Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06/05/1990
MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: May 31, 1990 1. Murphy's Landing DNR Trail - On Thursday, April 26, 1990 representatives from the DNR, Murphy's Landing and Barry Stock met to discuss the proposed trail alignment through Murphy's Landing. Shown in Attachment #1 is a correspondence that Barry Stock has sent to Marge Henderson regarding the issues discussed at the meeting. 2 . Community Youth Building - Gang Toilets - On May 15, 1990 City Council approved allowing overnight sleeping in the Community Youth Building contingent upon staff's investigation as to whether or not gang toileting is required. Shown in Attachment #2 is a brief memo from Mr. Houser regarding this issue. He states that there is not requirement for gang toileting in the facility at this time. Also shown in Attachment #2 is the correspondence that Barry Stock sent to the Community Youth Building Committee regarding Council 's action. 3 . Downtown Flower Plantings - Between May 19 and May 21st, the Shakopee Cub Scouts planted the annuals in the downtown area. The Cub Scouts will be reimbursed in the amount of $1,500. 00 for their services in conjunction with this project. 4 . Van Pool Ridership Survey - During the month of April the Energy and Transportation Committee surveyed the van pool riders to determine whether or not they were satisfied with the existing service. Shown in Attachment #4 are the results of the survey. The survey results indicate that there is a high level of ridership satisfaction in this program. At this time, the Energy and Transportation Committee is not proposing any changes in the van pool program. 5. Shakopee Area Transit Survey - During the month of April the Energy and Transportation Committee distributed a direct mail survey to over 4, 000 households in Shakopee. This survey did specifically question Shakopee residents regarding their interest in Sunday dial-a-ride service. Survey results did not give a strong indication whether or not Sunday service would be feasible. The Energy and Transportation Committee will be reevaluating this issue and may consider implementing a dial-a-ride service on Sunday between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM by demonstration project basis some time in 1991. The survey also indicated an interest in expanding dial-a-ride service to Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. The majority of those surveyed stated that they would utilize service to Eden Prairie if it were offered. The Energy and Transportation Committee is in the process of pursuing a cost share arrangement with Southwest Metro in an attempt to develop a fixed route dial-a-ride program which would offer peak AM, mid-day and peak PM service to the Southwest Metro Service Area and back. The Committee hopes to implement the proposed service on a demonstration project basis this fall. It may be necessary for the City of Shakopee to request a budget amendment from the Regional Transit Board to provide funding for said program. Once program costs have been analyzed and cost share arrangements have been discussed, the Energy and Transportation Committee will be reporting back to City Council with a formal report on the proposed program and corresponding budget implications. 6. Mona Strunk has requested permission to close the West one- half of 3rd Avenue on Saturday, June 16 from 1 : 00 P.M. to 7 : 00 P.M. There will be a wedding reception at her house and she is concerned about young children running out into the street. The police department has approved the request. 7 . Attached are the March 23 , 1990 and the May 12 , 1990 minutes of the Shakopee Community Youth Building Committee Meetings. 8 . St. Mary' s Church has applied for an exemption from lawful gambling license for August 26, 1990 in conjunction with their annual festival . They do meet the requirements of the city code. 9 . Attached is the June Business Update from City Hall . 10. Attached are the April 18 , 1990 minutes of the Energy and Transportation Committee Meeting. 11 . Attached is the June calendar of Upcoming Meetings. 12 . Attached is correspondence from MnDOT regarding a Hwy. 212 public hearing to be held June 6, 1990. 13 . Attached is a summary of 1990 legislative action on significant AMM policy issues. 14 . Attached are the June 7, 1990 agendas for the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment & Appeals meetings. 15 . Attached are the May 3 , 1990 minutes of the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment & Appeals. 16 . Attached is the Police Newsletter for Council review. 17 . Attached is a memorandum from Dave Hutton regarding the Lewis Street Project. .44 / 4ggig CITY OF SHAKOPEE N\9OW _ ' 11-Z ��, INCORPORATED 1870 ti 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612)445-3650 1/t10 <i� 2 • May 16, 1990 Ms. Marge Henderson Murphy' s Landing 2187 East Highway 101 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Ms. Henderson: Enclosed is a follow up summary of the Murphy' s Landing walk- through that took place on Thursday, April 26, 1990. I felt that the meeting was very useful and productive. I also sensed that the DNR will make a conscientious effort to accommodate as many of the concerns of Murphy' s Landing as possible. Attached is a copy of the notes that Mr. Steve Rose took during the meeting. I believe that he has accurately summarized the issues that were presented by Murphy' s Landing. I also believe that he accurately reflects those areas of agreement. If Murphy' s Landing has a problem with those areas of agreement that Mr. Rose has identified, I would request that you bring them to my attention as soon as possible. I expect that the DNR officials will have a plan drafted for Murphy' s Landing' s review within the next 30 to 60 days. At that time, I 'm sure they will have adequate documentation in support of or denial of the security mitigation measures requested by Murphy' s Landing. I would request that you share a copy of this correspondence with your Board for their information. If you have any questions or comments regarding the notes taken by Mr. Rose, please feel free to call me. Sincerely Bar A. Stock Assistant City Administrator cc: Steve Rose, DNR Shakopee Mayor and Council The Heart Of Progress Valley AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Murphy's Landing Walk-Over Notes April 26, 1990 PRESENT: Gary Scott (Security Expert) , Marge Henderson (Murphy's Landing Site Manager), Barry Stock (Shakopee Assistant City Administrator), John Winter, Steve Rose, Mike (Murphy's Landing) I will break down the notes from the Murphy's Landing walk-over into two sections. One will deal with the areas of agreement between the DNR, Murphy's Landing staff and the City of Shakopee. The other suggestions posed by Gary Scott and Murphy's Landing that are still under considera- tion. Areas of Agreement 1. We agreed to no snowmobiles running through Murphy's Landing main complex area. This has not been an issue for quite a while. 2. We agreed to run the Minnesota Valley Trail (MVT) along the north edge of the Mill Pond Creek until it is approximately 50' to 75' west of the Minnesota River and cross the creek with culverts. Originally, we planned on coming up the service road and entering the wooded area. (See attached map. ) 3. We agreed to coming up the natural ramp that exists just directly west of the open air picnic pavilion area. We will try to keep the MVT very low running past the open air pavilion in order to avoid loss of sight-lines to the river. 4. The DNR will put an information kiosk and interpretive signs right by the overlook to encourage people to stay out of Murphy's Landing unless they want to purchase a ticked to enter. A bike rack will be placed outside of the fencing. 5. The DNR agreed to keep the MVT as close as possible to the Minnesota River because any land between the fencing and river will be useless to Murphy's Landing. 6. The DNR will change the direction of the black powder in order to direct it further away from the MVT. 7. The DNR will consider a natural surface instead of black top in the area of the overlook. 8. To not extend the MVT through Murphy's Landing until Peavey and Valleyfair are ready to construct. Gary Scott and Murphy's Landing requested the following security items: 1. Eight foot chain link fence to run the entire length of Murphy's Landing except in area of overlook where a wrought iron fence is requested. This wire fence should include a barbed wire area on top with three strands of barbed wire. Vegetative screening such as vines and/or conifers preferred to reduce the negative impact of the wire fence. 2. Wrought iron fencing in the area by the overlook preferably five foot or higher. This should include spiked tips on top to discourage trespassers. Should consider stone pillars to support fence in this area. 3. Mercury vapor lighting to be placed every 50 yards along the perimeter of the fence. 4. A security road or path along the inside of the fencing to patrol perimeter of area. 5. No gates or access roads on the east end of Murphy's Landing site close to Peavey. 6. Also suggested was closing the entrance to Murphy's Landing at dusk and reopening at dawn to reduce the threat of vandalism or trespass- ing. These are the basic items of discussion from our walk-over. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. I - W - WO v` , W M ut z o13 w W W % (n U Q /2 Z / I LL1 L 111( ) �Z ll�O /, lit 111 O 111 -� (n Q'� • /,r ! / / f W ____0-)c \ dj /.�. ,/• -,'-• -tom — • \.\ ' • •. \\\* s.„..,\. Z W o O O rn \ o - J Cr Na j . \i 4 qi ›- 0 lt \\. ..\ ift , , ., \\\ \ -.6 is - . -. D \ . \t . '4 . . \ o \,` ; F—Z Az J 2 I E "' u Z OQ o � o , m X11 w 0 F- e u �r F W 2 0 _ h Z W F- d n Eklill'. :/r _ m 77/ • \ \7-1 � j t `<-o It tii 'r > a , v 1 ` I Q #� Memo To: Barry Stock From: LeRoy Houser Date: 5/16/90 Subject: Youth Building Introduction Attached, the fixture table in the State Code. This building is classed as a assembly occupancy. Under the code one fixture per each per 100 occupants is required. One urinal for each one hundred occupants is required in the mens room. The building meets minimum code requirements for the occupant load permitted at one person for each thirty square foot of building area, not including kitchens, store rooms or restrooms, Remember, this is not a drinking/dining facility that increase the need for fixtures over and above what is required by code. There are two rest rooms on the main floor and two rest rooms on the lower level. You could certainly increase the need for more restroom fixtures if the building is turned into a State or National meeting place for special events or, it is used as hotel. However, we must keep in mind that the original intent of the building was for a place for the community youth to meet If you accept that premise, then you have to accept the fact that the building is properly designed and meets code. There is absolutely no requirement for a shower or bath tub in this facility. If the Council wishes to have gang rooms installed in the building, I will be most willing to see it gets done. However, when the cost estimates are in, I think the Council will find it prohibitive. 4715.1215 TABLE OF REQUIRED SANITATION FIXTURES. 1 1 1 1 0 li I 1 it IA i H _ — t r. 8 8 1 - !HAIR xS uP88 311 > pp m 3 5 Q s pASZ - 'z - RRSSRRSR18SSR SRS mR 8 8 ! JhJihJI!hi'il W 1 Ii g i 1I i 42 TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 15, 1990 Mayor Gary Laurent presiding 1] Roll Call at 8: 00 P.M. 2] Approval of Agenda 3] Proclamation - National Public Works Week - on table 4] Liaison Reports -from Councilmembers 5] Mayor' s Report 6] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 7] 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. ) APPROVED*8] Approval of Minutes of May 1st and May 7th, 1990 (TYPO CORRECTED) 9] Communications: APPROVED a] Mark Pidde re: Lease of property for Valley Ice Arena b] 10] Public Hearings: None 11] Boards and Commissions - Planning Commission APPROVED *a] Amending A Condition of Approval of the Final Plat of Hillwood Estates - Res. No. 3233 12] Reports from Staff: APPROVED a] Youth Building Panic Hardware - tabled 5/1 APPROVED b] Applications for Liquor Licenses - Turtle ' s Bar & Grill APPROVED c] 1989 Annual Financial Report - Auditor's Presentation APPROVED d] Swimming Pool Remodeling - tabled 4/17 APPROVED e] Street Lights SET HEARING APPROVED f] Fiscal Disparities Option for TIF Districts 3 and 4 - Tabled 5/1 INFO g] Batter's Eye Construction Update - Verbal report by City Engineer - Fence in center field APPROVED h] Approval of Bills in Amount of $272 , 382 .45 APPROVED i] Local Government Aid (LGA) Cuts APPROVED j ] Renaming Street in Stonebrooke First Addition 2.-/ legit CITY OF SHAKOPEE `G` : INCORPORATED 1870 �. 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612)445-3650 it Mr. LaVern Johnson, Chairman May 18 , 1990 Shakopee Community Youth Building Committee 311 Shawnee Trail Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Johnson: On March 15, 1990 the Shakopee City Council approved the Community Youth Building Committee ' s (CYBC) request to allow overnight sleeping on the main floor of the Youth Building. Approval for overnight sleeping is contingent upon the following conditions: 1. That the doors be kept unlocked during the overnight function and that the appropriate fire lanes be kept open at all times. 2 . That the occupancy during overnight functions be limited to 50 persons with one adult chaperon per 10 persons in attendance. 3 . That Certificates of Insurance indicating liability coverage be submitted to the City of Shakopee by those organizations utilizing the Youth Building for overnight camping purposes. The City Council has also requested the Community Youth Building Committee to attempt to raise funds for the panic hardware. The cost estimate that we have to purchase and install the panic hardware is $780. 00. Purchasing and installing the panic hardware would provide additional security at the building during overnight functions. I would like to request that the CYBC report back to me with any progress that you have made on acquiring funds for the panic hardware by July 1, 1990. If you cannot raise the appropriate funds, the Shakopee City Council will consider including it in their 1991 budget. At the Council meeting on May 15, 1990 one of the council members made an inquiry regarding gang toileting. The City Building Official has investigated this issue and has determined that gang toileting is not needed based on the occupancy of the building and its ' use. If you have any questions regarding the City Council ' s position in regard to overnight usage of the Youth Building, please feel free to call me at 445-3650. Sincerely Barr A. Stock Assistant City Administrator The Heart Of Progress Valley AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER SHAKOPEE AREA TRANSIT VANPOOL SURVEY Total Responses - 37 1 . Did you use the MTC service that was provided to Shakopee on a regular basis before we started the vanpool program? 10 Yes 27 No 2 . In you answered yes in question #1, in general how would you compare the current vanpool program with past MTC service? 12 1. The vanpool program offers better service. 0 2 . The vanpool program service is worse. 0 3 . There is no significant difference between the two services. 3 4 . Don't know. 3 . Do you feel that for better transportation service a higher fare is reasonable? 16 Yes 14 No (Maybe 1) 4 . In the average week a person who rides every day accounts for 10 passenger trips. On the average how many passenger trips do you make a week on your vanpool? 29 9 - 10 6 7 - 8 2 5 - 6 0 less than 5 5 . Please circle the response that best describes your feelings in regard to the following issues. Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree A. The current fare structure is reasonable. 1 22 2 12 3 4 4 5 B. The occasional rider fare is reasonable. 1 12 2 8 3 8 4 4 5 1 C. Routes & Schedules are convenient. 1 24 2 11 3 2 4 5 D. The vans are comfortable 1 26 2 12 3 4 5 E. The current transfer policy is adequate. 1 14 2 8 3 10 4 1 5 F. Drivers are courteous & cautious. 1 27 2 10 3 1 4 5 G. Back-up drivers are courteous & cautious. 1 23 2 12 3 1 4 1 5 H. The back-up vehicle is sufficient for our program. 1 21 2 14 3 3 4 5 I. Other (please specify Extra Step 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6. Of the issues listed in question #5 which one do you feel most strongly about? A - 4, C - 8, F - 2, D - 5 Other comments or suggestions in regard to the Vanpool Program. Thank you for your cooperation. 45 SHAKOPEE TRANSPORTATION SURVEY 4 1 . Were you aware that there are daily vanpools available to transport persons from the Shakopee area to work sites in downtown Minneapolis? 407 a) yes b) no If you answered no to this question, skip to question number 3. 2. How did you hear about the vanpool program? Ip a) newspapers b) television c) brochures M an ��� d) word of mouth e) other (please specify) !-showca�.. 9 IIS r- nut Wt..v6and r- wean yo "°auT a?- Az 5u 3. Were you aware that the cost to be involved in the Shakopee Vanpool VrTam i on y $12.50 per week and vanpool drivers ride free? ii -‘ a) yes b) no 1 s 7 4. Were you aware that the City of Shakopee can implement vanpools to service any work site in the metropolitan area if a ridership of nine persons can be maintained in the vanpool? 10 6 a) yes b) no 1 q g 5. Were you aware that the City of Shakopee has a van available to transport persons who want a ride on an occasional basis (shopping, seminars, etc.) to downtown Minneapolis? S 1 a) yes b) no a 1 4, 6. In what community is your primary work site? dial. ttc-("a-d- 7. Were you aware that the City of Shakopee sponsors a Dial-A-Ride program which operates within the Shakopee City Limits, Monday through Friday from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. and Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.? The Dial-A-Ride program provides door-to-door local transit service to anyone within the Shakopee City Limits. a 7 8' a) yes b) no If you answered no to this question, skip to question number 12. 8. How did you hear about the program? 1 7 a) newspapers .61b) brochures c) word of mouth d) saw around town e) other (Please specify) /- � w . 159 4- N o:,c� la-e a n n,�dIZ.c-,Qd I_ p,te•5chca•C. Prw cll.a.nt, (Survey continued on next p'ag °�0'�'(713 au-- ✓o r - '`'` u r''`cx• i- 6oc..tq"c> wazIC 9. Have you or a member of your family had the opportunity to use the Dial-A-Ride service? to a) yes b) no i ao If you answered no to this question, skip to question number 12. 10. In the average week, how many trips does your family make on the Dial-A-Ride? A. More than 10 B. 7-10 C. 4-6 -- 15 D 1-3 E. Less than 1 Jo 1 11. Please indicate your opinion by circling one of the following responses: Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 A. The current fare structure is reasonable 1 q8 2 91 3 1 8 4 5 5 O B. The Dial-A-Ride vehicles are comfortable 1 SS 2 Si 3 2.P\ 4 I 5 0 C. Access into the Dial-A-Ride vehicles is adequate 1 43 2 9 Lt 3 a"5 4 3 5 D. Drivers are courteous and cautious 1 Si?" 2 7g 3 .4 4 '4 5 D E. The dispatcher is courteous 1 5(p 2 3 oZ 8 4 cf 5 F. The operating hours of the Dial-A-Ride program are adequate (Mon-Fri, 6AM- 9PM) (Sat. 9AM-5PM) 140 2 `77 3A9 4 Ips 5 (P G. The responsiveness of the Dial-A-Ride program to your need for a ride is adequate 1 2 rB 3 a 1 4 I a 5 5- H. H. Other (please specify) I- Ckouic4,.Qt_ (e .L/1 c1[xuSG(.UtfP 2 3 4 5 /- Saet c1.2A� q- C`Lcu c.41 t 1 2 3 4 5 / - (1)0/4-cel ?,-* a147-420- �v .7 12. Would you or your family use the Dial-A-Ride Program if service operated on Sunday between the following hours: A. 7:00 a.m.-12:00 noon Yes 1 3 No 153 Maybe 8° B. 7:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Yes 3%1 No iy, Maybe 8 7 13. Would you or your family use the Dial-A-Ride Program if service were expanded to the following areas: A. Chaska Yes 1/9 No 105 Maybe S I B. Chanhassen Yes Al No iA,S Maybe 76 C. Eden Prairie Yes gr No ger Maybe I I`1 14. Would you like additional information about the Shakopee Dial-A-Ride or Vanpool program? a) yes, please send me more information on the Dial-A-Ride program. 74 b) yes, please send me more information on the Vanpool program. 39 c) no, thank you apte 15. If you answered yes to question 14, please list your name and address: **Please complete and return the survey to the City of Shakopee, by refolding survey, so the City of Shakopee address panel is on the outside. Staple or tape shut. Survey may also be dropped off at City Hall or returned to Dial-A-Ride drivers. El2wolsnO 1VISOd 89Z#�!WJad 6L£SS NW `aado>ieys 6LE55 NW `aadm{aUS pied a6elsod 's'fl 1re� anuany Tsaid Tse� 63 I. JosaJd aVnoa Jau aTea Mn8 aadomegS ;o An v ,, thri SHAKOPEE AREA TRANSIT 6LE55 NW `eado>{agS anuany )said lsa2 63 . aadomegS ;o An 3E13 dWVIS 9OV1d SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES: MAY 12 , 1990 10: 00 - 11: 00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: LaVern Johnson, Gwen Marie Solseth, Dick Marks, Joyce Bassinger, Gary Lindstrom, Ann Tuttle GUESTS: Ed Dressen, Tom Daily Minutes from the meeting of March 23 , 1990 were approved by the members present. The Treasurer' s report was accepted as submitted. A donation of $25. 00 from the Oxboro Greater Minneapolis Service Unit of the Girl Scouts of America was accepted. OLD BUSINESS: Ms. Solseth indicated the application for a booth at Derby Days and the deposit have been sent in to the City of Shakopee. It was reiterated that the tables and chairs are not to be removed from the building. Discussion was held regarding the question of crash bars for the exit doors. The new members were advised of the question raised by the Girl Scout leaders who hold sleep overs in the building. No motion was made. NEW BUSINESS: The following officers were elected by the Committee: Chairman: LaVern Johnson Vice Chairman: Gwen Marie Solseth Vice Chairman: Ann Tuttle Secretary: Joyce Bassinger Treasurer: Gary Lindstrom Mr. Tom Daily from the Minnesota Correctional Facility - Shakopee presented a request for use of the building September 4 - 6, 1990 for an arts and crafts show by the Correctional Facility. The members of the Committee approved of this request but indicated to Mr. Daily that we do not have the authority to allow adult usage. He was referred to Mr. George Muenchow, Director, Parks & Recreation, for authorization. The policy of any adult activity scheduled in the Youth Building being subject to pre-empting by a youth activity was pointed out to Mr. Daily. Mr. Dressen brought up the need for light bulbs for inside and outside the building. The Committee authorized Mr. Dressen to use the $25 . 00 from the Girl Scouts to purchase a supply of light bulbs for the building. Mr. Dressen informed the Committee that two bulbs have been stolen from the lights on the flag patio. These bulbs cost approximately $35 each. The bulbs are to be removed from the flag patio after each use and stored inside the building. Adjournment: 11: 00 a.m. The next meeting of the Shakopee Youth Center Building Committee is scheduled for Saturday, June 9 , 1990, at 8: 30 a.m. *V) SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES: MAY 12 , 1990 10 : 00 - 11 : 00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: LaVern Johnson, Gwen Marie Solseth, Dick Marks, Joyce Bassinger, Gary Lindstrom, Ann Tuttle GUESTS: Ed Dressen, Tom Daily Minutes from the meeting of March 23 , 1990 were approved by the members present. The Treasurer ' s report was accepted as submitted. A donation of $25. 00 from the Oxboro Greater Minneapolis Service Unit of the Girl Scouts of America was accepted. OLD BUSINESS : Ms. Solseth indicated the application for a booth at Derby Days and the deposit have been sent in to the City of Shakopee. It was reiterated that the tables and chairs are not to be removed from the building. Discussion was held regarding the question of crash bars for the exit doors . The new members were advised of the question raised by the Girl Scout leaders who hold sleep overs in the building. No motion was made. NEW BUSINESS: The following officers were elected by the Committee: Chairman: LaVern Johnson Vice Chairman: Gwen Marie Solseth Vice Chairman: Ann Tuttle Secretary: Joyce Bassinger Treasurer: Gary Lindstrom Mr. Tom Daily from the Minnesota Correctional Facility - Shakopee presented a request for use of the building September 4 - 6 , 1990 for an arts and crafts show by the Correctional Facility. The members of the Committee approved of this request but indicated to Mr. Daily that we do not have the authority to allow adult usage. He was referred to Mr . George Muenchow, Director, Parks & Recreation, for authorization. The policy of any adult activity scheduled in the Youth Building being subject to pre-empting by a youth activity was pointed out to Mr. Daily. Mr. Dressen brought up the need for light bulbs for inside and outside the building. The Committee authorized Mr. Dressen to use the $25 . 00 from the Girl Scouts to purchase a supply of light bulbs for the building. Mr. Dressen informed the Committee that two bulbs have been stolen from the lights on the flag patio. These bulbs cost approximately $35 each. The bulbs are to be removed from the flag patio after each use and stored inside the building. Adjournment: 11: 00 a.m. The next meeting of the Shakopee Youth Center Building Committee is scheduled for Saturday, June 9 , 1990, at 8: 30 a.m. If 7 SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES: MAY 12, 1990 10 : 00 - 11 : 00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: LaVern Johnson, Gwen Marie Solseth, Dick Marks, Joyce Bassinger, Gary Lindstrom, Ann Tuttle GUESTS: Ed Dressen, Tom Daily Minutes from the meeting of March 23 , 1990 were approved by the members present. The Treasurer' s report was accepted as submitted. A donation of $25. 00 from the Oxboro Greater Minneapolis Service Unit of the Girl Scouts of America was accepted. OLD BUSINESS: Ms. Solseth indicated the application for a booth at Derby Days and the deposit have been sent in to the City of Shakopee. It was reiterated that the tables and chairs are not to be removed from the building. Discussion was held regarding the question of crash bars for the exit doors. The new members were advised of the question raised by the Girl Scout leaders who hold sleep overs in the building. No motion was made. NEW BUSINESS: The following officers were elected by the Committee: Chairman: LaVern Johnson Vice Chairman: Gwen Marie Solseth Vice Chairman: Ann Tuttle Secretary: Joyce Bassinger Treasurer: Gary Lindstrom Mr. Tom Daily from the Minnesota Correctional Facility - Shakopee presented a request for use of the building September 4 - 6, 1990 for an arts and crafts show by the Correctional Facility. The members of the Committee approved of this request but indicated to Mr. Daily that we do not have the authority to allow adult usage. He was referred to Mr. George Muenchow, Director, Parks & Recreation, for authorization. The policy of any adult activity scheduled in the Youth Building being subject to pre-empting by a youth activity was pointed out to Mr. Daily. Mr. Dressen brought up the need for light bulbs for inside and outside the building. The Committee authorized Mr. Dressen to use the $25 . 00 from the Girl Scouts to purchase a supply of light bulbs for the building. Mr. Dressen informed the Committee that two bulbs have been stolen from the lights on the flag patio. These bulbs cost approximately $35 each. The bulbs are to be removed from the flag patio after each use and stored inside the building. Adjournment: 11: 00 a.m. The next meeting of the Shakopee Youth Center Building Committee is scheduled for Saturday, June 9 , 1990, at 8: 30 a.m. 4kr1 SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES: MAY 12 , 1990 10: 00 - 11: 00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: LaVern Johnson, Gwen Marie Solseth, Dick Marks, Joyce Bassinger, Gary Lindstrom, Ann Tuttle GUESTS: Ed Dressen, Tom Daily Minutes from the meeting of March 23 , 1990 were approved by the members present. The Treasurer ' s report was accepted as submitted. A donation of $25. 00 from the Oxboro Greater Minneapolis Service Unit of the Girl Scouts of America was accepted. OLD BUSINESS: Ms. Solseth indicated the application for a booth at Derby Days and the deposit have been sent in to the City of Shakopee. It was reiterated that the tables and chairs are not to be removed from the building. Discussion was held regarding the question of crash bars for the exit doors . The new members were advised of the question raised by the Girl Scout leaders who hold sleep overs in the building. No motion was made. NEW BUSINESS: The following officers were elected by the Committee: Chairman: LaVern Johnson Vice Chairman: Gwen Marie Solseth Vice Chairman: Ann Tuttle Secretary: Joyce Bassinger Treasurer: Gary Lindstrom Mr. Tom Daily from the Minnesota Correctional Facility - Shakopee presented a request for use of the building September 4 - 6, 1990 for an arts and crafts show by the Correctional Facility. The members of the Committee approved of this request but indicated to Mr. Daily that we do not have the authority to allow adult usage. He was referred to Mr. George Muenchow, Director, Parks & Recreation, for authorization. The policy of any adult activity scheduled in the Youth Building being subject to pre-empting by a youth activity was pointed out to Mr. Daily. Mr. Dressen brought up the need for light bulbs for inside and outside the building. The Committee authorized Mr. Dressen to use the $25 . 00 from the Girl Scouts to purchase a supply of light bulbs for the building. Mr. Dressen informed the Committee that two bulbs have been stolen from the lights on the flag patio. These bulbs cost approximately $35 each. The bulbs are to be removed from the flag patio after each use and stored inside the building. Adjournment: 11: 00 a.m. The next meeting o r Sof the aturday,Shakopee June 9 Y 1990 ,outh C at 8r 3 Ou a.m.ing Committee is scheduled 4e7 SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES: MAY 12 , 1990 10: 00 - 11: 00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: LaVern Johnson, Gwen Marie Solseth, Dick Marks, Joyce Bassinger, Gary Lindstrom, Ann Tuttle GUESTS: Ed Dressen, Tom Daily Minutes from the meeting of March 23 , 1990 were approved by the members present. The Treasurer' s report was accepted as submitted. A donation of $25. 00 from the Oxboro Greater Minneapolis Service Unit of the Girl Scouts of America was accepted. OLD BUSINESS: Ms. Solseth indicated the application for a booth at Derby Days and the deposit have been sent in to the City of Shakopee. It was reiterated that the tables and chairs are not to be removed from the building. Discussion was held regarding the question of crash bars for the exit doors. The new members were advised of the question raised by the Girl Scout leaders who hold sleep overs in the building. No motion was made. NEW BUSINESS: The following officers were elected by the Committee: Chairman: LaVern Johnson Vice Chairman: Gwen Marie Solseth Vice Chairman: Ann Tuttle Secretary: Joyce Bassinger Treasurer: Gary Lindstrom Mr. Tom Daily from the Minnesota Correctional Facility - Shakopee presented a request for use of the building September 4 - 6 , 1990 for an arts and crafts show by the Correctional Facility. The members of the Committee approved of this request but indicated to Mr. Daily that we do not have the authority to allow adult usage. He was referred to Mr. George Muenchow, Director, Parks & Recreation, for authorization. The policy of any adult activity scheduled in the Youth Building being subject to pre-empting by a youth activity was pointed out to Mr. Daily. Mr. Dressen brought up the need for light bulbs for inside and outside the building. The Committee authorized Mr. Dressen to use the $25 . 00 from the Girl Scouts to purchase a supply of light bulbs for the building. Mr. Dressen informed the Committee that two bulbs have been stolen from the lights on the flag patio. These bulbs cost approximately $35 each. The bulbs are to be removed from the flag patio after each use and stored inside the building. Adjournment: 11 : 00 a.m. The next meeting of the Shakopee Youth Center Building Committee is scheduled for Saturday, June 9 , 1990, at 8: 30 a.m. 47 SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES: MAY 12, 1990 10: 00 - 11 : 00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: LaVern Johnson, Gwen Marie Solseth, Dick Marks, Joyce Bassinger, Gary Lindstrom, Ann Tuttle GUESTS: Ed Dressen, Tom Daily Minutes from the meeting of March 23 , 1990 were approved by the members present. The Treasurer' s report was accepted as submitted. A donation of $25. 00 from the Oxboro Greater Minneapolis Service Unit of the Girl Scouts of America was accepted. OLD BUSINESS: Ms. Solseth indicated the application for a booth at Derby Days and the deposit have been sent in to the City of Shakopee. It was reiterated that the tables and chairs are not to be removed from the building. Discussion was held regarding the question of crash bars for the exit doors. The new members were advised of the question raised by the Girl Scout leaders who hold sleep overs in the building. No motion was made. NEW BUSINESS: The following officers were elected by the Committee: Chairman: LaVern Johnson Vice Chairman: Gwen Marie Solseth Vice Chairman: Ann Tuttle Secretary: Joyce Bassinger Treasurer: Gary Lindstrom Mr. Tom Daily from the Minnesota Correctional Facility - Shakopee presented a request for use of the building September 4 - 6 , 1990 for an arts and crafts show by the Correctional Facility. The members of the Committee approved of this request but indicated to Mr. Daily that we do not have the authority to allow adult usage. He was referred to Mr. George Muenchow, Director, Parks & Recreation, for authorization. The policy of any adult activity scheduled in the Youth Building being subject to pre-empting by a youth activity was pointed out to Mr. Daily. Mr. Dressen brought up the need for light bulbs for inside and outside the building. The Committee authorized Mr. Dressen to use the $25 . 00 from the Girl Scouts to purchase a supply of light bulbs for the building. Mr. Dressen informed the Committee that two bulbs have been stolen from the lights on the flag patio. These bulbs cost approximately $35 each. The bulbs are to be removed from the flag patio after each use and stored inside the building. Adjournment: 11: 00 a.m. The next meetingSof the aturday Shakopee June 9 Youth 1990,C at 8r 3Oualming Committee is scheduled 4' 7 SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES: MAY 12 , 1990 10: 00 - 11: 00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: LaVern Johnson, Gwen Marie Solseth, Dick Marks, Joyce Bassinger, Gary Lindstrom, Ann Tuttle GUESTS: Ed Dressen, Tom Daily Minutes from the meeting of March 23 , 1990 were approved by the members present. The Treasurer' s report was accepted as submitted. A donation of $25. 00 from the Oxboro Greater Minneapolis Service Unit of the Girl Scouts of America was accepted. OLD BUSINESS: Ms. Solseth indicated the application for a booth at Derby Days and the deposit have been sent in to the City of Shakopee. It was reiterated that the tables and chairs are not to be removed from the building. Discussion was held regarding the question of crash bars for the exit doors. The new members were advised of the question raised by the Girl Scout leaders who hold sleep overs in the building. No motion was made. NEW BUSINESS: The following officers were elected by the Committee: Chairman: LaVern Johnson Vice Chairman: Gwen Marie Solseth Vice Chairman: Ann Tuttle Secretary: Joyce Bassinger Treasurer: Gary Lindstrom Mr. Tom Daily from the Minnesota Correctional Facility - Shakopee presented a request for use of the building September 4 - 6 , 1990 for an arts and crafts show by the Correctional Facility. The members of the Committee approved of this request but indicated to Mr. Daily that we do not have the authority to allow adult usage. He was referred to Mr. George Muenchow, Director, Parks & Recreation, for authorization. The policy of any adult activity scheduled in the Youth Building being subject to pre-empting by a youth activity was pointed out to Mr. Daily. Mr. Dressen brought up the need for light bulbs for inside and outside the building. The Committee authorized Mr. Dressen to use the $25 . 00 from the Girl Scouts to purchase a supply of light bulbs for the building. Mr. Dressen informed the Committee that two bulbs have been stolen from the lights on the flag patio. These bulbs cost approximately $35 each. The bulbs are to be removed from the flag patio after each use and stored inside the building. Adjournment: 11: 00 a.m. The next meeting of the Shakopee Youth Center Building Committee is scheduled for Saturday, June 9 , 1990, at 8: 30 a.m. tkCji SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES: MARCH 23, 1990 4:37-6:06 P.M. MEMBERS ATTENDING: LaVern Johnson, Gwen Marie Solseth, Dick Marks, Ed Giesen Guest: Ed Dressen MINUTES FROM MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 1990. Approved by members present. TREASURER'S REPORT: Ms. Solseth said that the balance in the treasury was the same from the previous meeting, with a total between cash and checking of $784.48. To this amount, a check for $50 was acknowledged as received from the Prairie Squares, and $9.05 cash from the copier fund. The Prairie Squares were originally scheduled as one of the groups to use the building. The majority of their membership is retired seniors, and the youth board was directed earlier by the REC board to schedule them. The $50 check was an honoraium from this group for use of the building, and was not solicited. Their use of the building occurs on weekends when the building is not in use by the youth. Note: Mr. Dressen mentioned that Pete Clay of the VFW was now donating the pop machine to the building. He said that the pop was not being used fast enough to keep it cold. The gift has not yet been made official . The board acknowledged they would accept the gift of the machine when a formal transfer was made. OLD BUSINESS Mr. Dressen said that toner for the copy machine is needed. He said that Jerry Mathwick of Metro Sales would be contacted to adjust the machine, and bring along a new plastic tray for holding finished copies . The board appointed Mr . Dressen to obtain the toner and order the maintenance for the copier. MOTION: To appoint Mr Ed Dressen as official scheduling coordinator for youth groups in the Shakopee Youth Building and to have him submit monthly reports to the committee and Community Recreation Board. The board also requested Mr . Dressen to oversee the maintenance of the building and report any problems so the Shakopee Building Inspector and City Council could be kept informed when the board was not available to inspect the building. Approved by all members present. 1 1 MOTION To have Mr. Dan Gerold to strip and wax the upper floor of the youth building for an amount not to exceed $100, including labor and materials, during the next 2-3 weeks. (Mr. Gerold is able to use the equipment from Sweeny Elementary School per a recipricoal agreement between the school and the building committee for use of the building. ) Mr. Dressen told the board that the Scott County Education Service is using the Youth Building once a week, through April, for drug awareness programs. Mr. Dressen was also instructed by the board to call Ms. Sandy Frankhauser to recover the key to the Youth Building she currently has in her possession. Ms. Frankhauser said she would submit the key only to Mr. Dressen. Tables Mr. Dressen said that during Derby Days last August , 1989 , several tables were left in the rain, and the covering was currently starting to peel up. MOTION That the building committee would not permit the tables and chairs to be taken outside of the Youth Building or loaned to others outside of the building. Approved by all members present. MOTION To request the Park and Rec . Board to deliver several picnic tables to be placed around the Youth Building for use by the youth organizations and the community. The secretary was instructed to prepare a letter to the Park and Recreation Board making this request. Approved by all members present. Mr. Dressen also noted that sprinklers had been installed by the VFW in the kitchen and furnace room in the upper floor, and that concrete stops had been placed on the parking area outside of the building. Members of the committee discussed obtaining donations or moneys and /or materials for dividing curtains in the basement to increase the usage of the building. Mr. Dressen said that in scheduling the building, almost twice the number of organizations could use the building if dividers were available for the basement area. 2 2 Obtaining donations and installation of an air conditioning system for the building was also discussed. Mr. Dressen said that the furnace should be moved at the same time to allow the entire system to be upgraded so it would operate efficiently. No motion was made regarding this discussion. MOTION To have the secretary become the official liaison between the Youth Center Building Committee and the Shakopee City Council, especially the city manager, regarding the maintenance and any future construction on the building. Approved by all members present. The secretary is to prepare and send a letter to Mr. Barry Stock regarding this appointment and acknowledge the receipt of his letter dated March 21, 1990, which is attached to these minutes. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Dressen said that there was a water problem in the northeast corner of the basement caused by settling of dirt around the foundation. HE said that this problem is currently being taken care of with the Park and Rec. Board. He added that the organizations should be notified that they may, and should fly the U.S. Flag whenever possible. Mr. Dressen also noted that Mr. Barry Stock should be informed that the closer on the inside left glass door does not work and needs repair. He also asked that Mr. Stock be questioned as to who should replace the light bulbs in the exit signs and overhead lighting. He mentioned that he is currently performing this task. Mr. Giesen posed a question directed by the current Girl Scout team leader as to why no crash bars were on the upper exit doors to the building. Mr. Dressen said that crash bars were avoided in the original construction of the building due to their cost, and the doubling of exit doors over code. These doors are to always be open when the building is in use. Ms. Solseth said that for the girl scouts safety during sleep overs, that the doors cannot be unlocked. The members then discussed the possibility of soliciting donations to obtain crash bars for these doors . Although the number of the doors on the main level exceeds code, the locking of the doors during sleep overs does create a code violation, although the locks are easily opened from the inside. 3 7 The secretary was requested to question Mr. Stock whether the city would want to install these crash bars, or if the board should solicit donations for their purchase. Ms. Solseth said that she had received a letter from the City regarding Derby Days during August 3-5 this summer . She suggested that a cheaper item, such as popcorn, candy bars and small items such as chips, should be sold this year since they were not sold last year. She added that this may be a good source of revenue, since there is less preparation and waste than with cheese sauce, taco chips and hot dogs. She added that the city was requesting $35 to reserve the booth at Derby Days. MOTION To write a letter to the City of Shakopee stating that the youth building committee would take a booth, but would sell popcorn and small items such as candy bars instead of Nacho Cheese and Hot Dogs. The treasure was instructed to write a check for $35 for the booth, subject to approval by the city for the change. Approved by all members present. Mr. Dressen added that the popcorn could be obtained in large bags at a very reasonable cost, and not be popped on site. A popcorn machine would be acquired to hold the popcorn. CLOCKS Members discussed the purchase of clocks for the building, which were discussed at the last meeting. After looking at a Best Company catalogue, the following motion was made. MOTION To approve the purchase of 2 battery operated clocks from Best Company for the youth building at a cost not to exceed $100, and acquired by the Treasurer. Approved by all members present. Adjournment: 6:06 p.m. The next meeting of the Shakopee Youth Center Building is scheduled for Friday, April 13, 1990. New Members appointed to the committee by the Shakopee City Council include the following: Ms. Ann Tuttle, 727 S. Shumway Street, Shakopee--2 Year Term Ms. Joyce Bassinger, 835 W. 6th Avenue, Shakopee--2 Year Term Mr. Gary Lindstrom, 1006 Minnesota St. , Shakopee--1 Year Term These individuals replace previous committee members Ruth Bayless, Dick Marks and Ed Giesen. 4 1 Shakopee Community Youth Building Committee c/o Mr. LaVern Johnson--Chairman 311 Shawnee Trail Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Mr. Barry Stock Assistant City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Mn. 55379 April 2, 1990 Dear Mr. Stock; In response to your letter dated March 21, 1990, the Shakopee Community Youth Building Committee ( CYBC ) has designated the Secretary of the committee to be the official liaison between the committee and the City Council . Enclosed with this letter are the minutes from the meeting of March 28, 1990 committee meeting . You will note that the committee officially designated the secretary as liaison and Mr. Dressen, a community member who has devoted much of his time to the maintenance and operation of this building, as the committee ' s official representative to watch over the maintenance of the building and scheduler of activities for the building. During our meeting, you will note that several other motions were made which should be of interest to you and the council. We do request some direction from the city on several points as outlined in the minutes . 1 . To preserve the tables and chairs used inside the building, we have requested that the Rec . Department place some picnic benches or tables around the building for community youth. Could you please meet with Mr. Muenchow to see if this is possible, and what types of tables could be obtained. 2. We are in the process of looking for donations to obtain dividing curtains for the basement of the building. These curtains would allow more groups to use the building. Could you please meet with the committee at one of our future meetings to discuss how we should proceed with this matter to better utilize the space in the building to meet the community' s needs. 3. The left inside closer on the door to the main level of the building has failed and needs repair or replacement. Could you please send someone to repair it. 1 4. We are lacking crash bars on the main upper level doors of the building. Currently we comply with code if the doors remain unlocked during meetings . However, during girl scout sleep overs, there is a problem with security. Should we solicit donations for the addition of these items , or would the city consider installing them. (Please see our discussion regarding this item in our minutes. ) Please contact me regarding these items . Officially, the secretary is the liaison for the committee. But since Mr. Marks is leaving, and a new secretary will need to be elected, I will serve as the interim liaison for the next few weeks. Thank you for your help and correspondence. Yours Truly, LaVern Johnson Chairman Shakopee Community Youth Building Committee Shakopee Community Youth Building Committee c/o Mr. LaVern Johnson--Chairman 311 Shawnee Trail Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Mr. George Muenchow Director, Parks and Recreation City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Mn. 55379 April 2, 1990 Dear Mr. Muenchow; The Shakopee Community Youth Building Committee at their last meeting discussed the possibility of obtaining picnic tables of benches to be used around the outside of the Youth Building. We have contacted Mr. Barry Stock, assistant city administrator of the city, to talk with you regarding the placing of these benches or tables around the building. Because the tables and chairs used in the building are designed for interior use only, we have experience some damage to them when they were used outside last year for the Derby Days celebration. If you have any ideas or suggestions regarding what could be done to place some tables or benches around the building for use by the community and youth organizations, we would be very grateful . Thank you for taking the time to consider our request. Yours Truly, LaVern Johnson Chairman Shakopee Community Youth Building Committee I BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL 4- I Vol . 4 No. 6 Dear Chamber Member: June 1, 1990 CITY ADMINISTRATOR The City Council recently authorized the advertisement for the hiring of a full time City Attorney. The deadline for the receipt of applications is June 5th and it is anticipated that a new City Attorney will be hired by mid- summer. The increasing legal work load of the City has resulted in the need for the move to a full time City Attorney. CITY CLERK Council has renewed a lease with Valley Ice Arena for the bubble at Lions Park for an additional five years. Council has approved a liquor license for Turtle' s Bar and Grill, a new business which will occupy the VFW site on 1st Avenue. Council has approved the establishment of a Park and Recreation Advisory Board to oversee Shakopee Community Recreation. Although the Board is being established now, it will not take charge until January when the school district will no longer participate in its funding. Anyone interested in serving on this Advisory Board is encouraged to complete an application. Applications can be obtained at city hall or by calling 445-3650. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT On May 16, 1990 the City Hall Siting Subcommittee of the Community Development Commission (CDC) made a formal presentation to the CDC regarding their siting analysis for a new city hall . The CDC subsequently accepted the report of the subcommittee and moved to recommend to City Council that a public hearing be set to solicit further public input on the following three sites: 1 . Block 50 (Cavanaugh McNearney Funeral Home block) 2 . 30 acres East of County Road 17 North of County Road 16 and South of 4th Avenue and 3 . The Marquette Bank Building plus 30 acres. Each of the alternatives recommended by the CDC would provide the City with an approximately 20, 000 square foot building for an approximate cost of $3 , 000, 000. A formal presentation will be made to the Shakopee City Council on June 5, 1990 . The first round deadline for the submittal of grant applications for the Downtown Rehabilitation Grant Program has been set for June 6, 1990. The program provides a 25% grant to successful applicants who are proposing to rehabilitate the exterior portions of their buildings. In accordance with the rehab grant program guidelines, if all dedicated grant proceeds ($50, 000) are not allocated, a second funding cycle will be announced with an application deadline set for early November. It should be noted that successful grant applicants have 12 months from the date of notification of grant award to complete their project. PLANNING A workshop for the Comprehensive Plan was held on May 24 , 1990. Members of the Planning Commission and the Comprehensive Plan Task Force met to informally discuss the comments from the April 19th public hearing. From the workshop several sections of the plan were identified as needing further refinement through additional policy statements. The Planning Commission will forward their recommendations on the Comprehensive Plan to the City Council in July. Following draft approval by the City Council in August the plan will be reviewed by Metropolitan Council staff and a public hearing will be held. The Metropolitan Council review requires at least 90 days. Final adoption of the Comprehensive Plan by the City Council is anticipated by December. POLICE Four hundred eighty (480) fifth and sixth grade students graduated from the Shakopee D.A.R.E. project last week. D.A.R.E. which stands for Drug Abuse Resistance Education is relatively new to Minnesota. The course, which lasts 17 weeks teaches students about drug related problems but the real focus is on learning refusal skills and on developing the attitude that being drug free is the "in thing" or is "cool" . We plan to reinforce this message as the kids move on into high school . PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING At their May 15, 1990 meeting City Council awarded the Lewis St. construction project to S.M. Hentges & Sons, Shakopee, MN. The contractor is indicating a May 29, 1990 start-up. Completion of this project is scheduled for September 15, 1990 . At the same meeting City Council awarded the Killarney Hills construction project to GMH Asphalt, Minnetonka, MN. A start-up date has not yet been determined. Completion date for this project is September 1, 1990. Phase II of the Upper Valley Drainage Project has begun. Richard Knutson Inc. , Savage, MN. is the general contractor on this project. Phase I of the Upper Valley Drainage Project is expected to be completed some time in June. Third Avenue Construction Project is expected to be completed in the first part of June. SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY RECREATION (S.C.R. ) The Shakopee Municipal Swimming Pool, owned by the City of Shakopee and scheduled by Shakopee Community Recreation, opens for the current summer season Saturday, June 9 , and will remain open on a daily basis through Sunday, August 19 . The pool features a sand beach and a sand bottom providing an atmosphere for people of "like being at a lake" . The major difference is that this facility is safe, clean, and fun to be around. Season tickets and swimming instruction registrations are processed at the S.C.R. Office, 129 Levee Drive. Many Shakopee organizations and businesses plan their group picnics at Lions Park so that they can take advantage of using this pool during this fun activity. For further information, call S.C.R. , 445-2742 . Minutes of the Energy and Transportation Committee Regular Session Shakopee, MN April 18, 1990 Chairperson Drees called the meeting to order at 7: 00 P.M. with Commissioners Otto, Stolarcek, Case, Drees, Reinke and Amundson present. Commissioners Roman and Ward were absent. Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator was also present. Amundson/Reinke moved to approve the minutes of the March 21, 1990 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock informed the Committee that staff has been working with Scott County to establish a household hazardous waste collection day latter this fall. Several cost estimates have been obtained from various licensed hazardous waste collectors. Cost estimates for a five hour collection period range between $30, 000 and $35, 000. In light of the extremely high cost for a one day collection program, both City and County staff felt that this was not a cost effective or long terms solution to a serious problem. Therefore, the concept of constructing and locating a temporary household hazardous waste collection facility was discussed. County officials are planning to construct a household hazardous waste facility as a component of their waste processing facility which is schedule to be complete in approximately three years. However, in the interim there is no disposal option for our residents in terms of household hazardous waste. In order to facilitate a household hazardous program, City staff suggested that the Public Works compound area be utilized as a site for a temporary household hazardous waste disposal facility. The site is adjacent to the Police Station and is surrounded by a six foot high security screened fence. Mr. Stock noted that he did contact the Public Works Director, who informed him that they are in need of a cold storage facility. With this in mind, staff proceeded in drafting a proposal to the Scott County Board which would provide for the location of a temporary household hazardous waste disposal facility. Under the terms of the proposal, Scott County would be responsible for reimbursing the City of Shakopee the full cost of constructing the proposed facility. Additionally, Scott County would be responsible for all staffing of said facility and subsequent liability claims as a result of operating said facility. Mr. Stock stated that the cost to construct the facility is approximately the same cost as conducting a one day collection program. Mr. Stock stated that under the terms of the proposal, the County would be responsible for staffing this facility on at lease two Saturdays per month. The County would also be responsible for any claims made against the City of Shakopee in Minutes of the Page - 2 Energy and Transportation Committee April 18, 1990 conjunction with operation of the proposed facility. Mr. Stock stated that the City of Shakopee would incur the following benefits as a result of pursuing the proposed as submitted: 1. Shakopee residents would be provided with an environmentally safe method of disposing of household hazardous waste. 2 . The City of Shakopee would receive essentially a free building at the end of the contract period. Commissioner Reinke questioned whether or not the facility would be open to all county residents. Mr. Stock responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Case questioned what the County would do with the materials collected. Mr. Stock stated that the County would be responsible for contracting with a licensed hazardous waste hauler to dispose of the materials collected in a safe manner. Commissioner Case requested staff to give a breakdown of the cost associated with a one day collection program. Mr. Stock stated that the two major cost components of conducting a household hazardous waste collection program were as follows: 1. Disposal cost 2 . Staffing Mr. Stock stated that the materials collected at the site would have to be disposed of by a licensed hazardous waste collector. The nearest hazardous waste disposal facility is in Illinois. Licensed and experienced chemists would be needed at the site to determine which waste would be accepted. The chemists would also be responsible for separating and packaging the materials to be disposed of. Mr. Stock stated that the City of Shakopee would not incur any cost as a result of the County operating the proposed program. Commissioner Case questioned where the County would get the funds to operate the facility. Mr. Stock noted that a reserve fund has been generated as a result of the landfill tipping fee charged by the County. Commissioner Stolarcek stated that when the landfill closes the County will no longer be collecting the fee. Mr. Stock concurred but stated that a significant fund has accumulated which should provide ample funding to support the program until the County' s permanent facility is constructed. Mr. Stock also noted that he believed the County was collecting a tipping fee at the Richard' s incinerator in Savage. Additionally, the County would be receiving funds from the state as a result of the 6% State Sales Minutes of the Page - 3 Energy and Transportation Committee April 18, 1990 Tax that has been placed on refuse just this year. Reinke/Amundson moved to recommend to City Council that the household hazardous waste collection concept proposal be submitted to Scott County for their review and approval. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock stated that he has received several calls from Shakopee residents, wondering why we do not collect plastics as a part of our recycling program. Mr. Stock stated that he contacted Waste Management to determine if plastics could be included in our program. Waste Management officials have stated that they can expand the recycling program to include plastics. However, due to the limited number of markets available they would have to impose a collection fee for processing, collecting and transporting said plastics. Mr. Stock stated that in the City of Minnetonka, plastics are recycled. The refuse hauler passes on a 300 per home rate increase to cover the cost of the plastics recycling program. Mr. Stock stated that if the Committee would like to see plastics added into the program, he felt confident that Waste Management would be able to offer the service providing the City of Shakopee would agree to a rate increase to offset the cost of collecting and disposing of the plastics. Commissioner Case stated that she was aware of a company that is purchasing plastics to make picnic tables. She could not understand why we would have to charge an additional 300 per home if there are persons out there willing to buy the plastic. Mr. Stock stated that it is true that there are markets available for plastics. It is also true that companies are paying to receive recycled plastics. However, if the City of Shakopee were to implement a plastics recycling program, it is likely that we would generate less than three tons of recycled plastic materials in one month. The cost being paid by the persons interested in buying plastics is much less than the operating cost involved in collecting the materials. Mr. Stock used aluminum as a good comparison to determine how much plastics would be collected in Shakopee in a one month period. He noted that less than two tons of aluminum and steel cans are being collected in our community. He noted that plastic containers are relatively light and it take a large quantity of items to accumulate one ton worth of materials. He also noted the bulkiness of some of the plastic containers such as beverage liter bottles. All these factors combined with the low cost being paid for plastics does not make it anywhere near a break even point from the refuse haulers standpoint. Commissioner Case questioned how much the refuse hauler was being paid for the recyclables collected in our program. Chairman Drees stated that the contract between Waste Management and the City of Shakopee specifies that the recyclables collected by the refuse hauler are the property of the City of Shakopee. Therefore, when Minutes of the Page - 4 Energy and Transportation Committee April 18, 1990 the refuse hauler sells the recyclable materials, all proceeds from the resale of the recyclable materials are returned to the City of Shakopee. Commissioner Case then questioned what portion of the current garbage collection rate is paid to the cost associated with the recycling program. Mr. Stock stated that approximately 15% of the monthly bill can be directly attributed to the cost of collecting recyclables in Shakopee. Mr. Stock stated that in a recent survey of communities, the City of Shakopee has one of the lowest refuse collection rates. Mr. Stock stated that the reason rates are going up, effective May 15th, is primarily due to the fact the Louisville Landfill is closing. The rate increase is a direct result of increases in disposal fees associated with having to haul our refuse to Kraemer's Landfill in Burnsville. Even at the new rate of $13 . 68 per month, Shakopee residents will still have one of the lowest rates in the Metropolitan area. To insure that Shakopee residents are receiving the lowest price per service, the City of Shakopee receives bids for the refuse program every three years. Commissioner Case stated that she had a program with the fact that the City of Shakopee offers a second refuse container for only $6. 00 per month. She stated that this is not an incentive for people to reduce their waste. Commissioner Reinke concurred with Mrs. Case' s point. Mr. Stock stated that the City of Shakopee does have the authority at any time to increase the extra container rate. If the Committee feels that the rate should be increased, Mr. Stock stated that he felt the appropriate time to do so would be when the City offers the 30 gallon container option. Mr. Stock stated that Mike Berkopec from Waste Management would be at the next meeting to explain the cost ramifications of the 30 gallon container option. Mr. Stock went on to state that if the Committee and City Council decide to pursue the 30 gallon option, the Senior Citizen rate would be eliminated. Mr. Stock went on to state that he wanted the Committee to be aware of the fact that by going to a 30 gallon container a resident's rate would not be cut in half. Mr. Stock stated that he did not know what the exact cost would be per month but he did know that it would not be half off the regular monthly collection rate. Mr. Stock stated that at the last meeting, the Committee wanted to look at what program could be implemented to serve as an incentive to get more residents participating in the recycling program. Mr. Stock stated that he felt the biggest incentive the City has to offer is it' s volume based collection rates. Mr. Stock stated that Mr. Berkopec would have some information available at the next meeting on possible incentive recycling programs. Mr. Stock noted that whatever program the Committee wishes to pursue, they should keep in mind the limited staff resources available to monitor and implement the program. Mr. Stock stated that at this time he favored a very simplistic approach to adopting a recycling 116 Minutes of the Page - 5 Energy and Transportation Committee April 18, 1990 incentive program such as designating the first week of each month as recycling week. During this week the City of Shakopee would randomly select a household address. If that address participated in the program by recycling, they would receive a $50. 00 cash prize. Mr. Stock then reviewed the transit and recycling monthly reports. Amundson/Stolarcek moved to adjourn the meeting at 8: 00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock, Recording Secretary June e 1 9 9 0 „, 1 ) UPCOMING MEETINGS SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT 1 2 3 4 5 - 6 7 8 9 4:30pm Public 5:OOpm Goals & 7:30pm Planning Utilities Objectives - Commission Commission Cont. 7:OOpm City Council 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 , 20 21 22 23 7:OOpm 7:OOpm City 7:45am Downtown Community Council Committee Services 5:OOpm CDC 7:00pm Energy & Transportation 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 May July SMTWTFS SMTWTFS 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 05/21/1990 Mn/DOTOeititare-7- IV I iii N e ws i MINNESOTA 1990lk o� Date: May 23, 1990 To be Released: IMMEDIATELY HWY. 212 PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD WEDNESDAY Minneapolis (May 23, 1990) - - The effects of the proposed relocation and improvements to Hwy. 212 will be discussed at a public hearing and informational open house on Wednesday, June 6. The open house will start at 5 P.M. followed by the hearing at 7 P.M. Both events will be held at the Chanhassen Elementary School, 7600 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen. The open house and hearing will allow the public an opportunity to comment and ask questions. Written testimony will be accepted at the hearing and at Mn/DOT. The proposed project includes construction of an 18-mile, four-lane, divided highway from the I-494/Hwy. 5 interchange in Eden Prairie to the City of Cologne. Acquisition of right-of-way property will be required and the project may impact wetlands, floodplain, recreational facilities at Eden Prairie Middle School and a variety of historic sites. After the hearing, written comments and other exhibits will be accepted through June 20, 1990. They should be sent to Evan R. Green, Project Manager, Mn/DOT, West Metro District, 2055 N. Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, MN 55422. Copies of maps, drawings, and the draft Environmental Impact Statement, are available for viewing or copying at Mn/DOT's Golden Valley and St. Paul offices, and at the public libraries and city halls in Chaska, Eden Prairie and Chanhassen. # # # CONTACTS: Ron Erickson Evan R. Green Don Stevens Pre-Design Engineer Project Manager Public Affairs 593-8540 593-8537 593-8414 Minnesota Department of Transportation/District 5, 2055 N. Lilac Dr., Golden Valley, MN 55422 X13 . .40* BULLETIN association of metropolitan municipalities p May 11, 1990 TO: AMM Member City Officials FROM: Vern Peterson Roger Peterson RE: SUMMARY OF 1990 AMM LEGISLATIVE POLICY AND ACTS OF INTEREST TO AMM CITIES. A. OMNIBUS TAX BILL (HF 2478 , CHAPTER 604) PRIORITY POLICY TAX ISSUES (ITEMS 1, 2 , 3) Pages 1. Budget/Aids/Levy Base/Credits 1 2 . Tax Base Equalization Aid (TBEA) 2 3 . Tax Increment Financing (TIF) 3 4 . Other Tax Bill Issues 11 B. MAJOR PRIORITY POLICY ISSUES - NOT TAX RELATED 1. Land Use Planning (HF 1654/SF 1510) 12 2 . Solid Waste Management (HF 2108/SF 1996) 12 Organized Collection (SF 2195, Ch. 600) 12 3 . Comparable Worth (SF 488 , Ch. 512) 13 C. OTHER POLICY ISSUES - PASSED IN 1990 1. Metropolitan Surface Water (SF 1894 , Ch. 601) 14 2 . MVET Transfer (HF 2200, Ch. 562) 17 3 . Combined Sewer Separation Funding (HF 2651 , Ch. 610) 17 4 . Airport Search Area Zoning (SF 2433 , Ch. 440) 17 D. OTHER POLICY ISSUES - NOT PASSED 1. Long Trucks (HF 6696/SF 447) 18 2 . Statewide Contractor Licensing (HF 2015/SF 1792) 18 3 . Fiscal Disparity Funds - Attempted Raids 19 Distribution Note: This Bulletin is being mailed to Managers/Administrators only. Please provide this information to members of your council and interested staff persons. 183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-4008 3 A. 1990 OMNIBUS TAX BILL (HF 2478, LAWS 1990 CHAPTER 604_) 1. BUDGET ISSUES/AIDS/LEVY BASE. PREFACE. The 1990 Omnibus Tax Bill continued the two year reversal of nearly two decades of state/city partnership in provision of key local public services. City Local Government Aid is cut $46 million in 1990 and 1991 following the nearly $100 million city LGA shift in the 1989 special session tax bill . In addition, if the budget reduction in the area of aids, credits, etc. in pay 1990 and 1991 do not create a continued savings of $175 million in pay 1992, additional cuts in LGA and HACA will be made proportional to the city and county levy bases. It is estimated at this time that the 1992 cuts could be as much as $54 million of which $28 million would come from cities. The 1991 Legislature will make the final determination based on Revenue forecasts in late 90 or early 91 and will also consider whether additional aid cuts will be allowable levies or base reductions. The bad news is that the year in question will be another election year for all legislators. LGA. The 1990 city LGA/HACA cut is $15. 6 million which equals approximately 1. 53% of a cities super revenue base of certified 1990 LGA, tax base equalization aid, general tax levy, and specials including bonded debt levy. This reduction in aid occurs with just 8 months remaining in the 1990 budget year and is a permanent aid reduction for future years none of which can be recaptured through levy by cities covered by chapter 275. 50 levy limits (i.e. those over 2500 population) . In addition another $15 million of aid increases granted by the 1989 special session tax bill are cancelled, thus holding the 1991 LGA level at the reduced 1990 amount. The total two year LGA cut, although disproportionately high when comparing the total city aid to state budget, is significantly less than the original governor's proposal or Senate passed tax bill . A provision which would have reduced MSA funds in cities with no LGA, TBEA, or HACA was eliminated from the final bill . LEVY BASE/LIMITS. The basic levy limit law of 3% inflation and one half of population growth did not change for 1991 nor did special levies for cities. However, after calculating the 1991 levy base from the current 1990 levy base, an amount equal to the 1. 53% aid cuts will be deducted from the new base thus making the 1990 aid cuts a permanent levy base cut. The Levy base cut in 1991 equal to 1. 53% of super levy base does apply to those cities that do not receive any LGA, TBEA, or HACA even though they did not lose actual dollars in 1990. LEVY LIMITS EXTENDED. The legislature did extend city levy limits one more year through payable 1992 so that the 1990 -1- aid/levy base slashes would force real spending cuts and would be less likely to show up as property tax increases. City and County Chapter 275. 50 levy limits will now both sunset effective taxes payable in 1993 unless changed by the 1991 or 1992 legislature. HOMESTEAD AND AGRICULTURAL CREDIT AID (HACA) . Because of the base reductions in 1990 there will be a permanent $1. 2 million HACA savings. In 1991 the cost of living adjustment is reduced and capped at 3 . 94% and changes made in class rates other than the high valued C/I property will not be paid for with HACA, saving an additional $10 million. The high valued C/I class rates are reduced to 4 .95% for 1991 and HACA will be increased by $18 million to offset the decreased property tax to prevent a shift to other property. HACA growth for 1992 and beyond will reflect only Household growth and not contain a cost of living adjustment. It will continue to be adjusted for net tax capacity changes and fiscal disparity adjustments. PROPERTY TAX CLASS RATES . Several Class Rates were changed which will not be funded by HACA thus causing a shift in taxes from one class of property to another. Of primary interest in the metro area is the change for Homesteads. The 2% rate will now apply to the market value between $68 , 000 and $110, 000 rather than $68, 000 to $100, 000 . The rate on the first $100, 000 value of C/I property drops from 3 . 3% to 3 . 2% . Other property with declining rates include utility real and personal , all classes currently at 2 .4% , agriculture, mobile home parks, and fraternity/sorority houses. The shift from over $100, 000 homes to other property is estimated to be $12 million statewide. TARGETING INCREASED. The pay 1991 targeting funding for homeowners with tax increases exceeding 10% was increased by $6 million to a total of $13 million. The refund will equal 75% of the first $250 increase over 10% plus 90% of the amount over the first $250. To qualify, the increase must be at least $40. This provision mainly benefits the metropolitan area. C/I EQUALIZATION REFUND REPEALED. The 1989 tax bill provided an equalization aid refund for C/I property in areas where the local tax rate was in excess of 100% , primarily in cities in greater Minnesota, at a cost of $10 million per year. This provision was repealed. 2 . TAX BASE EQUALIZATION AID (TBEA) . The final tax bill basically implemented a major AMM policy of grandfathering the 1990 distribution but provide no increase for 1991. The $19 million distribution in 1990 had been rolled into the LGA pot, however the new bill pulls it back out and continues a modified TBEA formula. The new unfunded formula reduces the equalized amount -2- 13 to 30% of a cities average 3 year levy and limits the increase if there were one to 12% plus adds eligibility for first class cities. There was discussion that if funding is considered in future years, it may be limited/targeted for C/I relief. 3 . TAX INCREMENT FINANCE (TIF) ARTICLE 7. Preventing restrictive amendments to the TIF law was one of the major AMM priorities for the 1990 session. The AMM worked very closely with the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) , North Metro Mayors Association and other city groups during the session to try and maintain TIF as a viable economic development tool for cities. Unfortunately, the opponents of TIF which included two county associations, two school district associations, several business associations and the Department of Revenue, launched a major anti-TIF lobby which helped convince the legislature to radically change the TIF statutes. Damaging as the amendments to TIF are, we were able to persuade the Tax Conference Committee to eliminate some of the most punitive features of the original house bill co-authored by Representatives Rest, Schreiber, Ogren, Simoneau and Price. The restrictive provisions eliminated from the original bill were volume limits, reverse referendum, prohibition against land write down, redefined project area and restricting use of developer repayments. The following is a section by section summary of the major provisions of the TIF Article. We want to acknowledge that much of the material contained in this detailed summary was prepared by Jim Holmes of the Holmes and Graven Firm. Section 1. Cities will loose part of their LGA or HACA payments for districts certified after April 30, 1990. The reductions vary depending on the type of district but the mechanism works as follows: (1) Determine qualifying captured tax capacity ("QCTC") for post April 30, 1990 districts. This is an amount equal to: (a) 100 percent of the captured tax capacity of economic development and soils condition districts; (b) For renewal and renovation districts, none of the captured tax capacity in years 1 through 5, then phasing in at a rate of 12-1/2 percent per year in years 6 through 13 . (c) For redevelopment districts, housing districts, hazardous substance districts, none of the captured tax capacity in years 1 through 5, then phasing in at a rate of 6-1/4 percent per year in years 6 through 21. -3- (2) Calculate the "reduction in state tax increment financing aid" ("RISTIFA") as follows: (a) Determine a make-believe state school aid amount assuming QCTC within the school district (divided by the applicable sales ratio) was available to the school district and, therefore, would be included in its tax capacity for purposes of determining state school aid payments ; (b) Subtract this make-believe state aid amount from the real state aid amount. (3) Equalize RISTIFA as follows : (a) Divide the municipality's total tax capacity by the applicable sales ratios; (b) Multiply the adjusted total tax capacity by 5 percent; (c) If RISTIFA exceeds this amount, multiply the excess by 75 percent and subtract the result from RISTIFA. (4 ) Add QCTC to the municipality' s taxing capacity for purposes of calculating its next years LGA. Section 2 . Essentially a special provision for St. Paul 's Galtier Plaza. Section 3 . POOLED REFUNDING BONDS . A provision in the municipal development district law (Minnesota Statutes, Section 469 . 129 , Subd. 2) has permitted the refunding of general obligation tax increment bonds with tax increment revenue bonds and the pledge of increment to the refunding bonds from all districts participating in the refunding. This permitted limited pooling, since districts with healthy cash flows could be used to pay debt service on the refunding bonds, thus freeing increment within other participating districts . This amendment revokes this authority after April 30 , 1990 . Section 4 . Technical Correction. Section 5 . REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS . Two substantive changes are made in the definition of "redevelopment districts. " First, the definition which authorized qualification of a district as a redevelopment district if parcels comprising 70 percent of the area were occupied, 20 percent of the buildings were structurally substandard and 30 percent of the buildings required renovation was eliminated. Therefore , a -4- (3 redevelopment district can now be created only if the area meets the 50 percent substandard test or if it consists of underutilized railroad property. Secondly, a new limitation was added with regard to determining whether a building is substandard. A substandard condition cannot be found if (1) the building is in compliance with the relevant building code, or (2) it is not in compliance, but would be at a cost of less than 15 percent of replacement costs. This determination can be based upon reasonably available evidence and does not require interior inspection or independent, expert appraisal . Section 6. RENEWAL AND RENOVATION DISTRICTS. The 30 percent substandard and 20 percent renovation test which was eliminated from the definition of "redevelopment district" by Section 5 is added as a separate definition of "renewal and renovation districts. " Section 7 . HOUSING DISTRICTS. The percentage of fair market value of a housing development which can constitute non-low and moderate income housing uses and still have the development qualify as a "housing district" is reduced from 30 percent to 20 percent. Sections 8 & 18 . ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS . The use of economic development districts was severely restricted. Economic Development districts are basically limited to manufacturing, warehousing, research and development, and telemarketing. Tourism projects can be included outside of the 7-County metro area. No more than 10% of the square feet of the buildings may be used for non-qualifying purposes. If the non-qualifying square footage is directly related to and in support of the qualifying activity, up to 25% may be for non-qualifying purposes. Cities with less than 5, 000 residents can use TIF to subsidize retail or commercial development up to a total of 5, 000 square feet on a cumulative basis for all economic development districts in the city. Cities cannot use economic development districts to entice a business from another Minnesota City. Section 9 . CREDIT ENHANCED BONDS . Added to the definition section of the tax increment act is the definition of "credit enhanced bonds. " They are bonds which are: (1) Payable primarily from tax increment which is: (a) Derived from a tax increment district within which at least 75 percent of the bond proceeds are expended on "activities" , as defined in Section 21 set forth below; -5- and (b) Estimated to be adequate to pay debt service on the bonds; (2) Further secured by tax increment: (a) Derived from other tax increment districts; and (b) Determined by the user to be necessary to market the bonds. Section 10. COUNTY ROAD COSTS. The Amendments broaden this requirement from soils conditioned districts only to include road costs precipitated by any type of tax increment district. In order for the county to conclude that the costs would not be required "but for" the existence of the tax increment district, the road improvement must not be scheduled for at least 5 years under existing county plans. Section 11. RENENAL AND RENOVATION DISTRICTS - MUNICIPAL APPROVAL. This amendment adds "renewal and renovation districts" to district types which the city must describe in its approving resolution. Section 12 . RENEWAL AND RENOVATION DISTRICTS - MODIFICATION. This amendment adds "renewal or renovation districts" to the distr-ict types for which findings supporting enlargement must be made by the City in its approving resolution. Section 13 . HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE DISTRICTS. Under prior law hazardous substance subdistricts could consist of parcels containing hazardous substances and contiguous parcels separated only by rights-of-way. The Amendments expand this to include contiguous parcels whether or not separated by rights-of-way. Section 14 . DEBT SERVICE ON CREDIT ENHANCEMENT BONDS . This authorizes the expenditure of tax increment from any tax increment district for debt service on credit enhanced bonds. The district from which the increment is derived need not be located within the same project as the project within which the proceeds of the bonds are expended. Section 15 . RENEWAL AND RENOVATION DISTRICT - DURATION. The durational limit for a "renewal or renovation district" is 15 years from receipt of the first increment. Section 16 . EXCESS INCREMENT. The Amendments provide that excess increment distributed to the city or county must be deducted from their levy limits for the following year. For -6- f purposes of calculating the city or county levy limit base for later years, the excess increment payment is to be treated as if it were a LGA payment. Section 17. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. The administrative expense definition and percentage limitation has been changed several times, each time with separate effective dates. With the Amendments, districts are subject to the following limitations: Date of District Certification: Pre August 1, 1979 or Post June 30, 1982 Definition: "Administrative expenses" means all expenditures of an authority other than amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district, or amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issues pursuant to section 469 . 178 . "Administrative expenses" includes amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel , fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. % Limitation: 10% Date: August 1, 1979-June 30, 1982 Definition: "Administrative expenses" means all expenditures of an authority other than amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district, or amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issues pursuant to section 469 . 178 . % Limitation: 5% Section 19 . REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS. The Amendments include "renovation and renewal districts" with redevelopment districts in the requirement that 90 percent of revenues derived from tax increment be used to finance the cost of correcting those -7- conditions "that allowed designation" of the district in the first instance. Section 20. COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE AND ROAD COSTS. Under separate provisions of the tax increment act, the county within which tax increment districts are located can require that the district pay for county road improvements (Section 469 . 175, subd. la) or county administrative costs (Section 469. 176, subd. 4b) . The Amendments authorize either party to submit disputes to binding arbitration. Section 21. POOLING RESTRICTIONS ; FIVE-YEAR RULE. Since the enactment of amendments to the tax increment act in 1982 , increment generated from a tax increment district could be expended anywhere within the "project area" which underlies the district and, which in many cases, is considerably larger than the district. The Amendments require that after May 1, 1990, 75 percent of the revenue derived from tax increment districts must either be spent in the district or to pay debt service on bonds the proceeds of which are spent in the district. Debt service on "credit enhanced bonds" is exempted from this rule. The Legislature also for the first time defines the activity upon which tax increment or bond proceeds can be spent in order to qualify under the 75 percent rule. "Activities" is defined to mean: " . . .acquisition of property, clearing of land, site preparation, soils correction, removal of hazardous waste or pollution, installation of utilities, construction of public or private improvements, and other similar activities, but only to the extent that tax increment revenues may be spent for such purposes under other law. Activities do not include allocated administrative expenses, but do include engineering, architectural, and similar costs of the improvements in the district. In addition, housing project expenditures authorized by the tax increment act in Section 469 . 174 , subd. 11 qualify as "activities within the district" even if located outside the district. Finally, county road and administrative costs are at best neutral , being deducted before calculating the 75/25 percent split. The Amendments also mandate that the qualifying expenditures be made in the first 5 years of a district or that they thereafter be limited to payment of obligations incurred during the fist 5 years. Accordingly, expenditures on "activities" will qualify only if the expenditure: (1) Is made to a "third person" (other than the developer or authority) within 5 years of certification; or -8- (2) Is for debt service on bonds issued to a third person within 5 years of certification; or (3) Is to pay obligations arising from contracts executed within 5 years of certification; or (4) Is to reimburse a party (note: not a "third party") for eligible tax increment costs incurred within 5 years of certification. Beginning in year 6 following certification, 75 percent of the revenue derived from tax increment that remains after bond and contract payments must be used to prepay bonds or contracts, so that the 25% expenditures outside the district becomes substantially less after the first five years. For example, assume that a district which is smaller than project area is certified in 1990 and in each year beginning in 1992 produces $1, 000, 000 in increment, 75%, or $750, 000 must be spent on qualifying activities within the district in 1992 , 1993 , 1994 and 1995 and in each of those years $250, 000 can be expended outside the district but within the project area. In year 6, or 1996, assume $500, 000 is paid on bond debt service and $100, 000 on contract obligations. This leaves $400, 000 in increment, 75% or $300, 000 of which must be used to prepay the bonds and contracts, leaving only $100, 000 to be expended outside the district. When the bonds and contacts are defeased, the district is decertified. Section 22 . ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS. Authorize assessment agreements with developers whether or not development agreements exist. Section 23 . EXCESS INCREMENT. Excess increment returned to a school district must now be allocated between state equalized and unequalized levies. Only the excess which represents unequalized levies is then deducted from the school districts levy limits and state aid payments. Section 24 . SCHOOL REFERENDA LEVIES. There had been some question about whether an authority and school district could agree to payment to the school district of referenda levies in cases other than where mandated under Section 469 . 177 , subd. 10 . The Amendments authorize this. Section 25. PENALTIES. with respect to any tax increment district, regardless of when formed, the Amendments mandate that the Commissioner of Revenue enforce the provisions of the Tax Increment Act; that any taxpayer can sue and recover cost, including attorneys fees; and that the State Auditor carry out financial and compliance auditing. -9- Sections 26, 27 , 29 . NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROGRAM. Affects Minneapolis. Section 28 . COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. Apply the county administrative costs recovery provisions for costs incurred on or after May 1, 1990 to pre-1979 districts. Section 30. TRANSITION RULES. Various cities are given exemption from certain new limitations. Section 31. EFFECTIVE DATES . (1) Each section of the amendment is effective as follows: Section Effective Date Section 1 School year and taxes payable 1991 Sections 2 , 3 , 4 , 13 , 17 , 20, 22 , 24 , 26 May 1, 1990. 27 , 28 , 29, 30 Sections 5, 6, 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11, 12 , 14 , 15 Certification after April 30, 1990 18 , 19 , 21 Sections 16, 23 Excess distributions after December 31 , 1990. Section 25 Violations after December 31 , 1990 (2) If a district is certified during April , 1990, the Section 1, 5-12 , 14 , 15, 18 , 19 and 21 limits apply, unless by June 1, 1991: (a) The authority enters into a development agreement for at least one site in the district ; (b) Bonds are issued to finance project costs; or (c) Property in the district is acquired by the authority after April 1 , 1990 -10- 4 . OTHER TAX BILL ISSUES. EXCESS LODGING TAX REPEALED. The provision of the 1989 tax bill allowing a no strings attached second tier 3% Hotel/Motel tax was repealed for cities that had not enacted it by February 1, 1990. Roseville may levy an additional 2% for its speed skating facility and Bloomington may levy 1% for promotion of the Metropolitan Sports Arena. The basic 3% Lodging Tax Authority for promotion of tourism was not affected. TRUTH IN TAXATION. All cities, including those under 2500 population must comply this year with Truth in Taxation requirements. The Revenue Department will certify LGA and levy limits for cities over 2500 population by August 1. All cities must adopt a proposed budget and certify a proposed property tax levy to the county auditor by September 1 and have selected the initial and continuation hearing dates for the formal public hearing. Budget hearings will be held between November 15 and December 20 with final levy certification by December 28 , 1990. The final levy cannot exceed the initial proposed levy unless population and household estimates are not final from the demographer in time for the September 1 certification. The county auditor controls hearing date selection within the county to avoid overlapping dates by taxing unit. The county will select first by August 1 and then the schools will select their dates by August 15 leaving the last two weeks of August for cities to select their dates. Besides a direct generic initial property tax notice mailed by the county to property owners by November 10, each local government must publish a newspaper advertisement of the proposed budget and levy in an official newspaper of general circulation in the taxing authority. The paper must be at least a weekly and does not have to be the Star Tribune or Pioneer Press. The ad must be at least one-eighth of a page and not in the legal notice or classified ad section. It must be published not less than two nor more than six days prior to the hearing. The purpose of the ad is to notify renters, etc. The Revenue Department will send out specific ad requirements prescribed by law. Parcel specific notices required in Hennepin, Ramsey, and St. Louis Counties for payable 1992 taxes will be required for all counties for taxes levied in 1992 , payable 1993 . PREVAILING WAGE A very scaled down version of early strict prevailing wage provisions was finally included in the tax bill . Prevailing wage for economic development assistance must be paid by recipients of a state grant of $200, 000 or more, a loan of $500, 000 or more or a sales tax reduction. HACA and LGA payments to local governments are specifically excluded from the requirements as are existing housing rehab or new -11- housing construction financial aid of less than $100, 000 . r Finally the bill sets up a legislative study of prevailing wage to be completed by February 1991. B. MAJOR PRIORITY POLICY ISSUES NOT TAX RELATED. 1. LAND USE PLANNING (HF 1654/SF 1510) This bill was sponsored by the Governor's Advisory Commission on State-Local Relations (ACSLR) and was a carry over from the 1989 Session. (The bill under a different number was first introduced in the 1988 Session) . The bill would substantially modify and combine the planning and zoning authority for cities, towns and counties. The AMM has opposed the bill since its original introduction due to its prescriptiveness which would cause a loss of local flexibility in the planning process. The AMM has had a special task force at work for over two years in an attempt to make this bill acceptable for metro area cities. Much progress has been made but since several problems still remain the authors of this bill did not request a hearing during the 1990 session. The AMM will continue its work on this bill because it is likely to be reintroduced in the 1991 session. Our hope is to modify the bill so that it will improve existing law instead of taking a step backward. 2 . SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT (HF 2108/SF 1996) For the first time in at least 10 years , a comprehensive bill dealing with the state's Waste Management Act did not pass during the 1990 session. A comprehensive bill (HF 2108/SF 1996) was introduced early in the session but it ran into major problems in the State Departments Division of the House Appropriations Committee and did pass. Several sections of the bill would have impacted cities but not necessarily in a positive way so the AMM did not push to pass the bill . However, one section of the bill dealing with organized collection was added on the floor of the Senate to SF 2195. ORGANIZED COLLECTION (SF 2195, LAWS 1990, CHAPTER 600) The following is a summary of the statutory changes impacting the city process for establishing organized collection: 1. The local government unit must provide the opportunity for all licenses haulers within the unit to participate in developing the plans and proposals for an organized collection system. 2 . At least 180 days (was 90 days) before implementing an organized collection system the governing body must by -12- / 3 resolution announce its intent to organize collection. 3 . During a 90 day period following the resolution of intent, the unit must include the licensed haulers in development of plans or proposals for organized collection. 4 . For a 90 day period following the original 90 day period, the unit must discuss possible organized collection arrangements with all of the interested license collectors operating in that city. If the unit is unable to reach an agreement with a majority of the haulers or upon expiration of the 90 days, the unit may implement an alternate method of organizing collection. However, the unit must first make specific findings as to why it is choosing an alternate method to organize collection and what the impact of that decision will be. These amendments are effective August 1, 1990 and apply to all local units that initiate action to organize solid waste collection on or after that date. These changes to the process for implementing, organized collection were adopted in lieu of the haulers proposal for compensation for those haulers who might loose business as a result of an organized collection system. 3 . COMPARABLE WORTH (SF 488 , LAWS 1990, CHAPTER 512) A new version of pay equity was passed by the 1990 Legislature which leaves no doubt that pay equity applies only to female dominated jobs. Legislative intent is clear that increased pay of any kind for males in male dominated classes is not a result or requirement of the Comparable Worth Law. The major change was in the definition. 'Equitable compensation relationship means that the compensation for female-dominated classes is not consistently below the compensation for male-dominated casses of comparable work value as determined under section 471. 994 , within the political subdivision. ' To the extent that a city used a corridor system and most of the female dominated job classes were paid several percentage points lower than men of comparable value within the corridor, pay equity is not achieved and changes must be made. However, if there is a good mix where some female classes are higher than male and visa-versa then pay equity is achieved. The Department of Employee Relations (DOER) will make the final determination. In determining compliance, DOER must consider items such as recruitment difficulties, retention difficulties, recent arbitration awards inconsistent with pay equity plans, and data demonstrating good faith efforts to achieve compliance. If that determination is negative, they must consult with the local -13- unit. The final determination can be appealed through an Administrative Law Hearing and ultimately the courts. If the subdivision is found out of compliance it can be fined five percent of its LGA or $100 per day whichever is greater. No fines will be effective until after the appeals process and after the legislature has had an opportunity to meet and review the compliance report required of DOER to the legislature. The pay equity implementation date remains December 31 , 1991 . An implementation report to DOER is required by January 31 , 1992 . Reports filed with DOER are considered public data. The evaluation system must be maintained and updated. Collective bargaining for balanced classes may consider internal pay equity studies but must also consider comparable classes in other subdivisions. The final bill definition of pay equity was significantly better than the initial 'equal ' in all cases language. The law now states that its intent is to eliminate sex-based wage disparities in Minnesota public employment but then clearly seeks only to adjust female dominated class salaries . C. OTHER POLICY ISSUES PASSED IN 1990 1. METROPOLITAN SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT ACT AMENDMENTS (SF 1894 , LAWS 1990, CHAPTER 601) This bill generally increases the statutory requirements for local water management in the metropolitan area and places local water management organizations (WMOs) under greater supervision by the state Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) . The intent of the bill was to implement the recommendations of the Metropolitan Local Water Management Task Force which was mandated and established by the 1989 Legislature to evaluate the Chapter 509 Surface Water Management System created by the Legislature in 1982 . The Task Force had found the Chapter 509 process to be lacking in some areas. This bill does not implement the recommendation of the Met Council that it (Met Council) replace BWSR as the approval authority for WMO plans . The following is a summary of the sections of this bill with major impact for local water management responsibilities. Sections 1-3 , Technical changes which do not impact local water authorities. Section 4 . Requires Chapter 112 Watershed Districts to establish technical Advisory Committees composed of representatives of local government agencies. Section 5 . Requires the Metropolitan Council to adopt a water resources plan which includes management objectives and target -14- 13 pollution loads for watersheds in the metropolitan area. Section 6. Technical change mostly but states that one of the purposes of metro water management programs is to 'protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities' . Section 7. Adds a definition for a 'subwatershed unit' . Section 8. Directs BWSR to adopt rules which prescribe minimum requirements for the contents of WMO joint powers agreement and prescribes that decisions by a joint power board may not require more than a majority vote except a CIP decision may require no more than a two-thirds vote. Section 9. Establishes certain operating standards for WMO's as follows: Subd. 1. Requires WMOs to report appointments and vacancies to BWSR, and requires that vacancies be filled in 90 days. Subd. 2 . Requires notice of vacancies on WMO. (Effective July 1, 1992) . Subd. 3. Requires BWSR to adopt rules prescribing standards and procedures for removing members of WMO boards for just cause. Subd. 4 . Requires an annual WMO newsletter or written report to residents (Effective July 1, 1992) . Subd. 5. Requires WMOs to solicit proposals for legal, professional, and technical consulting services every two years. Subd. 6. Requires BWSR to facilitate the formation of a metropolitan association of WMOs. Subd. 7. Allows WMOs to accept jurisdiction of existing public drainage systems. Section 10. Requires that watershed units on the fringe of the metropolitan area that are exempt from current metropolitan water planning law must prepare and implement water plans as determined by BWSR. Section 11. Technical Amendment related to section 10. Section 12 . Requires metropolitan counties to take on the responsibilities of a WMO for a watershed, if a WMO does not exist or is not performing according to BWSR standards. -15- If BWSR determines that a county has failed to perform as required, state agencies may withhold from local governments in the watershed certain state funds and certain delegated regulatory powers, and state agencies may stop issuing water-related permits in the watershed. An appealsprocess from the BWSR decision is established. Section 13 . Requires WMOs to coordinate their plans with counties and contiguous WMOs. Sections 14 , 15, 16. Requires BWSR to adopt rules which prescribe standard requirements and the procedure for amending watershed plans. Directs the Met Council to tell BSWR whether the watershed plans conform to the Council 's Water Resource Plan and requires BSWR to prescribe standards for determining whether water plans are being property implemented. Section 17 . Requires BSWR to review WMO plans at least every 5 years. Section 18 . Allows appeals to BWSR if a WMO fails to comply with its plan. Section 19 . Mandates that BWSR adopt rules prescribing requirements for annual financial and activity reports by WMOs (Effective July 1, 1992) . Section 20. Technical change. Section 21. Requires BWSR to prescribe standards for local water plans. Section 22 . Clarifies that levies for water management activities are not exempt from levy limit. Sections 23-26. Technical changes. Section 27 . Requires drainage authorities in the metropolitan area to prepare a report to BWSR on the general condition of the public ditches under their authority. Section 28 . Requires the Council to establish an Advisory Water Quality Management Task Force. Section 29 . Technical . Section 30 . Appropriates funding to BWSR to carryout its responsibilities. Section 31. Specifies that Section 9 , subd. 2 and 4 and Section 19 are not effective until July 1 , 1992 . The remainder of the -16- • c3 act is effective August 1, 1990. 2. MVET TRANSFER (HF 2200, LAWS 1990, CHAPTER 562) The Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) transfer from general fund to the Highway User Tax and Transit Assistance funds beginning July 1, 1990 was reduced from 35% to 30% taking away the gains made in the 1989 session. Damage Control here, as in other money areas, was significant. Early in the session hearings were held to discuss complete elimination of the transfer and MVET administratively is an easy target. No changes were made to the distribution provisions that eliminate the city and county highway share of the MVET after 1991. 3 . COMBINED SEWER SEPARATION FUNDING (HF 2651, LAWS 1990, CHAPTER 610) Section 22 of the bonding bill continues the state funding for 1991 and 1992 to assist the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul and South St. Paul to complete separation of their combined sewers. This bill provides $11, 850, 000 for each year (1991 and 1992) to be divided proportionately among the three cities based on the original grant allocation formula developed in 1985. The $11, 850, 000 per year is an increase of approximately $5, 100, 000 per year over the previous level of the state provided funding. The intent of the increase is to make up a portion of the shortage caused by the elimination of about $8 , 000, 000 per year of Federal funding plus some inflation adjustment. The three cities at their discretion may use a portion of the 1991 or 1992 funding for projects begun during 1990 but they are forwarned that the legislature does not intend to appropriate additional money to make up for any shortages in 1991 or 1992 because the money was used for 1990 projects. 4 . AIRPORT ZONING (SF 2433, LAWS 1990, CHAPTER 440) An airport bill passed in 1989 setting up a dual truck process, which continues use and improvement of the Metropolitan Airport while proceeding towards identification and site selection for a possible new airport, provided for the Met Council to select several 'search areas' in the first quarter of 1991 and select a final 'search area' by January 1, 1992 . The MAC then has until 1997 to identify a specific site. In order to protect the search areas from significant land speculation pressures or local mass rezoning to thwart the process, the Council sought some additional controls within designated search areas. Generally, search areas will be in the rural sections of the metro area and/or immediately outside the 7-county boundry. There will be no impact on the developing urbanized area and very little impact on the outlying cities that are included. The bill allows all activities provided within current zoning and comprehensive -17- plans. The council only becomes involved for zoning type change requests and then can only make adverse rulings if something is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. Chapter 440 provides that land not otherwise zoned in a search area is automatically zoned for agricultural use. A local unit may not permit a change in zoning, a zoning variance or conditional use that is inconsistent with the approved comprehensive plan. Any change must be submitted to the Metropolitan council which has 90 days to approve or disapprove. An expedited process will be developed. Any public building or facility, including sewer, must be submitted for Met Council review and comment in the final designated search area prior to construction. The Council in all likehood will approve most changes unless they would create a tremendous expense or deterrent to an airport. As Chairman Keefe explained, it will probably be cheaper to buy an actual development later than pay for the development rights to a dreamers version of that development now. D. OTHER POLICY ISSUES - NOT PASSED 1 . LONG TRUCKS (HF 696/SF 447) The 110 foot, triple trailer, 4 year demonstration bill was again heard in legislative committees. The action centered in Senate Transportation where it has lost on a narrow or tied vote in each of the last several sessions. This year there was some very heavy lobbying done by the trucking interests. In a Senate Transportation Committee meeting packed with opponents, the bill was presented by its author Senator DeCramer, shortened to a 3 year program, and passed by 1 vote without testimony and with very little discussion. It was then sent to Senate Finance where it was scheduled for hearing. However, the Teamsters finally officially joined the opposing forces and tipped the scale once again against the Triple Trailers. The future of this issue is unclear at this point since Senator Purfeerst, the Committee Chair and a strong proponent, is retiring as are one or two others on the committee. It probably will continue to be an issue. 2 . STATEWIDE CONTRACTOR LICENSING (HF 2015/SF 1792) HF 2015 introduced by Representatives Sarna , Vanasek, Simoneau, Bennett, and Long had a hearing in the House Committee on Commerce. The bill established a statewide testing and licensing process for building contractors, remodelers, and specialty contractors. It creates a state and regional advisory boards and authorizes the Commissioner of Commerce to establish rules, fees, and education requirements. The bill requires a $5, 000 bond and establishes a suspension or revocation process. Local licensing -18- 3 by cities is prohibited. The hearing was introductory only and not intended to process the bill. It will be pushed hard by the Builders Association of Minnesota Contractors next year and has significant support from th Building Inspectors organization. 3 . FISCAL DISPARITIES Two separate serious attempts were made to strip off part of the Fiscal Disparities pot before final distribution. The RTB Light Rail Transit Financing Plan initially included as the major capital funding source for LRT construction 40% of the growth in the fiscal disparities tax base (i.e. 40% of 40% or 16% of the total C/I growth) . The AMM took the lead in showing the RTB the folly of this position and it was deleted totally from the final recommendation. Hennepin County and Senator Linda Berglin devised a method to use a significant portion of the C/I F.D. growth for county health and human services. The diverted funds would be outside of Levy Limits and go to all 7 counties under a formula giving the lions share to Hennepin County. Once again the AMM took the lead in persuading the Senate Tax Committee that this was really an inappropriate funding source. The issue is complex in that most people feel that striping F. D. funds- mainly affects the large contributors whereas the actual biggest losers are the taxpayers in the areas which gain the most. These people lose a larger amount of the distribution and thus experiencing a larger property tax increase to make up the difference since F. D. is included in the local bases for levy limit calculations. -19- TENTATIVE AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, MN June 7 , 1990 Chairperson Melanie Kahleck Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M. 2 . Approval of Agenda 3 . Approval of May 3 , 1990 Meeting Minutes 4 . 7 : 35 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider approval of the preliminary and final plat of Valley Park 9th Addition. Applicant: Valley Industrial Realty Action: Recommendation to City Council 5 . Discussion: Fences in Residential Area 6. Discussion: Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Landscape Requirements for Complex Center, Shakopee Town Square. 7 . Discussion: Comprehensive Plan Workshop 8 . Discussion: City Code Amendment Process and Form 9 . Other Business a. b. Lindberg S. Ekola City Planner NOTE TO PLANNING MEMBERS: 1. If you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above items, please call Lindberg or Aggie on the Monday or Tuesday prior to the meeting. 2 . If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. TENTATIVE AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, MN June 7 , 1990 Chairperson Melanie Kahleck Presiding 1 . Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M. 2 . Approval of Agenda 3 . Approval of May 3 , 1990 Meeting Minutes 4 . Recognition by Board of Adjustments and Appeals of Interested Citizens. 5 . Other Business a. b. 6 . Adjourn Lindberg S . Ekola City Planner NOTE TO THE B.O.A.A. MEMBERS: 1 . If you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above items, please call Lindberg or Aggie on the Monday or Tuesday prior to the meeting. 2 . If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. 1 � PLANNING COMMISSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION May 3 , 1990 MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Allen, Christensen, Joos, Kahleck, Rockne, Spurrier MEMBERS PRESENT: Kahleck , Rockne , Spurrier, Allen MEMBERS ABSENT: Joos, Christensen OTHERS PRESENT: Dennis Kraft - City Administrator, Lindberg Ekola-City Planner , Sharon Storholm-Recording Secretary I. ROLL CALL Chairperson Kahleck called the meeting to order at 8 : 50 P.M. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Kahleck added that item 5 be discussion on Hillwood Estates, and that the rest of the items be moved down one numeral. The agenda was approved as amended. III. APPROVAL OF APRIL 5, 1990 MEETING MINUTES Spurrier clarified that the discussion on page 6 regarding hours of operation had referred to hours for starting the equipment also. Minutes were approved as amended. IV. RESOLUTION NO. 593 SUBMITTED BY TERMINAL TRANSPORT, INC. FOR A PERMANENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH NO TIME CONDITIONS FOR PERIODIC PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW, TO ALLOW OUTDOOR STORAGE OF TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT. Chairperson Kahleck opened the public hearing. Ekola noted that the zoning was I-2 , the acreage is 3 . 9 acres, there are municipal utilities and adjacent zoning land use is I-1 and R-4 on adjacent property. A conditional use permit had been previously granted (Resolution 580) to the applicant on November 13 , 1989 . The recommended conditions for this Conditional Use Permit would be similar to the previous report. From a site inspection on Tuesday, April 24 , the following items should be noted: Minutes of the Page - 2 Shakopee Planning Commission May 3, 1990 A berm has been constructed along the south and east edges of the site. No landscaping had been planted. Viking Steel Road is a gravel surfaced 24 . 5 ' public right-of-way. A mobile trailer has been moved to the site and is located near the entrance on the east side. The trailer appears to be used as an office. All existing trees have been removed from the site. Ekola went on to summarize the Staff Review Comments: 1. Building Department: Mobile trailer on site does not have building permit, which is needed. If permanent office to be built-plumbing will be necessary. Compliance is necessary for the Conditional Use Permit. 2 . Engineering Department: Dust control plan should be submitted and approved - this should include method of application and frequency of application. Existing right- of-way for Viking Steel Road is substandard. 3 . Fire Department: All fire lanes to be kept open at all times. Applicant indicates that no storage of fuel will occur on site with this Conditional Use Permit. 4 . Planning Department: Deciduous trees need to be provided along the south and east line to comply with code. 5. County Engineer: Fourth Avenue is now the jurisdiction of the City. Ekola said that Staff recommendations were as follows: 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall expire 24 months from date of approval and there will be periodic review by the Planning Commission. 2 . Applicant shall comply with all weight restrictions on 4th Avenue by using Highway 101 as an alternate. 3 . Dust control plan shall be submitted outlining method and frequency of application. 4 . A new site plan shall be submitted which identifies all landscaping, mobile trailer, setbacks and right-of-ways (in addition to information presented in original site plan) . -D Minutes of the Page - 3 Shakopee Planning Commission May 3, 1990 5. The gravel surfaces shall be set back 40 feet from 4th Avenue and 30 feet from Viking Steel Road right-of-ways. Minimums of 7 and 8 deciduous trees shall be planted along each road respectively. 6 . If fuel storage is to be provided, the Conditional Use Permit must be amended. All fire and safety codes shall be met in that event. 7 . No loading or unloading of trailers shall be permitted. 8 . No permanent storage of any trailers shall be allowed on the site. 9 . Applicant shall obtain a building permit for the office housed in the mobile trailer prior to the release of the Conditional Use Permit. Spurrier asked if the applicant was prepared for permanent improvements now. Questions were raised regarding the construction trailer. Ekola said that the situation was temporary, but the applicant should indicate his expectations for the lifetime of the project. The original conditions required that a drainage plan be submitted. Spurrier was concerned that material would be tracked on to 4th Avenue or Highway 101. Brent Coatney of Terminal Transport, Inc. came forward and said that they have agreed to a temporary use permit and have even over complied. They will put trees on Viking Steel Road and there is a dust control program that has been applied. Class 5 material would go on Highway 101 and 4th Avenue. Spurrier felt that a use had been permitted that would create a certain amount of traffic - which could create and carry mud. Coatney said there has been none there in six months. Spurrier said he had noted some mud on the video on the side entrance. Coatney said since that film was taken, more base has been added. Allen asked what the long term plans for the site were. Minutes of the Page - 4 Shakopee Planning Commission May 3, 1990 Coatney answered that it was a 32 month lease (actually 6 months at renewable increment) . Since the operation is spread out over a 24 hour period, he did not feel there was a safety issue. Loaded trailers come back on 4th Avenue and some on Highway 101. He felt he was being asked to do more than what was requested. Rockne asked if the site plan was utilized as shown - is the temporary office in the permanent position? Coatney answered that to his knowledge, the plan was correct. The trailers are parked as closely as possible. The present site of the temporary office is the best choice. It is being used as an office to process paperwork and answer phones. To his knowledge, Viking Steel ' s building did not have any available space for this use. Rockne said the issue of a permanent office may have to be addressed if this is to be approved for long term use. Ekola said the building permit will be issued on a temporary basis coordinated with the Conditional Use Permit. Chairperson Kahleck closed the public hearing. MOTION: Allen moved that the Commission approve Resolution No. 593 on the following conditions: 1. This Conditional Use Permit shall expire twenty-four months from the date of Planning Commission approval . A twelve month review by the Planning Commission is essential to ensure normal and orderly development since the applicant is proposing short term dust control measures and is using a temporary structure for office uses on site. 2 . The applicant shall comply with all weight restrictions placed on 4th Avenue (CR 82) by using Highway 101 as an alternate route. No additional access roads shall be allowed off of 4th Avenue. 3 . The applicant shall submit a Dust Control Plan which identifies the method of dust control and frequency of application to be approved by the City Engineer prior to the release of the Conditional Use Permit. 4 . The applicant shall submit a new site plan to be approved by the City Planner which identifies all proposed landscaping, the temporary mobil trailer, setbacks and adjacent rights-of-way in addition to the information / 1 '' Minutes of the Page - 5 Shakopee Planning Commission May 3, 1990 presented on the original site plan. 5 . The gravel surfaced area shall be set back 40 feet from the 4th Avenue right-of-way, and 30 feet from the Viking Steel Road right-of-way. A minimum of seven deciduous trees shall be planted along the 4th Avenue right-of-way and eight deciduous trees along Viking Steel Road to be shown on the site plan. 6. If fuel storage is to be provided, the Conditional Use Permit must be amended. In addition, all fire and safety codes and permit requirements shall be met for any fuel storage containers and dispensers located on the property. Fire lanes of 20 feet shall be installed between rows of stored trailers are required by the City Fire Chief. 7 . There will be no loading or unloading of trailers on this site under the Conditional Use Permit. 8 . Trailer storage shall only be allowed for those trailers that are used on a continual basis and permanent storage of any kind shall be allowed on-site. 9 . The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the office housed in a mobile trailer prior to the release of the Conditional Use Permit. 10. The landscaping shall be in place prior to the issuance. 11. The applicant shall maintain the retention basin. Rockne seconded the motion. * Vote on motion below. Spurrier asked if the property owner or the corporation was the actual applicant for the Conditional Use Permit. Kraft said the responsibility would be on the property owner if the tenant left. Allen was concerned that the retention basin could silt up and malfunction. Spurrier felt that Viking Steel should guarantee the maintenance of the pond. Kahleck asked if the City would need to do work on the road because of the excess travel. Kraft said it would be an engineering problem the City would have to work on. Minutes of the Page - 6 Shakopee Planning Commission May 3, 1990 Rockne said he felt the roadbed was substantial . Coatney said even though this has been one of the wettest springs, the roadbed is still very solid and not rutted. Kahleck suggested a 12 month period instead of a 24 month period of review. Kraft said the use should run for 24 months, but with 12 month reviews. Rockne said although it becomes the burden of the property owner, it would exist because the property owner allowed the use. It was decided to change the wording of item 1 from "Periodic" review to "twelve month" review. * Motion passed unanimously. Coatney asked what "maintain" meant in regard to the pond. Spurrier answered that it would involve keeping it free of silt. V. FINAL PLAT OF HILLWOOD ESTATES: Ekola called attention to item 6 of Resolution no. 3208 regarding easement placement for trail purposes. Construction of the trail easement located the trail approximately 10 feet from an existing house. He noted the letter from the Scott County Highway Department stating that they would allow the trail to be located within the right-of-way of County Road 79 . Dave Hutton, City Engineer, is in acceptance with this opinion. Del Miller of Scott County Parks does not object. The applicant is asking for exclusion of the trail requirement along the north half of Lot 1. Ekola continues that Scott County Highway Dept. had stated that there was sufficient room in the right-of-way for the trail . Spurrier felt that 10 ' would be needed. Dale Dahlke, president of B & D Development said the design of the trail was not made to established standards - it had just been suggested by the Park Dept. The retaining wall shown in the drawing is only about 5 ' high and 100 ' long. The home is so close, this requirement would make it difficult to sell . Minutes of the Page - 7 Shakopee Planning Commission May 3, 1990 The request is not reasonable. To decide at this time where the trail would go would make it very difficult. Chairperson Kahleck closed the public hearing. MOTION: Rockne moved that the Commission exclude condition 6 pertaining to trail easement requirement on north side of Lot 1, Block 1, Hillwood Estates. Allen seconded the motion and it passed 3 - 1 with Spurrier opposed. VI. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - REVIEW OF APRIL 19 , 1990 MEETING A. Approval of Comprehensive Plan Public Meeting Minutes of April 19 , 1990 . Minutes were approved as submitted. B. Discussion Chairperson Kahleck said that a meeting needed to be set up to discuss the Comprehensive Plan. Ekola suggested Thursday, May 24 for a joint meeting with the City Council . Kraft suggested a Comprehensive Plan review meeting for May 31, 1990. VII . OTHER BUSINESS A. Letter of Resignation of Gene Foudray. Thanks and appreciation was expressed at the service that Foudray had given through the years as a member of the Board and Commission. B. Fences - Gloria Vierling Vierling was not present, but it was noted that her concern had been the unfinished side of fences facing adjacent property. Ekola said property owners can build up to the side yard property line. Spurrier said there are some styles of fencing that appear finished on both sides. Chairperson Kahleck suggested that Staff work with Vierling to come up with suggestions for the problem. C. Planning Commission 3-ring Binders Minutes of the Page - 8 Shakopee Planning Commission May 3, 1990 Ekola said an orderly way was needed to get the information to the Commissioners. Hereafter, only the agenda for the evening will be sent out instead of the entire 3-ring binder. Regarding the Hillwood Estates trail, Spurrier noted that the existing home is a non-conforming structure and does not meet the required setback. If it met the requirement, there would be no issue on the trail easement. The easement will be there longer than the home - structures come and go. It should have been platted with the easement. Allen noted that he had a conflict with the June 7th meeting. VIII ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Kahleck adjourned the meeting at 10 P.M. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION May 3, 1990 MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Allen, Christensen, Joos, Kahleck, Rockne, Spurrier MEMBERS PRESENT: Allen, Kahleck, Rockne, Spurrier MEMBERS ABSENT: Joos, Christensen OTHERS PRESENT: Dennis Kraft - City Administrator, Sharon Storholm - Recording Secretary , Lindberg Ekola-City Planner I. ROLL CALL Chairperson Kahleck called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 P.M. II . APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Chairperson Kahleck called for any additions or changes in the agenda. There were none and the agenda was approved as submitted. III . APPROVAL OF APRIL 5, 1990 MEETING MINUTES Chairperson Kahleck called for any additions or changes to the minutes of April 5th meeting. There were none and the minutes were approved as submitted. IV. RECOGNITION BY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS OF INTERESTED CITIZENS. Chairperson Kahleck spoke to those citizens in attendance and reminded them that they were welcome to present their ideas on matters before the Board of Appeals and Adjustments at the appropriate times. V. VARIANCE NO. 592 : REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING ACCESSORY BUILDING OF 2 . 35 ' FROM THE REQUIRED 5 ' SIDE YARD SETBACK. Chairperson Kahleck opened the public hearing on request No. 592 . Ekola explained that the zoning was R-2 and the site consists Minutes of the Page -2 of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals May 3, 1990 of . 20 net acres. He gave a video presentation of the area under consideration. The existing garage is 22 ' by 24 ' . The addition that is proposed would be 22 ' by 24 ' also. It would be located south of the building. The alley is on the south side. Ekola referred to an addendum included on the variance which stated that lot coverage on accessory buildings should be limited to 10% of the lot area. The setback as well as the lot coverage issue would require variances in this case. Ekola stated the Staff recommendations as follows: 1. No physical hardship has been demonstrated. 2 . Issuance of the variance would seriously conflict with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3 . Approval of the variance would grant a special privilege (the expansion of a non-conforming structure) to the applicant not enjoyed by other R-2 property owners who comply with the code requirements. For the above reasons, Ekola recommended denial of the request. Ekola said his recommendation is as follows: Move to approve Variance Request No. 592 which denies approval for Daniel L. Barber to reduce the required setbacks for an addition to an existing accessory building. Rockne asked if the 5 ' setback was required when the home was built. Dan Barber of 536 8th Avenue East came forward and said that the setback Rockne asked about had been in effect when the home was built, but it was ignored in this case as well as in much of the neighborhood. The garage had been built after the home, which was built in 1952 . He stated that regarding the findings noted in the Staff report: 1. Hardship: He could build another, smaller garage. He had gotten the permit to enclose the garage, and then was told he would need a variance to add on to the garage. He did not know at that time that there were size limitations. Only after a copy of this report had been received was he made aware of the size limitations. The addition could be built if it were to be jogged over 2 . 5 ' , but he would like it straight back to utilize the existing driveway. Barber said he felt there was a hardship - he needs space to store his houseboat rather than park it on the lawn. It was not feasible to add a second accessory building on the property. All the neighbor' s garages are built 2 - 2 1 ' 4 feet from the lot lines . 1 ..r' Minutes of the Page -3 of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals May 3, 1990 3 . Special Privileges: Barber did not feel that special privileges would be granted if the variance were to be approved. Others had similar situations - consider Bill Nevin. He said he would not be here asking for the variance if he did not feel if was necessary. The neighbors have no problem with the variance. He would be willing to reduce the size of the addition. Allen asked if Barber would be willing to consider one small garage and eliminate the variance. Barber said the alley was 3 ' higher than the property. He would need to raise the garage and build a retaining wall. He would like a 20 ' by 24 ' . He needs depth in the addition. Spurrier asked if other accessory buildings in the area were closer than 5 ' . Barber answered that both neighbors of this house had such situations - he would not be setting a precedent. Ekola stated that the precedent is for the lot coverage, not so much for the setback. Lot coverage is limited by total square footage. It is the intent of the code to preserve property values and keep the emphasis on the residential structure in massing and impact on neighborhood appearance. Kahleck closed the public hearing. MOTION: Rockne moved that the Board approve the request for the side yard setback with the condition that the structure meets the requirements on lot size and building size as required by code. He cited hardship as being that other structures in the area . have similar conditions originating from when developed lot sizes were less - present code requirements put limitations on usage of such lots. Spurrier seconded the motion. Motion resulted in a tie vote. Rockne, Spurrier in favor. Allen, Kahleck against. Spurrier asked if item 7-F in code regarding building conforming to average setbacks applied to the side yard setbacks. Ekola answered that it did not - just from the yard setbacks of principal structures. MOTION: Allen moved that the Board approve Staff ' s request on Resolution No. 592 to deny the request by Minutes of the Page -4 of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals May 3, 1990 Barber. Kahleck seconded the motion. *Vote later. Allen explained that the lot size dictates buildings that can go on certain lots. There needs to be some kind of limits. The setback was unacceptable. Rockne questioned the reasonableness of 2 1/2 ' of dead space on the lot. Spurrier asked if the variance were to be granted in this case, would it be perpetual for the lot? If the home were removed or destroyed, would it still be in effect for the next structure? Ekola said that there is a clear distinction between a variance and a conditional use permit - this distinction needs to be kept. Kraft said if this variance were to be approved, it would be an expansion of a non-conforming use. Variances usually run with the land. Kahleck felt there were two main points: 1. There was no physical hardship - the property is usable. 2 . The only hardship presented by Barber seems to be that there is no place for his boat. This could be parked or stored elsewhere. If this were to be granted, it would be contrary to the function of granting variances. This Board is not bound by past precedents. Spurrier said he agreed with Barber on the encroachment on the setback - this is not a new problem in the area. However, he did not agree with exceeding the area of an accessory building. It would create an absurd shape if the zoning requirements were to be met specifically. Allen said that architectural things can be done in these instances. * Vote on motion above: Motion resulted in a tie vote: Rockne, Spurrier in favor. Kahleck, Allen opposed. Rockne gave reasons for his vote to be that the petitioner was willing to reduce the size of the structure and had not been aware of the lot area restrictions. MOTION: Kahleck moved that the Board approve Staff request Minutes of the Page -5 of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals May 3, 1990 on Resolution No. 592 by Daniel Barber, which would deny the request. Rockne seconded motion. Spurrier asked if the action of the Board were to be postponed, would it be helpful to Mr. Barber. Barber noted that a tie vote means the request is denied. He would like a hearing in front of the full Board. Kraft noted that Barber can appeal to the City Council if the request is denied. It should be appealed within seven days. * Vote on motion by Kahleck: Rockne, Spurrier in favor, Allen, Kahleck opposed. Motion defeated with a tie vote. Kraft noted that the motion to reduce the side yard setback from 5 ' to 2 1-4 ' had failed. VI . CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS ON THE PROPERTY OF SHAKOPEE TOWN SQUARE BY CARLSON REAL ESTATE. RESOLUTION NO. 590. Ekola noted that on April 5, this request had been tabled and Staff was directed to review the landscaping requirements. Ordinance requires that there is one deciduous tree every 50 ' along public boulevards. Staff proposes the following addition: Direct the appropriate City officials to take the necessary steps to amend Section 11. 6, Subd. 7-B of the Shakopee City Code, excepting commercial/retail complex centers in excess of 100, 000 square feet and for said commercial/retail complex centers. Alternatives are: 1. Direct the appropriate City officials to take the necessary steps to amend Section 11. 6, Subd. 7-B of the Shakopee City Code, excepting commercial/retail complex centers in excess of 100, 000 square feet and adding a new section setting forth landscaping requirements for said commercial/retail complex centers. 2 . Direct staff to prepare a more comprehensive amendment to the landscaping requirements as they relate to the City as a whole. 3 . Table action pending further information from staff. Minutes of the Page -6 of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals May 3, 1990 4 . Deny the variance request. 5. Table action on the Carlson Real Estate variance request. 6. Do nothing. Ekola said that Staff is recommending alternatives 1 and 5. Allen asked why 1 and 5 were recommended. Ekola said that time would be given for Staff to amend the zoning ordinance and then, after the amendment had been made, Carlson could withdraw the request. ` Kahleck closed the public hearing. MOTION: Spurrier moved that the Board table the action on the request by Carlson Real Estate regarding landscaping on Shakopee Town Square property. Rockne seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. MOTION: Spurrier moved that the Board direct the appropriate City officials to take the necessary steps to amend Section 11. 6, Subdivision 7-B of the Shakopee City Code, excepting commercial/retail complex centers in excess of 100, 000 square feet and adding a new section setting forth landscaping requirements for said commercial/retail complex centers. Allen seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. VII. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Kahleck adjourned the meeting at 8 : 45 P.M. I7 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator , FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Direct.r SUBJECT: Lewis Street Project DATE: May 31, 1990 INFORMATIONAL ITEM: 1. At the May 23 , 1990 neighborhood meeting regarding the Lewis Street Project, staff informed the public that Minnegasco had recently notified staff that they would be replacing their main line along the east side of Lewis Street as part of the project. Staff further pointed at the meeting that due the replacement of this main gas line, additional trees would need to be removed. Staff did indicate that discussions would be held with Minnegasco to try and locate the new gas main in such a location that it would have a minimal effect on the trees. Staff has met with Minnegasco to discuss new location of their gas main in order to minimize the effect of the trees. The gas company has decided to install a new gas main on the west side of Lewis Street underneath the sidewalk. This location will have no impact on the existing trees on the project. Another advantage to installing it on the west side of Lewis Street is to connect up with existing gas lines running in the alleys west of Lewis Street and therefore eliminate the need to cross Lewis Street with the gas line if it were to be installed on the east side. Therefore there will be no additional trees removed on the Lewis Street Project as the result of the gas company' s work. 2 . At the neighborhood meeting, several residents commented on the inadequate street lighting on these streets. Staff has discussed this with Shakopee Public Utilities and even with the 300 foot spacing the lights are not very bright due to the particular fixture used in those days. SPUC has indicated that they can replace the fixtures with the new, brighter lamps at a cost of $200. 00 per light. There are 7 lights that need to be relocated on the project and SPUC is proposing to add this new fixture to those lights. The City Administrator and City Engineer agree with the recommendation since the total cost is within the contingency amount and have authorized the work through SPUC. If any Councilmembers disagree with the action or have any questions, please contact staff. The funding for these new lights could very well be included in the assessments for this project and will be reviewed prior to the Special Assessment Hearing. TENTATIVE AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 5, 1990 1] Convene at 5: 00 P.M. 2] 5: 00 P.M. - Pavement Management - Public Works Director 3] 5: 40 P.M. - Overview of sources and uses of city funds - Finance Director 4] 6: 00 P.M. - Continuation of 1990 Goals and Objectives 5] 6: 50 P.M. - ten minute break before 7 : 00 P.M. regular session Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator 4411 am MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director30/°'' SUBJECT: Pavement Management System DATE: May 23 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: Staff is requesting that the City Council consider utilizing a Pavement Management System for the City of Shakopee. BACKGROUND: In recent years, the concept of Pavement Management has taken on a more responsible and technically sophisticated meaning due to the tightening of Municipal budgets. Today street condition is becoming a focal point of public concern. Today' s budgets are putting ever increasing emphasis on the City' s ability to allocate resources to effectively provide a network of safe and comfortable streets. Pavement Management strives to do that; Optimally allocate materials and limited funding within the street network where needed the most. The following discussion will review the concept of Pavement Management and why it should be incorporated in Shakopee. How Does Pavement Work? In order to fully understand the Pavement Management System, one must first understand how pavement works. The pavement structure is made up of three main components: the pavement itself (normally asphalt) , a gravel base and a sub-base. The sub-base is typically the native soil if local conditions allow it but if the native soils are not acceptable they are removed and an adequate sub-base is transported. All pavements are designed based on the characteristics of the sub- soils and the amount of traffic that will be carried on it. Design of a pavement structure consists of determining the adequate thickness of each layer to handle the traffic loading for the least expense over the life of the roadway. Once the roadway has been constructed and open to traffic, various elements begin to work immediately to deteriorate the pavement structure. The most significant of these elements are: traffic volume, vehicular weight, adequacy of design materials, local environment and drainage. Many maintenance techniques are available to extend the performance of a pavement and slow down the deterioration such as a seal coat, a pavement overlay or reconstruction. During the first 75% of a pavement' s life, it performs well and to the untrained eye it looks good. After that, however the pavement deteriorates so rapidly it seems to fall apart. Figure 1 illustrates the way pavements generally deteriorate. Pavement deteriorates at different rates depending on traffic levels, pavement thickness, soil conditions and climatic conditions. Consequently, pavements in one part of the City would deteriorate more rapidly than pavements in a different part of the City. Streets which carry heavy traffic loads will reach a critical point of deterioration at which the load bearing capacity and the ride quality diminish at a much more rapid rate than in the earlier years of the pavement' s life. Residential streets (low traffic volumes) tend to deteriorate at a much more consistent rate than high volumes streets. The critical point of deterioration is considered to be the point at which a major repair strategy, such as a seal coat or overlay, is needed in order to restore the pavement to its original quality in terms of ride quality and load bearing capacity. If this critical point of repair is missed by one or more years, the cost of full pavement restoration rapidly increases. Generally a delay of two or three years will result in a rehabilitation cost four to five times as great as repair costs completed at the appropriate point in time. Precious tax dollars have been expended ineffectively. Again, the attached Figure 1 clearly illustrates this point. Numerous studies indicate that if streets are properly maintained in the "good" to "excellent" condition, the total annual maintenance investment is four to five times less than if the pavement is allowed to cycle through to poor conditions and then reconstruct it. An over simplified explanation of this is that the engineer is maintaining only the top portion of the pavement if it is in good condition. In poor or failed condition, the entire base and sometimes the sub-base must be repaired and rehabilitated. Figure 2 illustrates the comparison cost necessary to rehabilitate a pavement before and after failure based on recent construction projects. It has been proven that a Pavement Management System will pay for itself in two to three years due cost savings in proper street construction strategies. Therein lies the dilemma of Municipal Engineers to determine when a street is ready for maintenance and how much maintenance is needed. Now, multiply this dilemma by the 100 miles of paved streets throughout the City and it is easy to recognize the magnitude of the problem. Without proper pavement condition information and reliable prediction models engineered to account for local conditions, the determination of the point at which the pavement will reach its critical point of deterioration is very v difficult, if not impossible, to determine. Staff can more readily make timely and cost effective decisions when utilizing the data produced by a well engineered Pavement Management System. Current System Currently the Street Division in conjunction with the Engineering Division, has established a routine of crack sealing, pot hole patching, seal coating, overlaying and finally reconstruction depending on the subjective opinion of the City Engineer and the Street Superintendent. These decisions are usually founded on the visual conditions of the roadway surface and the historic knowledge of street crew members on the history of the street. In addition, the number of citizen complaints on a given street segment play an important role in the decision on which streets need to be maintained first. Once a list of streets are established, staff further prioritizes the streets to develop the annual seal coat/overlay program based on the amount of annual funding. This current method of evaluating streets is often called the "windshield inspection" . This method is extremely time consuming and very unreliable. On the surface, the street may appear to be in relatively good condition but if the sub-base is deteriorated the street may actually need reconstruction and any money spent on overlaying or sealcoating would be wasted. Conversely, if there is some structural capacity of the street it may not need reconstructing when an overlay will extend the life of the street another 5 years and tax dollars would have been wasted reconstructing the street. Due to the technologies available today and the need for municipalities to get the most out of the tax dollars, a more systematic and more reliable system of evaluating pavements is needed. The technology is there and the City of Shakopee should utilize it. What is a Pavement Management System ? A Pavement Management System is the process of making maintenance and rehabilitation decisions for the streets in a given network. In the face of limited budgets, rapidly accelerating construction costs, and deteriorating roadways, cost effective and timely decisions must be made if tax dollars are to be expended in the most effective manner. The heart of an effective Pavement Management System includes: 1. An accurate and comprehensive condition survey for collecting and storing data. 2 . Development of reliable prediction models or performance curves. 7/ 3 . Proper timing and economic evaluation of maintenance and rehabilitation procedures. 4 . Analysis of budget impacts on annual programs. 5. Procedures to operate and update the data base. There are three major components to any Pavement Management System: Data Collection, Analysis, and Computer Software. The Data Collection portion of a Pavement Management System consists of: a. A street inventory including street name, length, width, area, number of lanes, functional classification, pavement type, sidewalks, curb & gutter and traffic information. b. An environmental survey related to the shoulder and or edge conditions, drainage conditions and site conditions. c. A surface condition survey. Most Pavement Management Systems consultants utilize a Laser Road Surface Tester to provide an automated state of the art surface conditions survey. Basically, this is a van that employs a laser beam on the front bumper to gather the following information on a street: the actual roughness as compared to the international roughness index as a measure of street safety, the amount of rutting on the street, the number and shape of all cracks in the street including transverse cracking, alligator cracking and block cracking, the texture of pavement including aggregate loss, raveling and flushing or polishing, number of potholes and patches in the street including the utility patches, and any deformities in the street. d. In addition to a surface condition test, most Pavement Management Systems include a deflection test. In the deflection test, a load is put on each section of street to determine the condition of the sub-base and the structural capacity of the street. The deflection test is a non-destructive test and normally one test per block is taken. All of the above components are part of the Data Collection portion of a Pavement Management System and as you can see it is a much more detailed and sophisticated analysis of the street conditions than what staff normally does during the "windshield inspection" . It has been estimated by several consultants, that the above data collection for the entire 100 miles of City streets in Shakopee can be completed within 3 to 5 days. For staff to attempt to collect this data with our current workloads would be a monumental task and would probably never be finished. V / The next portion of a Pavement Management System is the analysis of the data collected. Most systems incorporate several methodologies in analyzing the data. One methodology may be a performance based program whereby the program makes recommendations on what to do and when to do it each year for the next 5 years in order to achieve specified levels of service. The optimum approach method recommends the rehabilitation strategy and the year for the implementation that will provide the greatest benefit for the dollar expended. The least initial cost approach recommends a rehabilitation strategy and the year recommended that will achieve the desired level of service at the lowest initial cost. The second method uses the available dollars as a limiting factor. Rehabilitation strategies and times for implementation are recommended based on achieving the greatest benefit for the dollars available in current budget levels. The third methodology identifies strategies and cost necessary to maintain the pavement system at its current condition. This method offers recommendations on what to do and when to do it for the next 5 years so that at the end of a 5-year period the pavement condition of the entire system is no worse than it is today. All of the various analysis strategies implement cost benefit analysis to determine the best method of repairing a street based on its condition. The analysis portion is normally submitted as a hard copy report for a 5-year period and would need updating every 5 years. The third component of a Pavement Management System is a computer program that is used to implement the various strategies recommended in the analysis and to provide a number of "what if" scenarios to assist staff in the major decisions facing them in the use of limited tax dollars to protect the major City investment in the street system. The computer software will allow staff to utilize the graphics module which will generate pavement management data in the form of bar chars, pie charts, or graphs which would be easy for the public and Council to read. Cost Summary and Funding With the purchase of the computer software, staff could revise the strategies every year based on funding rather than have the consultant update the report every 5 years. Staff has been researching Pavement Management Systems for many years and has determined that there are two systems that would best serve the City of Shakopee. Staff has obtained preliminary proposals from the two consultants for their systems and the cost for the two systems are summarized as follows: Infrastructure Management Services Option 1 Option 2 Data Collection $18 , 100. 00 $18, 100. 00 Hard Copy Report $ 3 , 000. 00 --- Computer Software --- $20, 000. 00 Total Cost $21,100. 00 $38,100 .00 Pavement Management Systems Their costs are summarized as follows: Data Collection $30, 000 . 00 (Approximately $300 . 00 per mile) Hard Copy Report $ 5, 000. 00 Computer Software $18 , 000. 00 to $30, 000. 00 (Series 20 or Series 30 Software) Several other firms presented their services to staff, but they do not meet the City of Shakopee' s needs in terms of providing direction in street construction strategies. These firms mainly collect data and staff would need to analyze the information on its own. If a Pavement Management System will be approved by the City Council, staff is proposing that a formal proposal be solicited from each firm and also that a demonstration of their system be given to staff in order to fully determine which system would best utilize the City of Shakopee. In addition to the initial expense on obtaining a Pavement Management System, every 3 to 5 years the field data would need to upgraded to reflect new streets and new conditions. At this point in time, staff has not determined if this could be done in-house or contracted out. Based on current staff workloads, it is doubtful that staff would be able to take on the in-depth data collection survey that would be provided by a consultant. Even if staff were to take on the surface analysis survey, the distress survey would still need to be contracted out due to the special equipment required. Funding As far as the computer software goes, staff feels that purchasing this item could be delayed for several years and that it would be more economical to utilize the hard copy reports for the time being. v The City of Shakopee currently budgets $95, 000. 00 annually for the Pavement Preservation Program. This money is used for overlays and seal coating. In 1990 the Street Division budget currently has $95, 000. 00 in it for the Pavement Preservation Program. In 1989 , a similar amount was budgeted but approximately $70, 000. 00 was expended out of this fund. Staff contends that the purchase and implementation of a Pavement Management System is an excellent use of this fund. If this fund is utilized, the Pavement Management System would have no net effect on the current or future City budgets. Scott County Program Staff has contacted the County Highway Engineer to determine if the County has any plans on purchasing a Pavement Management System such that the City of Shakopee could utilize or "piggyback" on their system in order to reduce costs for both governmental units. The County Engineer has indicated that they are probably 2 to 3 years away from establishing a comprehensive Pavement Management System. The County is currently in the process of using their own maintenance staff to gather the field data necessary to implement a Pavement Management System and are not utilizing a consultant for this purpose. A Pavement Management System for a County road is not the same as one for Municipal City streets. The data that is collected for the County roads is not as comprehensive because there are no items such as curb & gutter, utility cuts, etc. In addition County roads normally carry more traffic than City streets so the amount of structural deflection testing needed would probably be greater in the County road system. In conjunction with the difference in the field collection between the City and the County, the computer software program which analyzes the data would need to be set up differently for each unit. The strategies used to analyze the data and make recommendations would be very different for a County highway with gravel shoulders and ditches versus a City street with curb & gutter and utilities. In addition the amount of available funding and 5 year plans for implementation for each governmental unit differ drastically. Most computer programs for Pavement Management Systems are modified and customized to suit each individual, City, County or State Agency. Therefore, staff and the County Engineer do not feel that the City and County' s System would be compatible with each other. In addition, staff does not feel there would be any substantial cost savings by doing this and given the fact that with a more systematic method of analyzing the streets, the cost savings by purchasing our own system would be realized in 3 to 5 years without having to "piggyback" on the County' s system. IV ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the request and authorize staff to submit the proposed cost for a Pavement Management System in the 1991 budget as a separate line item, rather than use the Pavement Preservation Fund. 2 . Approve the request and direct staff to utilize the 1990 Pavement Preservation Fund to pay for this item. 3 . If approved by Council, direct staff to solicit formal proposals from a minimum of 3 consultants and observe a demonstration of each system before a decision is made on this request 4 . Request additional information and table the request until staff can provide that information. 5 . Deny the request. RECOMMENDATION: Staff feels strongly that the Pavement Management System is essential for ensuring the best use of City funds and tax dollars for street maintenance. This system will pay for itself within 2 to 3 years in cost savings for street construction by using data and the actual conditions of the streets to determine which type of construction should be done, rather than deciding on the proper pavement strategy using a "windshield inspection" . A Pavement Management System will provide Council and staff with a systematic way of prioritizing street projects annually. Other Cities and Counties in the Metropolitan area are realizing the importance of such systems and the overall benefit in spending tax dollars wisely and are currently using some type of Pavement Management System. The Federal Highway Administration will require all State Department ' s of Transportation to have a system in place by 1991. Clearly the technology is there and the City of Shakopee should utilize it. Staff recommends that the City Council approve this request and direct staff to follow up on the issue by obtaining specific proposals and demonstrations from several consultants. In addition staff is seeking Council direction on whether or not this item should be funded out of the existing Pavement Preservation Fund or if a separate line item should be included in the 1991 budget. Since the current budget preparation process is underway, a timely decision on this is essential . ACTION REQUESTED: Discuss the overall advantages and disadvantages of a Pavement Management System and direct staff to take the appropriate action. V 75% Time FIGURE 1 j 40% Quality o Assume Slurry or Chip Seal Here top Lowest Annual Resurfacin —Cost ---------- __ ___ Each 61.00 of Renovation Cost Acceptability Index Here —- a --------------------- ------ - ---- -----------4- Will Cost $4 to a $ 5 if Delayed to Here 40% 0 Road Deterioration Quality cL vs Drop — Time o T ► Total Failure a' 12% Time m I 7 T 4 8 12 16 Years v N I - D. a) \ \ 0 CC CO (1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 t0 S-.. a U L Ce... CC CO CO rn o� 0 — > ) o N N¢ N 1� N O /' N 3 v, O U a--) S W '� N M�} O•� 0 4- T" U O U N �' S- N m td im U \ a 3 4J IL \\p ® O._ 0 o � F • CO 4 a• • CC W s- o J N I I I I '8 road he does it with a substantially 3 . 75% Time different outlook than an engineer. FIGURE 1 ' The consumer evaluates only rough- 40% ness. Panels of people were used by Quality AASHO to rate several test sections as gAssume Slurry or Chip Seal mere/ mop they were subjected to loading. The ° ratings were termed present ser- Lowest Annual Resurface Cost viceabilit ratin (PSR). PSR was --- — --- Each$1.00 of Y g Renovation Cost converted to present serviceability Acceptability Index __ true _ _ index through curve fitting in order to IT,. Cost $4 to reduce evaluation costs, write a per- 0 - $5 if Delayed formance equation, and encourage 40% to Here the development of equipment which $ Road Deterioration Quality would produce the same data as the ° vs �v panel. — Time Of course, a jursidiction can estab- o lish any type of criteria or level of ser- a 1___.- Total Failure vice which it desires. For example, Z12%Time // skid resistance could be identified as 3the long parameter which, when it 4 8 12 16 decreases to a certain level, would Years trigger the need for work, Few juris- dictions today have the funds to follow this as a strategy. Most cities and What Is Pavement Management? cent1efundssttoggmteettoimmedi�a e- maintenance requirements. Capital programs and rehabilitation pro- DENNIS POLHILL, P.E. agement application of pavement grams have been gutted due to infla- Pavement Management Systems management information. Some net- tion and budget cuts. In view of the (Colorado), work level questions are: economic factors in play today, most Lakewood,Colorado • What is the current level of ser- jurisdictions are concerned only with vice? maintaining the maximum structural PAVEMENT management is the • What will happen to the level of integrity for the minimum amount of process of making decisions service over the next few years if the money. That means either fixing or about pavements. It is a daily activity budget is set now? preventing potholes.The situation at of agencies responsible for pave- • What streets should receive the local level is desperate. ments. In the context in which priority consideration for mainte- One pavement parameter which is "pavement management" is used to- nance or rehabilitation? symptomatic of structure is surface day, it infers utilizing more informa- • What would be the impact of a distress. Several standardized tion in order to make those decisions change in traffic characteristics? methods of performing surface dis- better. • What maintenance activity is re- tress surveys have been developed. In pavement management, deci- quired to get maximum benefit out of The most common are:Asphalt Insti- sions are considered to be made at monies expended? tute, Texas Transportation Institute, two levels: the project level and the Any of the same pavement parame- Army Corps of Engineers, and Prov- network level. A total pavement ters measured in project level analysis ince of Ontario. Surface distress sur- management system includes both may be measured for network level veys are popular among cities and project level analysis, network level analysis:ride quality,skid resistance, counties because they are relatively analysis, and an information ex- rutting, and structural capacity. simple to perform. They can be per- change back and forth between the Those most typically used are ride formed by in-house engineering staff two levels. quality (which is more commonly or by local consultants.The informa- Project level analysis is the process termed road roughness), surface dis- tion can be used to estimate "now" of looking intensely at a particular tress, and structural adequacy. needs and has limited applications pavement for the purpose of optimiz- Pavement Management Systems has when summarized properly for en- ing the rehabilitation strategy being established network level pavement gineering, maintenance, and man- considered for that pavement.Project management systems based on each agement. level analysis is considered an en- of these three parameters individu- By referring to Figure 1, it can be gineering application of pavement ally, but usually uses a measure of seen that rehabilitation costs increase management information. serviceability termed pavement qual- by over 4 to 5 times if rehabilitation is Project level analysis may include ity index(PQI), which uses all three. deferred only 12 percent of a pave- consideration of several pavement Roughness, surface distress, and ment's design life. For typical pave- parameters,such as ride quality,skid structural adequacy are measured, ments, 12 percent amounts to about resistance, rutting, and structural converted to indices, weighted, and two years. In view of this fact, de- capacity. The single parameter con- added to get PQI. ferred rehabilitation is very expen- sidered most is structural capacity. Serviceability sive. Good management dictates that Network level analysis is the proc- rehabilitation occur at a time so as to ess of looking at an entire system (or The serviceability concept was in- derive the greatest benefit(or exten- network) of pavements. This is done itiated during the AASHO Road Test sion of serviceability) possible. The to answer network-wide questions, in 1958. The serviceability concept problem becomes very complex since such as which projects should be con- was an effort to put the perception of each different pavement structure sidered for rehabilitation. Network the consumer into proper considera- has a different performance curve level analysis is considered a man- tion.That is,when a consumer rates a and on similar structures with similar PMS PUBLIC WORKS for July, 1982 C7"1"/ • construction is generally considered Table 1-Annual Cost Summary, Utah DOT (1977) to be such a major undertaking that it is classified outside of rehabilitation in Annual Costs in Millions Dollars a third (capital project) category. System Strategy Surfacing Maintenance Total Maintenance costs increase as ser- viceability declines. This fact has A 4.94 1.35 6.29 been verified by several studies. PRIMARY 7.92 1.59 8.03 CThe most widely known is research C 8 85 1 77 0 5done by the Utah Department of D 8.85 t.76 t0.61 Transportation (UDOT) which was referenced in NCHRP Report #58 A 5.23 2.71 7.94 (see Figure 2 and Table 1). For all SECONDARY B 7.78 3.17 10.95 categories of roadway the least cost C 9.81 3.34 13.15 strategy was"A," where the highest D 10.37 3.50 73.87 service level was sustained. The highest cost was strategy "D" at A 2.53 0.82 3.35 which rehabilitation was deferred URBAN B 3.24 0.96 4.20 until such point that substantial in- C 3.97 1.01 4.98 creases in maintenance activity were D 4.33 1.06 5.39 required in response to public Pres- • sure to sustain serviceability_at a minimum acceptable level. Strategy "D" had been UDOT's mode of op- curves different pavements will be at Maintenance is defined as those eration. a different point in their service lives. routine activities necessary to sustain One of the best documented cases An important point can be con- the integrity of the pavement struc- of successful implementation of a eluded here.Unless a jurisdiction has ture. Maintenance activities include: network level pavement manage- all the money it needs for rehabilita- crack sealing, chip sealing, and ment system is the Regional Munici- tion,it is almost certainly a mistake to pothole patching. They do not add pality of Ottawa-Carleton, Canada, program rehabilitation on a "worst- significantly to the pavement struc- whose Transportation Director is first"basis. Maximum benefit cannot ture and do not extend serviceability. Michael J. E. Sheflin, P.E. In 1980, be derived from the limited public Maintenance activities preserve ser- Ottawa-Carleton's road budget was funds available if an agency binds it- viceability. 14 percent less in actual dollars and 43 self to a "worst-first" programming Rehabilitation is defined as those percent less in inflated dollars than it philosophy. activities which restore the pavement was in 1977. At the same time, aver- Within the field of pavement man- structure in whole or in part to origi- age service level was improved.Shef- agement the terms of maintenance nal condition.Rehabilitation activities lin gives credit for this accomplish- and rehabilitation are distinguished would include:overlaying, recycling, ment to the progressiveness of his from each other. padding,and structural patching.Re- council. DOD • . OA Rehabilitation Index 3.0 O Rehobilitation Index 2.5 5 5 otay onnioy 'overlay - . w .. overlay 4 4 3 6 • 2 o } r m o S q 6 20 25 30 35 • .40 45 5 b IS 20 25 30 35 40 45 YEARS - .. v < YEARS j Y w CO • Rehabilitation Indy 2.0 1.• O Delayed Rehabilitation - • 5 w o.n oa,tay-'. 4 . = rtoy \\ .N.i h4 4 K . a•3 a 3_ 1 t^ 0 5 0 1. . r t III = 40 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 4-5 YEARS YEARS E FIGURE 2 Graphical representation of the four rehabilitation strategies. PMS PUBLIC WORKS for July, 1982 I 4 City Council Strategic Planning TARGET ISSUES Top High Low Lowest Priority Priority Priority Priority Priority 4 points 3 points 2 points 1 point 16 3 19 45 1. City Hall 20 6 26 4 3 2 9 2 . Southerly Bypass 16 9 25 34 4 9 13 3 . Comp Plan/Code Revisions 16 3 19 32 4 3 2 9 27 4 . Mini Bypass 12 6 18 4 6 2 12 26 5. Communications/Public 8 6 14 Relations ( Image ) 8 3 11 25 6 . Industrial Development 8 6 14 4 6 10 23 7 . Downtown Redevelopment 8 3 2 1 13 3 2 5 20 8 . CR 18 & Bridge 12 3 15 3 3 19 9 . Senior Housing 8 6 2 16 4 6 10 18 10.Budget/Cost Containment 8 8 2 2 18 11 .Parks & Recreation 4 12 16 4 3 7 17 12 .Code Enforcement 8 2 10 8 8 15 13 .Solid Waste Management 4 3 7 2 2 14 14 .Pavement Preservation 4 6 2 12 4 4 11 15 .Intergov ' t Cooperation 4 3 7 Top High Low Lowest Priority Priority Priority Priority 16 . 17 . 18 . 19 . 20. d" Staff Doing But Should Not Council Staff 1. Taking sides on issues and 1. To involved Civic Groups bringing back old issues. 2 . NA at this time 2. To oriented to developers 3 . Initiating Projects 3 . Unequal Code Applic. w/o Council direction 4. Reading about proposed 4 . Twenty minute rule (10 min) activities in appointed committee minutes or newspaper. 5. Getting only one bid on 5. To much manual paper work items of significance (P.D. ) when time allows. 6. 0 6. Lack of delegation 7 . Taking public positions 7. Writing Ordinances re: fiscal atmosphere letters to Ed. 8. Accepting procedures not 8. Don't know - tell me! conducive to final result. 9. Finance Director not appropriate person to be in charge of maintenance acquisition of city vehicles/major equipment should be dept. head. V Staff Not Doing Should be Doing Council Staff 1. Furnishing full info on all 1. More involvement in budget alternatives ie. agenda items process rather than just budget worksheets. 2 . Proposing policy to cover & 2 . Better staff meetings handle re-occurring items. rather than simple agenda reviews. 3. Promoting long range planning in daily decision making. 4 . Interdepartmental Cooperation. 5. More face to face contact with community. 6. Need for cross training for advancement. 7. Setting personal goals. 8. Staff development/training. 9. Exploring new technology 10. Code enforcement/follow-up. Council Does Well Council Staff 1. Intergovern. Coop. 1. Analyze Issues 2 . Reacts to Pub. Needs 2. Fiscally Responsible 3 . Aware Policy Impact 3 . Support Issues as a Council on Taxes. 4 . Careful Study & Timely Dec. 4. Pass on citizen complaints 5. Cooperation/Communication 5. Mtg. Procedures 6. Procedure (Council Mtg. ) 6. Reasonable - Even Temp. 7. Everything: Political Stand 7. Sincerity 8. Trust staff - support 8. Allow minority opin. 9. Organizational Process 9. Positive Image 10. Seek info & ask ? 10. Read Agenda 11. Available to staff/public 12. Accept staff input 13. Open lines comm. 14 . Promote Comp Plan 15. Monitor Board & Comm. 16. Int. Coop. 17 . Pos . Council/Staff Relationship Y Council Does Not So Well Council Staff 1. Standby convictions once 1. Sometime silent majority vote taken says little. 2 . Does not stick to point in? 2 . Lack of Council Support - Staff Rec. 3 . Re-enforce Support Staff 3 . No surprise Policy 4 . Re-enforce Other Council 4. Not Pushing City Hall Past Councils 5. Redundant Disc. 5. Too much time debating small issues. 6. Doesn't Assess L.R. Impact 6. Budget/Purchasing policies 7. Too responsive to Pol. 7 . Fall too special interest concern groups groups positions 8. Initiate Dir. for staff 8. Fin. Panic 9 . Develop charge for appt. 9. Everyone (repeat comments) comm. 10. Handle Citizen Complaints 10. Sometimes involved in Admin. 11. Make motions sooner 11. Review policies periodically 12 . Adopt policy for re-occurring 12 . Stick policy not operations detail 13 . Allow staff to Admin. 13. Indecisions (Table) d' Staff Does Well Council Staff 1. Council Agendas/Staff Reports 1. Public Contact 2 . Improved telephone 2. Communication 3 . Research 3. PW snow & sewer 4 . Processing/Procedures 4 . Ideas & Problem Solving 5. Respect Council Direct/Input 5. Fire/Police/Parks 6. Courteous to citizens 6. Networking 7 . Department Management 7 . Cost Conscious 8. Teamwork 8. Planning Org. 9 . Communications 9. Support Boards & Comm. 10. Support 10. Hard working/Exc. staff 11. Special Projects 11. Extra effort 12 . Exc. Eng/Police 12 . Positive Image 13 . Org & Documentation 13 . Int. Coop. 14 . Cost conscious 14 . Responsible 15. Public Perception/Awareness 15. Admin. Support 16. Desire to serve 17. Fiscal Conserv. 18. Research 19. Produce 2/ Staff Not So Well Council Staff 1. Day to day comm. with 1. Passing on info (teamwork) Council Internal Comm. 2 . Past Planning 2 . Formal Comm. with public 3 . Tech. Logis (use of) 3 . Candid response to Council concerns 4 . Past P.W. Perf. 4 . Crisis Comm. 5. Opinionated on certain proj . 5. Use of computer by Police 6. Self-directed 6. Code enforcement 7 . Equip Need - Re-evaluation 7 . Not monitoring Dev. Impact based on current $ 8. Long term $ impact - Projects 8. Promoting LR goals & visions Follow-up 9. Project impact on individual 9. Promoting intergov't coord. 10. $ alternatives 10. Dev. base maps 11. Communication 11. Innovative fin. & cost containment 12 . Public Relations - Lack of 12. Non compliance - policy 13 . Being too assertive when 13 . Dept. efficiency Council is going other way 14 . Following Council policy 14. Creative problem solving 15. Promoting Ind. Dev. 16. Improving Employee Morale TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 5, 1990 Mayor Gary Laurent presiding 1] Roll Call at 7 : 00 P.M. 2] Approval of Agenda 3 ] Recess for H.R.A. Meeting 4] Re-convene 5] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 6] Mayor' s Report 7] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 8] 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. ) *9] Approval of Minutes of May 15, 1990 10] Communications: *a] Bob Schneider re: request from Lions Club to escrow funds for the development of Lions Park b] Richard Clark, Mn Dept. of Health re: stricter penalties for community water supplies failing to submit water samples c] Mn. Pollution Control Agency re: variance from state noise standards - Paul Schmitz property adjacent to Shakopee Bypass. 11] 7 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - Appeal by Daniel L. Barber from the Board of Adjustments and Appeals denial of a 2 . 35 variance from the side yard setback requirements. 12] Boards and Commissions: Community Development Commission a] Presentation by City Hall Siting Committee 13 ] Reports from Staff: a] Police Computer System *b] Application for 3 . 2 Beer License - Family Chow Mein *c] Gambling Licenses for Shakopee VFW *d] Park Dedication Refund for Meadows 4th Addition TENTATIVE AGENDA June 5, 1990 Page -2- 13] Reports from staff continued: e] Approval of the Bills in the Amount of $152 , 454 . 90 f] Changing the Fiscal Disparities Option for TIF Districts 3 and 4 - Res. No. 3241 g] Process of Hiring a City Attorney h] Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy - Res. No. 3242 14] RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES: *a] Ord. No. 290, Establishing a Park & Recreation Advisory Board *b] Res. No. 3238, Excusing a Condition of Approval of Registered Land Survey 134 *c] Res. No. 3240, Setting a Public Hearing on Installing a Street Light on Tyler Between 12th Ave. & Vierling Dr. *d] Res. No. 3239 , Authorizing Ad for Bids for Adams St. 1990-3 *e] Res. No. 3237 , Apportioning Assessments Within Meadows 4th Addition 15] Other Business: a] b] c] 16] Adjourn to Tuesday, June 19, 1990 at 7 : 00 P.M. Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting June 5, 1990 1 . Roll Call at 7 : 00 P.M. 2 . Approval of the May 1, 1990 Meeting Minutes 3 . Other Business b) 4 . Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director V OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA May 1, 1990 Chrmn. Vierling called the meeting to order at 7 : 15 p.m. with Comm. Wampach, Zak, Sweeney and Clay present. Also present: Mayor Laurent; Dennis Kraft, City Administrator; Barry Stock, Ass 't City Administrator; Judith Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney. Zak/Clay moved to approve the minutes of April 3 , 1990. Motion carried unanimously. There was no business. Wampach/Clay moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7 : 18 p.m. Dennis Kraft Executive Director Jane VanMaldeghem Recording Secretary 0.� 3 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive Director Shakopee HRA FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator RE: HRA Non-Agenda Info Items DATE: May 31 , 1990 NON-AGENDA INFO ITEMS: 1 . 5th Avenue Project: The property appraisal for the 5th Avenue Project has been completed. On May 18 , 1990 staff held a meeting with our legal counsel to review the appraisal . Staff has several questions regarding the information contained in the appraisal and the feasibility of proceeding with 5th Avenue as originally proposed. Staff expects to have a report from the City Engineer regarding the feasibility of the project based on the information presented in the appraisal for Council ' s consideration on June 19 , 1990. If at that time, City Council selects to proceed with the project as originally proposed or as amended, it may be appropriate for the Shakopee HRA to consider acquiring the Gordon Gelhaye property and Railroad right-of-way. Acquisition of the property in question may be necessary in order to finance the project in accordance with the 429 improvement process. HRA action on this item may occur at the July 3 , 1990 meeting. 2 . Shakopee Railroad Depot Appraisal - The appraisal for the Railroad Depot and the 2nd Avenue Street Improvement Project between Scott and Atwood St. has not been completed. Therefore, it would be premature at this time to conduct a feasibility analysis of acquiring funding sources for said acquisition. Staff is hopeful that the appraisal will be completed prior to the July meeting. A complete report on this issue will be submitted to the HRA when the appraisal has been completed. 3 . Downtown Rehab Grant Program - The first round deadline for submittal of Grant Applications for the Downtown Rehabilitation Grant Program has been set for june 6, 1990. Several mailings have been sent to property owners and tenants within the B-3 Zoning district regarding the program guidelines. Staff expects between four and six applications in the first round of funding. In accordance with the Rehab grant Program guidelines, if all dedicated grant proceeds are not allocated, a second funding cycle will be announced with an application deadline set for early November. It should be noted that successful grant applicants have twelve months from the date of notification of grant award to complete their project. 4 . Vacant City Owned Parcels - Staff has completed an inventory of parcels owned by the City for possible sale. At the request of the HRA Chairperson this item will be held until the July meeting so that Mrs. Vierling can be present. OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 15, 1990 Mayor Laurent called the meeting to order at 8 : 00 P.M. with Cncl . Zak, Vierling, Wampach, Clay and Sweeney present. Also present were Dennis Kraft, City Administrator; Barry Stock, Asst. City Administrator; Dave Hutton, City Engineer; Julius A. Coller II , City Attorney; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Sweeney/Wampach moved to approve the agenda with item 12m, Request by Shakopee VFW, being deleted at their request. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Laurent read and presented the Proclamation - National Public Works Week to Dave Hutton, Public Works Director. Liaison reports were given by the Councilmembers. The Mayor gave his report of the last few weeks and upcoming weeks. Mayor Laurent asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address anything not on the agenda. There was no response. Vierling/Zak moved to approve the consent business. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Zak moved to approve the minutes of May 1 with the correction to page 6 in regards to the custodian pay rate being $9 . 22 instead of $9 . 44 per hour. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Zak moved to approve the minutes of May 7 , 1990 . (Motion approved under consent business) . Sweeney/Clay moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension to the lease with Valley Ice Arena, Inc. , for the ice facility for an additional five years beginning May 1, 1990. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl . Sweeney had a question on the right-of-way for the bike trail in Hillwood Estates being in lieu of the park fee. He felt that the City should have some compensation for the land that is no longer being dedicated. Judy Cox answered that there is a park dedication requirement for each of the 10 lots contained within the development agreement. Wampach/Clay offered Resolution No. 3233 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 3208 , A Resolution Approving the Preliminary and Final Plat of Hillwood Estates, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Proceedings of the May 15, 1990 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Barry Stock reviewed the Youth Building panic hardware that is requested from the Youth Building Committee to accommodate overnight sleeping in the Youth Building. Cncl . Sweeney had a concern on the restroom facilities being adequate. Mr Stock said there will be no impact on the City' s insurance rates for overnight sleeping. Ed Dressen, representing the Viking Council of Boy Scouts, said the buildings current capacity is for 250 people. The overnight usage will be limited to a maximum of 50 people. Zak/Sweeney moved to request the Community Youth Building Committee tc attempt to raise funds for the panic hardware and report any progress made back to City Council by July 1, 1990 . Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Zak moved to allow overnight sleeping on the main floor of the Youth Building providing that the appropriate fire lanes are kept open and doors kept unlocked during the overnight function and that there are adequate toilet facilities. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant On Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor Licenses to Turtle' s Bar and Grill , Inc. , 132 East 1st Avenue, effective June 15, 1990, upon the surrender or transfer of the existing Club On Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor Licenses currently issued to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post No. 4046. Motion carried unanimously. Jim Streefland, Partner of Jasper Streefland Company, gave the 1989 Annual Financial Report presentation to Councilmembers. George Muenchow, Recreation Director, addressed the issue of the swimming pool remodeling to the concession stand. He said it is needed to update the current facilities that have been on site for 20 years. The additional space will alleviate the crowded situation by allowing better storage of food products and by allowing the installation of sinks with hot and cold running water. Wampach/Clay moved to remove from table the swimming pool concession stand remodeling. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Zak moved to authorize staff to enter into a contract with Ries Builders to do the work at the swimming pool for an amount not to exceed $5, 486. 00. Motion carried unanimously. Dave Hutton reviewed the request from a group of citizens to install a street light on Tyler Street, between 12th and Vierling. He said there has been some vandalism on this block. Staff has looked into the Special Assessment option and street lights are qualified for this type of assessment. The cost would be approximately $53 . 00 per property owner on this block. Mayor Laurent asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. Proceedings of the May 15, 1990 Shakopee City Council Page -3- John Perry, Tyler Street, said there has been some vandalism in the neighborhood and they feel they desperately need a light mid block. He said he does not feel that the residents should have to pay for the lights because other people in the city have street lights they did not pay for. Lynn Monnens, 1224 Tyler Street, said she feels the City should install the street lights because of the vandalism in the block. Lynn Tylicki, 1241 Tyler Street, has had 6 to 7 complaints directed to the police department, believes lights would help. Grace Perry said she talked to the Police Department and they would be willing to bring the record of complaints to the Council for review and does not feel the residents should pay for this light. Cncl . Sweeney responded to the issue of developing a funding method for additional street lights where requested. He said this would cause a snowball effect. He said the street lights currently in the city were paid for by the developer when the lots were developed and passed on to the residents by the cost of the lot. The developer for this particular development did not have street lights in his development plans. The City Engineer said street lights are approved and handled directly with SPUC and not the City. Cncl. Wampach asked about the possibility of upgrading the existing lights in that area because they are more decorative than useful . Sweeney/Vierling moved to set a public hearing on the installation of street lights on Tyler Street between 12th Avenue and Vierling Drive. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Laurent called for a 10 minute break at 9 : 40 p.m. Mayor Laurent reconvened at 9 : 50 p.m. Sweeney/Clay moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution changing the fiscal disparities option for TIF districts No. 3 and 4 , from Option A to Option B. Discussion followed: Greg Voxland, Finance Director reviewed the options available to the City for TIF districts 3 and 4 . The final date for changing the fiscal disparities option for pay 1991 has not been decided yet, it will more than likely be October. Cncl . Vierling suggested that we have the Administrator, Finance person, and the chairperson from each of the governing bodies meet and talk about it and come back to council with a recommendation. Mayor Laurent said he cannot support the motion at this time until he can get some further information. The consensus of the Council was to have a joint meeting with the Administrator, Finance person and a chairperson from each of the governing bodies. Motion carried with Cncl . Clay and Vierling opposed. Proceedings of the May 15 , 1990 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Vierling/Zak moved to direct staff to put together a meeting with the chairpersons, administrators and finance persons from the three different governing bodies, as well as Representative Becky Kelso and State staff, to discuss the fiscal disparities options for TIF Districts No. 3 & 4 . Motion carried unanimously. George Muenchow, Recreation Director, gave the Council an update on the Tahpah Park Baseball Field Batting Eye. He said the Shakopee Mens Amateur Baseball Team is spearheading this project and is currently in the process of securing the funding. They have secured commitments of donated poles and some other materials. Once they have the money in hand they will be back to the City to move ahead through normal channels. Clay/Vierling moved to approve the bills in the amount of $272 , 382 .45. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Clay moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution amending the 1990 General Fund Budget by reducing the appropriations for the vacant Police Sergeant position and the terminated position of Housing Inspector in order to offset the State cut in Local Government Aid for 1990 . Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Clay offered Ordinance No. 289 , An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Renaming Lakeview Drive in the Plat of Stonebrooke First Addition, from Lakeview Drive to Stonebrooke Drive and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Wampach moved that the City Administrator set the date for the Boards and Commissions Annual Picnic. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock reviewed the City Attorney Budget and Information. He said the salary for a Full Time City Attorney would be somewhere between $38 , 000 and $45, 000 . This position would be full time and the individual would be located in the upper floor of the City Hall. If everything goes as projected, cost to the City would be approximately $7, 000 over what is currently budgeted. Vierling/Sweeney moved to approve the City Attorney job description contingent upon the City Attorney' s approval. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 3236, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 3171, Adopting the 1990 Pay Schedule for the Officers and Non-Union Employees for the City of Shakopee, and moved for its adoption. Cncl . Sweeney said he had a concern on the pay being higher than what is really warranted for the City Attorney in a town the size of Shakopee. Vierling/Zak moved to amend Resolution No. 3236 by changing the salary range for the City Attorney to read $35 , 000 to $47 , 000. Motion carried unanimously. Proceedings of the May 15, 1990 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Motion carried unanimously on Resolution No. 3236, as amended. Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3234 , A Resolution Accepting Bids on Lewis Street Reconstruction Project No. 1990-5, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Sweeney moved to approve a contingency in the amount of 10% for use by the project administrator in authorizing change orders or final quantity amounts on this project. Motion carried unanimously. Dave Hutton reviewed the Killarney Hills Project. The project consists of paving Tyrone Drive and Sharon Parkway. They are requesting a 15% contingency because it is a smaller project and any changes will have a bigger impact. Wampach/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3235, A Resolution Accepting Bids on Killarney Hills, Project No. 1989-7, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Sweeney moved to approve the contingency in the amount of 15% for use by the contract administrator in authorizing change orders on this project. Motion carried unanimously. The Council set the date of May 30 at 6: 00 p.m. for a Goals and Objectives worksession. Mayor Laurent adjourned the meeting at 11: 10 p.m. .t�/¢Colx 1i y Clerk Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary - 0 [\REN1- /au MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Request from Lions Club to Escrow Funds for the Development of Lions Park DATE: May 31, 1990 INTRODUCTION: The City has received a request from the Shakopee Lions Club to receive a deposit of $8 , 000 to $12 , 000 for development of the lower portion of Lions Park and to hold it in trust until there are sufficient funds. BACKGROUND: The Lions Club has about $10, 000 which they would like to deposit with the City for development of the lower portion of Lions Park. They do not wish to start the project until completion of the by- pass. They desire to deposit the money with the City at this time to avoid paying federal income tax on the money. Their fiscal year ends June 30th. If they deposit the money with the City, at the City' s request, it is an eligible expenditure of gambling profits and is not taxed. (It is my understanding that the City has received $5 , 000 from the Lions for this project already. ) The Finance Director recommends that the money be deposited in the Escrow Fund rather than the Park Reserve Fund so that we can keep track of when it was received, from whom and what it is for. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize and direct the City Clerk to execute a "Request by a Government to Spend Gambling Funds" to the Shakopee Lions Club in the amount of $12 , 000 for development of the lower portion of Lions Park; and, direct the Finance Director to deposit the money received into the Escrow Fund earmarked for the development of Lions Park. May 30 , 1990 • City of Shakopee 211 W . 1st Ave . Shakopee , MN 55379 The Shakopee Lions Club would like to deposit $8 , 000 . 00 to $12 , 000 . 00 with the City of Shakopee to be held in trust for developement of the lower portion of Lions Park . At the time of completion of the Shakopee by-pass we would want the money available to build a shelter , a walk- way , plant trees and landscape the lower park area . This money would be part of the funds needed to complete this project . At the present time it is impossible to make these improve- ments because of the uncertainty of the by-pass project . We hope your cooperation will allow the Shakopee Lions to set aside funds for this project . Sincerely , • _ �!J ,t Lion Bob Schneider President Shakopee Lions Club cc : George Muenchow Shakopee Community Services a — 10 a� f-23 ( CG503 (Rev.9/27/89) Minnesota Lawful Gambling Request by a Government to Spend Gambling Funds Government Information « rrA ,O; ;i ; <» , 3MOma + : OM Name of Government Phone Number CITY OF SHAKOPEE ( 612 ) 445-3650 Address City State Lip Code 129 East First Avenue Shakopee Minnesota 55379 Check type of government making request I xJ City = County I Township I School District No. of . State of Minnesota, Department of , Division of United States, Department of , Division of I l Other Organization Information il:;.iSiffilMil;igil•;iiigigMi:C4inggSagaiggralinegfratagagglingnin Organization Phone Number License Number Shakopee 1.i ons Club ( 612 ) 445-1287 AddressAttn. Bob Schneider City State Zip code 1127 So . Madison Shakopee Minnesota 55379 -:.:::.,>.iii _ »:>;:><:>::>: - ;.::;:: Lawful purpose Request : :<::::>::::':: The above-named government requests lawful gambling profits for(explain expenditure-attach additional sheet ee if t requested ec ). ( ❑ initiating, performing or fostering worthy public works: 1 $12 ,000 . 00 Q erecting or maintaining public structures: Development of the lower portion of Lions Park by building a shelter , walkway , planting trees and landscaping. ❑ lessening the government's burdens: Ei voluntarily supporting, augmenting, or supplementing services that the government would usually perform: By completing and signing this form, the government's agent confirms that the requested funds will be spent for a lawful purpose.This request expires one year from the date below and may be renewed at the request of the local governing body. Signature of government agent 1 Date a 66/5/90 City Clerk Print name Judith S . Cox Use of Form: -If an organization wishes to expend gambling funds on behalf of a governing body,the governing body must complete this form. •Approval of the Gambling Control Board is not required. Do not send this form to the Gambling Control Division, •Organizations: Attach a copy of this form with your Schedule C Report for the month in which the funds are spent. Send to: Department of Revenue, Special Taxes Division, Mail Station 3350, St. Paul, MN 55146-3350. (Do not use this form for expenditures to improve, maintain, repair, expand, acquire or erect real property owned or leased by the organization;those expenditures require board approval. Use form CG260. available from the Gambling Control Division) ID 8 minnesota department of health division of environmental health 0 925 s.e. delaware st. p.o box 59040 minneapolis 55459-0040 -; (612)627-5100 ,h t ' April 27, 1990 City Council : Re: Stricter Penalties For Community Water Supplies Failing To Submit Water Samples The purpose of this letter is to inform all community water supplies that the Department of Health is adopting a stricter policy concerning the failure to submit required bacteriological water samples. Minnesota Rules, part 4720.1200, requires community water supplies that serve 1,000 persons or more to submit water samples for bacteriological analysis every month. The number of required samples depends on the population served. One of these samples is sent to the Department of Health laboratory for analysis, and the remaining samples must be analyzed by a certified laboratory and the results sent to this Department monthly. Failure to submit and/or report results of required sampling places the water supply in violation of State and Federal rules and subject to enforcement by State and Federal authorities. Community water supplies that fail to submit the necessary samples will be required to provide public notification to inform their consumers that the required sampling was not done. If a community water supply repeatedly fails to submit samples, the supply will be subject to enforcement action, which may include fines, by the Minnesota Department of Health and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The Department of Health provides sampling kits, sampling schedules, and also reminder phone calls if water samples are not received on time. With this assistance, there should be no reason for not submitting samples on schedule. Any questions concerning this issue can be directed to Thomas Henning at 612/627-5176. Sincerely yours, Richard D. Clark, P.E. , Supervisor Water Supply Unit Section of Water Supply and Well Management RDC:bs cc: Water Operator C06047- an equal opportunity employer ''"' IOC MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Paul Schmitz Noise Variance Shakopee Bypass DATE: May 30, 1990 Attached is correspondence received from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regarding the noise variance for Paul Schmitz in relation to the Shakopee Bypass. As you recall, the City of Shakopee has already gone on record as opposing the requested noise variance by Mn/DOT. As stated in the letter, the Division of Air Quality is recommending approval of the variance request, subject to several conditions. This issue will be discussed at the June 26, 1990 MPCA Board Meeting. Staff has already contacted MPCA staff in order to receive a copy of the draft permit and also the draft Findings of Fact and as soon as those are received staff will provide them to Council . Written comments on the noise permit must be submitted to the MPCA by June 19, 1990. In addition, any persons commenting on this issue may request that a contested hearing or public informational meeting be held prior to issuing the permit. Would you please place this letter on the June 5, 1990 Council agenda under "Correspondence" for City Council discussion. If Council wishes to take any action on this letter, staff should be so directed. If not, it should be received and filed. DH/pmp LETTER / 0 °' 41;41Minnesota Pollution Control Agency - 7 520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 P� Telephone (612) 296 6300 MINNESOTA 1990 XXY PUBLIC NOTICE OF INTENT TO ACT UPON AN APPLICATION FOR AN AIR QUALITY INDIRECT SOURCE PERMIT AND FOR A VARIANCE FROM STATE NOISE STANDARDS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Minn. Rules pts. 7001 .0100 to 7001 . 0210 , 7001 . 1250 to 7001 . 1350 , and 7010 . 0010 to 7010 . 0080 , that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has received an application from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) to construct Trunk Highway (T.H. ) 101 from T.H. 169 to inplace T.H. 101/T.H. 13 in Shakopee, Savage, and Jackson Township, Minnesota. T.H. 101 will be a four-lane divided freeway, 8. 5 miles in length. A signalized intersection with inplace T.H. 169 will be built 1 . 5 miles (mi . ) east of inplace T.H. 41 , and a folded diamond interchange at County State Aid Highway (C.S.A.H. ) 15, 1 . 5 mi . east of the T.H. 169 interchange. Diamond interchanges will be built at: C.S.A.H. 17 , 1 . 5 mi . east of the C.S.A.H. 15 interchange; County Road (C.R. ) 83 , 2 . 0 mi . east of the C.S.A.H. 17 interchange; and C.R. 89 , 2 . 5 mi . east of the C.R. 83 interchange. The eastern terminus is 1 . 0 miles east of the C.R. 89 interchange. NOTICE IS ALSO HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Minn. Rules pt. 7000 .0700 , that the MPCA has received an application from Mn/DOT for a variance from State Noise Standards, Minn. Rules pts. 7010 .0010 to 7010 . 0080 , for the above described project. This request will be considered separately at the regular meeting of the MPCA Board on June 26 , 1990 . The applicant is requesting a variance from State Noise Standards for one residence 250 feet south of proposed T.H. 101. The area 1 is located near the intersection of C.S.A.H. 16 and proposed T.H. 101 . , in area S-4 of the indirect source permit application. Specifically the request includes: 1) a maximum 7 decibel variance from the nighttime L10 noise standard for one home during the 6 :00 to 7 : 00 AM hour and 2) a maximum 8 decibel variance from the nighttime L50 noise standard for the same home located .250 feet south of proposed T.H. 101 , near the intersection of C. S.A.H. 16 and proposed T.H. 101 . , in area S-4 of the indirect source permit application. Regional Offices: Duluth • Brainerd • Detroit Lakes• Marshall • Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper The Division of Air Quality has reviewed the application and supporting information and has determined that the permit and variance should be issued, subject to special conditions, including conditions related to roadway improvements, design changes, fugitive emissions, and noise control . A draft permit has been prepared. A draft Findings of Fact for the noise variance has also been prepared. A copy of the draft permit and/or the draft Findings of Fact will be mailed to any interested party on request. Requests for the draft permit should be directed to John Foggia at the address and telephone number stated below. The Fact Sheet, variance application, and relevant information are available for public inspection at the office of the Division of Air Quality, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Road North, Saint Paul , Minnesota 55155. Written comments received no later than June 19, 1990, will be considered before final action is taken on the permit application and variance request. Comments on the draft permit or the variance request should be addressed to John Foggia, Noise Program Leader, Division of Air Quality, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Rd. , St. Paul , MN 55155 , 612/296-7372 . Persons who submit comments will be notified when this matter is scheduled for final consideration. Any person who submits comments on the draft permit must include the following: A. ) a statement of the person's interest in the permit application or the draft permit; B. ) a statement of the action the person wishes the agency to take, including specific references to sections of the draft permit that the person believes should be changed; and C. ) the reasons supporting the person's position, stated with sufficient specificity as to allow the commissioner to investigate the merits of the person's positions. Any person may also request that the agency hold a public informational meeting or a contested case hearing prior to taking final action on the permit. A public informational meeting is a meeting called by the agency to solicit public comment and statements on the permit or variance. A contested case hearing is trial-type proceeding conducted by an Administrative Law Judge in which parties introduce evidence and examine witnesses. Following this hearing the agency makes a final determination on the permit based upon the record from the contested case hearing. To request a public informational meeting or a contested case hearing, a person must include the information listed above and a statement of the reasons the person desires the agency to hold a public informational meeting or contested case hearing and the issues that the person would like the agency to address at the public informational meeting or contested case hearing. Requests for public informational -2- meetings or contested case hearings will be granted or denied in accordance with Minn. Rules pts. 7001 . 0120 and 7001. 0130 (1989) . Any person who comments on the variance request may also request that the agency hold a public informational meeting or a contested case hearing prior to taking final action on the variance. A person requesting that a hearing be held must accompany the request with a document stating the person's reasons for requesting the hearing, the manner in which the person has been aggrieved, and the relief requested. The agency shall grant or deny a request for a contested case hearing on a variance in accordance with Minn Rules pt. 7000.1000, subp. 3 (1989) . Dated this 21st of May, 1990. . 241La Barbara Lindsey Sims Deputy Commissioner -3- 41191 , Minnesota Pollution Control Agency F'\-- --, 520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 eket(4-7 1‘001 Telephone (612) 296-6300MINNESOTA 1990 May 31, 1990 Mr. Dave Hutton Engineering Department City of Shakopee 129 E. 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Hutton: Enclosed is a copy of the draft Indirect Source Permit (ISP) and draft Findings of Fact for the Shakopee By-Pass project, Trunk Highway (T.H. ) 101 between T.H. 13 and T.H. 169, in Scott County. Public notice for this project was posted May 22, and the comment period will end June 19, 1990. A copy of the public notice is enclosed for your information. Thank you for your request. Sin e�ly, •hn R. Foggia Noise Program Leader Air Quality Division JRF:mmr2.48 Enclosure Regional Offices: Duluth • Brainerd • Detroit Lakes • Marshall • Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper jO INDIRECT SOURCE PERMIT ISP 90-15 to construct TRUNK HIGHWAY 101 (SHAKOPEE BYPASS) IN JACKSON TOWNSHIP AND SHAKOPEE AND SAVAGE IN SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA In accordance with Minnesota Statutes Chapters 115 and 116 (1988) , Minn. Rules Parts 7001.0010 to 7001:0210, Rules Relating to Permits, Minn. Rules Parts 7001.1250 to 7001.1350,. Rules • Relating to Indirect Source Permits, State Noise Standards set forth in Minn. Rules Parts '7010.0010 to 7010.0080, and Minn. Rules Part 7005.0550, A Rule Relating to Control of Fugitive Particulate Matter, plans are approved and an Indirect Source Permit is hereby issued to the THE STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (hereafter Mn/DOT or the permittee) Transportation Building John Ireland Boulevard St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 for construction of the following project under the conditions set forth herein. PART I. DESCRIPTION The proposed project is the construction of Trunk Highway 101 from TH 169 to inplace TH 101/TH 13 in Shakopee, Savage, and Jackson Township, Minnesota. TH 101 will be a four-lane divided freeway. It will be about 8.5 miles in length. A signalized intersection with inplace TH 169 will be built 1.5 miles (mi. ) east of inplace TH 41, and a folded diamond mi• east interchange at County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 15, 1.5 of the TH 169 interchange. Diamond interchanges will be built at: CSAH 17, 1.5 mi. east of the CSAH 15 interchange; County (CR) 83, 2.0 mi. east of the CSAH 17 interchange; and CR 89, 2.5 mi. east of the CR 83 interchange. The eastern terminus is 1.0 miles east of the CR 89 interchange. The proposed letting date for the project is June 1990. Completion of Stage I of the project is expected in November, 1992. Completion of the total project is expected in November, 1995. -1- �o PART II. PROHIBITIONS, INFORMATION SOURCES, AND DEFINITIONS A. Certain Roadway Construction Prohibited. This permit does not authorize construction of any additional roadways needed for the project which would otherwise require a separate IS?. B. Exhibits, Plans, and Supplementary Information. 1. Submitted information. Exhibits and plans which further describe the project are in the information which was submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (hereafter Agency) in support of the application and variance request for this permit. That information includes: a. the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project, which was circulated in 1977; b. the Final EIS for the project, which was deemed adequate on September 25, 1978; • c. a letter from John Foggia of the Agency to James Hansen, of the permittee, concerning joint preliminary review of the Shakopee Bypass Noise Mitigation Plan, dated December 13; 1989; d. the draft ISP application for the project, received in January of 1990 by the Agency staff; e. a letter from Mr. Hansen of Mn/DOT to Susanne Spitzer of the Agency, concerning submission of the ISP and noise variance application, received April 5, 1990; f. the ISP application, received from Mr. Hansen, in April of 1990; g. a large scale plan of the project from Mn/DOT, including noise mitigation areas, an engineering layout of the the entire project, and a detailed design of a residence for which a variance was requested, dated April 1990; h. a detailed history of the Shakopee Bypass project from Mr. Hansen, received in April of 1990; i. a letter from Ms. Spitzer to Mr. Hansen, concerning permit fees and a tentative date for review of completeness, dated May 2; and -2- / dam j . a letter from Mr. Foggia to Mr. Hansen, concerning the removal of noise mitigation for the Backstretch Campground, dated May 3, 1990. 2. Supplemental information. Supplemental information received by the Agency includes a letter from the City of Shakopee to Mr. Foggia, officially opposing the noise variance, dated February 9, 1990. All of the above materials were used. in determining the conditions of this permit. Assumptions contained in the documents specified in Part II.B. involving density of land use and/or level of development, and resultant trip generation, trip distribution, and air-quality were used as the basis for authorization of construction as noted above. Except as permitted in Part III.C. , Design Changes, changes in these assumptions are not permitted by this permit. C. Definitions. 1. Agency. The term "Agency" shall mean the Minnesota • Pollution Control Agency. • 2. Authorization of construction. The phrase "the permittee may authorize construction" means the permittee may authorize or allow the issuance of any necessary construction or grading contracts for construction. 3. Commencement of construction. The term "commencement of construction" shall have the same meaning given it in Minn. Rules Parts 7001.1250, subp. 7. 4. Commissioner. The term "Commissioner" shall mean the Commissioner of the MPCA. 5. Contractor. The term "contractor" shall mean any person or persons with whom the permittee has contracted to commence construction on any portion of the project covered by this permit. 6. Design changes. A proposed modification of any project described in Part I of this permit, including but not limited to modifications of mainlines of roadways, interchanges, and frontage roads, shall be considered a "design change" if it meets any of the following criteria: • a. the modification would lead to a material adverse effect on air quality by altering mobile source activity; -3- �d G b. the modification would violate any special conditions or general conditions contained in Part III. and Part IV. of this permit; or c. the modification would (1) contradict the submitted information referenced in Part II.B. , and (2) lead to a material effect on air quality by altering mobile source activity. 7. Director. The term "Director" shall mean the Director of the Division of Air Quality of the Agency. PART III. SPECIAL CONDITIONS A. Authorization of construction. The permittee is authorized to construct the project as specified in Parts I. , and II. above, and subject toaany limitations and/or additional requirements in the Special and General Conditions contained in Parts III. and IV. of this permit. Modifications of the project shall be subject to the provisions in Part III.C. , Design Changes, if they constitute design changes. . B. No Actions to Violate Permit. The permittee shall authorize construction, and/or allow construction to proceed once it has commenced, for any portion of the project covered by this permit, only if the conditions of this permit have been met. In addition, the permittee shall use its best efforts to prevent or restrain any of its employees or any person retained by the permittee on a fee for service basis from knowingly taking actions, promoting policies, or signing contracts which encourage contractors constructing this project to violate the terms of this permit. C. Design Changes. Before implementing any design change, the permittee shall inform the Director of the design change and shall submit for review and approval such information as the Director may require to determine the effect of the design change. The permittee shall not implement any design change without first receiving the approval of the Director. D. Noise. To control noise at the project, the permittee shall either require all contractors for the project as a condition of any construction or grading contract for the project, for which the permittee may authorize construction, to perform these items, or the permittee shall perform these items: 1. ensure that all engines and engine-driven equipment used in construction and/or maintenance of the project are fitted with adequate mufflers that are properly maintained and in constant operation; 2. comply with any additional requirements of the noise ordinance of Shakopee; -4- (6 3. comply with the requirements of Minn. Rules Parts 7010.0010 to 7010.0080, except as provided in the variance issued by the Agency Board dated June 26, 1990, which provides as follows: IT IS ORDERED, that Mn/DOT is hereby granted a variance from the nighttime noise standards contained in Minn. Rules part 7010.0040, subp. 2, for the operation of a 8.5 mile four-lane freeway segment, new T.H 101, or the Shakopee By-pass, between T.H. 169 on the western edge of the City of Shakopee to inplace T.H. 101 near the Shakopee/Savage border. The variance applies only to a single residence locate 250 feet south of proposed T.H. 101, near the intersection of CSAH 16 and proposed T.H. 101, in the City of Shakopee. A variance of 7 dBA is granted with respect to the nighttime L10 standard. A variance of 8 dBA is granted with respect to the nighttime L50 standard. • 4. The permittee shall submit any proposal which would increase the noise sources within the right-of-way or • impacts on properties abutting or within the right-of-way, including construction of light rail transit or construction of new noise receptors not presently existing within the right-of-way, to the Director for review and approval. The permittee shall not approve any such proposal for additional noise sources or receptors without having received the aforementioned approval from the Director in advance. E. Fugitive Emissions. To control fugitive emissions on the project, the permittee shall either require all contractors for the project as a condition of any construction and/or grading contract for the project, for which the permittee may authorize construction, to perform these items, or the permittee shall perform these items: 1. spray construction areas and haul roads with water, oil, calcium chloride or other effective preparations to the extent necessary to minimize fugitive emissions, especially during periods of steady winds exceeding 30 miles per hour or high levels of construction activity; 2. wet ramps at the construction site and wash the streets surrounding the construction site on a daily basis, as necessary, to limit dust reentrainment, except when the streets are wet from precipitation or when such actions will result in freezing of the agent liquids during freezing temperatures; -5- I ° 3. ensure that the surface hardening agents, wetting or chemical agents, foam agents and oils are applied so they do not cause ground water or surface water contamination in violation of any applicable water pollution control statute or rule; 4. take any practical measures to prevent avoidable amounts of particulates from becoming airborne from trucks hauling materials to and from the site; 5. cease particulate-producing activities during periods of steady high winds exceeding 30 miles per hour; and 6. take any additional measures required by Minnesota Rules Part 7005.0550, "Preventing Particulate Matter from Becoming Airborne." F. Notification of Changes. The permittee shall notify the Director at least ten (10) days in advance of the date of signing any public contract in which items to be considered would, if enacted in the form proposed, result in the inability of the permittee to comply with the provisions of this permit. G. Annual Reporting of Construction. Beginning June 26, 1991, the permittee shall submit to the Director on an annual basis a report of the portions of the project completed and under construction, including required noise mitigation under Part III. until project construction is completed. The permittee shall send a letter to the Director, informing the Agency when all project is completed, within sixty day of such completion. PART IV. GENERAL CONDITIONS A. The Agency's issuance of a permit does not release the permittee from any liability, penalty, or duty imposed by Minnesota or federal statutes or rules or local ordinances, except the obligation to obtain the permit. B. The Agency's issuance of the permit does not prevent the future adoption by the Agency of pollution control rules, standards, or orders more stringent than those now in existence and does not prevent the enforcement of these rules, standards, or orders against the permittee. C. The permit does not convey a property right or an exclusive privilege. D. The Agency's issuance of a permit does not obligate the Agency to enforce local laws, rules, or plans beyond that authorized by Minnesota statutes. -6- 16 E. The permittee shall perform the actions or conduct the activity authorized by the permit in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the Agency and in compliance with the conditions of the permit. F. The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain the facilities and systems of treatment and control and the appurtenances related to them which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit. Proper operation and maintenance includes effective performance, adequate funding, adequate operator staffing and training, and adequate laboratory and process controls, including appropriate quality assurance procedures. The permittee shall install and maintain appropriate back-up or auxiliary facilities if they are necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit and, for all permits other than hazardous waste facility permits, if these back-up or auxiliary facilities are technically and economically feasible. G. The permittee may not knowingly make a false or misleading statement, representation, or certification in a record, • report, plan or other document required to be submitted to • the Agency or to the Commissioner by the permit. The permittee shall immediately upon discovery report to the Commissioner an error or omission in these records, reports, plans, or other documents. H. The permittee shall, when requested by the Commissioner, submit within a reasonable time the information and reports that are relevant to the control of pollution regarding the construction, modification, or operation of the facility covered by the permit or regarding the conduct or activity covered by the permit. I. When authorized by Minnesota Statutes, sections 115.04; 115B.17, subdivision 4; and 116.091, and upon presentation of proper credentials, the Agency, or an authorized employee or agent of the Agency, shall be allowed by the permittee to enter at reasonable times upon the property of the permittee to examine and copy books, papers, records, or memoranda pertaining to the construction, modification, or operation of the facility covered by the permit or pertaining to the activity covered by the permit; and to conduct surveys and investigations, including sampling or monitoring, pertaining to the construction, modification, or operation of the facility covered by the permit or pertaining to the activity by the permit. J. If the permittee discovers, through any means, including notification by the Agency, that noncompliance with a condition of the permit has occurred, the permittee shall -7- • / dam take all reasonable steps to minimize the adverse impacts on human health, public drinking water supplies, or the resulting from noncompliance. K. If the permittee discovers that noncompliance with a condition of the permit has occurred which could endanger human health, public drinking water supplies, or the environment, the permittee shall, within 24 hours of the discovery of the noncompliance, orally notify the Commissioner. Within five days of the discovery of the noncompliance, the permittee shall submit to the Commissioner a written description of the noncompliance; the cause of the noncompliance; the exac-z dates of the period of the noncompliance; if the noncompliance has not been • corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance. L. The permittee shall report noncompliance with the permit not reported under General Condition K. as a part of the next report which the permittee is required to submit under this permit. If no reports are required within 30 days of the • discovery of the noncompliance, the permittee shall submit the information listed in General Condition K. within 30 days of the discovery of the noncompliance. M. The ocrmittee shall give advance notice to the Commissioner as soon as possible of planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility or activity that may result in noncompliance with a Minnesota or federal pollution control statute or rule or a condition of the permit. N. The permit is not transferable to any person without the express written approval of the Agency after compliance with the requirements of Minn. Rule 7001.0190 subp. 2. A person to whom the permit has been transferred shall comply with the conditions of the permit. • 0. The permit authorizes the permittee to perform the activities described in the permit under the conditions of the permit. In issuing the permit, the state and Agency assume no responsibility for damage to persons, property, or the environment caused by the activities of the permittee in conduct of its actions, including those activities authorized, directed, or undertaken under the permit. To the extent the state or Agency may be liable for the activities of its employees, that liability is explicitly limited to that provided in the Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, section 3.736. -8- /4 C- P. Approval to construct or modify shall become invalid if construction or modification of the indirect source is not commenced within 24 months after receipt of the approval. The Agency may extend this time period upon a satisfactory showing that an extension is justified. The permittee may apply for an extension at the time of initial application or at any other time thereafter. Dated: J. Michael Valentine Director Division of Air Quality sps301:5 -9- FACT SHEET FOR ISP 90-15 TH 101 (SHAKOPEE BYPASS) (hereafter project) A. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT Location of the Project Cities: Shakopee and Savage Township: Jackson Township Length: 8.5 miles Termini: TH 169, inplace TH 101/TH 13 Roadway Type and Geometric Design Roadway type: Freeway Intersections: With inplace TH 169, 1.5 mi. e. of inplace TH 41 Interchanges: 1) Folded diamond at CSAH 15, 1.5 mi. e. of the TH 169 intersection 2) Diamond interchange at CSAH 17, 1.5 mi.e. of the CSAH 15 interchange 3) Diamond interchange at CR 83 2.0 mi. e. of the CSAH 17 interchange 4) Diamond interchange at CR 89 2.5 mi. e. of CR 83 interchange Applicant Applicant: The Minnesota Department of Transportation Completion Date Month/Year: November, 1995 B. TYPES AND LEVELS OF POLLUTANTS Types Carbon monoxide (CO) : CO will be produced by vehicles making trips to/from the site. Noise: Additional noise will be generated by vehicles making trips to/from the site. -1- /6C" Predicted Levels CO levels (in ppm) : Background: 1.1 (eight-hour). This background level is based on CO monitoring conducted in Fall, 1987, in the project area. It is also based on vehicle miles traveled increases, and future reductions due to the Federal Motor Vehicle Emission Control Program. Highest level after completion (in ppm): 2.1 (eight-hour) , in the Year 2005. Noise levels: The applicant will comply with state noise standards, except at a residence 250 feet s. of proposed TH 101, near the intersection of CSAH 16. The applicant has requested a variance of 7 dBA with respect to the nighttime 1,10' standard, and 8 dBA with respect to the nighttime L10 standard. " C. BASIS FOR FINAL PERMIT CONDITIONS Contents of Special Conditions This permit contains standard Special Conditions. Basis for Special Conditions These conditions are required to ensure continued compliance with the state Ambient Air Quality Standards. Applicable Statutor Re ulatory Provisions This permit is issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapters 115 and 116 (1988) , Minn. Rules Parts 7001.0010 to 7001.0210, Rules Relating to Permits, Minn. Rules Parts 7001.1250 to 7001.1350, Rules Relating to Indirect Source Permits, State Noise Standards set forth in Minn. Rules Parts 7010.0010 to 7010.0080, and Minn. Rules Part 7005.0550, A Rule Relating to Control of Fugitive Particulate Matter. D. REQUESTED VARIANCES As noted above, a noise variance has been requested for this project. -2- /6 � E. APPLICABILITY of CHAPTER 116D This permit is issued pursuant to requirements contained in Chapter 116D.03 (a) , (c) , and (d) , particularly with respect to: Coordination with other government agencies concerning air quality and traffic forecasts. F. PRELIMINARY DETERMINATIONS The Director has determined that a draft permit should be issued, subject to Special and General Conditions contained therein, inasmuch as the permit meets the requirements of Minnesota Rules stated in C. G. PROCEDURES FOR REACHING A FINAL DECISION ON THE PERMIT • Public Comment Period A public comment has been established, starting on May 21, 1990, and continuing through June 19, 1990. A copy of the public notice for the project was posted on May 21 in post offices in Shakopee and Savage. The Shakopee post office also serves Jackson Township. Procedures for Requesting a Public Informational Meeting or Contested Case Hearing Procedures for requesting a public informational meeting or contested case hearing are specified in Minnesota Rules Parts 7001.0120 and 7001.0130. Nature of the two procedures: A public informational meeting is designed to clarify and resolve issues concerning the preliminary determination to issue a permit. A contested case hearing is designed to determine whether a material issue of fact or of the application of facts to law related to the preliminary determination or the terms of the permit, in areas under the jurisdiction, and having a reasonable basis underlying issues of fact or law, should change the preliminary determination of issuance, or the terms of the permit. -3- /6 C- Name, Address, and Telephone Number of Contact Person for More Information Between May 22 and May 29, 1990: Innocent E. Eyoh Air Quality Specialist Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Division of Air Quality 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 612/296-7739 Between May 30 and June 19, 1990: Susanne P. Spitzer, AICP Principal Transportation Planner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Division of Air Quality 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 612/296-7723 5ps301:6 -4- 1O STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION COUNTY OF RAMSEY CONTROL AGENCY In the Matter of the Application of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) for a FINDINGS OF FACT, Variance from Minnesota Rules CONCLUSIONS AND Parts 7010 . 0010 to 7010 . 0080 ORDER for the Operation of 8. 5 miles of new, four-lane divided freeway, New T.H. 101 (Shakopee By-Pass) . The above-entitled matter came on for decision before the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (hereinafter "MPCA" ) on the 26th day of June , 1987 . After affording all interested persons an opportunity to submit written statements or argument, and after considering all the evidence in record and upon the entire file and record, the MPCA hereby adopts the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions . FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural History 1 . In April , 1990 the Division of Air Quality (DAQ) staff received a request from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) for approval of its application for a variance from State Noise Standards in conjunction with construction of a new 8 . 5 mile four-lane freeway segment, new T.H. 101 or the Shakopee By-Pass, between T.H. 169 on the western edge of the City of Shakopee to inplace T.H. 101 near the Shakopee/Savage border. / D � 2 . The MPCA Commissioner reviewed the variance application, and found it complete in accordance with Minn. Rules Part 7000 .0700 , subp. 3 . 3 . A combined public notice for the Indirect Source Permit ( ISP) and noise variance applications was posted in post offices in principally affected Jackson Township, and the cities of Shakopee and Savage. Copies of the notice were mailed and circulated to interested parties in accordance with Minn. Rules Part 7000 . 0700 , subps. 4 , 5 , 6 , and 7 . The notice was also mailed to the owner of the residence affected by the variance. 4 . In February 1990 , MPCA staff received a letter from the Mayor of the City of Shakopee indicating that the City Council opposed issuance of a variance, and asking that noise levels be reduced to State Standards . A copy of the public notice for ISP and noise variance was mailed to the City of Shakopee. Description of Project 5 . The project consists of constructing New Trunk Highway 101 (T.H. 101) , a four-lane divided freeway between T.H. 169 and inplace T.H. 101 , through Jackson Township and the cities of Shakopee and Savage, in Scott County. The various intersections include: a signalized intersection with T.H. 169 , a folded diamond interchange at C.S.A.H. 15 , a diamond interchange at C.S.A.H. 17 , a diamond interchange at County Road 83 , and a diamond interchange at County Road 89 . Total length of the project is 8 . 5 miles . Funded by the Minnesota Department of -2- / OC Transportation, the project is a necessary connecting link for southern tier suburbs of the metropolitan area, as a commuter route and heavily travelled truck route. This project is designed to improve safety and reduce traffic on inplace T.H. 101 through downtown Shakopee, and on neighborhood streets in the immediate area. Construction of T.H. 101 will remove approximately 23 , 600 vehicles per day from inplace T.H. 101 in downtown Shakopee (from 35 ,700 to 12 , 100 vehicles per day) . 6 . Land use on both sides of the proposed highway is divided into five main categories. North of the proposed highway the area is mostly undeveloped/agricultural land with some commercial , residential , park property, and manufacturing/industrial property, including Canterbury Downs Racetrack. Land to the south of the proposed highway is mostly undeveloped/agricultural , with some residential. According to proposed county, city and township land use plans, the project area will feature a mix of residential , commercial, and industrial development. By making the proposed project a controlled access facility, highway strip development with direct access will be curtailed. Clustered development at the interchanges may occur , but local units of government issuing building permits can control the type of future development along the highway. 7 . Through an extensive noise mitigation plan along proposed T.H. 101 including 13 , 800 feet of combination mound/wall , -3- / C projected noise levels for the "worst case year" , 2010 , will be in compliance with State Noise rules at all receptors except one residence 250 feet south of proposed T.H. 101 , near the intersection of C.S.A.H. 16 and proposed T.H. 101 . At this residence , nighttime L10 and L50 noise levels are expected to exceed state standards by 7 dBA and 8 dBA, respectively. Noise Standard 8 . Minn. Rules Parts 7010 . 0010 to 7010 .0080 contain noise standards which apply to the proposed T.H. 101 project. Under Minn. Rules Part 7010 .0040 , L10 and L50 nighttime noise levels are limited to 55 dBA and 50 dBA, respectively, in Noise Area Classification 1 (NAC 1) which includes residential areas. 9 . Probable noise impacts from the projected were examined at all sensitive land uses along the proposed route . The north and south sides along proposed T.H. 101 were divided into 12 areas , in which 100 noise receptors were considered. Six sections of mound/noise wall totalling 13 , 800 feet in length are proposed as noise mitigation along the route. One residential site is expected to exceed nighttime L10 and L50 noise standards by 7 dBA and 8 dBA, respectively, in the projected worst case year , 2010 . 10 . With the proposed noise mitigation plan required by the ISP, no other violations of the State daytime or nighttime standards are expected. -4- 11. The Minnesota Department of Transportation evaluated the feasibility of full compliance with the above rules. 12. Various combinations of berming and noise wall were evaluated, as well as changing the profile of the proposed highway alignment. No scenario achieved full compliance with State Noise Rules, and changing the highway profile eliminated all access to an inplace housing addition. 13 . Additional noise mitigation cannot be constructed for the . affected residence due to technical infeasibility. Conclusions 1. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has jurisdiction over this matter. 2. Notice of this variance was properly given and published, and all other relevant, substantive, and procedural requirements of law or rule have been met. 3 . Mn/DOT cannot comply with Minn. Rules Parts 7010.0010 to 7010 .0080 in operating proposed T.H. 101 with respect to one residence located 250 feet south of proposed T.H. 101, near the intersection of C.S.A.H. 16 and proposed T.H. 101, in the City of Shakopee. 4 . Mn/DOT's compliance with Minn. Rules Parts 7010 .0010 to 7010 . 0080 for this residence is not feasible. 5 . The project will improve safety and significantly reduce traffic on inplace T.H. 101 through downtown Shakopee, and on neighborhood streets in the immediate area. • -5- 6 . Granting the variance would avoid undue hardship and promote the effective and reasonable application and enforcement of laws and rules for the prevention, abatement, and control of noise pollution, all according to the terms of Minn. Stat. 116 . 07 , subd. 5 ( 1984 ) , provided all other noise pollution standards continue to be met. ORDER Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions , IT IS ORDERED that Mn/DOT is hereby granted a variance from the nighttime noise standards contained in Minn. Rules Part 7010 .0040 , subp. 2 , for the operation of a new 8 . 5 mile four- lane freeway segment, new T.H. 101 , or the Shakopee By-Pass , between T.H. 169 on the western edge of the City of Shakopee to inplace T.H. 101 near the Shakopee/Savage border. The variance applies only to a single residence located 250 feet south of proposed T.H. 101 , near the intersection of C.S.A.H. 16 and proposed T.H. 101 , in the City of Shakopee. A variance of 7 dBA is granted with respect to the nighttime L10 standard. A variance of 8 dBA is granted with respect to the nighttime L50 standard. MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Dated: Daniel D. Foley, M.D. Chairman Dated: Gerald L. Willet Commissioner -6- /1 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner RE: Appeal on Action by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals On Variance Resolution Number 592 . DATE: May 30, 1990 INTRODUCTION: At their meeting on May 3, 1990, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals denied a variance for the reduction of a side yard setback from 5 feet to 2 . 65 feet for an addition to an existing two stall garage. BACKGROUND: The variance, requested by Mr. Daniel Barber, proposed to expand the non-conforming garage which was built 2 . 65 feet from the side property line. The existing garage was built prior to the current ordinance requirement of a 5 foot side yard setback for accessory structures. The proposed addition (24 ' x 24 ' ) would double in size the existing garage (22 ' x 24 ' ) . An addendum was presented by staff at the meeting to address lot coverage restrictions which also limit the proposed addition. The proposal, as shown on the attached site plan, .exceeds the lot coverage requirements by 270 square feet. The staff report recommended that the variance request be denied for the following reasons: 1. No physical hardship has been demonstrated. 2 . Issuance of the variance would seriously conflict with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3 . Approval of the variance would grant a special privilege (the expansion of a non-conforming structure) to the applicant not enjoyed by other R-2 property owners who comply with the code requirements. At the meeting, Mr. Barber explained the use of garage was for the storage of his boat. He did not feel that it was feasible to add a separate accessory building on the lot to store the boat. The applicant was counseled by staff as to other options for the storage of his boat. These options included renting a commercial storage space or parking the boat on a concrete slab with a canvas cover. The variance request was denied on a tie vote by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on a motion to approve the variance. 1/ ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the appeal request which would reverse the Board of Adjustments and Appeals ' decision to deny the variance. 2 . Concur with the Board of Adjustments and Appeals ' decision to deny the variance. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommended to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals denial of the variance request. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals in their action on May 3 , 1990 concurred with the staff recommendation. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Variance Resolution No. CC-592 , a resolution denying a 2 . 35 foot variance request from the 5 foot side yard setback requirements by Daniel Barber, and move its adoption. Written Addendum For the Variance Request by Daniel L. Barber Resolution No. 592 NOTE: In addition to the request for reducing the side yard setback to 2 . 35 feet from 5 feet for expanding the garage, the variance request must include the waiver of the lot coverage requirement for an accessory building on a property zoned R-2 . ADDED APPLICABLE PROVISION: Section 11. 03 Subd. 6.C. ADDED CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The lot coverage requirements in the Zoning Ordinance limit accessory buildings on R-2 through R-4 zoned lots to 10 percent of lot area or they cannot exceed the footprint of the habitable portion of the principal dwelling unit. 2 . The lot area of the Barber property is 8349 square feet (57 . 9 ' x 144 . 2 ' ) and 10 percent of the lot area is 834 . 9 square feet. According to building permit records the footprint of the house is 1033 square feet. By ordinance the maximum area for accessory buildings on this lot would be 834 .9 square feet. 3 . The existing garage is 528 square feet (22 ' x 24 ' ) in area. The proposed addition (24 ' x 24 ' ) is 576 square feet; combined the proposed and existing garage would total 1104 square feet. The request exceeds the allowed lot coverage by 270 square feet. FINDINGS; RECOMMENDATION AND ACTION: The same findings, recommendations and action as identified in the staff report apply to review of the lot coverage requirements. iktof se - - - ------ - T- —_.—__..._. . . _._. ._--___... _ --- ------ ---- V5+131. 5-8141 - 5 ��‘4L. -- --- SGl `sib =112±! 1111 - _ _ .-----�" i jt-- . - . . .• : .• , •/ M 1 . • ----.—N---- _1 I - '--_._— _—.._—�1.----,---- ' i . cC. i I . • -- • • _/ —4k--' . .3 )C.f ie I Ctrbkr • - ; s 3 is 3-4` AUE. J E . ha 7 e e_ 1`n%t (,; 0 0 CI r0 Nem • - 1/ _ • 1.± • tEE.T..z._72-,iveti__r_°_ _.. . . ._..____ ____._ _ . _ . SCa / : �,1 �-ZDV. _- --- .. . .. . -- - . . _.. . . _ ._ .- - .. ' 'I CITY OF SHAKOPEE VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. CC-592 WHEREAS, Daniel L. Barber, the applicant and Daniel L. and Gail M. Barber, the owner have duly filed an application for a Variance dated April 16, 1990, under the provisions of the Shakopee Zoning Ordinance, Section 11. 03 , Subdivision. 6 .F, for: a 2 . 35 ' variance from the required 5 ' side yard setback; and WHEREAS, the present zoning for the parcel on which the Variance is being requested is designated as: R-2 Urban Residential ; and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as: 6 115 22 . 19 P/O SW 1/4 COM 231. 6 ' E of NE Cor of Block 104 , E 57 . 9 ' , S 144 . 2 ' , W57 . 9 ' , N144 . 2 ' To POB and; WHEREAS, upon hearing the advice and recommendation of the City Planner, considering the suggestions and objections raised by the affected property owners within a radius of 350 feet thereof in a public hearing held on May 3 , 1990, the Board of Adjustments and Appeals denied the Variance application; and WHEREAS, the applicant has appealed the decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals to the City Council ; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been advised in all things NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the aforementioned Variance application be and is hereby denied for the following reasons: 1. No physical hardship has been demonstrated. 2 . Issuance of the variance would seriously conflict with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3 . Approval of the variance would grant a special privilege (the expanding a non-conforming structure) to the applicant not enjoyed by other property owners who comply with the code requirements. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this 5th day of June, 1990. Mayor of the City of Shakopee // ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1990. City Attorney MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator RE: City Hall Siting Committee Presentation DATE: May 30, 1990 INTRODUCTION: In January of 1990 the Shakopee Community Development Commission (CDC) created a subcommittee to identify siting alternatives for a City Hall facility. The Committee has met on five separate occasions and on May 16, 1990 made a recommendation to the CDC. The CDC subsequently approved the Subcommittee' s recommendation and is prepared to make a formal presentation to City Council on their findings. BACKGROUND: City Hall Siting History On November 12 , 1984 the City Hall Siting Committee appointed by the Shakopee City Council met for the first time. Appointed to the Committee were Councilmembers John Leroux, Gloria Vierling and Dolores Lebens and Planning Commission Members Dave Rockne and Dave Czaja. At that meeting the Committee outlined the task ahead of them and scheduled tours of other cities with new City Halls to see how they had sited their city hall buildings. During the following months the Committee compiled a list of 24 sites, many suggested by citizens, which were evaluated based upon 28 weighted criteria. These criteria included things such as convenient street access, site size and cost, private development potential, availability of utilities, centralized location, and proximity to other government buildings. The Committee also conducted an informal survey of Shakopee citizens using the July 1985 utility bills. Fourteen percent of the surveys were returned with 46. 50% (286) preferring a site near the Police Station on Gorman, 29 . 8% (183) favoring a site near downtown, 8 . 2% (51) stating no new City Hall was needed and the balance 15. 5% (95) favoring various other sites. The Committee recommended to City Council a first and second choice both located on Gorman Street near the Police Station. City Council then selected an architect, Boarman Architects, Inc. , who worked with a Citizens Advisory Committee to analyze two sites plus a site downtown based upon the request from the City' s Downtown Committee. The architect and advisory Committee also evaluated space needs and scrutinized project costs. Ultimately the Architect and the Citizens Advisory Committee analyzed five sites. The sites were: (1) the Library site downtown, (2) the Gorman Street site, (3) Block 47 (Philipps Funeral Home block) , (4) Block 50 (Cavanaugh McNearney Funeral Home block) , and (5) a variation of 1 a./ Block 50 called Block 50 expanded. The architect evaluated the five sites based upon 43 weighted criteria. The architect' s ranking in order of priority was as follows: 1. Block 50 expanded, 2 . the Library block, 3 . Block 50, 4 . the Gorman Street site and 5. Block 47 . The architect also conducted a telephone survey of residential property owners and businesses in Shakopee. He contacted 380 of 2 , 500 homes and 10. 1% (256) responded. Three percent favored a City Hall site in or near the central business district, 41% favored a site near the Courthouse, 35% favored a site near the Police Station on Gorman Street and 11% had no preference. The architect also surveyed 263 businesses (163 non-downtown and 100 downtown) . Forty percent favored a downtown site, 25% a site near the Scott County Courthouse, 19% a site on Gorman Street near the Police Station and 15% had no preference. The City Council was then faced with a tough decision. Given the conflicting survey and site analysis results should it pick a site, or seek more advice from the public? Council decided to pursue an advisory ballot on two sites. The advisory referendum was held on November 3 , 1987 . The results of the referendum were as follows 25% (579) favored Block 50 and 55% (1281) favored the Gorman St. site near the existing Police Station while 20% (463) had no preference. Following the referendum, City Council ultimately selected to not pursue locating a new City Hall facility. The issue was revisited in the 1989 Strategic planning process. The 1989 Strategic Planning Analysis conducted by the City Council identified and prioritized ten major issues facing our community. The top three issues were as follows: 1. Complete the Southerly by-pass. 2 . Complete the Upper Valley Drainageway 3 . Construct a new City Hall. By the end of 1989 some progress had been made in regard to the first two issues. The City Hall issue however did not progress in any way or fashion. Recognizing this as a problem, the issue was again identified in the City of Shakopee' s 1990 One Year Work Plan as an objective to pursue. The Work Plan designated the task of identifying sites for the City Council ' s consideration to the CDC. City Council formally approved the One Year Work Plan by adopting Res. #3184 on January 2 , 1990. With these issues in mind, at their first meeting in January, the CDC created a Subcommittee to identify sites for a new City Hall . 2 1990 CDC City Hall Subcommittee Siting Process One of the first tasks of the 1990 City Hall Siting Subcommittee was to determine the space needs for a City Hall facility. The Committee concluded that the space needs analysis that was included in the 1987 site selection analysis was still valid. From that analysis, it revealed that City Hall and Community Recreation presently occupy 9 , 671 total gross square feet. The projected needs at that time, for a ten to fifteen year period, were 17 , 000 sq. ft. with an additional 4 , 000 sq. ft. of basement storage. The Subcommittee relied heavily on the information gathered by the 1985 Siting Committee and 1987 Architect and Citizens Advisory Committee Reports. Throughout the 1990 site evaluation process, the CDC Subcommittee attempted to analyze alternatives without placing great emphasis on cost. Generally, the Committee felt that a facility could be constructed or developed to meet the City of Shakopee' s short and long term space needs at a cost of approximately three million dollars. This figure was based on current building costs for similar type facilities ($100. 00 sq. ft. ) In determining sites for further consideration, the Subcommittee selected to analyze alternatives in three distinct categories: A. Sites within the institutional/downtown area. B. Sites outside of the institutional/downtown area. C. Existing buildings. In terms of existing buildings, the Subcommittee evaluated and investigated the possibility of utilizing the following buildings. 1. Marschall Rd. Medical Building. 2 . Canterbury Inn. 3 . Scott County Courthouse. 4 . St. Francis Hospital. 5. Central Elementary. 6 . Marquette Bank. 7 . Northwestern Bell Building. In terms of downtown sites, the Committee reviewed the following alternatives: (See map shown as attachment #1) 1. Block 50 (Carriage House Block) 2 . Block 47 (Phillips Funeral Homes Block) 3 . Block 28 (Block south of the Post Office) 4 . Block 29 (Library Block) 5. Block 31 (Abelns Bar Block) 6. Block 4 (City Hall Block) 3 Finally, in terms of a site outside of the downtown area, it was the consensus of the Committee that a parcel in excess of 5 acres should be pursued. In fact, the Committee felt that if the City Hall were to be located outside of the downtown area, that a site of at least 30 acres or larger should be pursued to provide for the long term future building needs of the City. Based on past interest, several smaller sites were also considered. The following sites were reviewed by the Committee: 1. Gorman St. site 2 . Existing Public Works/SPUC site 3 . Vacant property east of County Rd. 17 between 4th Avenue and County Rd. 16. 4 . Several parcels along the proposed southerly by-pass and Vierling Dr. adjacent to County Rd. 17 . The Committee utilized the same criteria developed by the 1985 Committee to analyze the sites. Upon evaluating each of the aforementioned alternatives, the Subcommittee attempted to narrow down their alternatives to their preferred choice in each of the three categories. A. Site Within the Institutional Area It was the consensus of the Siting Committee that Block 50 in its entirety best met the needs for constructing a new City Hall within the institutional area. Block 50 was considered over other sites in the downtown area primarily due to it' s proximity to the City Library. The proximity to the U. S. West Building was also seen as an advantage. In the committee' s review of existing buildings it was noted that U. S. West does have over 11, 000 sq. ft which they are willing to lease. The Subcommittee felt that this building could become available for acquisition in the next 5 to 10 years. Potential public uses for the building and adjacent City owned property may include a Senior Activity Center or small scale Community Center. In locating a site near the downtown area, the Committee wrestled with the fact that there were several blocks that could serve as suitable sites for a City Hall with few differences in cost or impact. Block 50 also ranked higher than other parcels in the downtown areas because several properties within Block 50 are presently for sale or vacant. Block 50 as a site is also consistent with direction set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The estimated acquisition, demolition and/or relocation estimate for Block 50 is approximately one million dollars. Block 50 has excellent and convenient street access served by 4th Ave. and Sommerville St. which will be a major north/south collector upon completion of the Mini By-pass. The potential negatives to Block 50 include taking property from the tax rolls. At the present time Block 50 in it' s entirety 4 / ;- Q/ generates $15, 257 . 00 in gross taxes. Net taxes paid equates to $12 , 565 . 00. Pursuing this alternative would necessitate condemnation with eight homes being moved or demolished. A potential contamination problem on Block 50 may also exist as a result of the location of a former gas station. However, if contamination is a problem, state funds are available for clean-up cost. B. Site Outside of the Downtown Area In considering a site outside of the downtown area, the Siting Committee felt that the parcel should be centrally located with good highway access. The Committee also felt that if a site were chosen outside of the downtown area that it should be large enough to provide for the long term building needs (25 - 50 years) of the City. Present and future building needs may include the following: 1. City Hall 2 . Law Enforcement Building 3 . Community Center 4 . Athletic Fields 5 . Library The Subcommittee felt that in order for the City to provide for the future long term facility needs that a minimum site of 30 acres be pursued. Identifying a site of this size that would be accessible to City water and sewer services proved to be a difficult task. The Subcommittee was successful in identifying an area that did have several alternatives for the assemblage of 30 acres. The property in question was located east of County Rd. 17 between 4th Ave. and County Rd. 16. Within this area is over 145 acres from which to choose. The property in question is located in the growing part of the community and is well served by access roads and City services. Cost estimates for the property in this area varies from $26, 000 to $35, 000 per acre. Assuming a worst case scenario, ($35, 000 ac. ) the City could acquire 28 acres in this area for one million dollars. The Subcommittee recognized that at the present time, the City is not being presented with the need to construct a new Law Enforcement Building or Library. The City also does not have the funds to pursue a large Community Center. However, the Committee felt that it was in the best interest of the community to pursue and acquire enough land area to provide for these uses in the future. The Subcommittee felt that the property in question would not diminish in value and in fact would likely appreciate. Therefore, under a worst case scenario, if the City chose to sell the property, at a later date, they would probably break even or make money. 5 ld.- a„,/ At the present time, vacant property in this area is being taxed at agricultural rates. The average gross taxes paid on one acre in this area varies from $8 . 00 - $22 . 00 per year. Therefore, the concern about taking the properties off the tax rolls is valid but not significant, since a 30 acre parcel is now only generating between $240. 00 - $660. 00 per year in gross taxes. It should be pointed out however that the future tax base generated from this property would be eliminated assuming it stays under the ownership of the City of Shakopee. This could be significant depending on the dwelling unit density of the structure that could be constructed on this area. The property is presently zoned R-4 (Multi-family Residential) . The Subcommittee felt quite concerned about acquiring property for the City' s future development needs. The Subcommittee felt that acquiring property at this time would eliminate future discussions and controversy surrounding the location of future City buildings. Finally, the Subcommittee would propose that the excess property be utilized for athletic fields as an interim use. In fact, the Comprehensive land use plan does call for the development of a 10 acre park within the area in question. The proximity of this property in conjunction with the Upper Valley Drainageway and trail would also be very conducive for a municipal complex. From the negative standpoint the site is not consistent with the direction set forth in the Comprehensive Plan in terms of locating a City Hall . The area in question has also been known to encompass bedrock near the surface which may increase development costs. C. Existing Buildings Within the City of Shakopee, there were relatively few existing buildings that realistically met the City of Shakopee' s space needs for a City Hall. The Subcommittee felt that if an existing building is pursued it should not entail significant rehabilitation costs and should present a cost savings to the City. The Subcommittee was successful in identifying the Marquette Bank Building as a potential site. Marquette Bank officials have informed the City of Shakopee that at the present time their existing building exceeds their space needs. The bank is also interested in constructing a new facility along Marschall Rd. or the new Southerly By-pass. Additionally, the Marquette Bank is considering expanding their existing drive-thru facility located on 3rd Ave. and Holmes St. The Marquette Bank Building was originally constructed in 1958 . In 1973 the bank expanded to the north and east, adding 7 , 500 sq. ft. In 1982 a two story addition increased the size of the building by approximately 4 , 000 sq. ft. At the present time, the building contains approximately 24 , 000 sq. ft. 6 J The Marquette Bank Building is well suited for professional office space. There are four separate heating/cooling units used to regulate temperature and humidity. In 1988 the main boiler was rebuilt. In 1989 a computerized energy management system was installed that controls all heating/cooling systems simultaneously to obtain maximum efficiency. The bank recently had their mechanical systems inspected. A copy of the consultant ' s evaluation is shown as attachment #2 . The average monthly utility cost for the building is approximately $2 , 100 per month. The building does have complete kitchen facilities, as well as a large meeting room in the basement that could be utilized as the City Council Chambers. The bank is also equipped with several fire proof vaults that could be utilized for records storage. In order for the City Council Chambers to become handicapped accessible, an elevator would have to be installed. The estimated cost for an elevator ranges between $25, 000 and $50, 000. The main floor of the facility is accessible. At least one restroom within the facility would also have to be modified to meet state and federal handicap requirements. The estimated cost for this improvement is $10, 000. The utilization of the Marquette Bank Building would be consistent with the direction being set forth in the Comprehensive Plan in terms of locating a new City Hall. The site is also advantageous in terms of its proximity to the institutional area. A downtown location may also serve to enhance the Downtown Retail area. The Subcommittee felt that the Marquette Bank Building could be utilized as a 10 - 15 year solution for a City Hall facility. Perhaps the facility would serve the City over a longer period depending on the community' s growth and building expansion possibilities. In any event, the Subcommittee felt that the City should also consider in conjunction with the acquisition of the Marquette Bank, 30 acres of land as previously discussed in this memo. This again would provide the City of Shakopee with flexibility in either relocating and constructing a new City Hall at a later date or expanding at the Marquette Bank site. If the downtown area develops, it may also be more prudent for the City of Shakopee to place the property occupied by the Marquette Bank Building back onto the tax rolls at a later date. The Subcommittee was quite concerned that if the City of Shakopee did not pursue additional land acquisition in conjunction with the Marquette Bank Building that in ten to twenty years, the City of Shakopee could be back in the exact same position that they are today. The Subcommittee noted that in 1990 the Marquette Bank Building would pay gross taxes in the amount of $50, 035. 00. The Committee felt that the loss in tax base, as a result of acquiring this facility could be totally or partially offset by the following: 1. Placing the existing City Hall back on the tax rolls. 2 . Tax base increase as a result of the expansion of the 7 Marquette Bank Drive-thru; and 3 . Tax base increase as a result of the construction of a new Marquette facility on the east side of town. The Marquette Bank Building presently has more space than is needed by the City. However, the facility is designed in such a fashion that two separate 2000 sq. ft. office areas could be leased until such time that the space is needed for City purposes. Based on current lease arrangements, staff projects that each 2000 sq. ft. space could be leased at a rate of approximately $1, 500. 00 per month gross. The Marquette site is also served by adequate parking. The bank lot adjacent to the facility has space for approximately 24 vehicles with 9 additional on-street parking spaces. The site is also in very close proximity to the Second Avenue Parking Lot which has space for approximately 80 vehicles. If needed, the Bank is also willing to lease additional parking space to the City (approximately 10 stalls) adjacent to the Holmes Street Bank Drive- thru. This space could be reserved for City vehicles or City employees. Finally, Marquette Bank is willing to negotiate the sale of any furnishings and fixtures presently located in the building. This would likely result in additional cost savings to the City as opposed to constructing a new building. The cost estimate for the Marquette Bank Building is $1. 5 million dollars. Building improvements and the acquisition of furnishings is estimated to be approximately $100, 000. Thirty acres of land near County Road 16 and Marschall Road could be obtained for approximately $1 million dollars. Total estimated cost for this alternative is approximately $2 . 6 million dollars. SUMMARY: The Siting Committee and the CDC have not ranked the alternatives in order of preference. Each group believes that either of the alternatives could be pursued at relatively the same cost (Between 2 . 5 to 3 million dollars) . The CDC would like to recommend that the City Council consider scheduling a public hearing to gather further input on the three sites. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Move to set a public hearing to gather further public input on the three sites recommended by the CDC. 8 2 . Accept the report by the CDC and discuss the alternatives at a Council work session. 3 . Select one of the three sites recommended by the CDC as the site for a City Hall. 4 . Select other alternatives to be presented in conjunction with the CDC' s recommended sites to be presented at a public hearing. 5 . Request the CDC to perform additional analysis of several other sites and report back to the City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative # 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Moved to set a public hearing to gather further input on the three sites recommended by CDC. 9 ‘..,___„.. „; MppRK EY�PI• _ — Attachment # I 1. / J"`ecR_ STH. RN � -EBL ppgTNMf51ERN -____ moo ___ , _ --f_ _ _ __ -H_ `r3y94, % S 111 4Ih. AYE i � i I I • 1 . ac• %owat, WTLOT A 1,Koos iff ,4 • ;t dc. \/ ' Kcc, I, �e B ••• •• 4. 46 �'•� ••r • , CANTERBURY DOWNS O -111 j I • ,, © 2(0 KuL, ' ' 144410' ,4*-w 4: ._____ kit to ©ISI• `s I. ,__ -7--= - -- - - miiik D A /It/ `" 4 _ • ' SI - - t nM 5 t: KV ?Alt / I IN ■ ! oto -' , i- ' . ''' 'A Elm - ,‘ ffillItiVAPO I . 4' NE Wim. MIR -1 JUNIOR N16N il*4 I PARK�� d.1 E ir�© I 1 At ounoT A `�I©��ginraf: .R.®•0�� Odd4©pt , irtk! ' am th filmeowviltr: isinks-fttow..41 ST. YARK� _-_„_r 6, aczal©c ,® MA I 2 MIR* ..� .�IA ' LEY I OpAihib., J f[ ,DR_ ._ 1 2 1;1_ z ;y z 1 l I B7aeR� ■E: mit `9 C pi I 111 ,�, !O �� --r- F iii _- 9 p 7- "1 I'3� I s ' VIERLINO DRIVE II — i �� I — — X\\\ i /> /-'-.c-- a-----71' r RIVER • w...---- :-..---' fes- [71 „NNW ow Et i 1 tool RIVERSIDE PARK , 50 .t•• ♦ ' '1.,...-.. r�J�k ...„,t, ,:s: las -we go irg F*RBREI. mR. :111 lin 14111 1rl11 1® RAVER all'e "- •'. .:,-..-it t1 . MattAle 1 . �r �� U1 lava_;_ °""'E €“g "111 a rl�i 1�1 It11 , 1att 1 isti ;,t�1 -�- r7tie_0.00- , o - % w!� x,111we&' ; art oft X11 qtr ►--- 111, 1 r p © 1iim® PI 11111 to pot elli ,7 its0a c1 WS MI- CT_CD . `iiaq��+A t' U II tt11 44a1t tial � n�UI S a„�„� ^liP-.. - .7(ZCi 4__=, .= --k - ...''. . �t-� �,�. arr1lt � t44 _ ':: r�� ttr�'��aarrl 11 - i Ell .1 ' i!b 1 �1 '11rig 9- t!1 9111111 r!ITT1111111 .� 5 --'II t'�} . 1"tti 11 -gat c.... Cro. WO x tas, sc. 10 ot'1 '4_It_ �! ®� =� :Sa,c, ,,- ' �tr11 : tt�tt tt klifr • P .��° z zi Maar ► rtr11 tlrt° °`°` _ 2 11a1t / W61;:, IMO ad\ *uris1T SE Rv I C ES 111 411tttia1�� \ B3 ,,EllaitIA 1 nal �A.AL x�l i1r11 t�rere3 Z 2.5 . . 11.--iii It-- AVE 0 4 IMa 1,x 6 t p1�,a ISI_, '1111111.11r: gEszc': w- - Q/TLU � 11111 0 11a 11 1 r . Irle__6 INE” IPA O •a A % � lb �41r 111 4 WU IL :46,‹r111t � 1C� �1a tt1► �'�� ” -. 0111 -�,, � a100����p att�2�1�r < R\ silltract .1E �� 1 _, 1 � � MEOW IIIc . vis 1 _ matt 01l�11 t�11 11■" wo STLU„. U `� ^^ � 11x10 � ise t11�111 WO . . - 111111 1 IR! � 1111t. ion - _?s s,= A etll ori xx 1111 ■� ; eEIF.l— m hM' . , B l . • . • En On 1131 i_ 1 1 • � 1i1 ! . ��.'Ona I'l I 11'=I 1 + n y �,t iv I I; n ` --- 4 ---±1 11 ��` r��^ '- =IL_. FIRST DRES CNURCN xN001 M � --3 2 1 ASSYB'T I �l 1 , ' CNURCN I 1. Eli • 1= :I (-y _. SENIOR WON U -7.-71 --.y .. I + y == ♦ `y -_+ _5 _ _ Ell U - - I _- •_ - _ :E � S. la —_. •„»'- ..,,�, - • • • MEM • t , =1--71 , I` I. I�yA ? �,_i,l_ y 4 MIN RIC N /kipp( MINNESOTA ST. ©• ' lif-I . PRA: ' / ? I oUTLOT A �': Al C, �(12irt, da - a” 1 s , 1 -------- - __ UUTLOT B I ----------_-- - fB' 7!3 2 N `�'. - - - - OUTLOT C V/ERLigg -*------sOR:VE � 1w OUTLOT B ^ 1 g •OUTLOT 0 , - • 1 I � PORATE LIMITS 2 N93N TOM'NSHID----- h L r1 1- ` �) 1 i• - i1 �i,4 1 11� -1 c.-3�j �,� ' t. { L+�• \'\ - - — — - —---7-7-.1 17---."--i -77"-n,F1\ ,. 3 - vro ur-A-A, /-2, t:-I It?,i."" :!-,-.t.-1 ._.1---1L--- _ _.Am, •_,_,......--,-- __.,..,--\t .0 •. IC G3 C:-:t C''';' ‘f---:-\\---;:1- ID a. 1 • k-:33*4...,vr.1___:-..'. - 4,:- . ‘.- 17-'17.'iT.-:7791\ 1 ffl �9 A AP j.,' liA \;:p4.\Vlf- L.....--2 _,...,-:,-... ..a \ G� �� x , i = PS gil ; 0 er.s E\w. 6". .ri----' NA'4V *.-- ..,3 etv..„3 . -��� I• ,.. . C7sy p �rfs %�...1 ~ �= y •`\ %. O'er - C, �.' - i •. .0. f lir r_D_ .M _,f___._- 4•., as l�. .(i � i��� � - s'itv • rig. a •M ., ,,, I'�yK it r ir -_ }- ,\`\ 4. my ..,::,.,.., .,., r., ...,. .._ 7'. MI 11114116m ! _ '1 SII= _ ri ..�..r i -" _ [ i .. 34 H ' ' -'.� -,i y ��r �: 41111:win1409 �_c- i-F No F.- .-}. 4,L., 1 [4-, ice-' Sylultr--- , ...,„_ ,...A.,. i•- _1 .. e . pi n 3 Fii i .- , A _ . ., plim raig 0047, ig.0 blk wit - ', . -...... ' .-., . . , poll -�ariiiP is, - • • . .7. ..,•___.: ..__., , stanimi . . . . : ., :7.. ,, . k I.::._,.,..,,,t9,.,_,_ .: ..:1:. .._ _ , Dm", 1 • . L....__ . . .,...: 1. • • , . 1 i.i I. _„...„1_,„ 1 . _ iv gli, •.4 ria . • .....10_!,: iiiriw7pirs . _ ,.. _,..,,,:x50„,.,.„,t . ....di Naiad.-= V .4.-V Ei - " , '. IH41 : --- . . . •A J • r :i I LL-LD Li,,,,,- P7 . • .spa:fa. • . 0 ..\ .� � %` �I M•v1• :1 •1I. I i . •`-• •• t •: 1 • ii �_� `J�� O° 11 r r : 't cit. ooirr ��PA .\ i . ' -- n=it i 1 . up. IF.11 4.6-1V. .1\ .'' . 41t I ' i ♦lip i -7 i I t i j.• ` I 1 , i I I o I i 8 t r I.y , 6' g m y y I R , y y i : Attachment # 2o_wEns Owens Services Corporation 930 East 80th Street Minneapolis,MN 55420-1499 612/854-3868 FAX:612/854-3769 April 30, 1990 Mr. Michael Phillips Marquette Bank 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 You also asked me for an evaluation of your mechanical systems and some projected replacement costs for systems that may require replacement. Overall , your mechanical systems are in very good operating condition. We have made some system improvements such as the new burner for the steam boiler, and Energy Management System. There were several outdated zone valve and damper motor replacements on tha McQuay rc.c ;.op unit. c ;1„ part of your system that is questionable is the Trane compressor system in the basement. Besides being very old, it also uses the refrigerant R-12 which is being phased out because of the CFC issues. It would be my recommendation to replace the Trane compressor system with a new unit which uses the refrigerant R-22. We would be able to reuse the rooftop condenser, cooling coil in the air handler, and some of the piping. By replacing this unit, you would be updating the system and, of course, making it a more reliable system in the process. The estimated cost to replace the Trane unit and make the necessary system alterations to adapt to the R-22 refrigerant is $8,000- $8,500. The major components of the rest of the system will continue to provide dependable service provided the systems receive proper routine and preventive maintenance. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me. Very truly yours, OWENS SERVIC COt '0' 'TION c � I/ , �• � Michael W. Joha nes Technical Service Representative MWJ:jcm /3a_5 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Steve Hurley, MIS Coordinator RE: Police Computer System DATE: June 1, 1990 INTRODUCTION: The Police Department needs to upgrade its computer system. It has $10, 000 in its capital equipment budget for 1990. BACKGROUND: The intention is to standardize as much as possible on hardware and software, not only within the Police Department itself but also with respect to City Hall ' s system. Within the department it ' s particularly important in the outer office where much of the data input occurs. Two very slow IBM PC' s, and one Epson Equity (front office and Operations) need to be replaced with computers that will provide a quicker response time. These replaced machines will go to Asst. Chief DuBois, Sgt. Poole, and the investigators. Printing on the network also needs to be upgraded by the addition of printer(s) that are quiet, fast and can handle letterhead paper easily. RECOMMENDATION: I have discussed department needs with the Chief and with the options available I am recommending they purchase three 286, IBM compatible microcomputers, and two laserjet printers. Two laserjet printers are recommended because the department does both plain paper and letterhead printing. Two printers would allow a print job to be sent to the appropriate printer without having to interrupt a print job in progress to change paper or calling someone else to change paper trays. Special pricing exists for a limited time that will allow us to purchase two HP LaserJet II printers less expensively than one HP LaserJet IID with two paper trays. The second printer will also serve as a backup unit on the network. The following are quotes received on three (3) IBM Compatible PC' s and two (2) Hewlett Packard LaserJet II printers. Computerland Computer Blue Star PCExpress Marketing Marketing .............. Three (3) 286 PC' s, $6, 834 $4 , 818 40707 $4 , 710 2 floppies 40 Mb H. D. Two (2) Laserjet $2 , 340 $2 , 698 $3 , 589 $2 , 778 printers Panasonic One (1) HP Memory INIP 260 ::.:::::::::::::; 305 279 upgrade 2 MB TOTAL $9 , 434 $7, 821 $8 , 356 $7 , 767 Highlighted entries: Blue Star Marketing - Three (3) PC' s $4 , 767 Computerland - Two (2) HP LaserJet II printers & one (1) memory upgrade. $2 , 600 Total $7 , 367 Selecting the printers and memory upgrade from one vendor and the PC' s from another gives us the flexibility to create the lowest cost system while sacrificing very little in warranty and service choices. Money budgeted but not spent will be used for miscellaneous equipment as necessary to connect the computers and printers to the existing network. Installation will be handled by the MIS Coordinator. REQUESTED ACTION: Move to approve expenditure of funds from Police capital equipment for purchase of three (3) 286 PC' s from Blue Star Marketing in the amount of $4 , 767, and two (2) Hewlett Packard LaserJet II printers and one (1) 2 megabyte memory upgrade from Computerland in the amount of $2 , 600, for a total cost of $7, 367 . CONSENT 1 3 Jo MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator (--- FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Cler RE: Application for 3 .2 Beer Lic nse - Family Chow Mein DATE: May 29, 1990 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: I have received an application for an On Sale Non Intoxicating Malt Liquor license from Kee P. Suen & Su S. Tang at 237 East First Avenue. Mr. Suen and Mr. Tang have acquired Family Chow Mein located at 237 East First Avenue. Their application is in order. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the application and grant an On Sale Non Intoxicating Malt Liquor license to Kee P. Suen & Su S. Tang, 237 First Avenue East upon the surrender of the existing license issued to Tieu Ky and Hong Khong. 3ONSENT 13c. MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Admin . trator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk -- RE: Gambling Licenses for Shakope VFW DATE: May 17 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: The Shakopee VFW is applying for a gambling license for their new facility on 3rd Avenue. They are asking that the City Council waive the 60 day reviewal period. BACKGROUND: The Shakopee VFW may not transfer the existing gambling license to their new location, but rather must make a new application with the Gambling Control Commission. They hope to have their facility complete and be able to occupy it the first part of August. In order to obtain a gambling license an applicant must make application in a timely manner in order to allow the local governing body sixty (60) days to ask the Gambling Control Commission to deny the license, if the choose to do so. In order to insure the granting of the gambling license by the Gambling Control Commission prior to August, the Shakopee VFW is asking Council to waive their sixty (60) day reviewal period. The Shakopee VFW does meet the conditions of the Shakopee City Code relative to gambling. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to waive the sixty (60) day reviewal period for Shakopee VFW Post #4046 for a gambling license at 1201 East 3rd Avenue. JSC/tiv CONSENT MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Park Dedication Refund for Meadows 4th Addition DATE: May 24 , 1990 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: On March 20, 1990, City Council adopted Resolution No. 3211 giving final approval to the plat of Meadows 4th Addition. One of the conditions contained in this resolution stated that the City Council shall authorize the appropriate City officials to reimburse the Developer $1, 363 . 00 for the dedication of park land in excess of the required amount. The final plat of the Meadows 4th Addition has now been recorded with Scott County Recorded along with the Developer' s Agreement and other appropriate documents. It is appropriate at this time for Council to authorize staff to issue the appropriate check reimbursing the Developer for the dedication of park land in excess of the required amount. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize and direct the appropriate City officials to reimburse the Developer of the Meadows 4th Addition $1, 363 . 00 for the dedication of park land in excess of the required amount. JSC/tiv * MM * rrrrrrrrr * r * r * /JE > MM * r r A * NN * 000000000 * N * N * NNNNNNN * NN * N N (") CO * 00 A 000000000 * 0 * O A 0000000 A 00 * 0 * 0 2 CD * 00 A 000000000 * 0 * 0 A 0000000 00 A O A 0 m 0 * WW A WWW030WWWW * O) * C) * AAAAAAA * WW * N A 0 C) * WW A 000000000 A V * r A. NNNNNNN A 00 A 0 A N 7; C) M z 1 0 < 0 0 m 00 000000000 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 O > N N 4)10 N N 0 0 N N N N N 0101 N N N N N N N (Cl N 1 N �� ��,.."-, �� �� m m w w (4(4(4(4 w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w > 00 000000000 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 0 7 �� ��� �� ��� � �� 0 Coco W CD Co(o Co CO CD(D Co co co (0(040 CD CO Co co row CO co 00 000000000 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 O m m D 3 0 C Z N r AA NN A r r 00 1 00NM 0rrr4-r4-Wr0 MO-. NN WMMONWN 0)NA VV 00 MAN r0)O)O)O)0)cAWC 0 VV 00 N00ACDOCDNW 000 00 0000 CAr0 NVVVVVVNVCT 00 00 ACJCOCA(CJCA)CD 000 00 00 WAA WVVVVVVAVN 00 )-r- c0N00NVrWQ) 000 00 NN * * * * * X. * * C)C) C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C) CO CO >>>>>>> >> > > MM >>>>>>>>> z M C)C)C)0000 NN M m rr ZZZZZZZzz Z -< MMMMPOMM NN Z r• rr 111111111 > 0000000 ZZ > > Cc mm Rlm rnmmmm M Z C) < X.> W W W O W W O O W 0M 1-41-44-44-4 M M m m Z MM CCCCCCCCC 0 ZZZZZZZ -11 Cl MMMMMMMMM0 00 -<-«-<-<-<-. 7 ZZZZZZZ 00 M ZZ N N N N N N N C) MM M M M H M M M M M V 0000000 3 3 X z z z z z z z z z 7J -1-1-4-4-1-I-1 C C m Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 0 >>>>>>> ZZ C) Cl 7 c 0 M -I m 0 C) H N 1 M 1 1 -1-4-1-1-1-4-I-4-1 'O 0 0000000 11 Cl M M MM MMMM>,a MMM M C CCCCCCC MM C m 1 rr DDDDDDDDD 0 PC4 v747)v-ovv >> m 3 m mm ««««< '*1 m MM11-owv-o << 0 M 3 111, mmmmmmmRlm D rrrrrrr mm -4 MM 1-1-1--1--r-r r r r N C) M M M M H M H r r 9. Cl 00 m m mmmmmmm ZZ 2.2.2.20 Q+20202.20 A NNNNNNN 202• N > 0 mm < 3 c z c) 000000000 > 00 W 0 m CCCCCCCCC 1 CC N m M WWWWOOWWW WW C) m 'o 000000000 NN m 1 1.41-41-11-11-4 -41-1 MM M M M 000000000 0 0 Z 0 -1-1-1-1-1-1-1-4-1 11 1 0 Z 00 000000000 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 W > MM r r r...... r r r r r r r r r MM r r C) i t I I I I I I I 1 l I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C) 4.4. AAAAAAAA A A A A A A A A A A AA A A 0 WW (4(4(4(4(4 W W W w W N N N N N N N N WW W CD C NN (4(4WWW C.)G)C.)w r r WW CO N Z r r 000000000 0 N 0000000 0 0 r rn -4 1 1 l l l l l l l l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 WW WWWr rr rr r A CDCO AWWrr rr A 0 Z NH• IWNIVONN4 V N r-NW1(W Nr r 0 0 MI- r r r r r r r r r V V MM r 0 II l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l l l l WW AWWW4 rrrr r A CD CDACWrr rr A 0 H Nr r WCVr VO NJ N r V N 4INW40W Nr r 0 Z 0 N N N N N N N N V (4(4(4(4(4(4(4 - A CO rrrrrrr 0 3C 0 M N N N N N N N N Cn W CO -9 l 0000000 0 0 i•- 1 cD It 0 3 m M 0 > * l 1* A * X. * M * 0 C) A * * * * * * * > m I 1 1 I 1 1 rn C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 r * r * r * r * I-• r * r * r * rrl r x 1* * � * -. COO * U1 * 111 * li1 * N VI * 111 * CFI * VI VI U1 U1 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0000 * 0 * 0 * 0 x CO * N * N) * N * N N * N * r * rrrr * r • r * r R1 O * O) * A * C.) * C.) C.) * r * CO * V V V V * V * C.) * 0 C) * VI * VI * O) * A (..) * A * I- * CO CO CD CD * V * A * 0 7 N Z -1 0 -< 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 > Ul V1 Ur VI 4.11 VI Vt Cn U1 U•(n U1 al al --1 V) ,,,,,,,, - . rn x C.) C) C.) C.) C.) w C.) CJ C.)C.)C.1 C.) w w D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 7 \ \ \ \ \ \ \�\\ \ - \ 0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CO CO CD CD CD CO CD CO 13rn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 m D 3 0 C r r z r1- ca C.) NN i--.I-. CO CO Cs)CJ •1 1-.i- 0000 UI VI I--I-. VV AA 00 A I-r r I- C)a) VV NN VI UI C.)C.) NN CO CD l-•*-• I--i•-• 00 VI r I--,-r 0)C) I-I- AA 0)0) AA 00 CO OD 00 CP UI 00 COAAAA CY)0) C...)(4 VV VV WW CAVI CT)V1 00 VV 00 0 VI U1 U1 CO WW WW CO a) * * * * * * * * * * * 7 C-1 H H 1-1 N 0 '11-n m m T1 m C) X H Z 0 C) 1 0 I-II-II-IF-1 N > 0 �7373 r 77:13 3 • X 0 v < �NN cncn -I r 3 -i = V) = -1 -1--I-1 V m m < D C) m 73 XI T 7J m -I = Z > >>>> C) Z o O r «« 52. 0 F-1 0 x 0 x Z mmmrn 73 > 0 1_1 V) m 1- ."O I- C Z 0 C) 0 0 < V) C) A 0 r- 0 1-1 4 N U) A X ✓ H m m rn rn rn '.•i m (1) PT1 M V) -< V) DDDD RI Z -0 0 Cn -I m ZZZZ 3 x 7 7/ mrnmm Cl) 1.1 < 737373 73 0 7:1 Z V N(//V)V) 0 M O N 0 0 N -4 M A V) m 'D -0 v -I C) CO CO CA CO M3 (1) I-I c 0 73 73 z z 0 r l^r r 0 0 C -i v C v M z z 1 0000 Fd 0 -11 3 Z z Z z Z << r v -I -I m 71 73 r 2.1 3 3 3 3 0 C) I-4 3 9* 12" Q° DDDD 3 T1 m m co D Qo Cn H i-11-11-1 > C (/) I-I "I "0 C) Z Z Z z 1-4 m X C7 z c C c N x -i-1-I-4 Z r > 7/ -1 03 W C) C 0 V M -I N r -4 1-1 VI 1.4 N 0 -1 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 > r r r r r r r rrrr r r r C) 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 0 A A A A A A A AAAA A A A 0 N NJ C.) C.) C.) C.) C.) N N N N N) N N C I- (.) U7 U1 UI CO CO W CO C.)C.) W N r Z O N 0 0 0 0 0 0000 N N UI V I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I C.) A Cn r C.) r r (>C.)r r A A A Z I- N I-. V C.) N V N)r CO Co NJ A N 0 r CT) r r r- 0) r 4.-i-.Nr C) r CO 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I (•,) A C)) 4- C.) r I- A C.)I-r A A A I-I I- N r V C.) N V N)r 00 CO NJ A N Z < r N V r r CO VI -.1 0 CO CO A N N 00 * 0 A C,) r A 1-. 0) D) 0 V A I V N • 0 0 r ?e .. 1 GO at 0 3 RI N > * * * * * * * * * * N C.) * * * * * * * * * * I* m * * * * * * * * * * 0 i I I 1 1 I I I m C) C) C) C) C) 0 C) C) C) C) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 N V) CA CO V) C/) Cn CO V) N IV 1-•-F- I F- i•- X. I--1- x r 1-1-- * F- * ►- * r H x 1-- x I--1- 1-- 13 .9-! V1 V1 (11 CA * V1 V1 r V1(nu) * V1 * (11 * V1 * t11 * (1 * III 0 (D 00 0 O * 00 * 000 * O * O * O * O * O * 00 2 O A A W CJ * W W * WWW * W * W * (,-) x N * N * N N m O CO (.0 * CO(O V 0 C7) V1 * OO * (TI(1to * CD * CO * V * VI * VI * W W S. 0 M Z --I O < . O O m 00 O O 00 000 O O O O O 00 D Ul VI vi to V1 In V1 viol Vf vi V7 V1 (11 V1(f1 -1 N ww w w CJ 43 www w CO w w CO Cc)GI D 00 O O 00 000 O O O O O 00 7. CO CO CO (O CO CO CO(D CO CD CO CO CO CD (O CO v 00 O 0 00 000 O O O O O 00 m RI D 3 O C.) C Z 03N NN (J11\3 IV AI-.r-I I-.I-. I-.I-. V V I-.I-. (13(D r r -( VW WW 0000 W O)V 0 N rA Nut NN WW AA 00 C4I--N VIA C.)C.) VI V1 V11-4. 001--C.3 1.3 0000 I-I AA 00 AA VAW (D V1 CO 00 V V 0 0 0 LP V1 CD CO 0 0 00 CO Co(D A A CO CO CON w 0)0) 1-.I-- VV (n 0 V1 A 00V(0 00 WCO V1 V1 NN 00 00000 * * * * * * * * 4 )1. 00 Z Z ZZ ZZZ 3 3 3 C) -I 00 N V) 00 000 Z W D D m mm NN v v << 737373 D C) Al 73 Z Z DD 1-I1 C) 0 0 73 ZZ 3 3 7C 7C 2 2 2 0 C r -< I-I I-I < I 1 mmm z rn v)v) m 9*2* -n Ti mm 73 Z rn r T Z 4-f- Z Z z D Z m 73 T.7C 0 DD mm < < 0 7373 0 NN 00 222 m m 3 DD 73 V)V1 XX -<-<-< -11 0 73 M "(I'11 0 00 ODD * C (n Z --1-1 z C)C) 737373 73 I-I 0 0 m DDD m v Z D C) I-I I-I CCC T. zz 1-rr 0 0 1-4111--1 73 000 m V)N N G) 1-1 (/) -4 m 73 vv C C 00 m V)V) N 73 m I v -I1 h-1 7373 -1 -I 0 C c c rn 0 0 73 7373 -1 00 M 1-/ 00 C-0v v I C -i 0 DD m '1 n7 1- I- I-I 13 13 -17 F-1 H 0 rn << I I-1 I-1 00 13r-r-- r -4 -O 73 mm NV) -I -4 22 NM N V) f-r- 0 m m I-( I--1 G)G) 3 m m m 0 3 rn m m 7373 rn m DVIN N D > C 73 2e 20 (n << N N 73 73 I-1 Z I--I m < C) 1"111-11 Z 0 Z r NUI 73 11 m -4 m -1 C C 1-1 Cc 73 0)0) v Z Z (n N -1 C C 1-1 1--1 1-1 h1 Z N V) 0 CO V-I Z N0 0 0 0000 000 0 CO 0 r 0 I-0 > CO 1-- r l- AA rrr r r r A I-. (n I- A I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I C) AA A A NN AAA A A A A A AA 0 CJ(.4 C.) C.) WC.) NNN N CO N N C.) WW C 1-I-. V V 0 0 WW1- F- N W N) I-- CO W Z 00 0 0 NN NN0 0 O) N N) O 00 -I 1 I i I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 (J1.13. A A 00 AAA C.) 0 A I- W I--I-- Z V I-- N N 00 ANA N 0 N A C.) CON 0 0- V V 00 I-C)I- I-- 0 a) (d I- rr 1 I I I i I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I A A A A 0 0 AAA C.) 0 A I- C.) I--I- I--I r►- N N 00 ANA N 0 N A C.) CON Z 0000 O V1(11 N N N (O =t 0 O)V1 1-- 0) v 1 • 0 O 1-- I (O It 0 3 m v N D * * 1 # * * * * * * * N 0 * * * * * * * * * > m * * * * * * 4 * C) 1 I I I I I I I 1 m C) C) 0 0 C) C) C) 0 0 x CO V) N (n N V) C/) N N C.) r * r * r * r * r * r * r a r * r a 1-./-** A rrrr 1- VI Vl * Ui * (.(I A (71 * ()1 * (TI * U7 A Ul * U7 * V1 U1 A cm(JI(!1 Ui C) co O * 0 * O * O * 0 * 0 * O A O * 0 A 00 * 0000 2 co A * A A A * A * A * A * A * A * A * AA * AAAA m 0 (D * CO * 00 * V * 0) * 111 A Ui A N a N * N N * r r r r C) CO * r * W * 0 * 0) a V A U1 * (0 * U1 * 0 0 )1 N N.)N N 7; C) N Z -1 0 -< 0 . 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0000 D U7 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V7 V1 V1 (fl N N Ir(fl U1 – N -, -, - -. -. ,-� ���� m x w w w C.) w w w w w C..)C.) wwww D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0000 T. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\\,, O CD (O CO (D CD (D (D (D CO (0 CO (0(0(0 tD v O 0 0 0 O O 0 O 0 00 0000 m m D 3 r 0 U1U1 AA e–A, 0 . . . . . Z AA 1-*1-^ NN A w0)Nr -1 V1 AA 0000 r WW rr co co 1-.1-• 1--•/-. CD WW N r0 VN A 00 0)0) r 00 V1 U1 CCA) NV1 0000 000 NNA0A r 00 00 1.71U1 U1U1 CO CO WW CD CD 00 000 AA1-.0)0) 0 00 00 AA 00 0000 U)U7 00 00 000 V 0)(4(DV * * A * * * * * * * (n Cr) 73 3 v 7, 7, x v v v 0 0 0 0 C) C) r-( D ri D m D D 2 2 0 2 m z Z O D 7J r. MH V)(ANN -1 1-I N 1-4 0 H I- 0 Z r-r -i r r 0 r -4 1n Cl) 3333 < N CO < '1 0 v rr m C) C Z ri N m Z 3 3 2*2a 2°!2* Z –i 0 1--I 73 2 3 v O D D 0 -< z r m rn D D r•(r-( DDDR 0 Z 0 m C) D N C Z Z V)V)Cl)(A 73 C) m 3 m 7: Z N Z -i-i C/)(./)N Cr) A 0 1-1 73 rn x D r 0000 = ✓ a (n = --1 m r-1 2^!2* 0000 rn r 0 0 0 3 0 m Z . 0 M 7:3,3 1-11-11-11-1 7: -1 m z 0 7) 000 v 0 rn 0 . M U) m 73 (/) m CO 0 CO V) N -1 CO OO -0-0'0 re C 0 r 0 r C C 73 r 1--1- 23737373 -1 v C 0 Z 0 v v 3> 0 00 0000 m -0 1--1 f) -1 C) v v < C) 00 T)m m-n I r v r r m I--1 3 2e 3 N N r 3 3 3 (/)NV)N 0 In 3 D D m m D DD mm rn m m V) D 11 N r-( V) V) 2a 1-1 1.4 H XIA7J7J N M Z 0 Z Z Z Z <<<< C) Z -4 2 -i V) -( -(--1 Xl -I 0 C 1'1 0 CO v r V) -I (A H N V) 0 -4 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 010)0)N D r r r r r r r r r 1-r r 0)0)0)U1 C) I 1 I I II 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 C) A A A A A A A A A AA AAAA 0 N) N N CO N N N W N N N WWWW C r Cl) C.) CO C.) r r w Cl) WW rrrr Z 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0000 -1 11 I 1 I 1 1 1 Ii 1 1 I 1 ) r (..) 0) r r r W A W r r U1 V1 V1 V1 Z Ul r r N co N.) N N N CO CO 00 V 0)N 0 0) N V Co W 0) r r r Nr 0(O Nr • 1I I 1 I 1 I I 11 I 1111 r (J 0) r r r W A W rr AAAA 4-4 V1 r r N CO N N N N 0000 rrrr Z U1 r r r 4.- 0 0 r 0 A A N W N V V Y* O CD V Cl) (0(O 0) C.) -0 1 • 0 0 r .fig ... CD = O X v V) D * * * * * * * * * * D m 1I I I1 I 1 i 1 m N N N V) CO V) N (./) V) V) A 13 ..e/ , * r * r * NI-. * I * N * 07 OO * CO co 0o Co 0o * 0 * CO 00 T. 0 H Z -1 O < O 0 T1 O O 00 000 O 00 00000 O O O n to to 00 000 0 til 0 00000 0 0 0 --1 N \ \ \\ \\\ \ \\ \\\\\ \ \ \ x W W WW W W W W WW W WWW W W W W D O O 00 C O O O 00 00000 O O O ?. O O 00 000 O 00 00000 O 0 0 m M D 3 N N 0 mm NN mm C . . Z NN CONN r WW vV -I 0000 AA . r VIWN AA NNCO vANNV1W 0000 NN 010 00 0000 0)01W ONON 010 NWA WWrrN0 WW 0)O) AO COLO NN NON NOCn0) 00 0100 N0000)0) WW 00 r0 00 00 000 WA01A 00 000 000000 WW 00 00 * * * * * * * * * * T N 0003 NNN V) NN 00C/)00 N N N C -1 I.I. CCC 2 -4-4 00000 2 A A r D mm m-om D CCCCC D 0 0 -1 m mm m m m x mm -4-4-4-4-4 x -I -1 0 -« mmm 0 mm xxxxx 0 -i -4 < Z -4 DDD m » ZZ EE -o m m 00 333 m zz mmmmm m C) C) z N I-( -4-4 m m m m C)O 00000 m -••I -i C7 n w 00 zmz 1--11-i --I--1-4-1-1 -< -< 0 x C O C) ... -4 00 D m r z C)c)C) 00000 C) C) C) m m D D D 2 mm CCCCC C) -I 0 x 1-i 1-C mm 0wwww m m r m N z 0c) cc CCC N m r c) 3 G) zmmmm N D m T, D XX 0wwww to c) z mm ADDDD 0 C -4 m Oc zzzzz 0 m m z m G) '0 .Z) M 0 -4 m A m C7 -(-C m10 v mm mvv-v m v m Fi .0 C mm AOC z mm mmmmm z 73 2) -I C m DD Civ 0 00 ..... 0 ►-1 0 m I-1 V) << 1-10m T1 mm ZZZZZ m z Ti 1 mm mmr -4-4-4-4-4 -4 20 r r 1-1 V) 00 N N C7 3 X.-rim m mm 2.9.2°2.2. m 2° m m D 0 2.2. >Co a zz w 71 V) I-1 C 1-+m < << MMM-O-0 < o < C) Z w CAO Zr CCCCC c z -4 N CC -1 wwwww w 1--1 O Cw v A3 WV) -I H 1-41-t I-( (1)N 0 -I -I-4 Z O O O O 000 O O O 00000 0 r O D r r rr rrr r 1-r I- 03 r O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 C) A A 4.4:. A A A A 4t..4. AAAA A A A A 0 N W WW NNN W WW WWWWW W C.) C.) C W co WW WCVr r r r 000 00 r 0 r Z N r 00 N N O 0 00 00000 0 0 0 1 I I I I 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ) 1 1 I 0) W NI- WWW W (OW (D0)AWN r r r 2 C) r VN NNN r NN r1NNO) N (O 0 0 N r N0 NNN C.) NN rr r(O' 0 r r • I I i t 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I I I 1 1 1 0) W NN W W W W OW (00)A C.)r r r r 1-4 N r VN rrr r rN r1--.NI-C) N CO 0 Z < 4C0 0) 1 0 0 I- 1 (o 4C 0 3 m v V) 3> * 1 * * * * * A * * N Ci) * * * * * * * * * D m * * * * * * * * * O I I 1 1 1 1 1 m C) C) O C) C) C) C) C) C) 7Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 ✓ r r * r * rr * r * r * r rr * r rr*-- * r r 0 0 0 * 0 * 00 * UI * 0 * U1 * U1 U7 * U1 U1 U1 U• * U1 C) co O O 0 * O * 00 * O * O * 0 * 00 * O 000 * O m (0 CO CO 0o * O * CO O * CO * O * O * U+cm * cm Ul cm cm * cm m 0 0 0 0 * U1 * W ca * N * O * 0 * 00 CO * 00 CO 03 00 * A C) N.) r O * O * OO * O * CO * 0 * 0000 * r 000 * 01 7C 0 Z -( O -< 0 O -*1 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 00o O D 01 U+ N 0 00 0 Ul N 00 N 000 0 -i (n \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \\\ \ m 2 C..) W W CO W W W W W WW W WWW W D 0 0 0 O 00 O 0 0 00 0 000 0 7C \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \\\ \ 0 CO CO (D (0 (O(D (0 CO CO WW (0 (0(0(D (O V 0 0 o O oo O o 0 00 0 000 0 m m D I 0 r CO 00 A A C U1 00 rr 00000 UI U7 VO AA rr -i 0 AA 00 AA 0100 (0(0 00 NN OAO WW (0NAN 0000 0 0000 00 00 VVo 00 NN (0(O Nrr 00 M.-40W AA 0 00 WW 00 OU1r VV (O(0 00 rOr VV 00W(00) 00 O 00 VV 00 V0V 0000 AA v.-+ rOr AA AA00 00 * * * * * * * * * * * C) C) 3 N EZ Z < C) << C CCC V) C > > 1-( >> H m A >> Z Z Z Z C) m m m ow r N m rr N HNM D m < CO -(-i r h1 G) rr --1-i---i m N m *4 D mm 1-4 G) mm Z 000 I < 0 M z M D ►+ -C-< m 000 0 m 0 Z C -i D D D N C) 0 G)G) -( MMM A 0 -I M -4 ZZ x rr MMM -( 0 > = DD N r DD C) ZZZ 0 M 'o C) 3 00 --1 D 00 0 -4-4.-1 0 C) T, 7C D mm m z NO 1 DDD r = z 33 m 0 3 rrr N M N Z mm r HM C) ✓ ZZ ZZ ONO 0 T. 00 -4-4 C)C) MMM 0 <<< v m C) H N -( M X m A -1 1 Cm N C -I coo -i AC)C N r m O m D -im C - A rC m mrr c -1 O z > C) ►•(O m . D C7m r 300 m m m m < = rm m r < om m 5-(00 m 1 m ►-1 r r•( m r m -1 r N Qo r Q+ -4 N r-( -1 r 3, = Ix f-1 CJ rn .m m rr Dr*1 O CDD m m m U) Qo m mm N m Qa (-sN Z Zr1F-1 N N < C) .O N< N Z m s-iZZ C) = N C N -i m-4-4 A O C 1-( C O . O o m Co z m r N N 3 -4 N N H r N N z 0 -4 -4 m z z O O O -.1 00 O r O 00 O 030o O D ✓ r r r rr r A r rr r rrr r C) I I I I 1 i I I II I I 1 I i I C) A A A r AA A A A AA A AAA A 0 W W W 0 WW N W W NN W (0NN N C ✓ (0 W 0 Vr r V (,) Wr N WWW r Z 0 0 0 O 00 0 0 0 00 r NO0 0 -4 I 1 1 1 1 1I 1 I I 1 I 1 ✓ r W O VW A r r OW O OAW A Z V N N O Nr N A N Wr N 0Nr A 0 00 00 r O r cD CO W r 0 r r Orr r iIi i I I i1 I I I I I I I-. r W 0 VW A r r OW O O A W A 1--1 -4 N N 0 Nr N A 0 Nr N 0Nr A Z < WW 01-r U(U1 000 VV OAA $t 0 rr 1-00 O 73 I 0 O r 0 .. CO 4* o m v N D I i I 1i m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 13 A- i•- r r r I- r r r r rrrr I- r r r r r r 4.- 4.51 UI UI U1 U1 VI UI UI N UI U1 cn UI N UI VI UI UI U7 VI C) (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 2 (o 00 00 CO 00 00 00 00 CO CO 00 0000 00 03 00 00 03 00 00 00 rn O I--• r r r r ►- r r r rrrr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) CO Co V 01 W A W N) I- 0000 (O CO V CO UI A W ]\ C) M Z 1 0 -< 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n N U7 UI (.11 UI U1 U1 U1 UI U1 U1 UI U7 UI UI V1 N N Ui UI -i (n ��\\ -. m 2 W W W W W W W W W ()W W W W W W W W W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7< � \�\\ � � 0 CD (O (O (O W (O CO CO (0 CO(0(0(O (0 CO CO CD CO (O (O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m D I r r 00 0) 1-1-, r C Z (O(O rr WW U1U7 AA WUIVOO(J rr rr rr WW NN UI -4 rr NN 00 NN AA NN NN 00 UI UI 00000 WW 0000 WW CAO) 0)0) 00 0 rr NN 00 NN 0000 00 00 00 00 00000 -.4,4 AA -4-4 W W (110 WW UI0 0 WW (0(0 00 (n0 WW 00 00 00 00 00000 AA WW NN 00 0U1 rr 00 O rl- UI UI 00 (0(0 Vv 00 00 00 00 00000 00 WW 0000 00 0)0) 00 00 0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Z Z W Z 3 3 r 0 0 C-14-4C-1C.4 i-I 2 I 0 0 -n m O > O rn Z 0 > m DDDD 0 r♦ > 0 m 7, r. xi 1 co (n 1 v) 71 Z C/)N U)N 3 r A r Z m 78 -I r 1 A -0 N r- M - v v M D I-( 7; 0 rn 3 m 2 Z > 0 r m m m m 1 Z C) 0 7) C C) r c1 mmmm m 2 z D 0 1-( m m > < -.1 1 0 I-I c C c r -I z z N 1 0 1 r-( CO Z Z m 0000 m 0 0 N 0 1 rn -( c A -( 0 m --1-4-1-c r m 0 co I-1 --1 0 m z M m 2'* 73 co 0 Ammo m m I-( Z 73 '*1 > -( -n r -4 m mmmm C) 1 Z 0 D C) I-I m = 70 Z mmmm r m 4-I 0 m v) D CO -n-nmrn r 0 .-I CO m -1 x Z c D m Z rrrr Z m Z Z Z C) m 0 C) I-1 1 73 0 >D>> C) < 0 0 X M 0 4-I < ZZZZ 0 f1 Z 11 0000 40 -n 71 0 C) 0000 n -0 I IO-I N -I RI XI m (/) v m m W 0 A C) 1311-0-0 0 m 1 -0 co co 0 '- C 0 C0 0 r Cmmmm C 0 z > C C c -( 0 0 0000 rn c > m -v -o m m I-1 0 -Il H I-I 0 CO m'1 m m (/) H < 7C -0 -0 (/) 3 0 r 0 v Z 0 -0 m r r I-( v) I 2° 2 VW)N C/) 20 r- ' I-( I.1 20 0 X rn m I I > m G) mmmm 3 m m m m > N z > > I.1 N > M M M M (/) > 20 m Cl) (n (n N I-1 < 1'1 I-( Z C 0) 71 <<<< C I-I C 0 Z Z Z -4 CO rn m CO Z CO U; 20 -1 -I 1 v) 1 rn (n -( C (n I-I C) rn C C) CO c) M Z Z 73 N 70 -4 -i 1 0 4 I-1 I--1 I-( - v (n v 0 1 1 1 1 z O O O O O O 0 N 0o VVr0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 > r r r r r r I- UI A W r U1 r r r r W r I- r C) I I I i I I ( I 1 I I I 1 1 1 i I 1 I I C7 A A A A A A A A NJ AAAA A A A W A A A 0 NJ N W N NJ N (3 0 W W W W W W N CO N NJ NJ W C G.) r r W W G) (O r 0 rrrr CO W W r r r CO Z NJ 0 0 N) NJ 0 r W NJ 0000 r N 0 (O 0 0 r -I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 A C..) 0) 0) C,) 0) W UI 0 VVrr r 0) W 0 r W W Z N I- 0 W N W r NJ 0 WrCOVI V N N 0 Ut NJ N 0 0) r 1- r r 0 r I- 0 rrrN 1- A r 0 r r r I I I I I ( I I I i l l 1 I I I I I I I A W 0) 0) W 0) CO A O VVrr r Cr) W 0 r W W IH N l- UI N NJ N) r I- 0 (41-CO UI V NJ N 0 UI N NJ Z N N 00 CO 0) C 0) 0 A CO CO Cb V V 0) 0 * 0 W N U1 UI CO CO CO r -o I 0 0 I- I I CO S 0 3 M N D I I N 0 > m 0 m V * r r rrr r r r r r I.-. * M M MMM M M M M M C) (0 * 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 2 W * 00 00 000000 00 00 00 00 00 rn 0 * N N NNN N N N N N C) * -.J 0) 000 A W N r 0 S. C) N Z -1 0 -< 0 0 TI 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 > M M MUl U) 0 0 M M M -I U) \ \ \\\ \ \ \ \ \ m = W W WWW W W W W W D 0 O 000 0 0 0 0 0 7C \ \ \\\ \ \ \ \ \ 0 (0 (0 (0(0(0 W W CO W W v 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 M M D F- 3 0 -1 0 rr MAW Aro rr C (0 Wr M 00r O)0)00VCJ0) W W O)0) 00 WW -1 A 000A00N VA00)0 0000 WW ('WWI WW AA AA rr 0)0) N OV00-1A00(WW0 0000 00 0000 C0) Mtn 00 U)U) rr 0) 0-100N0)(0(W00 0000 00 0000 00 00 00 00 0000 r 0N000)V0)00)0-1 00 00 0000 00 00 00 00 00 1 * * * * * * * * C (I)U)U) 0 A 0 0 -1 3 Z -1-4-1 Z 0 M 0 MMMM'1-,)mmmmm H N MMM > z r+ D 3 -1 C C C C C C C C C C C m v0 M N 0 Z > ZZZZZZZZZZZ U) 222 --1 M v < r 00000000000 I,, X rn(rn(n N > v r1 m v 0 z z z c r 1-4 -1 z 0000-1-10)NNrrr0 < 0 C) -1 S. Z U) 0 Ar Wr0)MW UAWr T1 -1-1- r 0 -1 0 0 0 w S S I m -I 2 A --1--I-1-1.-i-I-1--1-1-1< Tt Z comm D O M Z O 00000000000 0 ►•I)-+r+ Z r m m = -i-1-1-1-1-1<-1-11-1 3 U)U)N rn rn /1 (*1 >>>>>>>>>>> Z Re > 0 C) 1-rrrrrr4 rf r 3 C m M D v < v 4-1 M m Z U) 0 -4 N . 0 m M m-00r002-Iv C) v W WWW v rn v C) -1 4-4 OD-Ir(OMOMMDr M r rrr v 0 A v -1 0<0Z00DCDDvZ 0 0 000 0 C 0 0 D m vvvm(04-+-4 ZT.rn m C) C)C)0 -Ti 4-4 m < 3 01 Zx U) v v 0 m Zr- I-1D m '- > N 3 3 3 3 N N 2 r 0 rOmX0m -Imr m D DDD m 3 m C) m mcvmr N A 1-1 HF-IH v D v 2' V) -1D11 -< mm < z zzz < )-1 < m C) m1-4000 v C -1 -1-1-4 z m U) v CZ vDW <Z --1 m C )•4 ND v-< m0 C co v -10 1-1 1 Z U) -4 m -1-O T1 0 I--1 1--1 >> C U) 0 C rN Z -1 Z -1 N 0 H m r z 1-1 0 -1 4 -< m C) 0 0 000 0 0 0 00 0 D ✓ r rrr r r r A r C) 1 1 1 1 11 I I 1 i C) A A AAA A A A N A 0 W N NNN W N W W W C ✓ W WWW r W r 0 W Z 0 0 000 0 N 0 N 0 -1 1 I 1 I I I I I I I W W WWW r W 0) 0 W Z ✓ N NNN CO r M 0 N 0 ✓ r rrr A r 1- 0 r I I I 1 1I 1 1 1 1 W W WWW r W 0) 0 W 4-I ✓ N NNN 00 r M 0 N Z (0 r 0 r W W (0 N W W V 0 # 0 -1 A O) r v 1 A • 0 0 r yi 1 M = O 3 M v N D * D m 1 rn 0 X 0 W • 10D 0 co aD 00 0) OD OD OD OD Co OD co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OD 0 3 1-, H I-' I-, F-' F' H H I-, H I-' HF. 1--, HF- F' HHH 1-, H H 4" 4' 4• 4' 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4-4 •- 4- 4-4- 4-4-4- ,- 4- 4- 4- 1O,. y \O w \O \D \D\O \O D \ \ O \O \O\0\D w w w w w w D w 4- 4- \ cr H H w FN-' N0 LA) -3 N)RD H ONDNNO NIN' FN-' NFN-' \VD\\OD 0 \Nn \O > O H O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co w 4-F•' 4-H H O\ 0 1-' 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 F-' N N N H U) N Ca 0 N) 3 0 O\ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 H I-' I-' I-' H F-' F-' 0 0 F-' O H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w w 4-H 4-H F✓ ON 0 H 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H N N N I-, W N N) O N CO 0 f1 OD 0 OD OD OD OD OD CO OD OD OD CO OD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 c7 r a-' C F-' H H H H H H H H H 1-' F-' F-' H N H F-' H F-' F-' H H H 1 1 O I-, FH H F' 1-' H I' F' 1H H NNN N H F' 1-' I-, H N H I-, 1-' • O 0000000000000000000000 a 73 C.7 —1 F' N F-' F-' I-' 1-' I-' I-' H H I-' F-' I-' H H H H H N 1-' N H H A GU (D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n •sin `* C — C) J J Cr: -S- c C 0 N N d -EA FJ > Ito W \D \J1 H 1 CO H al H co \D NNW F-' O �.\n w \1 N) 0 ON 0 O\ \n \n \O O\\n W H \D N Z N\O w \n O\ w 0 0 - 0 0 \rn \X . 1 4-\n \n N N \n w \n c+ N OD OD -4 Co N w 1 1 O O 1 O F-' \O\n Co\n N\n O w N O to 0 \D Co 4' O\w Co 4- 0 0 CO N -4 OD 0 1 w N) 1 Co H • 0 GO ID c+ A > (') C) O D7 b =1 �7 M D1 xl D1 D1 X1 D 1 �1 Dz1 : : : : -3 : 3 C D3 C] Z Z (D 'Y (D (D (D (D (D (D (D (D (D (D (D (D r• c+ (D O fD 1-3 3 O 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 F-' U) r• 3 0 3 Cf3 I-, r• r• r• r• r• r• r• r• r• r• r• cD n H r 'h Co Com-' v W c+ CD c+ ct c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ Ro '��, CO (D b C!] �] =J Z1 C7 C7 b 3 =J "_] O r• x K (X VD CT1 H '-j trJ H H H t'j (D (D P (D H H (D (D OD 1...• v w y C Di r3 C] - 7d ''b '"b `< a C] r3 (D N FP- Ccv N t0 N a 'S '3 0 !� c+ 0 C7 N3 (...3 H 1) 0 C, CD A CTI C) C) H 'S H Cl) C7 'CJ 'CJ p O Cl) C) C h W W W W W W W W W W WWW W W W W W W W W W WH N N N) N NN N) N) N N NNN NNNNNNN N N N C) \O -3 11 -4 1 -41 1 1 -4 -4 1 -J 1 11111 -41 1 1 -3 :.,.1, .0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO COODCO 1 11111 -J1 1 -4 -4 • O \O CO -4 O\ \.11 VI -Aw N) H 0 0 0 \O \O \D \O \D\O\O Co 1 O\ z 0 O O tti O p t%J tt'i C I ID T. � cm < 3 < 3 Cl)to � 0> .Q a co fl .o C) 0 aO n g° (D 0 � o ,-$M 1-,) p yNZC p p m Di r• Di 0 0 0 O C) < �• < x it I H f.'. (D c+ (D I c+ U) r• (CD Uri (( 0' P D P Fes• M PA) x x m 0 o"0 0 F-' a K '0 CD (D (D (D (D 0 C x al N LO \D \n 1- \n !- g w VI N Off\ O Off\ \n \ten \O~ \n N w \n O\ w 0 0 0 -- CO N CO CO CO 1 1 O O \D 1 W N O \o 0 \D CO •' \D CO 0 0 1 \n F' 0 ik I3 -c. MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Changing the Fiscal Disparities Option for TIF Districts #3 & #4 DATE: May 31, 1990 INTRODUCTION: Council has directed staff to prepare resolutions changing the fiscal disparities option for TIF Districts #3 & #4. Attached are Resolutions No. 3241 and No. 3243 prepared by the City Attorney addressing the subject. BACKGROUND: Recently the City Council has been discussing the possibility of going from option A to option B for the fiscal disparities contribution for Canterbury Downs. Presently the City as a whole makes the fiscal disparities contribution (option A) . The State Statutes allow for a one time change to have the tax increment districts make this contribution rather than Canterbury Downs. As indicated this is an irrevocable decision and once made it is not possible to go from option B to option A. The Mayor and staff have met with representatives from the Minnesota House Research staff on May 22nd. The options apparently not only include option A and B, as previously discussed but also there is an opportunity for the City to declare an annual surplus on an annual basis which would not benefit the taxing jurisdiction but which would benefit local tax payers for that particular year. The long term benefits or disbenefits have not been totally analyzed at this time. If the pass through option were to be utilized the school district would loose state aid in an amount equal to the surplus that they would receive from the local tax base. In this instance the State of Minnesota would benefit because of a smaller contribution of state aid to ISD 720. This would also result in both the city and county having their levy limits reduced by the amount of surplus that would be passed through. As of this date the Finance Director has not yet received an answer from the County Auditor on the exact date when the changing of the fiscal disparities option or the declaration of a surplus needs to be finalized. A response will be obtained soon. There is a need to obtain additional background information on the rational for going with option A at the time the decision was made by the City Council in 1984. Additional information will be received from Assistant City Attorney Rod Krass and another attorney who's name is Jim Casserly, both of whom were apparently involved in the decision at that time. Because of the irrevocable nature of the decision it is recommended that this information be received prior to City Council action. 1 3 •(- Councilmember Gloria Vierling will be out of town on the meeting of June 5th. She has requested that the City Council not take action on this item in her absence. (In the past it has been the City Council policy to honor Councilmember' s requests for full attendance when votes are taken on items of major significance. ) Also, it is my understanding that the City Council merely directed that the resolutions be prepared at this time and that they were not going to be taking action at the June 5th meeting. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Table this item until all Councilmembers can be present and additional information can be obtained from the legal counsel involved in the earlier decision. 2 . Offer Resolutions No. 3241 and No. 3243 . RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive these resolutions at this time, give further direction to staff in terms of obtaining additional information if desired, and to take action of this item at either the meeting of June 19 , or at the meeting of July 3rd. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to table action on Resolutions No. 3241 and No. 3243 until June 19th or July 3rd. 1* 13 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Process for Hiring of City Attorney DATE: June 1, 1990 INTRODUCTION: The below mentioned procedure is being presented to City Council for purposes of comment if Council deems necessary. The procedure relates to the process the City Administrator intends to follow relative to the hiring of a full time City Attorney. BACKGROUND: Last month the City Council directed the City Administrator to advertise for the hiring of a full time City Attorney. Subsequent to that time advertisements were placed in various publications and a deadline for the receipt of applications was set for June 5th. Following that the procedure that the City Administrator intends to follow unless otherwise directed by the City Council will be for the staff to screen the number of applications down from the total amount received to the top 15 or 20 (assuming that 50 or more applications are received) . Following that a screening committee consisting of City Attorney Julius Coller, Assistant County Administrator Cliff McCann, and City Administrator Dennis Kraft will screen the 15 or 20 amount down to the top 3 to 5 applicants. Following that it is recommended that the forementioned screening committee interview those applicants and that following that the City Administrator will make a recommendation to the City Council relative to the hiring of a City Attorney. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Affirm the procedure outlined above by the City Administrator. 2 . Modify the procedure and direct the City Administrator to follow that modified procedure. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council endorse alternative #1 above. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to endorse the procedure outlined by the City Administrator relative to the use of a screening committee for implementing the process to present a final candidate to the City Council to be hired as City Attorney. * 13 k MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Marilyn Remer, Personnel Coordinator RE: Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy DATE: June 1, 1990 INTRODUCTION: It is the intent of the City of Shakopee to maintain a work environment which is free of alcohol and drug use. Use of such substances poses a danger to the health and safety of each employee as well as to the public and the property of the City. BACKGROUND: There has been a great deal of public attention recently to drug and alcohol use. Drugs on the job result in lost time, impaired productivity, injuries, property damage, increased health insurance costs, etc. It is therefore, desirable to have a policy in place, clearly defining the City' s policy on alcohol and drug abuse. The attached policy was drafted in accordance with the City of Bloomington' s policy and reviewed by Treavor Walsten, Attorney at Law, Krass & Monroe Law Office. It also has been reviewed by Police Chief Tom Steininger. Several minor clerical corrections and clarifications were recommended and have been incorporated into the policy. The policy allows for drug testing as part of a pre-employment physical and for reasonable suspicion testing. There will be no random testing. The City has utilized Park Nicollet Medical Center in the past for preplacement physicals which included drug screening. Park Nicollet requires the City must have a drug policy in place and a signed agreement with Park Nicollet for any future drug screening to occur. The cost of drug screening is relatively inexpensive (see attached fee schedule) . To avoid litigation in the future, Mr. Walsten recommends all new employees be required to have pre-employment drug screening. The offer of employment would be contingent on a negative test result. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council adopt Resolution No. 3242 , A Resolution Adopting a Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy. ACTION REOUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3242 , A Resolution Adopting a Drug and Alcohol Policy Testing Policy, and move its adoption. Drug Screening Program Fee Schedule * Urine specimen collection $15 Recollection visit if unable to provide specimen $10 Drug screening test Federal (N.I.D.A.) $40 State $31k- Medical Review Officer $10 (required under N.I.D.A. guidelines) * These fees are subject to periodic revision § :81.951 WAGES, HOURS, ETC. WAGES, HOURS, ETC. Subd. 5. Reasonable suspicion testing. An employer may request or require an 181.953. Reliability and fairness s' • • • • • employee to undergo drug and alcohol testing if the employer has a reasonable suspicion Subdivision 1 Use of licensedla that the employee: - requires an employee or job app ' lice (1) is under the influence of drugs or alcohol; 1 services of a testing laboratory ' (2) has violated the employer's written work rules prohibiting the use, possession, sale, except that, a breath test as an initi. `• medical clinic, hospital, or other met or transfer of drugs or alcohol while the employee is working or while the employee is on that does not meet the licensing re. the employer's premises or operating the employer's vehicle, machinery, or equipment, _ test meets the standards or require provided the work rules are in writing and contained in the employer's written drug and _ clause (1), and any confirmatory t. alcohol testing policy; : sections 181.950 to 181.957 and the (3) has sustained a personal injury, as that term is defined in section 176.011, subdivi } (b) The commissioner shall adopt Sion 16, or has caused another employee to sustain a personal injury; or g (1) standards for licensing, suspe: (4) has'caused a work-related accident or was operating or helping to operate machin- (2) body component samples that ery, equipment, or vehicles involved in a work-related accident. f Subd. 6. Treatment program testing. An employer may request or require an = (3) procedures for taking a sampi' employee to undergo drug and alcohol testing if the employee has been referred by the to the extent practicable, consistent employer for chemical dependency treatment or evaluation or is participating in a ro chemical dependency treatment program under an employee benefit plan, in which case results, including standards for i(4) methods of analysis and pro the employee may be requested or required to undergo drug or alcohol testing without prior notice during the evaluation or treatment period and for a period of up to two years (5) threshold detection levels for following completion of any prescribed chemical dependency treatment program. determining a positive test result: Subd. 7. No legal duty to test. Employers do not have a legal duty to request or (6) chain-of-custody procedures u require an employee or job applicant to undergo drug or alcohol testing as authorized in - the samples being tested; and (7) retention and storage proced L this section. I April * confirmatory Laws 1987, c. 388, § 2, • eff. Sept 1, 1987. Amended by Laws 1988, c. 536, § 1, eff. 15, 1988. retests of original sa (c)With respect to paragraph (b' • Historical Note t. breath test as an initial screening 1988 Legislation # analysis. The 1988 amendment in subd. 1(b) inserted (d) The commissioner shall als "except as otherwise permitted under that subdi i alcohol testing that are located in vision". licensed by the other state or by a the other state's or federal agent. 181.952. Policy contents; prior written notice meet or exceed those adopted urc Subdivision 1. Contents of the policy. An employer's drug and alcohol testing policy writing with the commissioner to r must, at a minimum, set forth the following information: ' laboratory licensed under this p (1) the employees or job applicants subject to testing under the policy; / retaining a license, agree in wr: (2)the circumstances under which drug or alcohol testing may be requested or required; } requirements for laboratories t }. the remedies set forth in section (3) the right of an employee or job applicant to refuse to undergo drug and alcohol i (e)The commissioner shall char testing and the consequences of refusal; depending on the number of Minr (4) any disciplinary or other adverse personnel action that may be taken based on a i Fee receipts must be deposited i r. confirmatory test verifying a positive test result on an initial screening test; i are appropriated to the commiss (5) the right of an employee or job applicant to explain a positive test result on a lease laboratory equipment as a confirmatory test or request and pay for a confirmatory retest; andleases possible. Notwith thstandini fee at an amount so at the to (6) any other appeal procedures available. this subdivision and allow an ado Subd. 2. Notice. An employer shall provide written notice of its drug and alcohol year sufficient to allow thecomr testing policy to all affected employees upon adoption of the policy, to a previously I use in administering to all this tom bdiv- nonaffected employee upon transfer to an affected position under the policy, and to a job ; applicant upon hire and before any testing of the applicant if the job offer is made 1 Subd. 2. Transitional labor: contingent on the applicant passing drug and alcohol testing. An employer shall also post es issued under bdiv sion 1, a: notice in an appropriate and conspicuous location on the employer's premises that the '- laboratory agrees employer has adopted a drug and alcohol testing policy and that copies of the policy are requirements: available for inspection during regular business hours by its employees.or job applicants ; (1) The director of the labor in the employer's personnel office or other suitable locations. • must possess a doctoral or ma: Laws 1987, c. 388, § 3, eff. Sept 1, 1987. • f least three years experience in 146 i G ` Crl ,Y0.\_LZA ` ..L 1:(\ �(2t«•_1-. i 1-1 RESOLUTION NO. 3242 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING POLICY WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City of Shakopee to maintain a work environment which is free of alcohol and drug use; and WHEREAS, the use of drugs and alcohol poses a danger to the health and safety of each employee, the public and the property of the City; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City to provide clear and reasonable expectations of the conditions of employment for its employees. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota that the attached Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy is hereby adopted. Passed in regular session of the Shakopee City Council held this 5th day of June, 1990. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1990. City Attorney DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING POLICY The City of Shakopee recognizes that alcoholism and other drug dependencies are a significant social problem affecting persons of every age, race, sex, and ethnic group. It poses risks to the health and safety of employees of the City of Shakopee and to the public. It is the intent of the City of Shakopee to maintain a work environment which is free of alcohol and drug use. To reduce those risks, this City policy establishes standards concerning drugs and alcohol which all employees must meet. It also establishes a testing procedure to ensure that those standards are met. The Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, will conform to the requirements of state law as set forth in Minnesota Chapter 181 as follows: 1. Definitions a. "Alcohol" means ethyl alcohol . b. "Confirmatory test" and "confirmatory retest" mean a drug or alcohol test that uses a method of analysis approved by the commissioner as being reliable for providing specific data as to the drugs, alcohol, or their metabolites detected in an initial screening test. c. "Commissioner" means the Commissioner of Minnesota Department of Health. d. "Drug" means a controlled substance as defined in Minn. Stat. 152 . 01, Subd. 4 . e. "Drug and alcohol testing, " "drug or alcohol testing, " and "drug or alcohol test" mean analysis of a body component sample approved by the commissioner, including blood, breath and urine, for the purpose of measuring the presence of absence of drugs, alcohol, or their metabolites in the sample tested. f. "Drug paraphernalia" has the meaning set forth in: Minnesota Statutes 152 . 01, Subd. 18 . g. "Employee" means a person, independent contractor, or person working for an independent contractor who performs services for the City of Shakopee for compensation, in whatever form. h. "Employer" means the City of Shakopee acting through its City Council, or its designees, the City Administrator and department heads. i . "Initial screening test" means a drug or alcohol test which uses a method analysis approved by the commissioner as being capable of detecting the presumptive presence of a drug, drug metabolite or alcohol in a sample. (3 j . "Job applicant" means a person, who applies to become an employee of the City of Shakopee, and includes a person who has received a job offer made contingent on the person passing drug and alcohol testing. k. "Positive test result" means a finding by a laboratory licensed by the State of Minnesota under M. S.A. Chapter 181 of the presence of drugs or their metabolites in the sample tested in levels at or above the threshold detection levels set by the commissioner, or a finding of the presence of alcohol in the sample tested of more than an alcohol concentration of . 05 percent; until threshold detection levels are set by the commissioner, the presence of a drug at or above the following levels shall be considered to be a positive test result: Initial Screening Confirmatory test Amphetamines 1, 000 ng/ml 500 ng/ml Barbiturates 300 ng/ml 300 ng/ml Benzodiazepines 300 ng/ml 300 ng/ml Cocaine metabolite 300 ng/ml 150 ng/ml Opiates 300 ng/ml 300 ng/ml PCP (phencyclidine) 25 ng/ml 25 ng/ml THC Metabolite (marijuana) 20 ng/ml 15 ng/ml 1. "Reasonable suspicion" means a basis for forming a belief based on specific facts and rational inferences drawn from those facts. m. "Safety-sensitive position" means a job, including any supervisory or management position, in which an impairment caused by drug or alcohol usage would threaten the health or safety of any person; all sworn and non- sworn personnel, excluding clerical employees, in the a. Shakopee Police Department are safety-sensitive positions. n. "Under the influence" means having the presence of a drug or alcohol at or above the level of a position test result. 2 . Scope of Coverage a. No employee shall be under the influence of any drug or alcohol while the employee is working or while the employee is on the employer' s premises or operating the employer ' s vehicle, machinery, or equipment, except to the extent authorized by a valid medical prescription. b. No employee shall use, possess, manufacture, distribute. dispense, sell or transfer drugs, alcohol or drug paraphernalia while the employee is working or while the employee is on the employer' s premises or operating the employer' s vehicle, machinery or equipment, except pursuant to a valid medical prescription or when engaged in law enforcement activity being conducted in accordance with Police Department policies and procedures. 3 . City Drug Awareness Program The City does provide an Employee Assistance Program to aid and assist City employees who are in need or have been referred for counseling and rehabilitation. Employees are encouraged to utilize the services of the Employee Assistance Program by contacting Emergency Consultation Service, telephone (612) 588-4471. Services are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 4 . Persons Subiect to Testing No person will be tested for drugs or alcohol under this policy without the person' s consent. The employer will request or require an individual to undergo drug or alcohol testing only under the circumstances described in this policy. 5 .Circumstances for Drug or Alcohol Testing a. Job Annlicants : Job applicants may be requested or required to undergo drug or alcohol testing after a job offer has been conditionally made and before commencing employment in the position. b. Reasonable Suspicion Testing: The employer may request or require an employee to undergo drug and alcohol testing if there is a reasonable suspicion that the employee: 1 . is under the influence of drugs or alcohol while the employee is working or while the employee is on the employer' s premises or operating the employer' s vehicle, machinery, or equipment; or 2 . used, possessed, sold or transferred drugs, alcohol or drug paraphernalia while the employee is working or while the employee is on the employer' s premises or operating the employer' s vehicle, machinery or equipment; or 3 . is under the influence of drugs or alcohol and has sustained a personal injury as that term is defined in Minnesota Statutes 176 . 11, Subd. 16 , or caused another person to die or sustain a personal injury; or 4 . is under the influence of drugs or alcohol and has caused a work-related accident or was operating or helping to operate machinery, equipment, or vehicles involved in a work-related accident resulting in total property damage exceeding $1, 000 ; or 13 5. has discharged afirearm other than (a) on a target range, or (b) while conducting authorized ballistics tests, or (c) as authorized by Shakopee Police Department concerning dangerous or suffering animals; or 6 . has, as determined only by employee ' s Department Head, or his official designate, or the City Administrator, engaged in an act or omission related to the performance of the job, whether committed on or off duty, that logically requires or justifies such testing, revealed as a clear and compelling necessity by the nature of the incident. c. Other Testing: The employer may permit an employee who has requested a drug or alcohol test to undergo testing in accordance with the procedures established by this policy. 6 . Refusal to undergo Testing a. Job applicants: If a job applicant refuses to undergo drug or alcohol testing requested or required by the employer, no such test shall be given, and the job applicant shall be deemed to have withdrawn the application for employment. b. Employees: If any employee refuses to undergo drug or alcohol testing requested or required by the employer, no such test shall be given, and the employer shall recommend to the City Council that the employee be discharged from employment on the grounds of insubordination. c. Refusal on religious grounds: No employee or job applicant who refuses to undergo drug or alcohol testing of a. blood sample upon religious ground shall be deemed to have refused unless the employee or job applicant also refuses to undergo drug or alcohol testing of a urine sample. 7 . Procedure for Testing a. Notification form: Before requesting an employee or job applicant to undergo drug or alcohol testing, the employer shall provide the individual with a form on which to (1) acknowledge that the individual has seen a copy of employer' s drug and alcohol testing policy, and (2) indicate any over-the-counter or prescription medications that the individual is currently taking or has recently taken and any other information relevant to the reliability of, or explanation for, a positive test result, and (3) indicate consent to undergo the drug and alcohol testing. b. Test Sample: The test sample shall be obtained in a private setting, and the procedures for taking the sample shall ensure privacy to employees and job applicants to the extent practicable, consistent with preventing tampering with the sample, and may include a witness, and shall conform with applicable rules of the commissioner. No test sample shall be taken on the employer' s premises and the test sample shall not be taken by City of Shakopee employees. c. Identification of Samples: Each sample shall be sealed into a suitable container free of any contamination that could affect test results. The sample shall be identified for processing by the licensed testing laboratory. d. Chain of Custody: A written record of the chain of custody of the sample which conforms to the rules adopted by the commissioner shall be maintained. Until rules are adopted by the commissioner the written record shall include a signature of each person accepting transfer of the sample and the date and time of the transfer. e. Laboratory: All drug or alcohol testing shall use the services of a testing laboratory licensed by the commissioner or qualifying under the transitional laboratory requirements set forth in Minnesota statutes ; however, no test shall be conducted by a testing laboratory owned and operated by the City of Shakopee. f. Methods of analysis: The testing laboratory shall use methods analysis and procedures to ensure reliable drug and alcohol testing results, including standards for initial screening test and confirmatory tests . g. Retention and storage: Retention and storage procedures shall comply with the rules adopted by the commissioner, and all samples, that produced a positive test result shall be retained and properly stored for at least six months . h. Test report: The testing laboratory shall prepare a written report indicating the drugs, alcohol, or their metabolites tested for, the types of test conducted, and whether the test produced negative or positive test results, and the testing laboratory shall disclose that report to the employer within three working days after obtaining the final test results. i. Notice of test results: Within three working days after receipt of the test result report from the testing laboratory, the employer shall inform an employee or job applicant who has undergone drug or alcohol testing in writing of a negative test result on an initial screening test or of a negative or positive test result on a confirmatory test. The employer shall also inform an employee or job applicant of the following rights pursuant to I. S .A. 181. 95 : 1. The right to request and receive from the employer a copy of the test result paper. 2 . The right to request within five working days after notice of a positive test result a confirmatory retest of the original sample at the employee ' s or job applicant ' s own expense. If a confirmatory retest is conducted in accordance with the rules adopted by the Commissioner, and by a licensed laboratory, and the confirmatory retest does not result in a positive test, the City shall reimburse the employee or job applicant the actual cost of the confirmatory retest in an amount not to exceed $100 . 00 . 3 . The right to submit information to the employer within three working days after a notice of a positive test result to explain that result. 4 . The right of an employee for whom a positive test result on a confirmatory test was the first such result on a drug or alcohol test requested by the employer not to be discharged unless the employer has first given the employee an opportunity to participate in either a drug or alcohol counseling or rehabilitation program. Participation in a counseling or rehabilitation program will be at the employee' s own expense or pursuant to coverage under an employee ' s benefit plan. The employer may determine which type of program is more appropriate for the employee after consultation with a certified chemical use counselor or a physician trained in the diagnosis and treatment of chemical dependency. The employee may be discharged if he/she has either refused to participate in the counseling or rehabilitation program, or has failed to successfully complete the program. Withdrawal from the program before its completion or a positive test result on a confirmatory test after completion of the program will be considered evidence that the employee failed to successfully complete the program. 5 . The right to be reinstated with back pay if the outcome of the confirmatory or requested confirmatory retest is negative. 6 . The right not to be discharged, disciplined, discriminated against, or required to be rehabilitated on the basis of medical history information revealed to the employer concerning the reliability of, or explanation for, a positive test result unless the employee or job applicant was under an affirmative duty to provide the information before, upon, or after hire. 7 . The right to access the information in their personnel file relating to positive test result reports and other information acquired in the drug and alcohol testing process including conclusions drawn from and actions taken based on the reports or other acquired information. 8 . The right of an employee or a job applicant, who has received a job offer made contingent on the applicant passing drug and alcohol testing, to not have the offer withdrawn based on a positive test result from an initial screening test that has not been verified by a confirmatory test. 8 . Action After Test a. Job Applicant: The employer will not withdraw an offer of employment made contingent on the job applicant on the job applicant passing drug and alcohol testing based on a positive test result from an initial screening test that has not been verified by a confirmatory test. Where there has been a positive test result in a confirmatory test and in any confirmatory retest, the employer will withdraw the contingent offer of employment if the employer determines in accord with the Minnesota Human Rights Act that alcohol or drug usage or abuse: (1) prevents the job applicant from performing the essential functions of the job in questions; or (2) constitutes a direct threat to property or the safety of others; or (3) otherwise constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. b. Employees : The employer will not discharge, discipline, discriminate against, or request or require rehabilitation of an employee solely on the basis of a positive test result from an initial screening test that has not been verified by a confirmatory test. Where there has been a positive test result in a confirmatory test and in any confirmatory retest, the employer may do the following: 1. First Positive Test Result: Give the employee an opportunity to participate in either a drug or alcohol counseling or rehabilitation program, whichever is more appropriate. The employer through its Employee Assistance Program may determine which program is more appropriate after consultation with a certified chemical use counselor or physician trained in the diagnosis and treatment of chemical dependency. Participation in a counseling or rehabilitation program will be at the employee ' s won expense or pursuant to coverage under an employee ' s own benefit plan. If the employee wither refuses to participate in the counseling or rehabilitation program or fails to successfully complete the program, as evidenced by i 3 -Vv withdrawal from the program before its completion or by a positive test on a confirmatory test after completion of the program, and alcohol or drug abuse prevents the employee from performing the essential functions of the job in question or constitutes a direct threat to property or the safety of other or otherwise constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification, the employer will recommend to the City Council that the employee be discharged from employment. 2 . Second Positive Test Result: Where alcohol or drug abuse prevents the employee from performing the essential function of the job in question or constitutes a direct threat to property or the safety of others or otherwise constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification, the employer will f recommend to the City Council that the employee be disciplined; including, but not limited to, discharge from employment. 3 . Suspensions and Transfers: Notwithstanding any other provisions herein, the employer may temporarily suspend the tested employee with pay for up to 90 days or transfer that employee to another position at the same rate of pay pending the outcome of the confirmatory test and, if requested, the confirmatory retest, provided the employer believes that it is reasonable necessary to protect the health or safety of the employee, co-employees, or the public. 4 . Other Misconduct: Nothing in this policy limits the right of the employer to discipline or discharge an employee on grounds other than a positive test result in a confirmatory test, including conviction of any criminal drug statute for a violation occurring in the workplace. 9 . Data Privacy ` The employer will not disclose the test result reports and other information acquired in the drug or alcohol testing process to another employer or to a third party individual, governmental agency, or private organization without the written consent of the employee tested, unless permitted by law or court order. 10 . Rights of Employees An employee has a right to offer the employer a written explanation of a positive test result on a confirmatory test within three working days after notice of the positive test result, and has a right to request within five working days after notice of a positive test result a confirmatory retest of the original sample at another licensed testing laboratory at the employee ' s or job applicant' s own expense. 11. Appeal Procedure Employees may appeal decisions made by the employer under this policy through the remedies available through their collective bargaining units. Employees who are not represented by a collective bargaining unit, may appeal decisions through remedies as defined in Section 18 and Section 20, Subd. 4 of the City' s Personnel Policy. The City will not retaliate against an employee for pursuing an appeal or the other remedies provided in Minn. Stat. 181. 956 . 12 . Good Faith Effort The City of Shakopee will make a continuing good faith effort to maintain a drug-free workplace through the implementation of its Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy. L 3 � CITY OF SHAKOPEE * * * NOTIFICATION FORM AND CONSENT FOR DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING I acknowledge that I have seen and read the City of Shakopee Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy. I hereby consent to undergo drug and/or alcohol seting pursuant to said policy, and I authorize a collection of a urine, blood and/or breath sample from mw for those purposes. I understand that the procedure employed in this process will ensure the integrity of the sample and is designed to comply with medicolegal requirements . I understand that the results of this drug and alcohol testing may be discussed with and/or made available to my employer, the City of Shakopee. I further understand that the results of this tesing may affect my employment status, as described in the policy. I am currently taking, or have recently (within the last month) taken, the following over-the-counter or prescription medications (if none, write "none") : Other information relevant to the reliability of, or explanation for, a positive test result, (if none, write "none") : Signature Date Witness Date CITY OF SHAKOPEE * * * I hereby refuse to submit to a drug or alcohol test. I have seen a copy of the Drug and Alcohol Testing Policy of the City and understand that a refusal to submit to testing may subject me to discipline including, but not limited to, discharge. Signature Date Witness Date CONSENT /5'CL/ MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator RE: Ordinance No. 290 Establishing a Park and Recreation Advisory Board DATE: May 25, 1990 INTRODUCTION: On May 1, 1990 the Shakopee City Council directed that appropriate City officials prepare the necessary Ordinance amending the City Code creating a Park and Recreation Advisory Board. BACKGROUND: Section 2 . 51 of the Shakopee City Code established the Community Recreation Board. Since the School Board has informed the City of Shakopee that they intend to terminate the Joint Powers Agreement effective December 31, 1990, it becomes necessary for the City of Shakopee to create a new Board within the City Code which addresses Park and Recreation programming and development. Shown in Attachment #1 is Ordinance No. 290 which establishes a Park and Recreation Advisory Board and sets forth the duties and responsibilities of said board. The existing Community Recreation Board will remain in tact through December 31, 1990 . Ordinance No. 290 as proposed repeals Section 2 . 51 (which created the Community Recreation Board) in its entirety effective December 31, 1990 and adopts a new section creating the Park and Recreation Advisory Board. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Ordinance as to form. Approval of the proposed Ordinance allows the City of Shakopee the opportunity to create a Park and Recreation Advisory Board and appoint its membership while the existing Community Recreation Board is still in tact. This will provide the City of Shakopee with a smooth transition period. It will also allow the new Park and Recreation Advisory Board to develop and create programs and policies that are currently not within the jurisdiction of the Community Recreation Board. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Offer Ordinance No. 290, an Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending the Shakopee City Code by repealing Section 2 . 51 as of December 31, 1990 and enacting a new Section 2 . 57 establishing a Park and Recreation Advisory Board and by adopting by reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 2 . 99 which among other things contain penalty provisions, and move its adoption. 2 . Amend and offer the proposed Ordinance for adoption. 3 . Table action pending further information from staff. 11/. a, STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative #l . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Ordinance No. 290, an Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending the Shakopee City Code by repealing Section 2 . 57 as of December 31, 1990 and enacting a new Section 2 . 51 establishing a Park and Recreation Advisory Board and by adopting by reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 2 . 99 which among other things contain penalty provisions, and move its adoption. ORDINANCE NO. 290, FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE BY REPEALING SECTION 2 . 51 AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1990 AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 2 .57 ESTABLISHING A PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SEC. 2 .99 WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISION. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: SECTION I : REPEAL Section 2 . 51 of the Shakopee City Code is hereby repealed in it' s entirety as of December 31, 1990 . SECTION II : A new section of the Shakopee City Code is hereby enacted as follows: Section 2 . 57 Park And Recreation Advisory Board Subdivision 1. Advisory Board Established and Duties Prescribed. A Shakopee Park and Recreation Advisory Board is hereby established. The Park and Recreation Advisory Board shall have advisory powers and shall be subordinate to the City Council . The duties of this Advisory Board shall consist of making recommendations to City Council on establishing policies and programs relating to park, recreation and leisure services. This includes, but is not limited to, the following: A. The Board shall make recommendations to the City Council regarding park development including the maintenance and upgrade of facilities and equipment, as well as location of new parks and what facilities they shall include. B. The Board shall make recommendations to the City Council concerning park land acquisition procedures and park dedication requirements. C. The Board shall be responsible for submitting an annual and five year capital improvement program, outlining recommended improvements to existing and proposed park lands prior to July 1 of each year. D. The Board shall make recommendations and l a, submit to City Council an annual operating budget and schedule for recreational program fees. Subdivision 2 . Composition of Commission. The Park and Recreation Advisory Board shall consist of seven members appointed by the Council having staggered terms of three years each. Appointment shall be made by resolution naming the board members and setting the term of office. Vacancies occurring thereafter shall be filled for the unexpired term of the vacant office and shall be by resolution adopted by a majority vote of the Council . The composition of the Board may include citizens from the community representing the following interests in the community: A. School B. Community Organization(s) C. General Public D. Senior Citizens Subdivision 3 . Proceedings. The Board shall adopt Robert' s Rules of Order (Newly revised) and shall adopt such other and further rules for it' s own proceedings as it shall, from time to time, deem expedient and shall meet periodically at set times and at other times upon call by a majority of it' s members. SECTION III . General Provisions Adopted Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 entitled "General Provision and Definition" applicable to the entire City Code including penalty for provisions and Section 2 . 99 , entitled "Violations and Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION IV. When in Force and Effect After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1990. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Q/ ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this day of , 1990. City Attorney CONSENT J 'b MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Resolution No. 3238 DATE: May 29 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: City Council is asked to consider adopting the attached Resolution No. 3238 , which excuses a condition of approval of the Registered Land Survey approved on February 20, 1990. BACKGROUND: On February 20, 1990, City Council adopted Resolution No. 3200 approving a registered land survey submitted by Jon Albinson of Valley Industrial Realty. You will recall that this RLS included the property subsequently purchased by FMG. One of the conditions of approval of the RLS was that Tract E shall be deeded to the City immediately following the recording of the RLS . Mr. Albinson proceeded to follow up with this request after the recording of the RLS. During this process he was advised by his legal counsel that the city had already been "granted public road easements on this property and that the city does not require anything more than that which they already have. (The city was provided a 60 ' permanent easement for the right to construct, alter, maintain and repair a public roadway, storm sewer and utilities in 1984 prior to the construction of 12th Avenue and Valley Park Drive. This provided an additional access to the race track) . After consulting with the City Attorney, staff is of the opinion that the city does in fact possess the rights necessary to utilize Tract E for roadway purposes. Requiring the conveyance of Tract E, by deed, is more than the city requires when a road is dedicated to the public in a plat. ALTERNATIVES: a] Require Tract E to be deeded to the city b] Do not require Tract E to be deeded to the city RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative "b" , do not require Tract E to be deeded to the city. Instead, staff recommends that the attached Resolution No. 3238 be adopted excusing the condition contained in Resolution No. 3200 requiring the deeding of Tract E. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3238 , A Resolution Excusing A Condition of Approval of A Registered Land Survey Approved By Resolution No. 3200, and move its adoption. VALLEY INDUSTRIAL REALTY April 18 , 1990 Ms. Judy Cox City Clerk City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Tract E (12th Avenue and Valley Park Drive Roadway) Registered Land Survey #134 Dear Judy: As provided for in resolution #3200 passed by the City Council on February 20th, the applicant is required to provide the City with title to Tract E immediately following the recording of the Registered Land Survey. We have discussed this with our legal counsel and he has informed us that the City was previously granted public road easements on this property and that the City does not require anything more than that which they already have. The original grant of easement was recorded in 1984 as document #29522 , granting a 60 foot wide easement. That was expanded by the recent grant widening the easement for drainage and utility purposes. Ideally, as Provided for in the granting of this easement in 1984 , the City supposedly has all the rights and interest that can be granted. The unresolved question is whether we have been paying property taxes on this roadway easement from that point in time to the present. We believe this may very well be the case, and we would request that you assist me in verifing whether taxes have or have not been paid by the owners on this easement area. If this is the case, we would wish to recover those payments. 1244 Canterbury Rd., P.O. Box 509, Shakopee,MN 55379 • Bus.: 612-445-3242 April 18, 1990 Page 2 Please check with the City Attorney to see if our understanding of the need for additional documentation on this Tract E is necessary. It is my understanding no additional documents will be required to provide the City with the legal interest that they have requested. In addition, if you could assist me in determining the status of the taxes on the area in question and if the owners have been paying for those during the period of time after the filing of the grant of easement in 1984 . Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Respectfully, VALLEY INDUSTRIAL REALTY GYZ/ Jon R. Albinson Broker/Manager c.c. Brian Brennan Dick Peterson / fr JULIUS A. COLLTE �R, II JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 6,2-445-1244 1859.1940 211 WEST FIRST AVENUE SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 553Z9 April 25, 1990 Memo to: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk From: Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney Re: Tract E. RLS 134 This is with reference to an easement for roadway purposes and/or deed for Tract E of Registered Land Survey 134. In 1984 you advised that the City received an easement for roadway purposes for 12th Ave. and Valley Park Drive which is the same land in question and when the RLS 134 went through the City review process there was a condition placed on the approval which stated "Tract E shall be deeded to the City immediately following the recording of the RLS." The requirement for a deed is superfluous. The City already has an easement and the deed would add nothing to what the City already has except fee interest in the underlining land which I am sure the City is not interested in. Respectfully yours, Julius A. Coller, II JAC/nh P.S. The enclosed certificate of Insurance issued to Gopher State Expositions, Inc. with the City of Shakopee and others listed as holders is acceptable in its present form and is enclosed herewith. 14 RESOLUTION NO. 3238 A RESOLUTION EXCUSING A CONDITION OF APPROVAL OF A REGISTERED LAND SURVEY APPROVED BY RESOLUTION NO. 3200 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 3200 approved a registered land survey encompassing Parcel No. ' s 27-904011-0, 29-909012-0, 27-909012-1, 27-910001-0, 27-910003-0, 27-910003-1 and 27-910007-0 ; and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. 3200 contained a condition of approval stating that Tract E shall be deeded to the City immediately following recording of the registered land survey; and WHEREAS, a permanent easement for roadway, storm sewer and utility purposes was conveyed to the City in 1984 when 12th Avenue and Valley Park Drive were constructed; and WHEREAS, the conveyance of Tract E to the City by deed would add nothing to what the City already has except fee interest in the underlying land which the City is not interested in. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the requirement of condition number six (6) of Resolution No. 3200 that "Tract E shall be deeded to the City immediately following recording of the Registered Land Survey" , now know as RLS-134 , be and the same is hereby excused. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1990 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1990. City Attorney s l �� CONSENT MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Directoc '- SUBJECT: Street Light on Tyler Street DATE: May 30, 1990 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3240, calling for a public hearing on street light improvements to Tyler Street between 12th Avenue and Vierling Drive. BACKGROUND: On May 15, 1990 the City Council of Shakopee discussed the request from a citizen group to install a street light on Tyler Street, between 12th Avenue and Vierling Drive. The City Council essentially decided that they would utilize the special assessment funding mechanism to pay for all new street light requests and directed staff to prepare a resolution calling for a public hearing on the particular street light. Attached is Resolution No. 3240 which sets the public hearing for the street light request on Tyler Street. The public hearing has been set for June 19, 1990 at 7:30 P.M. The proposed improvement consists of installing a single street light mid-block on this street. The estimate for this work as provided by the Shakopee Public Utilities Manager is $1, 164 . 00. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3240, which sets the public hearing on the proposed street light for June 19, 1990. 2 . Adopt Resolution No. 3240 but set the public hearing for a different date. 3 . Deny Resolution No. 3240. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3240, A Resolution Calling for a Public Hearing on Street Light Improvements to Tyler Street between 12th Avenue and Vierling Drive, Project No. 1990-9 and move its adoption. DH/pmp RESOLUTION NO. 3240 A Resolution Calling A Public Hearing On Street Lights Improvements To Tyler Street Between 12th Avenue and Vierling Drive WHEREAS, on May 15, 1990 the City Council discussed the request to install a new street light on Tyler Street between 12th Avenue and Vierling Drive; and WHEREAS, the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission has provided the City Council of the cost estimate to install the new light and the Public Works Director has submitted a memo to Council reporting on the funding alternatives and estimated assessments; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee ' s Special Assessment Policy adopted August 1, 1987 by Resolution No. 1282 allows for funding new street lights by special assessments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. The Council will consider the improvement of a street light on Tyler Street between 12th Avenue and Vierling Drive and the assessment of abutting and benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $1, 164 . 00 . 2 . A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 19th day of June, 1990, at 7 : 30 P.M. , or thereafter, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 129 East 1st Avenue and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. 3 . The work of this project will be completed by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission and is hereby designated as part of the 1990-9 Public Improvement Program. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 19 City Attorney COkISENT / 'ICI MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator / FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Directo17--Dkj SUBJECT: Adams Street Project DATE: May 30, 1990 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3239, authorizing staff to advertise for bids for the Adams Street Project. BACKGROUND: On January 2 , 1990 the City Council of Shakopee ordered plans and specifications prepared for the Adams Street Project by Resolution No. 3166. This project consists of adding pavement and curb & gutter to Adams Street, between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue and also 4th Avenue, between Adams Street and Harrison Street. Plans and specifications are now completed and staff is seeking Council authorizaton to advertise for bids on the project. Staff has been waiting for Mn/DOT approval of the plans since this is a State Aid Project and staff has recently received their approval for the plans and specifications. The proposed bidding and construction schedule for this project is as follows: June 7 , 14 , 21 Advertise for Bids June 29 Open Bids July 3 Council Awards Contract July 16 - October 1 Construction Period A copy of the plans and specifications will be available at the Council meeting for review and comment or they can be inspected ahead of time in the Engineering Department. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3239 . 2 . Deny Resolution No. 3239 . 3 . Table Resolution No. 3239 . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. )PIL ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3239 , A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Adams Street, between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue and 4th Avenue, between Adams Street and Harrison Street, Project No. 1990-3 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3239 RESOLUTION NO. 3239 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For Adams Street, Between 6th Avenue And 3rd Avenue And 4th Avenue Between Adams Street And Harrison Street Project No. 1990-3 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 3166 adopted by City Council on January 2 , 1990, Dave Hutton, Public Works Director has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of Adams Street, between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue and 4th Avenue, between Adams Street and Harrison Street by pavement, curb & gutter and storm sewer and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file and of record in the Office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2 . The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertise- ment for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The Advertisement for Bids shall be published for three weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the City Clerk until 10: 00 A.M. , on June 29, 1990, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, or their designated party, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by the Council at 7: 30 P.M. , or thereafter on July 3 , 1990, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier' s check, bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of Shakopee for not less than five (5%) percent of the amount of the Bid. 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 Cleric. Approved as to form this day of , 19 City Attorney CONSENT MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Cler _ RE: Resolution No. 3237, Appor ioning Existing Assessments Within Meadows 4th Addition DATE: May 24 , 1990 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: The Developer' s Agreement for the Meadows 4th Addition contained the apportionment of the existing special assessments against the new lots created as a result of the plat of the Meadows 4th Addition. The attached Resolution No. 3237 formally apportions the special assessments against the new lots of record. The Developer has been provided a copy of this apportionment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 3237 , A Resolution Apportioning Assessments Among New Parcels Created as a Result of Platting of the Meadows 4th Addition, and move its adoption. JSC/tiv RESOLUTION NO. 3237 A RESOLUTION APPORTIONING ASSESSMENTS AMONG NEW PARCELS CREATED AS A RESULT OF PLATTING OF THE MEADOWS 4TH ADDITION WHEREAS, on August 25, 1981, Resolution No. 1891 adopted by the City Council levied assessments against properties benefitted by construction of the 1981-1 V.I. P. Interceptor; and WHEREAS , on September 20, 1988 , Resolution No. 2946 adopted by the City Council levied assessments against properties benefitted by construction of the Valley Industrial Park Sewer Extension from the West side of County Road 17 to the East side of County Road 79 , Project No. 1987-13 ; and WHEREAS , on October 18 , 1988, Resolution No. 2974 adopted by the City Council apportioned the installments remaining unpaid against the parcels created because of the platting of Meadows 1st Addition; and WHEREAS, on October 3 , 1989, Resolution No. 3121 adopted by the City Council apportioned the installments remaining unpaid against the parcels created because of the platting of Meadows 2nd Addition; and WHEREAS, Outlots B and E of Meadows 1st Addition and Outlots A and D of Meadows 2nd Addition have been subdivided into the plat of Meadows 4th Addition; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to apportion the installments remaining unpaid against these Outlots because of the platting of Meadows 4th Addition; and WHEREAS, the property owners involved have been notified of this proposed action. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1) That the 1990 payable remaining balance of assessments: a] To parcel #27-136055-0 is $8, 434 . 26 for the 1981-1 V. I . P. Interceptor and is $32, 674 .86 for the 1987-13 V. I . P. Sanitary Sewer Extension b) To parcel #27-136058-0 is $5, 147 . 67 for the 1981-1 V. I . P. Interceptor and is $19, 942 . 61 for the 1987-13 V. I . P. Sanitary Sewer Extension c] To parcel #27-143032-0 is $695. 84 for the 1981-1 V. I . P. Interceptor and is $2, 695.76 for the 1987-13 V. I . P. Sanitary Sewer Extension Resolution No. 3237 d) To parcel #27-143035-0 is $204 . 36 for the 1981-1 V. I . P. Interceptor and is $791. 69 for the 1987-13 V. I . P. Sanitary Sewer Extension are hereby apportioned as outlined in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2) That all other parts of Resolution Numbers 1891, 2946, 2974 , and 3121 shall continue in effect. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 5th day of June, 1990. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this 5th day of June, 1990 . City Attorney pg 1 of 3 I ,GyV kOG EXHIBIT "A" `1 to Res . No . 3237 ASSESSMENT REAPPORTIONMENT TABLE P. I. D. NO. DESCRIPTION 1981-1(55) 1987-13 (63) TOTAL 27-136058-0 OUTLOT E $5, 037.73 $19, 516 . 70 $24, 554 . 43 MEADOWS 1ST 27-136055-0 OUTLOT B $7, 561. 22 $29 , 292 . 63 $36, 853 . 85 MEADOWS 1ST 27-150001-0 LOT 1 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150003-0 LOT 3 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150005-0 LOT 5 BLK 1 $52 .54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150007-0 LOT 7 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-105009-0 LOT 9 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150011-0 LOT 11 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150013-0 LOT 13 BLK 1 $52 .54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150015-0 LOT 15 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150016-0 LOT 16 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150017-0 LOT 17 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150018-0 LOT 18 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150019-0 LOT 19 BLK 1 $52 .54 $203 . 54 $256. 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150020-0 LOT 20 BLK 1 $52 .54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150021-0 LOT 21 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256 . 08 MEADOWS 4TH pg 2 of 3 ASSESSMENT REAPPORTIONMENT TABLE P. I. D. NO. DESCRIPTION 1981-1 (55) 1987-13 (63) TOTAL 27-150022-0 LOT 22 BLK 1 $52 . 54 $203 . 54 $256. 08 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150023-0 LOT 1 BLK 2 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150024-0 LOT 2 BLK 2 $49. 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150026-0 LOT 4 BLK 2 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150027-0 LOT 1 BLK 3 $49 .51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150028-0 LOT 2 BLK 3 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150030-0 LOT 4 BLK 3 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150031-0 LOT 1 BLK 4 $49. 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150032-0 LOT 2 BLK 4 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150033-0 LOT 3 BLK 4 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150034-0 LOT 4 BLK 4 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150035-0 LOT 5 BLK 4 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150036-0 LOT 1 BLK 5 $49 . 51 $191 . 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150037-0 LOT 2 BLK 5 $49 .51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150038-0 LOT 1 BLK 6 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH , 27-150039-0 LOT 2 BLK 6 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH pg 3 of 31101_,,101_,, ASSESSMENT REAPPORTIONMENT TABLE P. I . D. NO. DESCRIPTION 1981-1 (55) 1987-13 (63) TOTAL 27-150040-0 LOT 3 BLK 6 $49 . 51 $191 .80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150041-0 LOT 1 BLK 7 $49 . 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150042-0 LOT 2 BLK 7 $49. 51 $191. 80 $241. 31 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150043-0 OUTLOT A $175.90 $681.46 $857 . 36 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150044-0 OUTLOT B $10. 35 $40. 09 $50.44 MEADOWS 4TH 27-150045-0 OUTLOT C $17.71 $68 . 61 $86. 32 MEADOWS 4TH TOTAL $14 ,482 . 19 $56, 104 . 99 $70, 587 . 18 NOTE: IN BLOCK 1 LOTS 1&2 , 3&4 , 5&6,7&8, 9&10, 11&12 , 13&14 are combined respectively. Also combined are lots 2&3 blk 2 and lots 2&3 blk 3 .