HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/05/1989 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and city Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: August 31, 1989
1. We have received an appeal of the downtown assessments from
Dennis Schmitt. It has been forwarded to Mr. Krass, at the
request of Mr. Coller, for defense.
2. We have received an appeal of the 1988-1 Vierling Drive
improvements from Scottland Inc. It has been forwarded to Mr.
Krass for defense.
3. We have received a request from Nancy Poole to close Hauer
Trail at the top of the hill at the Y east to the Strehlow
home on Sunday, September 3rd from 2:00 p.m. until dark for
a neighborhood party. The request has been approved by the
Acting Chief of Police John DuBois.
4. Attached is a report from the Minnesota Department of Health
covering an investigation of our water supply. The results
do not exceed the maximum contaminant levels established under
the Safe Drinking Water Act.
5. Attached is the monthly calendar for September.
6. Attached are the agendas for the September 7, 1989 meetings
of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and . Planning
commission.
7. Attached are the minutes of the August 3, 1989 medtings of the
Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission.
8. Attached are the minutes of the July 28, 1989 meeting of the
Police Civil Service Commission.
9. Attached are the minutes of the August 11, 1989 meeting of the
Police Civil Service commission.
10. Attached are the minutes of the August 18, 1989 meeting of the
Police Civil Service Commission.
11. Attached is a copy of the September, 1989 Ehlers and
Associates, Inc. newsletter.
12. Attached is a copy of the July, 1989 Public Financial Systems
newsletter.
13. Attached is a copy of the letter from Brian Weinreis, St.
Francis Regional Medical Center, to Tom Johnson,
Transportation Study Board, regarding road conditions in Scott
County.
14. Attached is the September, 1989 Business Update from City
Hall.
DRK/jms
minnesota department of health
717s.e.do]aware et. p.o.box 9441 minneapolis 55440 O REC r•e V'E RR 4i:- V w'.d7
(612)623 5000
AUG 1 i 1989
cirr o= sHAKU-,E'
August 9, 1989
Shakopee City Council
c/o Ms. Judith Cox, Clerk
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Council Members:
Enclosed is a copy of the report of our district office covering an
investigation of your noncommunity water supply. The chemical results do not
exceed the maximum contaminant levels established under the Safe Drinking
Water Act.
This report should be placed in your records and a copy maintained on or near
the water supply premises and available for public inspection for not less
than ten years.
If you have any questions concerning the information contained in this report,
please contact Mr. Douglas Edson, Public Health Sanitarian, at 612/623-5727.
Sincerely yours,
Douglas J. Mandy, P.E. , Supervisor
Noncommunity Water Supply Program
Section of Water Supply
and Engineering
DJM:DE:ejm
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Al Frechette, Environmental Health Manager
Scott County Environmental Health
Mr. Jim Jarkamen,
Shakopee Memorial Park
Mr. Howie Heller, Park Lead Man
Shakopee Memorial Park
an equal opportunity employer
v90
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
REPORT ON INVESTIGATION OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY IY'
PWS ID Number
Name of Waxer Supply
Shakopee Memorial Park 5700181
Street Telephone Numbers:
1801 East Highway 101 City:
City State Zip Code
Operator:
Shakopee MN 55379 Engineer.
Count Oisvia other: _
Scott
Metro
W.I.Superintendent Claaificatbn Plant Clamsificauon Owns Type
Jim Jarkamen Municipal
Olney Operamrm Classifietrion Pkint Type Plumbing Permits and C) ❑
urvey
throe rked Repuired
N—I Communi Yes No
Date of Prevloum SData of Survey
Initial 5 15 89
City Engineer
Survey Cycle: 30 Months
SERV ICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS:
❑Municipal ❑School or Collage ®Recreation Area
❑Mobile Home Park ❑Hotel/Motel Campground
❑Company Town ❑Resort ❑Housing Development
❑Institution ❑Restaurant ❑Other
Population Served Service Connections Smrage Capacity:
(List Separately)
25
Design Capacity(gal/day) Average Daily Production Igal/day)
Emergency Cepacit (gal/dav) Highest Daily Prach ion (gal/day)
rptal: 30 Gallons
TREATMENT WELL DATA
'g `o o '3 o a ? _ E a [Av
S `o a
C pn C y D D ;us
es 8
source Name $ ¢ v $ cg oS eam & r a — o i ty is3 3mup oChamber P H 1987 5 No ila le SUB
I
Remarks:
Mr. Howie Heller, Park Lead Man surveyed by: DOUR Edso�
Shakopee Memorial Park
500 Gorman Street Approved by:
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
HE M42.02
Shakopee Memorial Park May 15, 1989
Chamber of Commerce Bathroom Tap
Recommendations:
1. In accordance with the Minnesota Water Well Construction Code, (Minnesota
Rules, Chapter 4720.0300) , no new public use well shall be drilled nor an
existing well altered until complete plans and specifications have been
submitted to this office for review and approval .
2. All threaded potable water connections shall be provided with an approved
vacuum breaker. This includes all hose bibbs. (See attachment.)
3. All building services shall be installed in accordance with the Minnesota
Plumbing Code.
4. The operator should keep the following records:
a. Bacteriological test results as required by the Safe Drinking Water
Act.
b. Maintenance and repair.
J
Douglas Edson
Public Health Sanitarian
Section of Water Supply
and Engineering
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH l
REPORT ON INVESTIGATION OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY
PWS ID Number
Name of water Supply 5700182
Shako ee Memorial Park Telepinne Numbers:
Street
1801 East Highway 101 City;
City State Zip Cade
Operator:
h ko MN 55379 Engineer:
County Distrix atter: 6 445-221
Scott Metro
Water Superimentlem Clanifintun Plant Claoifiratgn Owner TYPe
Jim Jarkamen Municipal
Other operators Clauifimion Plant Type Plumbirg Pernn,and ❑ C]
InspeclionsRWuired Yes No
-� N-Noncommunit
Date of Pravidus Survey Data of Survey
Initial 5/15/89
City Engineer
Survey Cycle: 30 Months
SERVICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS:
❑Municipal ❑Sclgol or College ®Venation Area
❑Mobile Home Park ❑Hotel/Motel ❑CampgrouM
❑Company Town ❑Retort ❑Housin9 oeyelopment
El Institution ❑Restaurant ❑Other
population Served Servke Connexions Storage Capacity:
(List Separately)
5 Average Daily Production(gal/davl Two 30-Gallon Tanks
Design Capacity (gallday)
EmergenW Capacity(gal/day) Hgheet Daily Produmiun(gel/day)
T•=•1: 60 Gallons
TREATMENT WELL DATA
uo _ $ E o €
C D d J O F
L d 3 _ x D 9
` p= _ Sm ` u E `m c g c o _ _ E e E
SS
Source Name w° Q O ¢' tg I yT Ua 9+ < u.
— O ) v U w` amu° w Oe.
Comfort 5 P 974 No Av ila le SUB
I
Remarks:
Mr. Howie Heller, Park Lead Man surveyedby. OouaEdson .�
Shakopee Memorial Park �
500 Gorman Street Approved by:
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
HE-00842-02
Shakopee Memorial Park May 15, 1989
Comfort Station Bathroom
1. In accordance with the Minnesota Water Well Construction Code, (Minnesota
Rules, Chapter 4720.0300) , no new public use well shall be drilled nor an
existing well altered until complete plans and specifications have been
submitted to this office for review and approval .
2. All threaded potable water connections shall be provided with an approved
vacuum breaker. This includes all hose bibbs. (See attachment.)
3. All building services shall be installed in accordance with the Minnesota
Plumbing Code.
4. The operator should keep the following records:
a. Bacteriological test results as required by the Safe Drinking Water
Act.
b. Maintenance and repair.
_1
Douglas Adson
Public Health Sanitarian
Section of Water Supply
and Engineering
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
• REPORT ON INVESTIGATION OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY
PWS ID Number
Name of Water Supply
Shakopee Memorial Park 5700179
Telephone Numbers:
Street
City 1801 EaSt Highway 101 Sun. zip cdd. City:
Shakopee MN 55379 Operator:
County Diaries Engineer: j
other: 612 445-2211
Water Superintendent Classification Plant Classification owner Type
Jim Jarkamen Municipal
Other Operators Classcetion Plant Type Plumbing Permits and
Impactions Required
N-Noncommunity yea No
Will of Previous Survey Date of Survey
Initial 5/15/89
City Engineer
Survey Cycle: 30 Months
SERV ICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS:
❑Municipal ❑school or College ®Rareation Area
❑Mobile Nome Park ❑Hotel/Motel I]CampgrouM
C1 Company Town ❑Resort ❑Housing Development
❑Institutian ❑Restaurant ❑Other
Population Served4T.EA
ce Connections Storage Capacity:
(List Separately)
25
Design Gpacity(gal/day) ges Daily Produttion(gel/mY)
Emergency Capacity(gal/ est Daily Production(gal/day)
mta1: 0 Gallons
NT WELL DATA
cz
y .p. ° pc. co o .E - g g' = 5 e = cSource Names - a —East WellG PNot 11va lab a H-P
Remarks:
Howie Heller, Park Lead Man Surveyed by: Doug Edson
Shakopee Memorial Park
500 Gorman Street Apprp..elby:
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
HE 0()842 M
Shakopee Memorial Park May 15, 1989
East Well
Recommendations:
1. In accordance with the Minnesota Water Well Construction Code, (Minnesota
Rules, Chapter 4720.0300) , no new public use well shall be drilled nor an
existing well altered until complete plans and specifications have been
submitted to this office for review and approval .
2. All building services shall be installed in accordance with the Minnesota
Plumbing Code.
3. The operator should keep the following records:
a. Bacteriological test results as required by the Safe Drinking Water
Act.
b. Maintenance and repair.
4. A well with a hand pump or drinking fountain unit shall be protected by a
durable watertight concrete or equal slab, platform or floor at
least 4 inches thick extending horizontally at least 1 foot in every
direction from the well casing and sloped to divert water away from the
casing. A watertight seal , which may be asphalt or similar material to
provide resiliency, shall be provided between the casing and slab. All
drains located within the slab shall discharge to a gravel pocket at least
10 feet from the well .
jj
Douglas Edson
Public Health Sanitarian
Section of Water Supply
and Engineering
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
• REPORT ON INVESTIGATION OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY
Name of Water Supply PWS ID Number
Shakopee Memorial Park 5700159
Telephone Numbers:
Street
1801 East Highway 101 city_
City State Zip Code
MN 55379 operator:
Shakopee Engineer:
County Distriat
other: 612/445-2211
Sc tt Metro
Water SuperimeMent Classification Plant Clarlificatum Owner Type
Jim Jarkamen Municipal
Other operators chmifintbn Pent Type Plumbing Permits and El 0
Inspections Required- - N-Noncommunity yea Na
Date of Previous Survey Date of Survey
Initial 5/15/89
City Engineer
Survey Cycle: 30 Months
SERVICE AREA CHARACTERISTICS:
❑Municipal ❑School or College Recreation Area
❑Mobile Home Park 11Hate1/Mo1e1 ElCampground
El Company Town ❑Resort ❑Housing Development
❑Institution ❑Restaurant ❑other
Population Served Sewice Connection, Stange Capacity:
25 (List Separately)
Design Capacity(gal/d.yl Average Daily Produation(gal/daY)
Emergency Capacity(gal/day) Highest Daily Produatum Igal/dayl
Total: D Gallons
TREATMENT WELL DATA
y O V p a a q G C 1
u _ o _ A
(rWetstW�eljl:
me r$ ¢ o ¢ ci r3 um r < u._ O > u' 3 ;mua so
- o
G P No Av ila a H-P
Remarks:
Mr. Howie Heller, Park Lead Man Suweyyby: Doug Edson
500 Gorman Street
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Approved by:
HE-00842-02
Shakopee Memorial Park May 15, 1989
West Well
Recommendations:
1. In accordance with the Minnesota Water Well Construction Code, (Minnesota
Rules, Chapter 4720.0300), no new public use well shall be drilled nor an
existing well altered until complete plans and specifications have been
submitted to this office for review and approval .
2. The operator should keep the following records:
a. Bacteriological test results as required by the Safe Drinking Water
Act.
b. Maintenance and repair.
3. A well with a hand pump or drinking fountain unit shall be protected by a
durable watertight concrete or equal slab, platform or floor at
least 4 inches thick extending horizontally at least 1 foot in every
direction from the well casing and sloped to divert water away from the
casing. A watertight seal, which may be asphalt or similar material to
provide resiliency, shall be provided between the casing and slab. All
drains located within the slab shall discharge to a gravel pocket at least
10 feet from the well . 1
Douglas Edson
Public Health Sanitarian
Section of Water Supply
and Engineering
September 1989
UPCOMING MEETINGS
SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SRT
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Labor Day - 7:00pm City 7:30pm
City Hall Council Planning
Closed Commission
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
':45am
Downtown
Committee
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
7:00pm 7:00pm City 5:00pm CC:,i=
Community Council
Recreation
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Rugust October
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
27 28 29 30 31 29 30 31
TENTATIVE AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
Regular Session Shakopee, MN September 7 , 1989
Chairman Forbord Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M.
2 . Approval of Agenda
3 . Approval of August 3, 1989 Meeting Minutes
4 . 7: 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a request for a
variance to have an accessory building closer to the front lot
line than the principal building upon the property located at
3751 County Road 79.
Applicant: Donald Jeurissen
Action: Variance Resolution No. 573
5. 7,40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a request for a 30'
variance from the rear yard setback to construct an addition
to the existing K-Mart facility located at the Minnesota
Valley Mall Shopping Center.
Applicant: Carlson Real Estate Co.
Action: Variance Resolution No. 577
6. 7: 50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a request for a 6'
variance from the required 10' side yard setback.
APPlicant: Bruce Heinz
Action: Variance Resolution No. 575
7. Other Business
a.
b.
8. Adjourn
Douglas K. Wise
city Planner
TENTATIVE AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Session Shakopee, MN September 7, 1989
Chairman Forbord Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M.
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of the August 3, 1989 Meeting Minutes
4. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a request for a
Conditional Use Permit to move in a dwelling upon the property
located at the corner of Pierce St. & 3rd Avenue.
Applicant: Bruce Heinz
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 574
5. 8.10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a request for a
Conditional Use Permit operate a concrete ready mix plant upon
the property located at 6800 E. Highway 101.
Applicant: Model Stone Company
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 576
6. Final Plat - Heritage Place 2nd Addition
Action: Recommendation to City Council
7 . Six Month cup Review - Edward Schmidt III, for a commercial
recreation facility located at 125 E.
First Avenue
8. Discussion:
a. Review Application Forms - Cont.
b. Air Quality in River Valley Area
C.
9. Other Business
a.
b.
10. Adjourn
Douglas Wise
City Planner
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION AUGUST 3 , 1989
Members Present: Stafford, Kahleck, Forbord, Foudray
Members Absent: Stafford, Allen, Rockne
Others Present: Doug Wise--City Planner, Sharon Swenson--Recording
Secretary
I. ROLL CALL
Chairman Forbord called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Four
members present.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Forbord/Stafford moved that the Board accept the
agenda as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 6. 1989
MOTION: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the Board accept the
minutes of July 6 as presented.
IV. VARIANCE REQUEST 567 SUBMITTED BY DAVID BRODERSON
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the hearing be opened
for discussion of the conditional use permit
application by David Broderson. _
Wise gave a brief overview of the application. The property is
located at 1174 Monroe Street. A request has been made to allow the
applicant to build an addition with a 5 foot setback since previous
construction on the property has already established that setback. He
would like the same setback for this addition as the existing attached
garage.
MOTION: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the public hearing be
closed. Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the Board approve
Variance 567 for a 5 foot setback. Motion passed
unanimously.
V. VARIANCE REQUEST 568 SUBMITTED BY BERT A. NOTERMANN 812 CO. RD
77
MOTION: Kahleck/Stafford moved that the public hearing be
1
opened for discussion of the variance request
submitted by Bert A. Notermann. Motion passed
unanimously.
Wise explained that the applicant is requesting a variance to
construct an accessory building closer to the front lot line than the
principal building. The code states that an accessory building cannot
be closer to the front lot line that the principal dwelling.
Notermann would like the garage closer to the front lot line. The
property is 10 acres and is in a rural residential district. There
will still be a 245' setback from the road. Trees, hills, and marsh
area surrounding the site make it difficult to place the garage
farther back.
NOTION: Stafford/Kahleck moved to close the public hearing
on the discussion of the variance application
submitted by Notermann requesting an accessory
building closer to the front lot line than the
principal dwelling. Motion passed unanimously.
OM TION: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the Board approve
Variance Resolution #568 subject to the following
condition:
1. The garage shall be built in the location as
shown on plans submitted with the Variance
application.
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the Board take a short
recess until the 7:50 time schedule for the next
application. Motion passed unanimously.
MEETING RECONVENED AT 7:50 P.M.
VI. VARIANCE REQUEST 569, SUBMITTED BY GERALD SCHESSO FOR THE
PROPERTY AT 1199 QUINCY
OM TION: Kahleck/Stafford moved to open the public hearing on
the variance request submitted by Gerald Schesso.
Motion passed unanimously.
Wise noted that the following variances are being requested for the
property at 1199 Quincy Street:
1. To allow an accessory building to exceed the height of the
principal dwelling by 10 feet.
2. To allow an accessory building to exceed 103 of the lot area
by 720 square feet.
3 . To allow an accessory building to be located nearer the street
2
than the principal dwelling by 10 feet.
Wise continued to explain that four years ago, Schesso had begun
constructing a large boat in his backyard. Two years ago, he
constructed a large shed in his backyard over the boat. It was not in
compliance with City Code. The required Building Permit could not be
issued. Staff concluded that the boat was not permitted in the
district. The decision was appealed and it was ruled that the boat
was permitted, but the shed must meet code. The applicant had
requested the variance to allow the building to be 30' by 60' by 25'
high. It was denied by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. He
appealed to the City Council and they granted the request with the
condition that it would expire on July 31, 1989- The boat is not yet
completed and Schesso would like another variance to allow the
building to remain longer.
Mike Stubber of 1199 Quincy appeared before the Board. He explained
that he is one of the builders of the boat and that they are doing as
well as they can. They are trying to keep the area as clean as
possible and would like to finish the boat in the structure.
Gerald Schesso of 1199 Quincy appeared before the Board. He explained
that he thought they would be done sooner, but last summer the
temperature was high and a lot of time was lost. It may take years to
finish the boat without the shelter. He would like the Board to see
the progress being made.
Kahleck quoted from previous Council Meeting Minutes: Completion is
anticipated by the fall of 1988, or else the boat will be moved to
finish elsewhere. The concern had been the length of time the shed
would be up.
Schesso said it was not physically possible to move the boat . at this
time.
Kahleck asked for how long a time period the applicant was requesting
the variance $roposal.
Schesso said he would need the shed until the boat was completed.
Hopefully, this would be within one year. If no shed would be
allowed, they could construct a frame of 2 by 4's and cover it with a
tarp.
Kahleck asked if Schesso meant he would move it when it was close to
completion or completely done. Would this be one year or five years?
Schesso said they were dealing with severe weather conditions in
Minnesota. If the shed were taken down now, it may mean that the boat
sit there for years. The structure cannot be seen until one is three
or four houses away on Adams, and it does not look bad from any
direction.
3
Tim Hitting of 154 Judith Drive, Chaska, came forward. He explained
he was one of the builders. He said that they had gotten the O.K. to
build the boat before they started, and no one had complained on the
first building constructed on the site.
Stafford asked what the anticipated date of completion was.
Schesso answered that they had first thought it would be about 2
years, but were incorrect. They would like to complete it.
Wise noted that he could find no documentation on the boat being
approved previously as Hitting had stated.
Forbord said that although he personally liked the idea of the boat,
the Board needed to enforce zoning regulations and code.
Clete Link of 12138 Link Drive appeared to say that he had no
objections to the project. He felt it was an interesting project as
well as a learning experience.
MOTION: Kahleck/Stafford moved to close the public hearing
on the variance requested by Gerald Schesso. Motion
passed unanimously.
MOTION: Kahleck/Stafford moved that the Board deny variance
569. Motion passed unanimously.
Forbord advised the applicant of his right to appeal the decision to
the City Council.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
None
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the Board adjourn.
Motion passed unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
4
7
PLANNING COMMISSION
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION AUGUST 3 , 1989
Members Present: Stafford, Kahleck, Forbord, Foudray, Allen (arrived at
8: 12) , Rockne (arrived at 8:25) , Czaja (arrived at (9:00
P.M. )
Members Absent: None
Others Present: Doug Wise--City Planner, Sharon Swenson--Recording
Secretary
I. ROLL CALL:
Chairman Forbord called the meeting to order at 8:02 P.M. Four
members present at 8:02, and three others arrived as noted above.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: Forbord/Kahleck moved that the Commission approve the
agenda as submitted with the addition of one item:
Houser/Nelson/Duplex under discussion, item 10 on the
agenda. Motion passed unanimously.
III. MINUTES OF JULY 6, 1989
MOTION: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the Commission approve the
minutes of the July 6, 1989 meeting. Motion passed
unanimously.
IV. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST 570 SUBMITTED BY JOHN P. BIWER
MOTION: Kahleck/Foudray moved that the public hearing be opened
for discussion on the conditional use permit request
submitted by Biwer. Motion passed unanimously.
Wise explained that the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to
allow for the keeping of horses. The City Code currently allows 2 horses
per 2.5 acres of land with a conditional use permit. A maximum of 8 horses
would be allowed at the property at 8029 Martindale Drive. The property is
part of the Fox Run Subdivision and there are existing buildings on the
site.
*Allen arrived at 8:12 P.M.
Kahleck asked if a time limit should be considered on the conditional use.
Wise noted that the area is not to be served by City water or sewer within
the next 20 year period.
1
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the public hearing be closed
on the conditional use permit request submitted by Biwer.
Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Stafford/Allen moved that the Commission approve the
Conditional Use Permit 570 subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant shall keep no more than 8 horses on the
site at any one time.
2. The horses shall be confined to a fenced-in area with
the minimum height of the fence at 3.5 feet and to be
constructed of wood, wire, or other durable material.
Motion passed unanimously.
V. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST 571 SUBMITTED BY KEITH & KATHY
LUSIGNAN
MOTION: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the public hearing be opened
for the conditional use permit request submitted by
Lusignan. Motion passed unanimously.
Wise explained that the applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit
to allow for the construction of an 8' privacy fence. The home is at 1042
Sibley Street. The lot is deep and the home is in the middle of the block.
Currently a 6' fence is allowed--over that height requires a conditional
use permit. The applicant is requesting an 8' fence which would be 28'
long to insure privacy.
Richard Broom of 1004 Sibley came forward and asked if the fence would be
only in that one area, or if it would be all around the lot.
Wise answered that it would be only on the one side.
Lusignan noted that the deck is 18.5" above grade and he felt an 8' fence
was needed.
Allen asked why the fence extended beyond the length of the deck.
Lusignan said it was not necessary that it extend that far, but that he
would like to make the deck larger at a later date.
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the public hearing be closed
on the conditional use permit request submitted by
Lusignan. Motion passed unanimously.
2
1
MOTION: Kahleck/Stafford moved that the Commission grant
Conditional Use Permit 571 subject to the following
condition:
1. The fence shall be constructed as shown in the plans
submitted with the Conditional Use Permit application.
Motion passed unanimously.
VI. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST 572 SUBMITTED BY CHARLES RITCHART
CSR FINISHING
Commissioner Stafford removed himself from the discussion on request
572 due to a possible conflict of interest.
MOTION: Allen/Foudray moved that the public hearing be opened on
the Conditional Use Permit request submitted by Charles
Ritchart, CSR Finishing. Motion passed unanimously.
Wise explained that the request was for a custom wood cabinet and finishing
repair shop. There is property in the area that is zoned I-1 (light
industrial) , and across the street is residential property.
*Rockne arrived at 8:25 P.M.
Kahleck asked about the landscaping requirements.
Wise explained the five year period for compliance would be up in January
of 1990. The requirements will need to be met by that date. He noted that
the building was vacant presently, although it had been a warehouse in the
past. He was not aware of any conditional use permit having been granted
for the building. He noted that no exterior changes have been proposed.
Allen had concerns regarding noise created from this use in the building.
Wise said that daytime and nighttime noise would be limited by statutes.
The applicant would need to meet residential noise limits at the center of
the street.
Forbord asked if there had been a controversy regarding the storage of
trucks on the property.
Wise said there had been such controversy, but the trucking operation was
ordered to cease.
Don Perrett, owner of the building, came forward and said that the size of
the building was 36' by 401 . He noted that the renter is moving items into
the building.
Charles Ritchart, the applicant, said he had moved some items into the
building as they had been in storage and he would need to pay another
month's rent if he did not move them. The loudest equipment he had would
be an air compressor. In answer to a question by Allen on odors, he
3
responded that he had an exhaust spray booth with a filtration system. The
products he uses are lead and formaldehyde free. He has had no complaints
on odors. The hours for business may extend to 10 P.M. because he also
does location work. He added that only a commercial sales business would
be quieter than his business. The garage door is almost always closed. He
does not advertise, but works on referral. He said there would be no
outside storage of materials or supplies--possibly a couple panels of the
spray booth, which is open ended. He added that the owner, Perrett, did
not want outside storage on site either. Only one or two vans a day would
be bringing supplies to the building.
Clifford Stafford, of 2328 Eagle Creek Boulevard, came forward and said he
had two concerns: 1. He felt 10 P.M. was too late. 2 . The noise in the
area is amplified because of the hills in the area. Sanders and similar
equipment may cause and echo effect when they are running.
Kahleck asked if the owner was aware of the landscaping requirements needed
to be met.
Perrett answered that he was aware of that.
Forbord noted that the site must meet National Fire Protection standards.
The City Building Inspector noted that the electrical system be sealed, an
exhaust system was needed, and possibly a sprinkler system would be needed.
Ritchart said that the building itself was used as an air draw.
MOTION: Foudray/Rockne moved that the Commission close the public
hearing on the Conditional Use Permit request submitted
by Charles Ritchart. Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Foudray/Allen moved that the Commission approve
Conditional Use Permit 572 subject to the following
conditions:
1. No additional access shall be permitted from CSAH 16.
2. The cabinet finishing portion of the building shall
meet national fire protection standards.
3. The entire building shall meet energy code.
4 . The property shall comply with Code requirements for
landscaping and screening.
5. The business must comply with City Code Section 10. 60
regulating noise.
6. Review of conditional use permit to be in one year.
4
MOTION: Forbord/Kahleck moved for an amendment to the original
motion, adding the following conditions:
7 . No outside storage of materials, vehicles, or
trailers.
8. Hours are not to exceed 10 P.M.
9. The overhead door is to remain closed, except for
delivery of materials.
Motion to amend the original motion passed 6 to 1 with
Foudray opposed.
Motion as amended passed unanimously.
MOTION: Foudray/Allen moved for a brief recess. Motion passed
unanimously. Recess at 9: 00 P.M.
MEETING RECONVENED AT 9:07 P.M.
VII. REQUEST BY GERALD SCHMITZ FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 566 FOR
AUTO/TRUCK REPAIR.
Forbord noted that the public hearing was closed at the last meeting, and
he had received calls from some residents who said they did not get notice.
Wise explained that the request was by Gerald Schmitz for a conditional
use permit for a home occupation to allow repair and outside storage of
vehicles. At the last meeting, Staff had recommended denial of the
application. The motion to deny the application had received a 2-2 vote,
and was not approved. The issue had been continued. There are inoperable
vehicles parked on the property, and the scale of the business is larger
than that permitted under the home occupation code. A request had been
made to Staff to list some conditions that would possibly make a
conditional use permit allowable. Staff does not feel that the property
and circumstances are suitable for the home occupation conditional use
permit requested.
Wise stated that the following possible conditions were included in the
Staff memo as suggested conditions should the commission decide to approve
the request:
1. This conditional use permit shall not take effect until all
exterior storage which does not comply with the conditions of this
permit has been removed from the property.
2. All repair of vehicles must be done within an existing accessory
building and shall be limited to vehicles not exceeding 9,000 lbs.
gross weight.
3. Hours of operation shall be restricted to 8: 00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M.
5
4. The operation must comply with City Code Section 10.60 regulating
noise.
5. Exterior storage shall be restricted to vehicles currently being
serviced or repaired. No more than 4 vehicles shall be stored
outside at any one time and all of these vehicles must have a
current license and be operable.
6. The outside storage/parking area for vehicles shall be screened
from view from all adjoining properties and the street. Screening
shall be 6' in height and a minimum of 80% opaque.
7. If the home occupation/property fails to comply with any of the
conditions of this permit the City staff shall inform the applicant
of the non-compliance by letter. If the property is not brought
into compliance within 7 days from receipt of the warning letter
this permit shall become null and void.
Czaja asked how long this occupation has existed on this site.
Wise responded that the applicant would be the one to answer that question.
Czaja asked what the situation would be if it existed prior to the
annexation to the City of Shakopee.
Wise answered that if that were the case, it would be grandfathered in. He
had assumed that the business was just being started since the applicant
had come in and requested permission to start such a business there.
Keith Zell of 3309 Sycamore Circle noted that the request does include
outside storage. Zell felt the business would have a detrimental effect on
the surrounding property. Zell added that there had been requirements to
clean up the area, but these requirements had not been met.
Ray Simmons, 2004 Norton Drive, appeared before the Commission and said he
would like to see the application denied. There would be old cars, etc,
sitting in the neighborhood and property values would decline.
Kathy Eckart of 2017 Norton Drive appeared before the Commission and asked
what the outcome was of the 1988 citing regarding the property.
Wise responded that the applicant had pleaded guilty and was to remove the
cars by July 30, 1989.
Eckart said the cars were still there. This is a residential area, and
this business would lower the property values.
Neil Johnson of 2146 Norton Drive said he had initially signed a paper for
approval. Now he would like to withdraw his name as he is against it.
Sherly Munenz of 1963 Norton Drive said she was against the application.
6
There are significant monies invested in the homes in the area, and this
would have a negative effect on the values. It has been proven in the past
that the applicant has violated City Code. What guarantee do we have that
he will comply with the conditions?
Wally Murske appeared and said he wanted his name removed from the paper
that he had signed in favor of the business.
Mark Schequen, 3509 Norton Drive, said he was the neighbor closest to the
property and saw no reason to deny the application.
Richard Schmitz said there are no houses on the farm other than Gerald
Schmitz's. There is no junk yard on County Road 17--cars have been there
since 1939. The business is grandfathered in.
Carol Schmitz said her husband, Gerald, put in for a conditional use permit
and she does not understand why the cars cannot remain if a fence is
constructed around them. The cars were there before the property was in
City limits.
Lou VanHout of 2144 Bridge Crossing said he lives to the south of the
property and he feels the property values in the area will be affected. He
did not like to complain, but it is wrong to give official approval. The
highway in that area is high and there is no way to effectively screen the
cars.
Dave Eckert of 2017 Norton Drive said he was a health provider in the area.
He felt there was a health hazard posed by "parts cars. " He felt some
environmentally safe conditions needed to be added to the application. He
is concerned with the children in the area. He would not like to see the
area become mini-industrial.
Gary Munenz of 1963 Norton Drive said he was opposed to the _ application.
He asked the Commission to note the letter in their packets from William
Weber stating that such a business would be detrimental to the properties
in the area.
Gerald Schmitz said the area is grandfathered in--cars have been there
since 1968 . Concerning the property values issue--his property is there
too and is worth as much as anyone's.
Czaja said a time limit could be added to this request. He asked if
screening had been discussed.
Wise answered that he did tell the applicant that screening would be
required.
Kahleck said she could see the reasoning about grandfathered home
occupations. The main concern of the neighbors seems to be the outside
storage of vehicles.
Wise noted findings stated in the packet including:
7
* It has been determined by case histories that this use would have a
negative impact on property values.
* The use proposed has a detrimental effect on surrounding
developments according to the County Assessor.
* The existing use is rural residential and agricultural. This would
be an industrial use.
Wise continued to note that the grandfathering issue would come into play
if the business were in use before City Code took affect and the use did
not change. If there were changes, a conditional use permit would be
needed. This decision should be made by the City Attorney. If the
Attorney should rule that the use is not grandfathered in, then the
Commission's action would be appropriate.
MOTION: Allen/Stafford moved that the Commission deny conditional use
permit submitted by Gerald Schmitz for home occupation
business.
Foudray said he believed this was a grandfathered business. He had been on
the Commission in 1968 and 1970 when the annexation of Eagle Creek took
place.
Rockne said any action taken (or not taken) by the Commission was valued
only on the decision of the grandfathering. He could see that the
surrounding properties could decrease in value.
OM TION: Foudray/Rockne moved for an amendment to the original motion
to add that the City Attorney's opinion be obtained on the
question of grandfathering.
VOICE VOTE: Ayes: Foudray, Allen, Rockne, Kahleck
Nays: Stafford, Forbord
Abstain: Czaja
Motion passed.
Discussion took place on the value of the motion pending the Attorney's
decision.
Wise stated that if the motion passes, (and the Attorney says the property
is grandfathered) , the denial is out of order and the use can continue.
Forbord called for a vote on the motion to deny Conditional Use Permit $566
as amended.
Motion passed 6-0, with Czaja abstaining.
VIII. FINAL PLAT FOR HERITAGE PLACE SECOND ADDITION
Wise reviewed the final plat for Heritage Place Second Addition with the
Commission, and he indicated that the plan complied with the preliminary
8
1
plat previously approved by the city.
Wise noted one change in the Staff recommendation: the name change on
Sapphire Lane would have to be approved by District Court, therefore, Staff
recommends adding the following condition:
Condition 10: The developer shall file a petition with District Court
asking that Heritage Drive from Lot 2, Block 2 and
Lot 2, Block 4 of Heritage Place First Addition, South
to Northern boundary of Heritage Place 2nd Addition
be renamed Sapphire Lane.
MOTION: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the Commission recommend to the
City Council approval of the final plat of Heritage Place 2nd
Addition subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney.
2. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of
required improvements:
a. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
b. Water system to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
c. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in
accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria
and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee.
d. Local streets and street signs shall be constructed in
accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria
and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee.
e. The developer shall be responsible for payment in lieu
of land dedication for park purposes.
3. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating
that not more than 103 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 the SPUC regarding extension of
the water main along Vierling Drive and looping of water
9
lines within the development.
7. A signature block shall be added to the final plat for the
City Attorney's signature and the ATTEST line for the
Planning Commission shall be eliminated from that signature
block.
B. The existing easement along the North property line shall
be vacated prior to recording of the final plat or shown on
the plat.
9. The easement along the lot line between lots 18 & 19, Block
2 shall be 10' in width on each side of the lot line.
10. The developer shall file a petition with District Court
asking that Heritage Drive from Lot 2, Block 2 and Lot 2,
Block 4 of Heritage Place let Addition, South to the
Northern boundary of Heritage Place 2nd Addition be renamed
Sapphire Lane.
Motion passed unanimously.
XI. REQUEST FOR AMENDING CODE REGARDING ANIMAL HOSPITALS AND VET CLINICS
IN THE B-2 DISTRICT.
Wise explained that the public hearing on the proposed code amendment was
closed and that Staff was directed to refine the proposed language to
better define "small animals.'-
Wise
nimals."Wise suggested the wording for small animals be as follows: -'Companion
animals and domesticated pets" because the terminology was used for the B-3
zone.
MOTION: Foudray/Allen moved to recommend to the City Council that
City Code Section 11.30, Subd. 3 (B-2 District) be amended
to allow as a conditional use "animal hospitals and
veterinary clinics serving companion animals and
domesticated pets; provided, however, that all animal
confinement areas shall be fully enclosed within a
building. " Motion passed unanimously.
X. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR 1990-95 / 1990 C I BUDGET
MOTION: Stafford/Czaja moved to recommend to the City Council
approval of the Capital Improvement Program for 1990-95 /
1990 C.I. Budget as drafted by staff. Motion passed
unanimously.
XI. REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 8 555--COMMERCIALRECREATION CENTER
ON EAGLE CREEK PLAZA
10
MOTION: Kahleck/Allen moved to terminate conditional use permit
#555 for a recreational center at Eagle Creek Plaza.
Motion passed unanimously.
XII. DISCUSSION
A. gEVIEW APPLICATION FORMS
No action
B. AIR QUALITY IN RIVER VALLEY AREA
No Action
C. CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING DUPLEX/TWIN HOMES
No Action
D. HOUSERMELSON DUPLEX
City Building Inspector, LeRoy Houser, felt that the Commission
did not have all of the correct information on hand when
discussion took place at the last meeting regarding the
construction of a duplex by John Nelson in the Heritage Place
Addition. He said that according to Webster's Dictionary, John
Nelson owns a duplex--a two family dwelling owned by one person.
The property is zoned R-2. Duplexes are permitted in R-2 . One
sewer line and one water line are legal, according to the State
Building Code. Technically, Nelson has one sewer line--but
legally, he had two because of manifolding the lines outside of
the property. The Developers agreement is flawed and not
enforceable. According to the code, there is no such thing as a
twin home. Regarding the covenant on the property, the covenant
was filed on September 21, 1988 and the title was slandered.
Forbord asked if certain lots had been removed from the
covenants.
Houser answered that they had, and listed them. He continued by
stating that all Mr. Nelson, the City Planner, and he had done
was legal. There are no violations and it can be done over and
over again. In R-2 areas, duplexes are possible. A definition
of twin home needs to be included in City Code.
Forbord said he had several calls and so did other commissioners.
He had called City Hall and gotten information.
Nelson said there was nothing deceptive done on this building.
11
XIII. OTHER BUSINESS
MOTION: Czaja/Stafford moved to reconsider the minutes of
July 6, 1989. Motion passed unanimously.
Czaja noted that under item II of the July minutes, the name Czaja should
be changed to Wise. Under V, item 7, it should be worded the westerly
boundary for noise control . On page 7, under the first motion, remove the
words "Czaja abstained. $'
MOTION: Kahleck/Allen moved to approve the minutes of July 6, 1989
with the amendments requested by Commissioner Czaja. Motion
passed unanimously.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION Kahleck/Rockne moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed
unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:15 P.M.
12
j .
g
SHAKOPEE POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
DATE: JULY 28, 1989
4:00 P.M.
CITY HALL, SHAKOPEE
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Dan Steil, Secretary Virgil Mears, and
John Roepke
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: Sgt. Jerry Poole
Meeting was called to order by Chairman Dan Steil at 4:00 p.m.
Copy of the agenda was passed out to all members.
Sgt. Jerry Poole addressed the Commission with regard to applicants for two
police positions. MPLS provided a list of names and test scores. Fourteen
applicants who scored above 72 on the test were scrutinized and application
forms were sent to those fourteen. The deadline for receiving applications was
set for July 28.
Notion by Commissioner Roepke that a four member interview board be established
which will consist of Sgt. Poole, Officers Carlson and Flynn and one Commissioner.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mears and passed.
Chairperson Dan Steil will represent the Police Commission.
Interviews were tentatively set for August 14 and 15. i
A discussion was held on the hiring of a Chief of Police.
Minimum requirements are as follows:
1. Sworn and license police officer in Minnesota.
2. Minimum of two year degree
3. Ten years of police experience in an increasingly responsible
position which involved supervision
Motion by Comamissioner Mears to adopt the requirements,seconded by Commissioner
Roepke. Motion passed.
Discussion was held on the salary for the new chief..
Moved by Commissioner Roepke and seconded by Commissioner Steil to list the
salary at $45,000. Notion carried.
- z
Moved by Commissioner Mears and seconded by Commissioner Roepke that the process
of selecting a new Chief be a combination of consultant help plus work by the
three Commissioners. A maximum of $5,000 for the hiring process will be requested
from the City Council. Motion carried.
Moved by Commissioner Roepke and seconded by Commissioner Mears to hire Labor
Relations Associates, Inc. as the firm to help with the selection of a Chief of
Police. Motion carried. -
Meeting on motion adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Submitted by:
Virgil Mears, Secretary
SHAKOPEE POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION 9
A S5
MINUTES OF MEETING
DATE: August 11, 1989
3:00 P.M.
CITY HALL, SHAKOPEE
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Dan Steil and Comm. John Roepke
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Secretary Virgil Mears
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: Sgt. Jerry Poole
Meeting was called to order by Chairman Dan Steil at 3:00 p.m.
Copy of aggenda passed to all members.
Motion by Chairman Steil, seconded by Comm. Roepke, that we meet on an ongoing
basis every Friday at 3 p.m, in the Council Chambers until the business of
employing a chief of police and patrolmen are completed. Carried.
It was agreed that an ad for the position of chief of police be placed in the
following newspapers: ShakopeeValley News, Star and Tribune, St. Paul
Dispatch and Pioneer Press, the MPPOA, and other appropriate media.
Reviewed the notice for Chief of Police to be published in the press. Set
the last day to apply for the position - September 15.
Reviewed the applications received for the two positions for patrolmen.
Meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Submitted by:
John Roepke, Acting Recording Secretary
SHAKOPEE POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
DATE: AUGUST 18, 1989
3:00 P.M.
CITY ANLL, SHAKOPEE
COIMiISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Dan Steil, Virgil Mears and John Roepke
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
OTHERS PRESENT: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Steil at 3:00 p.m.
Copy of agenda was distributed.
Motion by Mears and seconded by Roepke to approve the minutes of the previous meeting.
Motion carried.
Chairman Steil discussed interviews held for the position of patrol office. Three
names were sent to the City Council, namely, Crocker, Erlandsen and Krohn. It was
agreed to check the references of the top two candidates with prior employers.
Motion by Mears and seconded by Roepke that prior to adding more patrolmen, the
Police Commission will review the process for selecting the individual. Motion carried.
i
Motion by Roepke and seconded by Mears that after three months the Commission
evaluate the new patrol officers and at the end of six months decide whether they
remain on the force or be dropped from service. Potion carried.
The following time table was set for hiring of the chief of police:
a. Applications to be accepted from August 27 to September 29, 1989
b. Written and oral review will be held from September 29, to October 29, 1989
c. Selection procass for the three most.qualified applicants will be held from
November 1 to November 29, 1989
d. Visiting communities where the people being considered are employed and
interviewing citizens, policemen, council members, etc.
Motion by Roepke and seconded by Mears to accept the above schedule for the selection
process. Motion carried.
Chairman Steil will send a notice of the position to all prospective applicants.
Motion by Mears and seconded by Roepke to advertise the position of Chief of Police
for Shakopee. Motion carried.
Minutes of Police Commission Meeting - August 18, 1989, page 2
Commission members will outline a profile of what the new chief should look like.
At the next meeting we will share these and come up with a composite.
Next meeting of the Commission will be held at 3:00 p.m., Tuesday, August 29, at
the City Hall.
A copy of all the minutes of the Commission meetings will be sent to Judy Cox at
City Hall.
Motion by Roepke, seconded by Mears that the meeting adjourn. Motion carried.
Submitted by:
Virgil Mears, Secretary
Ir
Ehlers and
I
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE NEWSLETTER
1 1
%1-1 OFFICES IN MINNEAPOLIS AND WAUKESHA
VOLUME 34. NVNIBER 5
FILE: Financial Specialists: Eblers and Associates,Ina
Please distribute to governing body members
SEPTEMBER 1989
LOWER INTERESIr RATES; RE INCS
Interest rates continue to drop, especially in the short maturities with the spread between one year and
20 year tax exempts about one percent. In early August the BBI dropped to 6.9590, down from 7.58% at
the end of 1988. The possibilities for refunding older, higher interest rate debt becomes ever more
attractive. But it can become tQoo good. In Minnesota, for example, refunding bonds may not be more
dran 110% of the debt to be refunded and, if interest rates become too low, it takes more to defense
outstanding debt. Sometimes this can be overcome by doing crow ver refun inga, but over issuance
must be carefully considered. Refinancing when issuing new debt improves the value of a refunding.
LEASE PURCwASP1tNc1' I t Ar1RN'1 S I R CONTRACTS
Minnesota cities, counties and school districts may now acquire real estate as well as equipment by
lease purchase or installment sales contracts which are excluded from debt limits and election
requirements if the lessee community has the right to terminate the contract at the end of any year. The
latter provision, right to terminate, is apt to cause higher interest rates in addition to other lease related
costs, but with a local not-for-profit leasing corporation and a public sale of the lease backed
obligations, costs can be controlled. We pioneered the idea starting with the public sale of such
courthouse bonds in Cass County, ND and in Clay County, MN. We'll be happy to provide a
comparative cost analysis of all of the possible plans of financing. 1989 legislation strengthens and
clarifies this financing option.
EQUEMER9CE TFErr ATE4 (9TIES COMM AND NOW SCHOOLS
Cities and counties have for some time had the ability to finance direct equipment purchases by issuing
five-year general obligation Equipment Certificates. Now school districts can do similar financing
mut an electl9n. Recent legislation added the "no election" provision for these Certificates which
will attract low five-year tax-exempt rates.
Cities and counties should keep in mind that levies on Equipment Certificates are special levies, while
lease-purchase arrangements for equipment are not outside levy limits. Planning to issue Certificates
for next year's equipment needs can give you more levy limit flexibility as you are considering budgets.
2950 Norwest Center•90 South Seventh Street•Minneapolis,MN 55402-4100•612-339-8291•FAX 612-339-0654
WHAT TO LOOK FOR INA FINANCIAL ADVISOR?
Someone who knows how to get money? For sure. Someone to guide the community through
authorization phases such as elections, public hearings, etc.? Well now that you mention it. Someone
to carefully plan a bond issue to reduce public stress and to avoid future economic hardship? Of
course. Then why is it that, for some, the primary concern is the comparative cost of selling bonds,
getting the money. Ehlers and Associates pride themselves in performing all the functions, not just in
marketing bonds, important as that is. We are financial agbr am not just sellers of bonds, an important
distinction.
PROPERTY TAXES AND P.It
Many states struggle to make property taxes; a) lower, b) simpler, c)more equitable,d) go away. Many
states' property tax systems are almost incomprehensible but, so it seems, everytime a state sets out to
make them simpler and more equitable, they become more complex and inequitable. Minnesota is a
case study. It has so many classifications, municipal and school aids, homestead credits and income
related circuit breaker refunds that it is diffiwlt to explain and understand. Moreover, with each
legislative session the property tax system is changed and, thus, is unpredictable. The property tax is a
tax on wealth (distinguished from income) and, inasmuch as local functions protect and enhance wealth,
they ought to be financed by taxes on property (wealth).
To use the property tax to redistribute wealth only leads to confusion and chaos. Progressivity can be
built into total tax systems without every tax being progressive, and that analysis should involve
consideration of, not only the tax collec ' system, but the distribution of tax dollars. Good schools
directly improve property values. How valuable is property if one can't get to it for lack of plowed,
well maintained streets? Surely police patrols, fire departments, courts exist to protect property as well
w our persons. Perhaps if we better sold the public on what it is that their property taxes buy, the urge
to modify or do away with such taxes would diminish.
EHLER.S AND ASSOCIATES: EMPLOYEE OWNED
Ehlers and Associates, Inc. has completed its fourth year of successful operation under its Employee
Stock Ownership Plan. ESOPs are a wonderful way for a company and its employees to continue
serving clients in their traditional way, maintaining that quality of service that made the firm prosper
and grow originally. Quite different from being acquired by outsiders who might never have been
exposed to a philosophy of quality service and, perhaps, who are motivated primarily by volume and
market share,selling bonds. I recommend the folks here to you.
Sincerely;
EHLLEERRS AND ASSOCIATES,INC.
Robert L. Ehlers
1614R
SUMMARY OF AREA BOND SAIFS Bona
Net Buyer
Nuni sinalit, Bate Two of Bonds Mount Maturity Rate Index Ratinv
2®
do
Pltoana 06/05/09 6.0. BOM Mtl[. PrvJe[t Xotes S 1,2sd 1992 6.SR 1.111
���III CM1aritm 06/01/89 G.O. Corynrete purynxe BOnea IaSX IT)1-IDW 6.811 LISZ M
Molll11a 06/05/09 G.O. Ceryora[e Purpose Bones ]9pN 1990_1999 6.301 ),ISS B
Ms Lemmity 5/0 .111189 6.0. Mticipatop We[ants ].YiOX 1990 6.SR ].15i
Eaxtem 1- .1.1 89 G.O. antiNpat,u Warrants 3,eld, I. 6.652 1.111 M
C"""ity College
Esse.Comity I. p6/06/09 G.O. Ill., Builein9 BpgA1,BfpM 199130/0 ].OR ].1.
to
Iri{wnLY C_. SA 06/0]/09 6.0. s[6oa1 beds 91. 19903008 I.RZ 1.,.
Be[ten6oI,CmmnI, Sol p6/13/89 G.A. MH[Spatary XAv j, E.ESOX 1990 6.592 6.95F Al
Oes bima area 06/13/89 G.O. MIi[iptory WrrantA S..I. 19Po 6.101 6,M M
An
IIIlin q Lollege
hep Lmm Colo. SA 06/IJ/B9 6.0. an[icipatpry Xarranb 3,115. 1990 6411 6.952
le
WM1F Scot o-it,S/0 06/15/89 8.0. Mti[IWbap Xavants 1,300. 1990 A.. 6.95.
Xan[Mxtee 06/19/89 G.O. le no tit Balls ISO. 1991-3ep 6.61% 6.602
o"I"Porl Comity $N 06/20/89 L.O. Mticipatop Werants e,]SM 1990 6.SA 6.m1 W
..t.d.xa 06/21/B9 amble G.O. I-Iial Corporate I,SOd1 19903009 9.061 6.891 p
Ipuryose beds
Waterloo 06/22.9 G.O. hoes 4.MM 991-200e 6.09% 6.MZ YMC
calm O6/21.9 G.O. tire Station.Mx I.. 1990-1999 6.611 ].OBY M
Napton County 06/11/89 G.O. .p' [ourxe Igmrment Wtes 20.X 1991_2000
Sioux City Com. 5. 06/21/88 G.O. M[itlWtoq Warrants 5,000. 1990 1... 1.On
Ill
.,.I Neiex lim'" L.O. beds 20.28/8 19f3005 6.12, 1.. Pu
X tM1 Cwntr .11MI.9 G.O. County Xpipital 0nnex SSOM 19913000 6.551 1.on
Iwauu.111 C_.il' .111 89 G.O. s[bwl beds 3.000N Ml9 n. 6.6E LpBL
Cone l mxlrl[l Pl
Gilbert Lill S/0 07/11.1 G.O. Scbol BuSleing BOMB 2,810. 1.1-2W9 1... Io.
IA:Mllll 111,0.9 G.O. Sever Igrwaent bones I,OOF 19913001 6.BM 1.003 Ne
W[anh C-nl1, 5. 0]/11/09 1.0. SCM1wI BOn6i 3.2541 1992-009 6.951 1.001 RIP
Lriaes 0]/11/89 G.O. Bmex epOX 1991_2002 on
IMgsM A C ." 5. .111.9 G.O. S[Fool Bmex 1,250. 1991-2009 617. 6.952
.r lid,Cwnty Ol/25/09 G-0. Cgity Laan btea 3,800. 1991_2.5 6.661 6.9x1 PRI
Ce Oar valla 061 ntiei O111.9 4aa Utility Rermue . I,nine 1990300e 6.11l 6.9'i1 NgaC
Stale BVM aI Regmta 085/09 PIt..1 Ill.. Rnenua Boeda IO,pOpX 1992-2011 6.N. 6.952 el/Pr
IISV p( slim¢6 lecM1nningYl
MOMraceLranger 0/26.9 fapibl Loan.,.1a55N 1991-200s 6.911 6.952 R
Loinity 5.
YGranger 0/26/89 G.O. 5[Mol Boeds I... 19923.9 6.9111 6.952 Rl<
C-.it
cmmnnr aO
M!"psss6
W/Os/69 G.O. Iw-eant Rands l%de 1990.199e 6.58 1,1.
MM. 06.5.9 mail.G.O. Ian Imnew t bones ed. 199}1001 0.1E 1.152 P
Annta 06As/09 G.o. Wager 6 sayer Rrvmue Oonex 1,910. 19913.0 6.W% I.1. P
Mxrn 06m5.9 4.0. Igrwwmt Mex 1.015. 1991_005 606 114 PI
BiMik 06.5.9 11.11 4.0. Igrovmeet BUMx 1. 1991 6.IR 1.14 M
Chi saO City 06.5/89 G.O. Seger 6 lot.,Revenue A..dI BSd, 19913.5 6.98 1.1. Wa
Wstln9a p6M5.9 6.0. Zgr.-t 1Mr 1I.n. 1991-M10 6.BII 1.151 P
Sun(iaM1 LeYe 06.5/89 G-0. Iq,wa�nt BonOx 130. 1991-1995 fi.on 1.14 R
lod., 06/06.9 G.O. Gran!MIl:ift ton MtlI .. IM 6.1. 1.14 ey
Wnley (allx 06/08/89 G.O. Igrovwent beds net 1991300 J.M 7.14 R
LS.O. x191 Wit SL Paul 06/13/09 4.0. "'"' "'Ill'-"
ool bilging Bmex 6,635. I99130p1 6.092 6.94 Al
no Labs pfi/ILB9 6.0. lagora[y Igmra�nt Bmgi 8660. 1992 6.392 6.94 ba
Ill rd 06/8.9 G.O. 1[gprary Canst-,Iion bed, 57M 1991 6.An 6.9E R
M.nneapol it 06/13/89 60. BonOx S,OOdI 1993301 ].JB1 6.951 PY
IXC MeraM1ip 1.e .tiee Prq[sl 6 2019
eY Cmnty 3.9 6... L� p BOx IS,OOM 1.1300e 6.64 6.952 Pax/4.
Oi= 06/1 ..A
dl
06/4/n G.O. Aiming Panl BeMx 300N 193}001 6.8E 6.952 Baa
Rr9an 06/10.9 G.O. la In[raeeAt BonOi 2M 103-2005 1.001 6.952 R
A.t.r O6/11/09 L.O. Iq nL 6"i"""d
Sys. Onnb 255. 199130006.M I..
Al it.Rl pfi/19/09 City Lane,Rermue SOMs b5. 19913000 ].14 o..
.:to. .119/0 6.0. IgrOment .it, 315. 1991300 6.902 6.An de
S.Il It. Paul 06/19/89 G.O. Capital Wtes 525. I991_19N 6.131 6.04 IR
rer1Y 06/19/0 G.O. Grant a Lwn Rntl[. beds 91pN 1991 6.111 6.805 M
And. 06.0/09 G.O. Igror,ent Bmex 3,2W. 1990-001 6.14 6.MZ hal
CH.
iOge 0680/09 G.O. BOMx d,530N IWI-MIO 1.011 6.MS Bell
11 ity 06/M.9 G.O. brant R Luan Aulk. Mex 360. 19']1 6.562 6.881
1.5.0. /B]6 Mmedale O6/Z0.9 G.O. S[MAI Builelnq Bmex 0,990. 19923010 6.991 6.882 In
I.S.O. a32e J.,As.. 06/0.9 6.0. Ail Audk. Certs, of Ingabl Wpl 'm
6.An 6.BR R
I.Ilen."t
.,..9 L.O. Igrov-t Bmtl, 3,175. 1991_01 6.68 6.881
[on Count, 06/30.9 6.0. IarI I" I, I... .90_1939 I... 6.01 AA
Eynta^9 O6/21.9 4.0. Xa ue..1x 41. 193130/0 M.
Coreonn 0/2/89 4.0. Igrovment Balls I,iIol 1930-1999 6.111 6.05 Wa
C.Id Spring 0/2.9 G.O. Grant Anticipation lot,, 0 Lex 7. 19 6.41 ].I. III
Cull Spiry 011/09 1.0. tell-Iee lreelmnt I,60d1 1992302 ].101 ].OR Baa
roility Bnne,
Ls.O. 4W Grcre City 06/2J/M 6.0. Ail Mn[. Cerlx. of Inaebt. Y5n 190 6.56" LpB[ R
1.1.0. 850 Xi[ollet O6RJ/B9 6.0. s[6001 Bopling Refunding Bond, ].355. 1996-206 6.8E 1.08[ RIP
Lbley cuu ll 06.1/0 6.0. WbrsM1M Igrwa�n[ Bmdx 135. 19914. B. 1.05
,_dj 0n.An 6.O. Igm7e ]IM 1991-202 6.765 I.MZ
Milli .6.A'. 40. Sever Retinue Re f..in9 BOMB A. 1. 1930 GSM 1.RZ
Wnter 0/05/89 G.O. Ta. Invment hoes RSX 1982-1999 6.90 1.0E haAAl
Bav[o 0.5.9 6.0. Igrcyaent BOMB 3.31M 199L300 6.922 ].OE A.
01r0 Is1aM on"o G.O. Igrnmant BOMB 15P1 1991-1995 6.581 ].001 R
L S.O. I'll B,ai... 0]/10/89 G.O. Aid Antic Certs. of lnhbl I.e. 19$0 6.011 ].003 R
Bond
Net Buyer
Muni coal itv �
B to Type of Bands Mau"t Maturity Rate Index Ratina
I.S.O. 851 Felty DI/10/89 6,0. SID111 Builein9 and, L I... 1.23010 ].ORS /AOS 18U ^
0]/1 . 6.0. Aid Amir. Certs, Uf IMebt. I." 1990 6.511 ].084 Be
I.S.a. PI]I xiMw 6.861 7.m M
.S.1. 0]/10/89 6.0. Sex.Pee. 11-1,, 9 Bwda 65N1 193E
Nmtizello 0711./89 4.0. ITmrwent Banes 2a5X 19913.0
No 11Se110 Dl/IBA9 G.O. Ussile ]an Ie[rnt Balls Zoll I
a� WIM7 ..m1.00E A
[M1aplin 0]/11 A9 G.O. ITewwent Dells 665. 1991-1995C ],.OZ fell
0]/11/B9 G.O. Aid"ii,. Cex[x. of Ildebt. 30LN 1990 6.605 1.001 MR
LSD. HCI Xarheltlen SJSX 1931-1999 6.61E ].BOY Baa
paxk 01/11/89 6.0. y n[Bw05 920. 199C-ID8a fi."1 1.001 Ma
x 0]/I IA9 G.O. ]a+xlncrwent bMs
Savage afY 0]/13/89 G.O. [9ui9eent C-tlfi cafes JBOM 1991_1990 6.1. 1.001 lBRwl
p]/I]/B9 60. Aid Mtic (arts. of IMebl LO.pN 1990 b.I. 6.921
ISD. .l6 Belle filiue A 6.92 IN
I.S.O. .11 elf... 11/iI., G.O. Aid Antic. Ulf- of IMN[. "1WX 1930
1.5.0. /381 kete Suwriax 0]/11/89 6.0. Ale Mtic Lerts. o! Lntlebt 3.6CON 1990 fi.56Y 6.92E M
late 0)II]/B9 6.0. ITxaeRnt BOM' I,IIA 1990.1999 1,. 6.92 Bul
XortM1east 6.0. ScFml B111din9 Dens' 115. ien-2803 6.a6S 6.933 Allis
1k4golitan 0]/1]/B9
Intexwdill. $,I N16 81. 199999 6.8% 6.921 A.
Virginia 0]/IBA9 G.O. PeMntlLg Bon05 2-1
If Dili. D7/IBA9 GA. DIAPlial f
Re uMin9 BUMS d.."'d.."' 1991-2W6 1.03[ 6.92[ Bu
SaW Iss". 01/19/.9 I.B.
. ITceeentBonds M. 1991-2800 6.AM 6.9E Na
SauY Cmtee 01/19/.9 6.0. Mr Zssse tat Bmtls 40. 1990.1999 6.6m 6921 Baa
Y311m 0]/19/83 G.O. IT.orwen[.... 11355. 193130. 6AIY 6.92, A
]Fawn 0....9 6.0. ITmrsaIt BOMB 820x 1991-2010 l.e5i 6.9E IDI
Lee Ise 0180/89 G.O. IT Oewent Bends ICA 199" >.35i 6.9E �
L S.D. X]12 Nwntain 0721/89 6.0. Aid Mt3c Certs. If INML I..,. 1990 6.1. 6.$S
I-sIdd l
,.is IS.O. PI11 0]/20/89 6.0. Sused Buildln9 BOMs Ifaazl a.000M 1W2-20D. 6.8E 6.9 n
IMatnteni-W)exl 0]25/09 suable 4.p. pa Incr'wenI Belli IC. 1992-1999 B.S7Y 6.95Y Na
fele Spring Bea
CO1tl Spxin9 0]/ZS/p9 6ra61e 6.0. tan Invewnt bMx 26. 19923.9 9.2E
fOltl Sp.ing O7R5/B9 6.0. ITcwwenl bMs 6WX 19923.1 6.1E 6.95E Baa
LeOY Ceunfl .1125/89 6.0. ITrweaent iaz is-lt Bells 3,IIA 199LR011 6.915 6.951 1BIP
IYbel 0]/261. G.O. W sing Holl 4renm BOMB /,EIA 19'313010 7.011 6.YiZ i
1.S.0. flb IaYIOv fells 0]2]/09 G.O. Pid M11c. 0111- OI "It C6A 199. 6.uis 6.94 K
Buflele a/31/B9 G.O. Bonds ruse 1.13"5 6.633 6.951 Baal
4canzte falls "/]1/89 6.0. Bends ". 19913010 6.7M 6.94 A
LS.O. %99 C.I. is "/31/89 G.O. Aid Auric. Lextx. le Indebl BOON 1990 6.051 6.955 lal
Yi'Soull
M1adison Rtcapolitan LO /05/09 G.O. I-xxop I. 2.50011 199E-1993 6.065 7.,. A.
"/RA9 G.O. Pviisop Xo[es ]BOM 1930-1995 6.1. 6..S Al
Fane
IS Laa S/0 a
rtsdlle "/12A9 6.0. P-izzop Xetes 4,73. 1930-1999 6."5 6.94
,.-ill "/I2/" Sever SYstw Ibxtga9e Rel, Bmdx 95. 1931-2010 1.22 6.951 Ili
pwlaxka "/12/89 6.0. [aryente An; Bond, i,33. 19913"B 1,1E A.. Ma
Ile9wn "/1]/B9 G.O. LoniitY Oeeelepwnt bods 4,00. 19942"B 6.701 6.94 Al
Joint Sanitaq Dist. of "/15/09 Sevar Sy II Reeenue eaM E.06se 1992 6.9E 6.94 M
voy9an .persipPl impose.wte,
Gxeen Bay Acw 005 "/19/89 6.0[ Pcwiss-Y.les s,lose 1991-1999 6.561
ll, nt Spei sys "20/89 G.D. pewuse y tez 3"N 1.2-1999 7,6E 6.08E M
PSaedtary Oisblxt
lu If xauke'6a .22/89 6.0. Pmixsop.tel 1.61. 1990-1999 6.095 6.691 K
Niddletm{max Pltlnx "16/89 GA. Svise-D Pwl fadli".OMS L". 1991-1993 6.SR
SCMe1 Dis Vzet A
Iry if IS "16/.9 4.0. CaxpOrate IS,tolls 1.32A 19"3000 6.9E 1.081
Beloit "/2]/" Sever SYztw Rermue bMa J3.33se 193 ddl 4.04 ID" By
Mdson SN "21/" 6.0. StFoo1 .nds 0.40. 1991-2008 6.84 ]."5 AI
Kuston, xl 061]/89 Sar us S, 1 forty¢ 65. 19913"9 ].Nt ].083 IP
Peeenue Bells
.us[m, MI ./27/89 Xa I.r SY,tw Mectlede 91. 1991`010 7.375 I"m Be
rve n.OMs
Mall 5/O "1B/e9 G.O. Pf 11-,.1.1 11. 19A-1999 6.6"0
.6" 1.084 A
winlMaw Cwntr U620/09 G.O. R.1-di.,res 3.110. 1"1-1931 b.Ea1 7.M M
iwe0aq[Booty "28A9 6.0. Prwlx,ery.ter 3,8"M 1 one 6.3]3 1."3 Al
to 5/O 01/10/" 6.0. Irw Mtez 600M '990.19'39 6.611 '.", A
VI.ine[in IntlisnM1eatl VIAf 0]/10/" 6.0. Irwivory ata 3.p2A 991-1990 6.2m ."Z A
\loge e(ponuktt "/\1189 6.0. Ceryomte Iurpse.Ma 2.13. 19913"0 6.HY ].0" A
Wrtenrille S/0 0]/12/09 6.0. IT.^rewent Bells ].SOL. 199130" 6.Ht l.0" AIIAf
MaukeiM 5/0 01/12/09 G.O. Pfwissoq.tes I,Jppl 199}1990 6.105 1.000 Y
EIY6art 'As"1oAeulaF Ol/II. G.O. StNwl .Ms 1.91. 1991-2"1 6.76t 6.9E VBAC
S=f 0.sb c
end 0]/1]/" 6.O. pled-,Bit., 1,100. IS91-1999 6N1 6.9E A
Nielson 07/1]/" G.O. Irwi,s,.'.I 2,8]A 1930-1939 6.4E 6.9E Aa
Ipwl ton 0]/1919 G.O. Pr'wlisorY.[es 2.000N 1930-1934 6.045 6.9E
laCmxre founty 0]/M/09 G.O. PP-
SSA 1"A-1939 6.341 6.9E AI
LaCrosse County 0]20/" b.a. Corporate hx9me emds 0.02. 19913"C 6.535 6 1. Al
Ae
Bilvwkee Area vTAE "/25/89 6.0, prwixxeq.t.S 50. 1961993 6.M 6.Yv4
SeutF XilwuYee 07/117/09 S.A. M1wisxery.tax I.W. 19" 6311 6.952 AN
BiyarcA 06/"/09 Higbar ITrorwenl 0mtls 26. 1950-1991 6.061 ),ISZ Aa
wrck 06/./.9 eluMin9 lTmrwent OOMs C6. 1.1-1993 6.M5 LI54
warck 06/06/89 dln9 IT�Urwent.Ms 2.15. 1931-2001 651 .151
RTe, 06119/.9 es's.11ng yreezaent .M, De" 199DID.4 6.76,, ].Out M
6rvA Pork: O7/1]/89 60. tolls Ip00M 19"-1939 6.161 6.9E Aa
LraM Forks 07/17/89 R lulling Iwrmweit -S 1.0"M nee-1.9 6.555 6.931 W
Steele-Oune, 1.6Zfi Z.1.9 6a. SCFmI Building MMx ISO. IS90-1001 6.165 6.94
. . l :2
• • •
Public Financial Systems is redefining the role of
municipal government financial advisor.
PUBLIC FINANCIAL SYSTEMS • JULY, 1989 • VOLUME VI • ISSUE 2
GETTING A GRIP ON ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS
A s if trying to meet public service and capital rhetoric of the last election year,the bugle you
hear and the dust you see on the horizon are
facility needs didn't Place enough stress on moving in the opposite direction of what are
diminishing local government resources, a new viewed as ley created problems.
series of demands on the horizon may far
outstrip prior ones. Existing environmental risks Have you seen major development efforts
and the resulting financial exposure to public stalled until liability for leaking underground
bodies are being revealed daily, demanding storage tanks or other site contamination is
ways to assess these risks and provide financial b gin aHas nd dere opens in order provided
indemnity
eyto
assurance.
Most states in the "environmentally correct" Project moving?
Upper Midwest are in the process of adopting Awareness of these issues and the resources
Financia[Assurance Regulations designed to demanded to deal with them are creating
meet closure and long term monitoring costs of growing concern among the auditors charged
existing public and private landfills. The burden with financial disclosure and the Bond rating
for both private operators and public bodies agencies responsible for the analysis. They ask:
goes well beyond the estimatable cost of a)How do you quantify the risk?, b)How do
physical closure and monitoring and includes you put a value on an indemnity agreement?, c)
assessment of levels of contingent liabilities such Do you note the contingent liability or wait for
as third patty liability and long term damage to the first claims?, and d)Have you addressed
the environment. Public bodies, responsible for these issues in your Risk Management Plan?
the public health of constituents,either own mal leaders search for answers to
solid waste disposal facilities or may be forced while
into a void where private operators, unable to environmental they and financial
atoCregulate, an at
meet the stringent financial assurance the state they continue to legislate. The local
requirements, abandon facilities and disburse vernment level must pick up the cards they
assets to avoid liability. Public officials need to go for some regulatory
be concerned about closed landfills of known are dealt financial lief
or unknown location and the unperntitted has been working
landfills or unattended dumps that were so Public Financial Systems
common just a few years ago. hard to develop options for local governments
Each year, new environmental issues arise, such that are searching for landfill assurance
answers. If you need assistance in hedging the
as asbestos, site contamination, and leaking financial risks of environmental questions, call
underground storage tanks. Most state public Financial Systems. We have some
programs that have been devised to address thoughts to share with You. ■
problems do little but assure local government
that the locals will again have the pleasure of
solvinWashingtothen,ryou say? in spittee of all ut help
from
e
SLI
recent simplistically creative being converted to fees. The
�,/n N idea in municipal finance is the Treasury Department is threatening
use of guaranteed investment to target GIC's for restriction and,
G'CS contracts to assist in monitoring unfortunately, legitimate uses may
excess earnings for rebate purposes. suffer from restrictions intended to
Guaranteed Investment Contracts correct alleged abuses.
("GIC"'s) provide a guaranteed Ifare considers ou
rate of return on funds invested y ng investing[ax-
under the contract. They feature exempt municipal proceeds in a
flexible withdrawals making them GIC, you will want to clear their
ideal for uncertain project status before proceeding. At a
drawdown schedules. minimum keep in mind the
following:
Many communities subject to . Make sure that true, competitive
arbitrage rebate requirements have bidding is taking place.
fired their GIC rate at the bond
yield, determining the whaling GIC R Recognize that future restrictions
bidder by the size of the premium may include the placement fee in
offered. Because the investment is at investment yield calculations. If
the bond yield, the premium the GIC is at bond yield and you
represents excess earnings and is we subject to rebate, retroactive
placed in a separate account. GIC's restrictions may require a rebate
offer benefits to communities equal to the placement fee.
without rebate requirements also, by
eliminating the difficulty of Don't impose irresponsible
predicting and investing to project bidding criteria in an attempt to
draws. drive down the yield on the GIC.
Conditions of the contract should
These legitimate uses of GIC's we reflect the needs of the project
currently threatened by recent financed.
articles in trade papers that allege
abuses in the bidding of GIC's. The There are many good applications
payment of a placement fee to a for GIC's. GIC's should not be
broker by the GIC provider is a dismissed out-of-hand because of
long established practice, but there current uncertainties. ■
are allegations that excess yield is
SUMMARY OF BOND SALES
DAiEUi
WNDEAEE IE4UiA PUP11-
MONIA/DAY Di NTEMT F
ISY ISSVAgNDATING POE CK➢ U, MAWRIR
'
7/24 INDEPENDENCE SCHOOL IA — SCHOOL I.250,M NR 7(WM WIN —
CSD
725 COLD SPRING CITY MN 2,294 TAXABLE GO TAX INCR 240,0.0 Baa R519% 92/93 6.tt)
]/H COLD SPRMG CRY MN 2,2!M GO IMPROVEMEN! MAID 8vs 6.-2]N 9LN1 ].56
]25 COLD SPRRa'G CITY MN 2,2W TA%ABLE GO TAX INCR 2NI." Bs9 9.Y19°A 92/03 14.1]
725 BLACK HAWK COUN IA 13],561 GO CAPITAL LOAN MIS 3,BOD,WO AI 6MM 91/05 10.12
]25 MBVNIXOTA STATE MIS 4,0(/,148 SPURTS
&HLTH CLB 225,0(,0.) ALAAa 6.663% %`U9 9.66
FF @ CR
TM CEDAR FALLX CITY IA 36,32 GAS UTIL REVENUE 510AM Aa 6. M 91N04 9.61
72i M WAUKEE CHY WI 10A212 SCHOOL ORDER NOTES 32,(X== 6.(XIM Im LW
725 COOKCOUNTY MN 4,%2 C IMPR TAX]NCR 2.115.000 ARE, 6.91WT 92/11 14.45
BR
TM STATE D OF SCHOOL IA — ACADEMIC BLDG REV 10MMO AUAa 6.3E0Sb 92/13 1].25
RECIN15
725 STEEILDAWSON SCHOOL NO — LTD TAX SCHOOL BLDG IM,M NR 6.7( W/0i 9.16
PSD
]R$ MILWAUKEE SCHOOL WI — GO SW(X* NR 6.W9Po 91V93 —
AREA VO`TECH
7/26 MABEL I= MN MI GO NURSING HOME REV "151W] NR 7.015% 91/10 LIM _
]/]6 WOODWA SCHOOL IA — SCHOOL 2,SW,WS Acta 6.S 92/W 13.16
GRANGER CSD
7/26 WOODWAR0. SCHOOL IA — CAPITAL LOAN NOTES 555,W] Acte 6.916% 91N5 9.W
GRANGER CSD
7/26 TAYLORS PALLS SCHOOL MN — GOAWANTICCOFI 465.W0 NR 6.4WW 1990 ITS
LSD 140
MUNICIPAL MINIBONDS NEW ARBITRAGE
REBATE RULES
Municipal "Minibonds" are small minibonds, consisting of smaller by Stephen Rmholt
denomination securities that denominated bonds, will create
may be an attractive option for more transactions than a traditional /� new set of regulations
financing capital needs. Municipal bond offering of similar size. There A governing arbitrage rebate
bonds are usually sold in$5,000 is a benefit in minimizing the calculations were released by the
denominations. Mini-bonds are sold number of transactions to be Internal Revenue Service on May
in smaller denominations(i.e. $500 processed. 12. Under the Tax Reform Act of
or$1,000), making them an Deferred interest structures are also 1986, issuers of tax exempt bonds
affordable investment to investors are required to rebate to the United
otherwise unable to purchase bonds attractive to minibond investors States "arbitrage profits" earned on
because of ease of investment,
directly. Minibonds are sold by the the investment of bond proceeds.
security, and a fixed return. The
issuer directly ngthe
to the investor, deferred interest structures do away The new rules provide detailed
ti
eliminang the role typically played with reinvesting interest earnings by guidance for computing the rebate.
by an investment banker. locking into an interest rate until the The new rules generally apply to
The purpose of a minibond issue is bonds mature. governmental bonds issued after
not to replace traditional bond Unlike traditional municipal bonds, August 31, 1986 and private activity
financing. A minibond offering is a bonds issued after December 31,
method to expand the market for no secondary market exists for
Pan minibonds. Providing the investor 1985. Issuers may elect to apply the
debt, educate residents about the with a put option creates a means new riles to IDB's issued prior to
capitall investment process and needs for the investor to liquidate a December 31, 1985.
of the community, and create The put goodwill by providing residents minibond investment.
withP Under the law, issuers with general
an attractive investment that would option creates some risk for the taxing powers who issue bonds for
issuer by creating an obligation to governmental purposes ses in amounts
otherwise be unavailable to them. g r$o
The demand for minibonds is repurchase the risk can
prior to of not more than$5 million in any
seldom sufficient to fund all capital maturity. This risk can be one year need not make arbitrage
needs minimized by combining put option calculations or rebates with respect
fees, put option volume limits and to those bonds. The new rules do
The differences between minibond liquidity facilities to purchase and not affect this exemption.
and traditional bond financing are remarket the minibonds.
primarily: (I)The investment Although 243 pages long, the new
objectives and preferences of the A serial maturity structure will regs are far from the final word on
minibond investor differ from the attract more investor interest by arbitrage rebate. The Internal
bond investor and(2)Minibond accommodating various maturity Revenue Service has promised in
issuers perform many of the demands of investors and may lend future regulations to do the
functions traditionally performed by itself to level annual debt service following: clarify that the 6-month
an investment banker or trust objectives. exception to the rebate requirement
company. A successful minibond To assure that minibonds are applies to situations where reserve
offering should be structured to available to the largest number of funds and bona fide debt service
achieve the following: investors, minibond issuers typically funds are not spent within 6 months
limit the number of minibonds sold (so long as other proceeds are spent
• Generate sufficient interest to raise in that period); include allocation
funds for planned capital needs. to an investor. The minibond issue rules dealing with the practice of
is intended to enhance the capital commingling bond proceeds with
• Achieve attractive interest rates. investment process, not replace other funds; and to take certain
• Minimize ongoing cost. borrowing via traditional methods. hedging transactions into account in
Issuers have historically conducted
Deferred interest structures have minibond sales in conjunction with computing yield.
been used in achieving these a traditional bond issue. If the It still takes a computer and a
objectives. The deferred interest nature and structure of the detailed set of investment and
structure(zero coupon or capital minibonds is very similar to that of expenditure records to calculate
appreciation bond)minimizes the the conventional bonds, the same arbitrage rebate. However, revised
number of transactions processed Official Statement and bond rating computation methods required by
after the sale by paying investors can be shared by both issues. A the new rules, such as use of the
only once, i.e. at maturity. For an traditional bond sale immediately "future value" method of
issuer who never acted as preceding the minibond sale is an calculating investment receipts and
registrar/paying agent, a minimal effective minibond pricing means. payments, make the mechanics of
number of transactions makes bond the rebate computation simpler.
administration less cumbersome. If If you are interested m examining
a registrar/paying agent is retained, cminibondmi financing for your
the issuer must realize that community, please contact PFS for
compensation is usually paid by more details. ■ Continued on eak pace
transaction regardless of the value
of the transaction. Issues of
UPCOMING CONFERENCES
Minnesota County Auditors Wisconsin Counties Association Minnesota Association of School Business Officials
Fall Conference Annual Conference Fall Conference and Workshop 1
August 28-30 September 17-20 September 28-29
Fair Hills Resort Ray Wachs Civic Center Airport Hilton Hotel
Detroit Lakes, Minnesota Eau Clair, Wisconsin Bloomington, Minnesota
North Dakota League of Cities Iowa Society of Solid Waste Operations
Annual Conference 9th Annual Meeting
September 15-17 September 19-21
Kirkwood Motor Inn Carrollton Center
Bismark, North Dakota Carroll, Iowa
WHO'S NEW AT PFS
Public Financial Systems has Another new addition to the PFS CASH
recently welcomed two new staff is Heather L Braun. Originally
members to its staff. hailing from Waterloo, Iowa, Ms.
Paul R. Donna is serving as a Braun has just received her degree MANAGERS
financial analyst within the Project in economics from the Colorado
Management Group. Mr. Donna is College, Colorado Springs,
a recent graduate of St. Cloud State Colorado. She has done extensive
study of environmental issues Call PFS
University with a degree in Business
Economics. His on-campus activities including the cost effectiveness of for an
ranged from four seasons on the St. solid waste separation. Ms. Braun
Cloud Rugby Team to member of serves as a technical analyst within IN TRACK
Omicron Delta Epsilon, the the PFS Technical Services Group Demo Disk —
Economic Honor Society. Prior to and will specialize in federal tax
joining PFS, he served an internship issues including arbitrage rebate and (612) 333-9177
3 g p
in the Fmance Department of the advanced refunding.
City of LaCrosse, Wisconsin.
Continuedfo page3
Additional beneficial provisions calculation. In effect, issuers must from profit maximization to risk
include a credit of up to$1,000 for prove that they have not avoidance and rebate simplification.
the costs of having the rebate inadvertently committed a perceived Investment contracts, for example,
computed, certain de minimus rules, abuse. For example, it is necessary are likely to be used to a greater
elimination of the requirement of to worry about such things as extent in the investment of bond
recomputing bond yield in certain "imputed escrow,receipts" and proceeds. Faegre&Benson is
circumstances and elimination of the other arcane concepts. developing a set of bond structuring
need to make rebate computations if The rebate requirement generally, and investment recommendations
no rebate is due. Especially for dealing with rebate and
gratifying is that innocent mistakes and the new rules in particular, refunding problems, based on tools
in making the calculation will not present a significant challenge to available under Minnesota law and
necessarily cause bonds to become municipal finance professionals. elections and alternative
taxable. This challenge extends beyond the computations permitted under the
extensive revisions which must be new reqs. We will be making copies
Despite the calculation shortcuts made to bond documents and available upon request.
available for many conventional computer programs. New analytical
bond transactions, compliance is techniques must be applied to bond Mr. Rosholt is an attorney with
complicated by the extensive structures and investment decisions, Faegre&Benson in Minneapolis,
analysis required to actually especially in the case of refunding Minnesota practicing in the area of
demonstrate that the issuer is bonds. Because of the rebate municipal finance. ■
entitled to use the simpler requirement, the focus has shifted
!3
000
0
st. cis
REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER
August 21 , 1989
Mr . Tom L. Johnson
Executive Director
Transportation Study Board
G-24 State Capitol
St . Paul , MN 55155
Dear Mr. Johnson :
I was present at the Transportation Study Board meeting on Tuesday,
August 8, 1989 at the Knights of Columbus Hall in Shakopee, Minne-
sota. I was in hopes that I would be able to get on the agenda to
make a statement , but was unaware that there was such an interest and
time slots were not available . In lieu of making a public statement ,
I felt to get my point across , I would send a letter and copy to each
member of the Executive Committee , the Legislative members , and
Republic members .
I am the Vice President of Finance and Diversified Business at St .
Francis Regional Medical Center . It is a Medical Center that is
located in the heart of the downtown area of Shakopee. I have been
at St . Francis for only 18 months , but through this time period have
become very familiar with the road conditions in our patient service
area. St . Francis Regional Medical Center operates an Advance Life
Support (ALS) ambulance service for the cities of Shakopee and
Savage , and for the townships of Jackson , Louisville and Sand Creek .
Our Advanced Life Support (ALS) ambulance service also supports other
Basic Life Support (BLS) services in Scott and Carver County
providing the required back-up . I have been very involved during the
last 18 months in the operations of our ambulance department and , in
addition , was instrumental in getting a second unit on staff 24
hours/7 days a week to serve these areas . Although I work in the
finance area, I see the effects of the road conditions in our
Emergency Room each month.
When I first arrived at St . Francis , people would comment that " this
wing of the hospital was built by accidents that occurred on the 169/
Jordan area" , or "this wino of the hospital was built by accidents
that occurred on the 169/101 intersection in Carver County" . With
some of the traffic "bottle-necks" due to rush hours , entertainment
FF/ka
325 West Fifth A.enue.Shakopm.\Imneaxa 55379(612)445-2322
.Aninnnnre Aron nnluwn. HcAh S,,,,,,
/ 3
Mr. Tom L. Johnson
August 21, 1989
Page -2-
industry and railroads , our ambulance drivers have seen and can
relate some incredible stories that have occurred due to road
accidents .
Recognizing that better roads in our service area would most likely
result in the fewer Emergency Room visits and recognizing the current
state of our health care system, it ' s hard to recommend better roads
at a time that the hospital needs revenue , but the human interest
side of me would speak for the better road conditions . The effect of
the roads on our Emergency Room is only one aspect that I would like
to address in this letter .
A second issue that I have been dealing with over the last 18 months
is attemptino to recruit/attract additional medical specialities to
St . Francis so that fewer patients who require specialized services
need to be transferred to major metropolitan facilities . St . Francis
is a very advanced Medical Center and medical specialists are the
only ones requiring us to transfer certain patients to other medical
centers .
As we attempt to encourage specialists to set up offices and/or
office time within our outpatient area , we have to continue to answer
the question that comes up regarding road conditions . Certain
medical specialities require that a physician may have to get to our
hospital within a very tight frame or it could be a life/death
situation. A number of specialists have opted not to practice at St .
Francis approximately 5 years ago or in conjunction with the opening
of Canterbury Downs , due to the larqe amount of time spent on the
road and the potential risk to patients due to the time of getting to
St . Francis . Because of road conditions , all residents in our pri -
mary service area have suffered potential medical issues due to road
conditions . As we look at health care and what it means to the
50,000 plus residents within our primary service area, this is an
issue that affects all and not just one industry, and is the reason
why I feel that special attention should be given to the road con-
ditions .
It appears to me that road conditions in Scott County, western Henne-
pin , and Carver County should be studied quite carefully to determine
improvements that all people recognize are a problem. As I listened
to the various people speak at the hearing on August 8th , it appeared
that there was frustration with county, city and industrial leaders
of this area and it was unfortunate that I could not speak and
represent all residents because at some point in the future , statist-
ically, almost all of us will require some type of medical care.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, I would be happy to
meet with you to discuss this issue . In addition , if there are any
detailed questions , the large number of paramedics that work in our
FF/ka
/ 3
Mr . Tom L. Johnson
August 21, 1989
Page -3-
ambulance department would also be happy to talk about the road
conditions in our service area .
Sincerely,
Brian nreis
/l
Vice President of Finance
CC : Gerald Hart , President SFRMC
Becky Kelso , State Representative
Dennis Kraft , City of Shakopee
Mark McNeil , City of Savage
William Dellwo , Louisville Township
Norbert Theis , Jackson Township
Cycil Wolf , Sand Creek Township
FF/ka
BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL
Vol. 3 No. 9
Dear Chamber Member: September 1, 1989
CITY CLERIC
Council amended the City Code by reducing the minimum six month
fee for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license to a one month fee.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
In September, the City of Shakopee in cooperation with the
Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development will be
distributing a business retention and expansion program survey to
all businesses located within the Canterbury Industrial Park. The
program is designed to help communities increase employment,
maintain a stable tax base and attract new industry and other
businesses. The program facilitates cooperation and coordination
between local government and the business, industrial and retail
community.
City officials hope that this program will allow us to gather
information necessary to retain and expand businesses in our area.
Results from the survey will also help us address the immediate
concerns of the business community, such as zoning changes or
traffic routings. The survey results are useful planning tools for
long term development planning. If your business is selected to
participate in the survey, we would appreciate a timely response
to the survey questions. Results of the survey will be discussed
in future "Business Updates."
COMMUNITY RECREATION (SCR)
S.C.R. is jointly sponsored by the City and Schools. Adult
activities, including sports, are a part of the many activities
conducted and are available to local residents and full time
employees working in Shakopee. For example a business might wish
to sponsor a team of their employees or other local residents in
S.C.R. 's winter adult basketball league. To do that they need to
be prior registered which usually takes place at a league meeting
before the season starts. If you would like further information
call S.C.R. at 445-2742.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
The Engineering Department has hired a new Engineering Technician.
Jeff Swenson started work on July 5, 1989. Jeff is a recent
gradute of Dunwoody Industrial Institute and prior to that served
with the U.S. Marine Corps for four years. Jeff currently resides
in St. Louis Park with his parents. Feel free to extend a warm
greeting to Jeff if you see him in the office or around Shakopee.
The Third Avenue Reconstruction Project is in full swing now. The
contractor is Barbarossa & Sons of Osseo, Mn. To date, all of the
utilities (sewer and water) have been completed east of Holmes
Street and this portion is ready for street construction. Utility
work will now begin west of Holmes Street. The contractor
anticipates having the majority of the project completed by
November 1, 1989.
The Upper Valley Drainage Project is also under construction.
Barbarossa and Sons is also the contractor on this project.
Currently, the storm sewer is being installed near C.R. 16 and
Hauer Trail. The ditch grading has started on the drainageway from
C.R. 17 to Hauer Trail. The contractor is anticipating having the
majority of the project completed by November 1, 1989.
Staff has received permission to obtain bids on Market Street from
1st to Bluff, along with paving four alleys. The bid opening for
these projects is scheduled for September 1, 1989.
The assessments for the Downtown Streetscape Project were adopted
by the City Council on August 15, 1989.
Staff has been ordered to prepare plans and specifications for
upgrading the streets in the Killarney Hills Subdivision (Tyrone
Drive and Sharon Parkway) . This project will be constructed in
1990. Property owners that currently live on the paved roads will
be assessed 50% of the project costs, while the remaining property
owners will be assessed 100% of the project costs.
FINANCE/PERSONNEL
Council will begin working on the 1990 budget in September. A
public hearing notice will be published in the newspaper. The
impact on a property owner's tax bill depends on how much the
various governing bodies (city, county and school) levy for taxes
and what the Legislature does with the tax laws and aids to local
governments.
The City has authorized the hiring of two new Police Officers. One
officer will replace Earl Fleck who recently resigned. The other
officer adds an additional officer to the force, which will then
be an 18-member department.
Advertisements have been placed in local metro newspapers as the
recruitment for a new Police Chief is progressing to replace former
Chief, Tom Brownell, who resigned to accept a positon with the new
division of gaming enforcement in the Minnesota Department of
Public Safety.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 5, 1989
Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding
1] Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
2] Recess for H.R.A. Meeting
31 Re-convene
41 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
5] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
61 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. )
*73 Approval of Minutes of August ist and 15th, 1989
8] Communications:
a] Alan Beals, National League of Cities re: cost-of-living
adjustment in dues
b] Michael P. Wandmacher, Dep't. of Revenue re: Eagle Creek
Plaza Ptnshp. application for reduction in assessed
valuation of real estate
c] Joe Ries, County Administrator, re: Scott County 1990-94
Capital Improvement Plan
d] Gary Scott re: Mr. Krass' letter of July 18, 1989
9] PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a] 7:30 P.M. public hearing on the request to refinance the
commercial development revenue note for the Shakopee
Shops Shopping Center - Res. No. 3106
b] 7:30 P.M. public hearing on proposed public improvements
to Bluff Ave. between Marschall Rd. and Prairie St. ,
Naumkeag St. between 1st Ave. and Bluff Ave. ,
and Prairie St. between 1st Ave. and Bluff Ave. ,
Project No. 1989-12 - Res. No. 3105
c] 8:00 P.M. public hearing on an appeal, by Gerald
Schesso, of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
decision to deny variances regulating the construction
of accessory buildings
TENTATIVE AGENDA
September 5, 1989
Page -2-
10] Boards and Commissions:
a] Planning Commission - Ord. No. 275, amending the zoning
regulations
b] Community Development Comm. - elimination of left turns
at Holmes and Lewis Streets off of Highway 101
c] Energy & Transportation - Ord. No. 274, amending the
refuse collection regulations
111 Reports From Staff:
a] Request for Road Improvements by Bergquist Company
b] Derby Days Request for Funding Assistance
c] Assessment Agreement with Scott County ,
d] Tahpah Park - Upper Valley Drainage Channel
e] Lions Park Pond - tabled 9/15
f] Parking Lot by Scout Building - tabled 9/15
g] Upper Valley Project No. 1987-5 - Contingency
h] 3rd Avenue Project No. 1989-5 - Contingency
i] Approval of Bills in Amount of $248,210. 67
*j] 1989 Audit Services
*k] Nomination and Apppointment to the Downtown Committee
*1] Hold Harmless Agreement with Allen Plaisted
*m] Raffle License - The Minnesota chorale
n] 1990 Budget
o] Gambling License - Lion's Club Shakopee
p] Code on Ethics
121 Resolutions and Ordinances: _
a] Res. No. 3104, Ordering Feasibility Report for Adams St.
between 6th Ave. and 3rd Ave.
b] Res. No. 3107, Accepting Work on Tahpah Park Football
Field, Project 1988-4
c] Res. No. 3108, Accepting Work on T.H. 101/CR-83
Intersection Improvements, Project No. 1987-1
d] Res. No. 3112, Awarding Bid for Market Street and Alley
Improvements, Project No. 1988-6
e] Res. No. 3110, Providing for the Issuance and Sale of
$3,600,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds
*f] Res. No. 3111, Terminating License Agreement with the
Chicago and Northwestern Railroad
g] Ord. No. 273, Potentially Dangerous Animals
h] Res. No. 3101, Initiating Vacation of Easement - memo on
table 1l
13] Other Business: dol ay plya�
141 Adjourn to Tuesday, September 19, 1989
Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
TENTATIVE AGENDA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
Regular Session September 5, 1989
Chairman Gary Scott presiding
1. Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M.
2. Approval of the August 1, 1989 Meeting Minutes
3 . Bergquist Development & Financial Incentive Concept Plan
4. Other Business
a.
b.
5. Adjourn
Dennis R. Kraft
Executive Director
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MN AUGUST 1, 1989
Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 7: 01 p.m. with Comm.
Zak, Wampach and Clay present. Also present were Mayor Lebens,
Dennis Kraft, City Administrator; David Hutton, City Engineer;
Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; Judith Cox, City Clerk; and
Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney. Comm. Vierling was absent.
Wampach/Clay moved to approve the minutes of July 11, 1989. Motion
carried unanimously.
Zak/Clay moved to reopen the Shakopee Valley Motel Tax Increment
Financing Request. Motion carried unanimously.
Barry Stock reviewed the request from Mr. Bakken's request for
$100, 000 worth of tax increment financing to finish Jellystone
Park. Mr. Stock indicated that at the time of the original
submission of Mr. Bakken's request the industrial tax increment
policy had not yet been adopted by the City Council. The current
Bakken proposal meets all of the T.I.F. industrial policy criteria
except the provision of a minimum of 50 full time employees. Comm.
Scott said that since he does not meet all the criteria set forth
for tax increment he does not feel an added burden should be given
to the taxpayers.
Comm. Clay said he feels that tax increment was created to help
small businesses get established. When Mr. Bakken first submitted
his request there was no policy in existence. He said that Mr.
Bakken has developed a park geared toward family entertainment and
is of great value to Shakopee and he feels the HRA should help him.
Comm. Scott said he would like a policy developed for commercial
tax increment financing projects.
Clay/Zak moved to direct staff to prepare the necessary documents
to disburse $100,000 in tax increment assistance to Mr. Bakken for
improvements that have been made in conjunction with the
campground. Motion fails with Cncl. Wampach, Scott and Zak
opposed.
Wampach/Zak moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting
adjourned at 7: 17 p.m.
Dennis Kraft
Executive Director
Carol Schultz
Recording Secretary
MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Bergquist Development and Financial Incentive
Concept Plan
DATE: August 31, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
The Bergquist Company has filed an application for tax increment
assistance with the City of Shakopee. Due to the complexity of the
project, staff would like to review the proposed development and
financial incentive concept plan with the Shakopee Housing and
Redevelopment Authority before proceeding any further with the
project.
BACKGROUND:
Last fall, the Bergquist Company approached the City of Shakopee
with their development plans that included the construction of a
66,000 sq. ft. building at a value of approximately $3 million.
On November 1, 1985 the Shakopee HRA moved to direct the
appropriate City officials to inform the Bergquist Company that the
City of Shakopee would like to offer industrial development revenue
bond financing and tax increment financing in an amount equal to
3 years of gross tax increment capture.
Bergquist has since decided to construct their project in phases.
Since the Bergquist Company has not pursued their original
construction plans, staff feels that the original commitment made
to the Bergquist Company is null and void, however, the Bergquist
company would like to request tax increment financing for their
entire project as proposed herein.
Bergquist officials have informed staff that they plan on construct
a 30,000 sq. ft. warehouse facility with an approximate value of
$700,000 within the next 3 months. This facility will initially
employ approximately 10 persons. Bergquist officials have also
informed staff that they plan to expand the facilities in Shakopee
to the originally proposed 66,000 sq. ft. within approximately 2
years of the completion of phase 1. The proposed project when
taken in whole meets all the criteria as setforth in the City's
Industrial Development Incentive Program.
Staff has met with the City's bond counsel to discuss the potential
for tax increment assistance and the Bergquist Project. Both staff
and bond counsel agree that it would be possible to create a tax
increment district for the Bergquist project at this time. Staff
would recommend that the Bergquist Company be required to enter
into an developers agreement which would specify project
commencement and completion dates for both phase 1 and phase 2.
Phase 1 would be comprised of the $700,000 warehouse and phase 2
would be a $2.5 million assembly and office facility. The
developers agreement would also specify minimum market values for
the phases as they are completed. Finally, the developers
agreement would stipulate that should the Bergquist Company not
perform their responsibilities in completing the entire project by
a predetermined date, they would not be entitled to receive any tax
increment assistance.
Staff feels that this agreement would protect the City and insure
the completion of the project. When the entire project is
completed over 100 employees would be based at the Bergquist
facility. To give the City additional insurance, the Bergquist
Company has agreed to provide $5,000 in cash up front to be used
as security for the City in off-setting legal and administrative
fees should the Bergquist Company not comply with the conditions
of the developers agreement.
The financial inducement to Bergquist would off-set development
costs associated with road improvements, and sewer and water
expansion to the proposed development site. A partial land write
down may also be included as a financial incentive. The amount of
assistance would equate to 3 years of gross tax increment capture
for the entire project. The total inducement amount would be
predetermined based on the proposed completed market values of the
project in it's entirety. The City would not sell bonds for the
project until they are assured that the project will proceed in
it's entirety. No money would be disbursed to Bergquist until the
entire project is complete.
The main reason for the Bergquist Company requesting tax increment
financing for the entire project at this time stems from the fact
that they want some type of guarantee that they will be receiving
tax increment assistance for their project. The only guarantee
that the City can provide is in the form of a developers agreement
and subsequent creation of a tax increment district. If the City
does not wish to work with the Bergquist Company in establishing
a developers agreement and tax increment district, it is likely
that the Bergquist Company will not proceed with the construction
of the assembly and office facility at their site in Shakopee.
This would result in approximately 90 fewer full time job
equivalents being created in the City.
Staff would like the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority
to discuss the proposed concept plan and give staff direction as
to whether they support the afforementioned proposed plan of
action.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Direct the appropriate City officials to begin preparing the
necessary documents for the creation of a tax increment
district and developers agreement for the Bergquist Project.
2. Do not proceed with the development of a tax increment
district and a developers agreement for the Bergquist Project
at this time.
3. Table action pending further information from staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REODESTED•
Move to direct the appropriate City officials to begin preparing
the necessary documents for the creation of a tax increment
district for the Bergguist Project and the drafting of a developers
agreement.
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 1, 1989
Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl.
Clay, Zak, Scott and Wampach present. Also present were Dennis
Kraft, City Administrator; David Hutton, City Engineer; Barry
Stock, Administrative Assistant; Julius A. Coller II, City
Attorney; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Cncl. Vierling was
absent.
Wampach/Clay moved to recess for a Housing and Redevelopment
Authority meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Clay moved to reconvene at 7:17 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Liaison reports were given by councilmembers.
Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who
wished to address anything not on the agenda.
John Leroux addressed the council on the issue of the bicycle and
hiking trail along the upper valley drainageway and its proposed
crossing on County Road 17. He said it was originally proposed
to cross through a tunnel under County Road 17 and now he has
heard that it has been changed to a crossing on County Road 17 of
which the speed limit is 55 mph. He feels it would be
endangering our children to have a crossing on C.R. 17. He would
like to see a change order given to have it put into a tunnel.
Dennis Kraft reviewed the process that has to be followed and he
said the City must receive a permit from the County and the
County refused to grant the permit unless the County was absolved
of any legal responsibility of any one being injured going under
the road.
Consensus of the council was that a underground tunnel would be
the safest and best possible route.
Wampach/Zak moved to direct the City Administrator to contact
Sergeant Evenrude, member of the Minneapolis Park Police
Department to see how they handle the legalities of underground
pedestrian tunnels and come back to the council by the next
meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Wampach moved to approve the consent business. Motion
carried unanimously.
Clay/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of July 11, 1989.
(Motion approved under consent business) .
Clay/Wampach moved to acknowledge receipt of the letter dated
July 14, 1989 from Joseph F. Ries, County Administrator, to Mr.
Dennis R. Carson, CPA, Olsen, Thielen and Co. LTD, asking the
extension of conditions of their May 30, 1989 proposal on
City Council Proceedings
August 1, 1989 Page -2-
property tax situations to September 1, 1989. (Motion approved
under consent business) .
Clay/Wampach moved to acknowledge receipt of the letter dated
July 17, 1989 from Governor Perpich regarding the State
Legislature's transportation funding bill. (Motion carried under
consent business) .
Wampach/Zak moved to continue the public hearing on proposed
assessments for the Downtown Streetscape Phase I, Parts 1 and 2 ,
Project No. 1987-2. Motion carried unanimously.
David Hutton reviewed the adjustments to certain specific
assessments that were brought up at the last meeting. The
Sawvell property located on the south side of 1st Avenue between
Sommerville and Spencer Streets will lose access to 1st Avenue
when the minibypass goes through and because of this should be
excluded from the assessments. The Gilles property which also
includes all the railroad property which extends all the way to
Scott Street should be excluded except for using the same depth
of the lot as exists for the properties north and south of hers.
He said the City's cost would be $5,000 to absorb the cost of
assessments for these properties. Cncl. Scott said he feels the
City should pick up the cost of these exclusions and does not
feel the assessments should be spread against other properties.
Scott/Wampach moved to close the public hearing on proposed
assessments for the downtown streetscape project. Motion carried
unanimously.
Scott/Clay moved that the City pick up assessments against
properties at the East and West ends of the assessment area
because of the change of boundaries for the downtown streetscape
project, from the tax increment funds.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Scott and Zak
Abstain: Cncl. Wampach and Mayor Lebens
Motion carried.
Clay/Scott moved to open the public hearing on proposed
assessments for 11th Avenue Street and Storm Sewer Construction,
Project 1988-5. Motion carried unanimously.
David Hutton reviewed the 11th Avenue project assessment
calculations for the 11th Avenue project which was completed this
spring. He said the total project cost was $85,653.92. He said
Gold Nugget Development is being assessed for the majority of
this project. The Mayor said she felt that the property owners
to the North are being penalized for a road that was put in for
Gold Nugget Development Inc.
City Council Proceedings
August 1, 1989 Page -3-
Diane Henning, representing Harry Lane who lives at 1067 S. Main
St. , said Gold Nugget Development does not pay out of there own
pockets they put the cost on to the houses they sell. She does
not feel the people on 11th Avenue should have to pay for the
street for someone elses development. She is appealing the
assessment for her father Harry Lane. She submitted a letter
indicating intent to appeal assessments.
Clay/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3092, A Resolution Adopting
Assessments for 11th Avenue Street and Storm Sewer Construction,
Project No. 1988-5, and moved for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Scott moved for a 10 minute break. Motion carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Clay moved to reconvene at 8:50 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Clay moved to open the public hearing on proposed
improvements to Boiling Springs Lane by Drainage Facilities,
Project 1989-9. Motion carried unanimously.
David Hutton reviewed the drainage problem in the area of Boiling
Springs Lane. He said a feasibility report has been prepared.
Boiling Springs Lane is not platted. originally it was a gravel
road and was paved in 1983, but the drainage system was not
included at that time. He said the proposal is to construct a
swale 2 to 3 feet deep and 1000 feet long. The cost estimate is
approximately $13,000, plus administrative costs and easement
acquisition cost. He said it would not eliminate all the water
but would substantially reduce the amount of standing water after
a rainfall. Cost is estimated at about $471.00 per lot for the
people who would directly benefit from this project. Mayor
Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to
address this issue.
Donald Cowan, said the water table in that area is low and the
rains will raise the water table naturally, so he did not feel
that a drainage system would help that much.
Bruce Kupfer, said he would be for the project as long as the
cost was around $500.00.
Cncl. Clay asked about obtaining a permit from the DNR since it
would have to drain into Eagle Creek. The city Engineer said he
does not know what the DNR would require the City to do at this
time.
City Council Proceedings
August 1, 1989 Page -4-
Mrs. King said the water table is very high and that maybe her
neighbors should not have built where they did because they were
warned that it was a problem. She does not feel she should have
to pay.
Ronald Paschke, said he is for the project but wanted to know why
some lots were not included in the assessments.
Julie Luman, said he feels this would not be a benefit to them
because their house is away from the low drainage area in the
back.
Ronald Johnson, said he believes the City is partly responsible
for issuing a building permit for Mr. Otterblad and said he put
his own money into his drainage problem and feels the other
residents should too.
Wampach/Clay moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Zak/Scott moved to determine that the project is not in the best
interest of the City and deny Resolution No. 3090, A Resolution
Ordering an improvement and the Preparation of Plans and
Specifications for Drainage Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane,
Project No. 1089-9. Motion carried unanimously.
Scott/Clay moved to open the public hearing on proposed
assessments for Vierling Drive from CR-17 Easterly plus or minus
3200 feet, Project 1988-1. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Engineer reviewed the background of the project. He
said the eastern half of this street was built in 1987-88. The
west half was just completed this spring. He said $405,357.09
would be the total assessment for Scottland properties. The City
would be assessed around $120,000. The City Engineer read a
letter from Brooks Hauser regarding their objection to the
special assessment on this project.
Jon Albinson, 1244 Canterbury Road, said that Scottland has not
done enough research to determine whether they will appeal the
assessment or not, but want to keep their options open.
Scott/Zak moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Scott offered Resolution No. 3091, a Resolution Adopting
Assessments on Vierling Drive from County Road 17 Easterly for
plus or minus 3200 feet, Project No. 1988-1 and moved for its
adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Zak, Scott and Mayor Lebens
Noes: Cncl. Clay Motion carried.
City Council Proceedings
August 1, 1989 Page -5-
Clay/Wampach moved to approve the sale and transfer of the
Shakopee Franchise Ordinance and cable System from Zylstra/United
Cable Television to AMZAK Cable, Midwest Inc. (Motion approved
under consent business) .
Barry stock reviewed the refuse disposal Ordinance amendments. He
said the current ordinance provides for open refuse collection,
allowing homeowners to go with whomever they want. He is
recommending that we go to a closed refuse collection program
because it does the most for health, safety and welfare of the
residents. It makes it easier for staff to monitor any complaints
and also cuts down on the amount of garbage trucks on our City
streets. He said collection would be provided to all residential
units up to and including four plexes within the City's refuse
collection service area which is defined as all areas north of
the proposed southerly bypass and located within the City's
limits. Industrial and commercial units will not be in the
City's contract. Residents will be allowed to continue with their
current refuse hauler until the City advertises for bids for a
new contract.
Clay/Scott moved to direct the City Attorney to draft the
appropriate ordinance amending the refuse collection of the City
Code providing for a closed refuse collection system. Motion
carried unanimously.
The City Engineer reviewed the assessment policy alternatives for
improvements in Killarney Hills. He said the assessment policy
does not need to be set at this time, it can wait until the
project is completed. The consensus was that gravel road would be
assessed at 1008.
Roger Sames, 1459 Sharon Parkway, said he bought his property 18
years ago and said there has been numerous repairs on the road
and has a question as to whether this should be considered a new
road a just maintenance of the road.
Paul Schmitz, 1401 Tyrone Drive said he is satisfied with 50/50
assessment policy and asked what design it would be, curb or open
ditch. He said he does not want an open ditch because it would
flood his basement. The City Engineer said that will be decided
at a later time but that his concerns would be taken into account
and he is recommending a curb.
Scott/Zak moved to go with a 50/50 assessment policy on every
road in Killarney Hills except the gravel portions which would be
assessed at 1008.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Scott moved for a 5 minute recess at 9:50 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
City Council Proceedings
August 1, 1989 Page -6-
Clay/Scott moved to reconvene at 10:00 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3097, A Resolution Relating
to Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (Shakopee Shops
Shopping Center Project) ; Calling for a Public Hearing on the
Issuance thereof, and moved for its adoption. (Motion approved
under consent business) .
Discussion ensued on the request from the Police Civil Service
Commission for Financial Assistance to Hire a Police Chief. They
are asking for a consultant at a cost of $5,000. It was the
consensus of the Council to set the pay scale for a new police
chief at around $47,000 and a consultant fee of $2,500.
Scott/Wampach moved to approve $2,500 for the Police Civil
Service Commission to help fund the cost of a consultant
providing services in the selection of a new Police Chief.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Wampach moved to direct the appropriate City officials to
execute the amendment to the Home Energy Check-up Program
Agreement by and between the City of Shakopee and Minnegasco.
(Motion approved under consent business) .
The City Engineer reviewed the possible closing of the alley
behind City Hall. Due to the speed of vehicles, unsafe
conditions and the amount of traffic in the alley, it has become
a problem to pedestrians and also is adding problems on Holmes
Street just south of the bridge. The Chief of Police is in favor
of the closing as is the Public Works Superintendent. There were
two business owners that did have a problem with the closing.
The City Engineer said signing is an option and also the building
of a driveway which would allow trucks to enter and exit the
parking lot. Mayor Lebens said she is opposed to closing any
alley. Cncl. Zak said he is opposed to hampering anyones
business.
Mark from Parkside Printing spoke up and said that maybe a cross-
walk would be the best answer and would like the City to at least
try it. He has delivery semi's that come to the back and need
the alley to back up.
Glenn Maddox, antique dealer, said he feels the real problems are
the law breakers who are driving the cars, the alley is not the
problem. He said by closing off the alley they will be put out
of business because that is where their customers park. He said
85% - 90% of their customers are from out of town and they need
quick and easy access to his store.
City Council Proceedings
August 1, 1989 Page -7-
Zak/Clay moved to direct staff to find a solution to the traffic
problem in the alley behind City Hall which does not include
closing the alley in collaboration with the City Engineer and
Police Department.
Zak/Clay moved to amend the motion by adding that staff provide a
cost estimate to have the Police Department do some policing of
the alley. Motion carried with Cncl. Wampach and Scott opposed.
Roll Call On main motion as amended.
Ayes: Cncl. Zak, Clay and Mayor Lebens
Noes: Cncl. Wampach and Scott
Motion carried.
Clay/Wampach moved to authorize the public Works Dept. to
purchase a Raygo 350 road maintainer from Boyum Equipment Co. for
$5,650.00 and to authorize up to $2,000 from the Capital
Equipment Fund for any needed repairs by the City Mechanic.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Zak, Scott, Wampach and Clay
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Clay/Scott moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$167,114.30.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Wampach moved to approve the application and grant an on
sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Stonebrooke of
Shakopee, Inc. 2693 County Road 79. (Motion approved under
consent business) .
Clay/Wampach moved to approve the application and grant an on
sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Kenneth D. Berg, 222
East First Avenue, from August 2, 1989 to June 30, 1990. (Motion
approved under consent business) .
Clay/Scott offered Resolution No. 3098, A Resolution Amending the
City's Policy for City Vehicles, and moved for its adoption.
Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Scott moved to authorize the Mayor to execute the letter of
employment dated August 1, 1989 to Dennis R. Kraft. Motion
carried unanimously.
Clay/Scott moved to direct the appropriate City officials to
execute a Supplemental Agreement with Barton-Aschman to provide
additional design services associated with the Shakopee Bypass.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3094, A Resolution Amending
Resolution No. 3987 Adopting the 1989 fee schedule providing for
the collection of an application fee for commercial/industrial/
City Council Proceedings
August 1, 1989 Page -8-
mortgage revenue bonds and the payment of legal expenses as
billed and establishing a new fee for processing
commercial/industrial/mortgage bond refinancing requests and
moved for its adoption. (Motion approved under consent business) .
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3096, A Resolution Amending
Resolution 2989 Adopting the 1989 Budget and moved for its
adoption. (Motion approved under consent business) .
Clay/Wampach moved to discontinue the policy of the City paying
the portion of the cost of department physicals not covered by
insurance and offer Resolution No. 3093 a Resolution Repealing
Resolution No. 1351, and moved its adoption. (Motion approved
under consent business) .
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3095, A Resolution Amending
the City of Shakopee Personnel Policy as adopted by Resolution
No. 1571, and moved its adoption. (Motion approved under consent
business) .
Wampach/Zak offered Ordinance No. 269, 4th Series, an Ordinance
of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee Code
Chapter 6 Entitled "Other business Regulations and Licensing" by
Repealing Subd. 2 of Sec. 6.44 and by Enacting a New Subd. 2,
Sec. 6.44 and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter
1 and Sec. 6.99, Which Among Other Things Contain Penalty
Provisions, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried
unanimously.
Scott/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3099, A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of Shakopee Approving the Acquisition of
that Portion of the Electric Service Area of Minnesota Valley
Electric Cooperative Located within the City of Shakopee, and
moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Scott moved to adjourn to Tuesday, August 15, 1989 at 7: 00
P.M. . Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11: 05
P.M.
1th S. Cox
i y Clerk
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
7
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MN AUGUST 15, 1989
Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. with Cncl.
Vierling, Clay, Wampach and Zak present. Also present were
Dennis Kraft, City Administrator; Douglas Wise, City Planner;
Greg Voxland, Financial Director; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk.
Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney arrived at 8:00 p.m. Cncl.
Scott was absent.
Mayor Lebens read the City's Non-Discrimination Policy.
Liaison reports were given by councilmembers.
Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who
wished to address anything not on the agenda. There was no
response.
Clay/Wampach moved to approve the consent business with an
amendment to Resolution 3071 showing that deferred assessments
will accrue interest while deferred.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of July 18, 1989.
Motion carried with Mayor Lebens abstaining.
Vierling/Clay moved to approve the minutes of July 21, 1989, as
corrected. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to reconsider the minutes of July 21, 1989.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to accept the minutes of July 21, 1989 as
presented. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved to refer the letter from James Plahn in
regards to contribution to MN. Rural Water Association to SPUC.
Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on the Shakopee Super 8 Partnership application
to MN Dept of Revenue for a reduction in the assessed valuation
of real estate. Dennis Kraft said they essentially reduced their
market value from $1,142,800.00 to $858,000.00 and their tax
capacity from $43, 137.00 to $14,910.00. Cncl. Vierling said she
had a concern as to how this tax could be dropped that much.
Council expressed concern as to how the system is working.
Clay/Zak moved to direct staff to appeal as stipulated in this
letter (from Michael P. Wandermacher, Director, Gov't Services
Division, MN Dept of Revenue) for the purpose of collecting the
data necessary to make the proper decision. Motion carried
unanimously.
City Council Proceedings
August 15, 1989 Page -2-
Wampach/Zak moved to approve the 1990-1995 Capital Improvements
Program as drafted. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to direct the City Attorney to prepare the
appropriate ordinance amending City Code Section 11.30 to allow
animal hospital and veterinary clinics in the B-2 Zoning district
as a conditional use permit. Motion carried unanimously.
The issue of dangerous dogs was discussed and Colette Welch,
Prior Lake addressed the council on the issue saying that she has
worked very closely with the State legislature the past 2 years
regarding the dangerous dog issue. She said she had talked with
Cncl. Scott on the issue of pit bulls owned by his neighbor. She
said there cannot be an ordinance made against a particular breed
of dog.
Clay/Wampach moved to table the proposed ordinance on dangerous
animals until September 5, 1989, for further review. Motion
carried unanimously.
Dennis Kraft reviewed the proposed agreement between the Cities
of Shakopee and Prior Lake regarding improvements to McKenna
Road. The Mdewakanton Sioux Indian Community is proposing to
pave McKenna Road from County Road 42 north to the Shakopee City
Limits at no expense to Shakopee or Prior Lake.
Vierling/Wampach moved to authorize the appropriate City
officials to execute an agreement between the City of Prior Lake,
the Mdewakanton Sioux Indian Community and the City of Shakopee
regarding the paving of McKenna Road, a portion of which is
located within the Shakopee City Limits. Motion . carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to direct the appropriate City official to
execute a revised contract extension agreement with Orr-Schelen-
Mayeron and Associates, Inc. of Minneapolis, MN to perform design
services associated with Killarney Hills Project for a "not-to-
exceed" figure of $15,000, per the revised Scope of Services
which consists of an urban street design only.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Dennis Kraft reviewed the request made by Cncl. Scott regarding
paving an extension of the Lion's Park parking lot. He said with
the construction of the Scout Building it has created a need for
a bigger parking lot in Lions Park. The City Engineer has come
up with an estimated figure of $2,500 for additional parking in
front of the scout building. This would include pavement, gravel
base and curb and gutter. Cncl. Clay said he feels there is a
need for expansion of the parking lot but does not feel certain
that is the best way to expand it and would like to see staff
City Council Proceedings
August 15, 1989 Page -3-
investigate other possible options for expansion of the parking
lot. Consensus of the Council was that the parking lot does need
to be expanded but would like to see other alternatives for the
same dollar amount.
Vierling/Clay moved to table discussion on extension of the
parking lot at Lion's Park until September 5, 1989. Motion
carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on the request by Cncl. Wampach to install a
bench near Beren's Supermarket due to the number of senior
citizens waiting for a ride outside the market. It was the
consensus of the council to have staff look into the possibility
of moving one of the existing benches from somewhere else.
Clay/Vierling moved to direct the appropriate City staff to
install the additional signing, crosswalks and speed bumps as
discussed in the memo from David Hutton, City Engineer, dated
August 9, 1989, to improve the overall safety of the alley behind
City Hall and to direct the Shakopee Police to periodically
patrol this area for vehicles violating the speed limit and to
paint the speed bumps, not enlarge them. (DOC # CC-172) Motion
carried unanimously.
Dennis Kraft said that the County is agreeable to issue the
permit to allow the City to construct the County Road 17
underpass without signing a hold harmless agreement with the
following conditions:
1. City agrees to secure illumination of the area.
2. Signage must be posted associated with the use of the trail.
3. The City must provide continued maintenance.
4. City regularly patrols the area.
5. Other precautionary measures as deemed necessary be
utilized.
Zak/Vierling moved to authorize appropriate staff to change plans
to allow construction of a pedestrian underpass on County Road
17. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Wampach moved to approve the application and grant a
temporary on-sale 3.2 beer license to St. Mary's Catholic Church,
535 Lewis Street, for August 27, 1989. (Motion approved under
consent business) .
Clay/Wampach moved to remove from the table the application for
an on-sale, Off-sale, and Sunday Liquor License for Corp-Tool,
Inc. (Motion approved under consent business) .
Clay/Wampach moved to table the application for an On-Sale, Off-
Sale, and Sunday Liquor Licenses for Corp-Tool, Inc. (Motion
approved under consent business) .
City Council Proceedings
August 15, 1989 Page -4-
Clay/Wampach moved to approve the request of Dale Dahlke to
construct public improvements for Diamond Court according to
plans approved by the City Engineer. (Motion approved under
consent business) .
Clay/Zak moved for a 10 minute break. Motion carried
unanimously.
Zak/Vierling moved to reconvene at 8:10 P.M. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$318,982.36.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Zak/Vierling moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
execute the contract for private development by and between the
City of Shakopee and MEBCO Industries, Inc.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Clay, Wampach and Zak
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Zak/vierling moved to authorize appropriate City officials to
execute the First Amendment to the Contract for Private
Development with MEBCO Industries, Inc. Motion carried with
Mayor Lebens opposed.
Clay/Wampach moved to authorize proper city officials to enter
into a public sector work site agreement with the County of Scott
for the delivery of employment and training services through the
Senior Community Services Employment Program. (Motion approved
under consent business) .
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3071, A Resolution Adopting
Assessments Downtown Streetscape Phase I, Parts 1 and 2, Project
No. 1987-2, and moved its adoption. (Motion approved under
consent business) .
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3100, A Resolution Accepting
bid on the 1989 Pavement Preservation - Sealcoat Project No.
1989-10 and moved for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Zak moved to approve the 10% contingency requested by staff
for use by the Contract Administrator in authorizing change
orders on the 1989 Pavement Preservation - Sealcoat Project.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
City Council Proceedings
August 15, 1989 Page -5-
Wampach/Vierling moved to table action on award of Lions Park
Pond, Project No. 1989-11. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3102, A Resolution Approving
Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for
Market Street from 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue (Project No. 1988-
6) ; Alley in Block 81 (Project No. 1989-1) ; Alley in Block 55
(Project No. 1988-7) ; Alley in block 102 (Project No. 1989-8) ;
Alley in Block 7 (Project No. 1989-3) ; and Hereby Combining all
of the above projects into one project number, namely project No.
1988-6 and moved for its adoption. (Motion approved under consent
business) .
Clay/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3103, A Resolution Receiving
a Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvements to Bluff Avenue
Between Marschall Road and Prairie Street, Naumkeg Street Between
1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue and Prairie Street between let Avenue
and Bluff Avenue, Project No. 1989-12 and moved for its adoption.
(Motion approved under consent business) .
Wampach/Vierling offered Ordinance No. 270, An Ordinance of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending Chapter 7 Entitled "Street
and Sidewalks Generally" By Enacting a New Section 7.16 Entitled
"Sidewalk Inspection, Repair, and Replacement Policy" And By
Adopting By Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section
7.99 Which Among Other Things Contain Penalty Provisions, and
moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Zak, Wampach and Mayor Lebens
Noes: Cncl. Clay Motion carried.
Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 271, An Ordinance. of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter
5 Entitled "Liquor, Beer and Wine Licensing" by Repealing Section
5.02, Subd. 4 (B) and by Enacting a New Section 5.02 Subd 4 (B)
and by adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and
Section 5.99, which among other Things contain Penalty Provisions
and moved for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Zak and Mayor Lebens
Noes: Cncl. Wampach Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach offered Ordinance No. 272, An Ordinance of the
City of Shakopee, Amending Shakopee Code by Specifically
Repealing Section 12.12 of Chapter 12 entitled "Environmental
Protection" and by Specifically Repealing the following Portions
of Chapter it entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning) " Repealing
subd 13 Sec. 11.03; all of Section 11.60 and A and B of subd 10
of Section 11.35, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Clay moved to reconsider Resolution No. 3081. Motion
carried unanimously.
City Council Proceedings
August 15, 1989 Page -6-
Vierling/Zak moved to amend Resolution No. 3081 by changing the
General Fund levy from $1,848,639 to $1,916,647; total General
Fund from $1,867,938 to $1,935,946; and total levy from
$1,867,938 to $1,935,946.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Wampach, Zak and Vierling
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Vierling/Clay moved to approve Resolution No. 3081 as amended.
Motion carried with Mayor Lebens opposed.
Vierling/Zak moved to have the conduits on Sommerville extended
across third Avenue and out to the side of the street away from
the blacktop as recommended by Lou Van Hout, conditional upon
this being in compliance with the last discussion and agreement
between the City and Shakopee Public Utilities.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Zak and Wampach
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Discussion ensued by Council on the hiring of two individuals for
the vacancies in the Police Department. Cncl. Vierling suggested
that Raymond Erlandsen be hired at a Step 2 for a period of 6
months and upon a successful review after 6 months then jump him
up to a Step 4. Cncl. Zak said he feels with the background this
man has behind him that the City should hire him at Step 4 and
not downgrade his pay.
Clay/Wampach moved to authorize the hiring of Raymond A.
Erlandsen at the Step 2 pay level for a period of 6 months and
upon sufficient passage of a 6 month review jump him up to Step 4
and authorize the hiring of Thomas C. Crocker at the starting
salary rate of $2, 114.54 to fill police officer vacancies,
contingent upon their passing a physical examination, a
psychological evaluation and meeting background investigation
standards.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Wampach and Mayor
Lebens
Noes: Cncl. Zak Motion carried.
Vierling/Clay moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjournedatt/8:45 p.m.
(-2:ddith�S.�Cox
C,itp Clerk
J
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
wa-,
National 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW omoen
L� League Washington, D.C. v..an,
Of 20004 TMy DnmMtl
Cities (202)6263000 Mayon Pneend.Aman
Fax: (202)6263043 111.1 eReamer,
eW Goal
Mav,FI.WMM1 T
seornrl1r.'rearyard
w ss 50 rel J.RMXnkmy
M=w N Carol LgaZana
B !� I C e✓as P MIOMx
August 10, 1989 Y c— 'Plenrmll'am.MMna
E,¢nD�rmra
a.n Baiha ys
The Honorable Dolores Lebens
Mayor, City of Shakopee
129 E. First Ave.
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mayor Lebens:
NLC's Board of Directors has adopted a cost-of-living adjustment
in member dues for next year, and I wanted to advise you of this
change now since it will affect your next membership dues
billing. We value your NLC membership and your continued
participation.
NLC membership dues will increase four percent effective January
1, 1990. This reflects the decision of NLC's Board to change
over to a system of modest annual dues adjustments to reflect
cost of living increases as measured by the Consumer Price Index
(CPI) . It replaces our old system of periodic substantial
increases (15 to 25 percent) every four or five years to
compensate for cost increases.
NLC's Board believes that small regular increases are more easily
handled in the budgets of member local governments than
occasional larger increases. As you are aware, the CPI -- which
has increased approximately four percent annually for the past
decade -- measures the costs that individuals and organizations
pay for goods and services.
Under the new dues schedule, your local government's membership
dues next year will be $665.00 payable on your membership
anniversary date of November 1, 1990, through October 31, 1990.
A card with the complete dues schedule for 1990 is enclosed.
I am also taking this opportunity to send you our updated, brief
alstockholder'sh report on NLC activities, accomplishments, and
plans. We are committed to continuing an aggressive program of
advocating the interests of cities, towns, and other member local
governments in the nation's capital and providing a broad range
of services to the membership.
all ReaorvevnLL'TomarvtllGMga',IMP/y Mayor St Pal unu•Menry G.Jarrell
amelMIm9, alh.FeML,XvmaM,Reynolds, tlNttN.NwM LBtt4ne•W1111em X.Nu4nu1, R
MBYP.IMIaM synarra•GeorgvlMlmv4Mryw,,Manor Geode,
p.Jv»IV Yaleltivy,Mayne,NewFplyorC Vlrginm•Camy ReyMee.LWMywMWnalivge.et.,"fCollege,Lyl J...00nR
MW Gan hall CalholaCearyn COvtleearep ourv[eeaMe,AtarollCarl alVA A,800Mayayor Gland HaPeO.OHMbe:Gery<Menm,Jr,ra NoneM1ms•JBne Babe
MW
MOIarela,Car henem Carolyn Lanaorna- Lo ad-StepenT.0 Geagu•Marioneyn Soon.Mayor Gmntich-1.Morgan.John E.eW sonre,.ants. NMeDlarle9onl
soude
Cvtllnb IMrga' 1 CarpanleGMaya,llvinlon,Ldasb�ebpOML Gvevnq OepRyMryoG Mantl�eyer,LonnatleuL Xel Conklin.Mayo PN TOm.$0nla Barbra,CalllOrnn.eaulen
COugXMMCOumilm .R InOiane(rell. 'unimemMnS.MgdOsLM1Yya-FrecrtFMneylaeme•EE Eilen,Mayne.Ovenan0 POrk.Renaee•EOveN C.Far/011,Exemtive OireclGlnda
1.Hood.enaz alMryas�ROpaXd`yG-J. ...Jd0—.LOS1.rahP aeanb•Retl Guene,Mio,Ex en,ut,,Sa,Mto, , guea•ln Mu Xell,Ja,Loumlm LIOe q,C,t Sommissenev
E.XOotl,Maya RnT.IXIanW.Flatle.JOaaJeCYfon,Mryoc Mur4¢¢BS'e,iMree890.Pelvrl(Irp,Exsuliae OIllKea ky-nnaiamA. alltles Exmu0.LXY0ery.0k Lommu,wda
PallenO Day d M Or, MOrman,CEnCufneds.Da, dE.RnMunicipal League.Me11m MMh Carol Leag LouisvilleRm6cey.William i. engage,Cornornal Yuea AndaMunbpy
begue.0evltl 0.pn,PlOermerL CRa'ryo.Afra5.0eWtl E.R¢y noe;Eaeculrve 01ra¢b.NaN Ca Mine LeMue OI Mumupalixies.John M.ROpngue;CmaJMen.Yuma.Anxona.Perry
ROpuem*M,E,vt4 D'u AlaMrtJL06 Ol Murv "ItiM-JOmav$nelOel,Cam.YPRaem1.St Paul MnneMIs.FIo/en.Fvpbq MaprPreghP PGru,1.DPJo/e;Si0ongv.
Cwnnlmemcer.5eextle,Waenirgvn•E.6.TurneG C¢uriolmOn,LumOenm,lbxn Cudm
August 10, 1989
Page Two
If you have any questions about the new dues schedule, please
give me a call.
Sincerely yours,
Alan Beals
Executive Director
Enclosures
4�..
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
Mail Station 3340
St. Paul, MN 55146-3340 RECEIVED
(612) 296-0185
AUG-' 31989
August 21, 1989 CfTy OF SHAKOPEf;
Mr.Thomas Hennen Mr. Don Martin
Scott County Auditor Scott County Assessor
Scott County Courthouse Scott County Courthouse
428 S. Holmes St. 428 S. Holmes Street
Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379
Ms.Judith Cox Clerk
Shakopee City Clerk School District #720
Shakopee City Hall 505 S. Holmes
129 E. 1st.Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE:
Eagle Creek Plaza Ptnshp.
City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota
Application #340978
Parcel #27120 0010
The above application has been filed with the Commissioner of Revenue for reduction in the
assessed valuation of certain real estate.
The application states that a reduction in the assessed valuation of the above-described
property is warranted,because:
Based upon actual incomelexpenses a reduction in the assessed valuation is justifmble.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Application#340978
August 21, 1989
Page Two
For taxes assessed in 1988 and payable in 1989.
ORIGINAL VALUES CORRECTED VALUES
MARKET VALUE TAX CAPACITY MARKET VALUE TAX CAPACITY
$734,000.00 $36,585.00 $500,000.00 $24,300.00
Minnesota Statutes,Section 270.19,provides that where the reduction in assessed valuation
of any property exceeds $100,000.00 and/or the reduction in tax capacity value exceeds
$12,200.00 the city, town, school district, and county in which the property is located may
request a hearing to object to the reduction. If your political subdivision desires to have a
hearing on this application,please send your request to me within 20 days.
If I receive no request for a hearing within 20 days from any of the political subdivisions
affected by the reduction,the application will be considered by the Commissioner of Revenue
on its merits.
You may phone me at(612)296-0185 if you wish further information. You may also contact
the local assessor or county assessor if you have any questions relating to/he reason for the
proposed reduction.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL P.WANDMACHER,Director
Local Government Services Division
MPW:smcl4
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR U C
SCOTT COUNTY COURTHOUSE 110
SHAKOPEE, MN.55379-1382 (612)937-6100
JOSEPH F.RIES
Administrator
CLIFFORD G.McCANN
Deputy Administrator
BARBARA NESS
Executive Asst.
TO: Joint Administrators
SUBJECT: Draft of Scott County 1990-94 Capital Improvement Plan
DATE: August 7, 1989
In keeping with the spirit of the County's policy to advise its
municipalities on short and long range financial planning, I am enclosing
a copy of the proposed 1990-94 CIP approved by the Committee of the Whole
on July 18, 1989.
This document will be scheduled for public hearing and ultimately
adoption by the County Board in the later months of the year when you will
be advised of the specific dates. Kindly take the time to review this
with your City Council members and return your comments to my personal
attention at your earliest convenience. Thank you.
rgards,
J les
County Administrator
c: County Commissioners
Clifford G. McCann, Deputy County Administrator
Eileen Moran, H.S. Director
Brad Larson, Highway Engineer
Jim Berg, Controller
Sheriff Bill Nevin
Jim Rendack, Management Analyst
O /a/5' G & An Equal Opportunity Employer
SPRINGSTED
„ PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS
85 East Seventh Place,Suite 100
Saint Paul.Minnesota 55101 2143
612 22330110
Fax 612 223 3002
August 3, 1989
Mr. Cliff McCann, Deputy County Administrator
Scott County Court House
Shakopee, MN 55379-1398
Dear Mr. McCann:
Enclosed is a draft of the Scott County 1990 - 1994 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for
reproduction and distribution to County Board members and staff. Springsted Incorporated
will provide bound copies of the final document.
The 1990 - 1994 Capital Improvement Plan includes watershed districts as a fourth major
area of financing. If the County would like to include an expenditure detail section on
financing for the watershed districts please provide us with the documentation which we will
incorporate into the report.
Dave MacGillivray will be on vacation through August 11 th. Please do not hesitate to call if I
can be of assistance prior to Dave's return. My number is 223-3065.
Sincerely,
Brenda Krueger
Financial Analyst
mjt
Enclosure
cc: David MacGillivray
Indiana Office: Wisconsin Office'.
251 Nonh Illinois Street.Suite 1510 500 Elm Grove Road,Suite 101
Indianapolis,Indiana 462041942 Elm Grove.Wisconsin 53122 W37
3172373636 414 782.8222
Fax 3172373639 Fax 414782@904
RAFT
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
1990-1994 Capital Improvement Plan
Prepared By:
Mr. Joseph F. Ries, County Administrator
and
Springsted Incorporated
TABLE OF CONTENTSar
min
Ulaa � �
Page(s)
1. Purpose and Financing Objectives.............................................................................. 1-2
2. Revenue Sources
A. 1988 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds......................... 2
B. Other Revenue Sources................................................................................... 3-4
3. Expenditure Summary - Expenditures by Activity....................................................... 4-5
4, Scott County Direct and Overlapping Debt................................................................ 5-6
5. Plan Summary and Tax Capacity Rate Estimate........................................................ 6-9
Expenditure Detail
Criminal Justice Center..................................................................................... Exhibit I
Solid Waste Facility........................................................................................... Exhibit II
RoadImprovements.......................................................................................... Exhibit III
Road and Bridge Project Details.................................................................................. Exhibit IV
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA �,y
1990.1994 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
1. Purpose and Financing Objectives
The Scott County Board of Commissioners has established the objective of
coordinating the funding of major capital improvements. It is the intent of the County in
order to responsibly manage its capital assets to provide for a program of replacement
and upgrading of these assets, It is also the intent of the County to reduce its reliance
on the general property tax over the long-term by first coordinating the timing and
magnitude of capital improvement expenditures, and secondly, by decreasing major
maintenance costs caused by an inadequate capital replacement program. This capital
improvement program was developed and evaluated to accomplish these objectives.
A capital improvement is defined for the purposes of this plan to be a County roadway
construction project or a major building facility. One notable project not included in this
program is the construction of the new Bloomington.,Ferry Bridge. This project was
excluded because of the high uncertainty of the County share of the project cost.
The County has adopted a rigorous program for a meaningful, long-term reduction in
the reliance on the general property tax to fund both operations and capital
improvements. In 1988 the County commissioned Springsted Incorporated, the
County's financial advisor, to study the reasons for the County's relatively high general
property tax rate as compared to other Metropolitan Area counties. One of the major
findings of that study was the County had spent down its cash reserve balances to an
abnormally low level as compared to other counties studied. Those counties with
higher reserve levels were able to invest those reserves thereby generating interest
income to fund operations and reduce their reliance on the general property tax. Scott
County with its lower reserve levels was forced to fund a greater share of its
expenditures with general property taxes. A primary recommendation of the study was
to rebuild the County's reserve balances.
Following the study the County adopted the "6-10-6" program. The "6-10-6" program
provides for a 6% growth in operations, a 10%growth in the property tax levy, and a 6%
growth in assessed value (tax capacity). The County projects that with the "6-10-6"
- 1 -
® AFS'
program the cash reserve balances will be at an adequate level by the early-to-mid
1990's.
This capital improvement program has been developed in conformance with the
"6-10-6" program. The property tax levies required to fund both debt service and direct
cash outlays are within the guidelines of the "6-10-6" program.
2. Revenue Sources
a. 1988 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds
Under Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 373.40 the County obtained approval of
its five-year Capital Improvement Plan from the Minnesota Department of Trade
and Economic Development in the fall of 1988, thus giving the County the
authority to levy general property taxes and issue general obligation bonds for
the acquisition and construction of capital assets. The authority to levy such a
tax terminates in 1993, unless obligations exist which relate to capital
improvement financing, such as debt service beyond 1993. In the case of such
obligations, the County may continue to levy this tax to meet the scheduled debt
service until the obligation is fully funded.
On October 25, 1988 the County sold $8,370,000 General Obligation Capital
Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 1989A under the authority noted above. As
stipulated by the Scott County Board, the proceeds of the Capital Improvement
Plan Bonds will be used over the next several years soley for the purpose of
providing needed improvements to the County highway system. The
reconciliation and use of the Capital Improvement Plan Bonds proceeds is
shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1. Reconciliation of 1988 General Obligation
Capital Improvement Plan Bonds and Use of Proceeds
Gross Issue Size $ 8,370,000
Less: Bond Discount (150,660)
Less: Issuance (Estimate) (44,3401
Net Proceeds for Construction $ 8,175,000
Less: 1989 Road Program (1,826,300)
Less: 1990 Road Program (2,825,000)
Less: 1991 Road Program (2,800,000)
Less: 1992 Road Program (723.7001
Net Balance after 1992 Road Program $_0-
-2 -
UMF]
b. Other Revenue Sources
In this section, a differentiation is made between financing techniques and
sources of payment. Projects contained in the CIP are anticipated to be
financed by one or more of three techniques: Bond issuance, lease-purchase
contracts, and pay-as-you-go (cash). The selection of which technique(s) is
appropriate for a given project is based on financial and public policy
considerations. The anticipated financing technique(s) is listed for each project.
Following is a short-summary of the three financing techniques:
- Bond Issuance: The County is authorized to issue bonds If either a) the
financing is passed by referendum; or b) specific statutory provisions
exist allowing financing of particular types of improvements. There are
predominantly two types of bond issues which public entities have the
authority to issue; general obligation and revenue bonds. General
obligation bonds are backed by the full faith and credit and power of the
issuer to levy general property taxes for repayment of the bonds.
Revenue bonds are repaid from operating revenues generated by a
facility for which the bonds are issued. The Scoff County proposed solid
waste facility will rely on the issuance of revenue bonds.
- Lease-Purchase Contracts: The County may directly enter into the lease-
purchase contracts for the use and acquisition of capital assets. Given
an appropriate lease format, such contracts are not considered debt of
the County by the State. Since the lease is not debt, no referendum
approval is required.
- Pay-As-You-Go (Cash): The County has used pay-as-you-go in the past
for many of its capital asset acquisitions. In certain cases cash
purchases are appropriate. For larger asset financings, cash purchases
may have limited attractiveness.
The County has a limited range of revenue sources available for capital
financing. This CIP relies heavily on two sources: general property taxes and
user fees. Which source is most appropriate for a given financing is dependent
-3-
aA
on availability, and the assignment of benefit to particular parties. User fees
prove to be viable funding sources if benefit can be assigned to a particular
group and a practical means of collection is available. General property taxes
are used when a project has a larger benefit base or no practical means of
collection exists of benefits accruing to particular parties. it is the County's
objective to minimize the reliance on the property tax where possible.
In the watershed improvement area the County acts as an agent for the various
local watershed districts. Watershed improvements are usually funded by bond
issuance with the debt service paid entirely by special assessments against
benefifting property owners.
The County also receives other outside funds in the form of State aids and State
and federal grants for the construction of highway improvements and other
specialized capital projects. The County anticipates obtaining a $2,000,000
Solid Waste Capital Assistance Grant through the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency for construction of a solid waste facility.
3. Expenditure Summary
Expenditures by Activity
This CIP covers four major County areas of financing: criminal justice, solid waste,
roads, and watershed districts. In each of these areas the County is anticipating major
capital expenditures over the next five years. In criminal justice and solid waste, the
County will be constructing major new facilities which should be viewed as one-time,
long-term investments. In the case of roads, the improvements are for upgrading
existing roadways as part of an ongoing program to meet increasing levels of use.
The County has determined estimated total project costs in Table 2. These costs have
been totaled by major activity to demonstrate the overall magnitude of the program.
- 4 -
TABLE 2: Overall Expenditures by Activity CRAFT
1989-1993 19961994
Activi Proiect Cost Project Cost
Criminal Justice Facility $15,400,000 $ 1,200,000
Solid Waste Facility Undetermined 10,000,000
Road 5-Year Program 27,600,000 31,820,000
Watershed Districts Undetermined
Total $43,000,000 $43.020.000
It is not possible at this time to estimate the costs of watershed improvements.
4. Scott County Direct and Overlapping Debt
One of the County's financial management objectives is to stabilize its tax capacity rate.
In order to accomplish this objective, the County will increasingly look to financing of
capital assets through long-term obligations rather than pay-as-you go (cash). To
determine the level of overall future tax capacity rates, this CIP addresses the estimated
future debt service of new projects as well as the County's present debt service
obligations. Table 3 profiles the County's present outstanding (direct) debt and Table 4
profiles the County's present overlapping (indirect) debt.
Table 3: Current Direct Debt of Scott County
Last
Date Original Principal as Payment
Issue Issued Principal of 7-2-89 Year
G.O. Capital
Improvement 11/01/88 $8,370,000 $8,370,000 2010
G.O. Drainage* 10/01/86 245,000 215,000 2002
G.O. Refunding
Drainage* 05/01/84 740,000 295,000 1993
G.O. Drainage* 04/01/81 420,000 240,000 1997
G.O. Drainage* 12/01/71 80,000 15.000 1991
Total Outstanding $9,135,000
Watershed district bonds.
-5-
® RAFT
TABLE 4: Current Overlapping (Indirect) Debt of Scott County
Debt Applicable to
G.O. Debt Valuation in County
Taxino Unit(a) As of 7-2-89(b) Percent Amount
Cities:
Belle Plaine $ 2,245,000 100.0% $ 2,245,000
Elko 270,000 100.0 270,000
Jordan 2,400,000 100.0 2,400,000
New Market 490,000 100.0 490,000
New Prague 4,255,000 64.5 2,744,475
Prior Lake 12,230,000 100.0 12,230,000
Savage 12,035,000 100.0 12,035,000
Shakopee 12,610,000 100.0 12,610,000
School Districts:
191 (Burnsville) 11,465,000 10.0 1,146,500
194 (Lakeville) 17,180,000 15.1 2,594,180
271 (Bloomington) 4,650,000 0.2 9,300
393 (LeSueur) 645,000 1.1 7,095
717 (Jordon) 1,130,000 100.0 1,130,000
719 (Prior Lake) 14,590,000 100.0 14,590,000
720 (Shakopee) 3,750,000 100.0 3,750,000
721 (New Prague) 855,000 61.1 522,405
734 (Henderson) 210,000 2.0 4,200
287 (Vo-Tech) 9W'000(c) 0.02 198
917 (Vo-Tech) 1,137,000(c) 3.1 35,247
Met Council 29,830,000(d) 1.9 566,770
Met Transit District 33,610,000 1.2 403.320
Total $69,783.690
(a) Only those taxing units with debt outstanding are shown here.
(b) Excludes general obligation debt supported by revenues and general obligation tax and aid
anticipation certificates of indebtedness, but includes debt supported by tax increments.
(c) This represents only 30% of the tr0-Tech's total debt; since 70 - 85% of the debt service is
paid from State and Federal aids.
(d) Excludes $288,614,000 of general obligation sewer bonds which are supported by system
revenues.
S. Plan Summary and Tax Capacity Rate Estimate
This section brings together the annual financing budgets of all capital improvements
contained herein. Within each activity, the annual expenditures and financing sources
are indicated. Following this listing is an annual summary of the financing techniques
which are anticipated to be used to fund this plan. Concluding this section is a
projection of total future tax capacity rates.
-6-
) \ ) \/77 \ \ ; / \\ § §
§ � °
}\\ }
\
/ � � (\cc 0
00
/ § / ) _] / k
I �
}
* k7® \ / §
}
j
D2
kw ] g7 . \ \ ; § \
// _ j f ® @ § j _
6
| �
\ ° \/ \ \� \ \ \ \/ / \
V - O (
— §
0.2
_ 103 �
§ 2 )� � �
! - ' ` |32 co
a..,, 4; ° -io
) k )\ ) \ { \ ) 0 ) 60 )cc \ cc /
- , -
Estimate of Future Tax Capacity Rates DRAFT Y FT
Beginning with property taxes payable in 1989 (and since the drafting of the County 1989--1.993
CIP), terms such as assessed value and mill rate have been replaced by 'Yax capacity" and "tax
capacity rate." Taxes are now determined by multiplying the gross tax capacity rate, expressed
as a percentage, by gross tax capacity values.
Table 6 lists the estimates of future tax capacity rates. Column 1 is the year in which taxes are
levied. Column 2 is the year in which principal is repaid on the 1988 CIP Bonds and the year
in which County highway improvement costs will be incurred. Column 3 is the 1988 County
tax capacity, which for the purposes of these estimates is assumed to remain constant over the
period of these projections. The principal and interest repayment of the 1988 CIP Bonds is
shown in Column 4, and when divided into the County's 1988 tax capacity in Column 3, gives
the tax capacity rate for debt service on the 1988 CIP Bonds. The expected tax levies for
County highway improvements, which are not funded out of the 1988 CIP Bonds (see Table 5),
are shown in Column 6 and 7. Column 8 is the combined tax capacity rate for the general
obligation Road and Bridge operating and construction levies. Columns 9 and 10 contain the
estimated total future tax levies and tax capacity rates for financing both the 1988 CIP Bonds
and the Road and Bridge operating and construction levies.
-6-
DRAFT
TABLE 6. Debt Service/Levy Schedules and Tax Capacity Rate Impacts
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA Prepared: 08/03/89
1990 - 1994 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM By SPRINGSTED Incorporated
DEBT SERVICE\LEVY SCHEDULES AND TAX CAPACITY RATE IMPACTS
1988 CIP Bonds G.O. Road and Bridge Levy
---------------------- ------------------------------------
1988 Tax Tax Total Tax
Levy Mature County Tax Annual capacity Operating Construction Capacity Total capacity
Year Year Capacity Levy . Rate Levy Levy Rate Levy Rate
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
1989 1990 47,896.813 799,864 1.670% 1,365,000 2.850% 2.164,864 4.520%
1990 1991 47,896.813 803,145 1.677% 1,430,000 2.986% 2.233,145 4.662%
1991 1992 47,896,813 600,192 1.671% 1,400,000 2,201.300 7.519% 4,401,492 9.190%
1992 1993 47,896,813 801.833 1.674% 1.570,000 3.200.400 9.959% 5.571.833 11.633%
1993 1994 47,896,813 802.489 1.675% 1,555.000 3.450.000 10.450% 5.807,489 12.125%
1994 1995 47,896,813 801,904 1.674% 0.000% 801.904 1.674%
1995 1996 47,896,813 800,045 1.670% 0.000% 800.045 1.670%
1996 1997 47,896,813 802.132 1.675% 0.000% 802.132 1.675%
1997 1998 47,896,813 802.534 1.676% 0.000% 802,534 1.676%
1998 1999 47,896.813 801.208 1.673% 0.000% 801,208 1.673%
1999 2000 47,896.813 803,539 1.676% 0.000% 803,539 1.678%
2000 2001 47,896,813 803.707 1.678% 0.000% 803.707 1.678%
2001 2002 47,896.813 801.862 1.874% 0.000% 801.862 1.674%
2002 2003 47,896.813 803,227 1.677% 0.000% 803,227 1.677%
2003 2004 47,896,813 802,156 1.675% 0.000% 802.156 1.675%
2004 2005 47,896,813 803,867 1.678% 0.000% 803,867 1.678%
2005 2006 47.896,813 8D2,704 1.676% 0.000% 802,704 1.676%
2006 2007 47,896,813 798.630 1.667% 0.000% 798,630 1.667%
2007 2008 47,896.813 796.859 1.664% 0.000% 796.859 1.664%
2008 2009 47,896,813 797,292 1.665% 0.000% 791,292 1.665%
2009 2010 47,896,813 799.549 1.669% 0.000% 799,549 1.669%
Totals 16,828,738 7,320.000 8.851.300 33.000,038
Includes 5% State marWated overlevy.
Mote: The Scott County CIP projections for road and bridge levies aro made only through 1994.
-9-
RAFT EXHIBIT
Expenditure Detail - Justice Center Site Acquisition
1. Project's Need As It Relates To Current Infrastructure
This portion of the Scott County, Minnesota 1990 - 1994 Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP) represents a significant change from the 1989 - 1993 CIP. All aspects of the
1989 - 1993 CIP were contingent upon the acquisition of the former Minnesota
Womens' Correctional Facility located in Shakopee, Minnesota. The inability of Scott
County to conclude acquisition of that site in 1988 necessitates the amendment of the
1990 - 1994 CIP. Although Scott County anticipates the continuing need for ultimate
development of justice center facility, the current 1990 - 1994 CIP only contemplates
ultimate payment for site acquisition to occur in 1992.
At this time, the projected increase in land acquisition costs, the reduced likelihood of a
parcel of sufficient size and utility to the County being available later, as well as the
County's current financial environment, results in the planning for site acquisition only.
The land acquisition will allow Scott County to later address the deficiencies in its
current jail system, the inefficiencies of the present configuration of County offices and
address the continuing space shortage within the courthouse complex. An attempt will
be made to obtain an inexpensive option assessment allowing Scott County to pay the
full acquisition cost in 1992, assuming as is projected, that the acquisition cost would
approach$1.2 million. The determination as to the most appropriate acquisition site as
of the date of this writing, has yet to be determined.
2. Demand for Proiect
The land acquisition, as above stated, will allow Scott County to acquire a parcel prior
to the projected growth in land values and increased development which are currently
anticipated to occur following completion of certain major highway projects in Scott
County and adjacent areas. Current planning contemplates that until facility
development can occur, the County will attempt to generate income through lease or
rental of the subject property depending on the current use of the property at the time
of acquisition.
' I - 1
3. Estimated Costs DRAFT
The total capital cost of the land acquisition is currently estimated to be $1.2 million.
There are currently ten sites being contemplated for acquisition. Although there is
considerable price variation among the various sites, the current plan allows for
acquisition of any of the ten sites based on current projected cost. In developing the
1990 - 1994 CIP in this fashion, the estimated acquisition cost allows the site selection
committee to be unimpeded in their determination of the most suitable, cost effective
site.
Project Cost and Schedule
Year Cost Component Cost Annual Total
1992 Land $1,200,000 $1.200.000
Total $1,200,000
4. Other Available Public Funds
At present Scott County does not anticipate that other public funds will be available to
assist with this project.
5. Overlapping Debt - (See Section 4, pages 5 and 6.)
6. Priority
As discussed above, because of the need and demand for this site acquisition, this is a
high priority project expected to be concluded by 1992.
7. Impact on Operating Costs
Although the site acquisition may increase operating costs, depending upon the site
selected, Scott County's current intention is to obtain rental or lease income which,
hopefully, at least offsets any increased operating costs associated with the site
acquisition.
8. Shared Facilities
Not applicable.
I - 2
Expenditure Detail • Solid Waste Facility DRAFT EXHIBIT If
1. Proiect's Need As It Relates To Current Infrastructure
Metropolitan counties are required by 1990 to establish a means to process and
dispose of solid waste to reduce dependence on landfills. Scott and Carver Counties
are jointly developing a waste disposal system that will meet this need. The Counties
have selected recycling and composting as the preferred technology.
The composting facility which is being considered would be located adjacent to the
only operating municipal solid waste landfill in Scott County, it is estimated that this
landfill will reach its capacity and cease accepting waste within a year. However, there
is also an adjacent demolition debris landfill which will benefit this facility. The compost
facility will enable the participating counties and localities to significantly reduce the
amount of municipal solid waste that is landfilled. The participation of Carver County
enables the compost project to serve the needs of two counties, and reduce the cost to
citizens by the resulting economics of scale.
1dition to composting, the facility will separate ferrous and aluminum from the waste
These separated products will be sold and recycled, further reducing the
-f waste that is landfilled.
,amination of public ownership and private ownership options by the County led to
the decision to choose public ownership to the Composting facility. The facility will be
operated by private enterprise under contract to Scott County. This combination
assures the County maximum control over the project, while allowing the private sector,
with its experience in the operation of these facilities, to efficiently operate the facility on
a day to day basis.
Public ownership is required for eligibility for a $2,000,000 Solid Waste Capital
Assistance Grant from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. This also offers the
opportunity for the County to obtain the lowest net cost to borrow the money necessary
to construct the Compost facility.
The County is holding discussions with Dakota County regarding Dakota County
providing processing of source separated recyclable material for Scott County. If
II - 1
DRAFT
Dakota County cannot provide this service the County would need to include this in its
Solid Waste Facility financing plan. The County must also provide a facility to service
household hazardous waste collection. Financing for the processing of source
separated material and household hazardous waste collection may be included in an
amended capital improvement plan.
2. Demand for Project
it is anticipated that both Scott and Carver Counties will require that all or a major
portion of the solid waste generated within the two counties be delivered to the
composting facility for processing and disposal. A county has the authority, under
Minnesota Statutes 400.162, to designate a waste disposal facility for all or a portion of
the solid waste generated within the County.
3. Estimated Cost
The capital cost of this facility has been estimated to be in the vicinity of$10,000,000. it
is anticipated that the total cost of operating the facility (including debt service) will be
paid from processing fees and no portion of this facility will be funded through a general
property tax levy. The initial capital outlay to construct the facility is expected to be paid
by a $2,000,000 solid waste grant from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and a
$6,000,000 revenue bond issue. The revenue bond issue will not have a general
obligation pledge, and therefore will not be subject to repayment by a general property
tax levy.
4. Other Available Public Funds
If the facility is publicly owned, the County will be eligible to receive a$2,000,000 Capital
Assistance Grant from the State of Minnesota Office of Waste Management. Scott and
Carver Counties may elect to use accumulated landfill surcharge funds to further reduce
the capital costs.
5. Overlaooin0 Debt
(See Section 4, pages 5 and 6.)
II - 2
® ��T EXHIBIT III
Expenditure Detail - Road and Bridge Improvements
1. Proiecl's Need As It Relates To Current Infrastructure
The County's road improvements 1990-1994 principally deals with upgrading of existing
infrastructure rather than new construction. The growth in traffic volume in and through
the County has increased dramatically, with an estimated 3.0 -3.5 million visitors to the
County each year, excluding through traffic. To accommodate the increased volume,
the County must upgrade some two-lane highways to four-lane highways, pave present
gravel roads and repair, upgrade and replace bridges.
2. Demand For Project
As discussed above, the increased traffic volume requires the County to upgrade its
present road system. Traffic congestion in the County requires that capacity and road
design be improved.
3. Estimated Cost
The total estimated cost for road improvements for 19904994 is expected to be
approximately $31,820,000. The details of these costs are shown on page 3 of
Exhibit III. The County intends to finance approximately $6,348,700 of these costs with
the proceeds of CIP bonds. The remaining costs will be funded by a combination of
property tax revenues and other available public funds (i.e. state and federal).
4. Other Available Public Funds
It is estimated that some $9,300,000 of other public funds will be available. These other
public funds represent federal and state aids which may be applied to road
improvements. The detail of these other available public funds is shown on page 4 of
Exhibit III.
5. Overlapping Debt
(See Section 4, pages 5 and 6.)
III - 1
6. Priority DRAFT
The composting facility is a high-priority project. However, since it will be a revenue-
based project, it will not impact other Capital Improvement Program priorities.
7. Impact on Operatino Costs
All operating costs including debt service will be paid from service fees. Thus, the
project will not affect County operating costs.
8. Shared Facilities
At this time it is anticipated that this facility will be jointly developed and shared by Scott
and Carver Counties.
II -3
OUR
6. Prioritv
The selection and scheduling of projects is determined annually on the basis of a
priority rating system which takes into consideration such factors as traffic volumes,
accident statistics, roadway and intersection geometries. Accident and severity rates
can be reduced with improvement of the roadway geometrics and traffic control
devices. Travel costs to motorists caused by traffic congestion, delays, etc. could be
decreased by these projects by improving travel time. Equally important considerations
are the funding limitations of the County, the determination of maximum effective project
size and improvement of existing road infrastructure in order to maintain this essential
County service. Prioritization of projects, therefore, is done on a year-by-year basis.
Thus, in any one year of the Capital Improvement Program, all highway projects are of
equal importance. Those highway projects of less urgency are allocated to subsequent
years.
7. Impact on Operating Costs
One of the goals of the Road Capital Improvement Program is to reduce
Operating/Maintenance cost on the County Highway System while improving the safety,
convenience and economical movement of people and goods. The projects identified
in the program fall under three (3) major construction types: maintenance of existing
system; upgrading of gravel highways; and new roadway construction. All types
directly and indirectly reduce the operating costs required to maintain the system.
Reductions range from the elimination of dust control and blading of gravel roadways,
decreased drainage and erosion control work and decreased routine maintenance to
bituminous roadways.
Furthermore, the Road and Bridge Capital Improvement Program provides benefits to
the motoring public through a safer roadway environment and reduction of the wear on
vehicles.
8. Shared Facilities
As these road improvements are used by the general traveling public, the facilities are
not shared with other governmental units.
III -2
DRAFT
1990-1994 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
ANNUAL PROJECT COST BUDGET
Year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
Construction $2,525,000 $2,800,000 $2,925,000 $3,200,000 $3,450,000 $14,900,000
Right-of-Way 485,000 430,000 225,000 340,000 400,000 1,880,000
Consuhing 80,000 95,000 125,000 50,000 75,000 425,000
Engineenng 6WI000 520,000 580,000 620,000 550,000 2,920,000
Contingency 450.000 385.000 470 000 560.000 530.000 2.395.000
Total County
Funded
Portion $4,190,000 $4,230,000 $4,325,000 $4,770,000 $5,005,000 $22,520,000
External
Funded
Portion 1.375.000 1.650,000 1.950,000 2.425.000 1.900.000 9.300.000
Total Project
Costs $5,565,000 $5,880,000 $6,275,000 $7,195,000 $6,905,000 $31,820,000
III-3
R.AFT
SCOTT COMP PROJECT TITLE: 3 '."ear (1990-7994) Capita-
1990-1994 Improvement Program Summar-
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT n. MBER:
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way 1 485,000 1 430.000 1 225,000 1 340,000 1 400,000 1 1,880.000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction 1 3,950,000 1 4,450,000 1 4,875,000 1 3,623,000 1 5,350,000 124.250.000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting 1 80,000 1 95,000 1 125,000 1 50,000 1 75,000 1 423,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 650,000 1 520,000 1 580,000 1 620,000 1 550.000 1 2.920,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 430.000 1 385,000 1 470,000 1 560,000 1 530,000 1 2,395.00"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 5,6151000 1 3,880,000 1 6,275.000 1 7,195,000 1 6,905,000 131,870,000
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 4,240,000 1 4,230,000 1 4,325,000 1 4,770,000 1 5.005,000 122,570,000
------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) 40,000 1 1 1 1 1 40,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants 1 10.000 1 1 1 300,000 1 1 310.000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids 1 1.150.000 1 1,100,000 1 1.600.000 1 1,400.000 1 1.400,000 1 6.75O.Or^
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otter 1 175.000 1 150,000 1 330,000 1 725,000 1 500.000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 5.615.000 1 5.880.000 1 6,275,000 1 7,195,000 1 6.905,000 13-,870..C-
111-4
aaaaiiii$a.�$$$aiia$*$;a�..,i;v$n.i�.yii4*•Git$$5i!*$*iidiiiayaiyaryi;a�aayp$al
•
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECiaOF
199C-1994 T TITLE: Future Right-of-Way
-
CAPITAL I.MPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highwav
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: County-wide
DESCRIPTION: -
Acquisition of highway right-of-way required for 1995 and future year projects (Costs and
projects will be identified in future programs).
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Acquire needed right-of-way for projects prior to construction.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I I 1 1 400,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I I I I i I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I 1 I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I I I 1 I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 I 1 I I 400,000 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I I 1 1 400,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I I I 400,000 I
III-50
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT ?:TLE: Traffic Signals/Spot Safe C:!
1990-1994 Contingency
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NCNBER : 94-00-02
ROAD 5 BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: Unspecified
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________ .
Right-of-Way I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Construction I I I I ' 1 350,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I 1 - 1 - 20,000 1 -
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Engineering I I I 1 1 45,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
Contingency I I I 1 1 30,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
Other I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
TOTAL 1 I I I 1 445,000 I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I I I 1 1 445,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I - I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State aids I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10TNL I I I I I 445,000 I
III-49
SCOTT CO= PROJECT TITLE: 3i,.:mlrous Overlay
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRA.H
PROJECT NL74BER : 94-00-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: County-wide
DESCRIPTION:
Project is to place a bituminous overlay on approximately 10 miles of selected County
Highways.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
The purpose is to increase safety through enhanced rideability and skid resistance and
improve the load-carrying capacity of the roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Nay I 1 I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Construction I I I 1 - 1 600,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_
Engineering I I I 1 1 60.000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 I I 1 1 60,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 1 I I I 720,000 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I I 1 1 720,000 1
_ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants 1 1 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------'-
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 1 1 111-48 1 1 720,000 1
r.�.....aIXiXXXXX•,Xt->bd533ssXaX.;ppiyay asa_3psa a;.aiaiyXyy y;..,y{..a..i(..�...�
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Gravel
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROPEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NOMBER : 94-87-03
ROAD 8 BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 87110m CR 68 to CS.AH 21 (2. 1 miles-
Spring take Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of reconstructing CR 87 to current 2-lane rural design standards. Aggrega-
surfacing applied for wearing course.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will upgrade the geometrics to current standards. This will improve the safety and
load-carrying capacity of the roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Nay I I I I 50,000 I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________-
Construction I I I 1 1 250,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
Consulting I I I I 1 10,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I I 1 1 25,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
Contingency I I I 1 1 25,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________ . .
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I I 50,000 I 310,000 l
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I I I 1 50,000 1 310,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I I I I I 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
Other --------I-----------I------------I------------'------------I------------I---
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TCTAL I I i I 50,000 I 310.000 I
III-47
z•,�-�'xxxexaxx..xx-xxxxxexaxd._.xx.;.;x.;...,x.;.x.;xxax...x xxsaexxxxe=..xxx=... ��1 �
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Gravel
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT N01BER : 94-64-05
ROAD 6 BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 64 from CSAH 11 to CR 61 (1.0 mile -
Helena Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Construct extension of CR 64 to connect segments of CR 64 west of CR 61 and east of CSAR 11.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will provide continuity in County Highway System through connection of segments of
CR 64.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Right-of-Nay I I 1 1 40,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I 1 I I 1 150,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I - 1 5.000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I I 1 1 20,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I I I 1 1 15,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
TOTAL 1 I I 1 40,000 1 190,000 I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I 1 1 40,000 1 190,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ether I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I 1 40.000 I 190.000 1
III-46
SCOTT COUN Y PROJECT TITLE: Urban Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NLMBER : 70-644-Y2
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAH 44 from Fish Point Road to CSAR 27
(1.0 mule - Prior Lake. Sa,'age and
Credit River Township;
DESCRIPTION:
Reconstruction of CSAH 44 to a 4-1ane urban design roadway.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project is to increase the safety and capacity of this segment of CSAH 44 which serves as �..
major access to Prior Lake Elementary, Middle and Senior High Schools.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I 1 1 75,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I I I I i 1 1,000,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I - 1 - 10,000 1 -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I I I 1 100,000 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .
Contingency I I I I 1 100,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I 1 75,000 1 1,210,000 I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I 1 1 75,000 1 410,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) I I I 1 I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I 1 I 1 1 700,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I 1 1 100.000 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I I 75.000 1 1,210,000 I
111-45
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITL7-: Urban Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-627-16
ROAD 5 BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CS.aH 27 from CSAH 42 to CSAR 16
miles - Savage)
DESCRIPTION:
Reconstruction of CSAH 27 to a 4-lane urban design roadway.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project is to increase the safety and capacity of this segment of CSAH 27.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Way I I 1 1 75,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Construction I - I I I 1 1,000,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------____________________________________
Consulting I I I I 1 10,000 1
__________________________________________________________________ ________________--.
Engineering I I I I 1 100,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________ .
Contingency I I I I 1 100,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
Other I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
TOTAL I I I 1 75,000 1 1,210,000 I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I I 1 1 75,000 1 410,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I I I I ' I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids i I I 1 1 700,000 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I I I 1 100,000 1
___________________________________________________________________
TOTAL I I I 75,000 1 1.210,000
III-44
DRAFT
v.x�aai'raaq+a}ira}a{{?y{{aa{yaaarir}aaa ay.r}yv.y+{p++}r{rar�a}rr+{ ..?ayra _,._..,_
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Urban Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL 111PROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-616-15
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAH 16 from CSAH 17 to CR 53
(2. 1 miles - Shakopee)
DESCRIPTION:
PLRPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Fay 1 I I I 100.000 I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I I I 1 1 2.000,000 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .
Consulting I I I 1 1 20,000 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .
Engineering I I I I � 1 200,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I I I 1 1 200.000 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I 1 100,000 1 2,420,000 I
FINDING
1990 1991 1992 •1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I I 1 100,000 1 2.120,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Graatsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I 1 1 300,000 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 I I 1 100,000 1 2.420,000
III-43
**DUFT
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: 1994 Capital Impro•:ement Px x-__:a
1990-1993 Summary
CAPITAL I11PROVE9ENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER:
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I I 1 1 400,000 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Construction I I I 1 1 5.350,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I 1 1 75,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I I 1 1 550,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I I I I 1 530,000 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 1 1 1 1 6,905,000 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I I 1 1 5,005,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rec. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I 1 1 1,400,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I 1 1 500,000 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I 1 1 6.905,000 I
11132
.:kt S�`*>..*S*tx3{.:-.?a uxxpl**r..3**?*x'34*a?a•.P)r Ad:••+}**a?a a. .,.y..a .3*
RA�7
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Traffic Signals/Spot Safer:;
1990-1994 Contingency
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARMENT: Highway
PROGRA.`I
PROJECT NLTIBER : 93-00-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: Unspecified
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Nay I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Construction I I 1 1 125,000 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Consulting I I I 1 10,000. 1 1 -
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Engineering I I 11 1 15,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Contingency I I I 1 10,000 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I 1 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL 1 1 1 1 160,000 1 I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I I 1 1 160,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grants I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
_____ ________ ____________ ____________ ____________i____ _______________---___i__
Other
____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL I 1 I 1 160,000 I 1
11141
r
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Base and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 92-91-06
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 91 from Rice County line to CSAH 2
(2.0 miles - New Market Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the reconstruction of CR 91 to current 2-lane rural design standards.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to upgrade the roadway geometrics to improve the safety of this segment.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I I 1 1 350,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Engineering I I I 1 50,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I I 1 1 35,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I 1 435,000 I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I 1 1 435,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I I 435,000 I I
11140
.zzy...zz�zzzy.zz.;.z.zz..,;•zz-zzzzzzzezzxz:ze..;z.....zz....y�_z._z.;z.z�RAFT
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Base and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NLMBER : 90-91-05
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTSLOCATION: CR 91 from CSAR 8 to CSAR 12 (2.5 miles
Credit River Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the upgrading of CR 91 to current 2-lane rural design standards.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to upgrade the roadway geometries to improve the safety of this segment.
PROJECT COST DETAIL ,
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Right-of-way I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I I I ( 425,000 I i
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I I I
----------------------------------------------------------------•----------------------
Engineering I I 1 1 60,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I I 1 1 40,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
TOTAL I I I 1 525,000 l I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I 1 1 525,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I I 525.000 I
III-39
.�,;,,a_��_.;�,,t..�_._..,..;}��_�...,.....�.;;.�.;...;.�,;��.;:..............ea.-.-.,........._....mss.... . . _ .
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITTLE: Grade and Gravel
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 92-79-02
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 79 between TH 232 and CSAR 14
(3.5 miles - Louisville, Sand Creek 5
Spring Lake Townships and Shakopee)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of reconstructing CR 79 to current 2-lane rural design standards. dgere -r
surfacing applied for wearing course.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will upgrade the geometrics to current standards. This will improve the safet;. a..._
load-carrying capacity of the roadway. ,
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
Right-of-Way I I 1 50,000 1 ' 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________ .
Construction I I 1 1 450,000 1 - 1 -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting 1 I I 1 5,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I 1 1 65,000 1 1
___________________________________________________________ _________________________________
Contingency I I 1 1 43,000 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL I 1 1 50,000 I 565,000 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I I 1 50,000 1 565,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
_________________________________________________________________________________
State Aids I I I i I I
___________________________________________________________________________________________ .
Other I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL I 1 1 1114.000 1 565,000 1 1
SCOTT COLNTF PROJECT TITLE: Urban Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-644-XI
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAH 44 from TH 13 to Fish Point Rd.
(1.0 mile - Prior Lake)
DESCRIPTION:
Reconstruction of CSAH 44 to a 4-lane urban design roadway with channelization to major
intersections.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to increase the safety and capacity of this segment of CSAH 44 which serves as
major access to Prior Lake Elementary, Middle and Senior High Schools.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________ _
Right-of-Way I 1 1 75,000 1 � I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________ .
Construction I I I 1 1,000,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I 1 10,000 1 1
___________________________________________________________________________________________-
Engineering I I I 1 100,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Contingency I I I 1 100,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I 1 I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL I I I 75,000 1 1,210,000 I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I 1 1 75,000 1 485,000 - 1 1
___________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
___________—_______________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
___________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants 1 I I I I I
State Aids I I 1 1 375,000 1 i
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I 1 1 150,000 1 1
___________________________________________________________________________________________-
TOTAL I I I 111-4i.000 1 1,210,000 1 1
ya43}aak##ka4a#kaaa444#a#aa v.k 4v.444#kaaaa4aay a±.;a3#4i#aaaaaaaaaa4#rr{44
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Urban Roadway BRAFT
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NLIMER : 92-31-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 31 from CSAH 42 to South of CSAH 16
(1.0 mile - Savage)
DESCRIPTION:
Reconstruction of CR 31 to a 4-lane urban design roadway.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project is to increase the safety and capacity of this segment of CR 31.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I 1 1 25,000 1 1 1
----------------a----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I I I 1 1,000,000 1 1
-----------a---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I 1 10,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I . I 1 100,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I I I 1 100,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. .
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I 1 25,000 1 1,210,000 I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 - 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I 1 1 25,000 1 960,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I 1 1 250,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I 25,000 1 1,210,000 I I
III-36
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Bridge
1990-1994
CAPITAL I`IPROVEPOENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-599-X3
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAR 31 at Soo Line RR - Savage
DESCRIPTION:
Replace existing railroad overpass.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Present bridge is deficient in vertical and horizontal clearance and roadway geometrics.
Bridge is eligible for State bridge replacement funds. New structure would allow emergenc.
vehicles (fire trucks) use of the route.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Way I 1 1 25,000 I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Construction I I 1 1 775,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------_____________________________.
Consulting 1 1 35,000 1 60,000 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Engineering I I I 1 80,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________ -
Contingency I I 1 1 80,000 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL 1 1 35,000 1 85,000 I 935,000 I 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
------------------—______________----_____________________-___-_--__-_______________-______
Gen. Revenue 1 1 35,000 1 85,000 1 235,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grants) I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I 1 1 300,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Aids I I 1 1 325,000 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Ot:er I I 1 1 75,000 1 1
___________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL I I 35,000 I 85,000 I 935,000 I I
III-35
DRAF T_„___
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Urban Divided Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-613-07
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAH 18 from CSAR 42 to CSAR 16
(1.3 miles - Shakopee & Prior Lake
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of reconstruction of CSAR 18 to a 4-1ane divided roadway with
channelization.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose of the project is to increase the safety and capacity of the connecting roadway
between the Bloomington Perry Bridge/Shakopee Bypass and CSAH 42.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
Right-of-Fay I 1 1 50,000 1 I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I I 1 1 1,500,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting 1 1 1 1 15,000 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Engineering I I 1 1 150,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I I 1 1 150,000 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Other I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
TOTAL 1 1 I 50,000 1 1,815,000 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I 1 1 50,000 1 1,065,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing 1 I I I ' I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants 1 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I i I 1 500,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I 1 1 250.000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I III-M-000 1 1,315,000 1
SCOTT COUNTY PRCJECTT TALE: :993 Capital !'pro'.emelt ?
1990-1994 Summary
CAPITAL PSPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROCRASI
PROJECT NIMER:
ROAD 6 BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I 1 1 340,000 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------
Construction I I 1 1 5,625,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I 1 1 50,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I 1 1 620,000 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Contingency I I 1 1 560,000 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 1 1 1 7,195,000 I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I I 1 1 4,770,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I 1 1 300,000 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I 1 1 1,400,000 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
0_her I I i 1 725,000 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
TOTAL 1 I 1 7.195,000 1
III-33
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT ?'-TLE: Traffic Signals/SFoc Sa`ec% /
1990-1994 Contingency
CAPITAL IMPRO% MENT DEPARTMENT: Highwav
PROGRAM
PROJECT NLMBER : 92-00-02
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: Unspecified
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-way I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I 1 1 325,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________ .
Consulting I 1 1 20,000 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I 1 1 45,000 1 1 1 -
------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________
Contingency I 1 1 30,000 1 1 1
-----------------------------------------------------------__________________________________
Other I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..
TOTAL 1 1 I 420,000 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 - 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I 1 1 420,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev-. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
______________________________________________ ____________________________________
TOTAL I 1 420.000 1 I
IIIA
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Bituminous Overlay
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 92-00-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: County-wide
DESCRIPTION:
Project is to place a bituminous overlay on approximately 8 miles of selected County
Highways.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
The purpose will increase safety through enhanced rideability and skid resistance and will
improve the load-carrying capacity of the roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Nay I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I 1 1 325,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I I I
--------------------------------------m
I 1 1 30,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I 1 1 30,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I I 385,000 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I 1 1 285,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I 1 100,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------`- -_
Other I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 1 1 385,000 1 I I
11131
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Base and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL I.`DPROVEHENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT WnBER : 92-78-02
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 77-78 from TH 169 to CSAR 17 (3.6
miles - Jackson Township and Shakopee)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of placement of an aggregate base and a bituminous surface on the roadbed.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will improve the safety and rideability of the highway. Project is final phase is
upgrading roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------"'--------------------- -
Right-of-Way I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..
Construction I 1 1 600,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I - I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I I 1 90,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I 1 1 60,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_
TOTAL 1 1 1 750,000 1 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue I 1 1 750,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I 1 I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants 1 I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I 1 I I I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 1 1 750.000 1 I I
111-30
' aai*id#aya___aa#aadid#***dikrdi*iii###av,r#a#,j#**ddaaaaaiyap*y}a#..a#!.� ��
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 92-69-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 69 from CSAR 14 to 1.5 miles north
(1.5 mi. - Jackson & Louisville Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the reconstruction of CR 69 to current 2-lane rural design standards.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to upgrade the geometrics to improve the safety of this segment of roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way 1 1 20,000 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I - 1 1 450,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I 1 1 5,000 1 1 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering I 1 1 50,000 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I 1 1 45,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I 20,000 I 550,000 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 1 20,000 1 550,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsi I I I , I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I 20,000 550.000 I I I
• III-29
}a.vr}aar}�aa�g33:�}�}##ieF1}1':#r};�#}#fhf':;fv.}rynr}.afaaaiyy}aa}ya}ar+a a.y a�
y
SCOTT COCNTY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Bitcmicous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NL11BER : 92-62-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 62 between CSAH 46 and Dakota Co.
line (0.75 mile - New Market Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the reconstruction of CR 62 to current design standards and placing a
bituminous surface.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
The purpose is to upgrade the geometrics and wearing surface of the roadway to provide
improved safety, rideability and load-carrying capacity.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Way I 1 10,000 1 1 .. I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Construction I 1 1 225,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------______________________________
Consulting I 1 1 5,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________ _
Engineering I 1 1 30,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________-
Contingency I 1 1 20,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL - I I 10,000 I 280,000 I 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I 1 10,000 1 280,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I I I I I I
___________________________________________________________________________________
State Aids I I I I I I
__________________________________________________________________________________________.-
Other I I I I I I
___________________________________________________________________________________________.
TOTAL 1 I 10,000 1 280.000 1 I
III-28
.;..#.:.;######..a,.y.y..#..aa#,x#„#+#.}.a#•##t•:.;y.�a.a##aar.�.;aa##aa��.a.;a�a„aaa®. .. . . . . -
a
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT, TL'LE: Urban Divided Rcadwav
1990-1994
CAPITAL IHPROVE:MENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-642-08
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTSLOCATION: CSAH 42 E. of CSAH 27 to Dakota Count:
line (1.5 miles - Savage)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of reconstruction of CSAH 42 to a 4-1ane divided roadway with
channelization. Also includes a revision to the traffic signal system on CSAH 42 at CR 93.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to increase the safety and capacity of this segment of roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way 1 1 250,000 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Construction I 1 1 1.750,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
Consulting I 1 1 20,000 1 - 1 - 1 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------'
Engineering I 1 1 175,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------._.
Contingency I 1 1 175,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
TOTAL I 1 250,000 1 2,120,000 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 1 250,000 1 1,120,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I 1 1 750,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I 1 1 250.000 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_
TOTAL 1 1 250.000 1 2.120.000 I I I
111-V
' yy rri4iiddd4kkS*43#k###ayra#±a}ikkkiii#i}as#ya#r4ak44iraaxkd##i}##k##����
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Urban Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NOMBER : 70-609-Y1
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECT5 LOCATION: CSAR 9 from TH 169 to 0.5 mile north
(Jordan)
DESCRIPTION:
Realign roadway to urban design standards.
PMPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
In conjunction with the City of Jordan, realign and upgrade roadway to urban standards (curt
and gutter and storm sewer) .
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________-
Right-of-Nay 1 1 25.000 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________-
Construction I 1 1 650,000 1 I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I 1 10,000 1 - 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
Engineering I - 1 1 95,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________-
Contingency I 1 1 65,000 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 I 25,000 I 820,000 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue 1 1 25,000 1 170.000 1 1 1
_ ____________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl 1 I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Aids I 1 1 550,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I 1 100.000 1 1 1
___________________________________________________________________________________________-
TOTAL I I 25.000 I 820,000 I I I
III-26
DRAFT
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Regrade and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NU4BER : 70-617-11
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAH 17 from TH 282 to CSAR 12
(1. Mmiles - Spring Lake Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of widening and/or realignment of CSAH 17 to provide a 2-lane roadway wiC:
full-width shoulders and base.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will upgrade the geometrics of this segment to provide additional safety and
capacity. This is the final segment in the upgrading of CSAR 17.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
Right-of-hay 1 1 75,000 1 1 i I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction I 1 1 550.000 1 __ 11
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I 1 1 5.000 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Engineering I 1 1 65,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I 1 1 45,000 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I 75,000 1 665,000 1 I 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 1 75.000 1 465.000 1 1 1
-----------------------------------------------------a--------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grautsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5tate Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I 1 1 200.000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other 1 I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I I 75.000 1 I&M.000 I I I
:,aari{�k#k*k#*asr±..._##3!-**-v:`{#i{*v.y{*{kk#*rS#yFt•yy.y.y..+.#i..{{#k+.*##�
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: 1992 Capital Improvement Prc^r'-
1990-1994 Summary
CAPITAL PIPROVE:IENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER:
ROAD 6 BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Way I - 1 1 225,000 I I I
________________________________________________________:_____________________--____-_______ .
Construction I 1 1 4,875,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------
Consulting I 1 1 125,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________ .
Engineering I 1 1 580,000 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I 1 1 470,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL I I 16,275,000 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue I 1 1 4,325,000 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
________________________________________________________________C______—____________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Aids I 1 1 1,600.000 1 1 1
___________________________________________________________________________________________-
Other I I I 350,000 I I I
___________________________________________________________________________________________ .
TOTAL I I 1 6,275,000 1 I I
III-24
aa
DMFT
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Traffic Signals/Spot Safetv/
1990-1994 Contingency
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROCRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 91-00-01
ROAD 8 BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: Unspecified
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
-----------a--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Construction 1 I 150,000 1 I 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I 1 15,000 1 1 ` 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 1 35,000 1 1 - 1 - 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 1 25,000 1 1 1 1
----------------------------------------a-a--------a-----------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
----------------------------a----------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 I 225,000 1 1 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------a-----------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 1 225,000 1 1 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------aa------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
---------a----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
------a------------------------------------a------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
TOTAL I I 225.000 I 1 1 1
III-23
• _yx,._,;.xxext-x...,..:.,•x:xaxxe-vx,;x:,::.;xaa..x.xx-exxex-xe�..x.x.;.x.x.x.x�x
DRAFT
SCOTT COUNTY^CL9TY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Grace'_
1990-1994
CAPITAL I.`PROVE`fENT DEP.ARTHENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NLSER : 90-78-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 77-78 from TH 169 to CSAH 17 (3.6
miles - Jackson Township and Shakopee)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the reconstruction and realignment of CR 77-78 to current 2-lane rural
design standards. aggregate surfacing applied for wearing course.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will upgrade the geometrics and alignment to present standards which will improve
safety and load-carrying capacty of the roadway. Project will remove the current offset
alignment. Project provides link between TH 42/TH 169 and CSAR 17/CSAR 42.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_
Right-of-Way 1 25,000 1 50,000 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
construction 1 1 500,000 1 1 I 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I 1 5,000 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Engineering 1 1 75.000 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency I 1 50,000 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 25,000 1 680,000 1 1 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 25,000 1 680.000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 25,000 I 680.000 1 111_22 I I
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Urban Di•.ided Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL INPROVENENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-642-07
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS• LOCATION: 0.25 mile west of CSAH 18 to east of
Boone Avenue (Prior Lake and Savage)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of reconstruction of CSAH 42 to a 4-Lane divided roadway with
channelization. Also includes a traffic signal system on CSAH 42 to CSAH 18.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose of the project is to increase the safety and capacity of this segment of roadwa .
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Right-of-Way 1 50,000 1 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Construction 1 1 1,250,000 1 1 I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Consulting 1 15,000 1 15,000 1 1 � I I -
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.. .
Engineering 1 1 125,000. 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 1 125,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 65,000 1 1,515,000 1 1 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 65,000 1 865,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing' I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
-- ------------------------- ------------ ------------I------------ ------------
StateGrants--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids 1 1 400,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other 1 1 250.000 1 I 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 65,000 1 1,515,000 1 I 1 1
III-21
'•-t-ti}#ytt#�##tttr##+t#t#t-arrr r..�.#rra#t#t##4a..t#tt#a#tat*i'Fiiftttittkt �����
SCOTT COMITY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGR4P1
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-629-05
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAR 29 from CSAR 46 to Dakota County
line (0.75 miles - New Market Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the reconstruction of CSAH 29 to current design standards and placing a
bituminous surface.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
The purpose is to upgrade the geometrics and wearing surface of the roadway to provide
improved safety, rideability and load-carrying capacity.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------7----------------------------------- -
Right-of-Way 1 10,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
construction 1 1 225,000 1 1 - 1 - 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I 1 5,000 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Engineering 1 I 35,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 1 20,000 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I 1 I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 10,000 1 285,000 I I 1 I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 10,000 1 285,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants 1 I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Szate .aids I I I I I I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. .
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 10,000 I 285,000 1 1 1 1
111-20
•�•xiexxxeax••xexxxxx•s.xxcxxeo•x-xxaxxxxaxxxxxxxxxexaeeaexx=-.xse+c- -. �: ■
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL 111PROVEIMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRI`t
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-621-10
ROAD 8 BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CS.4H 21 from CR 87 to Credit River
73.0 miles - Credit River Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of placement of an aggregate base and a bituminous surface on the roadbed.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will improve the safety and rideability of the roadway. Project is the final phase
in the upgrading of the roadway and paving the link between I-35 and Prior Lake.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Nay I I 1 1 1 1 -
____________________________________________________________________________________________ .
construction 1 1 825,000 1 1 ' I I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I 1 10,000 1 1 - 1 - 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 1 125,000 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Contingency 1 1 80,000 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL 1 1 1,040,000 1 1 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue 1 1 540,000 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grants) I I I ' 1 I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids 1 1 500,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------- ____________________________________________________-
Otheri----------- I I I I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
TOTAL I 1 1,040,000 1 1 1 1
III-19
DRAFT
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Re_grade and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL I.`PROVENENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NLHBER : 70-618-06
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAR 18 from CSAR 16to TH 101 By
(1.3 miles - Shakopee)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of reconstruction of CSAH 18 to provide a 4-lane roadway.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to increase the safety and capacity of the southern approach to the Bloomington.
Ferry Bridge and Shakopee Bypass interchange.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way 1 200,000 1 1 1 I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
construction 1 1 875,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I 1 10,000 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Engineering 1 1 125,000 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .
Contingency 1 1 85,000 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 200,000 1 1,095,000 1 1 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 200,000 1 1,095,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing 1 1 I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..
Other I I I I I I
------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 200,000 1 1,095,000 1 111-18 1 1 1
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: 1991 Capital Improvement P
1990-1994 Summary
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Righwav
PROGRAM
_ PROJECT NUMBER:
ROAD S BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Fay 1 1 430,000 1 1 1 1
_________________________________________________________ __________________________________..
Construction 1 1 4,450,000 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________ _
Consulting 1 1 95,000 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________ .
Engineering 1 1 520,000 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Contingency- 1 1 385,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL. I 15,880,000 1 1 1 1
FMING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue 1 1 4,230,000 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
_____________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
________________
______________________________________________________________ ___________
State Grants I I I I I _I_
------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
State :lids 1 1 1,200.000 1 1 1 1
_______________________________________
________________________________________ __________-.
Other 1 1 450,000 1 1 I i
---
__________________________________________________
TOTAL ---� - ---- - --�-5,380.000 1 1 1 I
III-17
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Traffic Signals/SPOL Safety/
1990-1994 Contingency
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTIENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NVIBER : 90-00-02
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: Unspecified
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction 1 150,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting 1 10,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 20,000 1 . I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 15,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_
TOTAL 1 195,000 1 1 1 I 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 195,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 195,000 1 I I
III-16
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Bituminous Overlav
1990-1994
CAPITAL L`IPROVE.MENT DEPARVIENT: Highway
PROGRA-M
PROJECT NVIBER : 90-00-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS: LOCATION: County-wide
DESCRIPTION:
Project is to place a bituminous overlay on approximately 7 miles of selected County
Highways.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
The purpose will increase safety through enhanced rideability and skid resistance and will
improve the load-carrying capacity of the roadways.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I I I i I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction 1 275,000 1 1 1 _ 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 25,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 25,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I 1 I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_
TOTAL I 325,000 I I I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 275,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Aids 1 30,000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I I I I I
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 325,000 1 1 1 1 1
IIF15
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Gra%
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 90-91-04
ROAD a BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 91 from Rice County line to CSAH 2
(2.0 miles - New Market Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the reconstruction of CR 91 to current 2-lane rural design standards.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to upgrade the roadway geometrics to improve the safety of this segment.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Way 1 25,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------_------------------------------------____________________________________
Construction I 250,000 I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________..
Consulting 1 5,000 1 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Engineering 1 40,000 1 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Contingency 1 25,000 1 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________.
TOTAL 1 345.000 1 1 I 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue 1 345,000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
otherI I___------___-_------____-----_________-________-___-_____-____--
TOTAL 1 345,000 1 1 1 1 1
IIF1 4
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITTLE: Grade and Gravel
1990-1994
CAPITAL IHPROVEIMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 90-91-03
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 91 from CSAH 8 to CSAR 12 (2.5 mi'_es
Credit River Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the upgrading of CR 91 to current 2-lane rural design standards.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to upgrade the roadway geometrics to improve the safety of this segment.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Tota'
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way 1 45,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction 1 325,000 1 1 1 1 1
----------------------------------------------------------------_----------------------------
Consulting 1 3,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 50,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 30,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 455,000
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 455,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALI 45:,000 1 I I I 1
III-j 3
RAF 7
SCOTT COCSTY PROJECT TALE: Base and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROMMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT \UMBER : 90-87-02
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS : LOCATION: CR 87 from CSAH 8 to CR 68 (3.0 miles -
Spring Lake Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of placement of an aggregate base and a bituminous surface on the roadw,,.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will improve the safety and rideability of the roadway. Final phase in the upgradi:: .
of the roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I I I I I
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction 1 450,000 1 1 1 1 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I 1 I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 65,000 1 1 1 1 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 45,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
other I I I I I I
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 560,000 I I I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 560,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 560,000 1 1 1 1 1
III-12
SS: **F$$a*aaaSOi**$rav.a*!*a*a*aaa$*aara$**y*Saara$3*SSS#S#$$$SSa**as**DFT
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Grade and Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 91-77-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 77 from CR 77E to McDevitt (1.8 miles
Jackson Township and Shakopee)
DESCRIPTION:
Project involves the reconstruction of CR 77 to current design standards.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will upgrade the geometrics to current standards. This will improve the safet;: a�y
load-carrying capacity of the roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way 1 25.000 1 1 1 I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction 1 550,000 1 1 1 i I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting 1 5,000 1 1 1 - 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 80,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 55,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 715,000 1 1 I 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 715,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 715,000 I I I I I
III-11
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Base & Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER : 90-60-01
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 60 from TH 169 to Blakeley
(2.4 miles - Blakeley Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of placement of an aggregate base and a bituminous surface on the roadbed.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will improve the safety and rideability of the highway. Project is the final phase
in upgrading of the roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Way I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction 1 450,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 65,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 45,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
TOTAL 1 560,000 I I 1 I 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 560,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I 1 I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids 1 1 I I I I
-------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Other
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 560,000 I I I I I
III-10
VT �
SCOTT COMITY PROJECT TITLE: Bridge
1990-1994
CAPITAL IIPROVEMENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMBER 70-599-:ti
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CR 51 - 1.2
miles North of LeSueur
County line - Blakeley Township
DESCRIPTION:
Remove existing bridge and replace with bridge meeting standards for a 2-lane rural faciliC
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Purpose is to rep] - hridge deficient in geometry, structural condition and approach
alignment with a ' -,trrent design standards. Qualifies for State bridge
replacement fund= '� >, �
COST DETAIL
1992 1993 1994 Total
----------------------------____________________-___- "
Right-of-Way , I I I I
______________________ ______________________________________________-___-____
Construction I I _ I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting 1 20,000 1 10,000 1 1 - 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Engineering 1 1 15,000 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Contingency 1 1 15,000 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL 1 20,000 1 190,000 1 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue 1 20,000 1 140,000 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl 1 40,000 1 1 ' 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants I 1 10,000 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State aids I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other 1 I I I I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 20,000 I 190.000 1 1 1 1
III-9
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Urban Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL IHPRMT,11ENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGR.4)i
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-627-15
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAR 27 from CSAH 16 to TH 101
70.9 miles - Savage)
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Right-of-Way 1 75,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction 1 375,000 1 625,000 1 1 i I I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Consulting 1 20,000 1 1 1 — 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 150,000 1 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _
Contingency 1 100,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 720,000 I 625,000 1 1 1 1
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 420,000 1 125,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grants) I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids 1 300,000 1 300,000 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other 1 1 200,000 1 1 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .
TOTAL I 720.000 I 625.000 1 1 1 1
III-8
SCOTT COLNTY PROJECT TITLE: Base & Bituminous
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMPROyL-MNT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NLMER 70-62'-11
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAR 21 from CR 91 to Credit River
miles - Credrt River Township)
DESCRIPTION:
Project consists of placement of an aggregate base and a bituminous surface on the roadbed.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
Project will improve the safety and rideability of the roadway. Project is the final phase
in the upgrading of the roadway.
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-Nay I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Construction 1 125.000 1 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Consulting I 1 I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 15,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency 1 10,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL I 150,000 1 I I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gen. Revenue 1 25,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I I 1 I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Aids 1 125,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I 1 1 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 150,000 I I I I
III-7
.�aii.y;.#f#ki#}d•�i#4e43':aa;.#as#k##A:`S#t4i*•:aa####i#*k*3kdp#..p.}_##dai#':i#®-�FT
SCOTT COUNTY PROJECT TITLE: Urban Roadway
1990-1994
CAPITAL IMOVE3ffiNT DEPART` ENT: Highwav
PROGRM11
PROJECT NUMBER : 70-615-S1
ROAD & BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION: CSAR 15 from 5. limit of Shakopee to
6th Avenue (1.0 mile - Shakopee)
DESCRIPTION:
Reconstruct roadway to urban design standards.
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
In conjunction With the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Bypass Construction, upgrade
roadway to urban standards (curb and gutter and storm sewer) .
PROJECT COST DETAIL
__--__1990-_--____-1991_ -_-1992-__------19931994- Total
Right-of-Way I 30.000 I I I I
Construction 1 850,000 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consulting 1 10,000 1 1 1 1 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engineering 1 125,000 1 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Contingency 1 85,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL 11,100,000 l 1 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue 1 250,000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl I I I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Grants I 1 I I I I
-------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------
State Aids 1 675.000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other 1 175,000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL 11.100.000 1 1 1 1 1
III$
SCOTT COL:ITY PROJECT TITLE: 1990 Capital lmptOVAment
1990-1994
5,,—ary
CAPITAL 1.VRM EVENT DEPARTMENT: Highway
PROGRAM
PROJECT NUMM:
ROAD S BRIDGE PROJECTS LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION:
PROJECT COST DETAIL
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
________________________________________________________________________________
Right-of-Way 1 435,000 I I I t I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Construction 1 3,950,000 1 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Consulting 1 30,000 1 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Engineering 1 650,000 1 1 1 1 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Contingency 1 450.000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________-
Other I I I I I I
_____________________________________________________________________________________________..
TOTAL 1 5,615,000 1 1 I I I
FUNDING
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Total
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Gen. Revenue 1 4,240,000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Rev. Sharing I I I I I I
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Grantsl 40,000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State Grants 1 10,000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
State aids 1 1.150,000 1 1 1 1 1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Other 1 175,000 1 1 1 1 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 1 5,615.000 1 1 1 1 1
III-5
F
August 22, 1989 19 C,
Let's review Mr Krass ' letter of July 18, 1989:
First, he should be set straight on a few things. The election in which
the voters of Shakopee =-approved Chapter 183 was held on Tuesday, Sept 14,
1965, not on the 16th as Mr Krass alleges. Second, the old legislative
charter of 1875 was not the "original" charter as Mr Krass alleges, but
was, as it' s title indicates, AN ACT TO REDUCE THE LAW INCORPORATING THE
CITY. . . .AND THE SEVERAL ACTS AMENDATORY THEREOF INTO ONE ACT. The orginal
act was passed in 1870, as we so proudly display on the hydropillar out
on the east side.
Next, Mr Krass quotes Ch. 412.018, which I had called to his attention.
Specifically, I had felt that the phrase "and such other s e2 11 laws as
may be applicable to them" was the key to answering my questron wRther
Ch 183 was still valid. He telephoned Mr Harry Walsh, attorney with the
Revisor of Statutes' office in St Paul, whose statutory duty it is to
determine which laws are repealed,and to publish the law books - and Mr
Walsh readily verified what he had stated previously, that yes, indeed,
according to their records, Ch 183, laws of 1965 was effective law and
had not been repealed by Ch 412.018. Mr Krass than attempts to cast doubt
on this opinion by referring to it as "a quick perusal of the laws" .
Next, Mr Krass tries to impress the reader by reciting a litany of the
contacts made in researching the question, but fails to come up with one
solitary scrap of concrete evidence. We contacted Mr Gallagher of the
Attorney General 's office to find out just what he did tell Mr Krass.
Mr Gallagher replied, in effect, that all he said to Mr Krass was that
you can make good and valid argument on both sides of any issue. And that
certainly isn't much to hang your hat on.
Further, in order to impress we laymen, Mr Krass relates that he and his
staff "reviewed other sections of Chapter 412 not available to Councilman
Scott" ! Every citizen should know that Ch 412 in it's entirety is readily
available on the shelves of our public library - and in the law library
at the Court House for that matter.
He then says we figured in the discussions at the legislature. We wanted
a trade-off on the 1875 charter for the Statutory Code, and we wanted to
keep what we'd already won in 1965. In other words, the best of both
worlds. The mischief of abandoning Ch 183 was a local intransigence.
Mr Krass then lays out his reasons in support of his opinion:
First, he again cites 412.018 subd. 2, that the legislature was making it
very clear that all cities without home rule charters would be brought
under the'umbrella'of Ch 412. I have no argument with that. I have never
suggested 'End-neither has Mr Walsh of the Revisor's office, that we are
not a statutory city. We are, so Mr Krass' first "reason" is no reason at
all, and cmmnl=tele irrelevant. What Mr Krass forgot to do in his research,
was to read Ch 412.015 --- subd. 3 thereof, which says: the legislature
DOES NOT intend to "affect, alter, repeal or otherwise modify any law of
special applrca ion other than specs a�acts of incorporation and amend-
ments thereto" . -
Which leaves us with the question - was Ch 183 in fact, an amendment of
our legislative charter? For the answer to that we appeal first to some
very basic knowledge mutually shared by all who are familiar with parlia-
mentary procedvr-e. . For to constitute an amendment to another Ordinance,
-Z-
it is absolutely mandatory for the subject Ordinance to make a specific
reference to the Ordinance to be amended, both in the title and in the text.
And we all know that if we failed to make those references, and the Ord.
we had "intended" to amend were repealed, -- that the Ordinance we
"intended" as an amendment would still stand - even though pertaining to
the same subject matter and even written in the same language. I find no
reference in either the title or the text of Ch 183, to our old legislative
charter, Ch 6, 1875, nor could I find the word "amendment" anywhere in
the title or the text. And furthermore, anyone familiar with legislative
process knows that any bill presented which is intended to amend another
statute, must list changes oradditions by italics, and deletions by strikeat,
throughout the proposed bill. And my copy of Ch 183 was not the coded
form, but a copy of the original Senate file no. 860 as presented to the
legislature, and the above mentioned features are not at all in evidence.
But there's even a bigger reason why Ch 183 is not an amendment of Ch 6,
laws of 1875. Article XI, Sec 2 of the State Constitution as it read when
Ch 412.018 was passed, specifically prohibited the legislature from
passing any special law unless same was submitted to the governing body
or the voters for approval before it became effective. Sec' 5, Art XI reads
that existing laws . .valid when adoptedshallcontinue in effect until
amended or repealed in accordance with this article. Certainly, no one
will argue that Ch 183 wasn't a valid law in 1973 when Ch 412.018 was
passed. And I could find no evidence of any election where the voters of
Shakopee repealed Ch 183 as required by the Constitution.
And it doesn' t stop there. Section 2, Article I of the State Constitution
reads as follows: "No member of the State shall be disenfranchised. . . " .
That injunction heads the list of our State's Bill of Rights, and is
consdidered among the most inviolable of all civil rights. Ch 183 bestows
on the voters of Shakopee the right to submit for referendum vote by the
people:anv Ordinance they find objectionable in whole or in part; any sale,
lease, or other conveyance of interest in city-owned real property; all
franchises granted by the city; the vacation of any street or alley; the
sale or lease of any of the city's public utilities; plus the right to
increase the contributions from the city's public utilities to the general
fund in lieu of taxes•,- and the right to cast a binding vote upon any
question of public concern as submitted by the council. No legislator of
any stature would even think of attempting to disenfranchise an entire
citizenry in such a wholesale manner. And that' s precisely why the
legislature wrote the disclaimer in Ch 412.015 subd 3 as cited above.
Another group of reasons why the legislature never intended to effect any
special law except the sole, solitary Ch 6, laws of 1875 as made manifest
in Ch 412.018, are the numerous references they make throughout the
Statutory Code itself, to wit: 412.018 makes it eminently clear that they
intended that we continue to be governed, not only by the statutory code,
but by "such other special laws as ma be a licable" ; 412.023 subd 4 is
the very reason we ave mem ers on the council in
of 5 as the code
demands, thus recognizing there was no intent to create absolute tAMformity
among the statutory cities as Mr Krass implies; 412.211 clearly recognizes
again in the granting of general powers to the cities, that, "The powers
listed in this act are not exclusive and other provisions of law granting
additional powers to cities (such as Ch 183) shall apply. . " ;and again, in
$
-3-
C
412.881 of the statutory code, it is specified that "whenever the term
'President' or 'president of the council'is used in a statute applying to
any statutory city the term means the mayor of the city and the term
'recorder' as so used means the clerk. " Now I couldn't find the words
'president' or 'recorder' anywhere in the entire statutory city code
except in this section, so it becomes perfectly obvious to even a casual
observer that the legislature is again recognizing that there are many
laws out there like Ch 183 which are still valid, and the words and phrases
quoted above are- the same as used in Ch 183. And I 'm also quite sure
that the legislature was well aware of the provisions of our Constitution
which prohibited their repealing these laws without a vote of the people.
Mr Krass also argues that because of his understanding of the statutory
and case law . ."dealing with the rules for revocation by implication', he
thought they would be applicable in this case. — I'll quote but one of
the many case laws on the subject;
Independent School Dist 700, St Louis Co. vs. Crty of Duluth. 1969 ,
284 Minn 279.
Repeals by implication are not favored and will not be infered unless such
was the manifest intention of the Legislature, as where the later statute
fully covers the subject of the prior one and is manifestly inconsistent
therewith.
A special statute applicable to a particular locality is not repealed by a
statute general in its terms and application, unless intention of the Legislature
to repeal or the special law is manifest, even though {.erns of the
general act would, taken strictly but for the special law, include the case
or cases provided for by it. - Dist 700 vs. Duluth
As for Mr Krass' reliance upon the rules for revocation by implication,
I 'm afraid again he's grasping for straws. - �,et's - look at
those rules as spelled out in Ch 645.023 and 645.024 addressing the
special laws enacted under Art 12, Sec 2 of the Constitution. (such as
Chapter 183) . Ch 645. 023, subd 1 (b) permits the very activity the
legislature was engaged in with Ch 412 .018 in converting the city of
Shakopee to a statutory city -- but read on -- the very next Chapter
645.024 says very emphatically that Ch 645.023 does not apply to any
special law (such as Ch 183) which by its own terms becomes effective
upon the approval of the voters, as was the case in Shakopee. So in other
words, it can be shown that Ch 6, laws of 1875 could legally be repealed
by the legislature, since it was never submitted to a vote of the people,
but that Ch 183, another special law, could not be repealed by legislative
action alone, but only by another vote of the people of Shakopee.
Obviously, the evidence available in support of the State Revisor's
holding of Ch 183 as valid law is overwhelming. In all fairness, however,
Mr Krass did a good job of trying to sweep these hard-won rights and
priviledges under the rug - but I for one, can't buy it.
/s/ Gary Scott
Phillip R.Arris' V R A S S (� Rita J.Nadrr
IXnnks L.F4mnx•
1\\1K�1/...\, D lammn e.Muir
jams 8 (nm
Hzny 4:,Meta Fi .
ONROE 0d•
in3am
Jar D.Cludeug
iM+rc R.N21sen _ (Min D.plk-'11.9aa
�naneren - PaucM A.\Nile,
%lark:J.Muxlxss.
•noun anm rnmaw
Nut. M.(Arlxun x.u+ NnroiM ncvamw
.wwm.x.m uxm is�w.,
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Shakopee
FROM: Phillip R. Kress
Assistant City Attorney
DATED: July 18, 1989
RE: Issue Related to Chapter 183 of the Laws of 1965
Our File No. 1-1373-1
Last week Councilman Gary Scott asked to sit down with me for a few moments
and explain a problem he believed may exist for the City. The problem involved
Chapter 183 of the Laws of 1965, which appears to be a legislative charter for
the City. The charter is effective from and after an affirmative vote of the
residents of the City of Shakopee, which vote apparently occurred on September
16, 1965, at a special election, the vote being 222 yes and 208 no. Our research
shows that the original Act incorporating the City of Shakopee was adopted in
1875 and consists of approximately 25 legislative pages. The 1965 law was
considerably shorter.
In 1973, the legislature adopted an amendment to Chapter 412 codified in
Section 412.018 -Cities Under General or Special Incorporation Acts."
Subd. 1 of this Section is entitled "Termination of Government Under
Incorporation Acts.' This subdivision provides that as of July 1, 1975, any city
incorporated under general incorporation statutes, as well as specific
incorporation statutes for seven cities including Shakopee in the Special Session
Law of 1875 recited above, shall cease to be governed by the special or general
incorporation acts specified in this subdivision and will henceforth be governed
and controlled and derive their corporate legislative and other powers from the
laws applicable to statutory cities generally and from such other special laws
as may be applicable to them.
The very interesting question Gary Scott posed to me was whether or not
the 1965 Law Chapter 183 was -such other special laws as may be applicable to
Shakopee" and therefore was not terminated by the 1973 Act. If such were the
case reasoned Mr. Scott, Shakopee must still be governed by the 1965 Act, which
has several sections which may well be inconsistent with actions, motions,
Pao le:"mnrhall Rand Busitess Cemv.327Matt-it Ruatl.H0.19n 216.Shaku ee.Mimpvxa 553791PkjAxxxt.(612)9i650M P.A%(61214Z: 7(340
&mmpAw Couu,Suite 1100.1650NiA 8_4u1 Slnrt.Hutainp(m.%linrc a 5:A319•IOtlxmn:Ifi121 mt:.:iFKY1 FAX 16121885a5961)
� d
Page -2-
July 18, 1989
resolutions and ordinances adopted by various city councils from and after 1975.
It is certainly clear that the City of Shakopee has operated since July 1. 1975,
on the assumption that it was a regular statutory city and had no special
legislative charter.
While still in my office, I contacted an attorney working for the office
of the Reviser of Statutes with whom Mr. Scott had previously had some
discussions. The attorney made a quick perusal of the laws in question and
concluded that there was no express revocation of the 1965 Act. He was quick
to point out, however, that he would not render an opinion on such a matter
without some extensive research.
I contacted Dennis Kraft, explained the issue Councilman Scott had raised,
and was directed to do some preliminary research in an attempt to determine
exactly what had happened. Members of my staff did some research on Thursday
and Friday while I was unavailable, and we completed our preliminary
investigation yesterday. we have examined the statutes in question, spoken at
length with researchers at the League of Minnesota Cities, spoken to Michael
Gallagher, Special Assistant Attorney General with some extensive municipal lav
background, gone to the state archives and heard the tapes of the hearings which
preceded the 1973 Law making Shakopee a statutory city, and reviewed other
sections of Chapter 412 not available to Councilman Scott.
On the basis of all of the information presently available to us and for
the reasons hereafter set forth, it is my conclusion and opinion that the City
of Shakopee is a valid statutory city and is not in any manner governed by
Chapter 183 of the Laws of 1965.
The legislative history of the 1973 Act is crystal clear. The legislature
intended to put an end to the multitude of legislative charter cities. (A
legislative charter city is one whose charter is enacted and therefore must
amended by the legislature, as opposed to a "home rule' charter city which can
deal with, amend and change its charter in accordance with the provisions of that
charter and thus does not need constant legislative intervention.) The
legislators considering the 1973 Act specifically talked about Shakopee. It
seems that in 1971, the legislature adopted another lav, similar to the 1965 law
and which like the 1965 law required a referendum to become effective.
Apparently, the city council did not place the 1971 law on the ballot and it was
never adopted. The legislators commented that it seems foolish to go through
all of the work of dealing with the legislative charter for a city like Shakopee,
and then not have the city even place the matter on the ballot. The legislators
discussed this matter and made it clear they intended to get out of the business
of drafting amendments to legislative charters for all of the cities incorporated
under general or special legislative charters.
Chapter 412 itself sets forth legislative policy in Section 412.015
entitled 'Uniform Code of Municipal Government. ' I enclose copies of that
section together with Section 412.018, which is the subdivision Mr. Scott brought
to my attention. Section 412.015, Subd. 2 makes very clear that the legislature
wanted all cities without home rule charters brought under the umbrella of
Chapter 412. You will also see in Chapter 412.016, Subd. 1 that the legislature
has decided and states there are simply two kinds of cities, home rule charter
$ d
Page -3-
July 18, 1989
cities and all of the rest, which are now defined as "statutory cities' and that
term statutory city includes every city.
The second reason I have come to the conclusion I have is because of my
understanding of the statutory and case law in Minnesota dealing with the rules
for revocation by implication which I think applicable here. I will, if the
council desires, include in later correspondence the results of our research on
this rule of statutory construction.
I have a third reason for coming to the conclusion I have, and that deals
with some of the language in Chapter 183 of the Laws of 1965. The very first
section of that bill (copy enclosed) states that "notwithstanding the provisions
of any other law or city charter to the contrary, the City of Shakopee shall be
governed by the applicable provisions of this Act.- Chapter 183 goes on to set
forth some changes and additions to the original 1875 Charter. Since provisions
of the original charter were not revoked but merely amended, I think it
reasonable to read Chapter 183 of the Laws of 1965 to be simply an amendment to
the original 1875 Charter, and therefore included in the provisions of Subd. 1
of Chapter 412.018 which specifically repealed the 1875 Charter.
I apologize for bringing this matter to you with such little notice, but
the question Councilman Scott presented was not only very interesting but
obviously very serious and important. I felt it warranted some immediate
research and took it upon myself to request the authority to do so from Mr.
Kraft. I feel confident in the opinion I have given you and believe you have
the following options with respect to the issue:
Option No. 1: Accept this opinion and proceed to operate as Shakopee City
Councils have since July 1, 1975, as a statutory city. This option has the
advantage of speed, since this opinion is already given, and economy since it
will require no further outlay of staff time or money. This option may have the
disadvantage of not being -conclusive- enough for all concerned.
Ontion No 2• Request an opinion of the Attorney General of the State of
Minnesota. This option has the advantage of obtaining an opinion from a source
more often recognized and quoted than your Assistant City Attorney. It has the
disadvantage of lack of certainty, since the Attorney General could decline to
give an opinion on this subject and even if he does so, it will still be just
that, an opinion.
Option No 3: You could instruct your legal staff to prepare and file in
Scott County District Court an action for declaratory judgment determining that
the City of Shakopee is a statutory city and that Chapter 183 of the Laws of 1965
have no effect. This option has the advantage of some significant degree of
certainty and the disadvantage of an expense of time and money.
Option No. 4: You may request that the legislature, either at the special
session coming up this fall, or at its general session next winter expressly
repeal Chanter 183 of the Laws of 1965. There is little doubt in my mind that
the legislature would do so (unless it concluded beyond doubt that it had already
done so) , and this option would have the advantage of absolute certainty and very
g �
Page -4-
July 18, 1989
little, if any, cost. It would have the disadvantage of waiting until one of
these two legislative sessions to settle the matter.
Naturally, some of these options can be adopted in conjunction with others.
RECOMMENDA?ION:
I confess a partiality to Option No. 1. If there is significant concern
about this issue on the part of the council, then I would recommend Option No.
4. In the meantime, I feel very comfortable in recommending that you continue
to do business as usual under Chapter 412 and not consider yourself bound to any
provisions of Chapter 183 of the Laws of 1965.
§412.015
$tATTTCORY CITIES a 75,
412.012. Repealed by Laws 1959, c. 686, § 14; Laws 1959,Ex.Sess.,
§ I
2.36, repealed b HbtoAcal Note
Pier 412ce y - ,the repealed section,which related to inized Sec' now. settiom 414.01 tt seq.
prasant - poeuion of villages from certain ottaaconite,
Stoll! soxass situated on land conminfng
........ 412221(21) aas derived Prom laws 1955,c.390.4 1.
........ 412221(10)
.. ...412221(8),(9) 412.013. Additional powers )ant for the concentration
... 412121(19),(25) Any statutory city containing within its limits a p b resolution of its
... 412.221(25),(26) _ '
412.22 (1 - of taconite. either under construction from thet ownersnthereof sewer or water
...412.221(1ch city
6),(22), council may lease or purchase made by
(23),(2a) facilities or both and operate the same. Any suValidae t d and such city May
........ 412.221(11) '•= prior hereto, by action of the Council, is hereby
......... 412221(7) :..-.
........ 412.221(12) ='` continue to provide sewer and water services to its inhabit
sots
Paws
..... .. 412241 Laws 1957,C.72,§
1. Amended by Laws 1959.C.686,§
....... 412.221(32) 1973, c. 123, art. 2. § I-
......... 412221(28) Historical NOW
412.231
......
412.191(2) - The 1959 amendatory act deleted "Any vil-
........... 412.311 - Inge organizednto action 412.01
2.
........ 412.191(4) _ and" from the beginning
of the seclioo. -
........... 412101 - Cross Reference-
........... 412.851414.01 el seq.
.. 412.271(4) Annexation and consolidation of municipalities in genera,see 4
.281 (repealed; sec
N§ 471.695 et seq.) Library References
........... 412.251
.......... 412.091 . Municipal Corporations 4x270,271. lag to
.......... 412.091 CJS. Municipal COrPmOnom 44
.......... 412.091 1051.
UTION 412.014. Power to operate telephone lines 1n the territory of
Any statutory city heretofore lPRlincorporated,a been constructed
10, 1969 which previous to such incorporationsections 237.33 to 23740, is hereby
and operated by a town as authorized by
phone
ines and the
shall have
erate
laws 1965, c. 856,
alluthe powers granted to towns and the counc l shall have all of the powers
potation of any vil. granted to boards of supervisors under sections 237.33 to 237.40.
ith the provisions of Laws 1957, C. 58, § 1. Amended by Laws 1973, C. 123, an. 2. § I.
Section 412.011 be- NOW of Den-tom
he effective date of _ tionate part of former town funds,may jointly
imp legalized and I. joint operation operate and manage telephone system by joint
now statu. exercise of powers agreement. Op.Any.Gen..
Town and newly formed village
part of 1959.
tory city). each owning P Po 484--4. Sept. 15,
ar
former township telephone system and propor-
412.015. Uniform code of municipal p,iic . The legislature finds that the
Subdivision L Legislative findings; p cy,
laws relating to villages, boroughs and cities without home rule charters are
characterized by unnecessary duplication and inconsistency of treatment;
97
q
i
a
§412.015 CITIES, METROPOLITAN AREAS STATUT(
4
that confusion as to the application of such laws exists because of the e
imprecision of the terms village, borough and city; and that it is desirableqq 1. Classier
i that all such municipalities be governed by a uniform code of statutes in F Effea of l
order to provide them with a modern form of local government and to reduce t which is
p B which his n
u the volume of special legislation relating to municipal government. statutory ch
Subd. 2. Legislative intent. It is the intention of Laws 1973, Chapter 123 : iages would
to simplify the statutes relating to municipal government by bringing the 412.017.
basic laws relating to all villages, boroughs and cities without home rule 1
g charters under a single code of statutes and to effect the transition with a
1' maximum recognition of the desires of the citizens of such municipalities. The rp
Subd. 3. Limitations upon uniform code. The legislature does not intend cation ter.
a municipaliti
S by Laws 1973, Chapter 123: was derived
(1) to affect, alter, repeal or otherwise modify any law of special applies- Laws 1971
tion other than special or general acts of incorporation and amendments indicating d
i• •pp thereto;
II (2) to modify the application of other statutorycodesrelating to municipal It 412.018.
government; or Subdivi
it (3) to impose new substantive powers and duties on cities, villages or On July
boroughs. i Statutes 1
Statutes 1
Subd. 4. Liberal interpretation. Laws 1973, Chapter 123 shall be inter-
Laws 186
s preted liberally to carry out the intention set forth in this subdivision. Special 1-
Laws
Laws 1973, c. 123, an. 1, §§ I to 4, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Prague,S'
6; and St
Library References by the ge.
Municipal Corporations all,22. will then
CJS. Municipal Corporations §§ 15. 36.
legislative
412.016. Application; statutory cities generally
V Solid. :
Subdivision 1. Application and definttion. This chapter applies to any borough
city which has not adopted a home rule charter pursuant to the constitution choose to
and the laws of this state. Such a city is defined as a"statutory city,"and the approprie
term includes every city which was a village on January 1, 1974. the count
Subd. 2. Use of the term village. Except as provided in Laws 1973, resolution
Chapter 123,Article 4,the term"village"shall not be applied to any municipal statutory
1 corporation operating under the authority of this chapter. In the next and Subd.
Subsequent editions of Minnesota Statutes the revisor of statutes shall delete city or be
the term 'village" from this chapter except where necessary to effect the with the c
provisions of Laws 1973, Chapter 123, Article 4. The clerk
Laws 1973, c. 123, art. 2, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. for accot
provide 1
Cross References laws 197°
§ 103.
Classes of cities, see § .015. .
-' Stat defined, see§ ed, se 5.
i� Statutory city defined, see § 410.015.
The 19]4
'i Special lav
I 98
it
§412.018
i
V AREAS � - STATUTORY CITIES
Notes of Decision
se Of the char municipality of Pillager with a without
Effect 1. ffect Dwtlon of statutory clues tion of approximately 379 people and without
Effttt of provisions t the Uniform Cade of a home rule charter,Erom a village to a city of
.ta[ute5 in F Municipal Government making every city
t0 reduce which his not adopted a home rule charter a the fourth class Bigwater Corp. v. Larson,
jgatery city and providing
that
Cities was sOf- 1976,3101976.310 Mina. 512,247 N.W.2d tin.
ld
u pter 123 ###2
nging the 412.017. Repealed by Laws 1976, C. 44, § 70, eff. March 13, 1976
tome rule
Do with a Historical Note
ieipalities. The repealed section,which related to appli- laws formerly applicable to cilia would be
lot intend I ration o laws relsinIEm classes of cities to extended to ace, ipaiftleS historical formerly
no eeunder section
E was derived from lities which
aws 1973.turner4 123,art.2a§were 1- 410.015 gfor statement of purpose).
it applira- laws 1976.c.44,contained a stated Purpose
endments indicating that the act would determine whn:h
412.018. Cities under general or special incorporation acts
municipal Subdivision 1. Termination of government under incorporation acts.
On July 1, 1975, any city incorporated under and governed
by General
illages or - Statutes 1894, Sections 1045 to 1195, Laws Of _895, Chapter 8,
innesota
Statutes 1971,Chapter 411; and the cities and borough of Belle Plaine,Special
be inter- Laws 1868, Chapter 36; Chaska, Special Laws 1891, Chapter 2; Henderson,
bdivision. Special Laws 1891, Chapter 3; St. Peter, Special Laws 1891, Chapter 5; New
Prague,Special Laws 1891, Chapter 46; Shakopee,Special Laws 1875,Chapter
6; and St. Charles. Special Laws 1879, Chapter 57, shall cease to be governed
by the general or special incorporation acts specified in this subdivision and
will thenceforth be governed and controlled and derive their corporate
legislative and other powers from the laws applicable to statutory cities
s generally and from such other special laws as may be applicable to them.
- Subd. 2. Option for early change. The governing body of any city or
es to any borough described in subdivision I may, at any time prior to July 1, 1975,
nstitutionchoose to be no longer subject to its general or special incorporation act by an
of its me
," and the appropriate resolution enacted by a majority members and filed with
the county and state auditor and the secretary of state. After the filing of the
tws 1973, resolution the city or borough shall be governed by the laws applicable to
municipal statutory cities generally to the same degree as it will be after July 1, 1975:-
next and Subd. 3. Fiscal year, former cities. In any city which was a statutory
,all delete city or borough prior to 1973, and in which the fiscal year has not coincided
affect the with the calendar year, the calendar year shall become the fiscal year in 1976.
The clerk, subject to the direction of the council, shall make such adjustments
for accounts and reports during the transitional year as are necessary to
provide the basis for accurate and comparable accounting and reporting.
9 laws 1973, c. 123, art. 5, §§ 3, 4. eff. Jan. 1, 1974• Amended by laws 1974• c. 406•
,ss § 103.
Historical Now
General Statutes 1894, §§ 1045 to 1195 and
m
The 1974 amendatory act deleted'1<Sueur, ter 8 were repealed by laws
v Special laws 1891. Chapter 45' from subd. 1. Laws 1895. chap
99
;6
�r
CHaptex 183. Lev of 1965---- - �
=4L.
.wM'Am:m.•v ✓t4V.�..v -..
tt—
axt"
i 6n.�arit „ I.
_
NipIdi
}
Hcs � „•� m" n wu�n.'pa`" u. 55���� 1 vi .
-II»'•1 ^ "m '"'uMR.mu ^^e wu d�•v., an :y riq mew
Sar✓ryk,v w�.'" "qn..� .a _.'.J' wIt
MM
w
s It It
wW� .mIt. s.
d pN
toy .. .,
It
I In
It
It
ro.1., IM
w
YW=tt
P: A o
a I.
w
12
I =91. :•
"gym . y.:- ;�
a r
ay.,-
9
wsv.,9 — H.F. Now9216 clic utilities tvm�ission tM f.
M act xe U 3 w tl�e city o Ne piers
Se t eractcd by tIz 1 9islatum of Ne State of ftinnuote,
Sectim 1. Sl c Itt, City; public utilities CCI 1 city of Slako,ne ney, upon tln affimutive
wee of It majority of t electors toting m the question at a epactal election called by tM city
co 1 tl Itcf, define tin powers of lite pablic utilities carmussion.
A[prwed, dulre 6, 1969
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Shakopee Shops - Commercial Revenue Note Refinancing
Request - Resolution No. 3106
DATE: August 30, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
A public hearing has been scheduled on the proposed request to
refinance the commercial development revenue notes for the Shakopee
Shops Shopping Center Project. The appropriate public notice
requirements have been met. Therefore, it would be appropriate at
this time to proceed with the public hearing. Following the public
hearing it would be appropriate to take action on the proposed
refunding request.
BACKGROUND•
In December of 1981 the Shakopee City Council approved the issuance
of $600,000 in commercial development revenue notes for the
Shakopee Shops Shopping Center Project. (Red Owl complex) These
bonds were issued at a interest rate of 128. The owners of
Shakopee Shops Shopping Center are very interested in refinancing
this project. The owners feel that at this time they can obtain
a substantially lower interest rate. (Approximately 88) The
owners are also seeking to extend the final payment of the note
from 1996 to 2000 so that the balloon payment due on the final
payment date could also be significantly reduced.
The issuance of the original commercial development revenue note
and the proposed refunding note do not impose any financial
obligations on the City. Providing there is no adverse testimony
opposing said refunding, it would be appropriate for City Council
to approve Resolution No. 3106 as attached. The proposed
resolution relating to the commercial development revenue refunding
bonds (Shakopee Shops Shopping Center Project) grants preliminary
approval to the refunding request and authorizes the appropriate
City officials to prepare the necessary documents.
The applicant has submitted the appropriate information for the
City's approval of said refunding and has submitted the appropriate
application fee for said request. Staff is therefore recommending
that Resolution No. 3106 as attached be approved.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Offer and adopt Resolution No. 3106 relating to commercial
development revenue refunding bonds (Shakopee Shops Shopping
Center Project) ; giving preliminary approval and authorizing
preparation of necessary documents.
2. Do not adopt Resolution No. 3106.
3. Table action on this issue pending further information from
staff.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer 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 move its adoption.
� 6L,
After some discussion, Councilmember
moved for adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 3106
RESOLUTION RELATING TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (SHAKOPEE SHOPS SHOPPING
CENTER PROJECT) ; GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL AND
AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota (the Municipality) , as follows:
SECTION 1
Recitals and Findings
1. 1 . On December 17, 1981, the City issued its Commercial
Development Revenue Note (Shakopee Shops Shopping Center
Project) , in the principal amount of $600, 000 (the Note) , to
finance a project consisting of the construction and renovation
of an approximately 28,900 square foot commercial shopping
center facility (the Project) on behalf of Blair Wolfson,
Robert E. Segal, Robert E. Segal, as personal representative of
the estate of Benjamin Segal, deceased, and Blair Wolfson and
Elizabeth Wolfson, as trustees of the residuary trust created
under the last will and testament of Wilfred Wolfson, deceased
(the Borrowers) . The Project is located at 810-828 East First
Avenue in the Municipality. The Project is currently owned by
Blair Wolfson; Robert E. Segal; Blair Wolfson and Elizabeth .
Wolfson, as trustees of the residuary trust created under the
last will and testament of Wilfred Wolfson, deceased; Hermosa
Associates; Benjamin Segal Testamentary Trust A, u.w. f .b.o.
Sada Segal, Robert E. Segal, trustee; and Benjamin Segal
Testamentary Trust B, u.w. f. b.o. Jerry Segal, Leslie Segal and
Hillary Segal, Robert E. Segal, trustee (the Owners) .
Representatives of the Owners propose that the Municipality
issue its revenue bonds under Minnesota Statutes, Sections
969 . 152 through 969 . 165 (the Act) to refund the Note and
thereby refinance the Project.
1.2 . At a public hearing, duly noticed and held on
September 5, 1989, in accordance with Section 197(f) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, on the proposal to
refinance the Project, all parties who appeared at the hearing
were given an opportunity to express their views with respect
to the proposal to refinance the Project and interested persons
were given the opportunity to submit written comments to the
City Clerk before the time of the hearing . Based on the public
hearing, such written comments (if any) and such other facts
and circumstances as this Council deems relevant, this Council
hereby finds, determines and declares as follows :
(a) The refinancing of the Project would further the
general purposes contemplated and described in Section 469 . 152
of the Act.
(b) This Council has been advised by representatives
of the Owners that on the basis of their discussions with
potential buyers of tax-exempt bonds, revenue bonds of the
Municipality (which may be in the form of a revenue note or
notes) could be issued and sold upon favorable rates and terms
to refinance the Project .
(c) The Municipality is authorized by the Act to
issue its revenue bonds to refund outstanding revenue bonds
issued under the Act.
SECTION 2
Determination To Proceed with
Refinancing of the Project
2 . 1. On the basis of the information given the Municipality to
date, it appears that it would be desirable for the
Municipality to issue its revenue bonds under the provisions of
the Act to refinance the Project in the maximum aggregate face
amount of $510,000 .
2 .2. It is hereby determined to proceed with the refinancing
of the Project and this Council hereby declares its present
intent to have the Municipality issue its revenue bonds under
the Act to refund the Note. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
however, the adoption of this resolution shall not be deemed to
establish a legal obligation on the part of the Municipality or
its City Council to issue or to cause the issuance of such
revenue refunding bonds . All details of such revenue refunding
bond issue and the provisions for payment thereof may be
subject to such further conditions as the Municipality may
specify. The revenue refunding bonds, if issued, shall not
constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable,
upon any property of the Municipality, except the revenues
specifically pledged to the payment thereof, and each bond,
when, as and if issued, shall recite in substance that the
bond, including interest thereon, is payable solely from the
revenues and property specifically pledged to the payment
thereof, and shall not constitute a debt of the Municipality
within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory
limitation.
-2-
yw
SECTION 3
General
3 . 1 . If the revenue refunding bonds are issued and sold, the
Municipality will enter into a lease, sale or loan agreement Or
similar agreement satisfying the requirements of the Act (the
Revenue Agreement) with the Borrower. The lease rentals,
installment sale payments, loan payments or other amounts
payable by the Borrower to the Municipality under the Revenue
Agreement shall be sufficient to pay the principal of , interest
and redemption premium, if any, on, the bonds as and when the
same shall become due and payable.
3 .2 . The Borrower has agreed and it is hereby determined that
any and all direct and indirect costs incurred by the
Municipality in connection with the refinancing Of the Project,
whether or not the Municipality by resolution authorizes the
issuance of the bonds, will be paid by the Borrower upon
request.
3 .3 . The Mayor and City Clerk are directed, if the revenue
refunding bonds are issued and sold, thereafter to comply with
the provisions of Section 469 . 154, Subdivisions 5 and 7 of the
Act.
Adopted this 5th day of September, 1989 .
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of September, 1989.
-3-
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Bluff Avenue, Marschall Road to Dakota Street
Project No. 1989-12
DATE: August 29 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3105 for Council consideration which
orders plans and specifications prepared for improvements to
Bluff Avenue between Marschall Road and Dakota Street, Naumkeg
Street between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue and Prairie Street
from 1st Avenue to Bluff Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
On November 15 , 1988 City Council ordered the preparation of a
feasibility report for street improvements to Bluff Avenue
between Marschall Road and Naumkeg Street by Resolution No. 2973 •
The feasibility report was distributed to City Council on August
15 , 1989 and subsequently a public hearing was scheduled for
September 5 , 1989 by Resolution No. 3103 •
In the feasibility report, staff expanded the project limits to
include other streets in this area that are currently non-
improved including Bluff Avenue between Naumkeg Street and Dakota
Street, Prairie Street between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue and
Naumkeg Street between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue .
The proposed improvements consist of constructing bituminous
pavement, curb & gutter and storm sewers on the various sections
of the project . Staff will give a presentation on the
feasibility report at the public hearing.
At the conclusion of the public hearing if Council wishes to
proceed with the project, Resolution No. 3105 which orders the
preparation of the plans and specifications for this project is
attached for Council consideration.
ALTERNATIVES:
Depending on the testimony received at the public hearing ,
Council has the following alternatives:
1 . Determine that the project should proceed and order staff to
prepare plans and specifications for the project using the
project limits that were recommended in the feasibility
report.
2 . Determine that the project is not in the best interest of
the City and do not proceed any further with the project.
3 . Table any action on the project in order to revise the
project scope or to direct staff to provide additional
information to Council .
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to proceed with the project
and order staff to prepare plans and specifications for the
project as recommended by the feasibility report.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3105 , A Resolution Ordering an Improvement
and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Bluff Avenue
Between Marschall Road and Dakota Street, Naumkeg Street Between
1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue and Prairie Street Between 1st Avenue
and Bluff Avenue, Project No. 1989-12 and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
MEM3105
Division o1 AshlandOil, Inc.
98th St
1240 Wast 98th Street
Bloomington, Minnesota 55431
612-887-6100
SUPERAMERICA
August 25, 1989
AUG 2 81989
Honorable Mayor and City Council CITY OF SHAKOPEE
City of Shakopee
129 First Ave. E.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Honorable Mayor and City Council:
We have reviewed the Feasibility Report entitled Improvement of Bluff
Avenue between Marschall Road and Naumkelt Street dated August 10, 1989
as prepared by David E. Hutton.
We support the improvement of Bluff Avenue as proposed in the Feasibility
Report and urge the City Council to give the project their favorable
consideration to construct the project as soon as possible.
Respectfully,
Samuel S. VanTass
Real Estate Repres ative
cc: G.K. Townsend
RESOLUTION NO. 3105
A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And
The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For
Bluff Avenue Between Marshcall Road And Dakota Street,
Naumkeg Street Between 1st Avenue And Bluff Avenue
And Prairie Street Between 13t Avenue And Bluff Avenue
Project No. 1989-12
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 3103 , adopted on August 15 , 1989 ,
fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of
Bluff Avenue Between Marschall Road and Dakota Street, Naumkeg
Street Between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue and Prairie Street
Between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue by Pavement, Curb and Gutter,
and Storm Sewers ; and
WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through
two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the
hearing was held on the 5th day of September 1989 , at which all
persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be
heard thereon.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter
described:
The construction of pavement , curb and gutter and storm
sewers on Bluff Avenue between Marschall Road and Dakota
Street, Naumkeg Street between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue
and Prairie Street between 1st Avenue and Bluff Avenue
2, David Hutton, City Engineer is hereby designated as the
engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and
specifications for the making of such improvement.
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
19
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day of
, 19—.
City Attorney
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator ?c
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Appeal of Action by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
On a Variance Request by Gerald Schesso
DATE: August 311 1989
INTRODUCTION:
At their meeting on August 3, 1989, the Board of Adjustment and
Appeals denied the granting of a variance to Mr. Gerald Schesso,
1199 Quincy Street for construction of an accessory structure over
a boat being constructed in the rear of the property. Mr. Schesso
has appealed the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
to the City Council. Mr. Schesso previously had obtained a
variance for the existing accessory structure which expired on July
31, 1989.
BACKGROUND:
For background regarding this item please refer to the following
attached information:
1. Minutes of the August 3, 1989 Board of Adjustment and Appeals
meeting.
2. Staff report to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals regarding
this item.
3. Site plan showing the location of the accessory structure.
4. Letter of Appeal from Mr. Gerald Schesso.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The City Council can offer and move for the denial of Variance
Resolution CC-569 concurring with the action of the Board of
Adjustment and Appeals.
2. The City Council can approve of Variance Resolution CC-569
granting the variances requested by the applicant. The City
Council may add conditions of approval to the Variance, such
as a time limit.
RECOMMENDATION•
The staff recommended to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals denial
of the variance (alternative #1) . The Board of Adjustment and
Appeals in their action on August 3, 1989 concurred with the staff
recommendation.
ACTION REOUESTED•
Offer and pass Resolution CC-569 as outlined in either alternative
#1 or #2 above.
9 C
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION AUGUST 3, 1989
Members Present: Stafford, Kahleck, Forbord, Foudray
Members Absent: Stafford, Allen, Rockne
Others Present: Doug Wise--City Planner, Sharon Swenson--Recording
Secretary
I. ROLL CALL
Chairman Forbord called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Four
members present.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Forbord/Stafford moved that the Board accept the
agenda as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 6. 1989
MOTS: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the Board accept the
minutes of July 6 as presented.
IV. VARIANCE REOUEST 567, SUBMITTED BY DAVID BRODERSON
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the hearing be opened
for discussion of the conditional use permit
application by David Broderson.
Wise gave a brief overview of the application. The property is
located at 1174 Monroe Street. A request has been made to allow the
applicant to build an addition with a 5 foot setback since previous
construction on the property has already established that setback. He
would like the same setback for this addition as the existing attached
garage.
MOTION: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the public hearing be
closed. Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the Board approve
variance 567 for a 5 foot setback. Motion passed
unanimously.
V. VARIANCE REQUEST 568 SUBMITTED BY BERT A. NOTERMANN, 812 CO. RD
77
MOTION: Kahleck/Stafford moved that the public hearing be
1
opened for discussion of the variance request
submitted by Bert A. Notermann. Motion passed
unanimously.
Wise explained that the applicant is requesting a variance to
construct an accessory building closer to the front lot line than the
principal building. The code states that an accessory building cannot
be closer to the front lot line that the principal dwelling.
Notermann would like the garage closer to the front lot line. The
property is 10 acres and is in a rural residential district. There
will still be a 245' setback from the road. Trees, hills, and marsh
area surrounding the site make it difficult to place the garage
farther back.
MOTION: Stafford/Kahleck moved to close the public hearing
on the discussion of the variance application
submitted by Notermann requesting an accessory
building closer to the front lot line than the
principal dwelling. Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Foudray/Kahleck moved that the Board approve
Variance Resolution #568 subject to the following
condition:
1. The garage shall be built in the location as
shown on plans submitted with the Variance
application.
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the Board take a short
recess until the 7:50 time schedule for the next
application. Motion passed unanimously.
FETING RECONVENED AT 7:50 P.M. Y
VARIANCE REQUEST 569. SUBMITTED BY GERALD SCHESSO FOR THE VI.
PROPERTY AT 1199 QUINCY.
MOTION: Kahleck/Stafford moved to open the public hearing on
the variance request submitted by Gerald Schesso.
Motion passed unanimously.
se noted that the following variances are being requested for the Wi
Dperty at 1199 Quincy Street: pr
1. To allow an accessory building to exceed the height of the
principal dwelling by 10 feet.
2. To allow an accessory building to exceed 10% of the lot area
by 720 square feet.
3. To allow an accessory building to be located nearer the street
2
w
than the principal dwelling by 10 feet.
Wise continued to explain that four years ago, Schesso had begun
constructing a large boat in his backyard. Two years ago, he
constructed a large shed in his backyard over the boat. It was not in
compliance with City Code. The required Building permit could not be
issued. Staff concluded that the boat was not permitted in the
district. The decision was appealed and it was ruled that the boat
was permitted, but the shed must meet code. The applicant had
requested the variance to allow the building to be 30' by 60' by 25'
high. It was denied by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. He
appealed to the City Council and they granted the request with the
condition that it would expire on July 31, 1989. The boat is not yet
completed and Schesso would like another variance to allow the
building to remain longer.
Mike Stubber of 1199 Quincy appeared before the Board. He explained
that he is one of the builders of the boat and that they are doing as
well as they can. They are trying to keep the area as clean as
possible and would like to finish the boat in the structure.
Gerald Schesso of 1199 Quincy appeared before the Board. He explained
that he thought they would be done sooner, but last summer the
temperature was high and a lot of time was lost. It may take years to
finish the boat without the shelter. He would like the Board to see
the progress being made.
Kahleck quoted from previous Council Meeting Minutes: Completion is
anticipated by the fall of 1988, or else the boat will be moved to
finish elsewhere. The concern had been the length of time the shed
would be up.
Schesso said it was not physically possible to move the boat .at this
time.
Kahleck asked for how long a time period the applicant was requesting
the variance proposal.
Schesso said he would need the shed until the boat was completed.
Hopefully, this would be within one year. If no shed would be
allowed, they could construct a frame of 2 by 4's and cover it with a
tarp.
Kahleck asked if Schesso meant he would move it when it was close to
completion or completely done. Would this be one year or five years?
Schesso said they were dealing with severe weather conditions in
Minnesota. If the shed were taken down now, it may mean that the boat
sit there for years. The structure cannot be seen until one is three
or four houses away on Adams, and it does not look bad from any
direction.
3
Tim Hitting of 154 Judith Drive, Chaska, came forward. He explained
he was one of the builders. He said that they had gotten the O.K. to
build the boat before they started, and no one had complained on the
first building constructed on the site.
Stafford asked what the anticipated date of completion was.
Schesso answered that they had first thought it would be about 2
years, but were incorrect. They would like to complete it.
Wise noted that he could find no documentation on the boat being
approved previously as Hitting had stated.
Forbord said that although he personally liked the idea of the boat,
the Board needed to enforce zoning regulations and code.
Clete Link of 12138 Link Drive appeared to say that he had no
objections to the project. He felt it was an interesting project as
well as a learning experience.
MOTION: Kahleck/Stafford moved to close the public hearing
on the variance requested by Gerald Schesso. Motion
passed unanimously.
MOTION: Kahleck/Stafford moved that the Board deny variance
569. Motion passed unanimously.
Forbord advised the applicant of his right to appeal the decision to
the City Council.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
None
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Foudray/Stafford moved that the Board adjourn.
Motion passed unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 8: 00 P.M.
4
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
VARIANCE RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO CC 496
WHEREAS , Gerald Schesso having first
filed an aPPPPRica tion to the Boar o Adjustment an Appeals dated
June 25, 1987 , for a variance from the strict
applfcatfon o the provisions o the Shakopee Zoning Ordinance ,
Section
to-wit :
for the following variances: to exceed the height of the principal dwlg
to exceed 10% of the lot area by 720 sq. ft. & allow accessory : and_OVE':
WHEREAS, theProperty upon which the request is being made is
described as : 1199 Quincy Street
and
WHEREAS, said proposed variance request was Denied
by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals at their meeting OT—_111Y.91987
and this decision has been appealed to the City Council ; and
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council on August 4, 1987 held
a public hearing on the appeal from the decision o t e Boar o
Adjustment and Appeals .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that upon hearing the advice and recommenda-
tions of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and upon considering the
suggestions made by the applicant and suggestions and objections raised
by the affected property owners , within a radius of 350 feet thereof,
in public hearings duly held by the Shakopee Board of Adjustment and
Appeals and the Shakopee City Council that the aforementioned variance
be and is hereby: Approved
as follows :
The Expiration Date of this Variance will be July 31, 1989.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Shakopee City Code 11 . 04 ,
Subd. 5 B-5, if an approved variance is not utilized within one year
from date herein approved or by August 4 . 1988 it shall become
null and void .
Adopted in re ular session of the City .
Council of the City o Sha tope,, Minnesota a this 4thday f
August 19 87_. _ .
ATTEST: _
Aayor t City opee
i
Cit C erc _ .__. __ -.-_ ._ .
` Approved as to form 4.
this 41 day of
42J�, 19 F7 .
ci[may �A�t�[[o --
1/84
CITY OF SHAKOPEE 9 c
INCORPORATED 1870 :GZNDA. NO.
T 6
A� 1
V.
STAFF REPORT
METING DATE: August 3, 1959
RESOLUTION NO. : 569
-=EPAfZ'.D 5Y: Douglas R. wise, City Planner
APPLICANT
APPLICA3LL'- PROVISIONS: Section 11.03, Subd. 6; Section 11.04,
Subd.5; 6 Section 11.26
PROPOSAL: A variance is being requested for the following:
1. To allow an accessory building to exceed the height
of the principal dwelling by 101 .
2. To allow an accessory building to exceed 10% of the
lot area by 720 sq. ft.
3. To allow an accessory building to be located nearer
'fOCATION: the street than the principal dwelling by 101 .
1199 Quincy St.
APa TCANT: Gerald Schesso
SITE DATA
ZONING: R-2
ACREAGE: .25 Acres
KUNICIPAL UTILITIES: Yes
ADJACENT- ZONING
AND T-kND USE: N- R-2
<_ R-2
R-2
w- R-2
BAC&GRO=:
Approximately 4 years ago Mr. Gerald Schesso began constructing a
large boat in the back yard of his home at 1199 Quincy Street.
In the Spring of 1987, Mr. Schesso began constructing an
accessory structure over the boat. The accessory structure
measures 291x 60' and approximately 23' in height. On May 4,
1987, Mr. Schesso was issued a stop work order on the structure
because he had not received a building permit from the City. On
May 4, 1987, Mr. Schesso completed an application for a building
permit to construct the building. On May 12, 1987 Mr. Schesso
was sent a letter informing him that the building permit had not
been approved because it did not comply with the City
requirements for an accessory building. The letter also stated
that the City staff had determined the boat construction project
did not comply with the requirements of the R-2 Zoning District
(see attached letter) . Mr. Schesso then appealed the decision of
the City staff to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals.
At their meeting on June 4, 1987, the Shakopee Board of
Adjustment and Appeals affirmed the decision of City staff that
the structure in Mr. Schesso's rear yard is an accessory building
and that the construction of the structure does require a
building permit and must comply with all City Code requirements
applied to accessory buildings. The Board of Adjustment and
Appeals on the same date over turned the staff's determination
that the construction of the large boat does not comply with the
City Code, and therefore ruled that the boat could be constructed
in the rear yard of Mr. Schesso's house.
On June 23, 1987, Mr. Schesso submitted an application for a
variance to allow the construction of the accessory building.
Mr. Schesso's application indicated that the construction of the
building was necessary to protect the boat which he is
constructing in his rear yard. At their meeting on July 9, 1987,
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals denied Mr. Schesso's request
for the variances necessary to allow the accessory building to
remain.
Mr. Schesso then appealed the decision of the Board of Adjustment
and Appeals to the City Council. At their meeting on August 4,
1987, the City Council heard Mr. Schesso's appeal and granted him
a variance to allow the accessory structure to remain in his rear
yard. The variance was approved with the condition that it would
expire on July 31, 1989, approximately 2 years after approval.
At the City Council meeting, Mr. Schesso stated that he expected
to complete the boat building project by Fall of 1988.
On July 10, 1989, the City staff sent a letter to Mr. Schesso
informing him that the variance would expire on July 31, 1989 and
that the accessory structure must be removed by that date (copy
attached) . Mr. Schesso asked the City staff what the procedure
would be for renewing the variance and the staff indicated that
since there was no provision in the variance for renewal, he must
� G
file a new application for a variance and start the process over
again. Mr. Schesso has filed the variance application.
FINDINGS:
Criteria #1 Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply
to the property which do not apply generally to
other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and
result form lot size or shape, topography, or
other circumstances over which the owners of
property since enactment of this chapter have had
no control.
Finding #1 There are no exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances which apply to this property. The
lot on which Mr. Schesso's home and the accessory
building in question exist is not any different
then the other lots located in the same vicinity.
Construction of the accessory structure is totally
within the control of the owner.
Criteria #2 The literal interpretation of the provisions of
this Chapter would deprive the applicant of right
commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same
district under the terms of this Chapter.
Finding #2 other properties within the same zoning district
must comply with the size and setback requirements
for accessory structures.
Criteria #3 That the special conditions or circumstances do
not result from the actions of the applicant.
Finding #3 The design, size and location of the accessory
structure is within the control of the applicant.
It is within the applicants control to construct
the boat elsewhere if he so chooses, or if it is
necessary in order to provide proper protection
for the construction project.
Criteria #4 That granting of the variance requested will not
confer on the applicant any special privilege that
is denied by this Chapter to owners of other
lands, structures or buildings in the same
district.
Finding #4 Owners of other property within the same district
must comply with size and setback requirements
contained in the City Code for accessory
structures. Although the applicant has received
permission to construct the boat in his rear yard,
it is the staff's conclusion that this does not
enable the applicant to any special privileges in
regards to construction of structures which may
house this particular project.
Criteria #5 The variance requested is the minimum variance
which would alleviate the hardship.
Finding #5 It is the City's staff conclusion that a hardship
does not exist in this case.
Criteria #6 The variance would not be materially detrimental
to the purposes of this Chapter, or to the
property in the same zone.
Finding #6 The granting of this variance would be materially
detrimental to the purposes of the Chapter, and to
property in the same zone. The granting of the
variance would extend to the applicant a special
privilege in regard to the size and setback of
accessory structures allowed within the zoning
district. The granting of the variance would also
be materially detrimental to the purposes of the
Chapter because it would grant permission for an
accessory structure which is not consistent with
accessory structures allowed within the
residential districts of the City.
RECOMMENDATION•
The staff recommends denial of Variance Resolution No. 569 for
the following reasons:
1. The variance would grant the applicant special privileges
not enjoyed by other property owners within the same
district by allowing an accessory structure which -greatly
exceeds the requirements of the City Code for the district.
2 . The design, size and location of the accessory structure is
within the control of the applicant.
3 . The size and design of the accessory structure is not
consistent with the purposes of the Urban Residential Zoning
District.
4 . It is within the applicants control to construct the boat
else where if he so chooses, or if it is necessary in order
to provide proper protection for the construction project.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer and move for approval or denial of Variance Resolution No.
569 listing conditions for approval or the reasons for denial.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870
1
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE.SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 553741378 (912)4453850
,
July 10, 1989
Mr. Gerald Schesso
1199 Quincy
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Expiration of Variance Resolution No. CC-496
Dear Mr. Schesso:
At their June 4 , 1987 meeting, the Shakopee Board of Adjustment
and Appeals approved a motion to:
(1) Affirm the decision of City staff that the structure in the
rear yard is an accessory building and that construction of
the structure does require a building permit and must comply
with all City Codes requirements applied to accessory
buildings. And;
(2) Overrided the decision of City staff that the construction
of a large boat in the rear yard is not allowed by permitted
use, conditional use or permitted accessory use in the R-2
zone.
At their July 9 , 1987 meeting, the Shakopee Board of Adjustment
and Appeals passed a Resolution denying the following variances:
(1) A variance to allow an accessory building to exceed the
height of the principle dwelling by 10 feet.
(2) A variance to allow an accessory building to exceed 10% of
the lot area by 720 square feet.
(3) A variance allowing an accessory building to be located
nearer the street than the principle dwelling by 10 feet.
At the City Council meeting held August 4 , 1987, your request for
an appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals decision to deny
the variances was approved (enclosed) . The expiration date of
this variance will be July 31, 1989 .
The Heart OJ Progress Valley
pN EOW t ayC7q,UHlN ENSEO VEF
You are hereby advised that the accessory building must be
removed by the expiration date of the variance. If the accessory
building is not removed by this deadline you may be cited for
violating the zoning ordinance.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Douglas K. Wise
City Planner
DKW:trw
CC: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
CITY OF SHAKOPEE •
INCORPORATED 1870
1
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE.SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (812)x8.7850
July 12, 1989
Mr. Gerald Schesso
1199 Quincy
Shakopee, Mn 55379
RE: Expiration of Variance Resolution No. CC-496
Dear Mr. Schesso:
This letter is in response to your inquiry about the procedure
for extending City Council Variance Resolution No. CC-496. As
you are aware, City Council Variance No. 496 will expire on July
31, 1989 .
I have consulted with the City Attorney and he concurs with my
opinion that because there is no provision for renewal of the
variance, you would have to start the process over again with a
application for a new variance.
I have enclosed an application form for the request of a
variance. The next Board of Adjustment and Appeals meeting will
be held on August 3, 1989. The deadline for submission of
applications for the August 3 , 1989 meeting is July 17, 1989.
If you have any further questions, please feel free tocontact
me.
ncerely,
Douglas K. Wise
City Planner
DKW:trw
CC: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
The Heart Of Progress Valley
IN EOVIL OPPo FiUNRY EMPL O YEX
_ /, y, paa ter.. �
�� ��ftl�f� ���r���ourr����rn��� �4 �
SII ��� .y�
r�
�U(Wc�
- I
_ - -- -- �
.� I
O
51LJ
I
DRAW SKETCH HERE WHEN REWIRED
,A
Lac s rt
5 �-i q , li &I . �f
�„ .0 G1969
G1TY O� �;sAr.�3Y.r'-F.
P"
L!I;CA,J
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Amendments to City Zoning Code for Animal Hospitals and
Lot Width & Area Requirements When Party Walls are
Utilized
DATE: September 1, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
At their meeting on July 18, 1989, the City Council received a
recommendation from the Planning Commission to amend City Code
Section 11.03 to allow exemption of lots from width and area
requirements when party walls are utilized. At that meeting the
City Council passed a motion directing the City Attorney to draft
the appropriate ordinance including these changes. At their
meeting on August 15, 1989, the City Council received a
recommendation from the Planning Commission recommending that
Section 11.30 Subd 3 be amended to allow as a conditional use
"animal hospitals and veterinary clinics serving companion animals
and domesticated pets; provided, however that all animal
confinement area shall be fully enclosed within a building". At
that meeting the City Council passed a motion directing the City
Attorney to draft the appropriate ordinance containing this
amendment to the Zoning Code. Please find attached the draft
ordinance containing both of these proposed zoning code amendments.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council at their meeting on July 18, 1989, received the
recommendation of the Planning Commission to amend City Code
Section 11.03, Subd. 3 to add the following provision F.
"F. Lots maybe excluded from the width requirements and area
requirements if party walls are utilized or buildings are
planned to be constructed as an intregal structure, when
a planned unit development approval for the entire
property has been secured (except twin homes) . Separate
ownership of twin home units requires approval of a lot
split (Section 12.08) provided each unit has a lot width
and area equal to at least 1/2 of the area and width
required for a two family dwelling. "
The Planning Commission also recommended that a definition be added
to the Zoning Code for twin homes. The attached ordinance
incorporates these recommended code changes. If the Council
desires additional background on this item please refer to the memo
included in the agenda packet for the July 18th meeting on this
item (agenda item #10b.) .
At their meeting on August 15, 1989 the City Council received a
recommendation from the Planning Commission recommending that City
Code Section 11.30, Subd. 3 be amended by adding a Conditional Use
Permit Subd. 3 (B-2 Zoning District) be amended to allow as a
conditional use "animal hospitals and veterinary clinics serving
companion animals and domesticated pets; provided, however that all
animal confinement areas shall be fully enclosed within a
building". The attached ordinance incorporates this code change
recommended by the Planning Commission, for additional information
please review the memo from the August 15th meeting (agenda item
#9b. ) .
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The City Council can offer and pass ordinance #275 as drafted,
thereby approving the code changes as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
2. The City Council can offer and pass Ordinance 4275 after
changing the proposed wording of the Zoning Code amendments
recommended by the Planning Commission.
3. The City Council can offer and pass a motion to not adopt
Ordinance #275, thereby leaving the code as is.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REODESTED•
Offer and pass Ordinance #275 amending City Code Sections 11.02,
11.03, and 11.30 as proposed in alternative #1.
ORDINANCE NO. 275
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee
City Code, Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulation(Zoning)" by
Amending Section 11.02 by Adding Definition for "Twin Homes"; by
Amending Section 11.03 by Adding Exclusion provisions and by
Amending Section 11.30 (B-2)Subd 3 by Expanding Conditional Uses
and by adding by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section
11.99, Which Among Other Things, Contain Penalty Provisions
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION 11.02 Definition
The following definition is added to 11.02:
"Twin Home" - A two family dwelling where each dwelling unit is under
separate ownership or title.
SECTION 11.03 Subd 3 F Exclusions
Lots maybe excluded from the width requirements and area requirements if
party walls are utilized or buildings are planned to be constructed as an
intregal structure, when a planned unit development approval for the entire
property has been secured (except twin homes) . Separate ownership of twin home
units requires approval of a lot split (Section 12.08) provided each unit has a
lot width and area equal to at least 1/2 of the area and width required for a
two family dwelling.
SECTION 11.30 Community Business (B-2)
Subd 3 should be amended by adding the following Conditional Use:
Animal hospitals and veterinary clinics serving companion animals
and domestic pets; providing however, that all animal confinement areas shall
be fully enclosed within the building.
SECTION 11.99A Violation
Every person violating a section, subdivision or provision hereof, when
he performs an act thereby prohibited or declared unlawful or fails to do an act
which such failure is thereby prohibited or declared unlawful and upon conviction
thereof shall be punished for a misdemeanor but no jail sentence shall be imposed.
SECTION 11.99B When in force and effect
This Ordinance shall be in force and effect after the adoption thereof and
the attestation thereof and after the day of publication in the official newspaper
of the City of Shakopee.
Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of 1989.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
31st day of August, 1989.
City At m rney
(� ti L) !S
ORDINANCE NO. 275
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee
City Code, Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulation(Zoning)" by
Amending Section 11.02 by Adding Definition for "Twin Homes"; by
Amending Section 11.03 by Adding Exclusion provisions and by
Amending Section 11.30 (B-2)Subd 3 by Expanding Conditional Uses
and by adding by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section
11.99, Which Among Other Things, Contain Penalty Provisions
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION 11.02 Definition
The following definition is added to 11.02:
"Twin Home" - A two family dwelling where each dwelling unit is under
separate ownership or title.
SECTION 11.03 Subd 3 F Exclusions
Subd 3 should be amended by adding the fol lowing Exclusio
F. Lots may be excluded from the width requirements an area requirements if
party walls are utilized or buildings are planned to be constructed as an
intregal structure, when a planned unit development approval for the entire
property has been secured (except twin homes) . Separate ownership of twin home
units requires approval of a lot split (Section 12.08) provided each unit has a
lot width and area equal to at least 1/2 of the area and width required for a
two family dwelling.
SECTION 11.30 Community Business (B-2)
Subd 3 should be amended by adding the following Conditional Use:
M. Animal hospitals and veterinary clinics serving companion animals
and domestic pets; providing however, that all animal confinement areas shall
be fully enclosed within the building.
C' `
SECTION 11.99A Violation
Every person violating a section, subdivision or provision hereof, when
he performs an act thereby prohibited or declared unlawful or fails to do an act
which such failure is thereby prohibited or declared unlawful and upon conviction
thereof shall be punished for a misdemeanor but no jail sentence shall be imposed.
SECTION 11.99B When in force and effect
This Ordinance shall be in force and effect after the adoption thereof and
the attestation thereof and after the day of publication in the official newspaper
of the City of Shakopee.
Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of 1989.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
31st day of August, 1989.
City Attorney
ID,
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer
RE: Elimination of Left Turns at Holmes and Lewis Streets Off
of Highway 101
DATE: August 23, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
On August 16, 1989 the Shakopee Community Development Commission
moved to recommend to City Council that left hand turns off Of Hwy.
101 for traffic heading Westerly be prohibited at Lewis and Holmes
Streets between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M.
BACKGROUND:
The Community Development Commission feels that for safety reasons
left hand turns at Holmes and Lewis Streets should be prohibited
between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. The Commission also
believes that by eliminating the left hand turns, traffic flow
would be significantly improved in the downtown area.
Last year, the City Council considered several options for
improving traffic flow in the downtown area. One of the options
reviewed at that time addressed the prohibition of left hand turns
at Lewis and Holmes Streets. At that time, a number of the
downtown business owners objected to this proposal claiming that
it would place a hardship on their business. City Council
subsequently dropped the plan to eliminate left hand turns at
Holmes and Lewis Streets.
The City Engineer agrees that prohibiting left turns would increase
the traffic flow, but due to the fact that the City Council
discussed this issue last year and decided against adding this
restriction because of the impact on downtown business, he feels
that the status quo should be maintained, especially since the
construction of the mini by-pass is currently scheduled for
November 1990.
If City Council feels that for safety reasons left hand turns
should be prohibited at Lewis and Holmes Streets it would be
appropriate at this time to direct the appropriate City officials
to inform Mn DOT of the City's intent.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Move to direct the appropriate City officials to inform MnDOT
that the City of Shakopee intends to prohibit left hand turns
at Lewis and Holmes Streets between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and
7:00 P.M.
2. Maintain the status quo.
3 . Eliminate left hand turns at Lewis and Holmes Streets between
a different time period and also during the tourist season
only.
4. Table pending further information from staff.
STAFF RECOMIENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #2.
ACTION REOUESTED•
Move to maintain status quo.
Oc-
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Refuse Disposal Ordinance No. 274
DATE: August 23, 1989
INTRODUCTION-
Attached is Ordinance No. 274 amending the refuse collection
section of the Shakopee City Code. It would be appropriate at this
time to adopt Ordinance No. 274 as submitted.
BACKGROUND:
On July 24, 1989 the Shakopee Energy and Transportation Committee
held a public hearing on the proposed Refuse Disposal Ordinance
Amendments. Following the hearing the committee unanimously moved
said ordinance for Council approval.
On August 1, 1989 the Shakopee City Council directed the
appropriate City officials to prepare the necessary amending
ordinance to the City Code providing for a closed refuse collection
program. The proposed ordinance also addresses the type of refuse
container to be utilized, the collection point and the provision
of recycling and yard waste collection services by the City's
contractor. The ordinance also includes an anti-scavenging section
which provides the City of Shakopee with some recourse against
those persons who are unlawfully taking recyclable materials from
residents recycling containers.
The proposed ordinance moves Shakopee in the direction of a closed
refuse collection program. The ordinance requires all new
customers to receive City refuse collection service. The proposed
ordinance grandfathers 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) whichever comes first. Residents outside the
refuse collection service area that are receiving service from the
City would also be grandfathered. Upon execution of the new
contract in 1992, residents outside the City's refuse collection
service area would be excluded from the City's service unless they
could obtain 1008 participation from the residents in said
subdivision. In 1992 all Shakopee residents within the refuse
collection service area would be provided service under the City's
refuse contract.
I would like to point out that the proposed ordinance only includes
residential units up to and including four plexes within the refuse
collection service area. The refuse collection service area is
defined as all area South of the proposed Southerly By-Pass within
the Shakopee City Limits.
If City Council has no questions regarding the proposed ordinance,
it would be appropriate at this time to adopt Ordinance No. 274.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Move to adopt Ordinance No. 274.
2. Do not adopt Ordinance No. 274.
3 . Table action on this issue pending further information from
staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative 41.
ACTION REOUESTED•
offer Ordinance No. 274, An Ordinance of Shakopee, Minnesota,
Amending Shakopee City Code by Amending Chapter 3 , Entitled
"Municipal and Public Utilities-Rules and Regulations, Franchises
and Rates" by Repealing Sec 3.15 entitled "Rules and Regulations
Relating to Refuse Collection" and by Enacting a New Sec 3 .15
entitled "Rules and Regulations Relating to Source, Separation,
Collection and Disposal of Refuse: and by Adopting by Reference
Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 and Sec 3.99, which among other
Things, contain penalty provisions.
ORDINANCE NO. 274
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee
City Code by Amending Chapter 3, Entitled "Municipal and Public
Utilities-Rules and Regulations, Franchises and Rates" by Repealing
Sec 3.15 entitled "Rules and Regulations Relating to Refuse Collection"
and by Enacting a New Sec 3.15 entitled "Rules and Regulations Relating to
Source, Separation, Collection and Disposal of Refuse" and by Adopting
by Reference Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 and Sec 3.99, which among
other Things, contain penalty provisions.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 3.15 Rules and regulations relating to source separation,
collection and disposal of refuse.
Subd. 1. Definitions. As used in this section, the following
terms shall have the following meanings:
1. "Refuse" as used in this section shall include "garbage",
refuse and litter as defined in Chapter 10 of the City
Code, but shall exclude construction materials.
2. "Paper" shall include paper of the type commonly referred
to as newsprint.
3 . "Cans" shall include all disposable containers made and
fabricated primarily of metal, aluminum and tin.
4 . "Glass" shall include products used as bottles, jars and
other glass containers, excluding however, blue and flat
glass commonly known as "window glass" .
5. "Receptacle" shall mean individual containers constructed
of weather proof, insect and rodent proof materials such
as plastic or metal for refuse and recycling purposes.
6. "Recycling" shall mean any process by which materials
which would otherwise become solid waste are collected,
separated or processed and returned to the economic
mainstream in the form of raw materials or products.
7. "Yard Waste" shall mean grass clippings and leaves.
S. "Refuse/Recycling Service Area" shall mean the area in
which the City shall provide for the collection and
disposal of refuse, recyclables and yard waste, generally
defined as the area South of the proposed 101 by-pass or
otherwise approved by the City Council.
Subd. 2. Contract Required.
It shall be unlawful for any person to collect or dispose
of refuse or recycables from any single family dwelling
unit up to and including four plexes located within the
refuse collection service area without authorization from
the City Council.
Subd. 3. Collection and Disposal of Refuse. The City or its duly
authorized contractor shall provide for the collection
and disposal of all refuse from single family and
multiple family units up to and including four plexes in
a sanitary manner to insure the health, safety and
general welfare of it's residents, under such terms and
conditions as the City may, from time to time, deem
appropriate. Such collection shall be made only in the
areas defined by the City as the refuse/recycling service
area and in accordance with the schedule, as established
by the City.
Subd. 4. Collection of Recyclable Materials. The City or its duly
authorized contractor shall provide by contract for the
collection and disposal of newspaper, glass, cans and
yard waste in a sanitary manner to insure the health,
safety and general welfare of it's residents, under such
terms and conditions as the City may from time to time,
deem appropriate. Such collection shall be made only in
the areas of the City, and in accordance with a schedule
as established by the City Council.
Subd. 5. Kind and Placement of Containers.
a. Residential Units - The City or its duly authorized
contractor shall be responsible for providing refuse
and recycling receptacles to all single family units
up to and including four plexes located within the
refuse collection service area. The cost of the
receptacles shall be included in the refuse
collection rate. The refuse receptacles shall be
made of plastic and not exceed 65 gallon capacity.
These receptacles shall be water-tight and fitted
with handles and a substantially tight fitting cover
to prevent the disturbance of contents thereof by
cats and dogs, and to prevent the propagation of,
and infestation by, rats, flies, etc. The City
shall also be responsible for providing residents
within the refuse collection service area with a 30-
gallon recycling receptacle. The recycling
receptacle shall be constructed of weather proof,
insect and rodent proof material such as plastic.
The cost of the receptacles shall be included in the
refuse collection fees.
b. Commercial and Industrial Establishments - The
owner, manager, proprietor, agent or occupant of
any residential unit larger then a four plex, store,
hotel, restaurant, saloon, stable or industrial
building within the City shall be responsible for
providing water tight receptacles for the reception
of garbage and refuse. These containers shall be
water tight and fitted with substantially tight
fitting covers to prevent the disturbance of
contents, and to prevent the propagation of, and
infestation_byrats,_flies, etc.
c. Placement of Containers - In so far as practical,
receptacles shall be kept in the rear yard of homes
and other places served as near to the alley and
accessible to the collector as possible, and in
those instances where homes and other places are not
adjacent to alleys, the receptacles shall be placed
on the driveway or other place convenient to the
collector by 6 A.M. on the designated day of
collection. Receptacles shall be removed by 7 P.M.
on the designated day of collection and not
otherwise be stored in areas of the front yard
visible from the front curb line.
d. All materials classified as refuse shall be wrapped,
except in the case of restaurants, stores and
commercial establishments.
Subd. 6. Separation of Recyclable Materials - Recyclable materials
collected by the City or its duly authorized contractor
shall be separated, prepared and placed for collection
in the manner hereinafter set forth.
a. Newspapers - Used newspaper shall be placed into
the recycling receptacle directly or neatly-packaged
and securely tied bundles not exceeding (50) fifty
pounds, or neatly packed into strong or doubled
paper bags.
b. Cans - Used cans shall be placed into a paper bag
and deposited within the recycling receptacle.
C. Glass - Used glass, such as glass bottles, jars and
containers (except blue glass, and flat glass
commonly known as window glass) shall be free from
all food and liquid or other substances and placed
into a paper bag and deposited with the recycling
receptacle. With respect to glass, the caps and
all other metal shall be removed.
d. Yard Waste - Yard waste shall be placed in bags or
other suitable containers. Yard waste should be
free from refuse.
Subd. 7. Disposal Required. Every person shall, in a sanitary
manner, store and dispose of refuse that may accumulate
upon property owned or occupied by him in accordance with
the terms of this section. Refuse shall be collected or
otherwise disposed of at least once a week. Within the
refuse collection service area, individual householders
and single family units up to and including four plexes
shall be collected directly by the City's duly authorized
contractor. Individual householders outside the refuse
collection service area shall contract with the
authorized agent of their choice. Residential units
larger than four plexes, industrial and commercial
properties shall contract with private collectors
directly and shall not receive City collection service.
Individual householders outside of the City's refuse
collection service area may receive City collection
service if City collection is implemented in said
outlying neighborhood and 100% participation of the
residents in the neighborhood agree to said
refuse/recycling collection service.
Subd. 8. When Collection Shall be Made by the City.
a. The City or their duly authorized contractor shall
be responsible for the weekly collection, removal
and disposal of all contained refuse and recyclables
from all residential buildings containing not more
than four dwelling units and located within the
refuse collection service area.
b. Owners or lessees of residential buildings outside
the refuse collection service area, residential
buildings containing more than four dwelling units,
industrial and commercial properties shall be
responsible for the collection, removal and disposal
of the refuse generated by those dwelling units and
properties in the same manner and with same
frequency as for other residential buildings located
within the refuse collection service area.
Subd. 9. Service Charge for the Removal and Disposal of Refuse
and Recyclables. The City may charge a fee for the
disposal of refuse and recyclable materials. The fee
shall be set and maybe amended as determined by the City
Council.
Subd. 10. Billing. The City shall send to the owner of the
premises from which refuse/recycling collections are made
or to the "customer" responsible for payment of the water
bill if such person is not the owner, a notice of the
refuse/recycling disposal charges that are due, at the
same times and intervals, in the same manner and together
with, the water and sewer billings.
Subd. 11. Duty to Provide Dumpster-Type Containers. The owner or
occupant of any commercial/industrial building shall
provide that building with a large dumpster-type rubbish
container or containers. Said dumpster type rubbish
container must be rodent proof, well maintained, bear
identification of the rubbish firm supplying the
containers, including the phone number, and be provided
with metal or other approved material coverage which
people can operate with no unusual physical effort. The
rubbish haulers providing the dumpster service must
/r C
provide collection service at least once every week and
the dumpster or dumpsters shall be of sufficient size
and/or number to handle the accumulation of the rubbish
between pick up periods from the address being served.
Two or more citations for loose rubbish within a one year
period shall be presumptive evidence that an additional
dumpster or larger type container are needed to serve
that address.
Subd. 12. Storing of Refuse. No persons shall throw, place or
deposit rubbish in any street, alley, sidewalk or on any
public or private property in a commercial/ industrial
district except in a dumpster type container as described
in this article. No persons shall remove any refuse
therefrom, except the refuse haulers or persons having
the consent of the owner or occupant of the property
served or law enforcement agencies in the pursuit of
evidence. It shall be the responsibility of the owner
and occupant of any private property in a
commercial/industrial district to maintain the property
in a condition free of strewn or piled refuse.
Subd. 13. Grandfather Provision. All single family and multiple
family units up to and including four-plexes within the
refuse collection service area that are contracting with
a private refuse hauler at the time of ordinance
enactment shall be grandfathered from participating in
the City's refuse collection program until such time that
said residence is sold or until the expiration of the
present refuse contract (January 14, 1992) whichever
comes first. Likewise, all single family and multiple
family units up to and including four plexes outside the
refuse collection service area who are currently
receiving contracted City service shall continue to
receive said service until such time that the residence
is sold or until the expiration of the present refuse
contract. Upon termination of the present contract,
these neighborhoods will be required to meet the
participation criteria set forth in Subd. 6 prior to
receiving disposal service from the City's contractor.
Subd. 14. Collection of Recyclables Unauthorized Persons
Prohibited.
a. From the time of placement of the recyclable
materials at the curb or other designated place of
collection by the City or it's authorized agent
pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance and any
rules and regulations adopted thereunder, said
recyclable materials shall become and be the
property of the City or its duly authorized
contractor as determined by the City.
b. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any
person not duly authorized by the City to collect
or pick-up or cause to be collected or picked-up
any recyclable materials placed at the curb or other
designated place for collection by the City or it's
authorized agent pursuant to the provisions of this
chapter. Any and each such unauthorized collection
in violation hereof from one (1) or more residences
shall constitute a separate distinct offense
punishable as hereinafter provided.
Subd. 15. Unwarranted Disposal. No person shall throw, place or
deposit refuse, yard waste, recyclables, construction
materials or brush upon public property or privately
owned property unless otherwise permitted by the City or
private property owners.
Subd. 16. Violation a Misdemeanor. Every person violates a
section, subdivision, paragraph, or provision of this
Chapter, when he/she performs an act thereby prohibited
or declared unlawful, or fails to act when such failure
is thereby prohibited or declared unlawful, and upon
conviction thereof, shall be punished as for a
misdemeanor.
Subd 17. When in force and effect
This Ordinance shall be in force and effect after the adoption and
attestation of this Ordiance and one publication in the official
newspaper of the City of Shakopee, it shall be in full force and effect
from and after the date following such publication.
Passed 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
Prepared and approved as to form this
16th day of August, 1989.
City Attorney
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Berquist Property
DATE: August 31 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Staff has received a request from the Berquist Company for the
City to construct improvements adjacent to their property on
Valley Park Drive. Attached is Resolution No. 3109 which orders
a feasibility report prepared on the requested improvements.
BACKGROUND:
Staff has met with the representatives for the Berquist Company
several times to discuss their proposal to construct an
office/warehouse complex on their property at Valley Park Drive,
just east of the Conklin property . The project would be
constructed in phases.
Initially , a 22 ,000 - 30 , 000 sq . ft . warehouse would be
constructed. Berquist would like to get started on this building
as soon as possible because a fire has damaged their existing
warehouse. The warehouse would employ approximately 10 people.
A second phase would involve the construction of their corporate
office building and assembly area. The timetable for this
construction has not been determined .
Berquist Company is now requesting City Council action on two
issues, as indicated in the attached correspondence from them.
First, they are requesting that they be allowed to construct a
temporary gravel road on existing City right-of-way (Research
Boulevard) as shown on the attached Map No. 1 . This road would
be the access driveway to their warehouse. Eventually , it would
be paved to create a permanent driveway. Berquist is considering
making this their main entrance with landscaping and a boulevard,
so they would prefer to make this temporary until that decision
is made.
The City ' s Building Inspector has told Berquist that they could
construct a well and septic system until City sewer and water are
installed to the site.
Secondly , Berquist has submitted a petition to the City
requesting street improvements to an unnamed and undesignated
street along their south property line as shown on the attached
Map No. 2. The requested improvements consist of purchasing the
appropriate right-of-way, constructing a street, sewer and water
installation. The petition was signed by the Berquist Company
only.
If the Conklin frontage is included in the calculations, the
petition would not be valid because it would not be signed by 35%
of the abutting property owners and it would have to be a Council
initiated project (requiring a 4/5 vote) .
Since the Conklin property has existing street access, sewer and
water it is questionable whether or not they can be assessed for
this new street, which would be addressed in the feasibility
report . If they cannot be assessed , the City Attorney has
indicated that their frontage should not be used to calculate the
35% needed to initiate a project. If the Conklin frontage is
eliminated , the Berquist frontage would equal 36% of all abutting
properties making the petition valid and only requiring a
majority vote of Council to initiate the project.
Since it is questionable whether or not the petition is valid ,
Berquist is officially requesting that the City Council initiate
the project by ordering a feasibility report prepared.
If Council concurs, attached is Resolution No. 3109, which orders
a feasibility report prepared on this project.
Because of the time frame requested by Berquist Company, staff
would also like to obtain permission to utilize a consultant to
prepare this feasibility report.
If the southerly street proves to be non-feasible, the Berquist
Company will improve Research Boulevard to City Street Standards
and use that as the main entrance to their facility.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3109•
2 . Deny Resolution No. 3109.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
1 . Offer 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
Berquist Company (P .I .D. 27-910002-0) and move its adoption.
2 . Direct staff to allow Berquist Company to construct a
temporary gravel driveway on the right-of-way for Research
Boulevard. The driveway must be made permanent (paved) or
removed within 2 years.
3 . Authorize staff to obtain a proposal from a consultant to
complete the feasibility report.
DH/pmp
BERQUIST
-� MAP NO .
North
m �
al
> I proposed temp.
II I gravel driveway i
i Researah
Blvd. Berquist Property
i
� i I
12th Ave.
- - - - - - - - - - -- -
i
i I
'MAP NO . 2
• k '. _ North
^I I
i
LILI
Research
Blvd. Berquist Property
,
requested street
I improvements
12th Ave. I -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_I___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __
i
August 25, 1989
Mr.Dave Hutton
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First AVenue
Shakopee,Minnesota 55379
REFERENCE: Bergquist Company
Dave:
This is to formally request your approval for the
construction of a road on Research Boulevard The road would be a temporary gavel mad to accommodate
semi trucks.It would be converted into either a permanent single road to accommodate semis in the future
or a boulevard rad as we proposed in our initial drawings.The gavel road would be constructed this Fall to
accommodate construction of a 22,000-30,000 square foot warehouse on the site
It is our understanding,per our conversation,that the road to
the South will be receding and will be to City standards for semis,water,sewer,storm sewer,and other
utilities.Please confirm our understanding as soon as possible N build per the outlined requests.
We appreciate working with you and look forward m
providing this facility N the City of Shakopee.
S' ly
-Edward J-.kudet,Jr.,AIA - -
August 23, 1989
Date )&M>Ogp,)Ogg0
We , the undersigned, owners of the following described real
property, abutting on the proposed improvement and benefitted
thereby , hereby petition the City Council of the City of Shakopee ,
for the following public improvements :
street, sewer, water, and acquisition of appropriate right-of-way to the
south o an a 3acent to a Conklin proper y an a rgquis property,
from Valley Park Drive to 1500 feet east of Valley Park Drive,
r
—A _ _ c.,,e�fe........ and request that,the same
be made during the year 1990
In making this petition the undersigned understands that the
City of Shakopee , its agents or employee cannot guarantee the
amount of an assessment until a feasibility study of the improve-
ments has been prepared and accepted by City Council in accordance
with MSA Chapter 429.
r£TITIONER LOT BLOCK
I , hereby, verify that I circulated the above petition and that
the above signatures of the property owners and petitioners were
affixed in my presence .
circulator
Approved this day of 1984
City Attorney
This instrument prepared & drafted by:
H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee , MN 55379
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 Berquist Company (P.I.D. 2T-910002-0)
WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve an Unnamed Street Located
in Section 10 , Township 115 • Range 22 Immediately Adjacent to the
South Property Line of the Berquist Company (P.I.D. 27-910002-0)
by street, sewer and water including acquisition of right-of-way
and to assess the benefitted property for all or a portion of the
cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
429.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be
referred to David Hutton , City Engineer for study and that he is
instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed
advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the
proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best
be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement,
and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of ,
19—.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 19—.
City Attorney
116
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Derby Days Request for Funding Assistance
DATE: August 23, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
On August 5th & 6th, the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce ift
cooperation with the City of Shakopee held the second annual Derby
Days Celebration. The community celebration was a tremendous
success. Unfortunately, expenses exceeded revenues by $800.00.
On behalf of the Derby Days Committee and the Shakopee Chamber of
Commerce I would like to request that the Shakopee City Council
consider appropriating $200.00 to the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce
to off-set a portion of the debt incurred in conjunction with this
years Derby Day Celebration.
BACKGROUND:
Last year, the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce in cooperation with
the City of Shakopee put together the first annual Derby Days
Celebration. Last years celebration incurred net loss of
approximately $1,000.00. In 1988 the Chamber of Commerce budget
absorbed the entire celebration deficit.
This year the Derby Days Committee moved the community celebration
to Lions Park. This year over 4,000 persons attended the two day
celebration. I have heard nothing but positive comments and
suggestions.
In preparing for this years celebration, the Derby Days Committee
intended to have the project be self supporting. Community
businesses and local organizations were contacted for business
sponsorships. We were successful in raising over $6700.00 in
business sponsorships. This years total budget exceeded
$10,000.00. Unfortunately several of our revenue projections fell
short of our expectations. Additionally, we incurred several
unexpected expenditures (temporary electrical service) .
The City of Shakopee graciously provided staff assistance to the
Derby Days Committee for police assistance, public works assistance
in preparation and some of the time that I spent coordinating the
celebration during business hours.
For next years celebration, the Derby Days Committee is looking at
alternatives to increase revenues and reduce expenditures. one
area in which we will be directly saving funds is in the area of
electrical service. This Spring, the Derby Days Committee will be
requesting the Shakopee Lions Club to fund the undergrounding of
electrical power to the Derby Days stage area. We are confident
that the Lions Club will be supportive of this measure. This will
result in approximately a $400.00 savings. We are also currently
attempting to secure sponsorships from major national corporations
such as Pepsi and Miller Beer.
The Derby Days Committee is attempting to secure funding to off-
set the $800.00 deficit from several sources. I have contacted
the Shakopee Rotary and Shakopee Jaycees in an effort to secure
$200.00 from each of these organizations. I will also be
requesting the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce to pick-up $200.00 of
the deficit from their budget. Subsequently, I would also like
the Shakopee City Council to consider appropriating $200. 00 from
the contingency fund to off-set debt incurred by the Chamber of
Commerce for this years Derby Day Celebration.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Move to appropriate $200.00 from the contingency fund to the
Chamber of Commerce to off-set costs incurred as a result of
this years celebration.
2. Do not offer any financial assistance to the Chamber of
Commerce in regard to 1989 Derby Day expenses.
3. Offer some other amount of financial assistance to the Chamber
of Commerce to off-set 1989 Derby Day expenses.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REOUESTED•
Move to appropriate $200.00 from the contingency fund to the
Chamber of Commerce to off-set costs incurred as a result of this
years celebration.
/ lam
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Assessment Agreement with Scott County
DATE: September 1, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is an assessment agreement between the City of
Shakopee and Scott County for the assessment of the property in
the city by the County Assessor.
BACKGROUND:
The current assessment agreement between the City and the
County for the assessment of property in Shakopee expires with the
1989 assessment year. Scott County has handled the assessment of
Shakopee property since 1982. The proposed agreement is similar
to the expiring agreement, with three exceptions. 1) It is for one
year as opposed to three years.
2) The county will no longer be providing duplicate picture cards
taken of taxable property during the year. (This was discontinued
last year when Leroy purchased a 35mm camera. ) 3) The following
paragraph has been eliminated: "That it is understood that the
City of Shakopee may take legal action against the County of Scott
if the City should be penalized of any State Aid resulting from the
co-efficient of dispersion standards not being met. " This does not
take away the City's rights for litigation should they be
warranted.
The City paid $24,257.95 for 4,451 parcels @ $5.45/parcel for
1989. The $26,700 fee contained in the agreement is a 103 increase
over 1989 and is the same 103 yearly increase contained in the
previous three year agreement.
The County Assessors office spent 1,700 hours on Shakopee
for the 1989 assessment year.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
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.
_SESSMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
AND THE COUNTY OF SCOTT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Shakopee
and the County of Scott , State of Minnesota, this day of
19_ ,
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee wishes to enter into an agreement with the
County of Scott to provide for the assessment of the property in said City by
the County Assessor ; and
WHEREAS, it is the wish of said County to cooperate with said City to
provide for a fair and equitable assessment of property;
NOW THEREFORE IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS HEREIN CONTAINED IT
IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1 . That the City of Shakopee which lies within the County of Scott and
constitutes a separate district , shall have its property assessed by the County
Assessor of Scott County, for the assessment of the year 1990 .
2. That the County Assessor of Scott County assign a knowledgeable
assessor with industrial/commercial experience to provide the Shakopee
assessment, said assessment to be reviewed by the Deputy Assessor who
coordinates all industrial/commercial assessments.
3. That the assessor assionec to Shakopee be available during normal
working hours to respond to Shakopee citizens' requests for assessing
information and requests for assessment data from the City of Shakopee.
4. That the City of Shakopee will continue to conduct a Board of Review
and upon the agreement of both parties, the City Attorney may assist the County
Attorney in any tax appeals.
5. That in consideration for said assessment services, the City of
Shakopee hereby agrees to pay the County of Scott the sum of $26,700 on or
before July 15, 1990 .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement this day
of 19
In presence of : For City of Shakopee
Signed:
By
Attest
In presence of : For County of Scott
Signed:
By
Attest
JAMES A TERWEDO, SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY
Approved as to Form:
Brian Nasi
Assistant Scott County Attorney
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Tahpah Park r Dk-e
DATE: August 29, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is desired on final design of the Upper Valley
Drainage project through Tahpah Park.
BACKGROUND:
Previously Mn/DOT had requested that the City of Shakopee assist
them in the design of the remainder of the Upper Valley Drainage
System for County Road 79 west to the bypass and any drainage
systems associated with the Shakopee Bypass. This design work
and the cost associated with the design work is part of the $1 .0
million dollars contributed by the City towards the project. The
actual construction of the drainage facilities will be funded
jointly by Mn/DOT and the City of Shakopee based on runoff
percentages , which will be established by a cost sharing
agreement once the project is ready for bids. The City' s share
of the construction is not part of our $1 .0 million dollar
contribution and in fact will be above and beyond that.
The City of Shakopee has retained the services of Orr-Schelen-
Mayeron and Associates to complete the design of this portion of
the project for Mn/DOT. The design is currently in progress.
During this design, it became apparent that the final design and
alignment of the Upper Valley Drainage System through Tahpah Park
may effect the operation of this facility. Staff desires Council
action of the final design and alignment of this drainageway
within Tahpah Park.
The Upper Valley Drainageway will be located along the north edge
of Tahpah Park , as shown on the attached Map No . 1 . This
location is established because it is the existing low area and
has been identified as the route of the drainageway for several
years.
The problem faced with this location is as follows. If the
drainageway is constructed as an open channel , which is the
desired method, the ditch will eliminate two softball fields from
Tahpah Park (Fields No . 3 and 6) and possibly a third field
(Field No. 4 ) .
Staff has discussed this matter with the Community Recreation
Director and he does not feel this is an acceptable situation due
to the high amount of use this complex receives. The Shakopee
Jaycees were also contacted regarding this situation and their
Executive Board has indicated that they feel the City should
explore other alternatives and strive to maintain all existing
softball fields. Based on those discussions, staff has requested
our consultant to develop alternatives and cost estimates. In
addition, since Mn/DOT will be funding approximately 50% of the
drainageway, their input was also solicited on the alternatives.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following options are available to the City.
1 . Construct the open channel as planned.
The cost for constructing an open channel through Tahpah
Park has been estimated at approximately $25 ,000 which
consists of grading and seeding the ditch. This channel is
100 feet wide and is approximately 5 to 6 feet deep.
Constructing the open channel will result in the loss of 2
or 3 softball fields , which will severely affect the
operations and use of this park. Staff, along with the
Community Recreation Director and the Shakopee Jaycees finds
this alternative to be unacceptable. In addition, Mn/DOT is
required to mitigate the effects of their projects on
parklands and since they are funding 50% of this project,
they do not feel the loss of any softball fields is
acceptable.
2 . Construct the open channel and build two new softball fields
to replace the ones lost by the ditch construction.
The current layout of Tahpah Park does not allow for the
construction of additional fields. All available land
within this park is used up.
The City could choose to build additional fields elsewhere.
There is no more available land immediately adjacent to
Tahpah Park without first annexing land , therefore the
fields would need to be constructed in other remote places,
such as Lions Park, other City owned lands, school property
or by outright purchase.
The cost to construct a softball field is estimated at
around $45 ,000 , not including any land acquisition costs .
Therefore, constructing two new fields would cost around
$90 ,000 , excluding land acquisition costs , and result in
placing these two fields at remote locations away from the
remaining fields at Tahpah Field.
3 . Install an enclosed storm sewer pipe system under the
fields, instead of an open channel.
This would mitigate the effects of this project on Tahpah
Park and eliminate the possibility of losing any softball
fields. Unfortunately this is the most expensive solution.
The estimated cost to construct a storm sewer through the
entire length is approximately $370 ,000 ( 1 ,300 lineal feet
of pipe) . Mn/DOT would pay 50% of those costs, so the net
expense to the City would be around $185 ,000 . No softball
fields would be eliminated by this alternative.
Mn/DOT does not have a problem with this alternative or in
justifying such an expense due to the requirements from
mitigating the impacts of their projects on parklands.
4 . Install an enclosed storm sewer pipe system through Field
No. 6 and then construct an open channel through the
remainder of Tahpah Park.
Due to the topography and the limited amount of property
adjacent to Field No. 6 , this field is the one that is most
likely to get eliminated. By installing a storm sewer pipe
through this field and moving the ditch slightly north of
Field No. 3 , the overall cost of installing a pipe the whole
length of Tahpaph Park can be reduced , yet still not
eliminate any fields.
The cost to complete this alternative is approximately
$250 ,000. Again, with Mn/DOT paying 50% of the costs, the
net expense to the City of Shakopee is around $125 ,000 , with
no softball fields eliminated. Mn/DOT is in support of this
alternative.
If an open channel is constructed through this area it would
mean the loss of Field No . 6 at a total cost of
approximately the same as Alternative No. 1 . The Community
Recreation Director and the Shakopee Jaycees both feel that
the loss of one field, while undesirable could be tolerated.
Mn/DOT would not allow this field to be eliminated unless
the City of Shakopee approves of its loss.
5. Construct the open channel , eliminate the softball fields
and compensate for loss of those fields by installing lights
on the remaining fields.
Lights would cost approximately $30 ,000 to $40 ,000 . The
softball association in conjunction with other service
organizations are in the process of developing a plan to
install lights on one or two fields per year until all of
the fields are lighted. Therefore, within five years all of
the fields are planned to be lighted and the City would
still lose the full use of two softball fields.
Staff and the Community Recreation Director still feel that
the loss of several softball fields is unacceptable, even if
the remaining fields are lighted . Also Mn/DOT cannot
justify any expense associated with lighting the fields,
whereas they can justify using an enclosed storm sewer pipe.
The cost of lighting the fields would be entirely the City' s
(no Mn/DOT participation) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Basically, the above discussion can be summarized as follows:
o For $25 ,000 the City can complete the Upper Valley
Drainage System through Tahpah Park and lose one or two
softball fields.
o For $ 125 , 000 , the City can complete the drainage
channel and not lose any fields.
o For $185 ,000 , the City will not lose any fields but
will have storm sewer pipe through Tahpah Park the
whole way rather than an open channel .
Staff recommends Alternative No . 4 which is to construct an
enclosed storm sewer pipe system through Field No. 6 and an open
channel ditch the remainder of the way through Tahpah Park. This
alternative maintains the integrity of the existing softball
complex without losing any fields at the lowest expense to both
the City and Mn/DOT.
Staff would also like to point out that the total cost of the
City' s Phases I1, III and IV of the Upper Valley Drainage Channel
is around $2 million. The current cost of Phase I of the Upper
Valley (under construction) is around $1 .4 million. Therefore,
the total cost of this system to the City will be around $3.4
million. Spending $100 ,000 to maintain the integrity of Tahpah
Park does not seem like a major expense when looking at the total
picture.
Staff has also attached letters of recommendation from the
Community Recreation Director and the Shakopee Jaycees regarding
this issue.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move 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.
DH/pmp
TAHPAH
TAHPAH Alternative No. 1 N
PARK W+E
G
off
3
4
7 EEO 2
MKING LOT
BASEML
FIELD
9
FOOTBALL --!--LD
PROPOSED UPPER VALLEY SYSTEM
> = w
y � �
� C C
a g �
13TH
s.' I
OT old 1
1
i
> Ii
TAPAH PARK
2 3
`, 0_ B 5 E 0
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
l
w
I I
� EGEly RR I
_ _ _ __�.....r. • F�O`J 4•Jo- O.M� �oy.d.w, �Wcw.e�+k CGv�}<�r��� I __ -
J I
J I 3 S B 6 5 3 �2PV QBE
7 4� /
19 T T 6 m
QP 2
1 � 2 I
i 3
13 B g T B 9 10
UTLOT/QkJ
0 12 9 u 9 12 2 OUTI
1 OUTLOT 8 C
a
IO 0
4vE . 13 TH AVE
4
5 OUT
I I 2 3 4 6 ] B 9 OUTLOT 0 E
� y
5
ry
�e
s NORBERT THEIS
Q4.
,O t�
.f
�j:
TAHPAH Alternative No. 2 N
PARKW E
5MA14 Sew e P
a� O�GI�.✓ C.i/A.rwEt S
I
i
I 6 I
I
1
I
I
5 4 3
I
1
I
TOT-
7 2
I
I c
I
PARKING LOT
I ^ Enc r�nce/Exit �;
I
I
1 �
L
' BASEBALL
I
FIELD
9
F00?3ALL FIELD
TAHPAH Alternative No. 3N
PARK W+E
I
I
6
1
I
I
I
5 4 3
1
1
I
TOT-
7 LOT Cnncrss. 2
1
PARKING LOT
I
I Encrence/Exic
� r
I E
I
1
6
I.
2
BASEBALL
FIELD
9
' FOOTBALL FIELD
ftakaper Tommnnity Kraration
129 Levee Drive
Shakopee, MN 55379
Phone: 612-445-2742
Memo To: David Hutton, City Engineer
From George Muenchow, Community Recreation Director
Subject: Uppper Drainage Project Design Through Tahpah Park
Date August 31, 1989
This is formal verification of my concurrence with your recommendations for
designing this project through Tahpah Park. In addition, if it had to be,
I would have no problem in losing Field N6 to this project. In my opinion,
as previously stated, all other fields are untouchable.
Thank you for your continued concern for the preservation of a good quality
of life for the citizens of this community.
A COOPERATIVE EFFORT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT 720 SINCE 1954
SHAKOPEE
1w4rctff(5
P.O. !OX 133, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
F *_
September 5 , 1989
Shakopee City Council
129 First Ave. E.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Sirs/Madams ,
We, the Board of Directors of the Shakopee Jaycees , in a
full board meeting on August 30, 1989, do hereby unanimously
recommend alternative No. 4 as spelled out in the City
Engineers memo dated August 29, 1989 . As a chapter, the
Shakopee Jaycees have donated hundreds of thousands of
dollars and countless hours to the development of Tahpah
Park. This park is now one of the premier complexes of its
kind in the state. Any action that would result in a net
loss to the City of any of the donated facilities at this
park would cause the Jaycees very serious concerns.
Sincerer,
lA/✓ll a,, l�J..�, S//
Dan Foslid, President
o
//e)
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer U \.BUJ
SUBJECT: Lion' s Park Pond ��
DATE: August 30 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
On August 15 , 1989 the City Council discussed the bids that were
received for the above referenced project. Because the bids were
higher than the funding provided by the Shakopee Lion' s Club, the
Council tabled any action on the bids until staff could meet with
the Lion' s Club to solicit their recommendation.
BACKGROUND:
On August 11 , 1989 bids were publicly received and opened on the
Lion's Park Pond Project. The low bidder was Tim' s Lawn and
Landscaping with a total bid of $56 ,460 .00 .
The Shakopee Lion' s Club has committed $40 ,000 towards the
construction of this pond. Because the bids are higher than the
committed funding, the City Council tabled any action on the
award of this contract until staff could meet with the Lion' s
Club to consider their position on additional funding.
On August 22 , 1989 staff met with the Lion' s Club and the
Community Recreation Director. The purpose of this meeting was
to determine if the Lion' s Club could provide additional funding
to complete this project this year.
Staff informed the Lion' s Club of the following facts:
• If this project were bid in conjunction with the Upper
Valley Drainage Project, the bid price would probably
be lower because it would be a much larger project.
The remainder of the Upper Valley Project is scheduled
for construction in 1991 .
• If this project were bid with the Upper Valley Project,
Mn/DOT would also pay for a percentage of the pond
construction since it will be utilized for stormwater
storage associated with the drainageway and bypass.
• If the Lion' s Club desired the pond constructed this
year, they would need to provide an additional $17 ,000
for funding , since the City did not budget for this
item in the 1989 Capital Improvement Fund and the
Contingency Fund is nearly depleted.
Staff recommended to the Lion' s Club that they wait and construct
this project with the storm sewer improvements (Upper Valley
Project) scheduled for construction in 1991 . The pond could then
be constructed at a greatly reduced cost thereby allowing the
Lion ' s Club to spend their remaining funds on the footbridge,
plantings and trail extensions.
The Lion' s Club agreed and recommended that the City Council
reject all bids and construct this pond in conjunction with the
Upper Valley Drainage Project.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Reject all bids and construct this pond with the Upper
Valley Drainage Project.
2 . Award the contract to the low bidder and allocate $17 ,000
from the City' s Contingency Fund to complete the project.
3 • Table any action in order to have further discussions with
the Lion' s Club regarding increased funding.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . The Shakopee Lion' s Club
recommends Alternative No. 1 , also.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to direct staff to reject all bids received for the Lion' s
Park Pond, Project No. 1989-12 and to inform the Shakopee Lion' s
Club that this project will be constructed in conjunction with
the remainder of the Upper Valley Drainage Project.
DH/pmp
LPOND
CITY OF SHAKOPEE ZZ
y, Y
INCORPORATED 1870 .- 77---7-
129
' -.--129 EAST FIRST AVENUE,SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612)6453650
August 15, 1989 ' •'
Shakopee Lion' s Club Exec. Board
% LeRoy Houser
RE: Lion' s Park Pond Project
Gentlemen :
Bids have been received for the pond project which the Lion ' s Club has
committed $40 ,000 .00 for construction. The bids received are as follows :
Contractor Total Bid
Tim' s Lawn and Landscaping $ 61 ,680 .00
w/Alt. $56 ,460 .00
Busse Construction $63 ,530.00
No Alt. Bid
Richard Knutson, Inc. $69,520.00
w/Alt. $64 ,558 .00
W. J. Ebertz Co. $77 ,050.00
w/Alt. Same Amount
The amount of funding committed by the Lion' s Club is about $17 ,000 .00 short of
the low bid received. Engineering staff is recommending postponement of award
of the bid to allow the executive board time to reconsider your funding
alternatives, which would include :
1 . A recommendation to reject all bids.
2. Increased funding.
3• Seeking cost participation by the City of Shakopee.
4. Others.
City staff would recommend Alternative No. 1 , at this time. Staff feels that
this same project can be built in 1991 with storm sewer improvements in the
same area at a much reduced cost.
Please let us know the direction the Lion' s Club wishes to take with this
project in order for City Council to take action regarding award at the next
regular meeting on September 5 , 1989. Thank You.
cerel
Ray Ruu ka
Engineering Coordinator
:= cart of Progress Valley
AN EOWI OYPoflTUNI"EMPLOVEP
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineers—)
SUBJECT: Parking Lot by Scout Building
DATE: August 31 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Councilman Scott has requested that staff place an item on the
Council agenda regarding paving an extension of the Lion' s Park
parking lot adjacent to the new scout building. This item was
discussed at the August 15 , 1989 Council meeting but tabled to
allow staff to provide additional information and alternatives.
BACKGROUND:
The construction of the new scout building created a situation
whereby the parking lot at Lion' s Park should be expanded.
The driveway for the scout building is curved with two accesses
off the parking lot. (See Attachment &1 site sketch) . Between
the two driveways is an area consisting of dirt and vegetation,
just adjacent to the existing paved driveway. Vehicles are
utilizing this area for parking and the potential is there for
vehicles to encroach on the newly laid sod.
Councilman Scott has asked staff to prepare an estimated cost for
paving this area and to put this item on the next Council agenda.
Staff has done a detailed cost estimate, which is included as
Attachment No. 2. The total estimated cost is $2 ,500 .00 which
includes bituminous pavement, gravel base and curb and gutters.
On August 15 , 1989 the City Council discussed this issue but
tabled any action on it and directed staff to provide additional
information and alternatives.
The Community Recreation Director is in favor of this project,
but has indicated the project could be expanded to enlarge the
existing parking lot directly across the driveway from the Scout
Building and also to enlarge the parking lot at the east end, due
to the overflow of parked cars using the grassy areas.
Expanding the project scope certainly has merit due to the large
number of vehicles using this parking lot during the summer. But
the normal process is to include this project in the Capital
Improvements Budget and identify the funding sources prior to
ordering the project. At this point , the area brought up by
Councilman Scott is definitely in need of some pavement in order
to complete the construction of the site for the Scout Building.
Other parking lot expansions may also be needed, but should be
completed using the normal City procedures for projects.
r � r
Staff was requested to investigate the use of posts and chains or
concrete wheel stops to keep vehicles from driving on the new
sod. These are certainly viable options to replace the curb and
gutter, but would not result in any substantial cost savings.
Curb and gutter would control drainage better and also conform to
the existing parking lot, whereby posts/chains or concrete wheel
stops would not match the current parking lot.
Regardless of whether curb and gutter is used or some other
method, the area in question still needs pavement. Basically, it
is bare ground and looks unsightly between the asphalt driveway
and the newly planted sod. City crews may even be able to do a
portion of the work, thereby resulting in lower costs than
estimated .
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Direct City staff to arrange for paving this portion of the
parking lot at a "not-to-exceed" amount of $2 , 500 .00 .
Council should select whether curb & gutter , posts and
chains or concrete wheel stops should be utilized.
2 . Expand the project scope to include paving another portion
of the parking lot directly across from the Scout Building
and any other parking lot expansions desired.
3 . Pave the parking lot by the Scout Building as requested, but
direct City staff to use the normal Capital Improvements
process for completing any other parking lot expansions
required.
4 . Deny the request and direct staff to submit a request for
all parking lot expansions desired and to follow the normal
Capital Improvement Projects process.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Discuss the various options and direct staff to take the
appropriate action.
DH/pmp
SCOUT
E,r�sr%✓6
��eK�ab
i ��- P °�
i
i
I
' i
f ! q
\ � �eY�/e���
¢�
iw �oar e��� .. '. .!>r fi.l+.ri
I ,B,..e a..✓S
� � I�
a
� ,
.. �
� �
� I
D i II
i
� i
i ��
_;.
�ry �.ro �S
ATTACHMENT i2
COST ESTIMATE
Asphalt - 2- thick
For 20 Ft. x 120 Ft. area, tonnage = 30 tons
Cost = 30 tons @ $25 per ton = $750.00
Gravel Base - 4- thick
For 20 Ft. x 120 Ft. area, tonnage = 58 tons
Cost = 58 tons @ $7 per ton $400 .00
Curb & Gutter
120 L.F. @ $7.00 per foot = $850 .00
Miscellaneous (grading, riprap for spillway, etc. ) = 0$5 0 .00
TOTAL COST = $2,500.00
11�-
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Enginee� �
SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage Project
Pedestrian Underpass at C.R. 17
DATE: August 31 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Staff has executed a change order with our Contractor for the
Upper Valley Drainage Project to provide for the construction of
the pedestrian underpass at C.R. 17 .
BACKGROUND:
The City of Shakopee and Scott County had several discussions
regarding the installation of a 1pedestrian underpass at C. R. 17
in conjunction with the Upp r Valley Drainage System and
associated trails. The County B and has indicated that the City
can construct this pedestrian derpass if certain conditions
were met, such as lighting the underpass , providing adequate
safeguards including signing and patrolling the area. On
August 15 , 1989 the City Council of Shakopee discussed this issue
and accepted the County ' s conditions for the pedestrian
underpass. The Council directed staff to negotiate a change
order with our Contractor to cover the installation of the
pedestrian underpass.
Staff has negotiated a change order with our Contractor ,
Barbarossa & Sons for the pedestrian underpass. The current plan
show a 4 ' x 12' box culvert proposed at C.R. 17 . This 41x 12'
box culvert will be deleted from the contract and replaced by two
separate box culverts. An 81x 8 ' box culvert (pedestrian
underpass) and an 81x 4' box culvert.
As shown on the attached change order the two new culverts will
cost approximately $108 ,176 .00. The box culvert that will be
deleted from the contract equals $72,400.00. Therefore the net
change to this contract is an increase of $35 ,776 .00 for the
construction of the pedestrian underpass. Staff has reviewed
these change order prices and finds them to be acceptable.
The original contract for this project is $1 ,404,188.00. This
change order of $35 ,776 .00 represents an increase to the contract
of approximately 2 .5% .
According to the new change order procedures , the project
administrator (City Engineer) has the authority to approve any
change orders with the concurrence of the City Administrator up
to a contingency amount approved by Council at the time the
contract is awarded. For this project, staff failed to request a
contingency amount from Council at the time the project was
awarded. Staff is now requesting that the Council establish a
contingency amount of 10% of the contract as a maximum amount
available for change orders which can be approved by staff.
Staff cannot exceed this contingency amount without first
obtaining prior Council approval . As usual , staff will inform
Council of any and all change orders.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Approve of the change order for the pedestrian underpass
associated with the Upper Valley Drainage Project in the
amount of $35 ,776 .00 .
2 . Direct staff to negotiate another price associated with this
change order.
3 . Reject the change order completely and eliminate the
pedestrian underpass from the project.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move 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.
DH/pmp
CO1UV
�l
CHANGE ORDER
Change Order No.: 1 Project Name: Upper Valley Drainage
Date: August 25, 1989 Contract No.: 1987-5
Original Contract Amount $ 1 .404.188.00
Change Order(s) No. thru No. — $ -0-
Total Funds Encumbered Prior to Change Order $ 1.404.188.00
Description of Work to be (Added/Deleted):
The 4 x 12 box culvert at C.R. 17 shall be deleted from the contract and replaced by two
culverts - an 8 x 4 culvert and an 8 x 8 culvert (pedestrian underpass).
The above described work shall be incorporated in the Contract, referenced above, under the
same conditions specified in the original Contract as amended unless otherwise specified
herein. Any work not so specified shall be performed in accordance with the Standard
Specifications adopted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota.
The amount of the Contract shall be increased $ 35.776.00
The number of calendar days for completion shall be (increased/decreased) by -0-
Original Contract Amount $ 1 .404.188.00
Change Order(s) No. 1 thru $ 35.776.00
Total Funds Encumbered $ 1 .439.964.00
Ccmpletion Date: No Change in Completion Date
The undersigned Contractor hereby agrees to perform the work
specified in this Change Order in accordance with the
specifications, conditions and prices specified herein.
Contractor: 1'6-iflel s sn r, r r
By:
Title
Date: —R/— �9
APPROVED
City Engineer Date
City Administrator to
Box Culvert Prices From Barbarossa
8 x 4 - $251 .00/Ft. x 160 L.F. _ $ 40 ,160 .00
8 x 4 End Section - $7 ,000 .00 EA. x 2 = $ 14 ,000 .00
8 x 8 - $297 .00/Ft. x 128 L.F. = $ 38,016 .00
8 x 8 End Section - $8 ,000 .00 EA. x 2 = $ 16 ,000 .00
Total $108,176.00
Box Culvert Deleted
4 x 12 - $340 .00/Ft. x 160 L.F. _ $ 54,400.00
4 x 12 End Section - $9,000 .00 EA. x 2 = $ 18.000.00
Total $ 72,400.00
$108,176.00 Less $72,400.00 = $35,776.00
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft , City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineelr
SUBJECT: 3rd Avenue Reconstruction Project
DATE: August 31 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Staff would like to inform Council of several changes to the 3rd
Avenue Reconstruction contract.
BACKGROUND:
Within the last 2 weeks , there has been several field changes
made to the scope of work for the 3rd Avenue Reconstruction
Project. Staff has negotiated a change order for these items,
where necessary, and would like to inform Council of the changes.
There are three changes to the contract:
1 . The removal of an existing tunnel .
During the installation of the sanitary sewer in 3rd Avenue
immediately west of Holmes Street, it was discovered that
there is an existing underground tunnel running diagonally
between the drive-in bank and the Kohlrusch building. This
tunnel is 8 feet high, 6 feet wide and made of 10 inch thick
concrete walls and roof with reinforcing steel . The tunnel
is located at an elevation such that the top of the tunnel
would be actually within the pavement section of our street.
In addition if the tunnel were ever to develop cracks or
holes it would result in the street deteriorating at that
point and possibly caving in.
Staff has determined that the tunnel should be removed from
underneath the new street. The contractor has submitted a
lump sum price to do this work of $3 ,500 .00 and it is
estimated to take approximately one day to complete. Staff
has reviewed this change order and finds it to be
acceptable. Since a decision had to be made immediately
whether or not to remove this tunnel due to the sewer
construction, staff has already authorized the Contractor to
remove this tunnel.
2 . Filling an Old Basement.
Within the same block of 3rd Avenue between Holmes Street
and Fuller Street, it was discovered that an old basement
protrudes out into the street from the north. The basement
is essentially under the sidewalk and curb 8 gutter and
along the north edge of the street. Again this basement has
a potential to create voids and allow the sidewalk or street
to buckle into it. Staff feels that this basement should be
filled in with sand or other material to prevent this from
happening. In addition there is a doorway coming from the
existing basement in the Kohlrusch building adjoining this
basement under out street. Staff feels that this doorway
should be bricked up and no longer available for use.
Staff has negotiated a change order with the Contractor to
do this work. The Contractor has indicated that he will
fill the basement with good granular material and block up
the doorway to the basement for a total price of $300 .00 .
Staff has found this price to be acceptable and has
authorized the Contractor to proceed with this work.
3 . Sewer on Fuller Street.
During the construction of the sewer at 3rd and Fuller, it
became apparent that there was a service connection problem
with an existing house on Fuller Street . Basically the
house at 4th and Fuller has a service connection that runs
all the way down to the sewer in 3rd Avenue. This service
connection is in need of repair. In order to correct this
situation and also to conform to current building codes, a
mainline sewer is needed on Fuller Street from approximately
the alley north to 3rd Avenue.
Since the City has a unit price for sewer construction, no
change order is needed for this work. But the overall
project costs will be increased because this sewer was not
part of the original plans. The net increase to the project
costs for this additional sewer would be approximately
$7,225 .00 , which includes 200 feet of 8 inch sewer pipe, one
manhole, and one 6 inch wye.
Staff has notified the Contractor to proceed with this sewer
installation.
The total of all three changes to the contract is $11 ,025.00 .
This represents an increase of about 1 .4% of the original
contract amount.
According to the new change order policy, a contingency amount
should be established by Council at the time the contract is
awarded for use by the project administrator in processing change
orders. For this project, staff failed to request a contingency.
Staff is now requesting that Council establish a 10% contingency
for use by the project administrator for change orders on the 3rd
Avenue Project.
In conformance with the new change order policy , staff would like
to keep Council informed of all the changes. Attached is a copy
of the executed change order to cover Items 1 and 2 above.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move 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 10% for use in processing change orders
associated with this project.
DH/pmp
C013RD
CHANGE ORDER
Change Order No.: i Project Name: 3rd Avenue Reconstruction
Date: August 30, 1989 Contract No.: 1989-0
Original Contract Amount $ 777.425.00
Change Order(s) No. = thru No. $ -0-
Total Funds Encumbered Prior to Change Order $ 777.425.00
Description of Work to be (Added/Deleted):
The removal of an existing tunnel and basement in the street right-of-way on Third Avenue
between Holmes Street & Fuller Street.
The above described work shall be incorporated in the Contract, referenced above, under the
same conditions specified in the original Contract as amended unless otherwise specified
herein. Any work not so specified shall be performed in accordance with the Standard
Specifications adopted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota.
The amount of the Contract shall be increased $ 3.800.00
The number of calendar days for completion shall be (increased/decreased) by -0-
Original Contract Amount $ 777.425.00
Change Order(s) No. 1 thru $ 3.800.00
Total Funds Encumbered $ 781 .225.00
Completion Date: No Change in Completion Date
The undersigned Contractor hereby agrees to perform the work
specified in this Charge Order in accordance with the
specifications, conditions and prices specified herein.
Contractor:
By: L
Title
Date:
APPROVED
City Engineer Date
City Administrator D6te
NN NN N N NN
PP PP A N N AA N N AARP P A O S T
DO O Om O m0 O N�� 0000 O O m m W W r sAAA O
rr s O t N t t r t w t W t pAP * O t A S O
Z y
O C
O
mW mm m Po m PoPo m q 2222 2 m D T
WW W W \
00 00 O O O 00 O O 0000 O O S
\\ \\ \ \
to
\ \ \ O
mm mm m m m mm m m ibis m m
D
O
c
z
mm WWW AA WO WW 00
Aw VO WW mm 000 00 00 WW
ON
"Mm
VAP YW WW Jwr NW HN WJwWW 00 OO
OV 00 00 ArW 00 OmmAN 00 00
0
0 OO O O m Amz m m anaa D a
na DD x a z a zzzz 3
AA D Z F « C r 0000 E
AA mm M y DD < 2222 D z
WW ms Z2 A
0o so z i i zAvv n m
zz m n pp m W n z
yy cc 'c ,`a 88 C O an`na Z A
mz mm m ss r 99
Da mm y z 9Amm a O
00 00 r Z 99 A9 y 2
02 N Z 00 V1
00 mW 2 2 00 C n
AA KK r 00 9 m S
Z CC D
22 0 00
O S m
00 WW O 0
N
y
m
nm mm 9 mW n
DO OO A 9 CC O O ZCC m D
9C CC O O C W ti99 <
99 y O T DD m yyrr W = 3
D9 y N 00 P 0 O
r3 33 P mm 3 PPmm
➢ ➢D O A D W D N
z < 33 c W n
OZ ZZ C W DD Z CC W
Cy yy m yy y WW W Z
() H
9 O
y m Z
00 0o N o 0 00 0 0 0000 o A n
N W O
n
AA PP A A A AA A P Litt A A O
C
rW Z
O. 7 lost y
AW S A A it i j mAW O z
NP Ar NN O O
PJ p
AW WP P mAW O
NA Pr �- V J NN A r rrN'- r p
APPP
O
O m 0000
rrrr W O
O
x m
3
W D
N 0
n
n n
00 n n n n n m
s s s s s s s
W W N N W W N V) W r
• NN N N N N N N N Np •'
NN N N N A N p 2 m
N r r N T
Ap W w m b • N • W • O b
' W W • q • •- e w J • N � W • A • A JC N
2 ti
O t
O
O r
Wm m m w m m m m m m W m m
bb m b b b m b b b b q m
D
3
r O
q c
z
00 WN -1
0lpr r•- W YF rr NN
pNm bb �q PA 00
pqw 00 00 00 Vb W� qq Wr
qNr 00 mN 00 00 b JJ UI NN pA V J
22 2 Z D m O m a C D 2
titi O ti < Z V m < D
m O A A T
bN O 2 A D m b
8 C T VI O b m 2 O
0 r y m m Z \ A
p A m z m O q O
qN O Z O m Z A T
Om y Z ti 2 Z LJ O
O O m A
nn v s oA m
N N
O 9 m
m
b 9 b 3 m 3 r A
C9 N T ➢ � C 1 O 9 m C ~
90 ti v v "o O
m
m
ti 0 C -1 r
m 9
N �
m O
J Z
am o O o 0 0 0 0 0
z
NO O O O O ti
pF N P r O
A
AA •' r �.� N r P •' r 2
G
0 0
a� x ob
o A
3 b
N D
D m
O
s s s N s s s s s
q b N b N m N b m N
N N N NNN N N N N N N r
rPJ N npi npi npi npi P npi e.Ai P npi N O_ m
w N N
J p vvv m m � b
m • • VI • • A t N • m • W • V : N • b • J� N
Z Y
O <
O
0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a
I I m i
wwW W W n
0 0 0 000 0 0 o a o 0 o s
b m m .omu m m m m m b b m
a
N C
b W NWJm NN y
W NN N AOJN WW NN W0 rr
A mm NN NGiWO 00 JV NN WW 00 mm W
00 OJNO 00 00 mm
A 00 00 WNWm 00 NN mm 00 00 00 WW
3 3 O O 0
m A T
Y 000 Z m D Z { W
m s o
Y O W.W A 2 A <
Y W m O W O
r W W 9 Z A Z
3 D 0 ]C W n O
O 0 3 0 O O O
D 2 D D N Z s
r O b N T m m D O
Z C Z Y V Y x
m 9 W Y < O
W 2 9 m A O
Y 0 O 2 O T
C W 2 m O
A A O O
a Ll
W
Y
m
n Y W Y m
0o n c o o
O C C 222 9 D D C b C
T YY < V < Y 3
9 9 WWW 9 D
b D 0 O
A D D P b W D D N
< D
2 Z O w N 2 2
W W
9 b
b N O
O O O JOO O O O O O p O n
O
O
P A AAP P P A O
W C
Z
000 O O O O Y
A Z
O
r m r w W W W •- N N •- r p 2
000
P
O 3 O
000 N O
O
3 m
N D
0
D
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n n m
s s s s s s s s s s
W W b VI b w b N W W b W
p N p N N NNN � N W N W Z b
N N m
N p p P N 1-•-•- W
N r N b N m W • N x O
+ • • rp w • N x NNN • q � b + S O
Z Y
O <
O
O a
Om w w m � mmm m m w w w D
b
\ \ \ \\\ \ \ W \ T SD
W
O O O O O 000 O O O O O S
fp m b m W bbb m W m b f0 m
D
3
O
C
2
m0 wW W Y
ryY mN �W AP 00 N W
NVIm AA mm NN A
00 00 0000 Nb mm OO N N
bb 00 JJ 00 00 ---
000
rW000 3 3 3
S VI O O S bNb a a O 3D m
O „ 333 0 m
T O O 2 O PAW D c O
T D W A D_ NNW D A
0 0 W W 000 A Z
O O O b 000 T T O
O rrr r s
000
non o
i o �
n
W
T 3 a O aLa y y W Y S
C W D O N 000 a D T
G G 3
r TTT y r O T
y A T <<< T T W P m W
W G � GGG W W W A
y C C C
0 W a
W a b
W W O
y Y Z
O O O O mNN O O O O n
O
A A A APP P P A A P O
N C
Z
O O 000 O O O O y
P A Z
p N O
A•-O
m W O
O
Y b
3
W D
Ll
D
0
o n n 0 0 n n 0 n n T
s s s z s s s s s
N W W W W W W W W W A
NLDNP P P P PP P O
NNNNN N N N� NN S
q N
00000 m mm N N t, wm O m
Z -1
O <
O
v T
mwwwN w m m mw m w O mm m mm -1 q
W41W WW (\il W W W w 4\t W WW W ww a
00000 p O o 00 0 0 011 0
op p op s
mzmmm m m m mm m m m mm m mm m
m
n
a
0
mm oo c
z
y
V1F WPq mm WW AW qq NWJ
pV1pNq 00 OPN
OOVOO JJ rJA NPN NN w0 �- Nr0
00000 JV WW 0000 NN OmD
rrrr N G C CC q ti N yW q mN
rrrrP N D N„ C O -i 00
00000 c W by m z m TT �+ titi
00000 9 m 00
O ON
WWWWW A O y 3 M m Z q Z
AAAA9 m aA A N .T HH ~ tiJ p
DDDDD N mm
00000 ` m O -iH O D m qq O
Wq
AAAAA G 3 rr a q AA M CC m
00000 m 00 O CC O
s
00 Am < 33 DD
M, T
G< 00 ZZ �
N
9m➢1W C WW q 3 N V'O 9 T9 ti A
pZOm� 0 -I m 9 O C A aA ti
s W.3.r cOi C m V. � m 00 ^
0.xx
22 3
qT m P£ T
,mxx w N Z =Z q N <G G CC A
W y y ~~ WW
Wm �
O
z
A
3
4
~0000 O O 00 O O O 00 00 N
'-•-,-r N W W PN P N WW W DW 0
=-OWW N w y
mOJmN O 00 O 00 00
00000 PA NW q O
00000 � O �
00000 P O
00000 D O qN N
O
O N
rt m
3
q ➢
D m
m
O O s s O s z O
N q N VI q N N m
N N N N
P P A A P AP P O P P O
N 2 m
m b
s A W N Y 00
O
O
Z ti
O <
O
O m
mwwwwmww m m wm m m w
aw 00000000o0 0 tiD
Un
x
9
b m m m m b m m b mm m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
n
3
O
m.Y--wow c
z
YOmOmmNW ON -I
mm YY NN rY WN Om YY
OWmNmmNA UN mN Wm pP FA mm m b0 N
mmOmYbO� UU m pp 00 UU 00 m 00
.11=ON 00 AP 00 00 00 OmP 00 00 mm 00 OW
OWWUNWow mm 00 mm 00 AA mm 00 00 00 mAU 00 00 mm 00 00
w • r a • • • a v x . v . t a
` o m o a i z xx o m c
r 2 Z AA D b 0
C_C_C_C_C_C_C_C_ O < O Z ti 2
U C S -1 D til ➢ 0 <
00000000 x n o z m i as z w m
c m o 0 G>w a 0 m a
ANNNNYYO
1 0 r ti S TT < 2 T A O
UmUWNpWY O 0 ➢ $ K n D O
K 9 O 00 1 W . 0
O m 0 x Tm r D O 1O
00000000 0
r�D1r-D�1DrtiDr'Dryr'➢�r-➢�Drti rzC 1 T
0
O
D 0 O
I m 0
0 0
O xmx
3x z a
9 0 Z O m T
O O 22 0
ti4 O
m
YONm-Iv0 IA .S 0 U b bD O N 0 A
00m0Dm C 0 0 0 O C c b0 0 0 C -i
mDCDDAZ C D C C Z T TO z c 9 0 0
3mZ i-�H xm ➢ v m v c 0 m r oc m c m n 3
9ADmr�r-SAD 0 T Ab Dz P N 2 O
0Y00mtimr m 3 r 3 3 w m m rr m m 0 m
OOmr , n P D ➢ O w b U W D U U
<0 <x 3 0 D O < a o
m0 Ac D z N z z x Ua x z a
3 Dmm mz Y -i C -1 -i 9 O m➢ 0 1 C
ZCY�111O O U
~ODD C m W VIm m
2-Irw 2 ti m
2rw0 O
209
020
� O v
O 4
w m
O
ti
O O O O O O O qU O O O O a D
P O
0
N N N N N N W
� O
w W U m Y WA b Y Y 0 Z
O O O 0 00 O O O H
P P
L. O
P A O 00 O O
O 00 O
P O 00 P 0
N r �- A P O � N Y 00 U N N •- O Z
G
O
m m 9
w O
O w
x m
3
'n
w m
D m
0
� m
s
x b .
m b
n
s n
z �
o <
0
O T
n
ti N
m Z
D
x
O
9
m
m
n
o I
c i
0
z
voau
A b0
O ONrb
O
-1 CCCC
r 0000 <_
O
numb O
A
0000000
- O
x
yy4y
DDbD O
rrrr s
A
m
N
ti
ti
A
mNr
no. I
ooi m
ba s
3
v0
an
N
DTi O
HOA
ZaCO
D
m 2 O
C 1 2
O
r N
ti
D
O
O
O
C
Z
Z
O
z
x o
0
o N
u b
3
I
n
c>
o m
to o!m o m m -Io0oo 00 OO0000000y o m m m m m m m mmm 0 �
rr r Y F r rYrr rr YYYYr Yr YYw r r Y r r Y r r YYY m
FF F W N F W W W W FF FFFFCFFFFC W C F F C F F F CFF � y •
NNb VI w � VI VI VI VI ww FFCwWWWWWw \n � � V) V] b \O b \O�b R 2
FY M Y O N CCWN �i� ��p VJNNNNNNN Y N N N N N N W NNN
FCO 0 0 0 0000 WF HFww CwrY
YO O O O O O O OS N
O n*O O O O OOO
000pSSSwNYWNNN0p0p00N S ' 0 OSS
C
N
R I
o Y m FO_ m m 0000 F0.10 000000 OF0_ Fo_•W O m m m m m m m mmm n
K
OOO 0 0 0 0000 OO OOOOOOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
Y r YrYr rrrY YY r000 0 0 00000 00 0000000000 0 0 00 rYrYY 0 0
OOH n
R
a
n
cq
et
) O F Vi O Y N� FN Wm oD NmD\WY W r O\ Vt O -1 C O N VI Fmb
� U
O ID N�O N m O\N N N D,V)v�D -1 0\O\b O o O w N 0 0 0 N N F R
9 F w O O F MHO N CH m O m m m O O O NNN c
W
R
n a
� n
c
www
s r 2 0 m ammo R r- m m m m m m m m m m m m = z
H 3 O O 3 3 W R 7 t• m Y m 3 µ µ r 3 3 µ µ µ Y 3 H P
M F•' a F" Y• m lD n Y n N (p Y•
W .'0
3 0 %
N n C O' S Y• Y m Y O 3 n C
± yg ; 04 m O H w m y m m r m m m m Y Y p1 K P W Z M P. O m
t a+ N h1 I m A R N m a H H O n a C
M 3 Yt O OO m 0 0 0 Y K
J µ O Y Y O P+ Y m O O m C
N R m Y n m b b W b
a < H
P]
a
uww w w w 0000 ww 0000000000 w w w w w w w 0 000 Y V
) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
] 00 0 0 0 0000 00 0000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
n VI0 F F F CCCF FF CFFFFFFFFF F F F F W W W W WWW �D F
' r O b m �1 O\O\O\T VI Vt FFCCFFFFFF W N r O w m w O\ \n VI\n z
O
O Z m pt Fm+ O H 'ate] 'ro5 [1 w O O 0 - - W <
H K 3
(a] n a n
a
4 0 a m O O Y y Y O O QI LD
n m
Y cf m 0 H m m
b m S C m R C
m m m 0 F
S 7 m Y O O
W m m Y b b
Y r m m
R a m m
n
• vJ Y Y m F w Y vri 3 !-
\
H Q\ w N O 0 O C 4
F \n O Y F Y N 0\ \n N F O
I m 0 0 UJ N \O W H O O w N 0 0 o m U
) w 0 0 rn r 0 m 0 rnrn m 0 0 0 rn
( m O m om o 0 0 o
r r �n Y N r r r P
-w
0 w w m rw N w N
W O W W r
OrFF NW O M. 0 WNr �rO
.
0 00N00
0
OOYOO N m
000pp00 0 1
AO
a
c*
mT mm- YOm r m m o m o o o o 0
NN Y W F Y C F F r Y V i r N Y r Y M
0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 a
mHny r Y r r r Yr r r r
3 m M a F H w O 0 0 0 0 0 00 O O O
N H N M 09 0 N 9
an
w r n
O w H a '•J �
`m0 VpON `INO' .aGR 3
F
w 0 0 0 0 00 vii N b
K
n
0
� o
r a o a K n � �+ M c a• 3 ti
mm�O Vi O w ct M 0
Vii F'N N vNi (F OAC r N am+
op C W W m y
�n m
�O 8 0 0 N T O Y 0 3 w µ
YP• �
W 9 O
� to
a
00 0 0 0 8 0 O o 0 X r
p
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �p
0 ut
O
pozs � ° � o � om
y µ A 3 X < d
K X O
r r w w
n n m� N
Y E N N O
y r a
< N M C
M O K
n
X
b 0 O
0 0 O O vii N
!o o p m m m mmm Ym rd o
F F F F F F F FtF F F � H
YO O W J N PO Y N O W Y a
b
n
F F O S o 0 000 0 0
v r Y o
�o r r o
Y N 0pp000 0pp pO mr
m'
m
K
mWom rn N O O m m m m mmm m m 0
Y rn r cr Y Y r r r r r r r r K
I I I t9 rr Y Y r Y r r r r r Y
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ooo O o a
0 0 0 r r r Y r r r r Y Y Y r a
O [y++ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 O O
h o m W Ca
H '•1
K � C
maa w r
m bF p Fp �1 F N wp WpoF r W O
•00 NF i0 b O mO�N O N
O N m O O m r r O F
O� O N a\ O O C N a\ O m _
WN
n a
' � n
n
� o
O = O M W b b 9 Z 2 S W w C
c' O m m m m m m m m m m H
y
m M Y• Y• Y• Y• Y• Y• Y+ Y• F+ QI
w w r b d d b 3 m� M w K
b W D\ 3 N [n N m W N Y Y b r a
O H Ip
W F' 4 W O 0 O K K O 0 O m C-1
N a\7N m < O r w W
O Fb N O O Y N Y K
G Y• m
N �
W W WW W W W W w w W w h Y
o o 0 o 0 o o 000 O O X
00 0 000000
RF
o �m m N m �n F www N Y o
C O jy Uri _ _ y m 0 m
0
O Y O q O K
0 0 W W M M
K N <
0 3 5 X b O
m mTF O N
0 00 N
N m
m m
n
x
m F r 0 w 3
b F F �1 F N O r W
wF O N w r N w m
0 V�
O �n N O N
F O�
0 N m 0 0 N 0 m
CONSENT
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: 1989 Audit Services
DATE: August 29, 1989
Introduction
Attached is an audit proposal for 1989 audit services from Jaspers,
Streefland 6 Company.
Background
This firm has done the audit for the City for over 20 years with the
exception of having the State Auditor for 1969. The same individual doing the
audit for more than 10 years. Staff has recommended changing auditors for
about the last seven years, primarily in order to have a fresh look at the
financial operations of the City. Council has continued to retain Jaspers,
Streefland 5 Company. Accordingly, the motion drafted below reflects past
Council actions in retaining the previous auditors.
The price quoted by Jaspers, Streefland 6 Company is reasonable and in
line with previous years.
Alternatives
1. Accept Jaspers 6 Streefland proposal.
2. Solicit other proposals.
Recommendation
Staff recommendation is to change auditors.
Actio
Move to accept the proposalofJasper, Streefland 6 Company for 1989 audit
services in the amount of $8,300 and that the City Administrator is authorized
to execute the Understanding of Engagement.
JASPERS, STREEFLAND & COMPANY
JEROME JASPERS.CGA.JAMES STREEFLAMD,Jr.CVA
MEMBERS OF TXE AMERICAN INSTInITE OF
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACoxNTANIS
206 SCOTT STREET,SNA[OPEE,MN S5379,161P US 2817
August 25, 1989
Members of the City Council
City of Shakopee
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Understanding of Engagement
Dear Council Members:
We are confirming our understanding of the arrangements to make an examination
of the balance sheets of the various funds of the City of Shakopee at December
31, 1989, and related statements of changes in fund balance and revenues and
expenditures for the year then ended and such other supplementary information
as required.
The examination will be made in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards. Accordingly, we will test the accounting records of the organization
and perform other auditing procedures by methods and to the extent we deem
appropriate for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the financial state—
ments. We expect the city staff will be available to prepare, under our
direction, certain of the detailed schedules necessary for the examination.
An examination directed to the expression of an opinion, on the financial.
statements is not primarily or specifically designed, and cannot be relied
upon, to disclose defalcations or other similar irregularities should any
exist, although their discovery may result.
At the conclusion of our examination, we will submit our report with respect to
the financial statements and will make separate recommendations for strengthening
internal accounting controls and improving operating procedures to the extent
that such matters come to our attention.
Our charges will be made at regular per diem rates, plus direct expenses. We
will advise you promptly if we discover any indication of defalcations or other
irregularities, or if other circumstances develop that require us to extend our
work significantly (e.g., internal control is found to be ineffective, books
are not effectively closed, accounts are out of balance) .
We are prepared to assist you with a wide range of financial and management
services. Please feel free to call on us for advice at any time regarding any
problems or matters which you feel we can render assistance.
Page 2
If the above understanding is acceptable to you, and the services outlined are
in accordance with your requirements, please sign the copy of this letter in
the space provided and kindly return to us.
We are looking forward to an enjoyable and continuing association in service to
you.
Yours truly, _ /
'a'
Jaspers, Streefland 6 Co.
Certified Public Accountants
JSC/ry
The services described in the foregoing letter are in accordance with our
requirements. The understanding described in the letter is acceptable to
us and is hereby agreed to.
City Administrator
CONSENT
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Adm' trator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clsrk�� ../
RE: Nomination and Appointment the Downtown Committee
DATE: August 30, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
I have received an application from Michael A. Phillips who
is interested in an appointment to the Downtown Committee.
BACKGROUND:
The Downtown Committee may be comprised of 11 to 20 members,
as currently established by resolution. There are only eight
members currently serving on this Committee. Theresa Roehrich
was serving on the Committee as a representative from a lending
institution. I understand that she has moved to California. Mr.
Phillips is an employee of the Marquette Bank Shakopee and could
fill that vacancy. Mr. Phillips is planning on moving to
Shakopee in September. The City's guidelines for appointments to
Boards and Commissions encourages representation on all Boards
and Commissions from a diversity of professions and occupations.
There is currently no one else serving on the Downtown Committee
from a lending institution.
The routine procedure for appointments to boards and
Commissions provides that individuals are nominated at one
meeting and appointed at the next meeting. Because there is a
shortage on the membership on the Downtown Committee, Council may
wish to dispense with the rules and make the nomination and
appointment at the same meeting.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Do not nominate Michael Phillips to the Downtown Committee.
2. Nominate Michael Phillips to the Downtown Committee.
3. Nominate Michael Phillips to the Downtown Committee,
dispense with the rules, and appoint Michael Phillips to the
Downtown Committee.
RECOMMENDATION:
Alternative No. 3.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Nominate Michael Phillips to the Downtown Committee.
2. Dispense with the rules and appoint Michael Phillips to the
Downtown Committee.
JSC/tiv
APPLICATION FOR COUNCIL ADVISORY BOARDS AND/OR COMMISSIONS 'Ili
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
We welcome you as a possible applicant for one of our City Boards
and/or Commissions.
What are the qualifications for serving on these advisory Boards
and Commissions? You must be a resident of Shakopee, except where non
residency is permitted by Council resolution, and more importantly, you
must have an interest in serving your community.
The Boards and Commissions meet during the evening and typically
have from one to two meetings per month, as follows:
Planning Commission/Board of 1st Thursday after 1st Tuesday
Adjustments and Appeals at 7: 30 p.m.
Community Development Commission 2nd Wednesday at 5: 00 p.m.
Energy & Transportation Committee 3rd Thursday at 7:00 p.m.
Ad HOC Downtown Committee As Needed Wednesday at 7:30a.m.
Cable Communication Commissions As Needed Monday at 7: 30 p.m.
Housing Advisory and Appeals Board As Needed
Building Code Board of Adjustment As Needed
& Appeals
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 1st Monday at 9: 30 p.m.
Shakopee Community Recreation 3rd Monday at 7: 00 D.M.
Polices Civil Service Commission As Needed {/
Name: , L `?' "I "IS Address: / 3f 77/ -' It;"� & ,/'r
Phone: (H) �(_ C - 77ti(, �p �<� 1144
(B) yq S—b-?
How Long Have you Been A Resident of Shakopee?/ CX pec T /0 MCVA 11C I"t
��// rn� 4 a3 fig`,
Occupation: (' r� Y — €' eti'w,� 'ry-t &—k
Does Your Work Require You To Travel? (check one)
A Great Deal Periodically Very Little Not At All
Do You Have Any Special Interests or Training Which You Feel A
Particular Board or Co fi�sssion Could Use? (Use separate sheet if
necessary)_ c < r7C,. S {.e.�.�.
Board or Commission In Which You Are Interested? oc"k
Please State Briefly Why You Are Interested In Serving On this
Board]/Commission For Which You
,...{Are
�jSubmitting An Application:
�(� Glu/1V ct {1.Q-+,. r��3-w�•' t' I / "'�- C `]�.� r � V'�r" �c•
f wC `F 41f
{z 4, 7�f A,
y 4
'r 4--„ 7- 1, a,✓
Conflict of interest Zs defined as the participation in any activity,
recommended action, or decision from which the individual has or could
have the potential to receive personal gain, whether it be direct or
indirect.
In accordance with this definition, do you have any legal or equitable
interest in any business, however organized, ich could be construed
as a conflict of interest? Yes No If yes, please provide
details on a separate sheet of paper.
In accordance with this definition, do you own any real property
located in Scott County in which you have a legal or equitable interest
which could be construed as a conflict of interest? Yes No J�
If yes, please provide details on a separate sheet of paper.
Please List Three References /(.Name, Address and Ph ne) :
I. �:�l L-u,r( j �'C'S.�-G+.. /�1 Gi 5 C4
E {
3. 13�, r3/ � 1 4 - - LCu ,�
I hereby certify that the facts within the foregoing application are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
') 7e
Signature RETURN APPLICATION AND
PLEDGE TO:
/Z s A, City Clerk
City of Shakopee
Date 129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MPI 55379
445-3650
DATE RECEIVED: % )
'JONSENT �l
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk -C�
RE: Hold Harmless Agreement with' Allen Plaisted
DATE: August 31, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is an agreement between the City of Shakopee and
Allen Plaisted holding the City harmless with regard to any
liability arising from the encroachment of a retaining wall into
the alley easement.
BACKGROUND:
If you will recall, Mr. Plaisted requested the vacation of the
alley North of Taco John's when it was discovered that the
retaining wall was encroaching into the alley.
When Council considered the request of Mr. Plaisted to vacate
the alley, Mr. Plaisted and Council agreed that Mr. Plaisted would
enter into an agreement to hold the City harmless from any
liability resulting from the collapse of the retaining wall.
The attached agreement does hold the City harmless from any
liability as a result of the collapse of the retaining wall in the
alley. The agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize the proper City officials to execute a hold harmless
agrement with Allen Plaisted for the encroachment of a retaining
wall into the alley easement.
JSC/tiv
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREMENT, is made as of this day of
1989, by and between Allen M. Plaisted and Kathryn L. Plaisted,
husband and wife (referred to herein as "Owners") and the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota (referred to herein as the "City") .
WHEREAS, Owners are the owners of certain real estate situate
in Scott County, Minnesota described in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto; and
WHEREAS, the City has certain easements for access ingress and
egress, and for inspecting, rebuilding, removing, repairing, and
improving certain utility facilities over the described property
(the "Easements") , and
WHEREAS, the City has vacated the alley North of the parcel
described in Exhibit "A", retaining a perpetual easement for
utilities (the "alley easement") , and
WHEREAS, Owners have encroached upon the Easements with the
building constructed upon the property; and
WHEREAS, Owners have built a retaining wall which does
encroach on the alley easement and Easements;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants of
the parties hereto, and the mutual benefit to be gained by the
performance hereof, the Owners and the City hereby agree as
follows:
1. That Owners shall maintain the retaining wall .in its
current condition at Owners sole expense.
2. That Owners shall hold the City harmless from any
liability arising from the collapse or use of said
retaining wall.
3. That the City agrees and consents to any encroachment
onto its Easements, and Owners agree to hold the City
harmless with regard to any liability arising from the
encroachment and to indemnify the City thereon.
4. That this Agreement shall insure to and be binding on the
heirs, representatives, successors and assigns of the
parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this
Agreement as of the day and year first above written.
Allen M. Plaisted
Kathryn L. Plaisted
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Administrator
By
Its City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _
day of , 1989, by Allen M. Plaisted and Kathryn
L. Plaisted, husband and wife.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) -
) SS.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _
day of , 1989, Dolores M. Lebens, Mayor and
Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
of the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation, on behalf of the
municipal corporation.
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
Timothy D. Moratzka
MACKALL, CROUNSE & MOORE
1600 TCF Tower
121 South Eight Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
CONSENT
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Adn' ' trator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk`-h'
RE: Raffle License - - The Minn ota Chorale
DATE: August 24, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
The Minnesota Chorale is asking the City Council to waive
their 30 day disapproval period which a municipality has prior to
the State Gambling Board approving an application for exemption
from Charitable Gambling License.
BACKGROUND:
On August 18, 1989, The Minnesota Chorale provided me with a
copy of their application for exemption for Charitable Gambling
Licenses to the Capitol State Gambling Board for a lawful
gambling exemption to conduct a raffle on September 24, 1989.
The Minnesota Chorale is planning to hold it annual benefit - A
country barbecue - at Canterbury Downs on September 24, 1989.
The proceeds from the raffle ticket sales and tickets to the
benefit will go to concert and operating expenses of The
Minnesota Chorale.
Mr. Coller, the City Attorney, has reviewed the application
and has found that it does meet the conditions of the Shakopee
City Code relative to conducting gambling within the City of
Shakopee.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Waive the City's reviewal period.
2. Do not waive the City's reviewal period.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative #1, waive the City's reviewal
period.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Waive the City's reviewal period which the City has prior to
the State Dept. of Revenue - Gaming Division issuing a Gambling
Exemption to The Minnesota Chorale for a raffle to be conducted
on September 24, 1989, at Canterbury Downs.
JSC/t1V
Memo to: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Re: 1990 Budget Process
Date: August 31, 1989
Introduction
Due to actions by the State and the uncertainty of the tax bill status,
our budget calendar has slipped. Council should set a new schedule and
set the dates for public hearings on the budget and tax levy.
Back rg ound
The deadline for final tax levy certification is November 9, 1989.
Council may finish the process and set the final levy sooner of desired.
Final adoption of the budget does not have a deadline.
Council is required to hold a public hearing on the tax levy and the
budget. Notice of the hearing must be published in the Star Tribune at
lease five weekdays before the hearing and must be a quarter page
advertisement.
The legislature may meet in special session during late September. There
may be changes to the tax laws that impact the budget on the tax levy.
Council should weigh this factor when deciding to work on the budget in
September or waiting until October.
Council is scheduled to received the draft 1990 Budget for the September
5, 1989 meeting. I suggest the following points be covered at that time.
A.) Brief introduction and overview of the Budget to put spending
priorities and the tax levy in perspective prior to detail
discussions.
B.) Set the public hearing dates.
C.) Review the 5-year C.I.P. to give staff work direction for 1990
on which projects Council really wants to spend money on.
Action Reauested
Discussion of above items
GV:mmr
BUDGET ON TABLE
Bring 5 year CIP - 8/15/89 agenda item 9a
CONSENT Ilo
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Gambling License - Lions Club Shakopee
DATE: September 1, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
The Shakopee Lions Club is asking that the Council waive the
60 day review period provided to municipalities.
BACKGROUND:
The Shakopee Lions Club has made application to the
Department of Revenue - Gaming Division for renewal of their
gambling license. The Gaming Division changed their licensing
period so that their current license is expiring earlier than the
Lions realized. They have not made application for renewal of
their license the full 60 days prior to expiration of their
current license. (Their license expires August 24, 1989. ) In
order to minimize the number of days that they can not sell pull
tabs, the Lions are asking the Council to waive the 60 days that
the City has to review their application and recommend denial of
the license, if they so chose. (If a municipality does not
respond to the Gaming Division within 60 days recommending
denial, the Gaming Division automatically issues a license. )
If a municipality waives the 60 day reviewal period, the Gaming
Division will approve a license application at their next
meeting.
The Shakopee Lions meet the requirements of the city code
for a gambling license.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to waive the 60 day review period and recommend that
the Department of Revenue - Gaming Division approve the gambling
license renewal application for Lions Club Shakopee.
CONSENT f o
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Gambling License — Lion's Club Shakopee
DATE: September 5, 1989
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
I have been advised by Rodger Frank, Gaming Division, that they do infact
recognize that the current license of the Lions does not expire until October.
So they are not now without a license.
Waiving the 60 day reviewal period will allow the Gaming Division to act
on their renewal at their meeting in September, so that the renewal will then
be in effect when their current license expires in mid October.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to waive the 60 day review period and recommend that the Department of
Revenue — Gaming Division approve the gambling license renewal application for
Lions Club Shakopee.
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: A Statewide Code of Ethics for Elected Officials and
Public Employees
DATE: September 1, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Would the City of Shakopee favor or oppose enactment of a
statewide code of ethics for elected officials and public employees
that would require compliance with specific standards of conduct
and financial disclosure?
BACKGROUND:
The League of Minnesota Cities Elections and Ethics Committee
is developing legislative policy recommendations. In order to help
in this drafting, cities are being polled to see if they would
favor or oppose the enactment of a statewide code of ethics for
elected officials and public employees. Please review the attached
redraft of a bill which will be considered by the 1990 legislature.
ALTERNATIVES:
1] Support ethics legislation as now drafted
2] Oppose ethics legislation as now drafted; please specify
which provisions are objectionable
3] Take no position at this time
X. The legislature considered a bill (S.F. 5) that would have required
city elected officials and city employees to comply with state-
wide standards of conduct and financial disclosure requirements
and become subject to a state ethics commission inquiry and
enforcement process. The proposal has been redrafted and will
be considered by the 1990 legislature.
Would your city favor or oppose enactment of a statewide code
of ethics for elected officials and public employees that
would require compliance with specific standards of conduct and
financial disclosure for local officials who hold elective or
appointive office or who are employed in a public position and
have the authority to make or to vote on final decisions involving
public finances, including deposit, investment or expenditure of
such funds - that would require compliance with the following:
* Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest
* Avoidance of conflicts of intererest
* Filing of statement of economic interest only for candidates,
elected officials and employees in cities of 10, 000 pop, or more
a. name, address, occupation and principal place of business
b. listing of all real property in the state(except homestead)
in which the official or employee holds a direct or indirect
interest of more than $2,500 or an option to buy the property
worth $50, 000 or more
c, listing of all real property in the state in which a
partnership in which the official or employee holds a direct
or indirect interest or option to buy an interest valued at
more than $2, 500 or has an option to buy property worth
$50, 000 or more
d. listing of investments, ownership in property connected with
pari-mutuel horse racing in the U.S. and Canada
e. source, nature and approximate value of gifts with fair
market value of $50 or more received during the report
period from an association or person (other than a member
of one's extended family) with financial interest in
matters with which the individual deals in an official
capacity
* Adherence to the following standards of conduct (for public
employees and elected officials as defined above) :
no use of public position to obtain preferential advantage,
benefit or privilege to generally available to others;
no use of public funds, time, personnel, facilities or
equipment for private gain or political campaign activities
unless authorized by law or which results in no significant
public cost
no solicitation, acceptance, offer or donation of- compensation
to a local official or employee for performance of public duties
no intentional use or disclosure of information gained through
public position
Support Oppose _ If your city opposes the
ethics legislation as now drafted, please specify which
provisions are objectionable: ,
NOTE: The following city officials would be obliged to comply
with these provisions: mayor, councilmember, city administrator
city manager, city clerk, city treasurer, finance director,
some library directors, EDA directors, HRA directors and board
members, port authority directors and board members, and
volunteer firefighter relief association board members
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Adams Street, from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue
DATE; August 29, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3104 which orders the preparation of a
feasibility report for Adams Street Improvements, from 6th Avenue
to 3rd Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
In October , 1988 the City Council of Shakopee discussed dust
control on Adams Street, between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue, which
is currently a gravel road . At that time , the City Council
discussed the overall City wide dust control policy and also the
specific section of Adams Street.
The City Council determined that the existing City wide dust
control policy for gravel streets within urban Shakopee was
sufficient and elected not to revise this dust control policy .
Essentially, the policy states that if a neighborhood desires a
dust control application on a gravel road in urban Shakopee, the
City would do it at the expense of the abutting property owners.
The City Council also expressed a desire to eliminate or upgrade
all remaining gravel roads in urban Shakopee and directed staff
to prepare a five year plan on completing this task of upgrading
or vacating all remaining gravel roads . Staff is currently
working on this plan.
In regards to Adams Street, between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue,
staff informed Council that Scott County was proposing to upgrade
Adams Street (C.R. 15) from 6th Avenue south all the way to the
bypass. The County had planned on constructing this upgrade in
1991 in conjunction with the Shakopee Bypass.
The County has now informed staff that they will be upgrading
C.R. 15 from a two lane highway to a four lane City street from
6th Avenue south to the bypass in 1990 . They are currently
proceeding with the design of this project.
Staff feels that the City should consider upgrading Adams Street
between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue at the same time the County is
upgrading the remainder of Adams Street. This would benefit the
City because our construction could be completed as the same time
as the County' s and the City would receive an overall lower bid
price than if we were to do the project on our own. The City
could even complete the project under the County's contract using
a cost sharing agreement.
In order to construct this roadway in 1990 , the legal process
needs to be started immediately. Attached is Resolution No. 3104
which orders the preparation of a feasibility report on roadway
improvements to Adams Street, from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue.
Currently, Adams Street is a gravel road with sewer and water.
The feasibility report would address the cost of constructing
bituminous pavement , curb & gutter and storm sewers, as well as
proposed assessments and possible alternatives to the roadway
alignment.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3104 ordering the preparation of the
feasibility report for this project.
2. Deny Resolution No. 3104.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to order the preparation of a
feasibility report for this project.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3104, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation
of a Feasibility Report for Adams Street, Between 6th Avenue and
3rd Avenue and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
MEM3104
cv
RESOLUTION NO. 3104
A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A
Report On An Improvement
To Adams Street, Between 6th Avenue And 3rd Avenue
WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Adams Street, Between 6th
Avenue and 3rd Avenue by Pavement, Curb & Gutter , and Storm
Sewers and to assess the benefitted property for all or a portion
of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 429 •
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be
referred to David Hutton, City Engineer for study and that he is
instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed
tn,a rnuacil is a 4reliminary way as to whether the
proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best
be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement,
and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,
19—.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this _
day of r 19_-
City Attorney
l -� 8
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
1' �!
FROM: John H. DeLacey, Engineering Tech. III `r 'r
SUBJECT: Tahpah Park Football Field, Project No.: 1988-4
DATE: August 31 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is required for a resolution accepting work and
making final payment on the Tahpah Park Football Field, Project
No. 1988-4 .
BACKGROUND:
All of the work for this project has been completed in accordance
with the contract documents.
A signed copy of the Certificate of Completion is attached.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3107 , A Resolution Accepting Work on the
Tahpah Park Football Field , Project No . 1988-4 and move its
adoption.
Approve final payment to S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. , P.O. Box 212 ,
Shakopee, MN 55379 in the amount of $512 .00 .
JHD/pmp
MEM3107
RESOLUTION NO. 3107
A Resolution Accepting York On The
Tahpah Park Football Field
Project No. 1988-4
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City
of Shakopee on May 11 , 1988 , S.H. Hentges & Sons, Inc. , P.O. Box
212 , Shakopee, MN 55379 has satisfactorily completed the Tahpah
Park Football Field by grading and seeding, in accordance with
such contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITT OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the work completed under said
contract is hereby accepted and approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk and Mayor are
hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on
such contract in the amount of $ 512.00 , taking the contractor' s
receipt in full.
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
19
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this —
day of
City Attorney
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
CONTRACT NO. : 1988-4 DATE: August 31 , 1989
PROJECT DESCRIPTION : Tahpah Park Football Field
CONTRACTOR: S.M. Hentges & Sons , Inc .
P.O. Box 212
Shakopee , MN 55379
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT . . . . , , , , . . . . $ 10 ,900.00
QUANTITY CHANGE AMOUNT , , , , , , , , , , , , , 8 -0-
CHANGE ORDER NO. i THRU NO. 2 AMOUNT , , . $ 1 ,9oo.00
FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT , , , , , , , , , , , , , , $ 12 ,800.00
LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS . , . , , . . , . , . , $ 12 .288.00
FINAL PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 512.00
I, hereby certify that the above described work was inspected
under my direct supervision and that, to the best of my belief and
knowledge, I find that the same has been fully completed in all
respects according to the contract, together with any modifications
approved by City Council . I, therefore, recommend above specified
final payment be made to the above named Contractor.
Professional Engineer
K-lea Minnesota DepartmW of Revenue , ,•t'(
Went.7
re51 "Affidavit for Obtaining Final Settlement of Contra t�th the Stat �lte"
3`.•'- .:
Minnesota and any of Its Political of Gover 1 Subdivisions �t�9
t
Name of cormactorMamesoN kenlifioalsm number
S.M. Hentges S Sons, Inc. \, Is rwna reed bdouctoml
arakreae adereaa 3312 36 5
P.O. Box 212
Area wM and tekphane number
Oily.bwn a poet Office state [
lip code
Shakopee NH 55379 ( 612 ) 445-7004
Check the box which describes your involvement in this project(read definitions on other side)
❑ Prime contractor ❑ Contractor ❑ Subcontractor
pmecl bcalbn Projed ar 0aneact number Period of contrectlMonthIYearl
Tah ah Park 1988-4 Fnpt,t6/88 re 6/89
Named Mimewla govermrenMl unit br whkh wmk was performed TdM amble d[Dead AnnarM eaa due
City of Shako ee 13801 1512.00
.axrlvaYoyAMmeitnYawar 'm,Y Cayamenamm Post duce art coda
129 East First Ave.. Shakopee, MN 55379
Did you pay or supervise the payment cf persons employed on this contract? LN Yes ❑ No
If yes,did you withhold Minnesota income tax from the wages
of each employee as required by Minnesota Statute 290.927 IN Yes ❑ No
Have you filed all required withholding returns and deposited Minnesota tax withheld with
the Department of Revenue as required by Minnesota Statutes 290.92 and 290.97? ® Yes ❑ No
Do you authorize the Department to inform the prime contractor
upon it's request whether your form IC-134 has been certified? ❑ Yes ❑ No
If you are a subcontractor, list your prime contractor's business name and address.
Name'
If you are a contractor or subcontractor,skip the next section of this form and sign below.
If you are a prime contractor, fill in the names and addresses of all your subcontractors. If you need more space to list your
subcontractors, attach a separate sheet.Also you must attach certified affidavits of your subcontractors and sign below.
Name and address Name and address
Don Eve and Sons
9580 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie MN 55344
Name and address - Nemeandaddress
Name and addtess Name and eddress
for willfully making a false statement, that the above statements are hue and correct to the beef of m I declare under the penellies of cdminal liability
Y knowledge and beael., ,
Adm. Asst. 7/12/89 Sign
role Here v.,i amnum
Data
:ompllance with Minnesota Statutes 290.92 and 290.97 Certificate of C
davit and the facts in the files and records of the Department of Revenue, the above Based on the facts stated in the above still
contractor/subcontractor has properly com
Plied with all of the
provisions of Minnesota Statute 290.92 relating to the withholding of income lax on wages paid to employ
ms and Minnesota Statute 290.97 relating to contract services with the Stale of l+
Minnesota or any of its govemmefttV c5pe
litr_al subdivisions.
,tative /
Date "..'u- zea De,anmem dne'Ierale reprefer
Ic l u Minnesota Department of Revenue
Mev.r1V
Affidavit for Obtaining Final Settlement of Contract with the State of
1-1v. Minnesota and any of its Political or Governmental Subdivisions 0E C
Named cantat MUla sobs identifkabon nurMN
nn1 - 1 £ . _ //oc. of none.read imtn,caane)
Baaress�-r_�ess Lct..n", �il.[Lt _ L'�.l✓ 1� Mia Cosasteel tekpleones mw
d2_.✓ l�c.._c._.� . YYL-�.-. SS��•E ( �/i)
Check the box which describes your involvement in this project(read definitions on other side)
❑ Prime contractor ❑ Contractor 0 Subcontractor
Project idoatenftas as contract Isenod of contract lMmth/lean
s�FhAr zz - `l 14H G -bc7b,9. _ 9 From J`-1-99 To .rt-3c-j
Name of"asnaseta govemman unit for wnich 7 was panomled Tocontrail
amount of contraMesut anN due
Tn
Address of Mfnnmm govemm r I unit Gry,town or post onice zip tilde
'lac. ,E S'-;- 1-5S -17
Did you pay or sup• vise the payment of persons employed on this contract? 2-Ws ❑ No
If yes,did you withhold Minnesota income tax from the wages
of each employee as required by Minnesota Statute 290.927 2-yes ❑ No
Have you Filed all required withhoiding returns and deposited Minnesota tax withheld with
the Department of Revenue as required by Minnesota Statutes 290.92 and 290.97? 'Dyes ❑ No
Do you authorize the Department to inform the prime contractor
upon It's request whether your form IC-134 has been certified? Dyes ❑ No
If you are a subcontractor,list your prime contractor's business name and fad�dress. h,
Name: S /'r r , PO /0,x �/3- tel_ .-Z.R-t+-- V"i�..� .rS 377
If you are a contractor or subcot ractor,skip the next section of this form and sign below.
If you are a prime contractor, fill in the names and addresses of all your subcontractors. If you need more space to list your
subcontractors,attach a separate sheet. Also you must attach certified affidavits of your subcontractors and sign below.
,,, _ Namar.n wn.e.. m.ne ary auumaa -n w.
I -...-...._tee.
:s Name and address Name and addre:
Is Name and address Name and addre:
to penalties of al If - for willfully making a false stalement, that the above statements are true and correct to the best of my 1 doom Vugo. �� lo..edg7/� y - 7sin
Nene Two pale Here younsign
Certificate of Compliance with Minnesota Statutes 290.92 and 290.97
acts stated in the above affidavit and the facts in the files and records of the Department of Revenue, the above Based on the I
:ontractor has properly complied with all of the provisions of Minnesota Statute 290.92 relating to the withholding contractorisubl
on wages paid to employees and Minnesota Statute 7 relating to contract services with the State of of income tax
ny of its governmental orfiI p
Iitical diwsl s Minnesota or a
r °f-t ,�R. ,...� �
zed uepartment of Revenue representative • Date S;quture of aumon
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: John H. DeLacey, Engineering Tech. III
1%
SUBJECT: T.H. 101/C.R. 83 Intersection Improvements
DATE: August 31 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is required for a resolution accepting work and
making final payment on the T. H. 101/C . R . 83 Intersection
Improvements Project.
BACKGROUND:
All of the work for this project has been completed in accordance
with the contract documents.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3108, A Resolution Accepting Work on the
T.H. 101/C.R. 83 Intersection Improvements Project No. 1987-1 and
move its adoption.
Approve final payment to Egan - McKay Electrical Contractors,
7100 Medicine Lake Rd . , Mpls. , MN 55427 in the amount of
$441 .38.
JHD/pmp
MEM3108
RESOLUTION NO. 3108 '
A Resolution Accepting York On The
Trunk Highway And County Road 83
Intersection Improvements
Project No. 1987-1
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City
of Shakopee on May 11 , 1987 , Egan McKay Electrical Contractors,
Inc. , 7100 Medicine Lake Rd. , Mpls. , MN 55427 has satisfactorily
completed the Intersection Improvements to T. H. 101 and C.R. Road
83 , in accordance with such contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the work completed under said
contract is hereby accepted and approved ; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk and Mayor are
hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on
such -ccRtract 1r. 'he tak=^8 t.h8 rnnLranLnr's
receipt in full.
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
19 _
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 19
City Attorney
0, G
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
CONTRACT NO. : 1987-1 DATE: August 31 1989
PROJECT DESCRIPTION : T.H. 101/C.R. 83 Intersection Improvements
CONTRACTOR: Egan - McKay Electrical contractors , Inc .
7100 Medicine Lake Rd.
Mpls . , MN 55427
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT . , . . . . . . . . . • $ 92 ,210.38
QUANTITY CHANGE AMOUNT , . , . . . . . . . . • . $ -3 , 130.95
CHANGE ORDER NO, 1 THRU NO. 2 AMOUNT . . . $ 4 , 529.78
FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 93 ,609.21
LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS , . . . . , . • . • • . . $ 91J67 -83
FINAL PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 441 .38
I , hereby certify that the above described work was inspected
under my direct supervision and that, to the best of my belief and
knowledge, I find that the some has been fully completed in all
respects according to the contract, together with any modifications
approved by City Council . I, therefore, recommend above specified
final payment be made to the above named Contractor.
�rofesional Engineer
xx
Minnesota gewvlmad of nevenue s �afin T^
mw..rest
Affidavit for Obtaining Final Settlement of Contract with the State
9 Minnesota and any of its Political or Governmental Subdivisions
NamB
at cenVaclw �
Egan-McKay Electrical Contractors, Inc. Minrm3aai,amMk:mxn,,,,mbe,
pl rxne.mad nswctansl
&ISN1a3983JIB3
7 00 t-7edicine Lake [mad }l I" P� I1 P( a
Cay,town a recall office _ Mea cads al,d lakplwne"umbr -
e
Minneapolis, Slala PT4 5 ( 612 )544-4131
Check the box which describes your involvement in [his project(read definitions on other side)
❑ Prime contractor ❑ Contractor ❑ Subcontractor
Plgect bcalian Plgect or contract rumba, Period of cwnraw Wllr a Arrar1
1987-1 Intersection Irrpmv TH101 and C.R. 83 1987-1
Fran 5/87 To 10/87
Noma of Minnesotagovernmarnin wul Forwruch wwk was pa adorned Tmal amount of calbad Anloure stip due
City of Shakopee 96,740.17 $3,572.44
Address la Mnm°sda gaverw,uxal unit
129 East 1st Avenue cwia7 0W,"&N 55379
TIP
code
Did you pay or supervise the payment of persons employed on this contract? ❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes,did you withhold Minnesota income tax from the wages
of each employee as required by Minnesota Statute 290.92? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Have you filed all required withholding returns and deposited Minnesota tax withheld with
the Department of Revenue as required by Minnesota Statutes 290.92 and 290.977 ❑ Yes ❑ No
Do you authorize the Department to inform the prime contractor
upon it's request whether your form IC-t 34 has been certified? ❑ Yes ❑ No
If you are a subcontractor, list your prime contractor's business name and address.
Name:
If you are a contractor or subcontractor, skip the next section of this form and sign below.
If you are a prime contractor, fill in the names and addresses of all your subcontractors. If you need more space to list your
subcontractors, attach a separate sheet.Also you must attach certified affidavits of your subcontractors and sign below.
Noma and Valley Paving, Inc. Nan
address and addmss ---
11
8050 D Highwav 101
Shakopee, M 55379
Noma arW aJdmss Nan,e and.ddress
Nameandaddmss Nana anJ aJJ,ess - '�
know
I dneel under the frenallies of cr,minal babdity fw willfully making a false slalemmn
enr, that the above stateents are hue and correct to the besl of legge and hdfi¢r ^V ,
Signf\ -CD z a
Here y�"IGw l
ills �
Certificate of Compliance with Minnesota Statutes 290.92 and 290.97
Based on the facts staled in the above allirlavil and the facts in the tiles and records of the Department of Revenue, the above
contraclor/subconlraclor has properly conyrlied wilh all of the provisions of Minnesota Statute 290.92 relating to the wlthhoidinc
of income tax on wages paid to employees and Minnesota Statute 290.97 relating to contract services wi[h lire Stale of
Minnesota or any of its gpvernmenial or pofilical subdivisions.
UEC 0 0
�^ruJ nh dT--a�nrm¢a,f,elmnn,nm m rte ev mm rew„srn,ouve ._
gain- -
a* G
IC-134 Minnesota Department of Revenue
;M
"°•'y7� '-t Affidavit for Obtaining Final Settlement of Contract with the State 0 a\`.'i�
Minnesota and any of its Political or Governmental Subdivisions 3
µ�(bleonpa - Minnesota idemiucation nk,
~Valley Paving (il roma,read insuuctlons)
Business address )< >r «`/(
8O50D Highway 101 Area oodeartt4;-.ne number
City.rows or post office slate Lp ooda
Shakopee MN 55379 ( 612 ) 445-8615
Check the box which describes your involvement in this project(read efinitions on other side)
El Prime contractor ❑ Contractor Subcontractor
Project location Prow is,conuatl number Penwofconm3ct an at
1987-1 Intersection Improv. TH101 & C.R.83 1987-1 From 5/87 T010/87
Name 0 Minrlesola govern ental unit for which woA wee pertained Total amount of contrail AmouN"M due
City of Shakopee $ 20,468.90 tar
Address of Minnesota governmental unit city.town or post or" LP coda
129 East let Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379
)[ Did you pay or supervise the payment of persons employed on this contract? Yes ❑ No
)!If yes,did you withhold Minnesota income tax from the wages - El No
of each employee as required by Minnesota Statute 290.92? L7 Yes
it Have you filed all required withholding returns and deposited Minnesota tax withheld with
the Department of Revenue as required by Minnesota Statutes 290.92 and 290.97? Q Yes ❑ No
X Do you authorize the Department to inform the prime contractor _/ El No
upon it's request whether your form IC-134 has been certified? L7 Yes
If you are a subcontractor, list your prime contractor's business name and address.
Name: Egan-McKay Electrical Contractors Inc .
If you are a contractor or subcontractor,skip the next section of this form and sign below.
If you are a prime contractor, fill in the names and addresses of all your subcontractors. If you need more space to list your
subcontractors, attach a separate sheet.Also you must attach certified affidavits of your subcontractors and sign below.
Name and address Name and address
Name and address Name and address
Name and address Name and address
I declare under the penalties of criminal liability for willfully making a false statement, that the above statements are Imo and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
Sign yw �
Here
Certificate of Compliance with Minnesota Statutes 290.92 and 290.97
Based on the facts staled in the above affidavit and the facts in the files and records of the Department of Revenue, the above
contractor/subcontractor has properly complied with all of the provisions of Minnesota Statute 290.92 relating to the withholding
of income tax on wages paid to employees and Minnesota Statute 290.97 relating to contract services with the Stale of
Minnjapte or any of its governmental or political subdivisions. j
ju
`. e y j•+:/r,t:.,%•� OCA
Squwre of aurMriraa Delaad^'a'I of Reverue repeasnwe
oau
� z
MEMO T0: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator-^
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineef -
SUBJECT: Market Street/Various Alleys
Project No. 1988-6
DATE: September 1 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3112, A Resolution Accepting Bids and
Awarding the Contract for Market Street and Various Alleys ,
Project No. 1988-6 .
BACKGROUND:
On August 15 , 1989 the City Council ordered the advertisement for
bids for the Market Street/Various Alleys Project. This project
consists of paving Market Street between 1st Avenue and Bluff
Avenue and paving four alleys in Blocks 7 , 55 . 81 and 102.
On September 1 , 1989 at 10 : 00 A. M. bids were received and
publicly opened for this project. A total of four bids were
received and summarized in the attached resolution. The three
low bids are tabulated below:
Contractors City Total Bid
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. Shakopee $ 80 ,903 .00
Alber Construction Plymouth $ 96 ,818 .50
Valley Paving , Inc . Shakopee $102 ,076 .00
The Engineering Department has reviewed all bids for completeness
and also the qualifications of S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. , the low
bidder, and have determined that they are able to perform the
work as described by the plans and specifications.
The Engineer ' s estimate for this project was approximately
$80 ,000 . The Market Street portion of the project came in
slightly higher than the Engineer' s estimate, but the four alleys
came in slightly lower than their respective estimates.
In conformance with the new change order policy, staff is also
requesting that the City Council authorize a contingency amount
equal to 15% of the project for use by the project administrator
to cover any change orders . 15% of the bid is equal to
$12 ,100 .00 . Essentially the new change order policy authorizes
the City Engineer to approve of all change orders up to that
amount with City Administrator concurrence.
Attached is Resolution No . 3112 which accepts bids on this
project.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Accept the low bid and adopt Resolution No. 3112 awarding
the contract to S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc.
2 . Reject the low bid and award the contract to the second low
bidder or another low bidder.
3. Reject all bids and rebid.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to accept the low bid and
award the contract to S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. of Shakopee, MN.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3112 , A Resolution Accepting Bids on Market
Street and Various Alleys , Project No . 1988-6 and move its
adoption.
Approve of a contingency in the amount of 15% for use by the
contract administrator in authorizing change orders on this
project.
DH/pmp
MEM3112
RESOLUTION NO. 3112
A Resolution Accepting Bid On
Market Street And Various Alleys
Project No. 1988-6
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the
Market Street and Various Alleys Project , bids were received ,
opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids
were received complying with the advertisement:
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. $ 80 ,903 .00
Alber Construction $ 96 ,818.50
Valley Paving, Inc. $102 ,076 .00
Hardrives, Inc . $103 ,325 .00
. AND WHEREAS, it appears that S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. , P.O.
Box 212 . Shakopee, MN 55379 is the lowest responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITT OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and
directed to enter into a contract with S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. ,
in the name of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of Market
Street and Various Alleys by Pavement, Curb & Gutter, and Storm
Sewer , according to the plans and specifications therefore
approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the
City Clerk.
2 . The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their
bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the
next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been
signed.
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this day of
19--
Mayor
9_-Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day of
19_.
City Attorney
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
BE: Resolution No. 3110 Providing for the Issuance and Sale of $3,600,000 GO
G.O. Tax Increment Bonds Series 1989A
DATE: August 30, 1989
Introduction
The City needs to issue bonds to provide funding for the second phase of
the upper valley project and the City's commitment for the 169 bridge project.
Background
Bonds need to be issued to fund the second phase of the upper valley
project and the 169 bridge commitment to MOOT. The Council has acted in May of
1989 to direct staff to proceed with the issuance of G.O. tax increment bonds
for these two projects.
If the resolution drafted by bond counsel does not arrive in time for
inclusion with the agenda packet, it will be on the table for the meeting.
Action Requested
Offer Resolution No. 3110 A Resolution Providing for the Issuance and Sale
of $3,600,000 GO Improvement Bonds Series 1989A.
Councilmember introduced the
following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 3110
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $3, 600,000 GENERAL
OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1989A;
CALLING FOR THE PUBLIC SALE THEREOF
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota (the City) , as follows :
1. Authorization. It is hereby determined to be
necessary and expedient for the City to sell and issue its
general obligation tax increment bonds in the principal amount
of $3,546,000 to finance costs to be incurred by the City in
aid of its Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment
District No. 1 in accordance with its Tax Increment Financing
Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 1 and 4, and to
issue and sell, together with said bonds, $54 ,000 of bonds of
the same series , representing interest as provided in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 475 . 56. Such bonds shall be denominated
"General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1989A, " and
shall be issued in the aggregate principal amount of $3 , 600, 000
(the Bonds) .
2 . Sale. This Council shall meet at the time and
place specified in the notice of sale hereinafter prescribed
for the purpose of receiving sealed bids and awarding sale of
the Bonds. The City Clerk-Treasurer is hereby authorized and
directed to cause notice of the time, place and purpose of the
meeting to be published in the official newspaper of the City
and in Commercial West once not less than ten days before the
date of said meeting in substantially the following form:
I
I�
NOTICE OF BOND SALE
$3,600, 000 GENERAL OBLIGATION
TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1989A
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, will receive sealed bids for the purchase of
$3,600,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series
1989A, of the City (the Bonds) , until 11 : 00 A.M. , Central Time,
on Tuesday, October 3, 1989, at the offices of Springsted
Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, St . Paul,
Minnesota 55101-2143 at which time the bids will be opened and
tabulated for presentation to the City Council for action
thereon at a meeting to be held at the City Hall at 7 : 30 P.M,
on the same day. No bid submitted may be withdrawn before the
Council meeting. The Bonds will be issued for the purpose of
financing costs to be incurred by the City in aid of its
Minnesota River Valley Redevelopment District No. 1 . The Bonds
will be issuable as fully registered bonds, in denominations of
$5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, will be dated, as
originally issued, as of November 1, 1989 , and will mature on
February 1 in the following years and amounts:
Year Amount Year Amount
1991 $135,000 1998 $290,000
1992 200,000 1999 310,000
1993 215,000 2000 330 ,000
1994 225,000 2001 350 ,000
1995 240,000 2002 375,000
1996 255,000 2003 400 ,000
1997 275,000
Bonds having stated maturities in 1999 and later years are each
subject to redemption at the option of the City, in inverse
order of maturities and in $5 , 000 principal amounts selected by
lot within a maturity, on February 1 , 1998, and any date
thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof
plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. Interest will
be payable on each February 1 and August 1, commencing
August 1, 1990 . A legal opinion will be furnished by Dorsey &
Whitney, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Copies of the official
Terms of Offering and additional information may be obtained
from the undersigned or from Springsted Incorporated at the
above address , telephone 612-223-3000 , financial consultants to
the City.
Dated: September 5, 1989 .
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Judith Cox, City Clerk
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
-2-
I
3. Official Terms of Offering. The following
Official Terms of Offering shall constitute the terms and
conditions for the sale and issuance of the Bonds and such
terms and conditions are hereby authorized to be incorporated
in material distributed to prospective bidders for the Bonds:
III
-3-
OFFICIAL TERMS OF OFFERING
$3,600,000
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1989A
Sealed bids for the Bonds will be received by the City or its designee on Tuesday,
October 3, 1989, until 11:00 A.M. Central Time, at the offices of SPRINGSTED Incorporated, 85
East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota after which time they will be opened and
tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:30 P.M.,
Central Time, of the same day.
DETAILS OF THE BONDS
The Bonds will be dated November 1, 1989, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest
payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1990. Interest will
be computed on the basis of a 36Oday year of twelve 30-day months and will be rounded
pursuant to rules of the MSRB. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of$5,000 each,
or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to
principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and
interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered
holder thereof at the holder's address as lt appears on the books of the registrar as of the
close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month.
The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
1991 $135,000 1996 $255,000 2000 $330,000
1992 $200,000 1997 $275,100 2101 $350,000
1993 $215,000 1998 $290,000 2002 5375,000
1994 $225,000 1999 $310,000 2003 $400,000
1995 $240,000
OPTIONAL REDEMPTION
The City may elect on February 1, 1998, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or
after February 1, 1999. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, in inverse order of
maturity and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a
price of par and accrued interest.
SECURITY AND PURPOSE
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and
credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge tax
increment income from the City's tax increment financing District's No. 1 and 4. The proceeds
will be used to finance eligible project costs within the City.
TYPE OF BID
Bids shall be for not less than $3,546,000 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of
the Bonds, and shall be accompanied by a certified or cashier's check in the amount of
$36,000, payable to the order of the City. No bid will be considered for which said check has
not been received. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will
be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the
/ �, S�-,
purchaser fails to comply with the accepted bid, said amount will be retained by the City. No
bid can be withdrawn atter the time set for receiving bids unless the meeting of the City
scheduled for award of the bids is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without
award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of
1%. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate
from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional bid will be accepted.
AWARD
The Bonds will be awarded to the bidder offering the lowest dollar interest cost to be
determined by the deduction of the premium, it any, from, or the addition of any amount less
than par, to the total dollar interest on the Bonds from their date to their final scheduled
maturity. The City's computation of the total net dollar interest cost of each bid, in accordance
with customary practice, will be controlling.
The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non-substantive informalities of any bid or of matters
relating to the receipt of bids and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all bids without cause, and,
(iii) reject any bid which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein.
REGISTRAR
The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City
will pay for the services of the registrar.
CUSIP NUMBERS
If the Bonds quality for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the
Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect
thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the
Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers
shall be paid by the purchaser.
SETTLEMENT
Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the
purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be
subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of
Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing
papers, including a no-litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds
shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City
or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms
of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents,
the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reasons of the
purchaser's noncompliance with said terms for payment.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
Underwriters may obtain a copy of the Official Statement by request to the City's Financial
Advisor prior to the bid opening. The purchaser will be provided with 50 copies of the Official
Statement.
Dated September 5, 1989 BY ORDER OF THE CRY COUNCIL
/s/Judith Cox
Clerk
- ii -
9 . Official Statement . The City Clerk and other
officers of the City, in cooperation with Springsted
Incorporated, financial consultant to the City, are hereby
authorized and directed to prepare on behalf of the City an
official statement to be distributed to potential purchasers of
the Bonds. Such official statement shall contain the statement
of Official Terms of Offering set forth in paragraph 3 hereof
and such other information as shall be deemed advisable and
necessary to describe accurately the City and the security for,
and terms and conditions of, the Bonds .
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this _ day
of September, 1989.
City Attorney
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing
resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, and
was presented to and approved by the Mayor, whose signature was
attested by the City Clerk.
-4-
Recommendations
For
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
$3,600,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS,
SERIES 1989A
Study No. 3547
SPRINGSTED Incorporated
August 31, 1989
SPRINGSTED
PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS
85 East Seventh Place,Suite 100
Saint Paul,Minnesota 55101 2143
612.2233000
FAX 612 223
August 31, 1989
Mayor Dolores Lebens
Members,City Council
Mr. Dennis Kraft, Administrator
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Recommendations for the Issuance of $3,600,000 General Obligation Tax Increment
Bonds, Series 1989A
We respectfully request your consideration of our recommendations for the issuance of
these bonds. Proceeds of the bond issue will be used to finance two major tax increment
projects, which have been underway for some time and for which the City has previously
issued some tax increment debt in order to fund early planning portions. Approximately
$1,588,000 of the bond proceeds will be used to fund the City's commitment to MnDOT for
the Mississippi River Bridge and Roadway Junction. The remaining bond proceeds will be
used to fund the second phase of the Upper Valley Storm Sewer project. The bond issue
consists of the following components:
Bridge - City Share $1,900,000
Less: General Obligation TIF 19868 (162,000)
Less: General Obligation TIF 19878 (150,000
Subtotal $1,588,000
Upper Valley Storm
Construction Bids - Phase 1 $1,404,000
Construction - Phase II 950,000
Easements 451,000
Contingency 350,000
Engineering/Admin/Costs of Issuance 590,000
Less: MnDOT Construction (356,000)
Less: Park Reserve Contribution (26,000)
Less: General Obligation TIF 19866 (1,424,000
Subtotal $1,939,000
Total to be Funded $3,527,000
Plus: Bond Discount 54,000
Costs of Issuance - Bridge Portion 19.000
Total Issue $3 600 000
The cost of issuance for the bridge portion can be found at the bottom of the project budget,
while the same costs for the storm sewer project are listed with the engineering and City
Indiana Office: Wisconsin Office'.
251 NOM I inois Street.Suite 1510 500 Elm Grave Road,Suite 101
Indianapolis,Indiana 462041942 Elm Grove,Wisconsin 53122003'
31723736M 4147823222
F. 3172373639 F.:4147a229N
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
August 31, 1989
administration. The bond discount represents 1.5% of the bond issue amount representing
the underwriter's profit for acquiring and remarketing the bonds.
These bonds will be supported by tax increment income received from tax increment
financing (TIF) Districts#1 (K-Mart) and #4 (Canterbury Downs). We have prepared for your
review a summary of the current status of these tax increment districts, as we have for all
recent TIF bond issues. The summary is attached as Appendix I of these recommendations.
Page 1 represents the tax increment income as currently projected by the contributing
parcels. These projections are based upon the 1989 tax levies as certified by the county
auditor by parcel and applied to that portion which is to be received by the tax increment
district. In column 8, there is a deduction from the incremental income to reflect the
agreement the City has made with the school district regarding the school district's excess
levy in which 13.2% of the increment income would be returned to the district. For taxes
payable in 1989 this amounts to $470,790. That levy was rescinded by the voters this year
and, therefore, the incremental income to the tax increment districts will be reduced each
year by the loss of that levy. For this reason, we have shown that as a deduct from the 1989
levy throughout the remaining term. In addition, the county auditor previously erred in filing
taxable valuation information with the State, and has made an adjustment to recover the
funds from that error, which adjustment will be reflected in the 1990 tax payments. This
amounts to an additional $395,120. That calculation is also shown in column 8 for 1990
only. Column 9 represents the net incremental income to be received by the districts,
making no further assumptions of increases or decreases in tax rates or valuation
adjustments.
Page 2 of Appendix I represents the debt service currently supported by these two TIF
districts, plus the proposed new debt service as shown in column 9. The total debt service
to be supported is then shown in column 10. We have summarized the results of this
analysis on page 3, which demonstrates the surplus of incremental income over debt service
requirements. The district had a beginning fund balance of $2,600,666 as of
December 31, 1988; this amount is shown in column 4 as a beginning balance.
The K-Mart tax increment district was originally designed to have a final maturity in 2005.
Our calculations, therefore, utilize the full term to demonstrate to the City the potential
earnings of the tax increment districts. The total debt service has a final maturity in 2003,
payable from the taxes collected in 2002. If at that time no additional debt has been
incurred, the K-Mart district can be closed. There are, in fact, substantial fund balances
which could permit the City to prepay bonds if that surplus actually materializes.
Appendix II is our recommended maturity schedule for these bonds. The bonds will be
dated November 1, 1989 and will mature on February 1, 1991 through 2003. The 2003 date
coincides with the final maturity of the first bond issue for the Upper Valley Storm Sewer and
represents a term which is consistent with the previous plans. We also recommend that the
City retain the right to call bonds maturing in the years 1999 through 2003 as early as
February 1, 1998 without penalty. This will permit the City to prepay bonds, closing out the
district, if the funds are available. This call feature includes $1,765,000 of bonds, or 49% of
the issue.
A bond rating will again be required for the City and Springsted will make the necessary
application to Moody's Investors Service. The costs of the rating are included in the costs of
issuance.
Page 2
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
August 31, 1989
These bonds are subject to the Tax Reform Act of 1988, however, since the City has not
issued and, we understand, does not intend to issue more than $5 million of tax-exempt
bonds during calendar year 1989, the City can exempt itself from the rebate and reporting
requirements as a small issuer.
We are recommending the bonds be offered for sale on Tuesday, October 3 with bids to be
received in the offices of Springsted at 11:00 A.M. At that time, the bids will be tabulated and
verified for accuracy. We will present them to the Council for action at your regular meeting
that same evening.
Respectfully submitted,
SPRINGSTED Incorporated
rls
Page 3
APPENDIX pL
� ! )
! ! ; ! ; ! ! ! ! # ! ; r ! ! ! ! . ! $ ! �
\ k �
) ` ■
3
\ � \ 22222 }
E ! ! !
■ f ) ^ ! ! ! 7 ; ! ! ! l171 ! ! ! I . ! ! } ! !
� _ � § ! § ■ ! k ; ■ ; k ; & ; - ; ■ � 2 � ! ;
. | ' ■ ! ! \ 4 ! ! § ! ! ! E ■ B2 § ! . \ -
K , . mm , akKk « ke6C- Ksi
� - � , � ! ! • ! ; ! ! , � l � l = ! ! ' � � � � / �
} � ƒ
� - - - . - . , � . ■ 7 - ,
� f ® ! ! 7 ! ■ ■ , 9 ! ■ Ee « ! ; § � � � { ! � `
§ - - - - - - - - - - - k ! ! ! � k !
- - - - � � - � -
� �- ! ■ . � !
!
_
. . -
■ - j \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ .\\ \ .
m mw
APPENDIX 1 2
m e
o - o e 3 f $
y C N N N N _ _ _ .. ;ryj g
Cm 0 C a N n m m a
L T V
8 ° m - o
mea = 29
� gmmip = me
am o —
' as" ems $ $ „ _ vee
� � � :� demmmmmesem ' m
lo
< 4 �
4a
PF -
ssn "a � � se m
so
NNNryNNNNN a ;
$ Y € € w o
m 8 +
a
s
U U Y U _ _ _ _ _ r r .y - r -
1 - 11 Page
APPENDIX I
m
8
Mme
_ o r
m m m . . . . . . . . . .5 ItS o
.� . e . ^ _
o
T - m g8 G
F 6 IS- 9
O L
T T - T - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
u V Y _ y y N y y O
I - III Page 6
APPENDIX II
City Of Shakopee, Minnesota Prepared August 30, 1989
$3,600,000 G.O. TIF Bonds;. Series 1989 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated
Upper Valley Storm - Phase II i. -Bridge/Junction p
Dated: 11-. 1-1989
Mature: 2- 1
Year of Year of Total
Principal
Levy Mat. Principal Rates Interest S Interest
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1989 1991 135,000 6.20% 294,686 429,686
1990 1992 200,000 6.25% 227,379 427,379
1991 1993 215,000 6.30% 214,879 429,879
1992 1994 225, 000 6.35% 201,334 426, 334
1993 1995 240,000 6.40% 187,046 427,046
1994 1996 255,000 6.45% 171,686 426,686
1995 1997 275,000 6.50% 155,238 430,238
1996 1998 290,000 6.55% 137,363 427,363
1997 1999 310,000 6.60% 118, 368 428, 368
1998 2000 330, 000 6.65% 97,908 427,908
1999 2001 350, 000 6.70% 75,963 425,963
2000 2002 375,000 6.75% 52,513 427,513
2001 2003 400,000 6.80% 27,200 427, 200
TOTALS: 3,600,000 1,961,563 5,561,563
Bond Years: 29,595.00 Annual Interest: 1,961,563
Avg. Maturity: 8.22 Plus Discount: 54, 000
Avg. Annual Rate: 6.628% Net Interest: 2,015, 563
N.I.C. Rate: 6.810%
Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant
alterations of this schedule.
The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary.
Page 7
OFFICIAL TERMS OF OFFERING
$3,600,000
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1989A
Sealed bids for the Bonds will be received by the City or its designee on Tuesday,
October 3, 1989, until 11:00 A.M. Central Time, at the offices of SPRINGSTED Incorporated, 85
East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota atter which time they will be opened and
tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:30 P.M.,
Central Time, of the same day.
DETAILS OF THE BONDS
The Bonds will be dated November 1, 1989, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest
payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1990. Interest will
be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months and will be rounded
pursuant to rules of the MSRB. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each,
or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to
principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and
interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered
holder thereof at the holder's address as it appears on the books of the registrar as of the
close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month.
The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
1991 $135,000 1996 $255,000 2000 $330,000
1992 $200,000 1997 $275,000 2001 $350,000
1993 $215,000 1998 $290,000 2002 $375,000
1994 $225,000 1999 $310,000 2003 $400,000
1995 $240,000
OPTIONAL REDEMPTION
The City may elect on February 1, 1998, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or
after February 1, 1999. Redemption may be in whole or in part and it in part, in inverse order of
maturity and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a
price of par and accrued interest.
SECURITY AND PURPOSE
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and
credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge tax
increment income from the City's tax increment financing District's No. 1 and 4. The proceeds
will be used to finance eligible project costs within the City.
TYPE OF BID
Bids shall be for not less than $3,546,000 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of
the Bonds, and shall be accompanied by a certified or cashier's check in the amount of
$36,000, payable to the order of the City. No bid will be considered for which said check has
not been received. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will
be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the
Page 8
/t-
purchaser fails to comply with the accepted bid, said amount will be retained by the City. No
bid can be withdrawn atter the time set for receiving bids unless the meeting of the City
scheduled for award of the bids is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without
award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of
1%. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate
from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional bid will be accepted.
AWARD
The Bonds will be awarded to the bidder offering the lowest dollar interest cost to be
determined by the deduction of the premium, if any, from, or the addition of any amount less
than par, to the total dollar interest on the Bonds from their date to their final scheduled
maturity. The City's computation of the total net dollar interest cost of each bid, in accordance
with customary practice, will be controlling.
The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non-substantive informalities of any bid or of matters
relating to the receipt of bids and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all bids without cause, and,
(iii) reject any bid which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein.
REGISTRAR
The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City
will pay for the services of the registrar.
CUSIP NUMBERS
If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the
Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect
thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the
Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers
shall be paid by the purchaser.
SETTLEMENT
Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the
purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be
subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of
Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing
papers, including a no-IRigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds
shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City
or Its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms
of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents,
the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reasons of the
purchaser's non-compliance with said terms for payment.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
Underwriters may obtain a copy of the Official Statement by request to the City's Financial
Advisor prior to the bid opening. The purchaser will be provided with 50 copies of the Official
Statement.
Dated September 5, 1989 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/Judith Cox
Clerk
Page 9
CONSENT
To: Judy Cox, City Clerk
From: Lou Van Hout, Utilities Manager
Re: Termination of Chicago and Northwestern license #98419
Date: 8/24/89
The license listed above is for a crossing of the railroad by an
electric line. The license is being terminated as part of the
terms of a new license agreement which permits two crossings, which
are needed for a new feeder line being constructed in the
industrial park area of the Shakopee.
The termination of a license requires Council action as is a
surrendering of an existing right of the City.
The Utility Commission will be approving of the replacement license
agreement at their September 11, 1989 meeting.
I would request, on behalf of the Utilities Commission, that the
license agreement #98418 be terminated subject to replacement by
the new license agreement, by Council approval of the attached
draft resolution.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 3111, A Resolution Terminating Licenses
Agreement #98418 With The Chicago and Northwestern Railroad,
and move its adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 3111
A RESOLUTION TERMINATING LICENSE AGREEMENT #98418
WITH THE CHICAGO AND NORTHWESTERN RAILROAD
WHEREAS, Chicago and Northwestern license #98418, permitting
the crossing of the railroad by an electric line, is to be replaced
by a new license with the railroad, and
WHEREAS, the new license will adequately replace license
#98418, and
WHEREAS, the Utilities Commission is requesting termination
of license #98418 by the Shakopee City Council,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, that license #98418 is hereby
terminated, subject to the concurrent approval by the Chicago and
Northwestern Railroad of a new license agreement, yet to be
numbered, for two crossings of the railroad by an electric license
at 13.9 kV potential.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all things necessary to carry out
the terms and purpose of this resolution are hereby authorized and
performed.
Adopted in regular session of the Shakopee City Council this 5th
day of September, 1989.
Mayor, Dolores M. Lebens
ATTEST:
City Clerk, Judith S. Cox
Approved as to form this
day of September, 1989.
City Attorney, Julius A. Coller, II
JULIUS A. COLLER. 11
«Ew Ar of :sy AT Lew eiz-aas-�zes
��ossp is.o wcs. wvcwuc
SHAHOPEE. MINNESOTA
55329 .._. ... .. r
AUG 1 ? 1989
Dolores Lebens, Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
Shakopee City Council Members
From: Julius A. Caller, II, City Attorney for the City of Shakopee
Date: August 9, 1989
Re: Dogs and other animals
As a result of concern over vicious dogs and particularly pit bulls as a
result of recent popularity of such animals the Council requested the
drawing of an Ordinance covering the issue. This has been somewhat comp-
licated by Chapter 37 entitled "Animal Control-Dangerous Dogs" as adopted
by Minnesota State Legislature and approved by Goveuor Perpich on April 17,
1989, which in Subdivion 8 thereof provides that no city or county may
adopt an ordinance regulating a dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs
based solely on the specific breed of a dog. Ordinances inconsistent with
this provision are void. This proposed ordinance has been drawn to cover
pit bulls without so specifically stating or defining and it is the new
law that is the reason why the term "pit bulls" is not included in the
proposed ordinance.
ACTION RECOMMENDED:
Offer Ordinance No. 273, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,
Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 10 Entitled "Public Protection, Crime
and Offenses" By Repealing Subd 1 and Subd 8 Sec. 10.21 and by Enacting
New Subd 1 and a New Subd 8 and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code
Chapter 1 and Section 10.99 which among other things contain penalty previsions,
and move its adoption.
ORDINANCE NO.273
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City
Code Chapter 10 Entitled "Public Protection, Crime and Offenses" By
Repealing Subd 1 and Subd 8 SeclD.21 and by Enacting New Subd 1 and
a New Subd 8 and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter
1 and Section 10.99 which among other things contain penalty provisions.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
ARTICLE I: Definitions
The following definition section is added to Section 10.21
Subd 1 — Definitions
The following terms as used in this section shall have the meanings herein
stated.
A. The term "owner' means any person, firm, corporation, organization,
unit or department pmssessing, harboring, keeping, having an interest in, or having
care or custody or control of a dog, cat or domestic animal.
B. The term "at large" means outside of the premises of the owner and not
under restraint. A leash shall be a restraint oraline, belt, cord or chain, not
more than 10 feet in length for leading or restraining a domestic animal securely
fastened around the neck or collar of said animal, except in a case of a potentially
dangerous or vicious animal the leash shall be no longer than 4 feet in length.
C. The term "potentially dangerous or vicious animal" means
1. Any animal with a propensity, tendency or disposition to attack,
cause injury or otherwise endanger the safety of human beings or other domestic
animals as evidenced by its habitual or repeated chasing, snapping, barking or
howling.
2. Any such domestic animal which attacks a human being or other
domestic animal without provocation.
3. Any animal owned or harbored primarily or in part for the purpose
of dog fighting.
Subd 2-Running at Large Prohibited
It is unlawful for any dog, cat or other domestic animal to run at
large and any vicious animal, outside of its kennel or pen must in addition to
being on a 4 foot leash, shall be muzzled by a muzzling device sufficient to
prevent the dog from biting persons or other animals. except when shown either
in a sanctioned American Kennel or Show or upon prior approval of the Health
Department.
ARTICLE II: The following new Subd 8 shall be added to Sec 10.21:
Subd 8 Obligation to Prevent Nuisances
It shall be the obligation and responsibility of the owner as herein
defined of any animal in the City whether permanently or temporarily therein
to prevent such animal from committing any act which constitutes a nuisance
and it shall be considered a nuisance for any animal to habitually or frequently
bark or cry at night, to frequent school grounds, parks or public beaches, to
chase vehicles or individuals, to molest or annoy any person, if such person is
not on the property of the owner or custodian of such animal, or to molest,
defile or destroy any property, public or private. Failure on the part of the
owner to prevent his animal from committing an act or nuisance shall be subject
to penalties herein provided. Each occurrence is a separate offense.
It is also unlawful for any owner of any domestic animal not to immediately
remove any feces left by such animal on any public or private property and to
dispose of such feces in a sanitary manner and not to have in such owner's
possession a device or equipment for picking up and removal of such animal feces.
The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to a paved or traveled portion of
a public street or road or to rural undeveloped areas of the City nor to guide
dogs accompanying a blind person or to a dog used by police or in rescue operations.
ARTICLE III: Repeal
This Ordinance repeals the following portions of Chapter 10, to-wit:
Subd 1 and Subd 8 of Sec 10.21
ARTICLE IV: Violation
Every person violating Section, provision or subdivision hereof when he
performs an act hereby prohibited or declared unlawful or failed to do an act
which failure is hereby prohibited or declared unlawful and upon conviction thereof
shall be guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
ARTICLE V: When in Force and effect
After the adoption and attestation hereof one publication in the official
newspaper which shall be in force and effect the day after the date of such
publication .
Passed 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
Prepared and approved as to form this
9th of August 1989.
City A[[
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Admr' l trator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Vacation of Easements Behind K-mart Expansion
DATE: September 5, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
The attached resolution sets the date for a public hearing to
consider the vacation of utility easements in order to allow the
expansion of the K-mart store at the mall.
BACKGROUND:
The City has received a petition for the vacation of utility
easements in the south corner of Lot 1, Block 1, Valley Mall 1st
Addition. There is a utility easement behind that part of the mall
where the K-mart store is expanding too. In addition to the
expansion into the mall, there will be an expansion to the rear of
the building. There is a utility easement immediately behind the
existing building which must be vacated prior to construction.
There is a public water main in the easement which needs to be
relocated. The applicant is in contact with Shakopee Public
Utilities. A new easement will have to be given to the City and
the current watermain will need to be relocated within this
easement. The applicant has been informed that this must take
place before the resolution of vacation can be adopted. Since K-
mart is anxious to begin construction this fall, they will be
working closely with Shakopee Public Utilities to relocate the
watermain as soon as possible.
Resolution No. 3101 sets October 3, 1989 for a public hearing
to consider the vacation of the easement. If the watermain has not
been relocated by this time, the hearing can still take place. The
resolution of vacation, however, does not have to be adopted at
this same time. It can be adopted at a subsequent meeting when the
watermain has been relocated.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Offer 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
move its adoption.
JSC/tlV
RESOLUTION NO. 3101
A RESOLUTION INITIATING THE PARTIAL VACATION OF A UTILITY
EASEMENT LYING IN THE SOUTH CORNER OF LOT 1, BLACK 1,
VALLEY MALL 1ST ADDITION, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, a petition has been received from the property owner
requesting the partial vacation of a utility easement in the south
corner of Lot 1, Block 1, Valley Mall let Addition; and
WHEREAS, the property owner proposes to relocate the utility
easement and watermain within the easement so that the current need
for the easement will no longer exist; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing must be held before action on the
vacation can be taken and two weeks published and posted notice
thereof must be given.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that a hearing be held in the Council
Chambers on the 3rd day of October, 1989, at 7:30 P.M. , or
thereafter, on the matter of vacating the utility easement lying
in the south corner of Lot 1, Block 1, Valley Mall 1st Addition,
Scott County, Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that two weeks published notice be
given by publication in the Shakopee Valley News and posted notice
be given by posting a copy of such notice on the bulletin board in
the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse and the bulletin
board in the Shakopee City Hall.
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 5th day of September, 1989.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1989.
City Attorney
V
� z g•Wim/ oma/ /ham °a• �p a ���\\\ �d
`S6\ c¢y rf
CDs Ai
D/0
• O C t §' OU# \
r a\ L
ti
� WIMMI
•.9 '• � � ��v \\ $ y� \ Y
a 04
Cl 4 IJa ul L� ~ III r C I�
td
Y
c\ 11J AYIn y � iJ. I � Y
INN
/ o
M, u.62aISN � r- - M„22,IO,bSN� f— ?✓ - -_ ... ���I
bt zo,
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
RE: Clerical Position Vacancy
DATE: September 5, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
Authorization of filling position vacancy.
BACKGROUND:
With the recent resignation of Cora Hullander, Building Department
Secretary, a vacancy was created. City Council authorized the
filling of the position.
Internal advertising resulted in several qualified candidates.
After interviews the decision was made to recommend that City
Council approve hiring Jeanette Shaner, currently Secretary to City
Administrator to fill this position. It is the intent of the
Building official to give this position more responsibility with
additional education being required for the position which will be
responsible to answer questions relating to residential zoning
requirements as well as being able to perform non-structural
building code reviews during periods of peak construction activity.
It is anticipated that a TSP will be taken in 6 months for this
position.
Secondly, to fill the vacancy created by Jeanette's transfer,
Council's approval is requested to transfer Toni Warhol to position
of Secretary to the City Administrator. This position would also
be a 40 hour week position. It is anticipated that this position
will also take another TSP in 6 months to reflect added
responsibilities being added to this position.
Thirdly, it is recommended that the Secretary position in the
Community Development Department be reduced to the position of
Clerk Typist II. It is possible that this position might be filled
on a 32 hour per week basis to start, depending upon workload.
It is my opinion that 2 secretaries and a clerk typist will better
meet needs of the organization than 3 secretaries and will result
in a cost savings to City while providing a superior level of
service to users of city services. This should result in an
initial annual savings of approximately $7000 in salary.
RECOMMENDATIONS.
(1) Appoint Jeanette Shaner to position of Secretary for the
Building Department at Step 4 of the Secretary position of the
pay plan ($22,442) .
(2) Appoint Toni Warhol to position of Secretary to City
Administrator at Step 4 of the Secretary position of the pay
plan ($22,442) .
(3) Authorize advertising for a clerk Typist II position (Step I
annual salary $15,640) , with the provision that it be a full
time job but is to be initially filled for up to 32 hours a
week, until such time as a full time position can be
justified.
ACTION REOUESTED•
Move to transfer Jeanette Shaner to Building Department Secretary
at current salary.
Move to transfer Toni Warhol to Administration as Secretary to City
Administrator at current salary.
Move to authorize advertising for a Clerk Typist II position to
replace the existing Secretary position.