road and Prairie Street; Naumkeag Street between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue and Prairie Street between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue, Project No. 1989-12 . Motion carried unanimously. Ron Scherer stated he believes this project to be beneficial only to the Ashland Company. He further stated that in 1981 the City had the opportunity via a grant to do this project but decided against it then. Bob Shields presented a petition of individuals opposed to the project. He stated the sewer and water was placed in this area when it was not necessary and seemed to benefit one individual. He stated that many lots are vacant and may be left to return to the tax rolls rather than pay the high assessments. He asked consideration be given whether the residents can afford the project. He further stated his business will never recover these costs. He requested consideration of the petition and asked the project not be conducted. Ida Rohlfs stated she is a senior citizen who likes to pay her own bills and does not like this project nor the resultant high assessment. Bill Hauer stated initially this project was to be gravel and upgraded like the rest of the streets in the area. City Engineer confirmed this but stated that the City's policy towards gravel roads had since changed due to the high maintenance. Bruce Wallace stated that the project seems to be directed toward the interest of SuperAmerica. He questioned how much Bluff Avenue is actually traveled and if this was to be an alternate for Hwy. 169. Proceedings of the September 14, 1989 Shakopee City Council Page -3- John Nelson stated they (co-owners of various lots in the area) have looked at this area very objectively for possible developments and would like the City to delay the project until the proper occupants could be located. He further stated that the storm sewer improvements are not needed for this area but for 1st Avenue. He suggested a project of this nature be conducted when the area is improved. City Engineer stated the assessments were proposed on current design standards but the Council had the right to deviate from those standards. Scott/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Scott moved to determine the project not in the best interest of the City and to proceed no further with Project No. 1989-12, at this time. Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Wampach moved for a 10-minutes recess at 8:45 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Clay moved to reconvene at 9:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Zak moved to open the public hearing on an appeal by Gerald Schesso, to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals decision denying variances regulating the construction of accessory buildings. Motion carried unanimously. Gerald Schesso stated the accessory structure had been approved three years ago in order to complete the construction of their boat. He admitted a time frame was placed upon them at that time but stated that this deadline could not be met. He further stated they are working as fast as possible and have received no complaints. He requested a two year extension to complete construction of the boat. Scott Ferros stated he has looked at the boat construction project and is very impressed with the hours Mr. Schesso gives his project. He further stated he didn't believe there was a way anyone could possibly know the completion date. Cncl. Zak stated the Council was not against the project but an end date is necessary. He voiced his concern for precedence setting on Conditional Use Permits and stated the Board of Adjustments and Appeals wants and should have a time frame established. Cncl. Scott stated his concern in overriding the decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals once again. He added they are doing their job and the Council should respect this, if they want to keep this service functioning. Proceedings of the September 14, 1989 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Tim Henning, co-builder, stated they need the building to complete the boat but cannot give the City a deadline date for completion. Don Schesso stated he would like to see the project completed but is requesting the extension to carry into the fall of the year rather than have it expire in July 1991, as has been suggested. Wampach/Vierling moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to grant Variance Resolution NO. CC-569 (construction of accessary building over a boat) for a period of 30 months commencing September 30, 1989, subject to the condition Mr. Schesso replace the tarp as needed and the Council may require screening of the project if it is not kept clean. Motion carried with Cncl. Scott opposed. Mayor Lebens stated she will not sign Resolution No. 3110, for bonds for Highway 169 and if the tax increment financing falls by the wayside, it was the necessary way to handled this situation. She asked if the resolution could be prepared to separate the Highway 169 project from the Upper Valley Drainage Project, as the later project she is in favor of but could only approve the Highway 169 project with the support of the people. Gregg Voxland, Finance Director, stated the two bonds are combined to save the City money. Mayor Lebens requested Resolution No. 3110, be placed on the November election ballot. She was reminded by Cncl. Zak that the voters had elected her into office and thereby supports her decisions and this separate issue need not be placed on the ballot. Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3110, A Resolution Relating to $3,600,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989A; Calling for the Public Sale Thereof, and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes - Wampach, Zak, Vierling, Clay Noes - Lebens, Scott Motion Carried. Clay/Vierling moved to direct the Ass't City Attorney to commence with the preparation of the necessary paperwork to legally require the Mayor to sign Resolution No. 3110, or commence with whatever documents are needed to expedite the signing of this resolution. Motion carried with Mayor Lebens opposed. Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3111, A Resolution Terminating Licenses Agreement #98418 with the Chicago and Northwestern Railroad, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously under consent business. Proceedings of the September 14, 1989 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Vierling/Scott moved to table the ordinance on potentially dangerous animals, until the City Attorney's return to allow him further time to check with the County relative to their licensing procedure. Motion carried unanimously. Due to time allowance, omitted from the agenda for City Council action were: Planning Commission Ordinance No. 275, amending the zoning regulations, report from the Community Development Commission relative to the elimination of left turns at Holmes and Lewis Streets off of Highway 101 and Ordinance No. 274, amending the refuse collection regulations. The City Engineer explained the request of Bergquist Company for the City to construct a road adjacent to their property on Valley Park Drive. Jon Albinson, Scotland, stated he hopes the City can show benefit for assessments to Conklin prior to proceeding with the project as outlined in Resolution No. 3109, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of a Report on An improvement to An Unnamed Street Located in Section 10, Township 115, Range 22, Immediately Adjacent to the South Property Line of the Bergquist Company. He stated that if the Bergquist Company wants the road, they should be willing to pay for it. Vierling/Scott moved to deny the request of Bergquist Company to prepare a feasibility report for road improvements. Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Clay moved to appropriate from the Contingency Fund to the Chamber of Commerce $200 to off-set costs incurred as a result of the 1989 Derby Days celebration. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion Carried. Vierling/Clay moved to authorize the proper City Officials to execute an assessment agreement between the City of Shakopee and the County of Scott for the assessment of the property in Shakopee for the 1990 assessment year for $26,700. Roll Call: Ayes - Lebens, Clay, Vierling, Scott, Wampach Noes - Zak Motion Carried. Vierling/Scott moved to authorize City Staff to design the Upper Valley Drainage Channel through Tahpah Park in such a fashion that all existing softball fields are maintained using the most cost effective methods, including the use of an enclosed storm sewer pipe through Field No. 6, and an open channel system along the north boundary of the park the remainder of the way and to pursue the possibility to purchase the adjacent land. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion Carried Vierling/Zak moved to table all bids received for the Lion's Park Pond, Project No. 1989-12 and to inform the Shakopee Lions Club that this Proceedings of the September 14, 1989 Shakopee City Council Page -6- project will be constructed in conjunction with the remainder of the Upper Valley Drainage Project. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Clay moved to remove from the table pending action on the parking lot by the Scout Building. Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Vierling moved to direct the City staff to arrange for paving this portion of the parking lot at a not-to-exceed amount of $2500. and to utilize curb, gutter and black top. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion Carried Vierling/Wampach moved to acknowledge Change order No. 1 to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , in the amount of $35,776. .00 in conjunction with constructing a pedestrian underpass for the Upper Valley Drainage Project, Project No. 1987-5 and to establish a contingency in the amount of 10% for use by the project administrator in processing change orders for this project. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion Carried vierling/Scott moved to acknowledge Change Order No. 1, for the 3rd Avenue Reconstruction Project No. 1989-5 for a total increase in the contract of $3,800.00 to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , and to establish a contingency amount of 103 for use in processing change orders associated with this project. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion Carried. Clay/Vierling moved to approve the bills in the amount of $248,210.67 as presented. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion Carried. Vierling/Clay moved to accept the proposal of Jasper, Streefland & Company for 1989 audit services in the amount of $8,300.00 and that the City Administrator is authorized to execute the Understanding of Engagement. Motion carried unanimously under Consent Business. Vierling/Clay moved nominate Michael Phillips to the Downtown Committee and to dispense with the rules and appoint Michael Phillips to the Downtown Committee. Motion carried unanimously under Consent Business. Vierling/Clay moved to authorize the proper City officials to execute a Hold Harmless Agreement with Allen Plaisted for the encroachment of a retaining wall into the alley easement. Motion carried unanimously under Consent Business. Vierling/Clay moved to waive the City's reviewal period which the City has prior to the State Department of Revenue - Gaming Division issuing a Gambling Exemption to the Minnesota Chorale for a raffle to be Proceedings of the September 14, 1989 Shakopee City Council Page -7- conducted on September 24, 1989 at Canterbury Down. Motion carried unanimously under Consent Business. Vierling/Clay moved to waive the 60-day review period and recommend that the Department of Revenue - Gaming Division approve the gambling license renewal application for the Lions Club Shakopee. Motion carried unanimously under Consent Business. Discussion of the 1990 budget and discussion of a statewide code of ethics for elected officials and public employees was omitted from the agenda due to the lateness of the hour. Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3104, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of a Feasibility Report for Adams Street, Between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3107, A Resolution Accepting Work on the Tahpah Park Football Field, Project No. 1988-4 and moved for its adoption and further approved final payment to S. M. Hentges and Sons, Inc. , in the amount of $512.00. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion Carried Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3108, A Resolution Accepting Work on the T.H. 101/C.R. 83 Intersection Improvements Project No. 1987-1 and moved for its adoption and further approved final payment to Egan- McKay Electrical Contractors, 7100 Medicine Lake Road, Minneapolis, in the amount of $441.38. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion Carried Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3112, A Resolution Accepting Bids on Market Street and Various Alleys, Project No. 1988-6 and moved for its adoption with the deletion of the concrete approach for the alley in Block 81 and further to approve a contingency in the amount of 153 for use by the contract administrator in authorizing change orders on this project. Roll Call: Ayes - Unanimous Noes - None Motion carried. Vierling/Clay offered Res. No. 3111, A Resolution Terminating License Agreement #98418 With The Chicago and Northwestern Railroad, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously under consent business. Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3101, A Resolution Initiating the Partial Vacation of a Utility Easement lying in the South Corner of Lot 1, Block 1, Valley Mall 1st Addition, Scott County, Minnesota and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Scott moved to transfer Jeanette Shaner to Building Department Secretary at current salary and to transfer Toni Warhol to Administration Proceedings of the September 14, 1989 Shakopee City Council Page -8- as Secretary to the City Administrator at current salary and further moved to authorize advertising for a Clerk Typist II position to replace the existing Secretary position. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Scott moved to adjourn to September 12, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:10 P.M. Judith S. Cox / City Clerk Jane VanMaldeghem Recording Secretary AM CONSENT 129 South HDlmes Shakopee,MN 55379 (612)445-6300 September 8, 1989 Dennis Kraft City Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Kraft: As we had previously discussed on Thursday, the bank will be celebrating its 125th anniversary during the week of September 18th. The Marquette Bank, formally the First National Bank of Shakopee, was chartered as a community bank in 1864 and has been a strong and positive influence in the development and growth of Shakopee. We are proud of our heritage and will continue to offer banking and financial services to the Shakopee area in the tradition we have established. The bank would appreciate a recognition or proclamation which would be formalized and read by the Mayor of Shakopee at the Chamber of Commerce meeting scheduled for September 20th. The proclamation presented at the Chamber meeting would be of special significance because of the main speaker, Mr. Carl Pohlad. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Daniel G. Steil Senior Vice President DGS/sr Recommended Action: Offer Resolution No. 3105, A Resolution Commending and Congratulating Marquette Bank Shakopee in Honor of their 125th Anniversary, and move its adoption. NT i `1 Marque Bank sawpl ,NA 129 South Holmes Shakopee, N 55379 (612)405-630 September 8 , 1,989 Dennis Kraft \ \ City Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Kraft: / As we had previously discus d on Thursday, the bank will be celebrating its 125th anni er during the week of September 18th. The Marquette Bank, formally, a First National Bank of Shakopee, was chartered as a cotmlunit b in 1864 and has been a strong and positive influence in e d elopment and growth of Shakopee. We are proud of our herit ge and ill continue to offer banking and financial services the S opee area in the tradition we have established. The bank would appreci e a recogn tion or proclamation which would be formalized and read by he Mayor of Shakopee at the Chamber of Commerce meeting scheduled for September 20th. The proclamation presented at the Chamber m eting would be of special significance because of the main speaker Mr. Carl Pohlad. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Daniel G. Ste 1 Senior Vice esident DGS/sr Reco mended Action: Offer Resolution No. 3105, A Resolution Commending and Congratulating Marquette Bank Shakopee in Honor of their 125th Anniversary, and move its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 3105 G' A RESOLUTION COMMENDING AND CONGRATULATING MARQUETTE BANK SHAKOPEE IN HONOR OF THEIR 125TH ANNIVERSARY WHEREAS, the First National Bank was chartered on June 3, 1864 and opened its doors for business in Downtown Shakopee in the Spring of 1865; and WHEREAS, the name of the bank was changed to Marquette Bank Shakopee on June 1, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Marquette Bank Shakopee has continually been in business and located in Shakopee for 125 years; and WHEREAS, Marquette Bank Shakopee has faithfully and diligently served many generations of Shakopee customers and residents; and WHEREAS, Marquette Bank Shakopee has been a community minded business since their initial establishment and has graciously contributed to numerous community projects; and WHEREAS, Marquette Bank Shakopee has been a downtown main stay which has attributed to the economic vitality of the downtown area; and WHEREAS, Marquette Bank Shakopee has assisted Shakopee residents in meeting their financial needs and pursuing their dreams; and WHEREAS, Marquette Bank Shakopee employees have been diligent, community minded, and service oriented; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Shakopee City Council acknowledges, commends and congratulates Marquette Bank Shakopee in honor of their 125 years of business in Shakopee. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1989. City Attorney September 5, 1989 Mayor Lebens and Council 129 E. 1st. Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mayor Lebens and City Council: Time limitations and an increasing workload make it necessary for me to resign from the Shakopee Community Development Commission effective immediately. I have enjoyed working with the Commission and I fully support their efforts to attract and retain commercial, residential and industrial prospects to our community. Sincerely, Al'Furrie si RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept the resignation of Al Furrie from the Community Development Commission, with regrets ; and, offer � 2solu,:ion No. 3115, A Resolution of Appreciation to Al Furrie, and move its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 3115 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO AL FURRIE WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council did create an Industrial and Commercial Development Commission in August of 1978; and WHEREAS, Al Furrie was appointed to said Commission as one of it's original members, and has served until his resignation in September of 1989; and WHEREAS, during his tenure on the Industrial Commercial Development Commission (currently known as the Community Development Commission) , Al Furrie served as Vice Chairman from October of 1981 thru November of 1985 and again from March of 1987 until April of 1988, and served as Chairman from November 1985 until March of 1987; and WHEREAS, Al Furrie has served unselfishly and has dedicated many hours to the efforts of the Community Development Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee city Council, on behalf of the resident of Shakopee and on behalf of the Community Development Commission, that the Shakopee City Council does hereby extend to Al Furrie the deep appreciation of the City for his years of civic interest and dedicated service to the community. Adopted in adjourned regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 19th day of September, 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this _ day of 1989. City Attorney kc., IIEEWAYM REAL ESTATE SERVICES,INC September 12, 1989 VIA COURIER Mr. Dennis Kraft City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Request for Indication of Economic Incentives Offered to Corporations Locating Their Facilities in the City of Shakopee Dear Dennis: We represent FMG-TSUMURA, a nationally known manufacturer of "Claire Burke", home fragrances, "Foltene", hair care products, "Minnetonka Medical", high quality health care products and "Vita Bath", in the development and location of their new Office/Research & Development/Processing and Distribution Center. Presently, we have completed the facility programming requirements as well as preliminary block diagrams and materials handling equipment design and our initial indication of facility requirements is for a total of 290,000, comprised of 50,000 and 240,000 square feet, respectively for office and warehouse/processing areas. Their initial site requirement is 30 acres which will accommodate the initial facility, 50% expansion thereof, parking for 427 cars and 20 tractor trailers plus sufficient green area to address aesthetic concerns. Preliminary building design thinking is along the lines of painted tilt-up concrete wall panels with architectural relief or a pre-cast sandwich panel with some architectural detail. Aesthetics are important to FMG-TSUMURA, but so are the costs associated with a facility of this magnitude; thus the final design will address both issues. The project schedule calls for the facility to be operational no later than December, 1990, therefore, our site search has been limited to sites that are essentially ready to go in terms of zoning and infrastructure. FMG-TSUMURA now is in the final stages of economic feasibility studies and is considering final site candidates in four municipalities, one of which is Shakopee. Within Shakopee they are considering a Canterbury Park parcel immediately east of Kmart, Standard Development, Thunderhawk and the Koskovich parcels. The economics of a project of this nature, particularly initial capital expenditures, become crucial to the project's feasibility, or indeed even its ability to go forward; therefore, we seek an indication from the City of Shakopee of all incentives that would be made available to FMG-TSUMURA should they decide to locate in your community. Specifically, we seek an indication of support from City Council for providing FMG-TSUMURA with Tax Increment Financing with five years of tax increment capture. 512 NkolMt Mall,Suite 430 T30 FiRM1 Nxuue.5uile 900 Mio,reawK MN 551112 xe eYwk,M1T Iwo (tilLIJ4N4Lg (2121397-1922 (612)3498439 FAX 1212139YAr°A PAx Mr. Dennis Kraft September 12, 1989 - Page 2 - Therefore, we request an audience with City Council at their September 19, 1989 meeting to make a brief project presentation and discuss their support on the aforementioned proposal. Very truly yours, cot ern Vice President JSA:Jr cc: Howard Hirsch Ron Whipperman Janet Pollish 90.. MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Final Plat for Heritage Place 2nd Addition DATE: September 15, 1989 INTRODUCTION• At their meeting on September 14, 1989, the Shakopee Planning Commission passed a motion recommending to the City Council approval of the final plat for Heritage Place 2nd Addition subject to conditions. BACKGROUND: At their meeting on March 21, 1989, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for Heritage Place 2nd Addition. In July, the developer submitted a final plat for the entire area included in the preliminary plat. At their meeting on August 3, 1989, the Planning Commission reviewed the final plat and passed a motion recommending to the City Council approval of the plat. Following the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the developer requested a change in the final plat. The developer indicated that they wish to plat only the West half of the property at this time and leave the East half as an outlot. At their meeting on September 14, 1989, the Planning Commission reconsidered the final plat for Heritage Place 2nd Addition with the proposed change and passed a motion recommending approval of the final plat with the proposed change to the City Council. A lO acre City park is located North of the proposed subdivision on the West end. The preliminary plat contained a condition that Ruby Lane, the street connecting Vierling Drive with the park, must be dedicated with the first phase of the development. The final plat recommended for approval does show the dedication of this street and the developer is planning to develop the West end of the plat first. Approval of the preliminary plat also required that a sidewalk be constructed along Ruby Lane connecting Vierling Drive with the park. A condition of approval for the preliminary plat also required that the developer meet with SPUC prior to approval of the final plat in order to reach an agreement regarding the extension of the water main along Vierling Drive. The developer has met with SPUC and has reached a verbal agreement with SPUC. The staff is recommending that a written agreement be executed regarding the extension of the water main on Vierling Drive and the looping of the water lines. A condition of preliminary plat approval required the renaming of certain streets within the plat. The streets have been renamed as required by the condition of the preliminary plat. Because Heritage Drive West has been renamed to Sapphire Lane the portion of Heritage Drive located North of this development and South of Lot 2, Block 2 and Lot 2, Block 4 of Heritage Place lst Addition should be renamed to Sapphire Lane as well. The Planning Commission has recommended a condition requiring the developer to petition for this name change. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At their meeting on September 14, 1989, the Planning Commission passed a motion recommending to the City Council approval of the final plat for 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. f. The developer agrees to the apportionment by the City Engineer of any existing special assessments. 3. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating that not more than 10% 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 construct a sidewalk along the West side of Ruby Lane connecting Vierling Drive with the park. 5. No lots will be allowed direct access onto Vierling Drive. 6. Prior to recording of the final plat, the developer shall execute an agreement with SPDC regarding extension of the water main along Vierling Drive and looping of water lines within the development. 7. The existing easement along the North property line shall be vacated prior to recording of the final plat or shown on the plat. 8. The easement along the lot line between Lots 18 & 19 Block 2 shall be 10' in width on each side of the lot line. 9. The developer shall file a petition with the District Court to rename Heritage Drive from Lot 2, Block 2 and Lot 2, Block 4 of Heritage Place lst Addition South to the Northern boundary of Heritage Place 2nd Addition to Sapphire Lane. 10. The right-of-way for Onyx Drive and it's intersection with Heritage Drive located in the Northeast corner of outlot A shall be shown on the final plat and dedicated to the City. 11. No building permits shall be issued for outlot A until it has been replatted. ALTERNATIVES• 1. The City Council can offer and pass Resolution No. 3117 approving the final plat for Heritage Place 2nd Addition subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. 2. The City Council can offer and pass Resolution No. 3117 approving the final plat for Heritage Place 2nd Addition subject conditions different then recommended by the Planning Commission. 3. The City Council can offer and pass a motion to not approve the final plat for Heritage Place 2nd Addition. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and pass Resolution No. 3117 approving the final plat for Heritage Place 2nd Addition as outlined in either alternative #1 or #2 above. RESOLUTION NO.3117 A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Heritage Place 2nd Addition WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did approve the Final Plat of Heritage Place 2nd Addition on September 14, 1989 and has recommended its adoption; and WHEREAS, all notices of hearing have been duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all things. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, that the Final Plat of Heritage Place 2nd Addition, described as follows: See Exhibit A Attachment be, and the same hereby is approved and adopted with the requirements that: 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. f. The developer agrees to the apportionment by the City Engineer of any existing special assessments. 3 . The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating that not more than 10% 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 construct a sidewalk along the West side of Ruby Lane connecting Vierling Drive with the park. � C� 5. No lots will be allowed direct access onto Vierling Drive. 6. Prior to recording of the final plat, the developer shall execute an agreement with SPUC regarding extension of the water main along Vierling Drive and looping of water lines within the development. 7. The existing easement along the North property line shall be vacated prior to recording of the final plat or shown on the plat. 8. The easement along the lot line between Lots 18 & 19 Block 2 shall be 10 ' in width on each side of the lot line. 9. The developer shall file a petition with the District Court to rename Heritage Drive from Lot 2, Block 2 and Lot 2, Block 4 of Heritage Place 1st Addition South to the Northern boundary of Heritage Place 2nd Addition to Sapphire Lane. 10. The right-of-way for Onyx Drive and it's intersection with Heritage Drive located in the Northeast corner of Outlot A shall be shown on the final plat and dedicated to the City. 11. No building permits shall be issued for Outlot A until it has been replatted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk and the same hereby authorized and directed to execute said approved Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this _ day of , 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this _ day of 1989. City Attorney Exhibit A The West 16.55 acres of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, which lies northerly of a line 40.00 feet northerly of and parallel with the following described line: Commencing at the northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 115, Range 22; thence South 00 degrees 21 minutes 02 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line thereof a distance of 628. 13 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 86 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East a distance of 2,261.21 feet; thence easterly 298.96 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the north, having a radius of 1,467.91 feet and a central angle of it degrees 40 minutes 09 seconds; thence North 81 degrees 55 minutes 10 seconds East, tangent to said curve, a distance of 657.45 feet to a point on the east line of the West 16.55 acres of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 115, Range 22, and said centerline there terminating. ALSO The South 16.5 feet of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, lying Westerly of the Westerly right of way line of the abandoned right-of-way of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company, said centerline of the track established by Scott County Recorder's Document No. 178637. ALSO The Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota lying westerly of the west line of Block 2, HAUER'S 4TH ADDITION according to the recorded plat thereof and its southerly and northerly extensions, and easterly of the east line of the west 16.55 acres of the said Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and which lies northerly of a line, 40.00 feet northerly of and parallel with the following described line: Commencing at the northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 115, Range 22; thence South 00 degrees 21 minutes 02 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line thereof a distance of 628.13 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence south 86 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East a distance of 2,261.21 feet; thence easterly 298.96 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the north having a radius of 1,467.91 feet and a central angle of 11 degrees 40 minutes 09 seconds; thence North 81 degrees 55 minutes 10 seconds East, tangent to said curve a distance of 657.45 feet to a point on the West line of HAUER'S 4TH ADDITION according to the recorded plat thereof and said line there terminating. Taw oP•Plcss BRIGGS AND MORGAN P80P833IONAL ASSOCIATION 8200 FIRST NATIONAL BANG BM IRO SAINT PAIIL,aINNE3OTA 66101 TBLEFBONE lew) .01-1205 „ ^ TELECOFIE81e121 E2E-40'11 V[N� _ 1989 9 INccasixo TSa Foausa FT' of C!1 y C.= $1411 KOPEE LEVITT, PALMEB, HONER, HOTM & SHARE September 12, 1989 City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Attn: Judy Cox, city Clerk RE: City of Shakopee, Minnesota - $4,000,000 Sports Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 1984-B Dear Judy: Enclosed for your review, and distribution to the members of the Shakopee City Council, is the resolution that I mentioned to you in our telephone conversation today. This resolution authorizes the further amendment to the Indenture of Trust and Loan Agreement currently in effect with respect to the above Bonds, to allow those Bonds to be remarketed on October 3, 1989 on the basis of a continued escrow of Bond proceeds. As I mentioned in our telephone conversation, the investment bankers and Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. had anticipated that, by October 3, 1989, the Series B Bond proceeds would be able to be released from escrow and applied to the costs which have previously been incurred by MRI. The intervening bankruptcy of certain shareholders of MRI has, however, made the remarketing of these Bonds on a non-escrowed basis impossible. The plan, comtemplated by this resolution, is to have the remarketing be accomplished in the same manner as it was last year, on an escrowed basis and with an extension of the existing letter of credit, until a new mandatory purchase date next spring. If the remarketing on a non-escrowed basis cannot be accomplished at that time, for any reason, Briggs and Morgan expects that this issue will be retired. It is hoped, however, that the Bonds will be able to be utilized by MRI at that point. m n,rs.x.rlw..t.....,,tomo woo fns c.. se$eo N.AUL.X r....<.n',.. y wT es,L norN.sor.avw N1Fre.. I.,,Nol.csoT.soma .1t PAUL.MIN..s6S.,d.l IGPI 861-IP,S IBIYI T.B-U..� 19121Pq- BRIGGS ax. MORGAN September 12, 1989 - Page Two Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Very truly yours, i ansen RH:jl/25 Ro� Enclosure cc: Rod Krass John Clarey Frank Fairman Jim Lockhart RESOLUTION NO. 3116 A RESOLUTION FURTHER AMENDING THE SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST DATED AS OF OCTOBER 15, 1984 FOR $44,000,000 SPORTS FACILITY REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1984-B AND THE LOAN AGREEMENT EXECUTED IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, on October 15, 1984, the City of Shakopee, Minnesota ( the "City" ) issued its $44,000,000 Sports Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 1984-B ( the "Bonds") and loaned the proceeds derived from the sale thereof to Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. ( "MRI" ) to finance a portion of a horse racing facility in the City of Shakopee now known as Canterbury Downs; and WHEREAS, the Bonds were issued and are outstanding pursuant to the terms of a Supplemental Indenture of Trust originally executed by the City and First Trust Company, Inc. (the "Trustee" ) October 15, 1984, and amended on December 18, 1984, December 27, 1984, April 1, 1988 and October 3, 1988 (collectively the "Indenture") ; and WHEREAS, MRI has advised the City and the Trustee that it wishes to further amend the Indenture and Loan Agreement currently in effect with respect to the Bonds to accommodate (a) the remarketing of some or all of the Bonds on October 3, 1989 on an escrowed basis, either through the extension of the existing letter of credit or otherwise, and (b) the document revisions required by Standard & Poor ' s Corporation or Moody' s Investors Services in order for that rating agency to continue to rate the Bonds on the credit of the letter of credit bank; and WHEREAS, Section 10-2 of the Indenture provides that the City and the Trustee may, from time to time, enter into supplemental or amendatory indentures so as to thereby, among other things, either (a) grant to or confer upon the Trustee for the benefit of the Holders any additional rights, remedies, powers, authority or security that may lawfully be granted to or conferred upon the Holders or the Trustee (b) subject to the lien and pledge of this Indenture additional revenues, property or collateral or (c) make any other change which in the judgment of the Trustee is necessary or desireable and will not materially prejudice any non-consenting Holder of a Bond; and WHEREAS, the Bonds are to be purchased from the existing Holder on October 3, 1989 for remarketing to new holders; and WHEREAS, the amendments to be made to the documents to accommodate a continuation of the escrow, whether accompanied by an extension of the existing letter of credit or otherwise, will not materially prejudice any of the existing holders, since those holders are required to relinquish their Bonds on October 3, 1989 . NOW, THEREFORE, it is resolved by the City Council Of the City of Shakopee that : 1. The Indenture described above should be further amended to allow for the remarketing of some or all the City's $44,000,000 Sports Facility Revenue Bonds on an escrowed basis, whether through the extension of the existing irrevocable letter of credit or otherwise, including any document revisions required by Standard & Poor 's Corporation or Moody' s Investors Services in order to allow either such rating agency to rate the Bonds on the basis of the credit of any letter of credit provider. 2. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute a Fourth Supplemental Indenture of Trust and Third Amended Loan Agreement, subject to review of the final forms of such documents by the City Attorney, as well as any other documents which in the reasonable opinion of its City Attorney are necessary to carry out the intention and purpose described herein. Adopted: September 19, 1989 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA By Its Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk dday oo Approved as to form this Y 1988. Assistant City Attorney 20/06 9 � MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official RE: Shakopee Community Youth Center DATE: September 11, 1989 It is imperative that the use of the Community Youth Center be clearly identified through a written City Policy or ordinance passed by the City Council. The Lion's membership has concerns that an inappropriate use can taint the spirit in which material and money was donated and 250 volunteers gave so freely of their time. The original intent of this project was to provide the youth of our community a place to meet, compete and enjoy each other's company. The Shakopee Community Youth Center was intended for structured, adult supervised youth activities only. Everyone who was envolved in this project was adament about this youth restriction. It was not intended to provide a meeting place for any pro-life, pro-choice rally, political or religious activities. We believe a policy should be established, approved by Council and enforced. I think the City Attorney would be the logical person to draw this up. It should be worded to include: Permitted Uses 1. Any supervised community youth activity. 2. Any supervised youth organization fund raiser. 3. Any non-political senior citizens activity if it does not conflict with scheduled use of scouting or youth activities. 4. Any educational youth program. Prohibited Uses 1. Political activities or rallys. 2. Pro-life meetings or rallys. 3. Pro-choice meetings or rallys. 4. Religious meetings or activities. 5. Any meeting or activity that is not youth organization orientated. scheduling Scheduled use of the building will be applied for through the five member community youth organization board which the City Council has appointed. Community Youth Organization Board Responsibilities 1. The Board shall be charged with scheduling the use of the Community Youth Center. 2. The Board shall be responsible for all interior cleaning of the facility and the exterior policing of the grounds. 3. The Board shall provide the Community Recreation Director with the building use schedule at least one month in advance. 4. The Board shall be responsible for notifying the Shakopee Building Inspector of any repairs needed to the facility. LH/jms CJ C MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: J.L. Shiely Co. Private Roadway DATE: September 15, 1989 INTRODUCTION• In October 1988, the City Council passed an ordinance amending the City Code allowing existing parcels of record to obtain building permits when they do not abut a public street certain conditions. one of the requirements included in the ordinance required approval by the City Council of existing private roadways serving more than two parcels of property. The J.L. Shiely Co. has requested that the City Council formally approve their private roadway which serves the Shiely gravel pit, the NSP substation, and Cretex. BACKGROUND: Prior to October of 1988, the City Code contained a provision stating that no building permits could be issued to property that does not abut a public road. The City discovered in 1988 that this provision had not been enforced by the City and presented a number of problems for existing parcels of property located in the City. In October 1988, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 253 amending this provision of the City Code allowing for existing parcels of property accessed by a private road or driveway to receive building permits when the roadway has been approved by the City Council. Attached are copies of City Code Section 11.03, Subd. 7. H. and City Code Section 11.60, Subd. 19. A. 9. , the sections of City Code amended in 1988. The Shiely Company has executed a roadway maintenance agreement for the private roadway serving their facility, Cretex and NSP, and has requested that the City Council approve the maintenance agreement and roadway. The City Attorney has reviewed the maintenance agreement (see attached letter) and recommended approval of the agreement as required by City Code Section 11.60, Subd. 19. A. 9. (a) • City Code Section 11.60, Subd. 19. A. 9. (b) states that in approving the roadway the Council based upon current street standards may require upgrading of the roadway to insure proper and save access. The roadway serving the Shiely property is a paved 24 ' wide road which carries an extensive amount of heavy truck traffic. The City Engineer has reviewed the roadway and indicated that the only standard not being met by the existing road is in regard to width. The Engineer has indicated that based on the City's criteria for upgrading existing roadways the Shiely road would be a very low priority. The City Engineer indicated that there is no need for the Shiely Co. to upgrade the road at this time. The road is constructed in such a manner that it performs the function it serves very well. s� STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the City council adopt Resolution No. 3118 approving the J.L. Shiely Co. private roadway and finding that the roadway complies with the requirements stated in City Code Section 11.30, Subd. 7 H and City Code Section 11.60, Subd. 19. A. 9. ALTERNATIVES• 1. The City Council can adopt Resolution No. 3118 as recommended by staff approving the road. 2. The City Council can adopt Resolution No. 3118 approving the roadway subject to upgrading or additional requirements being met. 3 . The City Council can offer and pass a motion to not adopt Resolution No. 3118 approving the J.L. Shiely Co. private roadway. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3118, Approving the J.L. Shiely, Co. Private Road As A Access Drive, and moved its adoption. RESOLUTION ON TABLE S 11.03 F. Where adjoining structures existing on the effective date of this Chapter have a different setback from that required, the front setback of a new structure shall conform to the average prevailing setback. The average prevailing setback shall be the average of all existing principal buildings on the same block face or if there are less than three (3) structures existing on the same block face, the adjoining block face closest to the subject property sahll also be included in the computation. Source: Ordinance No. 246, 4th Series Effective Date: 6-17-88 G. In areas served by private wells or private sewage disposal system, the City Administrator may require larger lots than required by the zoning districts if soil tests indicate that a larger lot is necessary to insure the sanitary function of such systems. Source: Ordinance No. 31, 4th Series Effective Date: 10-25-79 H. No building permits for a new principal struc- ture or addition to a principal structure shall be issued for any lot or parcel which does not abut a dedicated public street except under the following conditions: 1. Properties located within a Planned Unit Development where the streets are constructed and maintained by the Planned Unit Development Association. 2. Parcels of property being accessed by a private road or driveway easement when the individual parcels being served were parcels of record prior to the enactment of City Code, Chapter 12 (May 7, 1981). Access drives and roads serving these parcels must comply with the requirements contained in Section 11. 60, Subd. 19, entitled "Access Drives and Access". Source: Ordinance No. 253, 4th Series Effective Date: 10-14-88 I. (Repealed by Ordinance No. 253, 4th Series, adopted 10-4-88. ) Subd. S. Building Standards for Dwellings. A. All newly created dwellings, other than one family detached dwellings, shall contain not less than 400 square feet of usable floor area for each dwelling not having a separate bedroom, 720 square feet for each two bedroom dwelling and an additional 120 square feet for each bedroom above two bedrooms. i B. All new single family detached residences shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide for at least 80 percent of their length and shall be placed on a permanent foundation. Source: Ordinance No. 116, 4th Series Effective Date: 4-14-83 -279- (10-15-88) 9. private roadways serving more than two parcels of property may be approved by the Council. The Council in approving said roadways shall require the following: (a) A property owner's association or maintenance agreement for the road must be executed granting the responsible party for maintaining the road the right to assess all 5 11.60 properties benefitting from the roadway for the cost of mainten- ance. The agreement shall also grant the City the right to enter and maintain the roadway when it deems necessary to maintain safe access and charge the cost of such maintenance back to the entity or property owners. (b) In approving the roadway, if the Council based upon current MN DOT and/or AASHTO minimum street standards determines that the roadway must be upgraded to insure proper and safe access, the homeowner's association or property owners will be required to execute a developer's agreement with the City for the improvement of the roadway. The Council may stipulate in the developer's agreement that the road must be dedicated to the City as a public street when a certain level of traffic volume and/or development occurs on the roadway. Source: Ordinance No. 253 , 4th Series Effective Date: 10-14-88 JULIUS A.COLLEH. 11 V Lw �Ee a a Arroxy AT LAw eiz-ws-iznn �esa-ie.owe.rH SB ROPEE, mrI. Esora 55319 August 16, 1989 Mr. Doug Wise City Planner Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN. 55379 Dear Doug: I have again reviewed the proposed Maintenance Agreement between J. L. Shiely Co., Northern States Power Co. and Cretex and they have removed the objectionable portions from the agreement for the most part and of course the City is not a party to the agreement and it is not bound thereby. The only remaining part of the agreement that I think is highly superfluous and not binding on the City is the provision that "prior to maintenance work being started by the City or its agent a written cost estimate of the said project along with satisfactory documentation of the need for thw work shall be given by the City to Shiely for its review and approval except in an emergency situation." Section 3 a. I don't think that if a necessity arises the City shouldn't have to go through that sort of procedure but to me if the people want that in the agreement it is alright It is not binding on the City anyway. In view of the fact that the City is not a party to the agreement and is not bound by it, a photo copy would be all that we would need of the executed copy. Ver truly yours. J us A. Coller, II Shakopee City Attorney SAC/nh y MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 1. PARTIES. THIS MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, made this 1st day of November 1988, between , J. L. Shiely Company, a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Shiely", Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "NSP", and Cretex Companies, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Cretex", WITNESSETH; 2. PREMISES. That Shiely, owner of the private Roadway ("Roadway") shown on attached Exhibit A lying south of the north 380 feet adjacent to Trunk Highway 101 and north of the Chicago and Northwestern railroad tracks, hereby agrees to assume responsibility for the maintenance of said private Roadway as required by the Shakopee City Council and as set forth in the Shakopee City Ordinance, Section 11.60, Subd. 19A. Further, that Shiely also reserves the right under Section 11.60, Subd. 19A of City L Code to assess all properties benefitting from the Roadway for the costs of maintenance. �y. "1,Charge 3. MAINTENANCE. �Yaf of Shakopee, a municipal orporation, heri nafter referred to as "City", a. Shiely grants the CityZhe right to enter and maintain the Roadway when the City deems it necessary to maintain safe access. Prior to maintenance work being started by the City or its agent, a written cost estimate of said project along with satisfactory documentation of the need for the work shall be given by the City to Shiely for its review and approval except in an emergency situation. b. If the city required maintenance work can be done less expensively and to the City's satisfaction, by employees, agents, or contractors selected by Shiely, as opposed to the work being done by City employees, agents, or contractors, this will be permitted at Shiely's request. _ C. Costs of Roadway maintenance required by the City shall be borne equally by all benefitting property owners, currently being Shiely, NSP, and Cretex. NSP and Cretex are parties enjoying the benefit of said private Roadway by virtue of Road Use Agreements ("Road Use Agreements") executed by NSP and Cretex on November 1, 1988, and February 1, 1988, respectively. 4. UPGRADE. a. The private Roadway is currently maintained and developed and complies with standards for safe and proper access, but if it is determined by the City Engineer and the City Council at a future date that the Roadway must be upgraded in order to insure proper and safe access, Shiely hereby agrees to enter into a Developers Agreement ("Developers Agreement") with the City for improvement of the Roadway. Shiely shall be provided by the City with a written cost estimate of the proposed upgrade work along with satisfactory documentation of the need for the work prior to commencement of the proposed work. b. If the city required upgrade work can be done less expensively and to the City's satisfaction, by employees, agents, or contractors selected by Shiely, as opposed to the work being done by City employees, agents, or contractors, this will be permitted at Shiely's request. C. Costs of City required Roadway upgrading shall be borne equally by all benefitting property owners currently being Shiely, NSP, and Cretex. 5. DEDICATION. That Shiely acknowledges the City may require in the Developers Agreement that the private Roadway be dedicated to the City when a certain level of traffic volume and/or development occurs on the Roadway. Nothing in this Maintenance Agreement, in 1J _✓ any Developers Agreement or in any other agreement shall preclude Shiely, as sole owner V�7 . / of the private Roadway, from exercising its right, at any time, to dedicate the private Roadwav to the Ci[ If City imposed maintenance and/or upgrade requirements and costs are from Shiely's perspective unacceptable for whatever reason, Shiely may initiate road dedication proceedings. At the time Shiely initiates roadway dedication proceedings, neither Sheily, NSP, nor Cretex shall be responsible for City required maintenance or upgrade costs as provided in paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Maintenance Agreement, but rather, the City will then assess property owners for their share of road maintenance and/or upgrade costs according to City ordinance regarding public roadways. At the time said Roadway is dedicated to the City, this Maintenance Agreement and the existing Road Use Agreements with NSP and Cretex shall become null and void. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Maintenance Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first written above. Thi-Gity-0 Fi By _ Its: Mayor By Lien k except that Shiely, NSP, and Cretex have been informed by a May 17, 1989, letter from the City, attached as Exhibit B, that the City does not have to accept the Roadway. G J. L. Shiely Company, a Minnesota corporation By \ ^tC ?y' e`Lr r Its: Vice President Northern rStates Power Company, a Minnesota corporation By az A. W. Benkusky Its: Virp PrPgidt Byt Cathine A. Jones Its Assistant Secretary Elk River Concrete Products, a division of Cretex Companies, Inc., a Minnesota corporation By Its: hesi%ntai ley By A AX 11 Its: Lyn P. Schuler Cot troller I J_Z'R: EXHIBIT A ' [LO ,moo - VF-tC?IPTION '7K -TGH VOK GITY OF 'JHAKOPEE • _ T.H. 101 K.O_W.1 N �iM. 101 e.ow. 1� ; • to W _ ' WL"IAM G• FSARSON - GKETEY Co. INC'. v _ N HJczr, ;.ST p loo 4 R.R. MA4 11 l- No•P4LI1Jlil. Al:R,fw Rbvnwl ' RESOLUTION NO. 3118 A Resolution Approving the J.L. Shiely Company Private Road as an Access Drive WHEREAS, the J.L. Shiely, Company owns a private roadway located in the Southwest 1/4, Section 2, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, serving their property, Northern States Power Company property, and Cretex Companies, Inc. ; and WHEREAS, the J.L. Shiely Company has requested approval of the private road in accordance with Shakopee City Code Sections 11.03, Subd. 7.H. and 11.60, Subd. 19.A.9. ; and WHEREAS, the parties benefiting from the private roadway have entered into an agreement for maintenance of the roadway which also grants to the City the right to enter and maintain the roadway when it deems necessary to maintain the safe access and charge the cost of such maintenance back to the property owners; and WHEREAS, said agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and City Planner; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has inspected the private road in accordance with City Code Section 11.60, Subd. 19.A.9. (b) and determined that upgrading of the road is not needed at this time; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all things. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, that the J.L. Shiely private road is hereby approved as an access to the J.L. Shiely Company, Northern States Power Company and Cretex Companies, Inc. Properties in accordance with Shakopee City Code Sections 11.03, Subd. 7.H. and 11.60, Subd. 19.A.9. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1989• City Attorney q CA . MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Corp-Tool, Inc. Intoxicating Liquor Licenses DATE: September 15, 1989 INTRODUCTION: Corp-Tool Inc. , applicant for liquor lienses, is asking for approval of liquor licenses as this time - Arnies. BACKGROUND: You may remember that on June 20th, Council made a non- binding informal motion that if all of the required inspections were completed and all certificates properly made showing full code compliance and if the necessary insurance, bonds, and fee were filed, that they would grant to Corp-Tool, Inc. , 122 East First Avenue, On sale, Off Sale, and Sunday intoxicating liquor licenses. The owners of Corp-Tool Inc. , Gregory Ries and Ken Cryer have been working diligently since that time bringing the building up to code. The remodeling of the building is substantially complete except for some minor items. They plan on having the work complete so that they can open October 1st. Their insurance and bond are in order, effective October let. Recommended Action: Approve the applications and grant On Sale, Off Sale, and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor Licenses to Corp-Tool Inc. , 122 East First Avenue effective October 1, 1989 upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the building department. CONSENT MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Cler RE: Request for Deferment of Special Assessments DATE: August 9, 1989 INTRODUCTION: The City has received an application from Mr. Harry E. lane for the deferment of special assessments against his property as a result of the construct of 11th Avenue North of the Meadows Subdivision. BACKGROUND: As you are aware, both Minnesota Statutes and the City Code have provisions for Senior Citizens to defer their special assessments if it would be a hardship for them to make payments. Mr. Lane has completed an application stating that it would be a hardship for him to make payments for the special assessments against his property as a result of the recent construction of 11th Avenue. According to Mr. Lanes application, he does meet the conditions outlined in the City Code. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the request. 2. Deny the request. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative 1, Approve the request. REQUESTED ACTION: Approve the applications from Harry Lane, 1067 South Main Street, and grant deferment of special assessments to parcel #27- 022008-0 from the 1988-5 11th Avenue Public Improvements, pursuant to the conditions outlined in Section 2.82 of the City Code. JSC/tiv TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Parkridge Drive Connection Charge/Assessment DATE: September 12, 1989 Introduction Staff has encountered a difficult situation with the collection of some of the deferred assessments/connection charges for the 1974-1 road and water improvements in Hauer's 1st addition. Background Project 74-1 installed water and paved road in Hauer's let addition. Parcels along Parkridge Drive (and two on Jasper Road) were to bear their share of the "trunk" water line and road from CR 16 up to the top of the hill but not the line or the road along the top of the hill. Resolution Mo. 860 adopted assessments but the parcels on Parkridge Drive were "not being charged a special assessment at this time: Their improvements will be added on later in the program (Pending till hook-up)". See Attachment. In prior years these charges had been considered more of a connection charge rather than a pending or deferred assessment. Staff tried to keep track of the connection charges and collect them at the time of connection to the water system with the building or plumbing permits. They were not recorded as deferred assessments or pending assessments on the special assessment record system that was established around 1978. They were just recently set up as pending assessments in the special assesment files. Over the years, the houses have connected to the water system and the charges have missed being collected. Until recently, the charges were not listed as a pending assessment when special assessment searchs have been done as part of a sale or refinancing process. The result is that a number of houses connected to the water system years ago, the house has been sold and the current owner bought it on the basis of no pending or deferred assessments. The City Attorney has seen the attached page from the assessment roll and based on the wording, considers the charges not to be assessments and there is no basis for making the charges assessments at this time. The City could ask the owners of those parcels that have connected and ownership has changed since connection, to pay the charge but there is no basis to enforce collection. The status of the parcels are; A. Parcels 27-908065-0 and 27-908067-0 (on Jasper Road) recieved service through Hauer's 4th Addition. The owners paid the developer for the improvements and in 1988 Council cancelled the deferred charges for the 1974-1 project which were $431.06 per lot. B. Parcel 27-046005-0 connected in 1978, the owners are the daughter and Bon- in-law of the orginal owner and are in the process of refinancing. There are prior searches in the file listing "no pending", but the search for the �.0 refinancing did show a pending. The owner has paid the charge last month ($787.29). C. Parcels 27-046006-0 and 27-046004-0 are still in the original owners name. There are no searches in the file for either parcel. One parcel connected last year and one connected in 1981. Letters have been sent to both owners regarding the outstanding charge and I have recieved no response in over two weeks. D. Parcel 27-908023-0 was sold in 1976 and the current owner connected in 1984. A letter has been sent regarding the outstanding charge. E. The remaining four parcels have all changed hands and have searches in the file showing "no pendings^. All but one have connected to the water system over the years. I feel it is fairly safe to assume that the current owners have purchased the lots with the understanding or on the basis that there were no pending assessments at the time of purchase based on the special assessment searches executed by City staff. The charges for the lots on Parkridge Drive are $787.29 per lot. The project is done and paid for and the debt service fund for paying off the bonds is also finished and closed. If the charge is considered a connection charge, it is difficult to go back as far as ten years and collect the charge. If it is an assessment, there are searches on file showing no pending or deferred assessments show. Five of the parcels have different owners than when the project was put in or connection was made. Alternatives 1. Try to collect all the remaining charges as connection charges. 2. Cancel all charges and refund the one that has paid. 3. Cancel charges for those lots which have connected and there is a subsequent search showing no pendings and ownership has changed. Collect the charge from the one remaining lot when it connects. Direct staff to certify for collection with the taxes the charge for the two lots which have connected and still have original owners. Recommendation Alternative number 3. Actiop Hove the following actions; A. to drop the connection charge for project 74-1 for parcels 27-046001-0, 27- 046003-0 and 27-046007-0 due to prior connection and subsequent ownership change; B. to direct staff to certify the charge for collection with the property taxes the amount of $787.29 over ten years at 88 interest for parcels 27- 046004-0, 27-046006-0 and 27-908023-0 due to no ownership change since connection; C. to collect the charge ($787.29) as a connection charge from 27-046002-0 at such time as the parcel connects to the water system. 1974-1 Public Improvement Program in the Hauer ' s Addition Area Watermain and service road. Resolution No. 860. The following are not being charged a special asseuument at this time;--Their—imprgvements will be added on later in the program. ending till book-up) Jame s' ' v.-Hauer -" Watermain 431 .06 _ 1028 East 2nd Avenue Ser. Rd. 356.23 ' Hauers lst Addition Y10 L1 B1 Total 787.29 -Douglas D. Edwards c/o Mortgage Assoc.lnc, watermain 431 .06 a,?�. (125 E.Zills Street Ser. Rd. 356.23 Milwaukee , Wisconsin Total 787.29 Hauers lst Addition L2 B1 Richard L. Dellwo Watermain 431.06 H.H. #2 Ser. Rd. 356. 23 Hauers lst Addition �ZS L3 B1 Total 787.29 Eugene F. Malz f watermain 431 .06 y2 Box 1056 Ser. Rd. 356.23 7'h auers 1st Addition ✓1�{5 L4 B1 Total 787.29 James Hauer Watermain 431.06 S�7 41j�, 1028 East 2nd Avenue Ser. Rd. 356. 23 Hauers 1st Addition he L5 B1 Total 787 .29 Richard A. Ries yes 51NA watermain 431.06 R.R. #2 Box 990 Ser. Rd. 356.23 Total 787.29 Charles A. Olson - watermain 431.06 h 222 West 6th Avenue Ser. Rd. 356.23 Hauers lst Addition VO Ll B2 Total 787 .29 Floyd W. Hey Watermain 431.06 R.R. N2 Ser. Rd. 356.23 Hauers let Addition ' 6I,2 B2 Total 787 .29 Vernon R. Berg a 54Y Watermain 431 .06 Derald Feltman 54 2A Ylatermain 431.06 �IL�� MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Enginedrr SUBJECT: 2nd Avenue , Between Atwood Street And Scott Street DATE: September 12, 1989 INTRODUCTION: Staff is currently working on a feasibility report for the construction of 2nd Avenue between Atwood Street and Scott Street. Staff would like to update Council on the status of this project and receive direction on it. BACKGROUND: As part of the Downtown Streetscape Project, 2nd Avenue between Sommerville Street and Atwood Street was reconstructed as two one-way coupler streets on each side of the railroad tracks. The project stopped at Atwood Street, but entrance nodes were constructed on the west side of Atwood Street, both north and south of the railroad tracks in anticipation of a future project extending the two one-way couplers west to Scott Street. The northern entrance node is currently barricaded to prevent traffic from entering private property (the City does not own any right-of-way along the north side of the tracks) . The southern entrance node is currently available for use by vehicles traveling in either direction. Council has expressed a concern over the safety of this entrance node because the street width is too narrow for two vehicles to pass alongside each other through the node. In addition, it is difficult, although not impossible, for fire trucks to make the '.. turn from eastbound 2nd Avenue to southbound Atwood Street due to the node, unless they encroach on the northbound lanes of Atwood Street. Because of those concerns, Council has ordered staff to prepare a feasibility report for completing 2nd Avenue between Atwood Street and Scott Street. Staff is currently working on the feasibility report, but the report can not be completed until the status of the depot is resolved. Staff would like to update Council on the feasibility report and also discuss the depot status. Basically , the feasibility report indicates that this project would cost approximately $23 ,000 to construct. This consists of constructing two one-way streets on each side of the street and includes pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, sodding and trees. The existing road on the south side would essentially be retained but the pavement would be widened to create on-street parking and the existing street would be overlayed. Adding 10% contingency and 25% for engineering and administrative fees, the total project is estimated at $31 ,500, not including land acquisition costs. The City would also need to acquire right-of-way for the street on the north side of the tracks. The property is currently either owned by the railroad or the real estate company representing the abandoned railroad. The feasibility report has determined that it would be difficult to assess this project to the abutting property owners. The railroad owns the property abutting the entire south side, while there is a single property owner abutting the north side. At best , a zonal assessment would need to be utilized using a predetermined area. Staff has also explored the status of the depot. Apparently, two separate railroads own a 50% share each in the depot. Currently, the railroads are asking $56 ,000 for the land and $44,000 for the building, for a total cost of $100 ,000. This does not cover any expenses associated with moving the building. Staff has attempted to negotiate a deal whereby the City could acquire the depot , but negotiations have been unsuccessful so far. The asking price is too high and the railroads are unwilling to negotiate a lower price . Occasionally, private individuals have also attempted to negotiate a purchase, but to no avail. The Downtown Committee and the Community Development Commission have discussed this issue several times and have encouraged staff to work with any prospective property owners to secure acquisition of the depot. Since the depot issue is apparently not going to be resolved in the near future, staff feels that the feasibility report should be discontinued . Staff dos not feel it would be feasible to build 2nd Avenue around the depot, thereby locking this building in between the tracks and the street. If the street is built now and the depot is moved at a later date, the land where the depot currently sits would be essentially non-developable. It would seem to make sense to build the street along the track, once the depot is moved, thereby creating more developable land north of the street. Staff also believes that the quickest and best way to resolve the depot question is for the City to condemn it for purposes of constructing a public street. Staff would like Council to discuss this issue and provide staff with the appropriate direction. If 2nd Avenue is not completed, action should be taken to reduce the traffic hazards associated with the narrow street due to the node. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Request the HRA to proceed with condemnation of the depot and solicit proposals for relocating and developing the depot. 2 . Construct the north leg of 2nd Avenue around the existing depot. If this option is preferred , staff should be directed to complete the feasibility report. 3 . Direct staff to discontinue the feasibility report and postpone any consideration for completing 2nd Avenue until after the fate of the current depot is determined. 4 . If 2nd Avenue is discontinued, direct staff to remove the existing node at 2nd Avenue on the west side of Atwood Street to widen the pavement. 5 . If 2nd Avenue is continued, direct staff to make the block of 2nd Avenue between Scott and Atwood Streets one-way going eastbound to eliminate traffic conflicts at the node. "Do Not Enter" signs should be installed on Atwood Street at 2nd Avenue. According to the City Attorney , fire vehicles would still be allowed to use the block of Atwood as a 2-way street during emergencies. 6 . Direct staff to explore other options. RECOMMENDATION: The node in question would be extremely difficult and expensive to remove. The reason for this is because of the existing street light and electrical in this node . It is estimated to cost around $12 ,000 just to move the street light. The total cost to remove the entire node would be around $16 ,000 . Staff also feels that this is more of a quick fix solution than a permanent one. Staff feels it would more beneficial to continue to work at getting the existing depot sold and moved. Staff is continuing discussions with the railroad and private real estate companies in an attempt to resolve this issue. In the meantime , staff feels that the City should start condemnation proceedings on the depot and solicit proposals for relocating it. Until the depot issue is resolved , staff feels that making the existing 2nd Avenue a temporary one-way street going eastbound would eliminate the traffic hazard. The remainder of 2nd Avenue along the south side of the tracks going east of Atwood is already a one-way street, so this action would be consistent with the other streets in the area. This would simply be an interim solution. Because 3rd Avenue is under construction, staff feels that this street should remain open to two-way traffic until 3rd/ Avenue is completed. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to direct the appropriate City officials to commence acquistition and condemnation of the depot and solicit proposals to relocate it. DH/pmp DEPOT ® SPRINGSTED PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS / 85 East Seventh Place,Suite 100 Saint Paul,Minnesota 55101 2143 612@233000 FAX 612.2233002 September 19, 1989 Mayor Dolores Lebens Members, City Council Mr. Dennis Kraft, Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Disclosure of Mayor's Refusal to Sign Documents Relating to the Sale of $1,635,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 19898 In the marketing of its bond issues, the City is required to disclose to potential bidders any conditions and events which may affect the creditworthiness of the security and the capacity to conclude the sale transaction. These disclosures are made in the marketing document for the issue, the Official Statement. We understand that at present the Mayor is refusing to sign any documents relating to the sale of the $1,635,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 19898 (the "Bridge Bonds"). We are considering a recommendation as to disclosing this situation in the Official Statement. We believe there are potential adverse financial impacts whatever the decision is on disclosure. Our purpose here is to inform the City of the alternative negative impacts on each side of the disclosure question. We would like to assure the City that whatever the decision is on the Bridge Bonds, it should not adversely affect the other issue, the "Storm Sewer Bonds." If this situation is not disclosed and the City is unable to settle the issue because of the inability to execute the closing documents, then the underwriter(s), who have purchased the issue, will have incurred substantial costs and will have, in all likelihood, already sold the bonds to their investors. The underwriter(s) will have to absorb the costs and notify their investors that the investment transaction cannot occur. There is little chance of a financial remedy for the underwriter(s) and the investors. The potential negative impact is that the underwriting community and the investors will probably penalize the City in its future issues as a result of this experience either by higher interest rates on a subsequent bond sale, or, as an extreme measure, by refusing to bid on a future issue. If it were to come to light that the City knew before the bond sale of the potential for not being able to settle the bonds and did not disclose this, the underwriter could have grounds for a lawsuit. If the situation is disclosed, there is a high probability the City will not receive any underwriters' bids, since an underwriter wants to expose himself to as little risk as possible. If the City does receive a bid, there is a good likelihood that it will be at an interest rate far higher than would normally be the case because of the risk to the underwriter. The City does have the option of not awarding the sale if any bids are received. The decision to disclose will in part be influenced by the ability to resolve the situation prior to settlement of the issue. By terms of the Notice of Sale, settlement must occur within 40 Indiana Office: Wisconsin Office: 251 Noah Illinois Street Suite 1510 500 Elm Grove Road,Suite 101 Indianapolis,Indiana 462041942 Elm Grove.Wisconsin 531220037 3172373636 4147828222 Fax 317 237 3639 Fax 4147822904 City of Shakopee, Minnesota September 19, 1989 Page 2 days following the date of sale. The date of sale is October 3, so that the 40-day period would conclude on November 13. However, as a practical manner, in order to schedule the closing and prepare the documents, the last possible day for this situation to be resolved in order to settle the issue is Friday, November 3. The Official Statement is scheduled to be printed tomorrow, September 20. Unless there is now assurance that the situation can be resolved prior to November 3, we recommend disclosure in the Official Statement. If the situation is disclosed and events change prior to October 3, then a supplemental mailing can be distributed to the underwriters. We will contact the City tomorrow morning to determine the status of the issue. Please feel free to contact us if we can be any further assistance. Respectfully, Corlis�eeks Vice President and Section Head, Analysis Section mmr 9k MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City AdmiTirtorFROM: Judith S. Cox, City ClerRE: Unsigned Resolution No. lating to the Sale of $1,635,000 G.O. Tax incremds DATE: September 15, 1989 INTRODUCTION: This is to advise you that on September 14, 1989, Mayor Lebens was in the office signing documents for the City and did choose to not sign Resolution No. 3114, Relating to the Sale of $1,635,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds in Conjunction with the Construction of the Bridge Improvements - See attached summary. BACKGROUND: You may remember that last November a similar situation was created when the Mayor choose not to sign the Ordinance adopting the preliminary layout for the Trunk Highway 169 - 101 Bridge and Mini Bypass Project. At that time the City Attorney was consulted on how to proceed. He advised that the proper action to take was for Council to authorize and instruct the City Attorney or Assistant City Attorney to start mandamus proceedings compelling the execution of the document or declaring it to be valid, assuming the Council desired to make the documents valid. Because this Resolution involves the sale of bonds and the execution of various documents to facilitate the sale, there are additional documents which will need to be signed. If Council wishes to commence mandamus proceedings, staff recommends that the action include not only the execution of the resolution but also the execution of all bond transcript documents relating to the sale of the G.O. Tax Increment Bonds. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Do nothing - the Resolution does not take effect. 2. Start a writ-of-mandamus proceedings to compel execution of the necessary documents for the bond sale. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Make the report of Judith S. Cox, City Clerk, dated September 14, 1989, part of the Council proceedings. 2. Instruct the Assistant City Attorney to start proceedings to require the Mayor to sign or the Vice Mayor to sign Resolution No. 3114 as well as all bond transcript documents related thereto or in the alternative, declare all bond transcript items as well as the Resolution valid without signature. On the morning of September 14, 1989, Mayor Dolores Lebens stopped into the office to sign documents for the City. At approximately 10:45 A.M. I presented Resolution No. 3114 to her for her signature. At 10 :45 A.M. Present: Mayor Dolore M. Lebens, and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Judith S. Cox - I would like to present to you for your execution Resolution No. 3114, Resolution Relating to $1, 635,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989-8; Calling for the Public Sale Thereof. Mayor Lebens - As chief executive officer of the City of Shakopee, I hereby decline to sign Resolution No. 3114 as passed by the City Council on September 12, 1989, providing for the issuance of $1,635,000 General obligation Tax Increment bonds to be used for financing the so-called mini by-pass and bridge in downtown Shakopee for the following reasons: 1) Since the mini by-pass and bridge project involves the conveyance to MnDOT of 13 parcels of City-owned real property, and the vacation of 8 segments of streets and alleys, and since said conveyances and vacations are subject to voter referendum under Ch 183, laws of 1965, the issuance of said bonds prior to said conveyances and vacations constitutes a deliberate attempt to circumvent said voter's rights and effectively deny the same in direct violation of Article I, Section 2 , of the State Constitution, which prohibits the disenfranchisement of its citizens. 2) Because said Resolution represents a serious departure from long established City policy as mandated in Ch 429. 091, Subd 1 of the public improvement code which provides that the contemplated improvements must first be ordered and a contract let before the Council may issue bonds, and in this case no action is anticipated on the project until late 1990 or 1991. (We simply don' t need the money at this time. ) 3) Because said project obviously will not increase the City' s housing (but will instead actually destroy at least 12 existing low and moderate income housing units) ; nor will it remove any substantial blight (but will instead remove some of the area' s newest structures) ; nor will it increase employment or add to the tax base (but will instead destroy about one-sixth of the tax base of the CBD) -- and therefor stands in violation of M.S. 469 . 176 and 469 . 178. 4) Because the Legislative Auditor has already cited the city in the 1986 report on tax increment financing for using TIF for "the agreement with MnDOT to finance a bridge and downtown improvements", storm sewers, and utilities -- all in violation of the intent and purpose of TIF. 5) And lastly, because passing said Resolution at this time is nothing more than a blatant attempt to evade certain pending legislation designed to prohibit this very same kind of abuse upon the taxpayers. ti DATED THIS /'.� DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1989. CN yj�A i i -TO WHOM H3 MAX QQNGERN As chief executive officer of the City of Shakopee, I hereby decline to sign Resolution #3114 as passed by the city council on September 12, 1989,providing for the issuance of $1 ,635,000 General Obligation Tax Increment bonds to be used for financing the so-called mini by-pass and bridge in downtown Shakopee for the following reasons: 1 ) Since the mini by-pass and bridge project involves the conveyance to MnDOT of 13 parcels of city-owned real property, and the vacation of 8 segments of streets and alleys, and since said conveyances and vacations are subject to voter referendum under Ch 183, laws of 1965, the issuance of said bonds prior to said conveyancer and vacations constitutes a deliberate attempt to circumvent said voter's rights and effectively denythe same in direct violation of Article I, Section 2, of the State Constitution, which prohibits the disenfran- chisement of its citizens. 2 ) Because said Resolution represents a serious departure from long established city policy as mandated . in Ch 429.091 subd 1 of the public improvement code which provides that the contemplated improve- ment must first be ordered and a contract let before the council may isssue bonds, and in this case no action is anticipated on the project until late 1990 or 1991 . (We simply don't need the money at this time. ) 3) Because said project obviously will not increase the city's housing (but will instead actually destroy at least 12 existing low and moderate income housing units) ; nor will it remove any substantial blight (but will instead remove some of the area's newest structures) ; nor will it increase employment or add to the tax base (but will instead destroy about one-sixth of the tax base of the CBD) -- and therefor stands in violation of M.S. 469. 176 and 469. 178. 4) Because the Legislative Auditor has already cited the City in the 1986 report on tax increment financing for using TIF for "the agree- ment with MnDOT to finance a bridge and downtown improvements" , storm sewers, and utilities -- all in violation of the intent and purpose of TTj- 5) And lastly, because passing said Resolution at this time is nothing 11 more than a blatant attempt to evade certain pending legislation designe6 to prohibit this very same kind of abuse upon the taxpayers. N NN NNNN NU WNUNiNNNNNNN NNN NNNNN Y /� � U TW {IiNNN WWmNNNN mOm1W WWW WN O m 7 WW WWWW WW WWW WWWW W WW WW m N oo uuuu NN o00000000o mum o000o OO m AAPAAAPAPP O m mm • wWwW i rY x mmmmmmmmMm i WNN i WWWWW • Ap JC O Z O 1< O O r Om 00 0000 0 0 ..00000000 00m 00mmm m0 ➢ mm mmmm m mmmm m m_ Y YY YYYr rY YYYYY---- - •-\\ --- -- YY D WwY wWW S m mm 0mmm mip mmmmmmmmmm ��O mm mmmmm mm m a arw 3 Wo O AWm C Z W NW W y WpY W WAW pY A VO NWm NWWmm wPWNOW mA VOAY WO NNO Nmm V10 A0 mYNJYw WOVI W 000 Ammmm NNW WmNWmWWWWPA rOAJ mVWNwm 000 m mmm.WW WW DDDDDDDDDD DDD DDDDD DD C DD mmmm DD ytiHHtiti�1H HH mmm CCCCC 33 m CC m9AA AA goo g mm mmm mm PPPAPPIkaPP 00 00000 00000 z 9a zzzz as < T NmNm .9A ytiyyYtititi-11 00000 00 T m mm 00 333 mmmmm DD 0 m CC Wm 0000000000 m 22222 ZZ O OOOOOOO rr DD333333p333 Ono DDDDD DD A 0 000 C til 9 zz000 rrrrr titi m OO Z22 mmmmm O ti-Iti CCCCC mm S. y AAA 99999 ➢D $2 A ss y 220 ««< m 000 m ti N Tm mmmm 00 NMti ti'�'��ti�'� WWW c DO ccCC titi mmmmmmmm rrr DODD. 9 CC 9999 22 mmrrrrrrrr 000 OWO CCCC9 'C< 9 9999 00mmmmTTTT 3 99 rr AA 99999999 9999r ZZ 22222222 333 00 O •a 33 mYmm 00000000 wrnr ani 3333m m DD mmmm 33 m2ZZ2222 D➢DDm ➢D m mmmmmmm z mm a 22ti __ -�-� 00 ti-Yiti y mmo mm z O OO O0o0 WN .000000000 000 00000 Wm A IDp NNNN �A aAAAAPPAAP NNN aNNN WW C Y �N m APNwNNNNNN WWW Y 2 O 0000 000 v0 ti mP Nw•-'- mN YwNPWNYJmN wPNNN 00 O m wNr 00 FF YY PNNv 00 r W NN NYmm YWNYwNYVmN Ymm NID 00 2 G Y ma pwYr araawWw WrY rnm 0 00 O 3 m m ➢ a m W 0 0 N N N N N NNNNNN Y N W W m n m °' � 0 0 0 0 000000 m m O m s O s mY s mmmmmm F O 0 H O � O O 9 ummnn OO n m m m m ti m w ww wwwwww F m m m m m m�u m m m m mmmmm�e n NN C Z pp P AP WW mN NN APYNWI-gyp 00 pN� WC1 NN mm ONmWNipm 00 PA pp NmNYmYN J 00 mVl YY 00 YpV 00 YY ww Nm mmwANpm O O O cc n n 0 A NNNNNN D O D C S 2 p CCCCCC m 3 x A W D D C mmmmmm D r ti Y 9 3 n D Z O O x mW 2 9 2 Z TTTTTT T z W A z O NNNNNN x C DD 9 Z D O W0.N.W O O ~ W D n F 000000 z c o a T on c x cccccc n O T n 00 ti H"I ti'-Iti'-I 2 C ti vrr m_ O W W m A 9 TT m n 0 -ltitititi-1 F AA Z -I C tiYti-Ititi z A O 0 n n A M�+ T W NNNNNN n N ti A m W T 9 m NNNNNN sa C O A O 99 O A C CCCCCC H 9 O C C C OO N C O A 999999 9 W T9 2 999999 3 9 9 1 9 ➢ rrrrCr D 3 3 3 Nm P 3 m m mmmmmm m m D ➢ D .9A D A mNNwNW m z G< < x O 1 Z Z a C Z D A y ti 1 W ti Y O z 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 .Ooa.O . 77 n A A p P AA P A A A pppppp O N N N N NNNNNN C u a Y w w w w YYm Y Y Y.-YYYY O O N 00 O O 000000 ti P mLw-YY Z WW m N 0 O P A P J Y N p N mm r N Y N YwNYNm 2 G V P S O p W m O 3 m m D w D O n n n n n n n n n T s s s F y N N s s m m m m W N N NN N NNNNN UU U U U U UUUU O WW W W m W W 2 N N N 00 pAAAA O ww W m Y : ap Y m mmmm . m . JJvv� s � 21 O t O O T 00 Om o O nom Om O 0000 � mmmm0 D mm m m m mmmm m m U_ YY Y YY �- Y YYYY Y �-.YYYY D W W WWWWW S mm m � m m� m m b�O t0 tm0 m mmmmm m n 3 O z 2 1 WW AYYYY NN WW pYN VJ mOm 00 00 OOm 00 WWWWW mm UNU mm 00 mm 00 Wmm 00 00 ODUUU mmI'll Immm, NUS-.mUW OO Q D m DD O U .-I- 2 AA < O 'a AAA O UWUwN CC D Z 33 O NWmU m -1-1111 m0 O 00 1 1-111 3333 < m O 2 ZZ D D DD Z m UU D Z DDDD O 22222 Z SS 0 1 Y O ITm R<I 0 00 O 1 SS 2 „ 00000 O 11 2 1 O 00 AAAA.9 A WW O O LY 2 00000 00000 O w Z mm O OOOLJO S U m U DDDD O O a azzz Is mmmm G A9AA $ UNWU m 0 U 1 11 1 mU O ,1 W 99UWW p O 41 OC O 1rrr C AACCC 1 DD W D C C9 Z O o00o 9 00979 G< 1 < Y9 T T 0000 3 mm a m ro T.. o ( m 3333 WmYYY O m 3 3m DDDD m 1AW P D DU U .9U .9UWW W n < Z.Z. « n mU w 2 Z 2 1111 CC C 1 1 O mm m O 9 U Uw U O 11 1 Z OO O O 00 O O 0000 O NOOOO n n AP P A A AP P p PPAA A PPAAP O N NN W WWNNN N Z 00 O O Z O O 0000 O 00000 1 AA. a N NYNYY O P WP WW p PwY�- PWPwW UN Y Y N YY N N N'-mm U YYNYr Z N R O O 3 m VI D U 0 D 0 s s s s s H s s s U U U W N m U m w ' N N N N N N N mWN n W WW WW W W W 2 VWW WW OV W x Y s O x N r W s 000 s S N x AA s mm V x 2 ti O K 0 O m O OWE O OW Ob OW � � 000 D b W b bmb 1 N \ \\ \\m \m \ \ \ mWm 9 W bb MW W W W b ID b Vl WmW m a 3 0 AA W W = WW bb J YA ti WWW VV Wm VV OYJWb W NYP NN NN YW YNW W WN NN 00 00 NN NN YONW N W ODU "OY NN 00 00 00 00 NU MONO W N 22 D O O O r m ton SSS AA z rr n N z n n v z aaa Z GG SJC O O D 0 N UNN m DD 9Tn C N m K NNN m O rr m ry r N D rr NN m D C S PPP Z O KC Z. Z r m Z O O S 333 0 O mm x 000 33 z m i 3 - T zzz 0 Im 11 00 1 O O ~ 0Tm T 00 9 2 O O D n O N S O -1 OOn nn T AAA T r N 000 � N 1 A C CC C z O 9 ti v9v N ~ ~~ CC C ti C N m O D 000 ~ r N I < "I 3 N yy m v „ v r P m r mmN m N NN N C G GGG 0 ZZ Z Z O 0 N A ti y ti 2 N O C 0 m O N ti ti � O 00 00 O O O O O O NOO A W WW NA N A A A W W WWW 0_ N W � NW m O 00 O A O O 000 ti N NW pY A N O O O AP P O N NY px- A N A O Y W N YWW 2 G 0 W x o Y o 3 b N D N W O n n n 0 o to o n o m s s s s H s x s N N N N N U N N A N NNN N NNN N N Nm N WN VI NN O W W WW W W WW S A AP A PAA A WW W 10 APP PP PAP WW O r + rr + r- x 000 x Po + O x VVV mWW y x m + VV T. n Z ti O t O O 9 O 00 O OW OO � Ob 000 mm100 m O 00 D b Wb W bW WWW W WW m y_ D WW VW W 9 m wm m wWPo Po m mmm mmw m Po mm 9 b Wb W WWW b W WWW WWb b W bW m D 3 O bb C_ WN 'y pJrr WW 00 mpN Or bb WW rAyr rW41m NW WW NO O VP NpNm PPOO NNJW O byA NN FOWy 00 WW JJOO AOAO WW mm mN0 Em O 999 £ 333 333 3 3 33 A m C Dan 3 000 000 m O 2 CC D AA'A 000 ti 2_Z M ZZ r ... O X11 AAA r Z 00 i --N A 3 111 O T < N m C LJ L7 m 00 I DOD A yW s r 999 AAA r C 00 O 2 ££ D AAa m 222 111 T y 00 A A .T 000 yyW y 0 A 00 S ZZZ 0 IF TmT O m 2 ZZ 111 O y 000 0 JC 00 O ZZZ Z AAA A y 000 y y 1 y y 99y y y 9 Tmy y y CC A D OC C AAC C C OO OOC C 11 1 C C9 9 X39 T OCC CC9 9 3 9 9r1 10„ 0 0 y9 99r y 11 O 3 3m m m m m m33 33m m 00 ADD H„y y T Tm y 92 3 3 GNN y yy y ZZ A y Cy y D yy W 1 11 1 O z O 00 O 000 O O 000 000 O p 00 n N NN p WWN N P WNN N W WW 0 N Y J Z NO O m0 ONN O O 00 1 N WP r rrN N P Frr HW t• wr W y N WPN A O N N rN N N NAW Nr H Np W rV rPom pN r P Z W p O E O v O O W O 3 W y D D m 4) n n n n n 0 0 y y y y y y y y N N NNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNN N UUUUU UUUUUUUUUNUUUU UWUUUUU U n W WWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWW W 2 U UUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUUU P Nm N NNNNN mmmmmmm m n m x P • 00000 i m JJVJVJVVJJJJJV r i W x S O O � O v o m m 000 SHOW 0I costs a m m n u s m w mmmmm m mmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmm m 9 m m mmmmm m mmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmm m m a 3 O C_ N VAPN mpW WW y NmPP UmPpWYYYVW A AP NUWWYWWW VU mm mOVYWmNJWmmAmNU N N UU WOWU.O NOOPUOYmmNUNWJY 00000000 O O 00 000000 NU mOONOVmWNmOPWOU 00000000 mW O y U UUUNm m WUmmUlmmmmmUUmm mUmmWmU U titititiY -1 99999999999999 nnSSS2222 aaaaa cccccccccccccc nnnaD P nn000000vnoono NIKT.T. D SSSSS S 0000000 m < C O UNmNW D r S Z Z n0000 n mmmmmmm z v rr o 0 N TTTTT m mmWmNWm .9 o DDnan m n Z 2ZZ22 AAAAA A'4 C S 222 o n v mm0nm22 on000no � s T 11=12 O W 1 A m mmmmm FF cccccccccccc ccccccc .. C DDti-iti-1-1-11-i-1-11-1 -1-I-I-1-1-I-1 9 ti w 00000 O C 9 1-iwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwwww m y � OOOLJO 9 rww.riririw Ir-�.r+lr-�w rriwN 9 3 33333 m A-1-i-wiy-wi-11 ti1111 1111111 O P D➢D➢D 3n wr+w rr riw wwwwww 3 N ____ A mOm .TTTmm mmmmmmm D U 9 2 < 12Nm U�AWNmmUmmm mmmmmmm n C 11111 m2 2 m1 mn N O 2 O O 00000 O 0000000 - - O Dn YYwwr-rY Y O A P PPPPA P WAAPAAPAAPAAP APPPPPP P O W N NNNNN W mmWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWW N C U O Y W W WWVVVVVVVVVVV V VVW y O 00000 O NY000000000000 0000000 OOWWWWWAAWWWYY WNNYYYW OONNNN.-NNtn N.-mm O Y r WNmmm .� N mmmY A OYPNr pOmWNrr J.-r.-YNY YANYY OOmWWWWppWwwYY WPW.-YYW P Y Y NNmmm Y OONNNN.-NN.-N Ymm NNNmwmY A Z G O U R O W 9 P O R m 3 U D m 0 n m m n nn n n n m s s s w H w U U U W UNNNU NN O W q WWWWWWWW O WW 2 q NNNNNNNNNNN N NN NN W m N WW O m O + W + O + YYrYYrrYYYYYYY + m : a Pom + a S O O < O O m m p m w.mmmmndmbw0 p m ®m bbm . m D m m N r Y YYrYr-Yr-r r�rrYY Y rY D mWWWWWWwWWWWWW WW S \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \\ \\ O m Po Po mmmmmmmmmmm . m m mm mm T m m m mmmmmmmmmmm.m. m m mm mm m D 3 O C Z F vp YYJUYAOJYANNNr FY mON � Y J WAmVVANmWPNmmmO mVN P p NN UN PNOPorYmmOUmOUWN N NN mV ONJ O 00 OmNWNOAWUmANWWm OO VWY ONN O £ „ „ CCCCCCCCCCCCCC C T NN WW W S NNNNNmNNmUNUNO T y yA AA m O o mmmmmmmmmmm£££ « m a W mmm z nz 3 3 NNNNNUUNUmUNNU 3 mU Z zN rD ti44tititi 4-y4titi-�-�-� N Dm qmm W 3333333333 r Om W. 00 A00000000000000 00 0 1 N 0000000000000 zz 0 33333333333Z x 0 Z 0 3 S ti ti Z o m W q m C N N 44ytititil-Iti ltiti-IH N 0 titi H W „ C C mmmmmmmmmmmmmm CT O T rrrrrrrrrr T Y DD m H T mmmmmmmmmmmmm zy mm 3 9 r m_9_9_9_9_9_9_V_9_9_V_T_T_T_ ti r p rr O .. m m 000000000_0_0_0_0_0 ZZZ _ m PP m N W mmmmmN U W4^ U y mmmmmmmmm O VT A O WW CC O WW qN y N mm O 0 0 o rOOQOoo0000000 0 0 00 00 Y N A ���AAPPOPAAAAA N P YW PO O W N WWWwWWWWWWW WW Z NNNNNYNNNNNNNN m WW O O O 00 1 N rNWNYmJUWNY Z O rHarYWNYmJNWNr Y N N r m r w YW JN 2 G A x o u O x m 3 N D D m m O O O O O O z O s s s s h s N J N VI U N N N N N N NN N N N N N x- W bW m m W m p m m m W 2 w m m A O + W : r t VVVVJJJ x O S 0 Z Y O < 0 O Om Om 000000 O D m m m m b mm mmmmmm m Y N_ r r r r r r r r r H \rrrrrr r D w w 0 m m m . m u m mm b m m m emmmmmm m a 3 NN O P C_ WW W NN AAO 00 WWrrr-r Wm O 00 00 NV1 r0 00 wmWJ O00 00 00 00 mo 00 mbbmJWWV Wm O 00 00 00 NN mm 00 mm0 00 NN mm 00 mJmwWWmw 00 a1 9 W O o0O Z < 0 z➢ O 0 O W O Z D L O ry ryap «nAs'-0«n'-0➢A«nAnA<nA £H G 3 O 2 .0 3 O 0000000 3 Z r 0 WP W NW41NmWN D O O 6l Z ££ Y D D A m 3 Z 22 m 0 0 0000000 O 0 Y Z D p 0 S £££££££ 2 OT a 2 Y 3 D O N Z2 O 0000000 O N 9 0000000 Z S Y NW N « Y 2 < < 0 W O N Y A O O O 0 Cm CCO O0 aN DT cca.acC a o oo o m m W m T 2 m T TT C r p 3 Y m O W 4 T 4` W A WVI m 0 3 Y O P 0 3 a mmmmmmm m m m W A AA O D D NmWmmNm m W C C C O G O « Y Z m O W W W 2C 2 N 2 Y N W N 0 W 0 9 Z -i 0 O p O D p 9 m m 9 O Y Y Y a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .- 0 0 0 0 oo0p000 o D Nm o .- P A A R P AP A P AApPAPA P O W NNNNNNN C mV Z O O O O 00 O N O 0000000 O Y Or O P P W z m W Om O N p NVNx-w'-r 0 O Or O A WWApuvN N r N m r r w Ob O N p v NN N�-w�-r N 2 G P # O O J O 3 m b D 0 D T p O O O 0 T S JC N m m m m � m Z y O < 0 O T O O D m y N \ x D s 0 9 m m m a N O O 0 N N NANmm C_ m.NN. y N ........... N VNNwOwmtiPWm 00 O OOmONNbmNmW 00 00 O N OONOOmWNmmm 00 00 O y Tx O TTTTTTTTTTT E Q y CCCCCCCCCCC 3T ZZZZZZZZZZZ G 00000000000 O N N O_ 2 Wrwv-NNWNNp� y O x 00000000000 P C 11 O m x yyyyyyyyyyy aasaassnana w m n rrrrrrrrrrr m s c N y CTrrmONW2yGJ < N A yDmm�aOwAmm D C ..<Wmmncnnaz any zm 3 •'iOm D--IZ2y N.1 a yrN tiamN ND Z O <r;.+TmmT yr O m T3 � m N N yy � 90m<3 T O pANO m C 9 CC90 Dmm 2 NN G V<O O yy 1O y m nTn . o Z rN Z y NO 9 9 O A N O 4 n y o O a n P O c z O y O Z o O 0 0 o w z Y O 0 3 m n in n n n m m N m O m m 0000 O m m m m m mmm 0 �0 m y 0 0 0 yy O O N Y d m ' r r F P' PP Y r Y r Y r rrY r -Y F r r r Y P r Y y w m 0 F . ✓ H �O N O O ut N rO�Oy Y W y y Y Y mN0 O D\ N r 0 0 N WN O m m a r 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 *00 w 0 0 0 w r 0 0y F Y N O n 0 P O O 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 w 0 O W VI O Or N N F 0 M m P 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 Y O O S ut Y O 0 m Y 4\ 0 'O Y 00 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 w 0 O O w r 0 Oy F r F O m N 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 w 0 0 0 w ut O O H N N Y O 3 O' m H O m m 0000 O m m m m m mmm O O m y O O O yy O O N Y 0 P Y F Y r Y Y r Y r Y r Y r Y Y Y r F r Y r Y r Y r Y -] W K 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 a H r r rYrr r r Y r Y r Yrr Y Y r Y r r r P r r Y r n 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 n M ro a n cn � N r F m F W r Tm N m O urOt oNO_2VOFi bmN�rlN OmryFm �O OWNmm N N N0 �1� Grp Vvi FNIN- C O �N mO. m O JOrF O O 5__. _ . Oc' _ .. m O O� _ M n a x 0 a0 a M E o r w w x z w www a m m � m n c o m dm v o .• m m m m m m m m 0 m m o ry w a c c o _ o� 1 z M Y. Y• m m n Y Y• Y. Y. t+ w Y• M m m M G Y. H M M m y (n m 3 4a U] Y• W O H YY Ymn mM ❑ iP Y• O mn wmdK C mm 0 K o 0 o o r 0 O ro o m 0 0 a 0 GO o 0 0 0 Ho0 0 0 o m r w m >• m Y r O 3 3 A m r ro ro m m M w n C Sl WW W W W W W W W W W W W WWW W W W W W W W W W W w W W CJ Y 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 W N 0 0 0 0 0 00 O O O O Z m P OOOO H N O N 'rot O _ _ _ O m O _ _ _ W 0 O G O O W tl m O iii m N N m O W 3 c' a rn 3 ,o m ❑ m m w O K m [9 m d V Y• O 7 O O H O P E K N O O 'm1 3 M µ M tD Y m m O E n 3 m r m m r m W� Y 0 m a r F r 0 G m Y a & r W W n m Y m !h 0 w H a m C C G O m 00 m m m0 N m m m 3 N j' 0 0 m o a 0 w ro o r m0 0 d m o 0 r Y Y Y O m m x w � � m m VYI O O m N O C Vyi b N F O N m 0 0 Om 0 C 0 00 m 0 N 0 w0 VNi 0 0 0 �NiI 0 0 0 0 Wm 0 OY OHO3 r w�nY V z W W W W N � 000 n 0 n Nornw � ro momY � Novw v m K W m�I O�NrO OHOo O FYYVI�IWY Yw.nr y iiiilii 'd o00o a n n •G L O�n M a H `� O O K F K h a £ r Y1 xiWm n Gia nm 4 a 0 F11 c �r+ w 3 0 3 C - 'U m K n 1 n ' n i a o c N hh]] a z 0 µ 3 N (p O N h O Y 0 A W K �O O�iO F FVI W m m r —tw v� FrnY c Vi00�NNY WF wS�O FWWNN d S W W W W Y0 00 x FFFF � n O v �+ c n a Y 3 N N N N O N