Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/1990 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: September 14 , 1990 1 . Attached please find a copy of Resolution No. 3275 relating to the Noise Variance for the Shakopee Bypass adopted August 21, 1990. This resolution received minor changes after adoption by the City Council. Staff never makes changes to resolutions after being adopted by City Council, but an exception was made for this resolution because of the time frame. The minor changes made (highlighted) were recommended by Colleen Trendy, Assistant City Attorney' s office. Judy Cox. 2 . Just a reminder for R.S.V. P. ' s for Jack' s party. We will only be accepting the first 300 people who R.S.V.P. with a check ($10 . 00 per person) . The invitation has now gone out to the public, so if you wish to attend please R.S.V. P. early! Thanks, Tami. 3 . Attached is a memorandum from Lindberg Ekola regarding the Southwest Communities Coalition Meeting. 4 . Attached is a memorandum from Lindberg Ekola regarding the Street Light Policy Development. 5. Attached is the revenue and expenditure reports as of August 31, 1990. 6 . Attached are the minutes of the Committee of the Whole. They will be placed on the next agenda of the Committee of the Whole. 7 . Attached is a letter from the Minnesota Department of Health regarding pesticide analyses conducted on water samples. 8 . Attached is the September 19th agenda for the Community Development Commission. 9 . Attached are the August 15, 1990 minutes of the Community Development Commission. 10. Attached is September 19th agenda for the Energy and Transportation Committee. 11 . Attached are the August 15, 1990 minutes of the Energy and Transportation Committee. 12 . Attached is a letter that was sent out to City Administrators and Mayors of surrounding cities informing them of the Chamber of Commerce General Membership meeting on Wed. , Sept. 26th. The guest speaker will be Larry Bakken, President of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) . Mayor Laurent would like to encourage you to attend. 13 . Attached is the Police Newsletter for Council review. 14 . Attached is the August Building Activity Report. 15. Attached is a memorandum from Dennis Kraft regarding payment of second $25, 000 to Murphy' s Landing. 16. Attached is a memorandum from Dennis Kraft regarding the Annual ICMA Conference. 17 . Attached is a memo from the City Clerk regarding the renewal of pulltab license for Pheasants Preservation Inc. 4 / RESOLUTION NO. 3275 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE GRANTING OF A NOISE VARIANCE TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, WITH CERTAIN CONDITIONS FOR THE SHAKOPEE BYPASS WHEREAS, on January 16, 1990 the Shakopee City Council went on record opposing the granting of a noise variance by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) for the Shakopee Bypass Project (specifically affecting the property owned by Paul and Geraldine Schmitz) ; and WHEREAS, at the regular meeting on August 7 , 1990, Mr. Schmitz indicated to the City Council that he would be agreeable to having his home soundproofed as a means of mitigating the noise problem which will be created by the construction of the Shakopee Bypass; and WHEREAS , at the regular Council meeting on August 21, 1990, Mr. Schmitz agreed to accept an amount of $20, 000 as total remedial compensation from the City of Shakopee, as an alternative to soundproofing his home; and WHEREAS, both the Schmitz and the City Council desire to remedy the noise pollution problem in order to facilitate the construction of the Shakopee Bypass; and WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee made a commitment to contribute $1. 0 million to the Shakopee Bypass design costs on December 17 , 1985, pursuant to a letter from W. M. Crawford, District Engineer, MnDOT, dated November 4 , 1985 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that: 1) the City of Shakopee hereby recommends the granting of a noise variance and the granting of an Indirect Source Permit by the MPCA to MnDOT for the Shakopee Bypass Project (specifically affecting the Paul Schmitz property) contingent upon the Schmitz ' s entering into an agreement with the City which will provide for the city either: a] paying the actual cost of a consultant study and the installation of insulation in order to mitigate the noise problem affecting the Schmitz residence, or, b] in the alternative, paying the amount of $20, 000 to Mr. & Mrs. Schmitz as total compensation to be, paid in lieu of all costs for consulting services, all costs for noise mitigation measures and all costs for attorneys fees, provided that this alternative payment by the City shall be acceptable to both MPCA and MnDOT; 1 provided that the Schmitz agree to respond in writing to the MPCA recommending the granting of the noise variance for the Shakopee Bypass Project prior to August 28 , 1990, and further provided that MnDOT enter into a letter of understanding with the City of Shakopee allowing for a reduction in the City' s $1 million commitment for design services for the Shakopee Bypass Project in an amount equal to either the actual costs for the consultant services and noise mitigation measures (but not to exceed $50, 000) ; or, payment of $20, 000 as described as an alternative, if such alternative is acceptable to MnDOT and MPCA. 2) the appropriate city officials are hereby authorized and directed to enter into an agreement with Mn DOT allowing for a reduction in the City' s $1. 0 million commitment for design services for the Shakopee Bypass, in an amount not to exceed $50, 000, (but to be no more than the actual cost of noise mitigation measures) including any consultant or study fees or expenses; or, in the alternative, an amount of $20, 000 which shall constitute total compensation to Mr. and Mrs. Schmitz . 3) upon execution of an agreement with MnDOT, as authorized in 2 above, the appropriate city officials are hereby authorized and directed to enter into an agreement with Mr. & Mrs. Paul Schmitz to pay for a consultant study and appropriate sound mitigation measures for their residence in an amount not to exceed $50, 000, provided that the Schmitz agree to hold the city harmless for any problems which might arise out of the installation of sound insulation materials, including, but not limited to excess moisture accumulation; or, in the alternative, the city will pay an amount of $20, 000 to Mr. and Mrs. Schmitz , which shall constitute the total compensation to be paid in lieu of all costs for consulting services, all costs for noise mitigation measures and all costs for attorneys fees, provided that this alternative payment by the city shall be acceptable to both MPCA and MnDOT. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council approval of agreements identified in 2 & 3 above shall be null and void if the MPCA does not grant a noise variance and issue an indirect source permit for the Shakopee Bypass Project on August 28, 1990. Adopted in adj . reg. session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 21st day of August, 1990. Mayor of t • of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this )i. day of , 1990 . r • -� u)( Assistant City Attorney MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner RE: Southwest Communities Coalition Meeting DATE: September 13 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: On Thursday October 4 , 1990 at 7 : 30 a.m. the Southwest Communities Coalition will be holding a meeting with local elected officials. The meeting will be held at the Scott County Courthouse Assembly Room. Several topics will be discussed including the rural area development issues, the 40% non-point source reduction effort and the process for siting of a regional airport. q MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planners, RE: Street Light Policy Development DATE: September 12 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: On September 6, 1990 the Planning Commission reviewed information from staff on the development of a comprehensive street light policy. Additional time is needed for further policy development. This memo is informational. BACKGROUND: The City Council has requested that the Planning Commission work with the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) to review and update the City' s street lighting policies. Staff has requested that the engineering consultant to the City, Orr Schelen Mayeron and Associates (OSM) research the street light policies of surrounding metro cities and identify factors which impact street lighting in general . Attached is a letter from OSM which summarizes their recommendations on street lights. OSM also provided numerous studies and reports on street lighting. Included with the memo is a copy of the City of St. Paul street lighting policy. In developing this policy the report concludes that street lighting contributes significantly to the city' s identity. The policy is a result of a in-depth study of St. Paul ' s historic lighting features and the development of a plan to continue that tradition. As noted in the letter, the number of cities with clear policies on street lighting is limited. In developing this policy the Planning Commission is breaking new ground. To develop a comprehensive policy on street lighting for Shakopee, several tasks need to be completed. The brainstorming session on issues facing street lighting by the Planning Commission was one important step. Staff has listed several additional tasks which need to be taken to allow for an improved policy to be developed. DISCUSSION: The following list identifies some of the items that need to be addressed in developing a street light policy for Shakopee: 1. Goal setting - what do we want in terms of street lighting? 2 . Street light inventory - what do we have now? a. Locations - map all street lights b. Type of light - sodium, mercury, light wattage c. Pole design - height, natural, etc. d. Year installed e. Cost - installation, operation, maintenance 3 . Analyze future street light location through overlaying of maps. a. Street classification map - arterial, collector, local b. General land use map - residential, commercial, industrial , public c. Development intensity and type map - urban/rural , new/existing 4 . Compare street light inventory with analysis maps. 5. Develop street light design standards. 6. Develop street light policies. The most current inventory of street lights in Shakopee was taken in 1975. Obviously numerous lights have been installed. An essential preliminary step is to complete an updated inventory. With an updated inventory, staff can begin to analyze a series of base maps, including land use, street classification, development intensity and type and compare these maps with the existing street lights. In order to build this background information, City and SPUC staff need more time. When the inventory is near completion, staff will bring the research results back to the Planning Commission. The planning Commission will provide a final recommendation to the City Council and SPUC on a street light policy. ACTION REQUESTED: No action by the City Council is requested at this time. WWW -T1 r W W W W W W W W W W W W * W W W W W W W W W W * W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W * 000 D C WOL110 ,U,(,UIU,U 0(11(, * WWWWWWWWWW * * 000 DC (D N.....r r 0 0 0 0 * U A A W W N N N N N * M CDO W W W W W W W W r r r r 0 0 0 0VMAWNr0WW"40 * 01 .0VNAWNr0 * r00WWJO)0AWNANrOCCV * U1Nr 00 0 0M-n-CODMmrnrrD< r C)DC)30-0vxro) r 3O3SCnm(n£3MWOW1C)-I0C) -1 r r10CO C) zrnrrDU)rzzzOD Z m000-40000-I r r01 -irmmmrcrmr>ADD D O rm 0<rDrV)DOC)03r -I DC)CWDrr3C)D 0 000CmmZroCromoc>mW x 00)Z -ir -4 Z>-4-IC*1rfZ• r• rr Cn ZuZ►4-4r4r4m>-i m A 00m0mr23rD3CrC)rr m 00- -c rrz(n N ZAzm m -lrnJrmC)C)V)rm z • r• rm-17D DWOm 0m7Crnm N rD 0 mzC) 1 000)C)mmr< C) NC)-cm mm-I Cl, z--4m -zrrmrA zrr mC) 0 mm m-n32mm<Cnm 0 1 D = rn0C) m ZC)WC) i-iR..mr-Izz-C r-4 -n-n>m C) Cn Cnm m O0�1m mm>mm-4D < O-Im=E-I(n>OA N OmC 00 u000-40rmm0A 0< Oz rnl.l0Z00rzmr m -irn00<m-I0<> zZ03-0>£3D mms-+DDOC -41.-+{ Am N <rnm00--17ZmZCDm Z S D3• DD <z 9* 1 N• DmrDrrmm z0Zzmr D0A rm _ Dm ZC) Om-4 3 m-40m3rr-4 --C Wm r•+Z --i-•) mmrlm000v xmT -u> D rrn I CU"n"*1 r m mD DZr*1 DV) m CU) O Zrmmommm Hmz 2=Cn D -Ir 7C Cn <3mmmC,)C< z x!* rr r m N m-IZmM Cn33C)001-41-1 3 MC) r 0 Dr*1Dmmm0m -4 0 zZD 0 a • 73 OM Mrr-,m M00-713* rC Om - MZz MZ > 0 Co -(C)1-1 Cn 3 Im 3.O 1-4-12 U)mmmr-i -•iz ZC m 1 -40 <0�1 r < m • 0 r-( r rrm-Or-+m 1-1(poo mz Hm z m C)N S r m -1 r -I r -40M-1M -1 m 0-4 MM 0 0 m O'1(*1 • 0 D v) 0 U)0M(n3 Cl) N OZ Z Cl, mm(n 0 r I r -1 0 OM C m O r -( Z -1 N C 1.1 D N 0 --I r rn N 0 m N -Im m m z C MO C XI r N J V N 0 r1D m A CO r r Co r r 0)(D V 0) r U1 m m rnrNAr0 A 0) O) 00 NVWrAA0 A V AN m 0Aoo A(DV Cl) (D (D N I-0)O Vr0 oo0 Co U, CD U1 DZ rAoo G)U1N Co Co m r Co OOCOWNNJO 0 0 OW 0� < 000O000(0000>0 0 0000000000 (D 0000000,00W0000r00 V (0Oo0 C m 0000010000000 0 0000000000 W 0000000000410000000 N NO0 > Z O C Z m -I <_ m D m m r > v Z c) 0 m z -o C) -I r r - - m r Co NN N (D rV U) r 0) Nr 0) r -4,1w CD r r o0 Co N(O 0 V N O -I N VANO)NU 00 0 0) rUNNAC Co rWN U1WO Ar00 W 0(71W • OW 00(,000 00 co U1 o(DNOON co N(D U10UiU,,U10-1(1000 (D 00(0 m 00 000000 0 0 A 0 00000> 0 00 000000000000 V 00-4 m 00 000000 00 (, 0 00000(, 0 00 000000000000 U1 00o < 000000000000 0 0000000000 0 000000000000000000 0 000 z 000000000000 0 0000000000 0 000000000000000000 0 000 C m r A r r N r (D V > W 0 r r r .-411:1N V r r N O O)r W W A(D(D Wrr(DNN A(0 Co 0) 01 r-40 OO NNOor WON 0)WWN 0 0()1A ."O WNNOCOV (O141 r N rW O)U1O0W (0 OrrNWVAAA(Orr11VWW 0) ,NOO D 00W000 Or 0 N rA CDA0)r (D AOOO)O)NOW(,VOO)AJ(DOOV V JU1w D-I N 0)r0)WW0 V(D a0 0 Wm O)N(D(D V A(ON(,U1(D-ONr'1010oON r WWW 00 O 00000A00)0A0 UiW CO 0000000000 W 00000-4000NNNOOOr1O00 W OOOA C -Ti 000000r0A000) 00 ONOO)000000 (D 00000000NOOrU0U00000 r AOV rO CO D 1 W -I r N r" W (0 1 N Co I- A -40) r r 0 J WNO m (D N WNrW N 0 N N OW (D N Or VJV NNW-•4 W A10(D 0 OW 0VN000N OA V N CANWA( (l) 00 Ul VNOOV0 (DAr U10 V0)0) Cl) AVr D 00 (D(D000(D (Doo W -4 COAOO,Vr 0 ArWO)N,0)U1V001VCrN O NAW M 00 WooAWWW NO 0) (D CCOAVO)(O N ArrCp(11U(O(DONrVW0O)AJ W 0)00) D 000NO)00)oU0(,0) r Q4O(DU100U1O0 Co 00000J000NNJOOOOOroO CO (ONU) Z m 000000r0Co0A N 0000A000000 r 000000O0NOOrU100N000 (D MOW 0 D 1 I I 1 1 1 m G) 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ) 1 1 r.-r- 1 1 N r r 1 r r m N r r UIWAAAM OW M W r0 (OVA W (Or 0A0WAUINNA00)W A U1VA U'0(OWON WO W 0 rN (DN(..) W ACO UTA J OAU1000)A O)0) Co AO)• 'O 00 0 A 0 N N Co N W V Woo 0)r U1 A 00 O W N O(O W N CO O 0)(D O (D r N 0) 0 r (A * WW * W W W W W * W * (4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4 -11 r * (0(O * 00 00 00 00 00 * 0) * 000)000)U)Ut OV1 Ul N Ut(11U)N U)U10 DC (0 * r-0 * CNNN I• * 00 * U,tU1V1 V,AAAAWWWWNNNNN C)Z (0 * 00 * ONr00 * O * AWNOWNrO0WN0-VMAW0-- C)0 0 -1 0-4 3 3 C)v(n rr C) C) C) C)m z z 3 V0 D 0 Z-n v 3 C)-I(n 3 v C A m mm r- r+OrnDZ 0 0 x 0-+xrnms-4Z0mD-00-+00-i--C ZO M D CD (n VOZZ1-1 C C > -{- C),0V00-+3D-I C0zmm000 -r -4 z OZ 0 0-1-4(nm m z v <z<c0Ir(nmmZC)C)r,mC)r \ < U) fn m mm A •••1 --1 O >00- 1000 2 0. m Z m• r( 0 ') Om r r r-i (DM m v r m -C"z 0 00-4m0 m0 m Om r r00 -)10 m m N rncw -0Z0--1 030.mv0 03 V)m M Zv D Dc --1 ra H 0mz0000-irrmOr+mm. Z 0Z -n N -IN Z Z-1 C) Z z n <v0-0 zr-ss.rmr0Dmg0 mm (n m mri ,-, m rn 0 C)< 0rr00000'- zzv7Cv rim 2 Z r 0 00 -1 0 0 rr+zv mi 7Cm 0000)D0; vD > 0 W C CZ -< r+C)mOr+Nvm Q.Q•rn 1 mr(• N -(r = C 0 00 N Zm<00100-1 v vV) 1-1 H z mm 0 mD0000 C0m00 mm 0 0 0 C)Zr-0Zr 1 -41--IMO MM ZC 0 m -4 D 0 0 < �o0C 100 v DZar <z 0 m r m 0 < 00 m n <vcn 0 vv� na 0 N m m m0 r W c) mr -1 ZZ < m 00 -< Co (n m m CO m m m CO M R1 R1 Z C m0) c C..) m 0) N N A A 00 N y N 0 0 V A N U) U) (1 r00 A WA AN M rn V 0 0 O W m A A 0 CoA-.4 r0 WooAVN rn 00 W W N CO 00 0 0 0) V(0(0 rW0o00r WVA r DZ 0) N N A V V 0 0 r I--Am VOOW000NVW N A < 00 O 00 N 0000N 0 0 0) 0V0C400V0)0000(fN00()0 C-4 m CA 0 00 A 0000A CO 0o 0o 0U10(0000ANOOOr0000 D r3 Z O c Z m D m m M D v Z C) 0 m m m C) -( A M N UI NN r 0) C.) N N 0 VN 0 r 00 00 00 V UI 0-0--0-.N -4 V N Am W V r U) 0 0 V V (0AU)W N r 00 N (0) Co W(1 U) O U) O O 0 U) co r U1,O O O O U)N O m 0 co 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U)U)000000 0000 m A A A O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000 0000 < m 0 0 00 O 00000 0 O 0 00000000000000000 Z 0 0 00 0 00000 0 0 0 00000000000000000 C m < N m CO I- r A 1... D W W W U) C..) (4 00 1-•CO Nrrr 0-- 00 V V 0 V N N N (O AVA1 (O00)A U)r0)r v N V V V (ar 0) N N V U)CONC.) Vr U)1-0)1---Co A 0.0)Ut D 0) 0 O W U)O 00 0) 0) 00 0)N(000 NAN00000WN WOA 3*-1 N co r r CD NO V N N V (0AW0 00(0WWU)ONA U1NV C) ) A AO 0) A000N 0 0 V W(400A 00W(0W Ut 0(4(400 VN CO 0 U r- 00 000 0o A000A r r 0) U)(JOr00NAV000U)OON0) D 1 r0 CO r. D 1 C..) V r N r- 1r 1 0o W r 00 0) W N U) A A A 00 r 0) m CO CO Ut 0000 N (D 1- N V V V A V A 0) W1-.1-.0 0)W r 0 N 1- 0)U7 V Or(11 W V V V U)(0 NA 00)0r WrCoA U100(4 N D W 00 000 m A00 r W W r 0)N 00)Ut NANoorOWN OW0OA m Ui N NO O VOO N V V N (OA W(0000(0WWA ONA O UI VV rs D A 0 WO W U'000V (O (O N www U)OOW(OW Ut OWWOO NN Z v (0 N NO N 0)0000) co CD A U)W0(000NAV000Ut00000) C) D 1 1 11 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I m C) rrrr r r N rn Ut N Ut A A w A A V UI Ow00Vr A rW U) V 0 co 0) 0 0 O N CJ 00(00)(0 0-0 N VO W A N 0 00 NWWW U) 000)1-(40 00 Utr C) V N * A * A * A * AA * A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A * AAAAAAAAAAA -n ..- . * w * WI * V * OM * A WWWWWWWWWW w W W N N N)IV N N * r1--r-r....... DC (D * CO * 00 * r * r0 * 10(D ID(00-40)UIWNNrrr AWWNrr * UI UIU AAAAWWrO C)Z (D * r * N) * C) * I-CD * (DUIr0000001-O100)0PON)ONU'0 * Nr0WNICION)0 O0 0 C) 0 v -1 -1 v C) C)0 N 110C)zCr•Iv-1-Ivv1MCOPWINU v C�213v0-000() C 0 0 0 m D 70 m D DC C I-)PCOr-4Z73Am073mzP000CC m ZOmmmmm<D<D zo 4-4 Z Z 3 X D 70 v vM 'D NAPZZ1-001-+DrU0C)0>C1-)-170v Mt mADZZZ0mrmr -ir -I .-4 -1 -4 m Z X I-I I-IC) v C)C)0T-11CZ<m-13DmrHr0T-o N l I-000>v>MD -< 1--1 H -4 N N > -1 --Ix 1- (nx MOM-Imv>OrM -O0D1 0 -03-'1H1-11-4 -4M-IM 0 Z Z -4 m Z D >3> 1-1 1->9e 70 -13.t-ti-X0-4 N C) I--1 01-1 Z r m x 0 0 0 1-11-40-11-t MO O 0 C) D m m 1- r-0 m 4-Z m rI Z z 0 P H T N O X Z-n m m D OZ Z Z Z I m l m OM T M m Z 70 Z 1M N DONZ PC)C)!.Z 01-44-43>AC)C N 1- -<02*00W rUPN OZ Z z A N -I m m Z1-ICC) Nm m Zr0-11-1 m3 3 I I 1 1 t 1 Tom N C) C) m X 00 9. PN00m 22.0 0a+z)-Iz1r> N mC)1Im' -I l TT I-I x -< -< V) -1 v cm 0m00 C ZDZ-I1.0-4 m Z01-Im1-11-I m CC MD D 7o rn 1-1 N C 0 -00 01-0 1-4 m 70 -1X-710M0 1-11-r- --I r 7C A Z MO m N v2. CO 90Z2v7o < -m r-I mD vPrr 1ti 0 Z 0 IC 70 M 01-4 TN -I H M O. C) 3 OT N H P I-1 < MV) 1-0 mm v• r D C) 01-11-4A m-i--I Z C m T -1 Z1- N -I C) IH-I mm m Cr m 3z ZA HH z m m C -10 0 1.-42 NM N< v cow N v N N m m m 0 70 70 1-1 m 00 2Z 1 r D M • C C N m Z N ZO 1-4 C) MO ri 1-4 7070 N G) Or zm -Im 7) 0 DD N N G) 0)0 A ZZ ZZ -1 m m N D v -0 70 0 -o 70 r A -I r-1 0 ZC) C m r N r X r r r A N V r I- CO I 70 CO CO r NUIr WrWN r O) VNOOW UI N W (D ArW U(W M - - - - P V V r N IOr 0)O)Wr 00(JI 00 0 0)00CWW O) AV N)(D VI UIWV m (D /D Co UI W O)A UIW O)rNO ID A UINNC00 r UIw 0)Cr U10A DZ r r r rOoOWCJVrNOf(D0 N r(DCJNW UI O)0) U1(D(DONA C) Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 UI 00 W AW0000VVCCOO)000'-10rvmWw 0 000NOCAWIw(DU1 C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 r A(D0 AV UI0)A UI(O U)00000wrrr0) 0 000IOW0 A(DG)N A3 F•i I 0 -I Z C -4 71 <2 m A 70 M A 70 Z 0 RI M M 0 v 0 70 -4 r N) r . D r r N N O Ar W r A r r r -4 13 0 0 UI UI A A 0 UI rNIIr Wrr AID V0WWr N CA mw (DAN 0 0 UI UI N UI O) O) 0) UI 0o UI V W r UI W A(D C N r U7 0 V A W w CO r ACJ U1 A A (D 0)(O AO 0 0 0 UI UI UI r r 1V (D UIrr I ANW00 UIr UI A A 000000 Nr 0) N00)WOON 0UI(0 0 0 0 0 N N A A Co 00,-i-N 0 Nr UI U1000000N 0000 A ONWN0NO -Joo' 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 ID (D 0) 00000000000000000000 0 0000000 000 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00000000000000000000 0 00000000000 -I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00000000000000000000 0 00000000000 O Z-< I, I-. m I-. r Co Nr r 0 r 0 D UI UI co 00 UI W rrN UINr r ID WWr 0) W VV Dao NW00 r r A A UI UI 0 0 V 0VNWOWr U10)rWr Co (00)UI(0I 0 OO)N WNNIDOr 70 UI UI (D ID UI UI A A Co WOW-40(D WN UI 0 UI O)P.--M rr V00 CO VAU100 0)AV--4N4.) A V V U1 N N N ID ID Co 000rVWOO)AWAA(DOIO ro)Www V Oow0r CO oIDAC)-J A-1 N V V UI 0 0 0 A A N OO CJ CVAw0AAWAOrCO 00Nr00 O OArV (0AA0(0A 00 (D (D 0 O O O W W0 C VoorNr O)A A O)IDr U100)000 UI Ar r 00N UI0U 0)IDOWA C T A A r r 0 0 UI 00 W Co A C oo lD 0000 AO)Ar ONO Ar Ut U1 O) w �IOWNOrNNNr oo AO Co A I CO -I 1- ••••4 V N I.. 00 O) 1 CO ID 0 0 A N rWW r AIDWWrN U1 (D 4-0) W0 0)rA m (D Co Co UI 0 Co N NWWV0)000000A N-)U10)r C Ar V rm U10rNID0)00 0 A A N UI O O) A UIDO0WCArOWUIVICoNV000NrA O 0r000CJVVW(J0 D N N A A UI UI 0 rID0WC(DWC)-0U0IDOOCUI000O) 0 CCA00NV(DWrC M N N A A A A W rOrVO0000000(O(OrOWw-4mr W 0000NOOVIAA0O 1-4 0 O W W 0 O 0 0)0 r Nr 00V00W AOW000 AOWO(0 I A N 00 OO 00VAC)AW(0 AO UI Z v 0) 0) CO ID 0 0 UI 00 V N 0)NN)N 000)AC(000000 ID UI UI A N VOVCO(D OONC IDN m A I m F-. r I-. W 0 0 0 0 V V 0 NOOO 0000AA0AMI,40 00AN0 0 0W0M MV) MMM I-. r 0 0 0 0 W W W A Cr 0V r N U1 ACWV UI C rW0)VA W 00NA CJr UI U'N 0 0 r r 0 O W W A AWNOONVW000 V1 oo0WN OWWN(.11 0 OW(D(D (DA NODI 0 r *t r D c co C)Z <0 C) 0 O C n Z 0 H --i r -4 0 M G) 0 cn m -n C)Z m m cn C t H A Z A D > it 0 0m v O Z C m Z m D 0 r 0 -v A D --i 0 Z C) C m A X O A W in (rt m 0o D Z v C) -i-I 00 C 0 r D r3 O -i z c ---I A <x in H A C) m m v 0 v () Pzi • D A •v A A N A 0 O v c0 A U7 H O —1 O 0 Z N m Q) D W r A A D 0 D—1 (/) rn C) —1 0 0 <0 C m r D r 00 D r w w r m CO O O rn D 0o 00 H o Z •v O C) D m O m (.11 (0 v N C) -i N OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AUGUST 15 , 1990 SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Mayor Gary Laurent convened the City Council as a Committee of the Whole at 7: 28 P.M. with Councilmembers Joe Zak, Jerry Wampach, Gloria Vierling, Steve Clay, and Robert Sweeney present. Also present were Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator; Barry Stock, Ass 't. City Administrator; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Leroy Houser, Building Official ; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Cncl .Sweeney explained the procedure the Scott County Board follows when meeting as a Committee of the Whole. He also stated that the only actions taken are those that are referred to the County Board. Discussion followed. Vierling/Clay directed the city administrator to prepare a resolution, for August 21, 1990, establishing a Committee of the Whole. Motion carried unanimously. The Finance Director explained that he had received two bills for plan review services for FMG from firemen. He explained that bills have not been submitted in the past and that he thought that he should bring them before Council. Mr. Ries, Fire Chief, explained that he and Mr. Judd took off work to go over the plan checks. He said that they usually go over plan checks at night, but this time it had to be done during the day. He explained that the Building Official wanted their input, since they respond to fires. Mr. Voxland stated that he had a problem paying an employee two different rates, one rate as a fireman and another rate for plan checks. Discussion ensued. Clay/Sweeney directed staff to come up with a policy and fee schedule clarifying billable expenses for plan checks and to bring it to Council for consideration. Sweeney/Vierling moved to amend the motion to include exploring other alternatives to accomplish the desired outcome. Motion carried unanimously. Motion carried unanimously on main motion as amended. Clay/Wampach moved to recommend to city council the payment of a bill for $75. 00 for plan review and that it be placed on the next city council agenda as a consent item. G Committee of the Whole August 15, 1990 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Clay/Wampach moved to amend the motion to include both bills submitted totaling $100. 00 and that they not be put on the agenda as consent. Motion defeated with Cncl.Vierling, Sweeney and Zak opposed to the motion. Main motion as amended defeated with Cncl.Vierling, Sweeney and Zak opposed. Sweeney/Vierling moved to recess at 8 : 15 P.M. Motion defeated with Vierling, Zak and Mayor Laurent opposed. Discussion ensued on the new By-laws for the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association. Representatives from the Relief Association were present for discussion. Councilmembers reached a consensus on four issues: 1) 4 day notice for special meetings, 2) the Finance Officer will be an ex-officio member of the Board, 3) vesting shall be reduced to five years, and 4) the pension shall be tied to the Stanton average for two years. Mayor Laurent recessed the meeting at 9: 11 P.M. Mayor Laurent re-convened the meeting at 9 : 27 P.M. Discussion followed on the 1991 budget. Cncl. Zak recommended that Mr. Kraft and Mr. Voxland bring back a balanced budget. Cncl.Sweeney suggested that staff balance the budget or provide alternatives for expenditure cuts. Mayor Laurent stated that he was not opposed to deficit spending for one year. Sweeney/Vierling directed staff to come back with a budget with cuts to balance income and expenses. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Kraft informed City Council of the negotiations involving the noise variance requested by Mn. Dep't. of Transportation from Mn. Pollution Control Agency for the Schmitz property for the Bypass. He stated that he will put the matter on the City Council agenda for next week. Sweeney/Zak directed staff to place the variance involving the Schmitz property for the Bypass on the City Council agenda for August 21, 1990. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting of the Committee of the Whole concluded at 9 : 48 P.M. (M\ i i i ( i Cudith S. Cox ity Clerk Recording Secretary minnesota department of health division of environmental health r925 s.e. delaware st. p.o.box 59040 minneapolis 55459-0040 (612)627-5100 August 27, 1990 Shakopee City Council c/o Ms. Judith Cox, City Clerk City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Council Members: This letter is to inform you of the results of pesticide analyses conducted on water samples collected on June 13, 1990, from Wells Nos. 6 and 7. The sampling was performed as part of the routine monitoring of your water supply conducted by the Minnesota Department of Health. As indicated by the attached pesticide test results, atrazine was detected in the well water. This Department has utilized available health risk information to establish recommended allowable drinking water limits for exposure to this chemical . Listed below are the level at which the chemical was detected and the currently recommended allowable limit. Level Detected Recommended Allowable Limit Chemical (micrograms per liter) (micrograms per liter) atrazine (Well No. 6) 0.04 3.0 (Well No. 7) 0.05 The concentration of this chemical is below the currently recommended allowable limit. Based on the concentration of pesticide detected and the available health risk information, this Department offers the following recommendations or comments: 1. There is no need to limit the use of the well due to the presence of atrazine as long as the concentration of atrazine remains below the recommended allowable limit. 2. This Department will continue to monitor the pesticide levels as a part of our routine public water supply surveillance program. If you have any questions, please contact me at 612/627-5180. Sincerely yours, Richard D. Clark, P.E. , Supervisor Public Water Supply Unit Section of Water Supply and Well Management RDC:bs Enclosure cc: John Hines, Minnesota Department of Agriculture Art Young, Water Superintendent \ Gem= an equal opportunity employer �' . . . _: . . , 1 7 ..._. . . . 6.6.88 Org.for 1.,FY89 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Chemical Labortories Section Cr g.nic Chemistry Unit . Budget W : } -1 Date Collectd: ( ii ---1))61 ( / UATER ANALYSES ONLY Report To: JJ. ( (c„- II Date Received: -15-- 7`2 C / Chain Field Collected by: ,f,'.. - .41. k of Blank q Custody #: Lab Field - Container - • gurber N.,-e'er Sa.,ple Description H.Jober Type -, c-irid.39V b 5[1 ,- 1.1 6 1` c L\, c' I! - 1 c d 1 e tT Analysis Request Opticas 0/?3171 , Ola-i1 c d e VOLATILE HC 465 VOLATILE HAL HC 464 GASOLINE/FUFL + FC 463 VOLATILE CASES 460 TFdts (+ Vr,,. HAL Fes) 467 VOLATILE HC by C.C/TIS 448 HERBICIDES, CPA47o 7 P ` jUl_ 201990 1 PCBs 420 PHT44LATE ESTERS 490 PESTICIDES, Ct&OP,I`r+TED 502 , - TOXAPHENE 520 , , TECK4ICAL CHLC°DA:. 530 • DOT GROUP 554 PESTICIDES, Bt'.SL I UTRAL 571 ~)( / SPECIAL S4PLE HAPS 560 , Field t4otes: Lab dotes: 7 571 . 1 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Date CHEMICAL LABORATORIES Reported: 7-19-90 PESTICIDES IN WATER (CONCENTRATION IN UG/L) QUANTITATION LIMIT 9012397 9012398 Alachlor < 0 . 02 Atrazine < 0 .02 0.04 0.05 Butylate < 0 .02 Chlorpyrifos < 0 . 01 Cyanazine < 0 . 1 Diallate < 0 .05 EPTC < 0 .01 Fonofos < 0 .01 Linuron < 0 . 5 Methyl Parathion < 0 .01 Metolachlor < 0. 1 Metribuzin < 0. 05 Phorate < 0 .05 Propachlor < 0.01 Simazine < 0.05 Trifluralin < 0.05 Date Collected: 6-13-90 6-13-90 Date Received: 6-15-90 6-15-90 Date Extracted: 6-15-90 6-15-90 Date Analyzed: 7-11-90 7-11-90 FIELD BLANK: NONE NONE QUALITY CONTROL SPIKE QUALITY CONTROL DUPLICATE MATRIX: NONE MATRIX: NONE FOUND TRUE UG UG % REC. Alachlor ERR Atrazine ERR Butylate ERR Chlorpyrifos ERR Cyanazine ERR Diallate ERR EPTC ERR Fonofos ERR Linuron ERR Methyl Parathion ERR Metolachlor ERR Metribuzin ERR Phorate ERR Propachlor ERR Simazine ERR Trifluralin ERR Note Meeting Time: 5:30 P.M. - 8 TENTATIVE AGENDA Community Development Commission City Hall Council Chambers Wednesday, September 19 , 1990 1. Call to Order at 5: 30 P.M. 2 . Approval of the Minutes - August 15, 1990 3 . Economic Development Update (Verbal) a. Park Dedication Fees - Replats b. Toro Expansion 4 . Valley Industrial Blvd. No. - Utility Poles 5. Wall Mural Design Standards 6. S.P.U.C. Economic Development Action Plan 7 . Subcommittee Report (Verbal) a. Downtown Committee b. Transportation Coalition c. Business Appreciation d. Housing Assistance 8 . Informational Items a. Business Update from City Hall b. c. 9 . Other Business a. Next Meeting - Wed. , October 17 , 1990 - 5: 30 PM City Council Chambers b. 10 . Adjournment Please call Barry or Aggie at 445-3650 if you cannot make the meeting. Minutes of the Community Development Commission City Council Chambers Wednesday, August 15, 1990 Chairman Miller called the meeting to order at 5: 30 P.M. with the following members present: Jane DuBois, Jon Albinson, Mike Pennington, Mike Beard, Bill Mars, Mark Miller and Charles Brandmire. Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator was also present. DuBois/Mars moved to approve the minutes of the June 20, 1990 meeting as kept. Barry A. Stock stated that he did not have anything to report on in terms of an economic development update at this time. Mr. Albinson stated that he is currently working on a 200, 000 square foot suspect. Mr. Albinson also stated that Northstar Auto Auction experienced some difficulty with Shakopee Public Utilities in getting power to their site in a timely manner. Discussion ensued. It was the consensus of the commission to direct staff to place on the next agenda a discussion of areas in which Shakopee Public Utilities might be more helpful in providing information and assistance to development prospects. Mr. Stock reported that the City received a correspondence from Mr. Ken Cryer, owner of Arnie' s Friendly Folks Club requesting retroactive grant funding assistance for the improvements that were made to Arnie' s Bar in 1989 . Mr. Stock stated that this item was discussed by the Downtown Committee earlier in the day. The Downtown Committee is recommending that the request for retroactive funding assistance be denied. Discussion ensued. It was the consensus of the committee that the improvements made to Arnie' s Bar were substantial and well done. However, the Commission felt that it would be discriminatory and arbitrary to amend the Rehab Grant Program to allow for retroactive funding. Commissioner Beard stated that the owners could have waited until such time that the Rehab Grant Program was official approved. Chairman Miller stated that there were other improvements in the downtown area that were completed prior to the adoption of the Rehab Grant Program. He questioned where the City would draw the line in terms of retroactive assistance if they approved this request. Pennington/Albinson moved to recommend to the Shakopee HRA that the status quo be maintained in regard to retroactive grant payments for projects initiated prior to the formal adoption of the Rehab Grant Program. Motion carried unanimously. Minutes of the Community Development Commission Page -2 August 15, 1990 Mr. Stock stated that several communities in Scott County are working together to investigate the formation of an economic development coalition. The purpose of the economic development coalition would be to currently market the Scott County area. Additionally, the creation of the coalition and it's subsequent membership in the Twin Cities Metro Development Co. would give communities in the Scott County area the ability to utilize the Twin Cities Metro Development Company's expertise in processing 503/504 loans. Additionally, membership in the Twin Cities Metro Development Co. would provide a potential funding source for marketing efforts pursued by the coalition. Under the membership guidelines, organizations subscribing to a one time $5, 000 membership fee receive a 3/8 % processing and closing fee for each small business loan approved in the area. Under this scenario, a $1, 000, 000 loan would equate to approximately $2 , 250. 00 which would be rebated to the Economic Development Coalition. Mr. Stock stated that each of the communities is preparing a resolution in support of investigating the formation of the coalition. Additionally, each community is also passing a resolution in support of the Twin Cities Metro Development Co. Said resolution would be presented to the Scott County Board in an attempt to solicit their approval of the Twin Cities Metro Development Co. ability to process loans in Scott County. Chairman Miller questioned whether or not the area 's ability to process 503/504 loans would give us any advantage over other communities. Mr. Albinson stated that at the present time several communities are offering technical assistance in preparing 503/504 loans. He stated that this program is also good for financing new equipment. He stated that it is a flexible program that would be beneficial to many small businesses. Chairman Miller stated that the resolution simply states that staff 'will be investigating the formation of the Scott County Economic Development Coalition. He went on to state that he felt staff should be given the go ahead to continue investigating. Albinson/Mars moved to recommend to City Council approval of the proposed resolution indicating the City of Shakopee 's desires to investigate the formation of a Scott County Economic Development Coalition and requesting Scott County's support granting approval to allow the Twin Cities Metro Development Co. to process SBA 503/504 loan programs in Scott County. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock stated that he received a correspondence from Mr. Duane Wermerskirchen regarding the permit fee for a wall mural . Mr. Stock noted that the Downtown Committee did discuss this item on their agenda earlier today. Mr. Stock noted that the Downtown Committee is recommending that the City Code be amended, deleting the requirement of a Conditional Use Permit for graphic design and 17 Minutes of the Page -3 Community Development Commission August 15, 1990 neon signs and that a new provision be added providing for the review of graphic design and neon signs by the Community Development Commission. Mr. Stock stated that at the present time the Conditional Use Permit fee carries an additional charge of $185. 00 . The sign permit fee is $20. 00 plus 25¢ per square foot. Mr. Stock noted that when the Downtown Committee prepared and recommended amendments to the Sign Ordinance in regard to the Downtown area, they did not discuss whether or not it would be appropriate to charge an additional $185. 00 to review wall murals. He stated that the Downtown Committee felt that it was excessive to have two fees for the review of a sign. The Downtown Committee also felt strongly that the Planning Commission generally does not review design issues and therefore this requirement of a Conditional Use Permit was somewhat unusual . The Planning Commission generally reviews land use issues. Commissioner Brandmire stated that to have a fee for both the sign permit and a Conditional Use Permit in the review of a wall mural was double dipping. Discussion ensued on the normal review process for sign permits and Conditional Use Permits. Commission Brandmire stated that guidelines needed to be adopted by Ordinance controlling wall murals. This would provide staff with direction in reviewing and approving sign permits. Commissioner DuBois stated her concern over the control of wall murals. She stated that without strict guidelines and standards, we could some unusual wall murals pursued that would not be up to the community standards. Commissioner Mars stated that he felt wall murals would be an asset in the downtown are but the he would have to abstain from voting on this issue since he is related to the individual whom Mr. Wermerskirchen contacted to do his wall mural. Mr. Stock stated that if the commission desires to pursue an amendment to the City Code he is suggesting that the actual amendment be pursued later this fall when other housekeeping amendments are made to the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Wermerskirchen stated that he did not have a problem with waiting to pursue the wall mural until next year. DuBois/Pennington moved to recommend to the Planning Commission that Section 4 . 30, Subd. 4 C-14 of the City Code be amended, deleting the requirement of a Conditional Use Permit for graphic design and neon signs. Motion carried with Commissioner Mars abstaining. It was the consensus of the Committee that neither the Planning Minutes of the Page -4 Community Development Commission August 15, 1990 Commission or any other committee should be involved in reviewing wall murals. Commissioner Miller requested staff to work with the Downtown Committee to come up with strict design standards for wall murals which could be enacted by ordinance. It was the consensus of the commission that the review of wall murals should be done by staff. Mr. Stock stated that the Downtown Committee is recommending that the repayment provision within the Rehab Grant Program be deleted. Mr. Stock stated that the repayment provision within the Rehab Grant Program requires property owners who receive funding to maintain ownership or residency within their improved building for a five year period or be subject to repaying the grant award. The Downtown Committee felt that the repayment provision had an adverse impact on property owners desire to submit a application. Mr. Stock stated that several of the properties in the downtown area are presently for sale and the owners of the properties do not want to invest funds, knowing that they may sell the building within the next year. The Downtown Committee also felt that the intent of the program was to stimulate property owners to improve their building exteriors. The committee felt that if the building exteriors are improved than the major objective of the program has been accomplished and that to be concerned with whether or not the grant to be repaid was to be secondary. Mr. Brandmire questioned what type of tracking program is in place to ihsure that property owners who participate in the program are monitored in the event that they sell their property or relocate. Mr. Stock stated that all successful grant applicant are required to enter into an agreement with the Shakopee HRA. The agreement serves as the tracking devise. Additionally, projects which receive grant assistance in excess of $2 , 500. 00 are required to post a performance bond or establish funds in an escrow account equal to the amount of grant award. This devise insures that the City will retain their funds in the event that a person who received a large grant award sells or leaves the improved building. Commissioner Mars stated that, in his opinion, he thought the repayment provision should be eliminated altogether. He felt that it did not matter if the property owner left or sold the building, as long as the building was improved. Commissioner Albinson stated that he tended to agree with Mr. Mars and that the value of the improvements would stay in the community. He went on to state that it would not be very likely that a large developer would come to town and utilize the program to it ' s maximum amount ($25, 000) and sell the building within a short time period. He did note, however, that if this were to occur and a repayment provision were not in existence, the HRA may be subject to some criticism. Chairman Miller stated that the program is still in it' s infancy and it should be give a change to function without any significant changes to the grant guidelines. He went on to state that he did Minutes of the Page -5 Community Development Commission August 15, 1990 not feel the repayment provision, in itself, was not a significant issue to deter property owners from pursuing the program. He felt that if we hear directly from the property owners that this is indeed the reason why they are not applying for the program, then it can be reconsidered at a later date. DuBois/Pennington moved to maintain the status quo in regard to the Rehab Grant Program repayment provision. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Albinson stated that he will be unable to attend the next Scott County Transportation Coalition meeting which is scheduled for August 23rd at 8 : 15 a.m. in the Scott County Assembly Room. He went on to state the several City staff members will be in attendance and he will contact them to gather information for a report at our next meeting. Commissioner DuBois stated that she has been working on finding persons who are interested in the housing assistance subcommittee. At this time she believes that Wally Bishop, Betsy Theis and Randy Kubes are interested in serving on the Subcommittee. Mr. Stock stated that Butch Logeais has also indicated an interest to serve on the committee. Commissioner DuBois stated that she hopes that the Subcommittee can meet sometime in the first week of September. Brandmire/Albinson moved to adjourn the meeting at 6: 55 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock, Recording Secretary (D TENTATIVE AGENDA Energy and Transportation Committee Shakopee, Minnesota September 19 , 1990 Chrm. Drees Presiding: 1. Roll Call at 7 : 00 P.M. 2 . Approval of Minutes - August 15, 1990 3 . Closed Refuse Collection Ordinance 4 . Recycling Credit Alternatives 5. Vanpool Policy #22 Amendment - Licensing Requirements 6. Telephone Book Recycling 7 . Informational Items a. Dial-A-Ride Monthly Report b. Dial-A-Ride Saturday Service Report c. Van Pool Monthly Report d. Business Update from City Hall e. Recycling Report 8 . Other Business a. Next Meeting - Wed. , October 17 , 1990 - 7 : 00 PM b. 9 . Adjournment Barry A. Stock Assistant Administrator CITY OF SHAKOPEE 4- 11 Minutes of the Energy and Transportation Committee Regular Session August 15, 1990 Chairperson Drees called the meeting to order at 7 : 10 P.M. with Commissioners Otto, Case, Drees, Amundson, Reinke and Ward present. Commissioners Stolarcek and Roman were absent. Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator was also present. Reinke/Amundson moved the approve the minutes of the June 20, 1990 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock stated that at the last meeting of the Energy and Transportation Committee meeting, staff was directed to prepare a contract amendment increasing the extra container rate for a 65 gallon container to a level comparable to the first container. Mr. Stock noted that at the present time the cost for a Shakopee resident interested in receiving an extra container is an additional $7 . 50 per month. The regular contract rate for refuse collection service is $12 .76 per month. There are approximately 70 households in Shakopee which are currently receiving an extra refuse container. Mr. Stock stated that he contacted Mr. Berkopec, manager of Waste Management Inc. to determine if he would accept an amendment to the contract that would pass on the cost difference between the regular rate and the current price for the extra container to the City of Shakopee. Given the current number of persons receiving a second container, this would equate approximately $350 . 00 per month. Mr. Berkopec stated that he did not have a problem with the amendment. However, he felt that it was not worth it for the City of Shakopee to pursue an amendment such as this at this time. He also pointed out that Shakopee residents still have the option to select other refuse haulers who are currently providing unlimited collection. He questioned whether or not a move to increase the extra container rate would result in several of the persons receiving the extra container dropping the City of Shakopee service and contracting privately. Mr. Berkopec reminded staff that while this may not have an impact on our current rate, it could ultimately have an impact on future bids. Mr. Stock also stated that he doubted whether or not the increase in the extra container rate would increase the household' s recycling participation. Commissioner Case suggested that we should wait until the next contract to determine if there should be an extra container rate. Minutes of the Page - 2 Energy and Transportation Committee August 15, 1990 Commission Case also stated her concern that perhaps if we increase the extra container rate these residents may decide to dispose of their refuse along the roadways. Commissioner Reinke questioned whether or not we could proceed with action to request City Council to consider moving to a closed refuse collection system. Discussion ensued on the political aspects of this issue. Discussion also ensued on the importance of continuing to encourage recycling participation and the wear and tear refuse trucks have on municipal streets. It was the consensus of the committee to have the closed refuse contract issue placed on the next agenda for discussion. Ward/Amundson moved to maintain the status quo in regard to the extra container rate and bring it up for discussion in conjunction with the development of our next refuse collection bids. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock reported that the committee has been discussing the possibility of implementing new Dial-A-Ride service to the Southwest Metro Service Area. We were closely working with the Southwest Metro Transit administrator to determine what levels of the service would be appropriate and whether or not cost sharing arrangements could be set up. Mr. Stock stated that he has analyzed the 1990 budget and has determined that there is more than adequate funds available to maintain existing service levels. He also shared with the committee the fact that Beverly Miller, Southwest Metro Transit administrator has taken a new job as the administrator of the Minnesota Valley Transit System. Mr. Stock stated that this will have an adverse effect on our ability to initiate new service in the Southwest Metro Service Area yet this year. Given this fact, Mr. Stock stated that he is not recommending that we proceed with a budget amendment for the 1990 calendar year. Commissioner Reinke questioned whether or not the budget amount is the maximum level of funding available to the City of Shakopee. Mr. Stock responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Drees noted that staff 's 1990 budget projections are approximately $50, 000 under the budgeted amount. Commissioner Amundson questioned whether or not we could use these funds to expand service if we so desired. Mr. Stock responded in the affirmative. Mr. Stock went on to remind the committee that the City of Shakopee must adhere to • Regional Transit Board policies and guidelines. One of the policies relates to fair box recovery ratio. While we may have adequate funds to add additional vehicles to our program, he dos not believe that there is adequate ridership levels that would generate enough revenue to be consistent with the Regional Transit Board fair box recovery ratio guidelines. / 1 Minutes of the Page - 3 Energy and Transportation Committee August 15, 1990 Mr. Stock stated that he has recently expanded the Vanpool marketing program to include advertisements in the Mint. He stated that this has increased inquiries regarding our program. Discussion ensued on other marketing ideas for the Vanpool program. Commissioner Otto stated that he does not read the Mint but that he does read the flyers that are inserted in the Mint. Commissioner Ward questioned what the cost difference was between an ad and a flyer insert. Mr. Stock stated that ads generally run between $50 and $75 . Flyer inserts cost between $400 and $600 depending on the circulation. Commissioner Ward stated that since we have adequate funds within the budget for marketing the Vanpool program, that we might try the flyer insert route. Mr. Stock stated that he felt that this was a good suggestion. Mr. Stock also stated that he would be utilizing the Utility bill for a stuffer later this fall advertising the Vanpool program. Commissioner Drees whether or not any action was necessary in regard to the budget amendment issue. Mr. Stock stated that if the Committee does not choose to pursue a budget amendment at this time no official action is necessary. Mr. Stock stated that he recently received correspondence from the Metropolitan Transit Commission regarding a transfer reciprocity agreement. Mr. Stock stated that he has been on the MTC' s case since 1984 in regard to this issue. Mr. Stock stated that while the MTC has agreed to provide us with transfer reciprocity, they have proposed that we follow a process that is so cumbersome that I am not recommending that the City accept it. Mr. Stock stated that the MTC is suggesting that we send each of our Vanpool drivers a separate pack of transfer slips each week. Additionally, each of the transfer slips must be stamped with an official Shakopee Area Transit imprint. Mr. Stock stated that given the fact that we only have approximately five people that transfer on our program per week, it would be more costly for us to adhere to their transfer reciprocity policy than what it cost for us to subsidize the transfers just as we have been doing for the past five years. Commissioner Ward suggested that we send the MTC a letter thanking them for their responsiveness to our request but at the same time requesting that an alternative transfer reciprocity system be developed. Ward/Reinke moved to request staff to sent a letter to the Metropolitan Transit Commission thanking them for their responsiveness and requesting that an alternative transfer reciprocity arrangement be developed. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Reinke stated that Minnesota Ride Share is not fully aware of our Vanpool program. He stated that one of his riders recently called Minnesota Ride Share and they were not aware that Shakopee had a Vanpool program. Mr. Stock stated that he has had Minutes of the Page - 4 Energy and Transportation Committee August 15, 1990 correspondence with the Minnesota Ride Share staff for quite some time but that with their turnover in staffing he did not doubt that several of their employees are unaware of our program. Mr. Stock stated that he would call the Minnesota Ride Share director to remind him of our program and would also follow the conversation up with a letter. Mr. Stock then reviewed the Dial-A-Ride and Vanpool monthly reports. Mr. Stock noted that in July Dial-A-Ride ridership was up approximately 1, 000 passenger trips over July of the previous year. Mr. Stock also noted that if ridership levels continue at their present levels, both the Dial-A-Ride and Vanpool programs will exceed previous ridership records for the calendar year. Mr. Stock then reviewed the recycling report. He stated that at our next meeting, he would like the committee to discuss the recycling credit. Mr. Stock stated that the revenues derived from the recyclables generated and the County Perc have been placed in a recycling fund. He would check to determine how much was in the fund and methods available to issue a credit. Commission Reinke suggested that staff investigate the cost of issuing a direct check verses a credit on the utility bill . Mr. Reinke felt that the direct mail with a check and a letter would be a very effective advertising tool . Mr. Stock shared with the committee that Mr. Reinke has recently been appointed to the Regional Transit Board Local Official Advisory Committee. Mr. Stock stated that Mr. Reinke' s position on the board will be beneficial in improving our relationship with the Regional Transit Board. Case/Otto moved to adjourn the meeting at 8 : 00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock, Recording Secretary ')._ The following letter was sent out to: Mark McNeill, Savage City Administrator Don Egan, Mayor - City of Savage David Unmacht, Prior Lake City Manager Lydia Andren, Mayor - City of Prior Lake Coralee Fox, Jordan City Administrator Robert Cully, Mayor - City of Jordan Don Ashworth, Chanhassen City Manager Don Chmiel, Mayor - City of Chanhassen Dave Pokorney, Chaska City Administrator Robert Roepke, Mayor - City of Chaska Carl Jullie, Eden Prairie City Manager Gary Peterson, Mayor - City of Eden Prairie September 13 , 1990 Dear • The Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce will be holding their September General Membership meeting Wednesday, September 26 at noon at the Shakopee House. The Chamber will feature guest speaker Larry Bakken, President of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) . Bakken, also a Professor of Law at Hamline University Law School and acting Dean of the Hamline Graduate School, will discuss what he believes are his duties as an elected official and as a representative of metropolitan cities. Bakken will also focus on what he sees as the main roles he and the AMM Board, which together represent nearly 2 million citizens, should play in persuading the Minnesota State Legislature to review what he labels as an "ineffective" property tax policy. Furthermore, Bakken will present his views on the recently passed tax increment financing bill . Bakken calls this bill "bad for the cities" because, as he says, "long-term benefits were surrendered to short-term revenue pressures" . Finally, Bakken will discuss the many other important concerns of metropolitan area citizens such as police and fire, housing for the needy, and various environmental problems that deserve immediate attention but are not being addressed by the Legislature. iy Bakken' s speech will be of interest to all those who live and work in the metropolitan area and who believe that our needs should "be answered by action not by rhetoric" . The cost for the luncheon will be $10. Anyone interested in attending should RSVP to the Shakopee Chamber at 445-1660 by 4 : 30 p.m. Friday, September 21 . I believe this would be an excellent opportunity for elected city officials, city staff and other interested citizens. Please encourage the people within your city to attend. I look forward to seeing you in Shakopee on September 26! Sincerely, Gary L. Laurent, Mayor City of Shakopee CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT PERMITS ISSUED August, 1990 Yr. to Date Previous Year No. No. Valuation No. No. Valuation Single Family-Sewered 11 61 3 , 816, 900 9 66 4 , 750, 615 Single Family-Septic 2 12 1, 569,900 2 6 734 , 000 Multiple Dwellings - - - - 2 222 , 000 (# Units) (YTD Units) (-) (-) - (6) (6) - Dwelling Additions 8 51 124 , 650 11 63 258 , 671 Other - 13 114, 110 2 9 184 , 590 New Comm. Bldgs - 4 4 , 370, 000 1 6 1, 122 ,700 Comm. Bldg. Addns. - 4 1,741, 000 1 1 1, 000 New Industrial-Sewered - 1 11, 972 , 000 1 1 1,445, 000 Ind. Sewered Addns. - 2 1, 012 , 800 0 2 102 , 990 New Industrial-Septic - - - 1 1 172 , 000 Ind. Septic Addns. - - - 1 1 10, 000 Accessory/Garages 6 25 143 , 354 9 28 184 , 165 Signs & Fences 13 62 85, 325 5 52 61, 041 Fireplaces/Wood Stoves 1 9 18, 255 1 5 15, 900 Grading/Foundation 1 4 95, 000 1 11 1,407 , 920 Remodeling (Res. ) 2 18 95, 000 3 18 112 , 890 Remodeling (Inst. ) - - - 0 1 97 , 230 Remodeling (Comm/Ind. ) 3 26 655, 700 3 28 2 , 150, 019 TOTAL TAXABLE 47 292 25, 813 , 994 51 300 12 , 945, 501 TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - - 1 1 97 , 230 GRAND TOTAL 47 292 25, 813 , 994 51 301 13 , 042 , 731 No. YTD. No. YTD. Variances - 2 2 4 Conditional Use 2 5 3 16 Rezoning - - - - Moving - - - 1 Electric 34 206 29 229 Plumbing & Heating 30 272 30 255 Razing Permits Residential - 1 0 1 Comm./Ind./Inst. - 1 Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date 4 , 452 Jeanette Shaner Building Department Secretary CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN AUGUST, 1990 8736 Laurent Builders 644 Londonderry Cove House $ 160, 000 L 3 B 5 Stonebrooke 8737 Steinmetz Const. 3876 Marschall Road Garage 7, 200 8738 Daniel Barber 536 East 8th Avenue Garage 3 , 500 8739 Novak Fleck 528 Mint Circle House 59 , 000 L 1 B 6 Meadows 4th 8740 Laurent Builders Stonebrooke Drive Sign 200 8741 Craig Hotzler 4955 Eagle Creek Blvd. Fence 750 8742 Prestige Homes 335 West 6th Avenue Garage 5, 300 8743 Logeais Homes 1809 Ruby Circle House 61, 900 L 11 B 2 Heritage Place 2nd 8744 Larry Davis 1239 Ruby Lane House 67, 000 L 13 B 2 Heritage Place 2nd 8745 Ladbroke Racing 1100 Canterbury Road Grading 1, 000 8746 Novak Fleck 1222 Clover Court House 55, 000 L 16 B 1 Meadows 4th 8747 Novak Fleck 606 11th Avenue East House 45, 000 L 16 B 3 Meadows 1st 8748 Gary Turtle 132 East 1st Avenue Sign 6, 300 8749 Clemensen Const. 1212 Minnesota Street Deck 2 , 000 8750 Metropolitan Fireplace 1751 E. Shakopee Ave. Fireplace 2 , 000 8751 Attracta Sign 2400 East 4th Avenue Sign 1, 000 8752 Ken Berg 222 East 1st Avenue Sign 100 8753 Michael Menke 1018 So. Shumway Deck 4 , 200 8754 Garry Jones 1177 So. Tyler Street Deck 960 8755 James Murphy 806 East 8th Avenue Fence 700 8756 SuperAmerica 1155 East 1st Avenue Alt. 11, 200 8757 Ries Builders 727 East 7th Avenue Garage 6, 000 8758 Arrow Sign Co. 1116 Shakopee Town Sq. Sign 20, 000 8759 Schad Tracy Signs Shakopee Town Square Sign 1, 500 8760 SignArt Company 232 So. Marschall Road Sign 1, 950 8761 Novak Fleck 1207 Vierling Court House 65, 000 L 11 B 1 Meadows 2nd 8762 Schmitt Const. 532 So. Spencer Garage 6 , 500 8763 Ryszard Blaszczyk 1064 Sibley Street Fence 1, 000 8764 J. Bard Komarek 1199 Limestone Dr. Fence 800 8765 Signs of Quality 107 West 1st Avenue Sign 2 , 700 8766 E2 Construction Shakopee Town Square Entry Way 4 , 000 8767 B & D Development 1291 Diamond Court House 75, 000 8768 Logeais Homes 1816 Ruby Circle House 61, 900 8769 Logeais Homes 2015 Heritage Drive House 45, 200 8770 Paul Wermerskirchen 2707 Lakeview Drive House 170, 000 8771 Lauren Sorenson 721 So. Madison Deck 350 8772 Ted Sizer 1501 East 1st Avenue Reroof 600 8773 Great Scapes 1501-1511 E. 4th Avenue Decks 8 , 000 8774 Robert Wolf 1170 Limestone Drive Deck 1, 100 8775 Novak Fleck 1306 Minnesota Street House 63 , 000 L 2 & 3 B 3 Meadows 4th 8776 Bjergo Construction 1101 Legion Street House 76, 000 L 14 B 2 Prairie Estates 8777 Robert Merchen 1024 So. Main Fence 1, 030 8778 Robert Klehr 1077 Dakota Street Addn. 8 , 640 8779 Bob Mintz 3560 Marschall Road Finish Home 10 , 000 8780 Thomas Schmidt 330 West 4th Avenue Porch 500 8781 Shakopee Valley Printing 5101 Valley Ind. Blvd. Alt. 8 , 000 8782 William Norton 970 Miller Street Garage 3 , 700 * l7E> MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Payment of Second $25, 000 to Murphy' s Landing DATE: September 14 , 1990 On July 7 , 1990 the City Council approved the second half payments to Murphy's Landing on September 30th and on December 31st conditioned upon justification. This item is included in the 1990 budget. I have reviewed the packet of materials submitted by the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project Board and determined that the payment is justified at this time. Therefore I have authorized the September 30th payment to be made. No council action is necessary on this item it is being submitted to the City Council for information purposes only. cc: Finance Dept. 4k4 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Annual ICMA Conference DATE: September 14 , 1990 I will be attending the Annual International City Management Association (ICMA) Conference in Fort Worth, Texas. I will be out of the office from September 24th - September 27th. Acting City Administrator Barry Stock will be in charge during my absence. Any Councilmember needing to contact me can do so through Toni Warhol . #1(7 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk - RE: Pheasants Preservation Inc. DATE: September 14 , 1990 Pheasants Preservation Inc. has applied for renewal of their gambling license. They meet the requirements of the City Code. Pheasants Forever has been watching the pull tab operation of Pheasants Preservation Inc. at the Rock Spring Supper Club. They have obtained copies of their reports and have forwarded them to their home office. They have questions regarding this operation and have forwarded them to the State Gaming Board, who will be considering them in conjunction with the license renewal . Since Shakopee does not have an enforcement department set up to monitor charitable gambling, nor do we collect fees from charitable gambling licensees to offset costs to do so, Mr. Roger Franke, enforcement division of the State Gaming Department, recommends that the questions be handled by the State Gaming Board. Staff believes that the Pheasants Forever questions will be best addressed by the State. The purpose of this memo is to advise you and Council that there are questions regarding this operation and that they are being handled by the State. I do not recommend that Shakopee become involved at this time. TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 18 , 1990 Mayor Gary Laurent presiding 1] Roll Call at 7 : 00 P.M. 2] Approval of Agenda 3 ] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 4] Mayor' s Report 5] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 6] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) *7] Approval of Minutes of August 28 , 1990 8] Communications: a] 1990 Derby Days Committee re: city financial participation b] James E. Murphy, Shakopee Public Schools re: moratorium on development south and west of the high school 9] 7 : 30 P.M. Public Hearing on proposed improvements to 5th Ave. between Fillmore and Market, Project 1989-4 - Res. No. 3283 10] Boards and Commissions: Planning Commission: a] Preliminary Plat of Valley Park 10th Addition - 95 . 6 acre parcel lying S of Valley Industrial Blvd. South, W of Valley Park Drive and N of 12th Avenue 11] Reports from Staff: a] Park Dedication Fees on Replats - tabled 8/21 b] Scott County Radio Tower *c] Time Extension for Filing Canterbury Park 4th Addition *d] Underground Storage Tanks *e] 1990 Audit Services f] Annual Revision Conference With Codifiers g] Approval of Bills in Amount of $2 , 553 , 328 . 55 *h] Pay Estimate #9 for 3rd Avenue Reconstruction, Project No. 1989-5 i] City Hall Hours Christmas Eve Day j ] Committee of the Whole TENTATIVE AGENDA September 18 , 1990 Page -2- 11] Reports from Staff continued: k] Approval of Minutes *1] Completion of Probationary Period - Raymond Erlandsen *m] Completion of Probationary Period - Thomas Crocker 12] Resolutions and Ordinances: *a] Res. No. 3289 - Authorizing Delivery of A Deed b] Res. No. 3286 - Ordering A Report for Muhlenhardt Road from CR-16 to CR-18 c] Res. No. 3285 - Approving Plans & Specs for T.H. 169 Bridge and Mini Bypass, Phase I d] Res. No. 3287 - Declaring Cost to Be Assessed & Setting Public Hearing for Killarney Hills, Project No. 1989-7 13] Other Business: a] Metropolitan Council Regional Meeting b] Reschedule the October 2nd City Council meeting to October 9, 1990 at 7 : 00 P.M. C] Cs 01 /G NO CR ,? ,j d] d ►`x 3 r3 o nct t' ss u Of / U e garo.7/ e] APED► N7rna n7' i hI te.o,. w, rH fes/- Gl � p R. h a-s 14] Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator REMINDER: October meetings will take place on October 9th and October 23rd instead of the 2nd and 16th! I 7 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 28, 1990 Mayor Gary Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 00 P.M. with Councilmembers Joe Zak, Jerry Wampach, Gloria Vierling, and Robert Sweeney present. Councilman Steve Clay was absent. Also present were Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator; Karen Marty, City Attorney; Gregg Voxland, Finance Officer; Judith S . Cox, City Clerk; George Muenchow, Community Services Director; Tom Steininger, Chief of Police; and Lindberg Ekola, City Planner. Mr. Kraft reported on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) meeting which took place this afternoon. He reported that MPCA approved the variance request from Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn.DOT) for the Schmitz property and also the Indirect Source Permit for the Bypass. He explained that the Schmitzes have two options in addressing the noise pollution problem and that they must advise the city of their choice within 60 days. Mayor Laurent reintroduced Karen Marty as the new city attorney. Mr. Kraft reminded Councilmembers that they had directed him to prepare a balanced budget. He explained that it is necessary to reduce the proposed budget by $166, 606 and presented Council with a list of possible cuts. He explained that he left $20, 640 in contingency for comparable worth adjustments which must be made before 12/31/91 for female dominated positions. Discussion ensued on each item listed as a possible cut. Consensus of Council was to make the following adjustments to the proposed budget: Police Officer (duplication) cut $33 , 146 Murphy' s Landing Contribution cut $50, 000 Leave in the Planning Budget $30, 000 Fire Marschall (new position 1/2) reduce to $4 , 000 Fire Uniform Allowance cut $875 Fire Paint Truck Bays cut $3 , 000 P. W. Supervisor Position Elimination $48, 610 Add Unemployment $6, 000 Recreation Receptionist (1/2 position) retain for $12 , 000 Street Snow Plow Rents cut $3 , 000 Street Paint Mixer cut $1, 400 Transportation Coalition Contribution retain for $5 , 500 Contingency Increase (Compworth) retain for $20, 640 Sweeney/Wampach moved that the 1991 budget be certified to the County Auditor in the amount of $4 , 964 , 694 . 00 plus $20, 500. 00 . Proceedings of the August 28, 1990 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. Kraft also informed Council that a decision would have to be made whether or not to fund the insurance premium for the O'Dowd Lake Aerators, and the annual clean-up day which have not been budgeted; and that the budget for the legal department would have to be finalized. Mayor Laurent also mentioned the possibility of publishing a newsletter, which had been talked about during the goals and objectives sessions. Mayor Laurent suggested that the contingency fund could be reduced to off-set these expenditures, if Council so desired. Dave Hutton stated that nothing has been budgeted for the pavement management system and that he is still exploring options. He said that pavement preservation funds could be used. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Vierling moved to set the dates for the public hearings on the proposed tax levy and 1991 budget for December 5th and December 12th, 1990 at 7 : 00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Gregg Voxland asked Council when they wished to meet again to discuss other parts of the budget. Sweeney/Vierling moved to meet on September 11, 1990 at 8 : 00 P.M. for a budget worksession. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Vierling moved to reconsider the motion of August 21, 1990 to put in a street width curb cut and to construct an apron on the West side of Adams Street at the 5th Avenue right-of-way at the expense of the City' s Street Improvement Fund. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved to amend the motion directing the City Engineer to install surmountable curb and that the North end of it be in alignment with the Northly right-of-way. (Staff shall decide the minimum width needed. ) Motion carried with Cncl .Sweeney opposed. Motion carried on main motion as amended with Cncl . Sweeney opposed. Mayor Laurent adjourned the meeting at 10: 17 P.M. ' (: t ___t 1 2(___. Jfud'th S . Cox dit Clerk R'cording Secretary SEP 0 l 1990 September 7 , 1990 va.., .4G%`!; Mayor Gary Laurent 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mayor Laurent: On behalf of the Shakopee Derby Days Committee, I would like to request an appearance before the Shakopee City Council to discuss the potential for the City of Shakopee' s financial participation in offsetting costs associated with our annual community celebration. This year, we successfully completed our third annual Derby Days Celebration. We are pleased to report that we ended up with a positive fund balance for the first time ever. Since the celebration' s inception, we have diligently solicited contributions from local businesses and industry to offset costs associated with the celebration. We are thankful that the business community has embraced our celebration and has graciously participated in regard to contributions. This years budget was in excess of $10, 000 . The Shakopee Derby Days Celebration was initiated three years ago in an attempt to build community spirit and pride. One of the initial ideas behind the Derby Days Celebration was to have an event for Shakopee residents which would serve as an indication of our appreciation for their patience in dealing with our annual tourist traffic. In an effort to ensure that the Derby Day Celebration continues as a tradition in Shakopee, we would like the Shakopee City Council to consider making an annual cash contribution in the amount of $2 , 000. 00. These funds would be used to offset the cost associated with the activities planned for Saturday evening on the weekend of our celebration. In the past, we have traditionally held a street dance on Saturday evening. Attendance at the event has been excellent. However, in order to cover costs, we have had to charge an admission fee. The expense incurred in attracting quality entertainment is significant. Two years ago we had an excellent turnout at our street dance when the band, Bob and the Beachcombers performed. However, the cost for a three hour performance by Bob and the Beachcombers was in excess of $2 , 000. 00. With a $2 , 000. 00 commitment from the City of Shakopee, we feel we can attract quality entertainers which will enhance our celebration. If the City Council were to make such a commitment, we would also be prepared to offer free admission to all events held in conjunction with our Derby Days Celebration. We understand the extreme fiscal constraints on the City this year. We also are thankful for the tremendous in-kind support that the City of Shakopee has offered in the past in preparing Lions Park for the celebration and we hope that the City' s support in this area will continue. However, we firmly believe that a financial commitment from the City will provide us with a self-insurance policy in the event of bad weather during our celebration. We would like to remind City Council that foul weather was the primary reason why Shakopee-O-Valley Days was discontinued. In one year, this one factor essentially bankrupted the committee. We would like to take every precautionary measure possible to ensure that this does not happen to the Derby Days Celebration. This year we have several new members on our committee as well as past members who are very excited about the 1991 celebration. We would respectfully request your consideration of our proposal . I would appreciated it very much if you would contact me in advance of this item being placed on the City Council agenda. I can be reached at either 496-2000, 496-2192 or 445-6799 . Sincerely, / Duane Wermerskirchen 1990 Derby Days Committee Fred Jurewicz Bill Lepley Paul Ten Eyck Kevin Lyons Barry Stock Dick Dugan Tom Haugen Bonnie Karst Mark Kuchenmeister Dick Jonckowski Bob Friendshuh Kris Converse Mary Ann Metrz Darlene Schesso John Birnstein FL MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Letter from James E. Murphy, Shakopee High School Principal DATE: September 14 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: The attached letter was received from High School Principal Jim Murphy speaking on behalf of various community groups requesting time on the September 18th agenda for the purpose of discussing a possible building permit issuance moratorium. BACKGROUND: As the attached letter indicates various groups would like an opportunity to discuss the need for a building code moratorium with the City Council for land which is located immediately south of the Shakopee High School . The land potentially would be used for a variety of public uses including recreation facilities for the community. In that a moratorium is being requested this is an item that should be commented on by the Planning Commission. Also there will need to be legal input relative to whether an interim zoning ordinance (moratorium) should be put in place or whether the property should be officially mapped. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Refer the matter to the Planning Commission for review and report back to the City Council . 2 . Receive and file the letter. RECOMMENDATION AND ACTION REQUESTED: Move to recommend that the correspondence from James E. Murphy regarding the proposed moritorium be referred to the Shakopee Planning Commission for review and report back to the City Council at it' s earliest convenience. / =e--' v Shakopee Public Schools District Office Shakopee School Board 505 S. Holmes Street Janet Wendt,Chair James Sorensen,vice Chair Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Suzanne van Hout,Clerk (612) 445-4884 Jane Carlson,Treasurer Bob Techam,Director Jessica Geis,Director Director of Administrative Services Aggie Unze,Director Ronald E.Ward Acting Superintendent Director of Business Services Ronald E.Ward Robert N.Martin September 14,1990 Mr. Dennis Kraft, City Manager Shakopee City Hall Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Mr. Kraft: A coalition of local organizations requests that the City Council discuss the possibility of placing a moratorium on land directly south and west of the high school. Groups in the coalition include: the Hockey Association, Recreation Department, Athletic Complex Steering Committee, and individual senior citizens. We are requesting that this be placed on the agenda for September 18th and that members of these groups be given fifteen minutes to explain the need for a moratorium. Each group has a different need, but the need for a site is the common factor. The section of land that we are interested in would be bordered on the south by the extension of Vierling Drive, on the east by Spencer, on the north by the high school, and on the west by the extension of Fuller Street. It has been estimated that this area is fifty-five to sixty acres. Sincerely, / i/ / , - ,,- ames E. Murp y ALL SCHOOLS ACCREDITED BAN EQ TTH CENTRAL IATION Shakopee Public Schools: Forward Together For Our Future 44- 8b. Shakopee Public Schools Illy District Office Shakopee School Board 505 S. Holmes Street Janet Wendt,Chair James Sorensen,Vice Chair Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Suzanne Van Hout,Clerk (6 2) 445-4884 Jane Carlson,Treasurer Bob Techam,Director Jessica Geis,Director Director of Administrative Services Aggie Unze,Director Ronald E.Ward Acting Superintendent Director of Business Services Ronald E.Ward Robert N.Martin September 14, 1990 Dennis Kraft City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 1st Ave. E. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Kraft: As you are aware, the Shakopee School District is in the middle of a strategic planning process for our District. We are also discussing the possible remodeling of the athletic complex adjacent to the high school. It has become evident that if the District needs to expand the Senior High, there will be a need for up to 20 acres of additional land adjacent to the south and west of the current site. At the School Board meeting on Monday, September 10, the Board voted to request that the city investigate the feasibility of placing an 18 month moratorium on the land in that area. The requested moratorium would allow us time to finish the planning process and assess our needs. We would like to request that this item be placed on the City Council agenda for the next meeting. Board Chair, Janet Wendt and I plan to attend this meeting, and will be available to answer any questions that may arise. If this poses a problem, please let me know. Sincerely, / 61-c-a4fr (ei‘frc. Ronald E. Ward Acting Superintendent of Schools REW/ph ALL SCHOOLS ACCREDITED BY THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION Shakopee Public Schools: Forward Together For Our Future ANE9UALOPPORTUNITYEMPLOYER 7 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator ( e)p FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director kg,/ SUBJECT: 5th Avenue Project DATE: September 11, 1990 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3283 , which re-orders plans and specifications prepared for the above referenced project. A public hearing to consider this resolution has been scheduled for September 18 , 1990 . BACKGROUND: In November 1988 the City of Shakopee received a petition for street improvements to 5th Avenue, between Fillmore Street and Market Street. Subsequently, a feasibility report was ordered on the requested improvements. In December, 1988 the feasibility report was completed and a public hearing was scheduled for February 7, 1989 to consider the improvements. The original feasibility report discussed various options available to the City Council for public improvements in this area. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council ordered plans and specifications prepared for the project and selected Option 1 as recommended in the feasibility report. Option 1 is essentially making all necessary improvements to develop this entire area and consists of the following: • Extending 5th Avenue from Fillmore Street to Market Street, including all sewer and water. • Installing sewer and water on Market Street from 4th Avenue to 7th Avenue. • Extending Main Street from 6th Avenue 5th Avenue. • Adding pavement and curb & gutter to the existing gravel portion of 5th Avenue from Spencer Street to Fillmore Street. All of the other options considered in the original feasibility report were various partial segments of the above improvements. Option 1 is the only alternative that included all improvements. Staff has reviewed the original feasibility report and has revised it based on updated cost estimates and testimony received at the first public hearing. There are two major revisions to the feasibility report, as follows: ,7 1. A 4th option for the street and utility improvements has been incorporated into the report. This option was suggested by one of the property owners at the hearing and subsequently a discussion on this option was added to the feasibility report. 2 . It is recommended to upgrade Market Street to City and State Aid Standards by adding curb & gutter and constructing a 44 foot wide street. The cost estimate for the street construction has been revised accordingly. The original feasibility report recommended only utility installation on Market Street and street patching, rather than upgrading the street. Based on the condition of this pavement, lack of curb & gutter and poor drainage on the street, staff now recommends fully upgrading this street. This would alleviate the need to tear up the street a second time in the future to upgrade it. Since there is an existing blacktop street, this upgrade would be considered street reconstruction and assessed only 25%, rather than 100%. A copy of the revised feasibility report has been submitted to Council for their review, along with this memo. In March, 1989 the City Council held a public hearing and vacated that portion of 6th Avenue from Main Street east. This vacation was postponed from an earlier date until after the 5th Avenue Project was ordered due to neighborhood opposition to vacating 6th Avenue prior to 5th Avenue being ordered. Two houses have since been constructed on the vacated 6th Avenue right-of-way. In May, 1989 a real estate appraiser was hired to do an appraisal on the property needed for the right-of-way acquisition of 5th Avenue. Since that date, the appraiser and the Assistant City Attorney have essentially delayed the construction of any improvements due to exploring the various funding options, special assessments, and preparing appraisals on the various alternatives. On July 17 , 1990 the City Council held an executive session with the Assistant City Attorney to discuss the project. Based on the difficulty with assessing several lots that are non- developable in their present state (due to the old railroad property) , the City Council sent out requests for proposals to local developers in an attempt to develop this entire area. But in September, 1989 only one development proposal was presented to Council and subsequently rejected due to the cost to the City. Based on the appraisal report and legal recommendation, the City of Shakopee will need to acquire and assemble all of the non- developable lots in order to fully assess this project. Due to the confidentiality of the acquisition process, staff will not reiterate the impacts of the recommended takings on the City of Shakopee, but it was discussed at the July 17 , 1990 executive Council meeting. Staff would also like to point out what the City cost was on several recent projects that have been constructed or are in the process of being constructed. City Cost (Sewer Fund Project Name Total Cost SPUC, General Fund) Lewis St. Recon. $482 , 000. 00 $400, 000 . 00 3rd Ave. Recon. $800, 000. 00 $640, 000. 00 Killarney Hills $172 , 000. 00 $ 88, 000. 00 On nearly all Public Improvement Projects there is some City expense. Council must decide if the possible expense for this project out-weighs the benefits of developing this entire area that has existed in a non-developable state for many years within urban Shakopee. The City Council has already authorized condemnation proceedings to begin on the property acquisition for the 5th Avenue right-of-way and those proceedings are going forward. The City has not initiated condemnation proceedings on the property needed for assemblage as recommended in the appraisal report, though. Prior to ordering condemnation proceedings to begin on that property, the City Council should hold another public hearing on this project and re-order it. Because it has been greater than one year since the project was first ordered, another public hearing is required based on Minnesota Statute 429 . The plans and specifications are essentially completed (90%) but the project construction has been delayed due to the property acquisition and appraisal report process. If the project is re- ordered, it is proposed to bid this project out in early 1991 to obtain the best bid prices and start construction as soon as weather permits. Staff will give another presentation on the feasibility report at the September 18 , 1990 public hearing. At the conclusion of the public hearing, if Council wishes to re-order this project, attached is Resolution No. 3283 , which re-orders plans and specifications prepared. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3283 and re-order the project as recommended in the feasibility report, as revised. 2 . Adopt Resolution No. 3283 , but revise the project scope. 3 . Table Resolution No. 3283 and request additional information. ,r 4 . Deny Resolution No. 3283 . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to adopt Resolution No. 3283 and re-order plans and specifications prepared for this project as recommended in the feasibility report. Staff feels that the City Council has already committed to this project by vacating 6th Avenue, designing the project, obtaining appraisals and expending funds for legal, administrative, and staff time. To date, a total of $33 , 774 . 00 has been spent on this project by the City. Staff does not feel the potential expense to the City is detrimental to develop this entire area, especially in comparison to other projects that have been completed. Staff is recommending that another public hearing be held as soon as possible so that condemnation proceedings can start on the remaining parcels in time for 1991 construction season. Since the plans and specifications are nearly completed for this project the bids can be let as soon as the property acquisition process is completed. Per State Statute, the City can occupy the land 90 days after the condemnation order is filed, even though the actual settlement may take longer to resolve. In addition, ordering this project will generate additional taxes for the City by promoting development in this large undeveloped portion of Shakopee, further reducing the net impact on the City' s initial financing of a portion of this project. The State Aid System will fund approximately $92 , 000. 00 of the total project costs (for Market Street) . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3283 , A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for 5th Avenue Between Spencer Street and Market Street, Market Street Utilities From 4th Avenue to 7th Avenue and Main Street From 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue, Project No. 1989-4 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3283 q RESOLUTION NO. 3283 A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For 5th Avenue Between Spencer Street and Market Street, Market Street From 4th Avenue to 7th Avenue And Main Street From 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue Project No. 1989-4 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 3267 , adopted on August 7 , 1990, fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of 5th Avenue between Spencer Street and Market Street, Market Street from 4th Avenue to 7th Avenue and Main Street from 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue; and WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held on the 18th day of September 1990, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter described: Construction of sewer, water, curb and gutter and pavement to 5th Avenue between Fillmore Street and Market Street; and Construction of curb & gutter and pavement to 5th Avenue between Spencer Street and Fillmore Street; and Construction of sewer, water, curb & gutter and pavement on Market Street between 4th Avenue and 7th Avenue; and Construction of sewer, water, curb and gutter and pavement on Main Street between 6th Avenue and 5th Avenue 2 . David Hutton, City Engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 19 _ . • • tb R: S1EBENALF.R 9 . --. • .. 322 EAST 5TH AVE. ?-/(57 - 9a HAKOPEE; MN 55379 7�� cz-v," _Gz-G-ez_ Xe CLZ w1 SYN-ter• -` 4, oea_1.1.c.-fa,u D-7- `1a _y�-o .2.7 ca/ 5- 6 -e D.7 D o /,?.96- c • moi. ,a .iiL 41.L_' .. ^r _ AP t I _ Ai Allri _ ir �"1i/��� / r 'Yr • • 9 �" CZ/t/'"4" ../G: 9 /.2 �1 ./ _/ a, 1990 - 9 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF 5TH AVENUE BETWEEN MARKET STREET AND FILLMORE STREET IN SECTION 6 RANGE 22 TOWNSHIP 115 SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Date left Registration No. 19133. Revised 91/1?. . DECEMBER 1988 REVISED SEPTEMBER, 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. Feasibility Report Introduction 1 Background 1 Scope 1-2 Sanitary Sewer Analysis 2-7 Watermain Analysis 8-13 Street and Storm Sewer Analysis 14-18 Right of Way 19 Recommendations & Conclusions 19-21 Special Assessments 22-24 5th Avenue Spencer to Fillmore 25-26 Summary 27 Appendix Location Maps 1-2 Cost Estimates 3-10 Petition 11 9 INTRODUCTION The City Council of the City of Shakopee ordered the preparation of a feasibility report by Resolution No. 2991 on December 6, 1988 for street improvements to 5th Avenue between Market Street and Fillmore Street in Section 6, Range 22 , Township 115 in Scott County, Minnesota. BACKGROUND A petition was received and accepted by the City Council on December 6, 1988 for street improvements to 5th Avenue, between Fillmore and Market Streets. The requested improvements consist of sewer, water, curb and gutter and bituminous pavement. The proposed 5th Avenue is situated in an unplatted area of Shakopee, but is bounded on the west by the Original Plat of Shakopee and to the south by Wermerskirchen' s 2nd Addition. Currently, this portion of 5th Avenue is unimproved with very little development in the immediate vicinity. The terrain is mostly meadow with relatively flat slopes draining generally to the north and east. An abandoned railroad bed runs diagonally through the area from northwest to southeast. A portion of the right-of-way has been obtained by the City of Shakopee for the portion of 5th Avenue from Main Street to Market Street. The area is zoned R-2 , Urban Residential. None of the affected properties are within the flood plain. SCOPE This report investigates the feasibility of extending 5th Avenue from Fillmore to Market Street. In evaluating the preliminary design for the sewer and water in 5th Avenue it was necessary to expand the report to include additional utilities in portions of Main Street and Market Street. Several sewer and water options were analyzed which in turn created several roadway options. Cost estimates were developed for all alternatives. 1 7 This report makes a recommendation on the overall preferred option to adequately extend 5th Avenue and complete the sewer and water systems according to City design criteria. An estimated assessment roll was prepared based on the recommended alternative. In addition, that portion of 5th Avenue between Spencer and Fillmore Streets is currently a gravel road. To extend 5th from Fillmore to Market without addressing the block just west of Fillmore would result in all of 5th Avenue being completely upgraded except for that one block section. This report was expanded to include the feasibility of also upgrading 5th Avenue between Spencer and Fillmore. Since this portion was not included in the original petition, Council would need to order this project. SANITARY SEWER ANALYSIS Design Criteria and Alternatives: The existing sanitary sewers in the immediate area are shown on the following diagram. Basically, the existing sewer terminates on 5th Avenue at Fillmore Street and at 6th and Main. There are no sewers in Market Street between 4th and 7th. A preliminary design of the proposed sewer on 5th Avenue was done in accordance with the City of Shakopee Standard Design Criteria. It is proposed that an 8 inch PVC sanitary sewer will be required to serve this area. The minimum depth allowed for a sanitary sewer is 9 feet. Due to the topography and depth of existing sewers, it is impossible to design the sewer completely in 5th Avenue and have it flow in one direction. From approximately Main Street, the sewer must flow both east and west in order to maintain a depth of 9 feet. To construct the sewer on 5th Avenue from Main Street east, it will be necessary to construct a sewer on Market Street from at least 5th Avenue to 4th Avenue. Eventually, the sewer in Market Street will need to be extended south to 6th Avenue to serve the area. Several options were developed to adequately complete the sewer system as shown on the following diagrams. Option No. 1 is the preferred option, because then the entire area would have sanitary sewer service available. Option No. 2 is the minimum needed to complete 5th Avenue through to Market Street. Option No. 3 is available if 5th Avenue were only constructed from Fillmore Street to Main Street. Option No. 4 is available if 5th Avenue were only constructed from Main Street to Market Street. 2 7 To adequately provide sewer service to Lots 1 and 2 of Block 30, of Wermerskirchen' s 2nd Addition, a sewer extension will also be required from 6th and Main north to the alley just north of 6th Avenue. This sewer is common to all options and is being funded by a private developer per an existing developer' s agreement. Cost Estimates: The estimated costs of the various sanitary sewer options are as follows: Option No. 1 Construction Costs $ 80, 000. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 8 , 000 . 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 20, 000. 00 Total Cost Estimate $108,000 . 00 Option No. 2 Construction Costs $ 67, 600. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 6, 800. 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 16, 900. 00 Total Cost Estimate $ 91,300 . 00 Option No. 3 Construction Costs $ 18 , 600. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 1, 800. 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 4 , 500. 00 Total Cost Estimate $ 24,400. 00 Option No. 4 The cost of Option No. 4 is approximately $20, 000. 00 lower than Option No. 1 or about $88, 000. 00. Detailed cost estimates for each sanitary sewer option are found in the appendix. Special Assessments: It is proposed that all benefitted properties be assessed for the sanitary sewer on an area wide basis. Each proposed alternative benefits a different area. Although Option No. 1 has the highest cost, it also benefits the largest area. 3 A rough comparison of each sewer assessment can be calculated as follows: Option No. 1 Total Cost Estimate = $108 , 000. 00 = $10, 400 . 00 per acre Total Benefited Area 10. 38 Acres Option No. 2 Total Cost Estimate = $ 91, 300 . 00 = $10, 500. 00 per acre Total Benefited Area 8 . 69 Acres Option No. 3 Total Cost Estimate = $ 24 , 400. 00 = $9 , 420. 00 per acre Total Benefited Area 2 . 59 Acres Option No. 4 Total Cost Estimate = $ 88 , 000 . 00 = $10, 240 . 00 per acre Total Benefited Area 8 . 59 Acres A final assessment roll will be prepared at the conclusion of this report based on the recommended alternative for each phase. 4 \ , \ ' • ' '-------.-------- -:------i r 1 -. . 3,...b.....••••••••• , ... i 1 ....„ ...T, _. \_..._ \ \ \ 1 .7., Li3 L_ i -,-). \ , ,\`v ` \ EXISTING SANITARY SEWER '' , \ c' — \ - L - 1 I '.,^ - I I k.C � 1 ,3_ ,--- X - ---- ---1,--- - ,, C J � Ili, , \ A „., ..A -t ,,,\ \ 5 \-1 S •o \ ocf_o 7- (i int A\ \ I libbib. 4 3 s i .111111111111111 •iii iiiiihibb 111111 � 6 . ,,: ...4. a 9 i ..- \ \ --1\- \ : , io • j .. II. - I4,, 3 . 1 1 \ . ! 6M7c -) ivel LL1 ..e..... -N %,,... Ci — 9 .rA \-11 i i. 1 ,r-7. -. -7 71 , : \ \i 4.," 1 , -_-. i `' ' ' - i 1-:L_L_,:\ 1 i ( 4 Izt<TH LI u, -: \ i 1 ) 1 7/72 i 1 - . Ay - I Fr „ ._, 1 1 1 1 \-6,- 0 if 1 1 1 I 3 * 3 I iI .�' Jr �7> H I 1fcIiI' 11II I EL: 7, 77777-- m-nIl i ! 0 imi..* Z 17 S ST DO O C - .-:.:.:.::::::::•••••••••-•.::::-:•:::•:•::::.:•:.:•:.:•::::::::.:.:.:.:.......::::::.:.:.:.:.:r 1: V .... ... ....... ........ •...................................................................._ ; .__ ••••••••• . ... , . ��rrrrrrrrrriiiirrrrr■ _ • i -_---- :_•. ••••:::::::::::?.?:::-.....::.:::•-.......:.:.:.:.....:.............. .........:.:..:.......:.:.:......................:. ......:........................:. _ . _ _ • ot 1 -- --- _ . 4.4 • _ , -...0111111111111 + r1.6.:::.-2.2:.f:7•:.::.;..7....!-•.:?.7.::.:?...----- • '� ---�-I to tia :x:• ::• - O ■ I:: :: ''R-3 -., . Z D3 ,� S T : x?:. i' .. C:3 i rn f .. • N � W _ J _ •:am•: &:: • - CY -:.::::::F::.:::::::::::•:•:•:•. ::•:�:::`:• .r-. •• :•:.;•r-1/4'6:13..._ " " — ,-....:::::•,;:i:*:::::::::::.::.::.::.::: ■ 1:: s•:•::•:•: CA .. .. ........:. .•••• ,s,:. . _ ___ 1l ;KKET iirail rrr :::::.:::•;:::::::::::::::::•:.::::::::.•.••••:•::::.:.:.:.:.:.:..:.:.:.:.:.:.:•:.-.•;,• _ .--.....:-.:.:-......?:- .::::::::::••••::::;:::::::::::-.,::.:.:::.:::::::::.:-:::.: 'r •••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••:.:.....-.•:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:::.:.:::::::::::::: ::.::::::::::::::;.::.............. ... ••-•••••••••••••••••••...•••••••••: ....••••:_:.:•••...:•::.:.:.:.:•:.:. ::::.:.:.:.:::::e.....:.::::: _• -6.- ,;:.::.:::::::•::.:::::::.:..::::::.:.:.•...::::.:.:.:.:.:.,:....:.:.:.::::.:.:.: ........„.........„............... N V.. - .._ • ..] I a....:, , . i•••••:•••••••••::::•:•:::•:•:•:::.:.:.:.:.- I - ....„. ••••••••:•:-:::::::::::: ::.::.::.:::::::.:..........................................................4...„,.......,........ ,_____________1 - _ : :::mac;::::. •••••••... :::.•. ........... . . ..............1 / . ..._.......... ___ ... ... ... . . . .. _ ::::::::::::::::::...... _ •••••••••••• : :.:.•••••••••••••••1 :::::::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. -I •:::.::..:.::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.:.:„ .__ \ , I 0 ............ ....................••• ___ _- ••••......•.......• a .:::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:::.:.:::::::::, - -.......:....:.:.:....:::::.::. ••\ . ... ......• ... _______ . . --J, ...r., 0 (j) , . .. _., t::.:.:.:....:....:.:.:.::..:.................: . .__ ............,........... a ::::::::!;:::::::::::::::.:::-:::.::::.::.:-:::.:.:-. _„...:..__- 5„ -0 m ..ia.4.:::.::.::•:::.::.:i.....::.::.*-:::.:::?:::. 4. „ --1 _. ,, (JJ 1 ••••••••-••••• m ..:.r.):.:.:•••:::•:•:.:•:•:.-•-••••:• •••• • ..............4::::::, '51 0 co _____. _ 0 :::::::.::::.:•:::::::::: u ..*:: :::::::::•:•:.:•:.:.:•:•••/...-.-.• _ ..... . :::::::::•••:.:•:•:•:...• -;.-. .i. :%; . . ::..7. ..::::: . Z M ...........:.:....:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:7:•:•:•:•:•:•*... -- - .:::::::::::: :::ii. a :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::.:•: '. - J., '' Z ............ ...„;:„. , ............ ...... . , ...::::::::.:.:.:::::.:.:::..:::::.:.:.: .:.:.. L ______ „..; _____ ____ 0 _ m... N . ST. .......:•••••:•:•:•:. :•:•:•:•:•: •:•:•:•:--.7••••• •::•:•:-:::•:•:•:. ...•••••••• •••••:•:-:::•:. . – - ; ) 7Z. _ ...----- -,- - - • * v r. - —0- r --- _ - • ;•,.. ..,. . = ' .e..... N.) N.• > z , c .., 7^ U- • .--•- v) .... ,s• _ - -<. - - ON -I rn :_r. > •-r . ---- -4 - C = C - '• , ,.• _... - --------- --a M.^4 R K T rs) _ - . 0 v C n) M - ,-.. • . cr .. 1. -..3 . i —1 , • I I I 3 I - , . . .3.. - • --.3.111111 3 k _:--------3 0 (/) .....---- 3 :..r. 0 • 1:11 M I 0 . \1 I N., .23 N, ,.- A 7- —I .... '-r1 .....• r omil * --4 --4 • 0 V •-.0 ...t 05/ \ Z m r---. -- --4 I- 7 : 0 1‘.> r) x - -r. Lr t I I 41 > A T 21 \ DO '---- Z 0 CA al .,3 Cll V4,4:::•:AINE161.4SHEINWEV•:%.;":4TV4. .---- .......C."40r.:::MiiiMain:iiiiiMMENVIMW:d.* :.:::"•:':V,..-1*::;'•.,?:::MgRainnt.0:::::,:::,/ .•..„.<...,,,,,:w";. -.4 0 ”•-•'''''•••• e'.Mape*i:Wq;' APP.get ------74 .-------- ..,......V4'n':::Xii•I°: '5,•x4, -.•‘: ar: AIP::: .:Si4.er".'". V.N.:W4. ‘ ' •' - • .46 M:••• N IIIIIIIIIII ....0.:-4,0.....::;0*:;:•...„ ...:::::::!, 5.,....:%:•:-,-.:••:,•0:k s,$.;:a6..K.Q:=1:-•,--,_44•$•••••,-!--.....rtz ii •••••••••,,,::::*:,::::,— -.:•••••,,,V.....‘f:::-M::::--::'.:;*:V::•:::-;:A,A..:-:::,-;•,,:i. -, Q ••..t.,:•:,:i:.0..:,1.: .:, , 4,5., __ __ ...4 -,.. • . ;.." (..j4 •4••• 1,m, 7•-•.....:-.K:ci:::-.4-eft,:.:-..-t- - _ t..•, ligi:K:K:::::::::::f*..,.......iiiiiiiii iiiii:miiiimio:;§:iii§if --4.&:mo••• es... :::•,::,* ,....••••,%, - ..._. . _•- • ::::::::: :i5::::•$-.......::-:::::K.,5:i•tx:imimi:%:0:. ••-•:•:fww:•.:•,-::,,xf::.,..,-4., . .,:f••.•..-.••.-• ".--; 0 N.) • .:',...: . ,,,'M'•:.n.ii§i .___.,::g1MMi:iiigNE:.NMI ":,,:i.K•it', ..;..14::'.:::: .:::). ...---.... U. - 1 N3 ..K..iimaiiM i ::.iPMNS :;•:!.ViA.:•:-.--,,,, f:----ie:V.:- N :.-., ' 1 f :: „4—..:::: 1..: ---- . ..,,,.•,•:.•• --,.. :, •:.:4.4."••• .::, '• ,c _ ..K•g:::•,:::.:*.‹..*:••••••,::::::x:K:K:nr:,.•.„, r.• ..,..." •:,,,4,p,:::::,•••,..f • - OSUR:Mmi:V.IA:..:.::::•!?:*.sike::*AN:m.: ,:s ..A...:::. .4,4e — — -- .N.:,,x:ifts. :::-:Zia!giRWatifa: M.A..r,::'''.-d4:.".;:::::•'''.:':-:::: ... ty •-• r,i•• OA S i k''*'C:•R:r•S.W?•I.lngZen:N2:a Mil • W••:•,:::'::;&•;:P•&..:.t. 4,44::::5. ' ' 1 0 PaMiNget40.::?.."*W::::Mg0g.:::::'::::: . :0 gnat::•;i'if::::N11:e.VI ...: '' ...........• r .... .' 1:•;*1*.:5 f...A.141 :n.:,:.fgt!: ; :,%II fia:',6vaVios.?-:.:* : n :: „4:41:•••90;K::*:::Mg; ,.:;:V4-;..M.::::00:z?.:;:•::::'.* igNea.:5. 0k••••••‘•:•••\:• •mi:K:i:. ..:•.-...,..::. •••• -:•:.:,' •V`•••/*:A::•:•••':7::',-:•:, -•,....*K-'•':::-'x ' i11 - -- 11111•11111111111111111111.111111111111 - •e*,•,..'<"4:')!-:4:'""''''::::::-:,":::::i:'5•:%:"%:1::::::::‘::i:M*:::.f.0i:s'xf,:i*Mq,••:::.:0:::]:::::00:::::•::::::.::::::.::::fp:::::,*.icv,;,.sp 1 • '.". ••••/>;:-.Mfgge-iiiii a:::i,--iM4ii:M::gf 0::giig?.:04:: ::::::::::i::::i::i.::: ::::i:i:::::]:KiiiiK:::n:iii„..§:i0K::.:-..,::mi..:.;.*: _ .__ • . -- '. .irePik:511.11,0101MIRMIR IMMUMI: t\c3) -s ' tiliFfignelial:M43::0619EX:5110200:411E Lo . .-r. ,:l...:.::•-4,y..),...::-.,::::-.,::?:,•§ ..,:•••:%K.4:::.::::-.;,...-• -..-,...",--..:,.:.„:„....•-•-.**.•:•:;,,,,i)0.,,,4 -... .,•-:.,:::..f.„:„....„...„:„...-.... :.;;;;.,.:„.:: -- - - ] • 1 . •:,;:::,..4:::-.3....:::•.:-.:.....• .•.----•: :::,:k";:.% •,.:Iimitm-2-.::. -•:::i:i::::::::::::.. . -- - -- igi,'"..:.: :01.:- :S::54::A:::•46.-;'''.:.:?• :*•-•'•••••;":6g"':•:•:.P. -' : > ,,---------\ '•'', tn - ‘ lr WATERMAIN ANALYSIS Design Alternatives: The existing watermains in this area are shown on the following diagram. The proposed watermain is designed in accordance with the Shakopee Public Utility Commission Design Criteria. Basically, their criteria requires the completion of a watermain grid system and avoiding "dead-end" mains. A 6 inch ductile iron watermain is proposed in 5th Avenue. In order to satisfy the looping requirement of SPUC, the proposed watermain in 5th Avenue must connect to another proposed watermain in Market Street between 5th and 4th. This watermain in Market Street will be needed anyway to serve properties along Market Street that are currently on well system or 1 1/2 inch copper lines. Eventually, the watermain should be extended completely on Market Street from 4th to 7th Avenues. The cost estimate for any watermain installed in Market Street includes street restoration. In addition, a watermain should be installed in Main Street to complete that loop. A portion of that watermain is proposed to be funded by a private developer per an existing developer' s agreement. Refer to the following drawings for the proposed watermain options. Again Option No. 1 is the preferred option in order to provide the entire area with available City water. Option No. 2 is the minimum needed to complete 5th Avenue to Market Street and assumes that Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will allow the main to dead- end at Market Street. Option No. 3 is for completing 5th Avenue to Main Street only. Option No. 4 is for the entire project except for deleting that portion of the watermain from Fillmore Street to Main Street. Cost Estimates: The estimated cost of each watermain option is as follows: Option No. 1 Construction Costs $68 , 700 . 00 Plus 10% Contingency 6, 900 . 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 17 , 200. 00 Total Cost Estimate $92 ,800. 00 8 7 Option No. 2 Construction Costs $29 , 100. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 2 , 900 . 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 7 , 300 . 00 Total Cost Estimate $39,300 . 00 Option No. 3 Construction Costs $19, 300. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 1, 900. 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 4 , 800 . 00 Total Cost Estimate $26,000 .00 Option No. 4 Option No. 4 is essentially the same as Option No. 1, except for deleting approximately 300 feet of watermain resulting in a savings of $3 , 600 . 00. Detailed cost estimates for each watermain option are found in the appendix. Special Assessments: It is proposed to assess all benefitted properties on an area wide basis. Any oversizing costs or costs associated strictly with looping the system are typically absorbed by SPUC and not assess- able. The cost estimate for each option below will be slightly less than shown once the "looping" costs are deducted. Each option benefits a different area. Although Option No. 1 has the highest costs it also benefits the largest area. A rough comparison of each watermain assessment can be calculated as follows: Option No. 1 Total Cost Estimate = $ 92 , 800. 00 = $8, 616 . 00 per acre Total Benefitted Area 10 .77 Acres Option No. 2 Total Cost Estimate = $ 39 , 300. 00 = $6, 775. 00 per acre Total Benefitted Area 5. 8 Acres 9 7 Option No. 3 Total Cost Estimate = $ 26, 000 . 00 = $6, 341. 00 per acre Total Benefitted Area 4 . 1 Acres Option No. 4 Total Cost Estimate = $ 89 , 200. 00 = $10, 384 . 00 per acre Total Benefitted Area 8 . 59 Acres A final assessment roll based on the preferred option is included at the conclusion of this report. 10 ‘17 C T I � I I I r I r I I k,- Y - \ \ S d EXISTING WATERMAIN -mil 1 - \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 1 ir,, _i_ • a"' t \ (-31 Rif wri," 7- IMEM J111 / Mtn : ` e .. -- 4.. '0".:16716N6-2n - : . \ _,_, ;.. _ A \ , a trill, 4,- . L., 1, _ t 0; , c .„ Ik-e-sz•e......, . . ° (` ' - all0. :, I I \/ . I . z 000 _ \ , \ i 1 1 1 ,..._ 4.. HIAWATHA PARK 5 7fh ..,Ork::lok's Nimmosoloweelokimiklammoyikaiwayeelvik '4.1kVibmiveki la:1m 1 :; \ it eil d3 l IL\,,--- 1 i I a--, I , _. ... 4vEl 5 ( 7 I ii I F-7-7-7-7---T7 r _=J ' .9 s - I ._-! • - -•:K•:•:•:• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••:•:•.•:•:•:.••••.•.•.•• U ::-4: :::•:•:::•::::;:::: • Z; , --------r. — , r o� T M " 'r O • • • • • • • • • • • ;.;::::::::::: ::::::::.:::::::::::::::::.:.:::::.: i ;,,,::::::::::.::::.:::.:::::::::::::::::::.:::..:.:;.::..:;::..::....::.:...::..:;.:;.::...: ...__—__._ ___ -..... ck. _ ; (J4 „ ... Do .:::•:•:.:•:.:.:•:: _,,,,....:.:...,....;,...„,...:-.......:,....:.:.::::.:.:. ,....:.::::::.::.:.„.•:...::::::•. .......•... _ __ ,_-, : , . 0 I%) :M:::•: ------ ---- k, 7-•••:•':W:T;'•:•:T •:::: . .*- ,/ \ _ ,..,.:„.:.:„.::::, _. •:::::::::::::::::::::,:,:,*:::::::::: , , ,::::::::: ______._ _ .....:. , .__ . , _ - e::::::::::::::::,::,::.:::•::;.::;.:, . ,::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::.:.:.: .._• • .::::,:::.,:,:,:,::.:,:,:,::::::,:, , _._ ... , ., _. I .,, ..,.,:,:.*,:.„:„„:,:: ...._ . ................. ..---, _::::.:,„*.::,:,:,:,:,:,*„„:,:.,:,:.::: ______, , .____...._ ....... ... , :.. :::•::::::::::,:,:„„:. ,:,:,:,:,:, :::. 4 •••• .... , , IV 0.1 CD --" '..7 _ • -CD-- -. c' ( I::•:.::.•:::•:.::::::-ci::::.:::::::.:::::II.: I ::::I::::::::...:1:11::::.:•:i:•:ie..:::ill:::.; -. ° I '::::•:•:•:::::::::::•:.::::::::::::::: D i .., CY) .. 1:i::::*:;•• ::::::*i: W I iK:::::X:iff::::*:::::::::::::::::if:i. ___ 7,0 . - 4-- - - - :•:•:•:•:.:•:::::i*:::: . e::*:*:.:•::::::.::::::::::::•::::::::::::. :. _ _------ - ......1: o * 5,------P L.^ •3:::::::::1::1:1:1::1::::.::::::::::::::i • .::*:::$.:::::::::::::::::::$:iK:::::::...;:k.t --- ::::::::::::::::*i:i:i::::::::::::*.:;i:,:;3:1 .. 13 .:‘:.:.:....:.::•......:•: ..*:•:•:•:: X.:. e ___-- _ - ‘ .1 tr MIMI 11 111 II.MI . : : •:::::::: :::::::::*:: I • ..• ommi M...., N ' * ::.: :•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:- _ 2 > -.... t.../-- .Z ::::::::::::.::•:-..::::::•1:3.i:.::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::: - • SQ.. _ ; (-.1 - 1;:-.:;:::;••••:41.11•:* ::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::: ,..., 7:). -4 ....ir 7: 0 .......•.*:'........1,4:e :•.•.See.e.e.• ....:ye.:4, _< „ '""--- = : .e.... -I. 1\.) ....)::::::::.$15..:::•':.: ::::V.......•:::::::::::::: ..., :.:,' '7, N-c--' -- , t:::;:*!:iff•ilif:**::if:: :iffe/;:::::::•:::::::%.; ..,-, ,.. ; U. : ..0 - ' _ _ v, _ .10. ,.. __ .. -< _--- ------ -- 7" 71 LO . ' CA) aml > = X .'. 0 -.A - t-------..-'a e:1 ..,, *'•. •-- - - , M."ARKS 7..ET N _ • - . -- r---- i A (—. _ — 1 ; 1. l-- . ::: 0 7•) --- C . --4 > C 0 ° 5 -I .. \ _ (./) . tx) 0 J ---I c. • - T i> , i _ , __ • . - -_-----i\----, ...) , ,- 1 o . rs:.• \1 x 5" — -n C.;) VA -4 to _ la = ,,, (-14 0 o -.. Lli 01 V -< IV n -.4 — i 01 1 0 x r U• ($) • A T TZ.I • O. CT tgar BA;Cif 0.a.W.;::)::'511..4 JAN.'•; . C 1 i Cn 01 .Ri iar IF:::aggiiiini: m. ,. tZ.E Ve.:UPI* _-.-- -.4 ..-------- > I ...':.. ----- .e;:."g...::i,:::::::':V:::'7 . k 7 .0 I 111 II II II 1 II 1 li it;..4i ;?r,I.116:'4 -- -.•:...••:...e.::arV'"n„ 7:, .. CY VI "•:::•:,..zmnOM: ,, ,.&,,,,,:::::%:is ::•.:::?Ms::*-:-:.;?-:::-::::*T. Awri.m.; _--- --i _: . z m C) 7 04 Z. ;,...„„..00ifilittWi!i!i i:iiii,MIP mo ,4•Wiis..X :-:•*.a :-- -1-. -- -•- ('' .:ZN date mi rp.im* : ::.:.,&.:. DO -- -_, = z - , 0 . „.1...0.,,,,,walobio,:..".---_..---- • N., . ,.,::...:. as-;...ii:isolt.04 . ,....:,::,. TN.) 0 Z IV II ,1.0.; ,:ilkilp40,r. •--,c---. - ------1' o ,,....:,....N .:::;-...::: 9411.:1,044.,;-.--.____, 03_---- ____- __ . . .r. , ::. ::::,,,,.:::,--1:00: --. „.......,.:,..„„:„:11.:„:„,:.„.ma . ,.. .... > ,4 ,-:.1.,--:-.z-,,,:::.:::,-;::&;4;i„,:vm. „... -:-..: ‘ . iitft...:460:46111W • _.-- -7--.. ' % ()% .?;:.;:4V.;. ''-!•:§ .Zie.. .::Z.:::Kii:::---.§ :A.,...:::'''..W.gi ! - a °-' !-::•;.•7:.-A!.44&ViitiOk4:0•r::.„0: ;.Illi :°''''f.&:•;*iiiIROPANat 7 ' ' Z 1 '.''..W' ' :i:':'''S;;.M.7: :,", .. ! :-.-131 kcaligiaii:Z..:.. .:3.:Kitliagaii Irji '-'..-- sill - ;_ ........ • iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii„,.11 - •• -•:•.:.,.--,,,,:::::-:::,,:t:",..:::::i:x.::K:i:i:::-..?::::iiiiiiiK:ii:: :,:ii,: ,) . ....... .....,...................:...,:v:..,.:,.;:.y kew....ongAw:ww,-0:-...:;%-.;:',:'--->.::,...:7 0 - - - WG40g44 441:;,:; ::;W221:::.'4',.:iii:, " ' ',,:..._,..::,-,...:iii -• ii., i.i.,,;4N.,, , 1 = - ,..,----,..-t8,- ,-,:. w;:,..,:,-.-.--.::::;-:.- :::::::V4--$0:',,....::,:: :: :::a.v.zielA 0 .----• r KON-4r0+r- la••::444.4::::::::WW:e"•';:::"'"V441V, :".';?An.jrA:::::#a k.0 1 •• P _ . • - - -•:-. ......- - I ., --",..-'/e-',".•••'•:...:':.•:':`.;:•.':::;0: :' ,..,..,,, •.,. '''sn ••:::•:%•,:t....*.•vve*::.*.&•:•:•••x•:•:..:.:•.:.:,...:.„,.,_•:•• !!!!!!!V. *!'"::*•::*:=Wil,.?,.:::•K::::••. .:M:i:M:i:K::.::::::::::::::::::,::w:, - -- _ .-' 7 STREET AND STORM SEWER ANALYSIS Design Alternatives: The proposed street will be designed in accordance with Standard City of Shakopee Design Criteria. It is proposed that a 7 ton, local street should be constructed to a standard pavement width of 36 feet. Standard B618 curb and gutter is proposed. According to current design criteria, sidewalk is not required and none is proposed. Preliminary calculations indicate that the proposed street should drain from west to east. There is existing storm sewer in Market Street. It is proposed that the storm sewer in 5th Avenue would connect to the storm sewer in Market Street. Several alternative street alignments are proposed as shown on the following diagram. The proposed street options are based on providing adequate sewer and water systems as discussed earlier in this report as well as providing adequate storm water drainage. Option No. 1 consists of constructing 5th Avenue completely from Fillmore Street to Market Street, constructing Main Street from 5th Avenue to the existing street north of 6th Avenue and upgrading Market Street from 4th Avenue to 7th Avenue to City and Municipal State Aid Standards. Option No. 2 is to construct 5th completely from Fillmore to Market Street and also Main Street from 5th to the existing street north of 6th Avenue, but not upgrade Market Street. Option 3 would be to omit that portion of 5th between Main Street and Market Street. The reason for considering this option is based on the sewer and water options. If sewer and water are installed in this segment, they must also be installed in Market Street. Option No. 4 would be to eliminate that portion of 5th Avenue from Fillmore Street to Main Street. In order to construct this alternative, a cul-de-sac would be required on 5th Avenue at Fillmore Street and permanent storm sewer easements as well as possible other utility easements would be required between Fillmore Street to Main Street. Option No. 1 is the preferred option based on the preferred sewer and water options. Option No. 1 is also preferred because it will complete the transportation network in the area, promote develop- ment for all undeveloped property and provide an east-west connection in lieu of 6th Avenue which has been vacated. Option 1 is the only option that provides street access to all properties. 14 7 Cost Estimates The Estimate costs for each street option is as follows: Option No. 1 Street Costs $122 , 370. 00 Storm Sewer Costs 38 , 900. 00 Total Construction Costs $161, 270. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 16, 000. 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 40, 300 . 00 Total Cost Estimate $217,570 .00 Option No. 2 Street Costs $ 52 , 000 . 00 Storm Sewer Costs 17, 400 . 00 Total Construction Costs $ 69, 400. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 6, 900. 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 17, 300 . 00 Total Cost Estimate $ 93, 600. 00 Option No. 3 Street Costs $ 29, 100. 00 Storm Sewer Costs 14, 600 . 00 Total Construction Costs $ 43 , 700 . 00 Plus 10% Contingency 4 , 400. 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 10 , 900. 00 Total Cost Estimate $ 59,000. 00 Option No. 4 Street Costs & Storm Sewer Costs $137, 200. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 13 , 700. 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 34 , 300. 00 Total Cost Estimate $185,200 . 00 15 Special Assessments: Street costs can be assessed on a per foot basis or on an area wide basis, with the usual method being on a per front foot basis. Storm sewer costs are assessed on an area wide basis, per the Special Assessment Policy. This policy also states that 100% of storm sewer laterals will be assessed. The proposed storm sewer in 5th Avenue is defined as a lateral, based on design standards. To simplify the special assessments for the 5th Avenue portion of the project, it is proposed to assess all benefitted properties on an area wide basis for both the storm and street costs. In addition, the storm sewer is mainly a function of the street. In other words, without the street a storm sewer would not be needed. The Market Street portion of the project will only be assessed 25% since this is considered a reconstruction. In addition, only a 36 foot wide street will be assessed and any overwidth costs will be non-assessed. A final assessment roll will be prepared at the conclusion of this report based on the recommended assessment method for each phase. 16 ._ . • _ ___4.,_ •• 7 , • i • . _ . ...• ••K:K:::::::SK:i.--A/A:::-:•,..::&r :::E.•?:4 \___iPa*.4....E:i:.1: i -- . •:e4s.' ......., .,,,,•-•,. .P.A.S.- ..:......*•• Z.: s..:.:'::?..e...,•:,.:: :.::i*:. - -- 4... _23 ! .... i "----- - ' :---- - ' ---" 5"54. 1 • •.r. . 1 ! ,A n)1 ; 1 , cc . ,i,-, . 01/41 -:::.::::::::::::.,I5moki Cq":2.:.,13::4::: .A .,.,,4:::::•4 Cfl, L_______' ' : P1.-;'.;%:: " `:;:,...;..-:-....-*:;!..."::. ..., ----art : ,, r-----c)---' iTo..,:. ::.4::. .. ... ..4,-; :, ,....„..i..„...mi, _ ,...:„..... :.,;:::„.....:*fr-.,::::::-.: -- , al 0 M 1 -.% rs..-1-.....%:::-vey-gc.. 3::i•:>.liiiM i&• -"•••.rs,:::.. ,§.%.•:•:,:.:::•••.4iiiiE]Mf. T \ (T .M. •••,'. ::,:.; -.,-"''. '••..P:'.:Ww.•"::'••i: . -::::i:i--ki:::,,z!?,,k7.• -•• , \ Z M 1;:1•11------HI ii: - . F--- I (ft ' f;ii.;.*..:agigig . .:7:'.,..'W.'".....'...:','''''::'''. \'':".* :•:• z —I • 0 I I cr' I.,3 1 ::::::ii!iifiii.:i:::kilig,ir'' 4:.;:::::Fil,iAiiiii.,*..n:::.••::$: ..: i •.•:,....:•:::"...:•:.•.:.•••••:-....._,......,- -- ..4::::iii.::...1..i.te!!1;42. ...i F:::,%::,.g.trgilr,:..,.. .. -.._.0_4- _.__ 0 0 ----. ..7•i::•':::•;4••• .. -ii- :',... 4--..4..*,,.....:: 7'.8 M A!N -S- c 7 =----`)ii.`...agi:::.:ii.......,44-..-?<:...i.:.?‹ • ... T;. ill 1 .---....ci:K*: ::.?"MW.,. ...•::a•-:-.0.M. 1 ,:,q:::',Km.::i•x-,::It"...;"K::•fi'-•',::::0'...'z'N'': ;73 _2, \---____ _•--- —L. I ••••:Rigf..', z :-: -YOSigAr -- ' 1°... - 1 0 r\) 1 Ark-- ± .......:111:KriE:i:::",,,,:•:•:4,Zt.10:4111 - ---- - - 1=, I z x ' I N . ...:...:i:mi ...,":'!'s -.V4...!..:,.1.'ft:i''z:.W!' ",5 ::::]::M::::M:ii:• '. 4:]V.-K‘ii:f..0.-P:::§liot..__:--:::§MA\ ..-- -— •; . .___- 0....QpW° •': — . alr.:0,,X.W:Ni::?;.::.**x:::::::: :::::•:::::::.::::.::::::::i:::::::ifiiti:K:.ni:?..*::::::1 ...'i:?..Kik.::%::::.::- .......m:A. • - ! . .k-t,.,:i ..--.E.i:im::.giii]:::-:]::!:iiiiimgi.•:•:•:,. ...::]..,.:.:•,....:•::.miiiimi:iii-:]::ii:]:ii,:i:::?:.-,. ' .:,..,.:::-....-::Ak*..,,p-:*:::%.,. M...,: I..ift - , ‘,..---- '--, -,-- ,. i.„..t . ..,,,,...,,,,,I.:,i,,.:.......,: :,.:.:,..,•,. , k ....:%::::;..'?:::•1.::,?;?"•;•:$•:•V,:::. .'....:::::.. .:4i3 - CO , I - a i Cr' ;:volgoinsatimmiiimagfti. o :K:::::::::vg:55:3*-•.:. 1p . --- - L ..:.:.:.:*' • .. s'''''' ..70'.' ''':oss: •:,, ,.\_.,... - '-------01 k::::r4Vi:ii:::.iNMERMERigirgielitillgei .'.'i.: ..:::#7,.. ...p..:,..% , • - :::':::::::.'":":'' .,\•:%.,s,.:••• ..*:.Q. 5,.. [ Cr . !:•.:::.!::::::..!!!!!!:.::::.::.7:!?1:7:::: : ::..'::-.•:::: ] :Mt'igiNi::::iiiigif. K.4. ..._.„ ... . t - I II'MI I 111111 II 111 I I 1 1 1 11 1 1 I I I I I I I I W \\\\-\\_\lt \----:. r. ____I . 1 :ii:.:.;::.:5'...2.:5:.:: :.:',:f.:.:•:::•::::::::iiii:-;•,- - .: ..‘:.,.,..,.../-n.::.:§A.s,-..?tm,:.--f-cv::::::::::::,.:A;0:4'x'xX.: gik:ii:' •::','.i--5:-••'4:: - ; - 1 . i-NEL.,"3"4:::4,:.§•.t. ;.!...:,.&i:g:,,-;:,11Vii. .,i,:. . . .. f....w:, :-....: I :-:..24E...):mw:-::C:•ritivx......A‘i1:: •••• 1• .:i;::::,91/4::: L--- m) , -4 :'ri"e•.'U:°' .WgM::5:0:::.4:::::;::.:.:2A.•:*':A:::i::'..;:e;:r:Zt..':i:::4::NaigM:%::.::: :::..:::-.*;.V'::::;:....1.:•.. .ictimM.:!,• 0 3 c r- ' ag.„,,,ki,:••*%:*-:, ..No'''*:, 0•••:•4.:•-•••:::-::z-..40.-.,,,:::::'::::•:.,••• ••:;:.:4*."ts•vi,,m,..,, ..... :::::::„:v::::::N:i„e:iim.:;:-: - . ...., -7.:.o.K...m.• ••.-a:•:::.*:.:.•::.:::• ••,.....,.s •.,,,,:k••oii:g:iii::•;',---,-..• -..,--:?.:::::.::::.-,..-....::;•....-...:46 s•:•••Ez:..<•••:-:m::,,,,,.i?-e::, AO-. - \ i a _-14 ' p. :1.----:„.:Ai'mo.:ierwitr:A:,:aloggari,,,iii:i.,§!:-::,:1*.A,:i:::..?.wg,am. 1 :,...,amme4.1:4*goto .ug,r--- ,..- I:. , , I ery A I - . 1 N) - I al / 0 ct) I co ; -, ' 1 uj 1 • --- ''''''•':';':';':';'::•'..*::•:•:•:::;;.: _ _...\,..._ ••••••••••••••:.;--"*":"./••••:•:•:•:•:•:-.............:............. 4.. - iii:•::::::::::::::::::::* —ye:•::::.:.:.:.;:::::............................. ._ _---_ . . — • .r--. ••..•'''•''• --e•%v.v.••••••••••••....••••••...• . VA --— ---' :::::::::':*:':'::::::::---.X•e•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:••••:•:•:.:•••;:\ e''':':'::•.:::::•'::•:. 1—) 1•-i.. •.'. i 1r'•::.::**::::;::.:i::::•:iei.:f::fi::::::::e:::.§_::.:.•..:*i1:):.•i:::1.::•:::;;-::•:.:-_::i:::•1:.::::3i:-:;f::—— — ' -----------.-.'.'•.,.:::..:::;..:x...::.::..i:..i:.:'$..;:.::..*::.::..:::.::..::::.:i:.::::.:.::.:*::.::.::.::::..::.::.:.:*..::.::.:::...:::.:*:.:..:::.:::.::;:.;::.:i;::.ii.::i;..::.::.::.::..:.:.::::::.::;::::::•::.:.:.. _.-.2._-.z- - - :• .• 0z imI N) , = / .1 ` — — - - ---r =7 _ _ -- f0 rnii • .z-z.,_ _ .. .. Z IMI en ••-•''. .r .. ................N.:........:: : 4. '-` --. • J C) ____ **:.............:................* ':::::::::::::::::::::::::•:..... ::•::::::::: ::: 1 7 e.C.: .y............... ...v..... ............,.. 0 — . • C T 77, •,1.L. N rn -:::;.:i:;;;;;::::.::.:::::::.::;i:. ...e.•:•.••••••••••• ::::::::::: - . Cr.--- ,,7,......F7,4 ::.:::.::::::„:::::::::::::::::::. ..t.::•:•:•:::::t.:::::::::.: :::. - 'J-•:**-7:•:•:•:•:.* ...-- • C.:, 7: ("J ''''.:k:".:e.......e.e.•:...... ''.....:....... •••*Fe."...*Xi' ' •.>. •'..... . .' .." e'N NJ - :.....<1:e...................N.:it ,,,........:::: f..:..:::::.......:: , .. _......,. '-'.. ...":;:4•A::.":'!...............;.: :::::: el........X. e..........) :, ::, ff...:.::)::.: :: V" ......en ',7 : - • ! ::,:•:•:::•-•::::::::::::::-:::::::—:•:::::....::::::-..f..:•(.:::::.::::$ _ :::•:;;•:•:•:•:•::•:•:::.—;:•...•:............:...:.:::4.f_.......:..:.....:, :., ,,, .--0.:*-2_ _7 . _ . ,.-- .•:•x•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•.....,—.... __ •••••••••.••••••••••••• ... ••:•.•:•:::.........-........:•;:y. --- - - -- • • - - .--. :::".....f...i-.11.1.1...: ::::::::..::-..'il i-..=._,?...-—-—',.__.._i::!•:::::::::::::::::.:::::1:::::::::...::::::::::::•......*::::::::.:1 i -::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•.•:•..., .• • 7 ''" 7----- - % • .... --- Z .-7. -•: > --; 0 ° \ .,; ,..., , 7-:, • . . '' ,_ „ k.0 1 • .- -- '•, :/) ' .'"O 1 7 c _ . .... . _ . . . , _______;,.....„;,....-if.:•.;!:!.:•:...:;2,..•:,;:4 ..• •••• . .. . •. .. .................... .••••_.....•....•....•..•.. .....:•:.....:•:•:...._.:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:, - ..::::::„....::::•:•,--:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:, y, 0 cn _ 1 - ,. . 0 *:,:::::::::,:::,::::_::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::, .:•:•.....,,,...,:::•:::„..._.,:::,:,:::::::,:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::,•:•.........._..„....:•:•:•.•:•:•:•:•:•.•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:. , . ,, ,_ , ---sx.::::::::::.:::::::::.:::::::::.:::::.:. . 4 .,.. .. ‘ ....1 xj _ .....••••••.••••••••:,,,---:%:.,:::.%•:.::.x.:.::.:.::•.::. , cp\' . . — , ,...: ........,:•:Ly::•:•:•:•::•,___,:E: •.:::::::::::::::::::::::::: .::::. _., c, . 0.1 ::::::i:xi::::.:i*:, :::*: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i. _ - js ' . 0 m N.) 0 ::::::::::::::: —,:n::::::::::::::::::::::::..:::::::::: , CD - 0 e ...• ::::.:*:::::.:::::::::.:::::. : •:•:'eePeee•:•• --:::::•........:•:•.•:•.•:•:•:•: :•:•:•••••: .: :-, Z Ill i----—crr ..••••••.••• .•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••• ... ...... .... •••••••••:•:•••••::•:•:•:•D ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••.••••• .. __- ------ ::::::•::::::::::::::::• ;;:::::::::::*:::::::::::::. :::::::::::•.:7, _ . , 1 ,, i::::::•:•:•:•:::: •:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•: :•:•:•:•:•: •:•: . 0 _. ST 1 Iliiii ..§:iiiiiiig:ii".,::iii:i:g::.,::ifi:Ei;i, \ ' ..... ...... ____ _ __. - ... . 0.) , ............... _ , rn e•••••••••:•:•:•:::*:11-- _ _ _ - .. - — ..... I E:i:K:K::::::::::i*i:::: ..:2 - . , C3 -4-I - (...Q ::::::•:•:•::::::::::•:•:•:•:. 2 •H :•:•::e.::::•:•:::*::::x - 7. , •---...- --' - _-- • . .., 7-0 :iiiaiiiil:::::i:i:::::: ' r.,.: ......z.:::•:•:::::::::::: r":- '-'1-1c,--0‘• -,c--: I §:i:i• :::•*:•:•;:efee -•1 7> ->-, , CP----- __-- -,,• .... • -< •-;--- Lc • ..- Fl _ .q. - ;_ — - i•-• . -, 14 _...-- _ , ,,, _ , . i , ,4, .• • 1 a cl , ,,, ,.._—----al , _ , - S 7. _ _ — rs m.^.,F<KET -., •.: :, - 0 0 1. ...: 1 - _ - c.0 . _..- -. I _•-, P- > . Ni . - - - - r • - _ - ' --Aidgi:::fiiii' 11.ii;,r.!!!.;. *:•ft;1% k. \-- - 0 r i't I -,:t:•:::•:•:•:;... :::::::!:::, ':i!•••2'444?•:t;4...':.;:Z;;;•:.4•K;'.:Irf;;:•' , . • t I f-;•;•::i:W..i';!!!;K::::i:•% • ••••••,•••••• .' -- __4 , 4 :. i ‘,.. ton 1 4‘) ; ; C-• I____._ ____,. 2 A. " . m g. \ •11 . DJ 0 Z I CO Cb 04 C4 : 2 V. fri -4 -< - Cin . \ cr 0 M t ; •• 0 : ry 0 rn 1 co H____. i 13 Z m 1 i A ----137, v...... .„ ------: _\ -, 1 2 —I I I 1 • -:*;:ig.; I —# • (A :w:Am....: :!::.:::g::::Kii •::••••c•i4s;::,0:ts:KF,e...,:w.g. -, --- 0 1 CJ, I :::.%;4••'''.;'./4•:•• .&:;4•40.;;;;;i44:,42•::.:, %7\BO 4 .',.:i's$. :.:XS.'kz:P:::,..•••'4%.;:;.:?::K... %4:ki gmn..7.:::g:;K::::%:if:::::AWM;(0: F------ , .. .._-- - .S. ST. 111111 aCE::-Vri• .?:.; .,--f... ....:.:•:::::::::Klii -;:, ,....::-„w, '..7::''':,::.: ,- ' ‘, ...4 MAN 37 ill 1 mi!iiii:!!iiimimii!iiiiiiii•—, bi!i.:::. ___ . . .... ,-...,..!. --.!--.t - , - ---- .:,,,....0,-..0:-.:,:, ---‘, I. ,... , (A -" ,:i!:,:.:..:::::: :.:-::.;!:;:1::-:,:.:::!::p..!, ,,...0:,, _._. --- .. , :--w:Aft-: -0 04 _ g,iii:::-i.40-q.,:v -- ',.,.. . - :Ko ,---, 1 •=4, 1 i — „,: N.9 r`' Ai - 14;W:• :0:TVP.A:k :' 'c ' • •-:,-,.•:,:',X;?,••;,..;:,•.•;;:•:•.c; 4:elEftlinii .:11: ------t 't _.----- ct . V,:••:::.N.,..f`Vr• F-- b:::•:ix.2.4::•;-,..*V:::::::;•••• • ;.;.-a ----- 1 1•• ‘P i 1 •''''''‘;:‘,4':;;;%,..P.'.1:•4: ;-.. :•• • x';':::''''•••!!'•40.:::WAS::?•;?'•;:;:'!V;'.;;.::,:%':: ::::':;;V:1":•:%:%;,::•,-,':;:.,4'.,..,;;;;$•,,,%•;K:VOW:•-••-- CO 5iV.:.:•'.::..:•.:W.„„,..::.•;:"••:•:.:'.1-V-;••••••:;: :••:.:4:ii• ,;•:: 4,m''.444:•".,`•:''';;;;;;.•:kireV:::::•0;,..% ...:.:**.„3„,.. :.::....*::::;i:::::v:%•:!::;;;;<tt.t•:; .•r••:' ' • •--------\ 1- itt• ... I I •.•';;;;IMC.::::.;;•••-r:-.:';',4%4W4 .,.,_UMAiik* .......,;:.:::::.'4.1, 0.6M;i:i;n1:';:: ;:••;;;4.4:; :•;:; -4 . ":„ ....4:400::'''-,;;:ii:''':•:::;:$.4aKiRftA',10144; ' :'.:;;SJX ;*'45:::!•'•%•;:•':•;i . 1 r----- A CO : iiitikt;',. ... ,.,i4..4:•6:-QPRUniM•?,:;.11 .'n: ' 1 a i CP ..,,:04*"...4,;ii.*,.,...AMAL,:j:•ileanliki.R.:*Mr \IS c- ! _ —al • NTH.,:filbmAilimegamm,:, .%:,... ,..'i...t..• smomk,aal 1111111111 1 i III IJ.,,111::114144.11...1...01..t.1:4...11tlll11111!jr.I.lii"..:::iilat lip„.1!.114111;..1;n111.61.11.p.**nlis,..1.11.1_,.. ::;..r:7,,i..x:-: -. ._,-,-,.:::_j:ii ,_:,\.: ,i:wK:i•ev:<!.:.,;..-....-:.:,.;:??i:::f...?•?:,Kmg-•.,mi;.:;6::•:•aimiw:-.N.c.§:: ::--:vvi--:4::,--::-?•:-A*.:N4:::i,::::::is:wwiF:::!•.. • 0 -5 _ ' 1 .. . , ,,,,,...v-•:-„moo „....::0:,,..4,...:,:.1.*:.. t.:::.. al- , „:.w,m,,,;..4..a., ,,;-•.;:.-,..•,: ,-:,,::i:. *.,:. n v•,•,*''.:.:,,,?,:- .:;,,:::kw-:';'-e"-•\ - 1 , --1 er.:..:i••:'Vk::.V.::.:.:''::::!:;;;:z.!!:ik:7iefAth.m.K.,,Ii:WE •-•:---'•-• • “.. 1 ,,,.,ii :.: :::•,:,:.::!::. v,„;...:,:vaftilmio:,.:'6:::io,,e.:•:.:.....ge:401.0&084.104 --I - I .. .:„.--,.,w,/,:s4-..-..- •,,jov.:,,,,,:::.: ftliimuif:iiimi::ii:40:::::::::::- • ------- 1 Ci 1 -;•-•ca,,:.•,:.•:gMC.,*Mit-'Kiegm:!:!--,i:iw a:*:i ..,•••••••.---------- I •---..-.:......i.§-,.•:: i.....:...-:,•;:•:.::, ,....,.,?•:".;,,, I ' ?4 • iAi.,.- -.:•,:',,,:: ::;‘'.:tw,,-,,,m, i ' , - \ r, ; ,,,..• - - i - --------------- I „ a, LA _ ! I : C'1 (-" co • ..., 1--- . 1 , / , 9 8 ,w ! 1 1 ! CA I ! '"-- I---111 .• / r-) 7 RIGHT OF WAY To extend 5th Avenue from Fillmore to Market Street additional street right-of-way will need to be obtained by the City of Shakopee, either by purchase, dedication or condemnation. An 80 ft. right-of-way is proposed to be consistent with the existing right-of-way in this area. From Main Street to Market Street the City has already obtained 60 ft. of right-of-way. Normally, 60 feet is adequate for local streets but all other streets in this portion of the City are constructed on 80 ft. right-of-ways. It is proposed to obtain 20 additional feet of right-of-way for this portion of 5th Avenue. The estimated cost to purchase the right-of-way is as follows: Right-of-Way purchase $32 , 500. 00 Appraisal Reports 1, 000 . 00 $33 , 500. 00 Plus 25% Condemnation Costs 8 , 500 . 00 Total Estimated Right-of-Way Costs $42 , 000 . 00 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS Discussion: 5th Avenue has had numerous discussions and reports regarding the upgrading of this street. In 1972 , a petition was received to upgrade 5th between Fillmore and Market but no action was taken. In 1974 and 1982 a petition was received to upgrade 5th between Spencer and Fillmore, but again no action was taken. In 1982 , the Council ordered a feasibility report for that section between Fillmore and Main, but due to drainage problems associated with constructing only 1 block of this street it was determined to be "technically not feasible. " The report indicated that if the feasibility report were expanded to included all of 5th Avenue to Market Street it would probably be feasible. Council chose not to expand the report, so it was determined to not be feasible. The current petition that is addressed in this report is only for that portion of 5th Avenue from Fillmore to Market. To adequately install sewer and water in 5th Avenue, portions of Main Street and Market Street would also need sewer and water as discussed in this report. Since those portions were not petitioned, Council would have to order those portions of the project. 19 7 This area has been undeveloped for many years with a little development activity. Completing 5th Avenue as well as all associated utilities would greatly promote development in this area. Alternatives: There are several alternatives at this point. 1. Construct 5th Avenue all the way to Market Street as well as install any necessary utilities in Main and Market Streets and upgrade Market and Main Streets to City Standards. 2 . Construct 5th Avenue only from Fillmore to Main and also Main Street from 5th and 6th. 3 . Construct 5th Avenue from Main Street to Market Street only, upgrade Market Street and construct a cul-de-sac on 5th Avenue at Fillmore Street. (Option No. 4) 4 . Conclude that the project is not feasible as petitioned for. In order to complete the sewer and water systems, complete the transportation system and promote development in this large tract of undeveloped land amid a residential neighborhood, this report recommends Alternate No. 1. This would require the City Council ordering those portions of the project not covered in the petition. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Based on the recommended alternative, a special assessment roll was prepared using the estimated project costs. Due to the numerous options and combination of options, additional assessment rolls were not included in this report but could be easily prepared. The following table summarizes the proposed assessments and impacts on the adjoining properties of this project. Special Assessment Calculations Summary of Project Costs Sanitary Sewer Construction Costs (Option 1) $ 80, 000. 00 Watermain Construction Costs (Option 1) 68,700. 00 Street/Storm Sewer Construction Costs (Option 1) 161, 200. 00 Total Construction Costs $310, 000. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 31, 000. 00 Plus 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 77 , 000. 00 20 9 Plus Right-of-Way Costs 42 , 000. 00 Total Project Costs $460,000. 00 The assessments are broken down by sewer, water and street costs. A complete assessment table follows. A property location map showing areas is found in the appendix. 21 7 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 5th Ave. Improvements (Market to Fillmore) I I 09/13/90 I Cost to be Assessed: I I SEWER WATER STREET TOTAL $336,400 I I $10,404.62 $8,616.53 $25,064.70 Proposed per acre per acre per acre Assessments PID Property Owner Acreage 27-010016-0 Eugene A & Esther W. Brown 0.74 $7,699.42 $6,376.23 $18,547.87 $32,623.52 1661 W. 6th Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 27-010017-0 Associates Industrial Loan 0.32 $3,329.48 $2,757.29 $8,020.70 $14,107.47 % Thomas A. Egan 14300 Nicollet Court Burnsville, MN 55337 27-010023-0 John & Jane DuBois 0.20 $1,680.22 $1,680.22 1705 W.3rd Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 27-010024-0 John & Jane DuBois 0.20 $1,680.22 $1,680.22 1705 W. 3rd Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 27-906036-0 Dorothy Jane Ten Eyck 1.85 $19,248.55 $15,940.58 $46,369.69 $81,558.81 502 E. 4th Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 27-906117-0 Dean A. & Verena F. Smith 2.07 $21,537.56 $17,836.21 $63,686.53 606 S. Market St. 0.97 $24,312.75 Shakopee, MN 55379 (street) 27-906132-0 Gordon Gelhaye 1.00 I $10,404.62 $8,616.53 $28,295.08 2933 Spring Lake Road 0.37 I $9,273.94 Prior Lake, MN 55372 (street) 27-906133-0 Gordon Gelhaye 0.25 I $2,601.16 $2,154.13 $7,763.05 2933 Spring Lake Road 0.12 I $3,007.76 Prior Lake, MN 55372 (street) 27-906134-0 Gordon Gelhaye 0.16 $1,664.74 $1,378.64 $4,010.35 $7,053.73 2933 Spring Lake Road Prior Lake, MN 55372 27-906144-0 RJ Gregory - Property Mgmt 0.88 $9,156.07 $7,582.54 $22,056.93 $38,795.54 547 W. Jackson Blvd PO Box 6205 Chicago, IL 60680 27-097203-0 Shakopee HRA 0.67 $6,971.10 $5,773.07 $12,744.17 129 E. 1st Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 5th Ave. Improvements (Market to Fillmore) 09/13/90 Cost to be Assessed: SEWER WATER STREET TOTAL $336,400 $10,404.62 $8,616.53 $25,064.70 Proposed per acre per acre per acre Assessments PID Property Owner Acreage 27-906135-0 John A. & Ione A. Theis 0.93 $9,676.30 $8,013.37 $17,689.67 447 Market St. Shakopee, MN 55379 27-906043-0 Edward R. Siebenaler 0.82 $8,531.79 $7,065.55 $15,597.34 322 E. 5th Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 27-906115-0 Wm. J. & Julia McGoldrick 0.69 $7,179.19 $5,945.40 $13,124.59 5716 Blake Rd. Edina, MN 55436 Sanitary Sewer 10.38 1$107,999.96 $107,999.96 Watermain 10.77 $92,800.00 $92,800.00 Street 5.41 $135,600.00 $135,600.00 ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS Total Assessable Cost $336,399.96 $353,400.00 Total Cost $108,000.00 San. sewer cost 10.38 Total Acreage (san. sewer) $10,404.62 Cost per Acre (san. sewer) $92,800.00 Watermain cost • 10.77 Total Acreage (watermain) $8,616.53 Cost per Acre (watermain) * $135,600.00 5.41 Total Acreage (street) $25,064.70 Cost per Acre (street) * Includes R-O-W cost 23 7 MARKET STREET ASSESSMENTS TOTAL PROJECT COST - MARKET STREET ONLY = $124 , 000 25% ASSESSED - 25% x $124 , 000 = $31, 000 TOTAL ASSESSABLE FRONT FOOTAGE = 2 , 240 L.F. COST PER FRONT FOOT = $31, 000/2 , 240 L.F. = $12 .81/FRONT FOOT 24 5TH AVENUE BETWEEN SPENCER AND FILLMORE While this portion of 5th was not included in the original petition some mention of it is necessary in this report. This portion of 5th is currently a gravel street. Utilities are installed, but there is no curb and gutter or sidewalk. If 5th Avenue between Fillmore and Market is constructed, then the only block of 5th Avenue that would not be completely improved is that portion between Spencer and Fillmore. All other segments of 5th Avenue would be improved. Cost Estimate: A cost estimate for upgrading this block of 5th Avenue by pavement and curb & gutter has been prepared, as follows: Construction Costs $16, 200. 00 Plus 10% Contingency 1, 600. 00 Plus 25% Engr. and Admin. Fees 4 , 000. 00 Total Estimated Costs $21,800 . 00 Special Assessments: It is proposed that the abutting properties be assessed for this project per the front foot method. The approximate assessment rate is calculated as follows: Total Estimated Costs = $21, 800 . 00 = $38. 79 per front foot Total Front Footage 562 L. F. A complete assessment table follows. A property location map is found in the appendix. Recommendation and Summary This portion of 5th was not petitioned and therefore it would need to be ordered by Council. A gravel street is a large maintenance item, creates a dust control problem and is generally a detriment to a neighborhood. Adding in the fact that 5th Avenue east of Fillmore is addressed in this report, it is recommended that if 5th between Fillmore and Market is ordered, some consideration should be given to upgrading 5th between Spencer and Fillmore at the same time. 25 7 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 5th Ave. Improvements (Market to Fillmore) 12/27/88 ; Cost To Be Assessed: ; : $38. 79 21 ,800 ; : Front Foot : Cost ; ; ; — : ; Front : Proposed PID ; Property Owner ;Footage ; Assessments 27-001385-0 ; Edward R. Siebenaler : 90 : $3,491 . 10 1322 E. 5th Ave. ; : Shakopee, MN 55379 ; : 27-001386-0 ;Edward R. Siebenaler ; 90 ; $3,491 . 10 3...c E. .with Ave. ; ; — ;Shakopee, MN 55379 ; , 27-001388-0 ; Cornelius W. Furst �< Wife . 60 ; $2,327. 40 ; 427 _�. Jth ; : Shakopee, MN 55379 ; ; 27-001389-0 ;Richard & Cindy Kechely ; 52 ; $2,017. 08 4.35 E. 5th Ave. ; ; : Shakopee, MN 55379 : ; 27-001580-0 :Associates Industrial Loan : 30 ; $1 , 163. 70 ; % Thomas A Egan ; : : 14300 Nicollet Court ; ; ; Burnsville, MN 55337 ; ; : ; : 27-001581-0 : Craig St i eg ; 60 : $2,327. 40 430 . 5th Ave. ; . : Shakopee, MN 55.79 : ; : ; 27-001582-0 : William P. Doepke & Wife , . 60 ; $2.327.40 :420 E. 5th Ave. . ; : Shakopee, MN 55379 ; , 27-001583-0 ;Edward R. Siebenaler ; 60 ; $2,327. 40 : 322 E. 5th Ave. : ; ;Shakopee, MN 55379 : : — 27-001584-0 : Ester B. Johnson : 60 : $2,327. 40 ; 404 E. 5th Ave. . : Shakopee, MN 55.379 ; ; --- - f - - - - : 562 ; $21 .800. 00 ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS $21 ,800.00 Total Cost 562 Total Front Feet — ---------- $38. 79 Front Foot Cost 26 SUMMARY The test for a proper and legal special assessment is such that it is fair, consistent and is not in excess of the increased property value. In order to determine the actual increased property value a benefit appraisal should be done. Without doing a formal benefit appraisal, an analysis of a recent subdivison being developed in Shakopee was done to determine the impact of street improvements to the raw land. The raw land was purchased for around $0. 61 per sq. ft. The developed lots are selling for $2 . 19 per sq. ft. , but after deducting improvements, marketing, interest, legal, etc. , the net cost per lot is around $1. 25 per sq. ft. This represents an increase of 100% over the cost of the raw land and is a good approximation of the increased property value. This report concludes that 5th Avenue between Fillmore and Market is feasible. This report also recommends that the utilities in Market Street and Main Street be added to the project and ordered. This report also recommends upgrading 5th Avenue between Spencer and Fillmore be added to the project and ordered. This report also recommends upgrading Market Street from 4th Avenue to 7th Avenue to City and State Aid Standards and also construct Main Street from 5th Avenue to 6th Avenue. 27 APPENDIX 5th AVE. IMPROVEMENTS PROPERTY LOCATION MAP - ., n, r' I017023.-014vC 4 Y , I I o-(41 1 luotsz-o o I I si � ?,06 'el t-0O MSI - �� I-r 3 go6o3�-o -- o I 19x6135.0 z --- ^ -Q(.�5 4,/7 o' I I o.93 1.-----: - i _ - ` 34-. I I •2ND - _ a _ - w 0 oto 01(0-0 M I 106111-0 � 100043-o 1 Q $ o O.14 z.ol I c.Bz I < 3CO -. a�CX. o I clouts-o I r, o N N I O.s.4 -- �° a1. _ - _ ACNE '/ ' 190(. Itf.-O -_- -- - - I ———_a________%.,IMIll.MOIL Im...,J........-..---._ 302 G✓,✓ _ 3 C�6 3 0 9 - 314 ‘. i : u ` - .--. -_ - -- . - ------- ..- _ ----- .. -----, i__________._____-. - --------- 2 9 303 i 3C5 _, - 310 r. - E.�' 5 3' 3 . 1 eNt `t� 7 --- - 5th AVE. IMPROVEMENTS .,1 PROPERTY LOCATION MAP J -1 • f • `.. o 1 v ,y ,_ r. \-7:, ', ..- A f X L'� 1 . k r fro-\os c" , _.........— _------ ‘..c):\.e q t 4, C' ti • 1f t1 - �„ ✓ / I • �''_'' - 1 limo , •I -.f s 1 / _ ' 4 2 7 SEWER OPTION NO 1 —TEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT aNITARY SEWER 1 4" PIPE SEWER, EXTRA HEAVY CAST IRON L. F. $19 .70 1 ,240 $24,428.00 2 6" PIPE SEWER, EXTRA HEAVY CAST IRON L. F. $21 .50 40 $860.00 3 INSTALL 4" OUTLET WYE EACH $57 .75 31 $1 ,790 .25 4 INSTALL 6" OUTLET WYE EACH $80 .60 1 $80 .60 5 INSTALL CONNECTION TO EXIST. EACH $158.00 1 $158.00 SERVICE LINE (4" OR 6") 6 8" PIPE SEWER, 0-8 L. F. $25.00 1 ,300 $32,500 .00 7 8" PIPE SEWER, 8-10 L. F. $26 .50 275 $7,287 .50 8 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE, SHAKOPEE STD. EACH $1 ,258.00 5 $6,290 .00 8 ROCK EXCAVATION C.Y. $50 .00 140 $7,000 .00 SANITARY SEWER TOTAL $80 ,394.35 r SEWER OPTION NO 2 TTEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT SANITARY SEWER 1 4" PIPE SEWER, EXTRA HEAVY CAST IRON L. F. $19 .70 880 $17 ,336.00 2 INSTALL 4" OUTLET WYE EACH $57 .75 22 $1 ,270.50 3 8" PIPE SEWER, 0-8 L. F. $25.00 1 ,000 $25,000.00 4 8" PIPE SEWER, 8-10 L. F. $26 .50 175 $4,637.50 5 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE, SHAKOPEE STD. EACH $1 ,258.00 4 $5,032.00 6 ROCK EXCAVATION C.Y. $50 .00 140 $7,000.00 SANITARY SEWER $60,276.00 MARKET STREET RESTORATION 1 CLASS 5 TON $6.75 420 $2,835.00 2 BITUMINOUS PATCHING TON $30.00 150 $4,500.00 TOTAL $7,335.00 GRAND TOTAL OPTION NO. 2 $67 ,611 .00 SEWER OPTION NO 3 TEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT ANITARY SEWER 1 4" PIPE SEWER, EXTRA HEAVY CAST IRON L. F. $19 .70 400 $7,880 .00 2 INSTALL 4" OUTLET WYE EACH $57 .75 10 $577 .50 3 8" PIPE SEWER, 0-8 L. F. $25.00 300 $7,500.00 4 8" PIPE SEWER, 8-10 L. F. $26 .50 30 $795 .00 5 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE, SHAKOPEE STD. EACH $1 ,258.00 1 $1 ,258.00 6 CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL DEPTH IN MANHOLE L. F. $91 .00 1 $91 .00 GRAND TOTAL OPTION NO. 3 $18 ,101 .50 9 WATERMAIN OPTION NO 1 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 6" DIP L. F. $12.00 2 ,460 $29 ,520 .00 2 6" G. V. EA. $450.00 B $3,600 .00 3 HYDRANT EA. $1 ,400 .00 5 $7,000 .00 4 3/4" COPPER PIPE L. F. $10.00 2 ,440 $24,400.00 5 3/4" CORPORATIONS EA. $30.00 40 $1 ,200.00 6 3/4" CURB STOP EA. $75.00 40 $3,000 .00 OPTION N O 2 WATERMAIN TOTAL $68,720.00 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 6" DIP L. F. $12.00 1 ,160 $13 ,920.00 - 2 6" G. V. EA. $450 .00 4 $1 ,800 .00 3 HYDRANT EA. $1 ,400 .00 2 $2,800 .00 4 3/4" COPPER PIPE L. F. $10 .00 840 $8 ,400.00 5 3/4" CORPORATIONS EA. $30.00 21 $630.00 6 3/4" CURB STOP EA. $75.00 21 $1 ,575.00 WATERMAIN TOTAL $29,125 .00 OPTION NO 3 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 6" DIP L. F. $12.00 830 $9 ,960.00 2 6" G. V. EA. $450 .00 3 $1 ,350 .00 3 HYDRANT EA. $1 ,400 .00 1 $1 ,400 .00 4 3/4" COPPER PIPE L. F. $10.00 520 $5,200 .00 5 3/4" CORPORATIONS EA. $30 .00 13 $390 .00 6 3/4" CURB STOP EA. $75.00 13 $975.00 WATERMAIN TOTAL $19 ,275 .00 5 7 STREET OPTION NO 1 MARKET STREET PORTION ITEM NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT 1 Pavement Removal S.Y. $1. 50 2 , 900 $4, 350. 00 2 Common Excavation C.Y. $2 . 50 2 , 250 $5, 625. 00 3 Class 5 Base TON $6. 50 3 , 000 $19 , 500. 00 4 Base Course 2331 TON $20. 00 745 $14 , 900. 00 5 Wear Course 2341 TON $21. 00 745 $15, 645. 00 6 Tack Material GAL $1. 00 350 $350. 00 7 B-618 Curb & Gutter L. F. $5. 00 2 , 500 $12 , 500 . 00 8 Catch Basins EA. $800. 00 6 $4 , 800 . 00 9 15" RCP L.F. $21. 00 200 $4 , 200. 00 10 Sod S.Y. $2 . 00 5, 000 $10, 000. 00 TOTAL MARKET STREET $91, 870. 00 5TH AVENUE PORTION Same as Option 2 (See next page) TOTAL $52 , 000 . 00 Plus Storm Sewer Option 2 $17, 400 . 00 TOTAL OPTION 1 $161, 270 . 00 6 7 . • STREET OPTION NO 2 'TEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT OADWAY 1 CLEARING EACH $200.00 12 $2,400.00 2 GRUBBING EACH $130.00 12 $1 ,560.00 3 COMMON EXCAVATION C.Y. $5.50 2 ,400 $13 ,200.00 4 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 (6" ) TON $6.75 1 ,465 $9 ,888 .75 100 % CRUSHED 5 BIT. MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE (5%) TON $163 .00 19 $3,097 .00 6 BASE COURSE MIXTURE (1 1/2") TON $11 .75 375 $4,406 .25 7 BIT. MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE (6%) TON $163.00 19 $3,097 .00 • 8 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (1 1/2") TON $13.00 375 $4,875.00 9 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B-618 L. F. $5.25 1 ,820 $9 ,555 .00 STREET TOTAL $52,079 .00 STREET OPTION NO 3 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT ROADWAY 1 COMMON EXCAVATION C.Y. $5.50 1 ,375 $7,562.50 2 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 (6") TON $6.75 885 $5 ,973.75 100 % CRUSHED 3 BIT. MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE (5%) TON $163 .00 12 $1 ,956 .00 4 BASE COURSE MIXTURE (1 1/2") TON $11 .75 225 $2,643 .75 5 BIT. MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE (6%) TON $163.00 14 $2,282 .00 6 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (1 1/2") TON $13 .00 225 $2,925.00 7 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN 8-618 L. F. $5.25 1 ,100 $5,775 .00 STREET TOTAL $29 ,118 .00 9 STORM SEWER COSTS FOR STREET 2 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT STORM SEWER 1 12" R. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L. F. $28.20 100 $2,820 .00 2 15" R. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L.F. $29 .60 20 $592 .00 3 18" R. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L. F. $31 .70 180 $5,706 .00 4 CATCH BASIN WITH CASTINGS EACH $1 ,050 .00 5 $5,250 .00 5 STD. MANHOLE EACH $1 ,000.00 3 $3,000 .00 STORM SEWER TOTAL $17,368 .00 STREET 3 ITEM UNIT NO. ITEM UNIT PRICE QUANTITY AMOUNT STORM SEWER 1 12" R. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L. F. $28.20 60 $1 ,692 .00 2 15" R. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L. F. $29 .60 40 $1 ,184.00 3 18" R. C. PIPE SEWER, CLASS III L. F. $31 .70 175 $5,547 .50 4 CATCH BASIN WITH CASTINGS EACH $1 ,050 .00 4 $4,200 .00 5 STD. MANHOLE EACH $1 ,000.00 2 $2,000 .00 STORM SEWER TOTAL $14,623 .50 s 8 7 STREET OPTION NO. 4 COST ESTIMATE Same as Option No. 1 except for a savings of about 200 L.F. of street between cul-de-sac to Main Street 200 L.F. x $120. 00/L. F. = $24, 000. 00 Less Total Cost Option 1 = $161, 200. 00 Minus Savings (24, 000. 00) TOTAL ESTIMATE $137,200 .00 9 1 RIGHT-OF-WAY ESTIMATE Area Needed for Acquisition = 40, 600 Sq. Ft. or 0. 93 Acres Approximate Cost per Sq. Ft. = $0. 80 per Sq. Ft. Estimate for Acquisition of Right-=of-Way 40, 600 Sq. Ft. x 0. 80 = $32 , 500 . 00 Appraisal Reports 2 Parcels @ $500. 00 each = $ 1, 000. 00 Subtotal $33 , 500. 00 Add 25% for Condemnation and Admin. Costs 8 , 500. 00 Total Estimated Right-of-Way Costs = $42,000.00 10 7 Date //- 2 - y1 We, the undersigned, owners of the following described real property, abutting on the proposed improvement and benefitted thereby, hereby petition the City Council of the City of Shakopee, for the following public improvements: Oneninn Sth Ave. between Filmore and Market Streets and improve :with installation of sewer, water, storm sewer, curbing and bituminous Iva,. on Street/Avenue, between Street/Avenue and Steet/Avenue, and request that the same be made during the year ±oqp n- 1989 In making this petition the undersigned understands that the City of Shakopee, its agents or employee cannot guarantee the amount of an assessment until a feasibility study of the improve- ments has been prepared and accepted by City Council in accordance with MSA Chapter 429. PETITIONER LOT BLOCK /092z) i /54 .c2.6— C ' i f l 2 7- C 67)S"ro f!Ma;... s.v ' I , hereby, verify chat I circulated the above petition and that the above signatures of the property owners and petitioners were affixed in my presence. Circulator — Approved this /D day of /toy , 1.98cr This. truenc rre2ared c: dr_.--rd bv: H. R. . .. . ;e: CiLy 11 # /D a MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planners. RE: Preliminary Plat for Valley Park Tenth Addition DATE: September 11, 1990 INTRODUCTION: At their meeting on September 6, 1990, the Planning Commission passed a motion recommending approval of the preliminary resubdivision plat for Valley Park 10th Addition subject to conditions. BACKGROUND: Mr. Jon Albinson of Valley Industrial Realty is representing three property owners for the preliminary plat. The proposed resubdivision plat is generally located south of Valley Industrial Boulevard South, west of Valley Park Drive and north of 12th Avenue. The total land area included with this plat is 95. 6 acres and is zoned I-2 Heavy Industrial . The Planning Commission discussed at length possible conditions which could coordinate grading with tree preservation. The conditions recommended in this memo reflect the intent to allow opportunity for the developer and City staff to work together to coordinate grading and tree preservation. Staff is working on developing a tree preservation policy for private and public lands citywide. The applicant identified that on the final plat the southern two- thirds of the plat would be platted as outlots. Final grading plans would be developed with the final platting of these outlots. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. In an effort to bring these properties into an urban division of land format, the applicant is proposing the preliminary plat. The resubdivision plat will reorganize the land area near two existing developments (Toro, Mebco) into more useable lots and allow for new lots to be created along the proposed 10th Avenue right-of-way. 2 . The three property owners involved with this plat are Canterbury Business Park Limited Partnership, Valley Industrial Center 3 , and the City of Shakopee (as a fee owner of the Toro development because of the IR bonds issued) . 3 . In 1982 a proposed subdivision plat for the area was approved by the City but never recorded (Valley Park 7th Addition) . In 1989 a revised Valley Park 7th Addition was approved and recorded. This proposed plat overlaps a portion of Valley 1 Park 7th Addition (Outlots A & B) . 4 . The following terminology has been proposed by staff to be used in distinguishing the various types of plats that are submitted to the City for approval : a. Subdivision Plat - The initial division of land from a metes and bounds description or government survey to a lot, block and subdivision name description. b. Replat - a reconfiguration of lot lines only. c. Resubdivision Plat - a reconfiguration of lot lines and streets. If unplatted land is being added to previously platted land the term resubdivision plat should be used also. d. Lot Division - A splitting of a platted recorded lot into two to five lots. Because the plat includes an area that has previously been platted (Outlots A and B of Valley Park 7th Addition) and new streets are being proposed, the appropriate terminology for the submittal is a resubdivision plat. 5. The proposed plat covers a portion of Registered Land Survey (RLS) 134 which was approved by the City Council on June 5, 1990. The purpose of RLS 134 was to provide for the construction of the FMG facility and to clarify the legal descriptions of the properties divided in this area of the industrial park. The subdivision plat for the FMG site was approved by the City Council on June 19 , 1990 . As defined in the Subdivision Regulations a Registered Land Survey is "designed to simplify a complicated metes and bounds description, designating the same into a tract or tracts" . 6. The railroad spur running through the proposed subdivision combined with multiple land ownerships creates added difficulties in resubdividing land in this area. Lot 5 of Block 1, the Toro site, will allow for the land locked parcel between the existing south property line of Toro and the railroad tracks to be included in one lot for Toro. Lot 6 of Block 1 is essentially an unbuildable lot. The applicant is working to incorporate that property into the existing parcels to the north. Although awkward in shape and size, this parcel would meet the lot area and width required of the Zoning Ordinance. It should be noted that the railroad spur is on a private easement. 2 7 . The block length created by the proposed street layout (10th Avenue) will accommodate future industrial land development proposed for the southern two-thirds of this plat. Each lot is generally rectangular in shape, each meets the lot size and area requirements and all have access to a public roadway. 8 . Drainage and utility easements are being provided around the periphery of each lot, with the exception of those lot sides which are bordered by the rail lines. 9 . The topography of the proposed resubdivision is generally flat. A grading plan has been submitted for review and will be presented at the City Council meeting. 10. Existing stands of trees are scattered throughout the proposed resubdivision plat. The Subdivision Regulations encourage the preservation of natural features such as trees. Preserving trees can create amenities and cost savings to the future developers. At the time of grading care should be taken to ensure the greatest degree of tree preservation. The FMG facility has utilized existing trees in a beneficial way. A tree preservation plan to be used as a guide for future developments on these parcels will help identify appropriate trees to be preserved and locations for buildings and parking areas. 11. All departments reviewing this plat recommend approval . The following is a list of the departmental comments: • Administration a. All pre-existing easements need to be shown on the plat. b. The north-south portion of 10th Avenue should be renamed. The applicant must provide a recommended street name on the final plat. • Engineering a. All public easements have been shown on the preliminary plat. • Finance a. Two parcels (PID # 27-148002-0, Tract B RLS 134 ; and 27-148003-0 Tract C RLS 134) have assessments. Tract B assessments amounted to $20, 701. 46 and Tract C - $88, 621. 06. • Planning 3 1o &- a. Clarify the lot lines in the railroad tract area. The lot line between lots 4 and 5 of Block 1 is unclear. b. Rename 11th Avenue (cul-de-sac street) . The new street name should include either Circle or Court as a part of the street name. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Valley Park 10th Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. A tree preservation plan of the area covered by the plat to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and used as a guide to protect the appropriate existing trees with the development of each lot. 2 . Grading on lots 1, 2 , 3 and 4 of Block 1 and lots 1 through 11 of Block 2 will be done in accordance with the tree preservation policy requirements in place with the City at the time of the final plat process. 3 . Streets and street signs to be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. 4 . Lot 6 Block 1 shall be incorporated with Lot 7 Block 1 as one lot on the final plat. 5. All public easements, existing and proposed, must be shown on the final plat (utility, drainage etc) . 6. City approved street names must be shown on the final plat. 7 . All lot lines must be clearly shown on the final plat. 8 . Right-of-way dedications at intersections shall be made with the final plat if requested by the City Engineer. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The City Council could offer and pass a motion approving the preliminary plat for Valley Park Tenth Addition subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. 2 . The City Council could offer and pass a motion approving the preliminary plat for Valley Park Tenth Addition subject to 4 Je0 conditions different then those recommended by the Planning Commission. 3 . The City Council could offer and pass a motion denying approval of the preliminary plat for Valley Park Tenth Addition. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and pass a motion approving the preliminary plat of Valley Park Tenth Addition subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission as listed in their September 6, 1990 minutes. 5 A't\ c• cvl '' \ VA,L8 r _ `~-* �'"`G 4t.)1k 1 tea.... li i JIB Z �, N�gr -T _ - 6 tr. t EsT, CARTLRWRY ODO M9 I ��- • VALLEY KIRK A .1 * 411 _ ' W ,/RTD ,..4_,,if,1,1 ."--*,:s.:-..44 1.--G) 1-.!'. :: /) _ , .-_--,-s5•15.:Ip.,,,,,),„;,.,..,,,,_, 4t,.:_. .. ) —12 ,,..a..1,..L. .:.---------- I , , — — — - •r cif f. te..•rs�i ` 1' rI I j'-\/ A i,\— . _______r T - 4. • Ki.TA�mEY .,lw^ �v. LLL ADD'M ! ! T C H LOVE �L- 1 i i [>fo� cokt V^. -4--- F •.i! ;; 1 'rte \ hop1 1 1 l _—o \ HE Z` ` I ECMtIZI • r% �� 1 it, ADO'S - . 1`u -, op ( I. I,; 17 \. L_______ , `' i- iI f • O. : I a' ha vikisi \ 11 AG AGRICULTURE 1 . 4— # RI RURAL RESIDENTIAL \ • R2 URBAN RESIDENTIAL - R3 MID—DENSITY RES. -1 R4 MULTI FAMILY RES. ` 41_. B1 HIGHWAY BUSINESS --...___..-- • ` , _ B2 COMMUNITY BUSINESS i 1 1 , B3 CENTRAL BUSINESS 1_________._• -------- 11 UGHT INDUSTRIAL 12 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL i S SHORELAND '- ----- --- --- . --. -.. ..._ . RN FLOODPLAIN D1S - T ! 1 at° I I a -.1;-t u.--•• MANDAT• ' - 1 a- .1 RTD RAC-I' • CK D =t- I �� , i--1 ' ��� i 1 1 • ? - _!__ _° 'Cr w >"' Illg 14%1 QJ ; Qfi 1 �` r- {��5�-� • j 7/ _= D , Q� � -/'-�:i lb_sair _ . 1:r V J / f '1 r�'� / / i //C7 r 1....., < / a; ,r.., a , ___J • v W O / , .. L ... / ; _ // • a... >mp it ...,............v . . / / — .. 1 w .. i / _ .,„:,\,:,,,,-, ,,, \ „,, „ • V__,.:./..4( J // : cc-(._( ° "" , O \o 4%46,,‹ . 7 2. /O/Po/ _.- ----- i.- -4:.". ,1fLAI . i1 j� • 00111111 /() Lt; ;II f \\ ` 1.4, vr I 40 �I, _ / ; I m/ / � lYi7 i �: � r o�, _ i it Q ` 009 nej ‘C / ---..._____ / k , kr:i 1:',.i i tate" il if,' I -=--,,,,,.-' •:: .i \ --,. ill / \— ,'"/ f.i ‘ / 1/4.. \ II/.11 ,:.I r‘ ‹....... -.) Ns / ttl /.7.3 /tomcc/ .,i � � N - i / ;ft i lb' ;)"7., / . co / t- 1111. EJ , ,____41 i:1 / F , Q. / / °p9` / s. Il iii I • � •.. . 1 :) dLII i I l ilikll Obi -.1 :r / rr� �;-4 ./ / / _, / I 7 / :��� / / / / r t ``- I 1V 4 0 .t. 1/1 :In I r--Ir=--5-7——- -1,1_,..:,---;?. :______„,../ F---- . , 4 CI, 1 Z•' li. >thiVd A311VA i i ____ .) ..., .1, „______ CC e " 3 - o:t7 .-- - - 45' a. Ld D - z . , ---r,r 0 Z - -------/ k,----- -.; :-Nr • .._,--r, ii .. . : . ; -/ -._ ,' -• : / ' " ,-- I .r •--- --- i y: •I ; --L.,. Z 0 Li I / \ If 11.1 ° h< i / '' 4 ' ?i..1 ...,.. •••• ........... -••••„c" ! • izi tik ,\ \.. \•-•/..... oir v„.,4_, .. ..,._.., , „,1 1 Isl._ .‘ , . ',(- :,,.....---- 9 s! --._.. ----) 1 1<1 . , / / ...L.•=.-.---.---......,...ci.-7--. S'.'2.'- '.." / lj ss A = : % •••„... ' . 4.! \ , i .---.-.-...-.. ,, r -.---7 --= . „ ° 1 i -;,-e . . • 1.' / -,.. :1 .. , / 1 '-4 1 4:1 3 • ,,-.6..!..,1.•------ / . t..i...-•,,,:i _„.- ;-i-- ,! --_• . , ,...> . ; cr) . 1 ..,,..• ,-; ;, , . ! :., , • — cri N 1\ 1 --1 . - • • .::ci !r / / - ••••1 _ ii: i .—.—I .. . :....,1 7.e. .' .\ .0 : ,,' :.,, , . •• .. • •• I It, 1 . rzt \-..Y .'zve,1,.'.-:'' : • t•-• • , , i \ 7.- __,:•:- • -1- _____ ...-•-- / ' .4.:1 . "...- /..-.-- . r .,i, --- I\,• -- " ..., . _• —0 El tP- .: ...- - - . .- ...; 1... ' _ I . -,-'-'%-‘ . \ -l•' ir... .41\•----. ); : . f :,• , . i .... :0 L•Li .%‘ 'N —2— ) • • . ,,,,..1 '.54' ,. • i 7- .. : .. . - . 1._________-_,_ .1 _.... • 47. 4.. . . •::-OP P" , AA? - 1---— W ,..- , ......-- ' --- .,.• e...,,, —- - i . , , t...- 0 -- : -? H . . ," - Ill- - — --- - ----. , 1 ,-------/ s,,_ I ...r . ? i,...•,- ,. , . ,.. I, . \ , \ ( V t 1 . I r 1 „._ • , i, ,, . ... , ito) c : , „ ... . . . . ( ..„ .,....._... _ lik1401 t, (. "i\ . ...._,.. i IS• ... r 2 c 17 — 4+ r• e — — :;;*4* — — '; i _ 1 (s. ) - c • I I , - , I - r C4:' \ ' ) 9) . • :4 1 t ' i CO 611 / . . i 0.. r 1. I ,.., _../ 0 tai te) t 111 . ,7 . 1 ---- I: i -1•Witk A ,..• :-... .8 4,121\ , 08 71IF 1.. • V HI 01.,..) •: —r-- /MM • _ 41 I I.1:. 1 • --t T i ,. t _ I •- ------ -__J 4 1, . 8''''''-.--.„........ 1 Q 4•1•14 u) , ' L . R ,21 di 1.____... .._. ....— 404 I i . ........a, 4.1 -••'2 • MINIM.,grz••••.% •aINIIIIIIID' (/) -. 0 111111411 °.1 0 a. r .00114011) iI -- ' <I 42 - e ct ,_ , pp..4..„.._ ., P Mh' .ILM_Mbakt .• 1/373. - — - ---• — " — - - - ---_-..--7--- I ... . . rit.s - - ----- zz 0.,---- , . 1 s-i..7- I ie. ;• (T-0 Ct--- sea • 0...t1 I .,...7 :-- --1 CI I I C.) (2. . On 4. .ff..U.. ';••• Cf:_..i. VL1 1 I I e...1.:::-. 1-- • • II'- MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner/-s RE: Park Dedication Fees DATE: September 13 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: At their August 15, 1990 meeting the City Council tabled the park dedication fee agenda item so that additional legal research could be taken by the legal counsel of the industrial park landowners. BACKGROUND: Mr. Jon Albinson of Valley Industrial Realty requested in a letter dated June 20, 1990 to City staff that park dedication fees in relation to "replats" be addressed by the City Council . He identified the concern his clients have in repaying these fees with the replatting of property. He cited Canterbury Park 4th Addition where the new fee schedule for park dedication fees was required as a condition in the approval of this final plat. DISCUSSION: City staff received that attached memorandum from the Allianz Investment Corporation, a landowner in the Canterbury Business Park. This information, related to park dedication fees and subdivision platting requirements, merits more research. City staff discussions on this issue have been focused on the question of whether this is a legal or policy type issue. The City Attorney is currently studying the legal aspects. Staff will return this item to the City Council on the first meeting agenda in October. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council allow more time for additional legal research. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and pass a motion which will : 1. Remove the item from the table. 2 . Receive and file the memorandum dated August 8 , 1990 from Allianz Investment Corporation legal counsel . 3 . Table the park dedication fee item to the first City Council meeting in October, 1990. MEMORANDUM TO: RAP FROM: CSG DATE: August 8, 1990 RE: Allianz/Shakopee Planning File No. 4271-908288 INTRODUCTION This memorandum discusses two issues relative to the City of Shakopee' s current subdivision and park dedication policies and regulations : whether the City' s current subdivision regulations are applicable to the conveyance of land parcels 5 acres or larger in size for commercial or industrial use; and whether the City' s park dedication fee schedule and policies relating thereto can be constitutionally enforced. DISCUSSION 1 . Subdivision ordinances . A municipality' s power to enact zoning ordinances to regulate land usage within its boundaries exists solely as a result of the state ' s delegation of such authority through legislation. Northern Border Pipeline Co . v . Jackson County, Minnesota, 512 F. Supp . 1261 , 1263 (D. Minn . 1981) ; Denney v . City of Duluth, 295 Minn . 22 , 202 N .W. 2d 892 , 894 ( 1972 ) ; Hedlund v . City of Maplewood, 366 N.W. 2d 624 , 626 (Minn. Ct . App. 1985) . To successfully challenge a municipality' s legislative act , such as amending or adopting a certain zoning ordinance, a claimant must establish an unconstitutional "taking, " or that the municipality has acted beyond the scope of the authority delegated to it by the state. Sun Oil Co . v. Village of New Hope, 300 Minn. 326 , 220 N.W. 2d 256 , 261 ( 1974) . Further, a municipality' s ordinance "is invalid if it contains expressed or implied terms that are irreconcilable with a Minnesota statute. " County of Wright v. Kennedy, 415 N.W. 2d 728 , 731 (Minn. Ct . App . 1987) . In this case, the City' s definition of "subdivision" contained within its City Code directly conflicts with that set forth in the enabling legislation. Thus , the City' s definition is invalid and the subdivision regulations promulgated pursuant to its legislative authority are inapplicable to the proposed conveyance at issue. Minn. Stat . § 462 . 352 subd. 12 defines "subdivision" as : the separation of an area , parcel , or tract of land under single ownership into two or more parcels , tracts , lots , or long-term leasehold interests where the creation of the leasehold interest necessitates the creation of streets , roads, or alleys , for residential , commercial , industrial , or other use or any combination thereof , except those separations : -2- • (a) where all the resulting parcels, tracts , lots, or interests will be 20 acres or larger in size and 500 feet in width for residential uses and five acres or larger in size for commercial and industrial uses; Minn. Stat . §462 . 358 , Subd. 4b provides that : In a municipality in which subdivision regulations are in force and have been filed or recorded as provided in this section, no conveyance of land to which the regulations are applicable shall be filed or recorded, if the land is described in the. conveyance by metes and bounds or by reference to an unapproved registered land survey made after April 21, 1961 or to an unapproved plat made after such regulations become effective . The foregoing provision does not apply to a conveyance if the land described . . . . is a single parcel of commercial or industrial land of not less than five acres and having a width of not less than 300 feet and its conveyance does not result in the division of the parcel into two or more lots or parcels, any one of which is less than five acres in area or 300 feet in width; * * * Thus , pursuant to the terms of the statutes , the creation of five acre parcels for commercial or industrial use with a width of at least 300 feet does not constitute a subdivision under Minnesota law. The City of Shakopee, however, has adopted a broader definition of "subdivision" which purports to include a division of commercial or industrial property into two or more parcels of any size . Shakopee City Code § 12 . 02 (31) . This definition was adopted by Ordinance No . 109 , effective November 11 , 1982 . It -3- <a� is likely that a court will find that the provision of the City Code defining subdivision is invalid because it conflicts with Minn. Stat . § 462 .358 .1' Two Minnesota decisions are instructive on this point . In Costley v. Caromin House, Inc . , 313 N.W. 2d 21 (Minn. 1981) , the Minnesota Supreme Court observed that the enabling legislation applicable to the facts at issue there specifically provided that a state licensed residential facility for six or fewer persons "shall" be considered a permitted single family residential use for zoning purposes . See Minn. Stat . § 462 . 357 subd. 7 . Thus , the court noted in dicta that the municipality' s zoning ordinance at issue was required to treat such residential facilities the same as other single-family residences , because "a municipality cannot exceed the limitations imposed by the enabling legislation. " Id. at 27 . The court of appeals addressed a similar issue in County of Wright v. Kennedy, 415 N.W. 2d 728 (Minn. Ct . App . 1987) . At issue there was a provision of the county enabling statute which 1/ Minn. Stat . § 462 . 358 Subd. la provides , in part , that . . a municipality may by ordinance adopt subdivision regulations establishing standards , requirements , and procedures for the review and approval or disapproval of . subdivisions . " (emphasis added) ; and Minn. Stat . § 462 . 358 Subd. 3a provides , in part that "the regulations may require that any subdivision . . . shall be platted. " (emphasis added) . -4- in provided that county zoning laws could not prohibit manufactured homes that otherwise complied with the applicable zoning ordinances . See Minn. Stat . § 394 . 25 subd. 3 . Although the county adopted the statutory definition of manufactured housing , in its ordinance the county sought to "refine" the definition by creating a subclass of restrictions that only applied to manufactured homes . The court found that the state statute required that manufactured homes and site-constructed homes be treated alike, and therefore the creation of separate restrictions for certain manufactured housing conflicted with the state statute, rendering the ordinance invalid. Id. at 731 . Thus, in this case, the definition of subdivision enacted by the City of Shakopee directly conflicts with, inasmuch as it seeks to expand, the definition of subdivision under state law. Therefore, it is likely that the City' s definition will be deemed invalid and the remaining subdivision ordinances will have no application to the proposed conveyance at issue. 2 . Park dedication fees . Minn. Stat . § 462 . 358 subd. 2b allows a municipality to require that a portion of a proposed subdivision be dedicated for public use . That provision states : Subd. 2b. Dedication. The regulations may require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the -5- ) / 4. public or preserved for public use as streets, roads, sewers, electric, gas , and water facilities , storm water drainage and holding areas or ponds and similar utilities and improvements . In addition, the regulations may require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for conservation purposes or for public use as parks , playgrounds , trials , wetlands , or open space; provided that (a) the municipality may choose to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or all of the portion required to be dedicated to such public uses or purposes • based on the fair market value of the land no later than at the time of final approval , (b) any cash payments received shall be placed in a special fund by the municipality used only for the purposes for which the money was obtained, (c) in establishing the reasonable portion to be dedicated, the regulations may consider the open space, park, recreational , or common areas and facilities which the applicant proposes to reserve for the subdivision, and (d) the municipality reasonably determines that it will need to acquire that portion of land for the purposes stated in this paragraph as a result of approval of the subdivision. As part of its subdivision regulations and pursuant to the Minnesota statute, the City of Shakopee has adopted a provision regarding dedication. § 12 . 07 subd . 5(A) of the City Code provides that the reasonable portion of the land so dedicated "shall not be less than 5 percent for commercial or industrial plats . " Subd. 5(B) allows the City, at its option, to require a cash contribution in lieu of the land dedication, and sets forth a fee schedule for the cash contribution based upon a combination of a fixed fee and a fixed percentage of the total -6- fair market value of the land being subdivided.' The regulation further indicates that when structures are constructed on previously platted property, a park dedication fee, pursuant to the schedules enumerated, shall be paid when the building permit is issued, if no dedication in cash or land was given to the City at the time of the original plat . § 12 . 07 Subd. C. There does not appear to be a provision in the City Code governing the replatting of land absent new construction. Initially, it seems that the City' s position in this regard was to require that the current park dedication fee be paid for replats , with credit given for any previously paid fees in connection with the original plat . By memorandum dated July 13 , 1990, the City Planner has suggested that an additional park dedication fee should be required "only on replats and resubdivisions where an increased demand on parks and open space will be created by the new land division pattern. " The applicable Minnesota statute provides little guidance in this area, and merely states that a "reasonable" portion of land be dedicated and that the municipality may elect to require an "equivalent amount in cash" based upon the fair market value of the land. Minn. Stat . § 462 . 358 Subd. 2b. 2/ The City has apparently elected to require the cash contribution for all subdivisions . -7- ifs The Minnesota Supreme Court, in determining that the predecessor statute to § 462 . 358 Subd. 2b was not, on its face, an unconstitutional taking of property, examined the "reasonableness" requirement of the statute in some detail . See Collis v. City of Bloomington, 310 Minn. 5, 246 N.W. 2d 19 (Minn. 1976) . The Supreme Court first noted that a municipality could abuse its legislative authority by requiring land dedications or their cash equivalent in excess of the community needs created by the subdivision: "To tolerate this situation would be to allow an otherwise acceptable exercise of police power to become grand theft . " Id . at 26 . The court observed that the enabling statute itself prevented this result by imposing the " reasonable" standard, upon which the court commented: A " reasonable portion" is construed to mean that portion of land which the evidence reasonably establishes the municipality will need to acquire for the purposes stated as a result of approval of the subdivision. This is, of necessity, a facts-and-circumstances test , but it is the only kind of test that will consider the myriad of factors which may bear on a municipality' s needs for certain kinds of facilities and the relationship of a particular subdivision to those needs . Id. ; accord Middlemist v . City of Plymouth, 387 N.W. 2d 190 , 193 (Minn. Ct . App. 1986) . -8- In Collis , the plaintiff subdividers challenged both the constitutionality of the enabling legislation and the Bloomington ordinance promulgated thereunder . ' The applicable Bloomington Code section provided that a reasonable amount of land for dedication was "an amount of land equal in value to ten percent of the undeveloped land proposed to be subdivided" and further allowed the subdivider to pay a cash fee in lieu of land dedication in "an amount . . . equivalent to the value of land required to be dedicated . . . . " The value of the land was to be based upon the undeveloped land value as estimated by the city assessor . Id. at 21 . After determining that the Minnesota statute was constitutional , the court focused on the main three provisions of the Bloomington ordinance: 1) the 10 percent land/cash equivalent requirement ; 2) that the city assessor determine the value of the undeveloped land; and 3) that the value of the land was to be determined on the date the final plat was approved. With respect to these requirements , the court preliminarily observed that " [s] ince none of these aspects of the ordinance is mandated by the enabling statute, we might choose to hold that any or all of them is beyond the authority given by that 3/ . The court ' s review was limited to whether the Minnesota Statute and Bloomington ordinance were constitutional . It did not evaluate the reasonableness of the ordinance as applied to the plaintiffs ' property. Collis , 246 N.W. 2d at 20 . -9- //a- statute. " Id. at 26 . The court decided, however, that such a determination need not be made. The court first discussed Bloomington ' s 10 percent provision. The court reasoned that a flat percentage requirement would not necessarily be equitable, because such a provision does not examine the relationship between the proposed subdivision and the needs it may create . Id. at 27 . The court stated: . . . a 10 percent requirement might be arbitrary as a matter of law because it does not consider the relationship between this particular subdivision and recreational need in the community as required by the Pioneer Trust and Jordan cases .4' Id. Nevertheless, because the Bloomington ordinance stated that "as a general rule" 10 percent was reasonable, the court concluded that it was not unconstitutional on its face. Id . The court also decided that the City could not make the assessor ' s determination of the land value final , but that it could only be prima facie evidence of the value, which could be attacked pursuant to Minn. Stat . § 462 . 361 . Id. Finally, the court rejected the subdividers ' claim that the timing of the 4/ Pioneer Trust & Savings Bank v . Village of Mount Prospect , 22 Ill . 2d 375 , 176 N. E. 2d 799 ( 1961) ; Jordan v . Village of Menomonee Falls , 28 Wis . 2d 608 , 137 N .W. 2d 442 ( 1965) . -10- 1/ 41- valuation valuation as of the date of the final plat approval utilized the developed land value, rather than the undeveloped value, reasoning that the City' s use of that date was within the reasonable exercise of its police power . Id. at 28 . Thus , it is very likely that the flat fee plus flat percentage of land value schedule contained within the Shakopee City Code will be deemed unreasonable, or perhaps even unconstitutional , and therefore invalid . Because an examination must be made in each case of the relationship between the proposed subdivision and the corresponding increased need, if any, for either park land or other improvements under Collis , "the test of reasonableness cannot be limited to the percentage of land which a subdivider is asked to dedicate. " Middlemist , 387 N.W. 2d at 193 . The City Code makes no allowance for need-based considerations . Therefore, under Collis , this provision of the Code can be successfully challenged . This analysis is equally applicable to the City' s decision regarding resubdivisions and replats . The City Planner ' s suggestion that additional fees be required only where the new subdivision creates additional need for park or recreation areas seems to comply with existing law. The additional fees , however , cannot be assessed pursuant to a fixed fee schedule, but must directly relate to the increased need associated with the replat . -11- rte CONCLUSION Because the City' s definition of "subdivision" conflicts with that set forth in the enabling legislation, it will likely be held invalid. As a result, any subdivision ordinances enacted by the City should not apply to the creation of five acre parcels for commercial or industrial use with a width of at least 300 feet . The provision of the City Code regarding dedication does not sufficiently relate the amount of land dedication or cash equivalent to the community needs created by the proposed subdivision. Instead, the dedication amount is based solely on the market value of the subdivision. Therefore, the dedication ordinance is likely to be deemed unenforceable. 4881T/4893T -12- iib MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner RE: Scott County Radio Tower DATE: September 17 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: At the September 11, 1990 City Council meeting Councilman Sweeney initiated discussion on the proposed Scott County radio tower. Staff has investigated this proposal as requested by the City Council. BACKGROUND: The proposed Scott County radio tower for the emergency communication system (911) would replace the existing 180 ' tower with a 250 ' tower. The tower site is located in Jackson Township, south of 130th St. and east of Zumbro Avenue. The site is approximately 2 miles south of the current Shakopee City limits. The site is zoned A-2 , General Agriculture, and all surrounding land use is agriculture. Attached is a location map and a site plan for the proposed radio tower. DISCUSSION: Cellular One, a regional communications corporation, is proposing to replace the radio tower and transfer the ownership of the structure to the County in exchange for the right to use the tower for their business operations. The proposed tower would be used jointly by Cellular One and Scott County. Scott County residents benefit from the joint project at a greatly reduced cost. On July 9 , 1990 the Scott County Board of Adjustment continued a variance request from Cellular One for the radio tower. County staff is working on negotiations to acquire land around the existing site in order to provide an adequate sized site of approximately 2 . 5 acres. The existing County owned site is 133 ' x 175 ' . The successful acquisition would eliminate the need for a variance for setback requirements. Scott County staff and Cellular One have both stated that there will be no interference with existing communication frequencies. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) controls all radio frequencies and this project must meet all federal requirements. On September 24 , 1990 a public hearing will be held for the conditional use permit. A public hearing for a variance may also be heard if the acquisition of adjacent land area is not successful. It ALTERNATIVES: 1. Direct City staff to inform the appropriate Scott County boards that the City of Shakopee supports the proposed radio tower. The City would support the granting of a conditional use permit if one is sought for a 250 ' radio on the subject site. The City also supports the granting of a variance if the applicable provisions of the Scott County zoning ordinance are met. 2 . Do not go on record on the proposed radio tower. 3 . Go on record as to opposing the proposed radio tower. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and pass a motion which directs staff to take actions as identified in alternative #1. • Minnesdo ����� RIYr.......___i1 ■ r 10 a [��� IruMrs a 2' -: '' ..rogiNA.OOOOOO woggle J��%�S••■ rii a S 4 V4 4!gAll `, Lake J /s\ w�.iw-• •e�.i. i a 4 f R23W cc Cr .%�� . 11. ■11�If11f1 y . - - ; �1ll111111111111♦\11... 4 DOW. . Nysens i11r1/6 , 41i L- e V e/ J%� 11111\ qFF 12th Al yam_ 1 •"o ST. """I (. `'�_ 4g La os .1 11 �' , �Ar:A_'�o_ 73m__ A - •z EAST.fAND ST al • `. :: %. \ I `EAST-4ANo ST Gifford y .� Irier & Shakcr oneL8k@ V �1ACKS N Y1 3 ci`C� _1 P16u' u 125r +• - 16 a= ST. W. �`P6�. • x 17 s} 16 Lake a• k;pr7 2� a 128rn E S7 I'. ?126th ST.W. m j Troia . 0 F = � �1 Y 2 V4 �Y W Tro�1_ =—� 130th ST. w.• L Z cc cc `IFIL a �� 130th QIIMIMI 411.=, .r - - — .`� . RD. r, Z ST.W °�Ii3rA a O o I ®K th I.NORTH SHANNON `v HILLSIDE DR. �\ ANN S-.. HAVEN , • IR. 2.SOUTH SHANNON j < m 1 } 21 CIR. ° DR. DR. a ~ �( J J Paas��,22 p i I , 19 20 `� '/ a 6� ¢ 23 24 w WOOD. CK _ II \ O 4. >1 • z TRL. . _ 1 IL t 1 2 ." iiir. 140th ST -- if 1 Mi ngsota V. ley weHt.no �. & -- a anal Wildli OUISVI 2LAKEV1,Ew { =f ge 09---- 145 h 28 O I 27 145th 25 J 26 a 1 ST.�.A = ST.w I ..,i• 14ST.w. 2.t - s • - 1 _ -�a j t.TTR0L DR. , • y 29 r._ 2.TYROL CI _ a NORTO illhalt i (�, 3.TYROL Thole 2 DR. '• 1 BRENNER L Lake moth w. LN.� 1 e I 9 O 0 SChnke Ilki�� C:. Lae Z LO SY ® :: I Sw: 34 35 36— I 31 ��, —_ f .4 y _- Un%i 157th sTw. I ` �, ' _ MarystownlW , g 160th •1 Sr IN160th ST E. s' Loke 1 � `3 P1> . g o � z 1 _, 161st ST.E. L 3 165th ST w. m2 to 16$th 6 _ OIp_ 1 � O o 168th ST. < Ja 2 Campbell - � If r� -a . ,Al r. / au),-,..i E. O x a I Loke ®/��a� � yT ;. bi = 170th ST. W. 170th ST. E. r ,`\.1f,.s cc .© 173rd o ST W. oc� ¢U I a "?t a / _ B160. .. p, v C I 174 rh SL E. H >� ° r^ �/ 9 O ' b II I 1 j •y�:_.- It' 1 p ap a , 7 a 8 J• 9 t74 to • LYNNVILLE z - - ? °2 1 ST. E © ID LAKE VIEW DR. J i�.a' 0`� AL''©,� x j I SPRING LAKE Cha' ¢ QvP 9 99 .67'0 MAP, 1 180th ST, W. a > LAN . 180th -- -so J LN• W W ,�y ¢ -Pc, u-h / HS o 0 a E a QQ�va m .........401 %- a 185Th W. 0, 16 IS COUNTY 13 W. m 1 2 0 Back , > ,z p� 8 7 .85th Lake O 41iii �i . All S7.E.3 16 Op�/ • .tom O I 186th 500 4:> Y 0 a SAN CREEK I S7.E. 189th STE za z -- z 190th ST E. ; Jordan TRL. •` W I m1 x — a t.00K 1 f 4 0 KREUSEa,Pr .-. J�a'� a I 2i f.7 J W R0 p Z = j LANCER 0. L.; Y J �y� ,.' 21 w 22 Q 1 195th ST • 3 . I a 195th m®. �:• ..$ 2 0 3 J 23 w a 24 20 ST E o SANG J 0 W. 1X ' 21 g CREEK ¢ a j 0 03 a� a SUTTON 3 • W a , 4� I Zr • K 200th m ST. W. ° a 199th '? CRE�R. H W> St. Joe g I% �4'' I N 5T E pR VALLEY j oa ® = 1 9‹ r <q ON, ��CEDAR VA LLEY 28 2 G� I alli 205th $T E. ® �'-�' " qy LN. a 26 O 25 ICC O 29 , f 9 -s9£ o a I W g Lydia 'rte. ` // I I --- North Line of the South 175 feet of 14W 1/4 of SE 1/4, Section 23 33 I /- - -- 133.09- - - - � � _ � I S.88°43 29 W. ,_ T - - -- 100.07- - - E88T 3.G �,, 3 Oz' I f,,%S '."9 'C/� Lk. ,cence j.._•, N 1' . c.6 -1 _--x----."--- ., I ,s.f 4 • 1 Existing C er-•- _, � a roposed IEntr: `n Proposed County `l :. A } �� y Shelter / ..- .. .. ft A4 _ W 1 0 L 1 �� Exiting 200' 7owe -/ 4.3 v- Al.! I` 1111 1 111 . -Propane ank -4" Y. . ' .. , i jr4 = . / , .1 ..- .0 T Proposed She er- ,1, Proposed 250' Tower- ,a 11 I --N. M in 1 1i rExisting E►itr ►ice- , `` I =W n N II T m 1884 - d +' tv a, K' o N ,� . — O o o gr- t ! Z O c to \ 1 J 1 1, �s 1� A IP W T 'e X I 1 W 40 / I / / _ 133 900 rf I 1 c34II T 90•1 A 11. 4-2.- r Ali ! / , t 33.02-- __N. 88 43.29 E. I \ - -- - 13309 - - - - I �_—South Line of NW 1/ 4 of SE 1/4, Section 23---- 41, 33 1 i `'-Underyround Telephone. Line ,\ , •r t N M I. 1 NSE MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Plannerl. RE: Time Extension - Filing of Final Plat with Scott County - Canterbury Park 4th Addition DATE: September 11, 1990 INTRODUCTION: The City has received a request from Valley Industrial Realty to extend to December 31, 1990, the 180 day time period for filing of a final plat after approval by the City Council . The current deadline for filing the plat is September 19 , 1990. The City Code states that if a plat is not filed within 180 days after approval by the Council, the Council may rescind its approval. Attached is the letter request from Mr. Jon Albinson. BACKGROUND: On March 20, 1990, the City Council approved the final plat for Canterbury Park 4th Addition. City Code Section 12 . 03 , Subd. 4F states "If the plat is not filed within 180 days after approval by the Council , the Council may rescind it' s approval and shall notify the Scott County Recorder/Register of Titles" . Although the City Code does not list criteria for determining whether the time period for recording of a plat should be extended, in the past, the City has made the determination on the basis of whether changes have occurred, relating to the plat, which may necessitate the City reviewing the plat again. The City Staff is not aware of any changes that have occurred in the area of the proposed plat that would necessitate a new review and approval of the plat by the City at this time. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The City Council can pass a motion extending the 180 day time period to December 31, 1990 for recording of the Canterbury Park 4th Addition Final Plat. 2 . The City Council can pass a motion to not extend the time period for the developer to file 180 day time period for filing of the Final Plat for Canterbury Park 4th Addition and require the developer to resubmit the plat for re-approval by the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1. ACTION REQUESTED: Pass a motion granting the developer of Canterbury Park 4th Addition an extension until December 31, 1990 to file the Final Plat with the County. All VALLEY INDUSTRIAL REALTY September 6, 1990 Mr. Lindberg Ekola City Planner City Shakopee 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Canterbury Park 4th Addition Dear Lindberg: At their meeting of March 20, 1990, Council approved the preliminary/final plat of Canterbury Park 4th Addition. This resubdivision of the Canterbury Hotel site was predicated on a previous agreement between buyer and seller where the seller retained rights to repurchase a portion of the land previously sold to the hotel in the event that the hotel chose not to exercise its ownership rights detailed in the agreement. In the process of filing a plat, the County requires that all taxes for the year be paid in full upon filing. Inasmuch as the hotel owners have little to no interest in prepaying taxes, and since the 180-day deadline for filing this plat per the City ordinances will expire prior to second half tax payment deadline, we are hereby requesting an extension of time in which to file the plat of Canterbury Park 4th Addition. The current deadline for same, according to my records, would be September 19 , 1990. By this letter we request the filing deadline be extended to December 31, 1990 . It is our belief that all the various items necessary to accommodate the filing of that plat would be handled by then. We would appreciate this item being submitted to Council on Sepember 18th for their action and approval as required. If you see any difficulity with this, please let me know. Otherwise, we will assume this item will be handled in the suggested manner. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Respectfully, Jon R. Albinson Broker/Manager c.c. Dick Peterson Brian Brennan Charles A. Parsons, Jr. 1244 Canterbury Rd., P.O. Box 509, Shakopee, MN 55379 •Bus.: 612-445-3242 CONSENT Hcl MEMO TO: DENNIS KRAFT, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DAVE HUTTON, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR' SUBJECT: UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS DATE: SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses staff's request to utilize a consultant to determine the condition of the City of Shakopee's underground Storage Tanks. BACKGROUND: The City of Shakopee currently has 3 underground fuel storage tanks at the Public Works Facility. A 10,000 gallon unleaded gas tank, two 5,000 gallon leaded tanks and a 3,000 gallon diesel tank. The tanks were installed in approximately 1976 when the building was constructed. These gas pumps are utilized by all City vehicles, police and fire departments, public works equipment, (i.e. loaders, grader, street sweeper, tractors, etc.) , Shakopee Public Utility vehicles and School District vehicles. All gas used is billed back to the appropriate department. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has recently issued new requirements for protective devices on underground storage tanks. The City of Shakopee's underground storage tanks must be in compliance with the new federal regulations by December 31, 1991 (the deadline varies dependent on the age of the tanks) . The new requirements include retrofitting tanks with overfill-spill prevention equipment and corrosion protection equipment. The first step in determining the amount of improvements needed to be in compliance is to evaluate each tank to determine its condition, whether or not they are leaking, the corrosiveness of each tank, etc. Once the condition of each tank has been determined and an environmental assessment has been done on the adjacent soils, the City can then determine the necessary improvements to be in compliance with the new regulations. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has also established a Petrofund for owners of underground storage tanks to utilize in financing the upgrading of their tanks. Staff has met with a consultant specializing in underground storage tanks, Midwest Environmental Control Corporation (MECC) and they have submitted a proposal to do the necessary testing and inspection of each tank in order to determine the extent of upgrading required. In addition, MECC will assist the City in processing and obtaining Petrofund dollars to help relieve the financial burden of the City regarding the cost to bring our tanks in compliance. Attached is a copy of the MECC proposal to prepare a Management of Underground Storage Tanks plan for the City of Shakopee. Their proposal estimates the cost of their services to be in the range of $1864.00 - $2152.00. Staff has not obtained any proposals from any other consultants because to date MECC is the only consultant who has submitted data to the City regarding underground storage tank evaluations and staff is unaware of any other consultants specializing in this area. The 1990 Public Works Budget does not include a specific line item covering these consultant services. The Shop Division of Public Works does include $10,900 for Building Maintenance and $7,000 for Equipment Maintenance. As of July 31, 1990 approximately $1900 has been spent out of the Building Maintenance Fund and $0 has been spent out the Equipment Maintenance Fund. This leaves a balance of approximately $16,000 between the two funds. There are no more remaining large expense items currently planned for either one of these funds for the remainder of 1990. It would seem appropriate to utilize either one of these two funds for this expense. Once the extent of required improvements has been determined, the City can then budget for the appropriate improvements in the 1991 Capital Equipment Budget. Because the extent of the improvements are not known yet, staff has already included a preliminary amount of $27,000 in the proposed 1991 Capital Equipment Budget - $10,000 to upgrade the tanks and $17,000 for a new diesel pump and tank (see separate discussion in Capital Equipment request regarding the diesel tank) . Rather than spend any funds to upgrade our underground tanks, it has been suggested by a Councilmember that the City abandon the tanks and utilize local gas stations for our vehicles and equipment. There are two reasons why this is unacceptable and not recommended by staff. First, the cost to the City for fuel would be higher. Purchasing bulk fuel directly is cheaper than paying pump prices at service stations. In 1990, we have paid the following prices pre gallon for fuel: UNLEADED LEADED DIESEL JANUARY $.87/gallon $.90/gallon $.83/gallon MARCH .75/gallon MAY .71/gallon AUGUST .87/gallon 1.17/gallon During this same period, the estimated price per gallon at the pumps (prior to the Iran crisis) has been: UNLEADED LEADED DIESEL JANUARY $1.05/gallon $1.08/gallon $1.05/gallon AUGUST 1.16/gallon 1.22/gallon 1.20/gallon The second reason against utilizing local stations is the convenience and accessiblity of the pumps for all equipment and the increased paperwork associated with billing and payment for the fuel, assuming the local stations would be willing to go on a monthly charge system. Does the City really want to have to go to Super America with a front end loader or a fire truck in order to fuel up? Staff does not believe that would be in the best interest of the City. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept the proposal submitted by MECC and authorize staff to utilize their services for a maximum fee of $2152.00. 2. Solicit proposals from other consultants. 3. Deny this request and postpone any investigation until 1991. 4. Deny this request and direct staff to explore the feasibility of utilizing local gas stations to fuel vehicles and equipment with the intent of abandoning the underground tanks rather than upgrading them. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to authorize the use of Midwest Environmental Control Corporation to perform an environmental analysis of the City's underground storage tanks to determine the extent of upgrading needed to be in compliance with the new EPA regulations at an estimated fee not to exceed $2152.00, to come out of the Shop's Division Budget, Object No. 4230 "Building Maintenance". taw-ollrre., 1 Philht+k ::: RAS rlk nr .. • S fit. l� ° { lrhian 14.Muir tiarr) A. Mn �- 7� lanusll.lndl ,la, !)Goltllx•rg tt+lltvn\I lhnth Mark.l.\1mrS.° ` L' mox RO N i Or 11 Ty Sid t 11+u+r R.\\atsrrll chartered / Flamm m A Nelirr DIanr\I.Glrhun / I.aru k J.ti June 14, 1990 utti nr} \!urra\ k.Many .1' \.:.:., !mS..rl.11.,14 Mr. Dennis Kraft City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Street Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Underground Storage Tank Financial Responsibility for Cities Dear Mr. Kraft: I am writing this to you in the event that you city has Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) . If your city does own and operate any UST this is provided for your information. The EPA final rules and regulations require cities to demonstrate financial responsibility for underground storage tank clean-up by October of 1990. This applies to any local government unit which owns and operates an underground storage tank. This does not currently apply to septic tanks, heating oil tanks, motor fuel tanks with less than 100 gallons capacity, processing tanks, tanks in a building on a floor, pipelines, pits, ponds, lagoons, and storm water or waste water collection systems. For other underground storage tanks, the cities must demonstrate financial responsibility for the ability to clean-up leaking tanks and spills. The city can prove financial responsibility to the EPA through commercial insurance, self insurance, letters of credit, state trust funds, risk retention groups, surety bonds or indemnification contracts, or a combination of financial responsibility coverages. The city must have at least $500,000.00 coverage for each tank the city owns. This requirement increases to $1 million per tank if the tank is used in petroleum production, refining or marketing and has over 10,000 gallons per month flow through. The city is also required to have a minimum aggregate of $1 million coverage for all leaks which might occur in one year. This applies to cities which own between 1 and 100 USTs. First cities with 101 or more tanks, a $2 million in aggregate coverage is required. kIIII to: \lar.rhall Ko.),;Hu>uu•..(i nlrr.:327 Marschall k++a.! Lt 1.ti A 2I6.Shak+px•.•.\hnnrwd:l 553791)•{1.!xmr:ttil21•1.15•:,ukn i•\\I1,12:.1.1,:7610 S,:utht■+: t to ctrl Sril- 110(I. 1651)\\til tt'!tvI Strt j.lt6xutun n n.\ltnn\wd.+":Sa 4! lrlrph:ni II.I h 1.487,5;MM.+I'\\(1:1'21 tS t5 :N,'+ . June 14, 1990 a Page -2- The cities must send a copy of their financial responsibility documentation to either the EPA or the State Pollution Control agency. The city must also keep a record of this documentation. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Si &,MONRQE CHARTERED 7/ ----- i Y / 4 . Wa a -4/-i.-7 _1• /Attorney&at Law RJW/gw / stets <-rr -3 t v - Y- 1 J.T.. 41.--+F ,.y/''. Yom. ` C - �. MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL ---t"'.44--:- - -1 E CONTROL CORPORATION ;�"`. .•I �, r A Engineering and Environmental Services A Jr4" 3901 University Avenue N.E. —__ - • - p Minneapolis, Minnesota 55421 (612) 781-1647 r5.'":7.10,trirtire,;71404Wrik.„; ..;'''- '''_ UNDERGROUND TANK ENGINEERING # _ - Engineering Capabilities: i , �, - _�; • Management Planning Ir. `�1 r/ l • Prioritization Schedules e ' • Bid Specs/Tank Removals f. _ \ • Tank Installation Design s ' : • Leak Detection Controls iiiiiiO4.2 a ., • Tank Tightness Tests y'- � • Overfill Spill Controls l-‘4iiik . •* _ . _ --- - , ik,,. • Cathodic Protection .�A s L • Regulatory Compliance Midwest Environmental Control Corporation (MECC) is a multi-disciplined envir- onmental consulting engineering firm. MECC specializes in providing practical and cost effective environmental engineering solutions for industry, business and governmental institutions. Form 1089UT i It MANAGEMENT OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (MUST I) CITY OF SHAKOPEE MECC PROPOSAL P-1134-0690 JULY 26, 1990 if ra ict G C Q�� MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL July 26, 1990 O1 University Ave. N.E. E_ CONTROL CORPORATION Minneapolis, MN 55421 (612) 781-1647 Mr. David E. Hutton Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue I Shakopee, MN 55379 MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 Re: Management of Underground Storage Tanks (MUST I) ' (City of Shakopee) Dear Mr. Hutton: We have prepared for you our proposal for the evaluation and management of the City of Shakopee's underground petroleum storage tanks. This proposal briefly describes the problems associated with underground tanks, our intended exploration/evaluation procedures, and a cost estimate for performing our II engineering services. Upon completing our explorations and evaluations of the individual tank sites, we will provide you with a report detailing our findings and our engineering ' recommendations for the tank site location. These recommendations will also include suggested compliance considerations and management alternatives for the tank location based on the pending State and current federal underground tank rules effective December 1988. In addition, we will provide you with potential corrective procedures and response actions if petroleum product is found outside of the underground tank(s). M Engineering and Environmental Services Mr. David E. Hutton 1 ( MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 July 26, 1990 Page 2 This underground storage tank management program has been successfully utilized by many corporations and institutions including approximately 62 school districts within Minnesota. We intend to perform our services in combination with the participation of the City of Shakopee. Your involvement throughout the investigative phases, regulatory compliance criteria and possible response actions will allow for time and cost-effectiveness. We will provide you with our engineering services on a remunerative basis. Please 111 indicate your approval of our proposed services by returning either a signed copy of our proposal or a purchase order referencing this proposal. By the acceptance of this proposal and scope of services herein the City of Shakopee (Client) agrees to be bound by the General Conditions of Service and MECC Fee Schedule attached hereto as effective June 1, 1990. Unanticipated costs associated with additional work necessitated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or affiliated state agencies such as the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) or unanticipated conditions encountered while providing our services, will be incurred only with your prior written approval. An enlarged scope of work or costs associated with unplanned tasks will be documented with change orders, and compensation will be calculated in accordance with the attached MECC fee schedule. U I p p r Mr. David E. Hutton it Ck- MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 July 26, 1990 1111 Page 3 Should you have any questions or wish to discuss this project in greater detail, please do not hesitate to contact us at (612) 781-1647. We look forward to being of service to you and the City of Shakopee. Sincerely, MIDWEST ENVIRONME CONTROL CORPORATION osR s Ohman Vice President Environmental Engineering Services 1111 Craig D. Mahlberg, .E., CIH President U RLO/mir Enclosures Copyright MECC P-1134-0690,July, 1990 IAcceptance: Authorized Signature (Client) Title City of Shakopee Date I I I U 1 � � PROPOSAL Proposal Management of Underground Tanks (MUST I) City of Shakopee Client Mr. David E. Hutton E City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 MECC Proposal #P-1134-0690 Date July 26, 1990 Midwest Environmental Control Corporation 3901 University Avenue N. E. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55421 (612) 781-1647 LI Pi City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 P BACKGROUND P The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently written regulations 111 for many of the nation's underground storage tank systems. Many states are in the process of adopting and enforcing these federal regulations and are developing their Pown regulations based on the federal requirements. PFederal regulations for the proper management of underground storage tanks were Mformulated in part due to the U.S. EPA national surveys of underground storage tank release incidents. These surveys have indicated the following facts concerning existing underground tanks: o There exists approximately 3-5 million underground storage tanks across the nation. 1111 o A majority of these tanks contain petroleum fuels. o These petroleum fuels contain toxic pollutants such as: Benzene Ethyl Benzene Toluene Xylene PI - Petroleum hydrocarbons o The national average shows approximately one out of every Lithree tanks is currently leaking into the environment. P 1 p P City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 o Should a tank leak go undetected and affect the subsurface, clean-up costs could potentially exceed $1,000,000. o The majority of these tank failures are due to corrosion. o The national average for a tank to develop a corrosion failure is 17 years. Figures 1 and 2 represent graphically the age at which the largest percentage of tanks leak (source: U.S. EPA, "Summary of State Reports on Release From Underground Storage Tanks, " 1986) and the typical causes of tank failures (source: American Petroleum Institute, 1981.) Considering these facts regarding underground storage tanks and the potential clean- up costs associated with a leaking tank system, a soil and corrosion assessment of each tank site is conducted so potential problem site (s) may be identified before conditions are allowed to deteriorate. Underground storage tank corrosion failures are due primarily to the surrounding soil/ground water characteristics which affect tank corrosion rates. Our measurements of the soil/ground water characteristics such as acidity (pH), electrical resistance of the soil (ohm-cm) and the presence of sulfides will allow us to evaluate the potential corrosiveness of the surrounding soil/ground water. Corrosive characteristics of the soil/ground water are determined by testing soil samples obtained from auger probes in the backfill materials surrounding the tank(s) or tank site(s). 2 P AGE OF TANK AT TIME OF RELEASE INCIDENT E 23.0 . R 20.7 C 18.4 . T16.1....-. . ' 13.8 . FO 11.5 9.2 \ N 6.9 . . I 4.6 . E 2 3 • N 0.0 \. \ A FI T fI\ ig S <1 1 -5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 >45 AGE (years) SAGE (years) ®% of Incidents CAUSES OF TANK FAILURES r•14.s: •:rwK •%•••• .% g•w f~: • CJR SSCN 91.0% I El OT1-ER 6.0% PHYSICAL DAMAGE 2.0% 0 LOOSE FITTINGS 1.0% 1 City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 From the results of these tests, an engineering evaluation of existing conditions can assess the tank's potential for current leakage and scientifically predict the average time for a future leak to occur. These analyzed results will also allow us to prepare the design considerations for compliance with the pending State and existing federal underground storage tank rules. In addition, the soils surrounding the tank will be observed for the presence of petroleum product, for which response plans will be developed accordingly where petroleum product is identified. 3 I is City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 INTRODUCTION New federal underground storage tank regulations for existing petroleum product tanks require leak detection mechanisms to be installed based upon individual site characteristics and implemented according to tank age. With the exception of fuel oil tanks used for reserve heating supplies, existing tanks must be retrofitted with overfill-spill prevention equipment and corrosion protection equipment by 1998. Fuel oil tanks will require the same compliance at a later date. The underground storage tank management program begins by evaluating each tank site's present condition prior to developing a retrofitting and compliance schedule. These evaluation steps provide the data base with which an engineering tank management program may be designed according to the pending State and existing federal regulations. 4 Il 1 /4- iCity of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 II 111 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1111 Soil samples from an exploratory auger probe near the tank(s) provide us with a 1 direct means for evaluating whether a petroleum release has occurred in the subsurface and allow for a corrosion assessment of the backfill materials. This is in contrast to the volumetric tank integrity test which is an indirect method for determining if a petroleum release has potentially occurred based upon momentary test results. 1 111 Therefore, by analyzing the soil/ground water samples and their tested properties, I many characteristics such as leak detection and corrosiveness can be determined. With these test results, one may also evaluate the potential for a petroleum release I associated with corrosion failure. Corrosive characteristics of the backfill materials and the Rogers Equation are used to predict the average expected life for an I underground storage tank. In addition, the probability that a leak has occurred or will occur in the near future may also be accessed. IIIn those areas where ground water is near the surface and encountered during the 011 auger probe, direct evidence of petroleum product contamination in the ground water may be observed. In those locations where petroleum product contamination 111 is identified, additional investigation and evaluation may be necessary. I I 5 I I 11L City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 Following the completion of the individual site evaluation, an environmentally engineered site assessment report will be prepared which will include the aspects of the site exploration and analysis as presented above. With this base of gathered information, an engineering opinion of the environmental impacts and potential environmental impairment remediation costs can be formulated for each site. The following flow chart presents the individual phases of our site assessment/prioritization program. These phases are designed in logical order for successfully gathering the required data for our evaluation. 6 P�1 UNDERGROUND TANK SITE ASSESSMENT/PRIORITIZATION rCt PIMECC MUST PROGRAM Data Development / Assimilation PI - existing site plan evaluation - number of tank site (s) definition 01 Phase I - tank (s) history - tank characteristics U - products stored General Site Assessment - observe staining, biological stress - local topography / site relief Phase II - piping or settlement problems - operational activities / salt storage - utilities / overhead lines Site Investigation - internal tank evaluation - copper-copper half cell Phase III - soil probe / boring (s) - testing analysis U - soil / ground water characterization - sample collection - photoionization profile Phase IV Tank Site Data Evaluation Site Prioritization - tank system ranking P Phase V - low, moderate, high - alternatives evaluation Engineering Report P - short / long-term MUST program Phase VI - tank removals - tank upgrade schedules - tank monitoring plans P 11 City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 SCOPE OF SERVICES The combined site assessment, including the exploration and evaluation phases, provides significantly more information defining conditions and potential environmental impairments associated with underground storage tanks than any other assessment method. The scope of our services will include the following procedures: o A site visit by a qualified environmental geologist(s) or senior environmental technician(s). o Completion of the site survey information form located in the attached appendix. o The placement of auger probes and/or soil borings in the vicinity of the existing underground storage tank clusters (sites). A tank site is considered as those tanks within close proximity of each other (25 feet or less) under similar backfill conditions. o Copper-copper half cell reference readings. o Obtain soil samples from the auger probe placed in the vicinity of the tanks(s) for purposes of evaluating the corrosive aggressiveness of the soil. o Screen the collected soil sample for leak detection with a portable vapor analyzer and/or photoionizing meter such as the HNu Photoionizer or Photovac Tip. 8 I ( / t ICity of Shakopee MECC Proposal P4134-0690 I 1 o Determine if ground water affects the tank by noting water accumulation within the tank(s) and/or soil probe. Io If groundwater is near the surface and encountered within the auger probe, a sample can be obtained for a preliminary ievaluation of potential ground water impacts. o Upon assimilation of the site data, an engineering evaluation will be conducted to prioritize the tanks in Iour assessment/prioritization report. This report will include an itemization of our methodologies, our I interpretations, a priority matrix and our engineering recommendations. IA wide range of information can be obtained and evaluated from the site data collected during our site assessment phase. The site visit will initially identify Ivisual evidence of contamination which may include one or more of the following: soil staining, stressed vegetation, the presence of petroleum products on the water Isurfaces, evidence of surface spills, and any existing impacts on the adjacent land. IThis site assessment/prioritization program provides the data base for completing II the steps toward an efficient, cost-effective and timely management of an underground storage tank and regulatory compliance program. I I I 9 I I I // � COST ESTIMATE CITY OF SHAKOPEE MECC PROPOSAL P-1134-0690 JULY 26, 1990 I City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 COST ESTIMATE We intend to provide the City of Shakopee with the following engineering services on a reimbursable basis consistent with the attached MECC conditions of service and the 1990 MECC fee schedule. Monthly invoices will reflect only the actual hours and associated fees involved with performing our engineering services. Our scope of work includes an environmentally engineered assessment and priority evaluation of the tank site(s). The general history and actual number of tank site boring locations will be determined in conjunction with the City of Shakopee as indicated in Phase I of our program flow chart, page 8. I The following is a general cost estimate for budgetary purposes. It may vary based Iupon actual tank accessibility, number of actual tank sites, site preparation and soil conditions encountered. Therefore, we have prepared for you a range of our Ianticipated costs. (Please note: A tank site is one or more tanks located within similar backfill areas and situated less than 25 feet from each other.) I 1 10 I I I M 1 City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 1 Site Exploration/Assessment Phase Cost Estimate(per site) *Project preparation,equipment and $ 100-$ 150 personnel mobilization/demobilization and perdiem ($50-$75/site) x 2 sites= *Soil boring process,Environmental $ 456-$608 1 Field Engineer/Geologist,6-8 hours per tank site location @$38.00/hour x 2 sites= 'Soil/ground water corrosion aggressiveness, IpH, resistivity, sulfides and photo- ionization testing on selected soil samples from each boring,2 $ 152-$228 Iboring samples per site @$38.00/test x 4-6 tests= *Expendable items such as testing materials photo-log documentation and subsurface $30-$40 1 exploration equipment($15-$20/site) x 2 sites= Site Exploration/Assessment Phase Cost Estimate $738-$ 1026 IEngineering Evaluation&Report Procedure Cost Estimate 'Services of Project Engineer/Manager, $ 228 2 hours @$57.00/hour=$114 x 2 sites= 7 *Services of Environmental Field Engineer/Geologist, $ 546 I7 hours @$39.00/hour=$273 x 2 sites= *Services of Draftsman, $ 128 ! 2 hours @$32.00/hour=$64 x 2 sites= *Services of Clerical time, $ 100 2 hours @$25.00/hour=$50 x 2 sites= 7 *Services of Principal Registered Engineer, $ 124 1 hours @$62.00/hour=$62 x 2 sites= I Engineering Evaluation and Report Cost Estimate $ 1126 J I Underground Tank Priority Evaluation Testing Total Cost Estimate(2 sites with 4 soil borings)* $1.864 - $ 2.152 I 11 I I City of Shakopee MECC Proposal P-1134-0690 * Please note that these are estimates only. Our monthly invoices will only reflect actual time and expenses accrued while providing our services for this project. The City of Shakopee may allow for time savings in certain areas of our assessment phase by locating general background information on the tanks, identification numbers, specific tank locations and adjacent service utilities prior to our initiation of our site assessment. I It is our understanding these evaluation fees may be prorated toward satisfying the eligibility requirements necessary for reimbursement of expenses from the Minnesota Pollution Tank Release Compensation Board should contamination be identified and response actions be required. Compensation by the Board is generally considered, provided the Minnesota Pollution Agency (MPCA) rules for responding to a leaking site are met throughout the response actions. I I I I I 12 I 4 IFIEIE SCHEDULE ( l MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL CORPORATION 3901 UNIVERSITY AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55421 Environmental, Industrial Hygiene and Plant Engineering I (Effective June 1, 1990) I ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES (01) 1. Services of Principal Engineer $ 69.00/hour 11 2. Services of Senior Project Engineer/Manager $ 60.00/hour 3. Services of Project Hydrogeologist/Manager $ 57.00/hour 4. Services of Project Manager/Project Geologist $ 48.00/hour 5. Services of Project Engineer/Project Geologist $ 43.00/hour 6. Services of Senior Environmental Technician $ 39.00/hour 7. Services of Environmental Technician $ 35.00/hour 8. Services of Senior Draftsman/CAD Draftsman $ 45.00/hour 9. Services of Draftsman $ 32.00/hour 10. Services of Clerical Staff $ 25.00/hour 11. Services of Auxiliary Consultant(s) Cost + 15% * Overtime rates for personnel classifications 3-11, 1.5 x standard rate. INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE SERVICES (02) 1. Services of Principal Engineer/ $ 69.00/hour Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) 2. Services of Senior Project Engineer/Manager $ 60.00/hour 3. Services of Project Engineer/ $ 49.00/hour Senior Industrial Hygienist/Toxicologist 4. Services of Industrial Hygienist Toxicologist $ 45.00/hour 5. Services of Senior Draftsman/CAD Draftsman $ 45.00/hour 6. Services of Draftsman $ 32.00/hour 7. Services of Clerical Staff $ 25.00/hour I p June 90 Page 1 of 5 0 Ilk PASBESTOS MANAGEMENT SERVICES (03) II. Services of Principal Engineer/ $ 69.00/hour Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIII) 2. Services of Senior Project Engineer/Manager $ 60.00/hour I 3. Services of Senior Industrial Hygienist $ 49.00/hour 4. Services of Project Engineer/Designer $ 48.00/hour 5. Services of Industrial Hygienist/Toxicologist $ 45.00/hour II 6. Services of Industrial Hygienist Technician $ 39.00/hour 7. Services of Asbestos Abatement Worker $ 39.00/hour 8. Services of Draftsman $ 32.00/hour 1 9. Services of Clerical Staff $ 25.00/hour 10. Outside Services Cost + 15% 11. Laboratory Fees Cost + 15% y12. Expendables Cost + 15% PROJECT ENGINEERING (04) I1. Services of Principal Engineer $ 69.00/hour 2. Services of Senior Project Engineer/Manager $ 60.00/hour 0 3. Services of Project Engineer $ 49.00/hour 4. Services of Senior Draftsman/CAD Draftsman $ 45.00/hour 5. Services of Draftsman $ 32.00/hour I6. Services of Clerical Staff $ 25.00/hour RECYCLING /WASTE AUDIT (05) I 1. Services of g PrincipalEngineer n i neer $ 69.00/hour 2. Services of Senior Project Engineer/Manager $ 60.00/hour I3. Services of Recycling Specialist $ 45.00/hour 4. Services of Draftsman $ 32.00/hour 5. Services of Clerical Staff $ 25.00/hour 1 Charges for environmental, industrial hygiene, asbestos management, project engineering services, and recycling/waste audit in addition to technical personnel, will be made for time spent in the field, in consultation, in ipreparation of reports and in travel to and from the job site. I I June 90 I Page 2 of 5 I 4 OA- II EXPENSES I1. Transportation: via company or private vehicle $ 0.35/mile via public conveyance Cost + 15% 2. Computer usage: in-house terminal time $ 18.00/hour N contract computer service Cost + 15% 3. Long Distance Telephone, Meals and Cost + 15% Accommodations I4. Outside Services Cost + 15% 5. Sample Storage Beyond 60 Days $ 2.50/month 6. Shipping Charges Cost + 15% 7. FAX Usage (No Charge) 8. Blueprint reproduction $ 0.20/ft2 9. Mylar Reproduction $ 2.00/ft2 0 10. HNU Meter / Photoionizer Device Rental / OVM $90.00/day 11. Water Well Installation Cost + 15% Il12. Outside Remedial Contracting Cost + 15% REPORTS IReport Distribution - A maximum of 3 copies total of each report will be furnished to two addresses at the time of initial report submittal. I1. Additional copies, if requested $ 15.00 (minimum per copy) ' 2. Reproduction of previous reports $ 15.00 (minimum per copy) I I I I I I June 90 I - Page 3 of 5 I- 0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 0 1. Layout, Evaluations and Utility Clearance - $60.00/hour 2-Man Crew 2. Out-of-Town Accommodations $ 68.00/person/day 111 3. Services of Truck Mounted Drill Rig - 2-Man Crew $130.00/hour 4. Services of All-Terrain Drill Rig - 2-Man Crew Cost + 15% 5. All-Terrain Transport Vehicle Cost + 15% II 6. Additional Crew Member $ 35.00/hour 7. Water Truck used with Rotary Drill Rig $40.00/day + $ 1.00/mile 111 8. Pick-up Truck Auxiliary Vehicle $ 25.00/day + $ 0.50/mile 9. Travel time after initial mobilization $60.00/hour I plus mileage 10. Special permits and assist equipment required Cost + 15% to complete investigation such as bulldozer, etc. Lii. Diamond Bit Wear Cost + 15% 12. Portable Power Auger Cost + 15% 13. Expendable Items Cost + 15% III 14. Outside Services Cost + 15% 15. 1-1/2 Inch to 2 Inch PVC Piezometer or Vapor Well Pipe $4.00/foot IIINOTES: 1) Overtime, time in excess of 8 hours/day or 40 hours/week is 1.5 x applicable rate. 1111 2) Overtime, Saturday, Sunday or local legal holidays is 1.5 X applicable rate. III ROUTINE SOIL TESTS III 1. Visual Engineering Classification $ 3.50/sample 2. Water Content Test $ 6.00/test 3. Density Determination Cost + 15% II 4. Unconfined Compressive Strength Cost + 15% 5. Hand Penetrometer Test Cost + 15% 6. Organic Content (Ignition Method) Cost + 15% N 7. Sieve Analysis (-200 mesh) $38.00/test 8. Resistivity Testing $32.00/test 9. pH and Sulfide Soil/Water Testing $ 15.00/test N 10. Permeability Testing Cost + 15% 11. Aquifer Testing Cost + 15% June 90 Page 4 of 5 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT The following charges will be made for test equipment operated by Midwest Environmental Control Corporation personnel in addition to personnel charges: EE-1 HNU Model 101 or Photovac T.I.P. $90.00/day Photoionization Detector EE-2 pH Meter $8.00/day EE-3 Conductivity Meter $8.00/day EE-4 Combustible Gas Meter $20.00/day EE-5 Geophysical Equipment Cost + 15% EE-6 Resistivity Equipment (4 Probe Calculation) Cost + 15% EE-7 Ground Probing Radar, Cost + 15% $200 mobilization plus EE-8 Level C Protection $35.00/man/day Level B Protection $ 100.00/man/day EE-9 Expendable Materials Cost + 15% EE-10 Preparation of Bailers (PVC, Stainless $ 10.00/each Steel or Teflon) EE-11 Electrical Generator $35.00/day EE-12 4" Submersible Pump $25.00/day 3" Submersible Pump $35.00/day 2" Submersible Pump $55.00/day June 90 Page 5 of 5 MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL CORPORATION 1111 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SERVICE 1 'L The parties to this Agreement, in consideration of the mutual covenants and understandings contained 1111 herein, agree as follows: Page 1 d 3 Effective January t,1989 ill I. SCOPE OF SERVICES be liable for said costs or damages. The cost for restoration and returning the Project Site to its orginal condition is the MECC shall perform engineering and consulting responsibility of the CLIENT. If the CLIENT directs, MECC services at the Project Site according to the provisions of will restore the Project Site and add the cost of restoration to ilthis Agreement and such other proposals, quotations, the charge for services. purchase orders and other addenda which the parties may from time to time incorporate Into this Agreement. MECC VI. MECC RESPONSIBILITY shall not perform services in excess and beyond the scope of this Agreement unless CLIENT shall specifically direct A. MECC represents that it is licensed and authorized 4 such services. to work in the State of Minnesota II. COMPENSATION B. MECC represents that it is engaged in the business fl of consulting and engineering with regard to environmental CLIENT agrees to pay MECC for services performed in investigations. accordance with the Schedule of Charges provided in the proposal, quotation, purchase order or other addenda C. The performance of services under this Agreement attached to this Agreement, or as the parties shall agree shall meet current scientific and engineering standards in iiifrom time to time. A statement of the estimated cost for effect in the industry at the time the services are performed. services is not a firm figure unless stated as such. If there The services shall be carried out with the degree of care and is no other Agreement, CLIENT shall pay for services skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by according to MECC's most current Schedule of Charges. reputable members of the profession practicing in the same II locality. Cost estimates are based upon the best judgment of the requirements known at the time of the proposal and may D. MECC provides no other representations to CLIENT be influenced by CLIENT needs as well as unforeseen express or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included 4 circumstances. MECC will perform its services within the or intended in this Agreement, or In any report, opinion, estimated costs to the extent practicable and will notify the document or otherwise. CLIENT in advance of material variances in excess of twenty (20) percent. VII. CLIENT RESPONSIBILITIES III III. INVOICES AND PAYMENTS A. CLIENT agrees to provide MECC with all known information regarding the existing proposed condition of the CLIENT agrees to pay alt Invoices upon receipt. Project Site. CLIENT will provide MECC wtth any new Invoices not paid within thirty(30) days are subject to4 information as such information becomes available. Client interest at the rate of 1.5 %per month,but not to exceed the warrants the completeness and accuracy of information maximum rate allowed by law. MECC may, after giving supplied to MECC and acknowledges that MECC is relying written notice, suspend services without liability until upon such information in the performance of services under CLIENT has paid in full all amounts due for services rendered4 this Agreement, and expenses incurred, including interest on past due accounts. In the event CLIENT fails to pay MECC within B. CLIENT shall notify MECC of any known potential or sixty (60)days following the Invoice date, MECC may possible health or safety hazards or conditions exisitng on consider the default a total breach of this Agreement, and4 or near the Project Site prior to the commmencement of may , at its option,terminate all of its duties without liability services under this Agreement. to CLIENT or others. C. CLIENT shall correctly show on plans or surveys ii IV. TAX ON SERVICES furnished to MECC, the location of all subsurface structures, such as pipes, tanks, cables and utilites. CLIENT agrees to CLIENT agrees to pay the amount of any tax, license Indemnify and hold harmless MECC, its officers, directors, or other fee (local, state or federal)that may be imposed on4 agents, employees and subcontractors, from and against all the provision of services under this Agreement. claims, damages, losses and related expenses involving subsurface structures. V. ACCESS D. Client shall be fully responsible for the cooperation 4CLIENT grants to MECC and its subcontractors the and safety of its employees during the provision of services authority and permission to enter the Project Site where under this Agreement. services are to be performed. It is recognized and understood by CLIENT that the investigation of the Project inSite by drilling, borings, excavation, etc. involves an Inherent risk and may alter the existing site condition as well as ailed the environment in the Project Site area. MECC will take reasonable precautions to minimize damage to the ilProject Site. MECC, however, has not included the cost of restoration for damage resulting from the provision of services In the estimated charge for services. MECC will not 1111 MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL CORPORATION /1 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF SERVICE The parties to this Agreement, in consideration of the mutual covenants and understandings contained 111 herein, agree as follows: Pape 2 d 3 Elte N,e Janrary i,1999 mi VII. CLIENT RESPONSIBILITIES CONT. automobile liability insurance coverage with minumum coverage of$1,000,000 per occurrance for bodily injury and E. CLIENT recognizes that environmental,geological, property damage. MECC will furnish a certificate of 1111 hydrogeotogic and geotechnical conditions at the Project insurance upon request. If CLIENT requests increased Site may vary from those encountered during the provision Insurance coverage, MECC will purchase additional of services under this Agreement. The accuracy of services coverage if obtainable, at the sole cost and expense of relating to specific tests (e.g., a specific soil boring) may not CLIENT. MECC shall have no liablity beyond the limits and represent conditions a short distance away. CLIENT conditions of the additional insurance coverage. IIacknowledges that the use of tests, calculations, analyses, methods and procedures are in a constant state of XII. INDEMNIFICATION refinement by regulatory agencies and advancements in the field. Further,the provision of services relating to MECC agrees to hold harmless and indemnify CLIENT Licontamination or hazardous waste conditions is subject to from and against all claims in losses, damages, liablility, changing and involving standards. CLIENT recognizes that costs and reasonable costs of defense arising during the projects involving hazardous substances or contaminated performance of services under this Agreement and caused materials may not perform as anticipated or may be subject by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of MECC. Ill to government regulations that require the achievement of results not contemplated by CLIENT or which cannot be accomplished under current conditions. CLIENT agrees to hold harmless and indemnify MECC, its officers, directors, employees, agents and II ViII. SAMPLES subcontractors, from and against all claims, losses. damages, liability, costs and reasonable costs of defense MECC shall retain soil, rock,water and other samples arising out of or in any manner connected with the negligent from the Project Site for a period of thirty (30) days following acts or omissions of CLIENT, CLIENT'S employees and the provision of services. The samples will be discarded or others not under the direct supervision and control of returned to CLIENT, at MECC's discretion, unless CLIENT MECC,whether insured or not. requests specific dispositon at CLIENT'S cost and expense. XiII. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY III IX. REPORTS The liability of MECC, its officers,directors, employees, Unless otherwise directed, MECC will provide three(3) agents and subcontractors, for claims of loss or damage in copies of each report documenting the provision of services the performance of services under this Agreement, including IN herein to the CLIENT. All reports, notes, logs, field data, without limitation claims under Section XII herein, shall not tests, laboratory analyses, calculations and other exceed 100%of the compensation received by MECC as its documents, as instruments of service herein, shall remain professional fee under this Agreement. or $20,000, the property of MECC. The use of documents prepared by whichever is greater. In no event shall MECC be liable for 4 MECC shall be limited to the defined scope of services special, incidental, consequential or penal losses or identified in this Agreement. Any other use or reuse shall be damages, including but not limited to delay, loss of use, loss at CLIENTS's sole risk and CLIENT agrees to indemnify, of profits, loss of opportunity, loss of product or revenue or defend and hold harmless MECC, its officers, directors, cost of capital. ii agents, employees and subcontractors for all claims, damages and expenses arising out of such other use. If XIV. TIME BAR TO LEGAL ACTION CLIENT does not pay for MECC's services, CLIENT agrees that all reports and other work will be returned to MECC and All legal actions by either party against the other for 4 will not be used by CLIENT for any other purpose claims, losses, damage, liability and costs for breach of this whatsoever. Agreement shall be barred within one (1)year from the time of the claim arose or, within one (1)year from the completion X. CONFIDENTIALITY of services by MECC, whichever is earlier. In no event shall 1111 The parties shall not release any information MECC be liable unless CLIENT has notified MECC within thirty (30) days of the discovery of the claim, loss or concerning services under this Agreement except with the damage. express prior authorization of the other party. MECC, upon 14 CLIENT's request shall execute reasonable and customary XV. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR confidentiality agreements furnished by CLIENT. CLIENT agrees that MECC may use and publish. CLIENT'S name The relationship of MECC to CLIENT is that of an and a general description of services provided in describing independent contractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall be MECC's experience and qualifications to other clients or construed as creating the relationship of co-partners, joint lispotential clients. venturers, or an association. XI. INSURANCE II MECC shall maintain (1)workers'compensation and employee's liability insurance coverage in accordance with statutory requirements, and (2) comperehensive general and I 111 MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL CORPORATION I / kGENERAL CONDITIONS OF SERVICE J The parties to this Agreement, in consideration of the mutual covenants and understandings contained 4 herein, agree as follows: Page 3 d 3 Efrec>!ve..wii y 1.1989 illXVI. ENTIRE AGREEMENT XXI. NOTICES This Agreement constitutes the final and complete All notices which are required under this Agreement ilagreement between the parties and supersedes all prior shall be mailed or delivered to the parties as identified in the agreements, respresentations or negotiations, whether introduction of this Agreement, or as otherwise directed by written or oral. In no event shall the preprint terms or the parties. conditions stated on any CLIENT purchase or work order be 4 considered an amendment or modification of this Agreement. Any alteration, variation, modification or waiver of the XXII. GOVERNING LAW provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when reduced to writing and duly signed by the parties. The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions as to the execution, nature, obligation, Li XVII. ASSIGNMENT construction, validity and performance of this Agreement. Neither party to this Agreement shall assign the duties 4 and obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. The use of subcontractors shall not constitute an assignment by MECC. XVIII. SEPARABILITY AND WAIVER illIf any section, subsection, sentence or clause of this Agreement is adjudged illegal, invalid or unenforceable, such Illillegality, invalidity or unenforceability will not effect the legality, validity or enforceability of the Agreement as a whole or any other section, subsection, sentence or clause. The waiver of any provision contained in this Agreement by any parties shall not be construed as a waiver of any other 4 provision of the Agreement. IX, FORCE MAJEURE IIIMECC will have no liability for any failure to perform due to circumstances beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to, strikes, riot, war, fires, flood, explosion, acts of nature, acts of government, delays in transportation 4 or inability to obtain material or equipment. XX. TERMINATION 4This Agreement may be terminated by either party in whole or in part and at any time, with or without cause, upon ten days'written notice. In the event of such a cancellation, MECC shall be entitled to payment for work or services ill performed. After receipt of a notice of cancellation, and except as otherwise directed, MECC shall: IIII A. Discontinue the provision of services under this Agreement to the extent specified in the notice of 4 cancellation. B. Cancel all orders and subcontracts to the extent that they relate to the performance of services cancelled by the notice of cancellation. 1111 C. Complete performance of such services as shall not have been cancelled by the notice of cancellation. CONSENT TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: 1990 Audit Services DATE: September 12, 1990 Introduction Attached is an audit proposal for 1990 audit services from Jaspers, Streefland & Company. Background This firm has done the audit for the City for over 20 years with the exception of having the State Auditor for 1969. The same individual has been doing the audit for more than 12 years. Staff has recommended changing auditors for about the last eight years, primarily in order to have a fresh look at the financial operations of the City. Council has continued to retain Jaspers, Streefland & Company. Accordingly, the motion drafted below reflects past Council actions in retaining the previous auditors. The price quoted by Jaspers, Streefland & Company is reasonable and the same as last years. At this point in time in (September) , it is getting late in the year to begin the process to request proposals for audit services if Council would want to look at other firms. Alternatives 1. Accept Jaspers & Streefland proposal. 2. Solicit other proposals. Action Move to accept the proposal of Jasper, Streefland & Company for 1990 audit services in the amount of $8,300 and that the City Administrator is authorized to execute the Understanding of Engagement. JASPERS, STREEFLAND & COMPANY JEROME JASPERS,CPA•JAMES STREEFLAND,Jr.CPA MEMBERS OF THE AMERICAN INSTITLTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS *t t.0 206 SCOTT STREET,SHAKOPEE,MN 55379.16121 445.2817 c.t? September 5, 1990 Members of the City Council ( •ti City of Shakopee Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Members: Enclosed is our engagement letter for the annual audit of the financial statements of the City of Shakopee for the year ending December 31, 1990. Our fee for audit service for 1990 is estimated to be $8,300.00. Thank you for the opportunity of submitting our proposal. Yours truly, aspers, Stree land & Co. Certified Public Accountants JSC/mlj Enclosures JASPERS, STREEFLAND & COMPANY JEROME JASPERS,CPA•JAMES STREEFLAND,Jr.CPA MEMBERS OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 206 SCOTT STREET,SHAKOPEE,MN 55379.(612)445.2817 September 5, 1990 Members of the City Council City of Shakopee Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Understanding of Engagement Dear Council Members: We are confirming our understanding of the arrangements to make an audit of the balance sheets of the various funds of the City of Shakopee at December 31, 1990, and related statements of changes in fund balance and revenues and expenditures for the year then ended and such other supplementary information as required. The audit will be made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Accordingly, we will test the accounting records of the organization and perform other auditing procedures by methods and to the extent we deem appropriate for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the financial statements. We expect the city staff will be available to prepare, under our direction, certain of the detailed schedules necessary for the examination. An audit directed to the expression of an opinion, on the financial statements is not primarily or specifically designed, and cannot be relied upon, to disclose defalcations or other similar irregularities should any exist, although their discovery may result. At the conclusion of our audit, we will submit our report with respect to the financial statements and will make separate recommendations for strengthening internal accounting controls and improving operating procedures to the extent that such matters come to our attention. Our charges will be made at regular per diem rates, plus direct expenses. We will advise you promptly if we discover any indication of defalcations or other irregularities, or if other circumstances develop that require us to extend our work significantly (e.g. , internal control is found to be ineffective, books are not effectively closed, accounts are out of balance) . We are prepared to assist you with a wide range of financial and management services. Please feel free to call on us for advice at any time regarding any problems or matters which you feel we can render assistance. Page 2 If the above understanding is acceptable to you, and the services outlined are in accordance with your requirements, please sign the copy of this letter in the space provided and kindly return to us. We are looking forward to an enjoyable and continuing association in service to you. Yours truly, aspers, Streefland & Company Certified Public Accountants JSC/mlj The services described in the foregoing letter are in accordance with our requirements. The understanding described in the letter is acceptable to us and is hereby agreed to. City Administrator JASPERS, STREEFLAND & COMPANY JEROME JASPERS,CPA•JAMES STREEFLAND.Jr.CPA MEMBERS OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 206 SCOTT STREET,SHAKOPEE,MN 55379,16121 445.2817 September 5, 1990 Members of the City Council City of Shakopee Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Understanding of Engagement Dear Council Members: We are confirming our understanding of the arrangements to make an audit of the balance sheets of the various funds of the City of Shakopee at December 31, 1990, and related statements of changes in fund balance and revenues and expenditures for the year then ended and such other supplementary information as required. The audit will be made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Accordingly, we will test the accounting records of the organization and perform other auditing procedures by methods and to the extent we deem appropriate for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the financial statements. We expect the city staff will be available to prepare, under our direction, certain of the detailed schedules necessary for the examination. An audit directed to the expression of an opinion, on the financial statements is not primarily or specifically designed, and cannot be relied upon, to disclose defalcations or other similar irregularities should any exist, although their discovery may result. At the conclusion of our audit, we will submit our report with respect to the financial statements and will make separate recommendations for strengthening internal accounting controls and improving operating procedures to the extent that such matters come to our attention. Our charges will be made at regular per diem rates, plus direct expenses. We will advise you promptly if we discover any indication of defalcations or other irregularities, or if other circumstances develop that require us to extend our work significantly (e.g. , internal control is found to be ineffective, books are not effectively closed, accounts are out of balance) . We are prepared to assist you with a wide range of financial and management services. Please feel free to call on us for advice at any time regarding any problems or matters which you feel we can render assistance. Page 2 If the above understanding is acceptable to you, and the services outlined are in accordance with your requirements, please sign the copy of this letter in the space provided and kindly return to us. We are looking forward to an enjoyable and continuing association in service to you. Yours truly, aspers, Streefland & Company Certified Public Accountants JSC/mlj The services described in the foregoing letter are in accordance with our requirements. The understanding described in the letter is acceptable to us and is hereby agreed to. City Administrator / 1K MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Annual Revision Conference With Codifiers DATE: September 12 , 1990 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: On August 29th, the City Attorney, City Administrator, City Clerk and Mr. Coller met with the Codifiers for our annual revision conference. During the meeting the Codifiers advised staff of 1990 changes to the law which they thought we should be aware of. They also asked if Shakopee wished to amend their city code to incorporate a new law which allows the sale and serving of wine within a bed and breakfast operation. Staff is bringing this question to Council at this time so that they can consider the matter now rather than when later when approached by such an establishment. If Council does in fact wish to make this privilege available to bed and breakfast establishments within Shakopee, we may as well adopt the appropriate ordinance now. If Council so desires, an ordinance will be prepared for Council consideration at a future meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and direct staff as appropriate. * N * N * N * N * NNNNNNNNN * N * NN * NNN * N r 1I 6 * 0 * UI * 0 * 0 * 000000000 * to * 00 * 000 * N C) (0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * (ii * 000000000 * Ul * 00 * 000 * UI 2 CO * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 000000000 * 0 * 00 * 000 * 0 m 0 * (0 * (0 * (O * 00 * 000000000 * U7 * NN * NNN * r C) * V * N * NJ * 0 * (0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0 * r * 00 * 0)CA CA * A T. C) M . Z -i 0 < 0 ' 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 00 000 0 D T (0 (0 (D co (0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0 (0 WW (D(D(O (0 -i N \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\ \ \\ \\\ \ m 2 .t I- r r r r r►- rrr r > N N N N NNNNNNNNN N NN N N N N T. \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\ \ \\ \\\ \ 0 (0 (D (CO (0 (0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0 (0 00 000 (0 o O 0 O 000000000 0 0 0 000 O m m D z W W O rr 0000 00 C - - z (D(0 rr NN 00 W NN VNO Nr r rr -1 00 00 00 0)O) 0CrrNVANNN 0000 Nrr CN CA 0000 -.IV AA rr V..4 WCNCON CA U1CArA UIUI VAN VANO CA) 00 rr 00( VV 00 CArrCOrOV(D0) (00 NVO NWW VI VV 00 ON VV 0(0 W(n C0)rrCA00 (0(0 AA0 OWV0 UIN * * * * * * * * * C) C) C) W WWWWWWWWW W MM DDD D O r D D CCCCCCCCC D CCC 3 3 D -1 M NNNNNNNNN M MM -1-I-4 m M < C) -1 M M M M M M M M M W 000 21 C N 0 0 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z D 32.2. M < -1 Z MMMMMMmml1 M ZZ 0 0 0 C) m M M I NNNNNNNNN 0 00 mmm > Z m M D NNNNNNNNN N MM ZZZ Z 0 D Z C) 000000000 D NN MMM Z M Z -1 2 CCCCCCCCC 0 0 D D D D C) O ►-I -4-1-I-1-1-4-1-1-I 1-4 ZZ rrr -4 X Z M flM-1 fl rn-*1-*1 T1M Z m 0 Z MM M MMM M MM 0 9.9" NNN C) C) CCC W T. -1-1-1-I-4-•1-1-1-1 I.T. MMS D mmmmmmmmrn NN MMM Z M 23zazMMMMM 00 rr-r- X m NNNNNNNNN C)C) «< 0 M CO M M A -V m M 000000000 0 00 m m N M M D M 0 M CCCCCCCCC -1 cc 00c D -1 v M C 0 v v v v v v v v v 2 mm C C v < m M Z M -Tl -m-9m-000mm m mm MM- M 3 --1 1 m r r r r r r r r r 73 rr v v r z D N 1-41-4M1-11-41-11-41-41 1 MM M 0 0 r 42e 3 m mmmmmmmmrn M mm 33m m A m 000000000 3 CO N >>0 D CO M m M < M 1-11-4 G) C) 0 C Z a ZZ m m C W -1 0 -1-i Z M M < -1 -4 -Ti M m 0 m z 0 0 0 N 000000000 N 00 000 W A ✓ r r W 0 rr rrr 0 C) I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 11 I I C) A A A A 000000000 A AA AAA A 0 VI W N W NNNNNNNNN 0 NN NNN 0) C ✓ Ul W r r rr WWr r Z ✓ 0 N 0 000000000 (0 00 N N 0 N -1 1 i 1 I ) I 1 1 1 I I W W A 0 (DAAWWrr rr 0 AA AAA 0 Z N r N V rN r Nil-.V Cn Nr N WW ArN 0 0 ✓ r CA 0 r r0 r 1-Cn 0 • 1 ) I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 11 1 l l I W Cl) A A (OAAWWrrrr A AA AAA 0 M N r N r rNrNrV0)Nr r NN ArN 0 Z Of 0 CO it 0 V (D N M I I • r 0 A) I (0 YC 0 3 M v N A * * * * * * * * * N C) * * * * * * * * * > m * * * * * * * * * 0 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 I m C) C) C) C) A C) C) C) C) 0 Cl) CO 0 0 Cl) Cl) 0 0 r * NN * N N IV NJ N * N * NJ * N * NNN * N * N * NN N r • * U1 V1 * U1 U1 U1 UI UI * (J1 * UI * UI * (I1 VI 4.11 * 01 * U1 * UI VI UI C) (O * CA 4.51 * VI UI UI UI 01 * U1 * (.)I * U1 * UI U1 U1 * U1 * U1 * UI U1 UI = CO * rr * rrrrr * r * r * r * rrr * r * r * 1-•14-• r m O * V V * AAAAA * NJ * N * N * rrr * r • O * 00 0 C) * 00 * V V-4 V V * CO * 0) * 0 * U1 01 UI * r * 01 * CO W N.) 7: C) H z -1 0 -< 0 0 m 00 00000 0 0 0 000 O 0 00 0 D (0(0 (D CO(D CO(0 CO (D CO (O CO(0 (0 (D CO CO (O -I N \\ \\\\\ \ \ \ \\\ \ \ \\ -11. m X rr r I- r rrr r r 1--r- r D NJ N N N N N N N.) N N N N N N.) N NJ N N 7C \\ \\\\\ \ \ \ \\\ \ - \\ \ 0 (D CO CO CO(0(O CO CO CO (D (0(0 CO (0 CO (O CO (0 13 00 00000 0 0 0 000 0 0 00 0 m m D 3 0 N N r r C - - z r r r C.)C.) r r U1 U1 V 0) -I V UI r AN W UI N r 00 AA CO N0) CO CO CO CO NAV NN NV UI rCO A C.)r r o-4- rr VV UI UI N V (O(0 rI-. A CO U1 00 UI U10 A oo r(D Co O) (0(0 CO CO 00 0 W C...3.1:. 0000 CA)G.) 000 CO CO 000 0U74)03A0 UI U1 00 00 VU11J0 AA CO CO 000 00 * * * * * * * * * * M-71 m m m m m 0 C7 0 0 0 C) 0 <-4 CS C) C) I-4*-1 DDDDA C 1-I m D C 00 0 7373 N(AV)NV) m C) 3 ISS z r- 33 v V)co -I-I-1--1-4 CO -I I r I••1 -0-V -1-1 33333 m D C) N C CC < >DDDD 73 13 0 000 0 CO -1-1 m m -i-4 ZZZZZ V) S Z DDD Z mm 0 Z XI 71 0 X17777 D =z C 0 CC 00000 Z r vvv -1 I-4 0 NN 73737a.73A Ir D 73 33 v 72 -1-I CCCCC Z D C) 7:>; C) C)C)C)C)C) v rrr 0 0 -1--1 I '1 C C C --1 r t-( m 1-+ 333 0 r 00 z 0 r CDWW xr m 00 C) x r m m m z 73 70 717373 vv z ♦-1 11 rn Z rI C) C) M (4.) -4m M v v -0 0 13 0() V) rn C N N CO m -0 C)m N 11 DPC/MX/73C C 0 —1 CCC 0 xl >0 C -4 -<0 0000.0 v C 1.1 13-0-0 C 0 -DC v m Hsi '11-n-n m y 'V M r -0"0-0 11 '*1 MM 13 3 Z r r 'U H rrr -0 -1v r C)0 NN V)(AM 1-1 -1 MMM N > M C7 m mmmmm m 3 11 mmm 3 (71 r3 m m DA 73737373() V) D m V)V)V) > 73 D V) CO 0< <<<< 14 N r( < m H C) rn Z Z 0 Z z Z -•1 -4 C--4 f-I -i ►-( T1 H m 0 M Z (1)0 00000 0 0 0 000 0 0 00 0 > Ar r r r rrr r r 1-4/4-4 r C) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 C) A A A AAA A . A A A A A A A A A A 0 0)G) C.)C.)(4 NJ N N N C.) N N N N W UI 1J N.) C rr r.4-rrr r W V r r r C) r ICJ r Z NO 00000 0 N 0 000 N O 4NJ 0 -i I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I 1 1 I I 1 0r C.)C.)C)C.)r m W A 0)A C) 0) r rW A Z 0UI IV rrr V r r N NWN NJ 0) 0)r r 0 0r 1-4 CD r rr r r V Arr CO r r r 1 1 I 1 1 11 I I I 11 I 0r W G)C.)G)r 0) C.) A CO A C.) 0) r rW A 11 0U1 N 1--•1-.14..V r r N NNN NJ 0) 0)r r Z I- r r r N V NJ CO(O 0) W O) V V CJ * 0 Co V Co A CO CO UI 0 U1 V A -0 1 0 CJ (D r 0 f.) CO 3L 0 3 m v V) D * * * X. * * * * * N G) * * * * * * * * * > m * * * * * * * * * C) 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 rn C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) V) N N V) (A N N (A V) NJ * N * NN x NN * N N)N.)N N.))J N.)N x N It N IF NNNN N A N.) o•-- * VI x UI UI x 0 UI * 000000 U7 U7 * VI x (f1 U7 000 1.41 x 0 C) co • * (.)I * U1 UI x N U1 U1 0 U1 vs U1 Uf U7 cm A (A A U7 A U1 U1 Ir UI UI A Vi 2 co * N x NN * NN * NNNNNNNN * I-- * r A I-1-r-I- r * I- m 0 * N A 1-1- * r1- X. 00000000 * 00 IF CO * V V-.4-.4 V * V C) * A or UIVI x I-I-- * AAA)xAAAA x CD IF N) * CO CO CO CD 03 * 0) ?. C) 1--1 Z -i • O -< 0 0 "rI 0 00 00 00000000 0 0 0000 0 0 > CO CD CO (0(0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO(0 (0 CO (0 CO CO(D CD CO 1 V) \ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\ \ \ \\\\ \ \ m 2 I.-- 1--1 1-4/-. 1-4I-i-• -4-F-r r I- I-F-1-41-• I- )-I D N N)N N N) N N N N N N N N N NJ N N N N N N) 7C \ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\ \ \ \\\\ \ \ 0 CO CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO CO CO CO 0 00 00 00000000 0 0 0000 0 0 m m D I- 4- 1 co A A C.)C.) r 1- 0 N N)0 V V 00 C C.)CO CO CD r 0)0) 1-•I-. COOo -( CO CO A CO 0 U)r C.) U1N ON W 0)0) COCO N) 00 U1 UI Ut(n U1 VCo NUI V CO A Oo A r CO U100* UI U1 NN 1-.0000 00 C.)C.) 00 (JO►- 1-01- OC.)VW000)0UI CD 00 00 CO AAAA 00 AA 00 rVA NON coA-0co0coco 4U' 00 V-( 000 0 UI 00 AA A A A * A A * A * I U)CA 22 22222222 C) L) m-i-n-n -n m m m m DDDDDDDD N 3 1--IMNM 1-1 m Z 33 ZZ ,:1XI,:)7:10>3A737) 0 2 XIzPOA >3 N Z ZZ 33333333 C) CACACACA N r m 22 mm 00000000 D -i-i-1-( 1 m < -p mm ZZ ZzzzzzZZ 1-4 N a m 4.4ZZ 00A (A(ANV 0(A )CA(A Z -0 DDDD Z N Z Z 11 C) I <<<< > 0 00 1-41-1 22222222 D mm mm -1 )-1 0 -1 mm C)C) 00000000 r r Z m (AN 00 ££££££££ 1 0000 C) C) O mm m m m m m m r r r r C) 1 I 52.,12* mm mm = m DDDD 1-i C) C) NN ZZZZ 0 X z 00 mmmm > -4 Z XIP3AX) 0 XI 73 NN (A0CI)(A 0 m M IA 1 m 73 C) 0 0 m m CO CO CO V)(A(A CO U) -0 0 CO w w CI) -0 c) '-( O -I-I 00 I-rr-CCCCC XI -( rrrr D D 1 z 22 CC 000-0'v73"0"0 0 2 0000 -< v m TI mm '-IM C)G)0vvvvv -I1 m 00 G)G) '-i 1-1 3 7073 -0-arrrrr XI z 1 Qu 333NMH14.41--1 N XIII G) D 0 1-(1-( 33 DDDmIll mmm m 1--1 DDDD r m (A I I D D P-11-4 M(A N V)(A N vo I 1-11-41-(M D (A O '9y HM ZZZ < -CI ZZZZ G) m C) 2 XIA) Z Z 1-11 A -1-I1-i m 0 71 O 00 1-i 0 Z C 1-r O << < 1 1-4I- - -I N m ►-I m 0 ni Z 0 0)0) 00 00000000 0 0) 0000 U) 0 > I- 0)0) 1 4-- r 0) rrrr 0) r C) I I I I I 11 1 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 t i C) A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 0 CO U1 U1 NN NNNNNNNN W UI NNNN 0) UI C CO 1-I- C.)W C.)C.)C.)1-t-I-t-r r 1- C.)C.)C.)(.) I- I- Z 0 CD(0 NN 00000000 0 CD 0000 N I- 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 t 1 1 I 1 11 1 t 1 1 C..) U1 Ul 0)C.) 0)C.11-•CA(7)A C.)I-. A UI A(.)F-4- 0 C.) x N CO s4 C.)F-- C.)I-0)F-I-CJ N CO N Cr) NI-000 0 UI 0 1-- 0 V 1-4N) 01-N-41-401-I-' r N i-.1-•N I-- 0 o- 1 11 I I I I I I t 1 1 1 I I Illi I 1 W AA 0)CO 0)CJI-0)0)AC.I1- A . 4.CJI-1- 0 C.) 1-' N 1-1-. N.11-- (V I-(701-r N NJ CO N r N)r Co CO 0 r Z N N O CO 3C CO IV -O I N I- 0 NI CO SC 0 3 M v N D * * x * * * * D m 1 i ' ' m 0 0 0 CA N N CA N N N N N * NN T NN s N * NNNNNN t N % N NNNNNN * N r 0000 1C 00 A 141 0 s 0 h 000000 * VI * N 000000 * 0 C) CO 0000 * 00 * 00 s 0 * 000000 x 0 * 0 000000 * 0 2 (0 WWWW * WW * WW s W * NNNNNN * N A N NNNNNN * N m 0 WWW W A WW * WW * 0 f 000000000000 ! V x V) C)O)0)O)0)O) A W C) -.J-4-4,1 A P A A rr A r * 000000000000 A 0 * 0 A AAAA A A O) 7 C) H Z -1 0 < 0 0000 00 00 0 000000 0 0 000000 0 D (0(0(0(0 cow c^c0 (D (0(0(0(0(0(0 (0 (D (0(0(0(0(0(0 CO -1 0 \\\\ \\ \\ \ \\\\\\ \ \ \\\\\\ m = rrrr rr rr r rrrrrr r r rrrrrr r D N N N N NN NN N NNNNNN N N NNNNNN N 7; \\\\ \\ \\ \ \\\\\\ \ \ \\\\\\ \ 0 (0(0(0(0 COW WW CO (0(0(0(0(0(0 (D (0 (0(0(0(0(0(0 (O M 0000 00 00 0 000000 0 0 000000 0 m M D 3 0 C Z AA VV VV r -( rU1 00rV WN VV C)AAANrr C)C) rr O) U1NN A WWW00 000W 0)V(0 AA A0AAW(O CO AA CAC) 0NVW0)G)V WW 0WAo0 0)0C) 000 00 V(OVVootoCD 00 COLD C)CAOVANA 0000 VWr00 00U1 000 00 00AA000) 00 WW ...1r00-%40)0) 00 1 1 A X % A A s h A 3333 33 33 r rrrrrr -1 7: 7:7:7:777: H H►i HH ZZ HH 0 DDDDDD m ZZZZ ZZ C) -4-4-4-(--1-( m D HHHHHH 0 ZZZZ << ZZ D X=2=== m m Z Z Z Z Z Z mm mm DD r MMMM ,m < v 00C)C)C)0 CO < C)G)C)C) rr C)C) 000000 mmmmmm C) m NN(DAN mm 00 z vmmmmv rrrrrr = z C)C)C)C) -<< 33 H mmmmm-u 0 CCCCCC 0 0 0000 0 >>>>>> 3 -1-1-4-i-1--1 r z MM z .4.4.4.4.4.4 H NNNNNN C) mm * -Z(-I-- 1 Zlz- -I-1 C)) 000)0000 P m C)C) W D rrrrrr CO C) N H H H H H H 000000 -1 X 0 ZZZZZZ C)C)C)C)C)C) CC)C)C)C)C) 77 • •- •- •- •- - C)CCCC)C) v m • -I-4-4-1-4-1 N G) 0 m m CaCC CC vv m CQ)C CCO) -0 CO 000000 'V H -+v-1--4 -1-1 MM m rrrCCC m C rrrrrr M --.1 H M M H M N 00 1 0 0 0 v v v 0 m 000000 H m rrrr rr m'11 H C)C)C)vvv 'T1 v C)C)C)C)C)C) z I HHRH HH -1 rrr r -1 m m D D D CO D D DHHRH HH C mmm m DDD Qo m mm mm mm MM Z HHHCO)C A U) )-I PI H1-I HH CO 0000 00 << H ZZZ < ZZZZZZ m 0 0 -1-1-4 -1-I--1-1-1-4 C 7J Z co H v -4 C -i m 1..1 0 Z 0000 0 0 00 0o 000000 0 0 000000 0 D rrrr rr rr r rrrrrr r r 1- 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C) AAAA A P AA P A AAAA A A A A AAAA A A 0 WC.)WW WW WW CD NNNNNN W N NNNNNN W C V SiSV VV rr N WWWrrr r r WWWWWW 0 Z 0000 0 0 00 A 000000 0 0 000000 0 -1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 I O C)W►- AW Wr 0 WWWAAA W W AWrrrr C) Z Nr N Co N0 rN 0 rrrWWW W r Nr00000000 r 0 Nrrr VI-. 1-1- 0 rrr000 r r rrANrr r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C)0)Wr AW Wr 0 WWWAAA W W AWrrrr O) 1-1 NrN00 Nr rN 0 rrrNNN W r Nr00000000 r Z < r V 0o * 0 A (0 r -0 I V • r O N 1 CO It 0 3 m v k * A * * * s N C) A A AA • * A D m A A t * ♦ A A C) 11 m C) C) C) C C) C) C) C/) CO (0 CO 0 (0 0 A /1 g * N * NN x NNNNN * N * N * N * N * NNNNN N * r * VI * 00 * 0VI0 VI * VI * CJI * 0 x CJI * 00000 0 * 0 40 * VI * 00 * 00000 * 0 x VI * 0 * 0 * 00000 0 * 2 W * A * WC.) * W WWW W * W * W * W * W * W WWW W W * m 0 * N * 00 * 00000 * W * V * 0 x A * AAAAA A * 0 H Z -4 O < O O v 0 00 00000 O O O O 00000 O D c0 (0(0 0(0(0(O(0 c0 (0 (0 (0 o c0(0(0(0 c0 1 0 ✓ rr r r r r r D N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M 0 00 00000 (0 0 0 0 040000 C0 M O 00 00000 O O O O 00000 O m M D 3 rr M0) O I-./.... r (PCP 0000 rr rr rr C . . Z VIVI (JINN WNNNWN AA WW NN NN WA r r NN —1 00 r(0r 00)r A0v U'Ui 00 00 uiN Or(n>WA NN 00 00 NWc0 0vr(n0)0 NN 00 00 vv s-W VI A(0(0 AA N 00 4:.4:.0 (Ov(0N00 rr (00 00 NN NNOrAW 00 N 00 (0(00 000000 00 U)V1 00 AA 0)0)0(04.)10) 00 (0 * * * * * * * * * * v ZZ zzzzz z z 3 m 33333 3 D DD 00000 D < 0 00000 m 1 mm <<<<< 1 Z W 11-111 —1 C) DD >>>>> r G) m 00000 m = PKX 7 X D D m mmmmm 0 < I1 X.> N V) 0 --1 m Z CC TI-71-71-71-71 0 m Mmmmm cn Z —4-1 rrrrr 2 = C) 3 >>>>> D 0 Re 00 PPmmfn > 0 C) M>'>'7'a, r 0 00000 W r D 11111 m M > MM 7;7;7;70 7; C 1 r 00000 CO C) N DD (I) r 2 0 MM 1.4 1--1 1-1 m O —1-4 V) Z N Z C) 0 00 m C) 1 C) 7: m m 4-4 < m 7, Z In C) 0 .i . N 1 m m v mu) C)C)C)C)C) C 0 C) v mmm00 m 11 M 0C 1 1 D M 000CC 0 1 O Cu 00000 ►-1 = v 0 CCC--u C fn M 1-4M r m 11 TI M H r v v 1--1 3 Mr- C)C)C)C)C) w a 1 MM—Or-1-- v N m 22222 1 > V) ►-1 I1 0 M 3m 00000 w r r m 3331*Im 3 m m DN m 3 m DDDNU) > N < H mmmmm N v m < M M H M C) z mmmmm m 0 zzz Z z 1 7fl T1 TI'n TI 0 C —4-4-4 1 1-1 CCCCC < I"1 m Z Z Z Z Z v 1 00000 ►+ 0 z 0) 00 0000000000 r 0) 0 0 00000 0 D 0) rr AAAAA A 0) r r r C) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C) A AA N N N N N A A A A A AAAA A 0 W NN (4(4(4(4(4 W N 0 W N N N N N N C ✓ C.)r 00000 V r r r (4(4(4 r r W Z 0 NO NNNNN 0 (0 r 0 NNNO0 N —4 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I I I 1 0 WA 00000 r VI W W AAWAA W Z 00 NA 00000 A V r 0) ANNWN r 0 ✓ rr 00000 N (0 r r r0)rr0) r 1 1 1 11111 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I A WA 00000 r A W W AAWAA W 1-4 F.-. NA 00000 A r r r AIV N NN) r C (0 0000000000 W N 0 AV10)0)0) CO v N 0)00(00)(0 0 V 4* 0 V (4.0.0)W(0 CO W (0 N I N • r O N at 0 X v N D * * * * * * * * * N 0 * * * * * * * * * > P * * It IF * x * N. 0 1 I I I I I I I m C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N A NN A N * N * N * NN N * N A N r 0000 U1UlU1U10 0 * 00 * 0 * 0 A 0 * 00 0 * UI * 0 C) (D 0000 00000 0 A U)U1 * 0 * 0 * 0 * U10 N * Ul * Ui 2 (D • 0000 000 00 U) * OW A A * A * A * AA A * A * A rn 0 0000 00000 O * 00 * CO * a) * a) * 00 N * A * W C) 0000 0000000000 v * rr * (T * (O * r * 00 00 * 0 * 0 X C) r Z -i 0 -< 0 0 T1 0000 00000 0 00 0 O 0 00 0 0 0 A 0000 (0(0(0(0(0 (0 CO(D (D (0 (0 W0 (0 (O (0 --1 N \\\\ \\\\\ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ m 2 rrrr r rr r r r rr r r r A N N N N N N N N N N NN N N N NN N N N T� \\\\ \\\\\ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ 0 0000 00000 (0 00 (O (0 (0 00 (O CO (0 M 0000 00000 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 m M A WW 3 AW 0000 0 r r A(DUt AA C Z A NO rr 000 rr A W AA --( ArAA UIVa)AN0) NN 000 AA UI Ut NA00 0U0 rr WIWW 000WrOr AA a)0)O 00 rr Vv vUIN 00 (0(0 0000 A(DAA 0A(0WA(0 0000 000 00 0)0) AA 0)00) 00 00 00 aO)O) U10ArA0 AA 000 00 00 AA 000 00 (0(0 00 * A * * * * A A * * NNNN NNNNN N 6)U) V) M = MM M - M 2222 00000 2 22 C) 0 rn mm r 0 m AAAA CCCCC A AA 0 0 -< 00 C) N A 7C 7C 7C 7C -1-1-1-1-1 X MX -4 A Z 'l'l 2 r M 0000 22222 0 00 -1 C) 0 rr A 1 N < MM-M £££££ v My >; r mm z r 0 m mmmm mmmflm m P1rn C) 0 rr 0 < Z Z mmmm NNNNN m rnrll -1 m N 00 (Ti 0 -1-1-1-1-1 -< Z 7C Tl 0 0000 1 MM -1 £ MM z r r M mmmm NNNNN r rr m rn rr C 3 0 C) MMMM CCCCC M MX11 M M r MM 1 A M 2 <<<< WOJ30C rn mm m v 0 C)C) N 0 r m rrrr CCCCC 0 M r -4-4 0 m N C) C)C)C)C) MMMMM 9. AM 0 r Z MM Z N 1 M mmmm W003CM mm M N C) rr N NNNN >>>>> A I-1- 0 m 00 r M Z Z Z Z Z C rr m N Z m -4 P1m a C) 0 0 MM r N -4 M M CCCC 0vvvv 1 MM r v (1) MM 0 v 1 1-( 1111 MAMMM 0 rm m M C rr -4 M r -4 rrrr rrrOr C MZ 0 0 '0 00 2 0 N P I-1-1-1- ZZZIZ r MO A -Ti '0 00 m Tt C) 3 rrrr -4-4-10-4 D r r r -1-1-1-1 1 00 N r XX N 0 rrrr 9v9.9*rQo 3 1Z m m m AA r m m mmmm 0 A AN r 71 N rr 1 M N NNNN _-0MZ0 r 1 I r < ZZ 'V < C) CCCNC Z MM r 11 M M CO 0 00 0 1 r Z 0 r AM 0 < v r m 1 0 -11 H M 0 M Z 0000 a)aNrO 0 000 0 0 0 00 N 0 0 A rrrr 0)0)rAr r Nr r r r rr N r r C) lull 1 1 1 1 1 I ) 1 I I I I I I 1 I C) AAAA A AAA A A WA A A A AA A A A 0 (4(46)6) 6)6)6)6)6) N W r W W N NN (n W A C v v v v 000)-0 W NA r r I- WW r r (0 Z 0000 000(00 N ON 0) 0 0 00 CO 0 (0 1 mu 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 Wrrr 00UIrr W OW r r A rr U) W r Z r000000 VVWAW r ON W O A 0000 N r r 0 rANr mAAWr r Or A r r Nr r W r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I I (41-4--r A A A r r W OW r r A rr A W r r x000000 rrrAW r ON W a) A 000) r r r Z 00 0O) Ni- * 0 00 (O 1 r 0 N I 0 = 0 3 M v N A * * * * * * * N 0 * * * * * * * A m * * * * * * * C) 1 1 1 I 1 1 I rn C) C) C) C) C) C) C) X 7Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) N * N * N N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N * N N N N r /1 0 * Ui * 00000 Ul 00 000000000000000000000000 * 0000 C) (0 0 * Ui * 00000 0 00 000000000000000000000000 * 0000 2 (0 Ul * 0 * 00000 0 00 000000000000000000000000 * 001 010 m 0 . N * N * NNNN N r rr .....r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r * 0000 C) A * N * 00000 (0 cow 4-444,/4,1,144 V4V4V,14,1444,144 * (0(0(04 7C C) H 2 -( ' 0 < 0 0 m 0 0 00000 0 00 000000000000000000000000 0000 > (0 (0 (0(0(0(0(0 c0 WW (0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(O(0(0(0(0(0(0(0 (0(0(0(0 -4 (/) \ \ \\\\\ \ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ m = ✓ r r rr rrrr D N N NNNNN N PON NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNN T. \ \ \\\\\ \ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ 0 (0 CO WWWWW (0 WW (0(0(0(0(0(O(0(0(0(0(0 W(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(O(0(0(0 (0(0(0(0 m 0 0 00000 0 00 000000000000000000000000 0000 m Ill D X 4- 0 WA r C • z N rr r 040W C)4VVN r 00A4 rCAIWVN 0) W -1 V NN Orr NW 0000 VMI-- c0000UVV JOVAUN0U1rVVONc00)NO)N UA0AA A 001 0)0000(00107 0000 (0x00 0)OOOWVVV4(00(00)NN(DNOrN0000)A (OWNWW O) 00 00W0N0 VV WWO (000OWOOOr00Vrrnrrn'00WA000NrA WAO)AA 0 00 000000 AA 440 0)000(0000000(04-0Va)W000VA(0W000000 N0)00)0) 1 * * * * * * N N 00000 -1 NN 000000000000000000000)000 0000 -4 2 -4-(-4-1-1 0 -1-1 vmmm-om mmvvvvvvvvvmmMmMm 2222 m > DDDDD X C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C >>>> m x mmmmm mm C)C)C)C)C)C)C)000C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C)0 7�7CT H 0 7CT.7CT.7C U 773,3 0000 < 0 m 00004) -1 31.› m m mm m 2 m m ZZ m m m m z m m C)C)C)C)C) H C)C) mmmm 0 M rrrr r Z 1-41-1 0 N --1 mmmmm H NN U)(AU U) M 0DDDDD z mmmm C) ZZZZZ 0 .. ..A. 2 H ..... m mm «« m Z ZZZZZ A C)C) HHHH C) 0 00000 C)C)C)C) , 33 mmmm mm (1)!100 00 m C) H (A -1 M M CO m WWWWW -+ MO ZZ o0 C)C)C)CCCCCCCCCCCCmm031MW CCCC H C M rrrrr z OC D32.M-1000-+-I-4-4-1-4-1-I-i-i-I-iMmrrC -1-4-Ii -( M 0 00000 > Cm 1-10 2 Z Z Z H H H H H H H H H H H H 0 0 0 0 m r4,-41-41-1 m m m 00000 < Hm mmmm--1-1-I1--rrrrrrrrrrrmm .0G)v rt-rr X r m m r mm m H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H r 4-44-44-44-1 ✓ N 33333 r H N ZZZ-4-4-4-1- 1-i*-1-4-IU N33I-+ -(-1-(-4 0 m m >>>»D 3 m 3 C)m H 0 0 0 H H M H H H H H H H H H m m>>m I-II-it-1,-4 m U A HHHHH !N >0 m0,01mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmi0.'S 0 mmmm N < ZZZZZ H -IZ<1ZZ200000000000U<<ZZ NNNN C) -1-1-1-1-1 N Z mZ MC)C)C) -4-1 m C -1 MM 0-(-<-‹ ►-1 CA NC) < m CO -1 -4 1-1 LA H N 0 --1 Z 0 0 00000 0 00 000040)00000000000000000000 0000 D r r r 1-1•- rrrr C) 1 1 C ( 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 C) A A A AAA A A AA W W A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A AAAA 0 N W NNNNN W NN 0o0WU1(0(0(OWWWWWWWWWWW WWWNNN WWWW C ✓ r WWWWW C.) Wr WWrr(0(O(DV4VV44V VVVV4rrWWr 4444 2 0 0 00000 0 N 0 NJ,-0(0 r r r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 -I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W W 0)W1•-1-.1-r W WW 004U(0rrC0)0)0)CAAWWW1-rAWM1-4W 0)O)AW Z ✓ r WN000000 r rr WO*-4 41--.1-.1-.NN N(VINNU1Nr 0000NWN00r WNNN 0 ✓ r OrANr r rW 00r Vrrr 000)Nrr VrrrrNrrrC)rr Orrr • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 le 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 W W CWrrr W WW 00VAWrr0)0)0)00AAWWWrrAW0)rW 0)0)AW H ✓ r NN000000 r rr 00rrrr r NNNNrNNrNr0000NWN0or NNNN 2 * 0 (0 m 1 • r 0 N 3t 0 2 m m U) > * * * CA 0 * * * > m * * * 0 1 1 1 m C) C) C) U) U) X (A N N V N N N N N N N N N * NN * NN * N * N N N N N N N N N N N N * N N * N r 000000000 * 00 * 00 * 0 * 0 N 000000000 0 * (ft 0 * 0 A (O 000000000 * 00 * Ut UI * 0 * 000000000000 * N 0 * 0 x CO , 0)0)0)0)0)01 0)0)01 * MM * MM * 0 * Ui N 00 00 0000 N Ul * 0 0 * 0 T 0 WWWWWWWWW * WW * 4-r * 00 * 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 * A A * N C) V V....1. V * 00 * OW * 00 * * 0 A * A 7C C) M r z -i 0 < 0 0 -T1 000000000 0 0 00 0 000000000000 0 0 0 D (D(D(D(D(D(D(O(D(D WO OW (0 (0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0 (O (D (O -I U) \\\\\\\\\ \\ \\ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ ,\ m x 4-r 4-r r r r r D N N N N N N N N N NN NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N T. \\\\\\\\\ \\ \\ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ \ 0 (D(O C(O(O C(D(D C WW WW (D (0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0 (D W (D A 000000000 0 0 00 0 000000000000 0 0 0 m T D 3 WW 0 AW r C _ - z NW00 r Wr 4-(T r r N -1 N r 000)W 00(00 0000 V0000A0U1rNrANO)r AA (Or (OUiCorNUiN 000)N W0)0) r►- (OWC)WVrAWA0)00rA 0)0) 0)0) W00 (D VrWCA0001(D 0)0)0 (.)1VV WW (ONUN(DArAN(OArN NN 4-r riff 0)(O(00(000(DA AA0 0000 (0(0 N0A00A00)WU10)rW 4-r 4-r 00 * * * * * * * -««-<- ZZ ££ < CCCCCCCCCCCC (n (n (n >>>>>>>>> DD mm D Z 3 -I AAAMAAAAA U)U) 00 r 000000000000 > m A CCCCCCCCC 11 -I-I I- -v > m 00U)000U)0W mm m ££££££££££££ I I- I-1 < U)00(0U)(0U)00 MM < MMMMMMMMMMmm 0 C) T 000000000 33 CC 000U)00000U)0U) Z 'n X Z 000U)0U)U)0U) >> 0 03 0 -1-(-11-i-4-1-1-i-1-1-1 M In 0 ZZ 4-r r -i A A 0 xxxxxxxxx DD MM > 0C)C)00000000C) 0 m U) A 000000000 00 00 N 000000000000 0 C) ££Z££ £££ mm XX N 333333333333 r m X 33 F-(1-( 333333333333 0 0 m C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C)C) mm ZZ M C) 000000000 -4-4 00 Z O O X A A M m 0 8 M N 1 m A m00000000 CC mm W -I-1-41-4-4-1-1-41-(-1 U) U) m M ICCCCCCCC -1--1 AA r mmmmmmmmmmm(n C C 0 -I ommm 9'17mm'0 MM MM 0 rrrrrrrr rrrr -0 m Crn 0-vvvv-ovv-o 4-r zz 0 mmmmmmmmmmmm -0 v M 3 rrrrrrrr MM -i-( mmv-0mmmmmmmm r r m 3 M M M M M M M M --11 I x x x x m m x x x x x x M M 0 DMMMMMmmm MM 9.k. > 000000000000 T m 3 T M(AU)U)U)(n(nU)U) mm M ZZZZZZZZZZZZ N U) > U) Z 00 MA z mmmmmmmmmmmm M C) 1 CC -4 Z A 00(A 1 M 1 M 0 Z 000000000 00 00 0 000000000000 0 0 0 > 4-r 4-r r I- r r C) I ( 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 C) A A A A A A A A A AA AA A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 0 N N N N N N N N N WW WW N (4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4 N N N C VV 00 W NNNNNNNNNNNN r r W Z 000000000 0 0 00 0 0 0 N 1 111111111 I I I I 1 ( 111 ( 111111 I I I I 0)0)A A W W r r r -4V W r W A A W W W r r A W W Z WNANrr000oV NN 4-r r NrWN4-00V0)U'WNr A N 4- 0 ONr4-00rN4-1 4-r 4-r r 4-4-4-4-4-Nrrrrrr r r r - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II el 1 1 1 I I i 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I i I 0)0)A A W W r 4-r -.4,1 W r W A A W W W A W W M NNANrr0)0oV NN 4-r r NrWNr00V0)'WN4- A N r Z W M N 4- 4- N 4* 0 (D A (D r M I r 0 N W 1* 0 m -0 N D * * * * * * N 0 * * * * * > In * * * * * * 0 1 I I 1 1 1 m C) C) C) C) C) C) x N V) (i) 0 0 0 co N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N N N N N * N r // 'Cr=. 0 V1 VI N VI 0 VI VI 0 0 VI VI VI VI 0 VI 0 0 0 * 0 2 CO 00 0o CO 0o 0o Co 0o 0o W co W W 00 0o 0o 0o co co 0o * rn m 0 r r r r r r r O O O 000 O O O O O O * W 0 O) 0 A W N r 0 CO Co V WWW 0 A W N r O * V X 0 m Z -I O -< O O O 0 0 O O O O O O 000 O O O O O O O D CO W W 00 W CO W (D CO (O f0(O(0 (O CO (O (.O CO W CO ---1 (/) r r r r r r r r r r rrr r r r r r r r D N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N N N N N N X CO CO CO CO (O CO W W CO CO W W W W CO W CO W CO CO 17 O O O O O O O O O O 000 O O O O O O O m m D 3 WW O CO CO WW C N WW rr rr rr rr UINrr (OW rr WW rr WW 00 -I W rr WW NN (0(0 rr 0)0) VV (0(D 0)0) AN(0N AA 00 (0(0 NN VV WW Wr CO NN WW AA NN NN VIVI AA VIVI WW 0)0000) 00 VIVI 0)0) WW 00 VI VI 0)00 (0 (0(0 rr WW VIVI v-1 00 00 00 00 N0)0)(O 00 rr 00 WW 00 00 VVI 0) rr WW 00 00 (0(O 00 00 00 00 Vr(0-J 00 00 00 WW 00 0)0) rV * • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * r --I 7 z . . v 0 0 C) C) C) C>0 C) co co > > > > -< 0 > C 000 D r-1 COD 0 N 7r 0 r —4 a -~•I 9* r 73 -I 3 3 3 rift < a D -I ao m ►+ r D co C) m mi 0 -< —I m x co m 3 3 3 -n 00 m v In•1 Cm) Cl)C < r I I- 70 73 M m C) Cl) E CO C -I 000 0 v C) 2 .-( x 0 m 0 z 0 a D 0 w C 0, -I m w m -< m Z C) 0 00 --I Z m N 0 -I N r A a z 73 0 r D E z 2 m f) > Z mmm -4 0 U XI C) 0 x z I-( z m0 0 > X 0 <<< 1-1 N m 0 E x 0 0 r X z N —4 0 zzZ co c) < m 0 r( 01 a m RIrIl r 0 m 0 0 A N -o m 0 Z Z0 0 Z o-r-1 Z < N 00 C) C) xi m C) Cl) O m H N m z CO a m v (n 'Ti C) 0 C) Cl) D Z C) 3 (n CO m v N m I-4 r m 0 m C 0 0 C 0 C 0>0 0 C r 0 v m 0 —4 0 m C I-( 23 C z m z v 3--I z —4 v 0 C 0 > C m G) C '-4 z n H m N m v I m C) 0 m 0 m II r I•-1 3 (n v -I > v I- v XII z r v -0 D m 3 f2* m ft* 2.. k.• r0 v m 3 m 0(A0 m rn D N 3 rn 0 0 3 rn I1 0 > > N (n 0 4) 4-r0 C u) 1-1 > v > > N Z I-1 1-4 v 1 M C) C A M r m z M < —1 H C) -4 Cl) Z C > Z X 03 x 0 r -I Z I-( Z z M —I co -( —I 0 N 0 m -I Z --I a-I 0 C) 0 0) v r P3 r -1 (n N (/) 1-1 M 0 -I Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D r r r r r r r r r r rrr r r r r r r r 0 I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I C) A W A A A A A A A A WWW A A A A A A A 0 N 0) N W N N W W C,) N VI VI VI N N N N CO N N C W VI W VI r W CO CO (0 r AWN N r W W r A CO Z 0 0 N 0 0 N 0 r 0 0 r(O V N 0 0 N 0 N NJ -I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I r 0 A W 0) A W W W A 000 A G) r A r A W Z co O N r N N r r r r 000 A I- CO A W N W 0 r 0 0) r N 0) r r r r 000 r r N r A co r I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I— O A G) 0) A W W W A 000 A G) r A r A 0) M Co 0 N r N N r r r r 000 A r co A W N N Z CO r N I••' W N W A A NJ N 0) 00 r co CO 0 0 (n r 0 V VI 0) N r r N A V 3C O 0) A UI V A r A co N CO CO CO V 0 W co co A v 1 • r 0 N CO 3t 0 X v N D * N G) * D m * 0) 1 'Ti C) M 0 (0 * N N NN NN N N N N r It U1 N V1 UI UI 0 UI UI UI UI C) CO ' s 0 U1 0W 0V1 UI UI Ut UI 2 (0 * 00 00 00 Co 0000 00 00 00 00 m O * N N NN NN N r r r C) * A W NN rr 0 (D 00 V 7 C) H Z .--10 < 0 0 '1 • O O 00 00 O O O O > (0 (O (D(O (D(O (0 (0 (0 (O -1 N \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \t m 2 r r rr rr r r r r D N N NN NN N N N N T. \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ 0 (O (O (0(0 (O(D (O (D (D (D o O o0 00 O o o O m m D (0 N A r 3 N W (0 r r A r r O 0 I- (0 N A CO 0 r NN C • z A (4-40-4w8\1 IFVO 0V(0 AA r VV VILA N 1 O O O N VO)NO UI 000.0)A VNA VV 00 -4N4.$1 WOO 00 NN 00 NN W W 000AOUI-100r'IrNO(O NN 00 WOW OWU) 00 00 00 00 CO CO (O00O0000VAVWUIOW 00 00 000 000 00 00 00 rr (O UI W 0000000(100rAO O 00 00 000 000 00 00 00 OW 0 >t * * >t * * * * * 3 < mm ZZ 00 Z 0 X D 0 -1IM-vIm-Ti•'nTt-l-*ITt-ImTt-tTt 1•+ r X70 mm 1 co --i --I CCCCCCCCCCCCCCC mm —1-4 r < D z z z z z z z z z Z z z z z z U) U -<-,C 22 Z D X < r 000000000000000 m D 00 '1 0 r 0 m M A MM -I-4 m < 2 Z 00000000) 0)00+WNNNrr0 < 00 DD 0 0 A M 0 0.C.)Nrr 0A0 U1WWrA(Jr 00 AM \ -1 m W 0 0 rr r Z N > m --1-1-1-1--1-1-1--1-1-4-1-4-1-1-1 m mm DD -< -I 2 2 000000000000000 CC D m m 1 1-1 11.--1-4 1 X 11-1 X >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Z 00 00 v z C) rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr r 3 >3> 0 CC - 30 00 30 4-I m -I-I 0 Z C) O C) N N -I m M PC'1'UNrr000000C)1'U0 •v v 0-4 mm 0 0 3 -I *- 01f-I3>m(0(00")30>33.(() 30 30 CM 0.0 C -4 rr 30 1 Or30<Z0000 I CDCVDVZ 0 0 MD CC m 2 N D m zrrnvm(00)> t-(1.•(Z�m -n 3 (O< MN (/) m C) < X 0I-4 OM D 12210 30 0 m vv M m E 10 r I-+ I I-F M D P D 1-•(30 D (n -4 9m r 0, r 0 <mr'*13003T0vr1(*tr m I-+ 33 M v Cvry I mr U) v O (l2. >I. N X Q° (/) 11--IZ I m0 <I-I mm < Z C I-+►•I C •v 0 30. 30CC)30000 X MC N WN ZZ W m U) m C3C -m< Daum <Z U)C 1-4 U) O C F-( (/ mN '1m v<M m0 OW 0 < CO v 1r1 CX I-1 10 30(/) A N 1 ►•1 Z m -4M< m I-41-1 I-I I-( I-I M OZ D D rn C mo v U) 0 '1 \1 rV)3 Z -11 "I -I Z coo (nrn v 1 01 v z v Z0 v 1 c v(n O N I c. m 1 0 m 0 U) A 1 O r 00 00 O r O O > ✓ A rr rr r W r r C) I 1 I 1 I I 1 1I I (1 A A AA AA A A A A 0 W W W W NN W W A W C ✓ r (O W WW (0 r CO W Z 0 (O r0 N N r (D CO 0 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I W r WW Ar r 0 r W Z ✓ A rr NV N 0 r r 0 ✓ W rr rr UI O r r 1 I 1 I I I 1 1I 1 W r WW Ar r 0 r W 1--1 ✓ A rr N V N O r r C W N W if 0 (O (D -0 1 p N W # O 3 M v 0 D * N 0 x D m s G) 1 m 0 0 /t6- 0\w 0 0 w 0 0 0:) CO CO CSO CONCO CO COFCO 10 0 -1 0 0 0 SD 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- . 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- w -- 4-- 4• 4- w g W W W W vt W w '.D \D \D \O \O \O \O\O \O W N) \J1 CO 4- W W w c* H F✓ H N N \O \O N N N co N co N 11) N \O H I-' Ca 1-' \O \O W 0 0 0 0 \D O 0 W 1 w N H CO N O O V1 \O W H F-' O 0 a v1\fl N F•-' 0 W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 4' \11 O-1 N W W A Cl) 0\-4 0\O\ 0 W F-' 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 N N v1 O H O\ N N) c+ (D CO O W N 0 H I-+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 N OD N O N H 1-, H b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c+ 4'4'H N 0 W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 4" 4' 0 -4 H LA) w CD F-' h-' O\ON 0 W N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N H O N 0\ N N 3 cr (D 'S O\N 0 0 H 0 0 OD OD OD CO OD OD CO CO Co 0 0 N -4-4 0 0 0 ('1 v1 W I-. I-, co F-. H H F-' H H H H F✓ F' F-H F✓ I-, \O H I-� H f-• I-. i I-. I� I•. Fr H F' N H I-' H H F-' F' H F� H N F' H F-' N F-' F-' I--. 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 a N H N H H H H H H H I-H F✓ H I-H F✓ H H I-' H H H H H r 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 c+ MI a C) M H 4- F-' CO N CO r n W\O \ 1-1 \ \n-4 CO OCo a 0 \O c a v1 c.,..) I ' F' N \O H .I 4 CW H W CD H \O CO N F-' 0 N --1 7\O 4-" \O N 0 C\ 0 v1 \O N v1 0 WF--. H CO 4-W N F-' N C \O \O v10 0 CO N 0 -4 v10 v1 N) N N N 0 0 W \n O 4• = -1 W 0 CO O O O O \O N O O VI O \O ON ON O O v1 O CO O O O O \n 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co • 0 0 4- 0 CO OD CO 0 OD 0 0 -4 0 0 0 �p Al fi C) a ? 0 oO • No O C] C] D;1 ,U 7:1 DD DO DD 0 Cl) 0 CA 0 C7 C) H atC "i ' c+ 0 0 (D (D (D (D (D CD (D 0 0 0 c+ a 0 0 O K O 0• 0 z 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 't 0• 0 's at 0 9)(n ' a 1-3 'h (D 1-4) M H w r• r• r• r• r• r• M '+) (D 'i1-1) < CD Cl) R' Re R° 9) 0' 0 R3 R° H' . a (D H b d Cl) Cl) b 3 '_) 'ml (D H 04 c+ m D.0 'S 3 Cr) Cn t'i (D b ra 9) (D -4 H -Di, 3 • Cl) Cl) R° a < ' co C) DD '' 0 H << Q. C] H () 3 MI C 0 () K r )1 0' a (D 0 • > 0" 9) 'i Cl) a' Cl) C., O 0 0 's m0 () 0 c+ 0 (D (n 0 0 to < o o 9) N 9) 0 < 0 0 Cr 00) (~n C) FJ H CD H C) i H r. r '03 0 9) Cf) as 'etc+ C) C) Fe mt W W W W W W LA/ W LA) LA) W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 0 N NNN N N N N N N N) N) N N N N N N N N N N N N x• \O \O\O\O \O \D \O \O \O \O \O \O \O \O \C)\O \O \O \O \O \O \O \O \0 \O O N NNN N N N N N N N H FJ N N 1--, N H I-' N I-' F-' N H -J l -4 l 0\ vi 4- W N H 0 \D CO 1 1 -4 O\ vi -I W W N H 0 Q • H x C] - = ' 9j r• O O (D Iv c+ O lD • = 9, 0 < H = C Cl)Cz 3 'i c+ 3 3 c+ c+ Sv H ¢, m 0 • N a Cr) 0 a .0 << 3 3 's H c+ r• 0 ' 1-3 3 0 0 0 al Cl) '1 0 o C7 9 R° Cu9) Q. e< 14) co •+ r• W Cl) 4 `G x E r• D1 T.' 9) H m c+ '-1 1-4 O 9) Z DJ Cl) (D b H 'K c+ CD 0 O 0 r• (D 0 C C) (D Sv (D a 0 'i 04 0 N b (D 0• c)- > 0 c+ C) O (D O '0 O 9) (D m Co cf (D '•S '_I 0 C X' 'S "0 0 r• O (CD 0 CK+ 0) '0 0) 0 M <'1 (oD cc++ c< N C F N > C) 4- (n x N 0 4' \O v1 W H \~ O\ 4- . \O W F- F' N \O f✓ F' 1 CO f✓ -1 N F-' 3 N \O \0 N 0 O\ 0 \n \O N) \.T1 vl F-' CO -4 N) H N c3i• CO \l1 0 0 CO N) 0 -4 v1 0 0 N N) 0 W vt O -" -�1 H O O O \O N O O v1 O W O O \11 OD O O O O v1 0 0 0 CO 0 0 - - 0 0 CO 0 l 0 0 0 Cr r- H c+ Cf) (D c+ lD 3 cr (D CO-JCNNN1--' O '=J n N N vi z • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 tZ rotnNNmro0H P) CD NO ON 0 ) cD 0 ce E CO NO 1-3 m CO c+ x (Da I-s to Z" 1-1 zJ a w N tr d ¢. N cn yi O N 11 cam+ 3 c C< (CD Q. N 3 0 W sr c+ c+ tn z to r cn p. 0 `* 1 � ro A q m 31-1 C/) m RI ' ON a N 4-4wJ l � � trt7 w NO O V1 V'1 ON r 00 -4 n000C n tli n x `O • z 0 lD 0 n x 3 C,. CONSENT ► i MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: John DeLacey, Engineering Tech. III , l SUBJECT: 3rd Avenue Reconstruction, Project No. 1989-5 DATE: September 14 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: Council approval is being requested for the Semi-Final Pay Estimate on the above referenced project. BACKGROUND: The 3rd Avenue Reconstruction Project is now complete except for a few punch list items. Attached is the Semi-Final Pay Estimate for Council approval . Staff is recommending reducing the retainage to $10, 000. 00 on this project until the punch list items are complete at which time the contract will be finaled out. REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of Semi-Final Pay Estimate for the 3rd Avenue Reconstruction Project in the amount of $41, 499 . 63 to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , 11000 93rd Avenue N. , Osseo, MN 55369 . DH/pmp EST9 P t) SEMI -FINAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER Contract No. 1989-5 Partial Estimate Voucher No. 9 Period Ending: August 31, 1990 To: Contractor Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. Address 11000 93rd Ave. N. Osseo, MN 55369 Project Description Third Avenue Reconstruction 1. Original Contract Amount $ 777,425. 00 2 . Change Order No. 1 Thru No. 3 $ 23,530 .82 3. Total Funds Encumbered $ 800,955.82 4. Value of Work Completed $ 844,998. 60 Value of Work Remaining 5. Percent Retainage $ 10 ,000.00 $ -0- 6. Previous Payments $ 793,398.97 Percent Complete 7 . Deductions or Charges $ 100.00 100% 8. Total $ 803,498.97 Payment Due (Line 4-8) $ 41,499 . 63 CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT (I, We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work shown herein is a fair estimate of the work completed to date. CONTRACTOR ��-1 I4 ,,Y C; (-(� BY -1----7- ( , //- --- • < • TITLE i itl---; __--- t , i� APPROVED - CI 41F " • R•PEE 1 4111, ' / 1 /46' Project Engi -r Date At,143 /---- / /1 171-- 9 Pi City Administrat r D t 73 A A v () A f/ /1 > cm') O z �� 11 v o c) cn 70 < > -I 0 m 70 < m V) c —% ...4 ...A ...Pr .....h _ —1. _ —. 3 V) C7 •O CO V P (A r W N -. O •O CO V P VI r W N -. * 3k v 03 v P r O C) m N '. N N r-• > V) C) 3 A A A A A A A Cl C) CO Z C) = C) _ = CD 0 O W 3 W W -. (0 C O CJ CD (D CD CD 0 CD CD -1 -i •--• < < CO 3 "I r Op r W 0 (0 71 3 3 C CD m O CD C) (D C) C) C) -, a — O 7 (0 S 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 U C) 3 9 0 3 0 O (0 -) v oo\° CD r 0 < < < < < < < 0' ") •-• CD 3 CD 3 3 3 CD d CO -1. £ CO CO Cu 3 � (D CD CD CD (D (D CD -• 0 < 30300 n n . (D Cu C) C1 a (D 3 3 m m rt -1 rt 'I -, 03 CD C) $ CD C) (C) -3 rt (D m V) C) C) v N C) v (0 (0 (n X CD (D (D • 3 • a ") CD C co X rt co O co C C) P C) —• — ( m C) O N 3 < a -, 10 A C- (D CD CD C 3 3 3 C) D- Co X CD -I C) t) 0 (D Cr (D ^• ^• 03 , CO CO 0 CD Cu n < 3 3 z v V) v v v 0 0 C 0- X C (1. m G) C) (D D) Ro C) -4 < m A A -) d rt C) 4 v (D < rt N CP 0 7 C v 0 0 Ro C 0 (A C) CD C) -) rt 7r 4- 4- C) r- O Z 0 < < 7C )• C CD C) rt 0 L N C < Z C) .Z) m (D CD Cr (D -) • 3 CD • < rt CD -4 C) Z i C N CO 0 ') 3 (D rt 4 z < C) CD rt (D N 7 v i CD rt Z 0 •< K rt m C) r 0 • CD K * * * VI * •O W 0 C) .0 C 0 co a > z .o Z -i • ➢ VI -• _ NJ NJ -♦ A v1 < V r 0 O W W •O W NJ P O P — — ➢ 0 P O O r W C) (0 V VI W NJ O NJ r NJ --I C) • VI O O 11 O r r VI O O NJ O O •0 VI W W W -< < O O O VI O Vi VI O O O W 0 O O VI CO C) O O * A CD N N V) r -1 < -4 -4 C) C) m m N N N m r m m C f) 0 0 0 O ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ z 0 T T m T Z Z Z Z -< -< . • m -< T m m 3 • < N V) rt * * -I C n rt 0 C 3 Z •-• C) _ < O _ .-A NJ NJ Z W to O W VI v -1 NJ W P V . N W NJ O 0 O 0 0 VI VI O A A P b W •O 0 •O VI co •O •O O O V r W O O O O (-) C) o VI o vi co 0 0 O O C) O O P •O W In 0 0 0 m -I * P r v1 r VI IN m !A C) •0 V vi C) r VP — 03 r — NJ •O P P — to X > 0 03 CO O W O VI -+ VI •O to V O P V W V — W V -4 --4 X Z •O C3 O V o o •0 to to -J Vt O V r W co VI W C> 0 m O -4 C) C) O P O VI V O O O O O NJ C) V O O C) C) -1 Z C .v . . . . . . . • • . • . . . • • . . . ➢ 0 Z ➢ o O O NJ o to vi 0 0 0 O o 0 O W •O 0 0 0 r m -1 C) C) C) O VI O O O O O O O O O O v1 O O O C) V) 0 N < I I V V A A -4 m CO 0 -0 03 V P VI r W N -• O •O CO V P VI r W NJ * * r N N 0 VI •O O W W ••QQ W VI VI Q. v1 -• C -4 O W NJ W — W •O W VI r P •O O > •O •O NJ O r — P O NJ W NJ --• -4 P r r Z •O W -4 O r 03 O CO O O W O CO W •O W NJ NJ -4 NJ —' O C) r O) —' N O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 -4 VI W —4 C) O VI P W O O O O O O O O C) O O -< * v C) 70 m - •O r CO O P -.. V O r r N co P •O — P X m •0 •0 -. P W W W Co N V O NJ r V NJ W r W M -4 v < -4 WN O --s P O -• V VI O C) VI CO P r V C) C) m r C) O -+ vt P co r V vi o C3 C7 0 0 V r •O O o o O z m C v VI 0 < V) VI O -. O O NJ CO W O O O O CO NJ NJ VI O O O < m m r O O O O CO V V VI O O O (/) 0 0 -< II 0 VV C NJ •O O W OV -N+ Z O VI O CO V _ NJ O O C) C) O O C) O -1 vi O O O O O O C) C) < * < S C) IT •-• 0 X U) 3 NJ P O W NJ ♦A < 7) VI CO P .O VI W VI n m v r- 0 O O P O O O O O O C) C) o W N C) VI O O Z m m . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . V) 0 A -I O C) (,d O o 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 C) —8 r VI o 0 C) -I mm O O W C) O O 0 O O OW W VO O O 03 I O O V) 0 O II 8 r — N N 0 In •0 O � W •O W O. V P —' C •O •O r 00 r j •OP •O NJ Ar P •O co P r r Z •O W V O •O O 0 CO O 0 W O P O O NJ CO W W -1 N —' N O r Co N O O O O O O O O 0 O O < VI W P O O VI P W O O C O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 < II co 0 v C) -_ ➢ ➢ po P -. V03 x -. mmO- •0 r r (N •0 P •O4' < 3 •0 NO NJ P r W W O CO V O O W --• r W VI to < 0 v V co W co P 4 P o- + W to O •O o W •O r o Ln r) m r •O * t� to o O O COCO v o to 0 O Zv ➢v � O •• tC. O A O O N -4 0 0 O O •O r V -' 0 0 0 < m -1 m O O 0 0 P C) O O O O O N 0 m 0 II V V D A A 70 n A 1( h II 0 o = II - _ II O V) II D i II 0 ."I X/ II -a II 0 m a II 70 . 2 II N C) II N) N) N N N N) N) N) N II -I H N m CO V O' VI r W N O * * D O II = o' S ' C Co D C) C 7o TC C) < T Vl 13 1 -n 3 70 N W II C H m _ m m O. O 0) (D 0 D -7 C /D (D -1 C m ID -4 11 II a • 7 .< 3 C) fD •I 0 3 fD -1 X m 0 II I1 T. T. Co O cn n A N 7 a_ 7 ID 3 • O 3 II 11 `G n C ) < .1 • In N DI C1 H II 'p m rf fD qo CD N fD `G In Co 0 -4 II II n n (p V1 et 3 70 fn N S (/1 • S P .* m m II H p) co .1. T ID 0 C7 (D (D 0) C V C) - fD VI 3 II H NV) N N -. 7 -. rt C) CO Ro "7 R° v n II II .4 mrf 1D 3 O) N V § A Co () Co N 3 (I) m p r II II D E L CO 3 r. N fD - S ') •V - CO (I) V >1 - - Ii •-• ID •• fD In• CD • rt 7 -) 3 17 VI I1 A 17 •C II -) -I -4 -0 T Co v 3 Ib O Cl) O) 0) -1 < 11 m 70 77 II 0 . 0 . 70 Cl) C 70 -• 7 O) 3 _• () > 3 .4 - H 7/ O O II 3 3 • 3 A 3 CO N) -0 .* 0 S 0 rt • 0 3 II 0 L C.. II m m 7 C) .4 = 0) S Z C) II A • m II X X CO ID Co C C ID CH VI < II •I n IIrt. J .y r • 07 a) a = . _ Co-n -) II Z 3 II 3 < II Cl) II a)) - m a). -) a m II • 0 • II 7 fD a) ID II * * * 11 CO xII * II 'O• � W II D 3 II •OO II CL Z -I H • a II -4 X) II V1 < I1 pppp W W N O < - IN V1 -. a 11 CD II COO O 0 -4m II • II N 00 4 II I1 o 0 CO o -. 0 0 0 o r o * II IAD H IIII r- r m (/) r V) VI m m m CO C II C) II D • • • • D D D D -n -n • T CO T T • -< •• II 3 II -4 H Cl) 11 N H ri I1 * * H .7 HIII I 11 II 11 K 11_ 11 D II 0 II II C II 3 H -y 0 II II VI N) N N) C II II VI O N) VI VI VI 7) 1 II II CO V O O O O O O O o 7J 73 11 II II OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'O n n II II o 0 o 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 * m < II II D II r H II V p N NJ O' 0) X D O II II VI 0 0 0 vl v� o vl -1 1 3 Z II II VI 0 0 CO 0 0 0 O -r 11 11 O O O O O O O O O a O C C M II D a 0 C a II II 0 o VI 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 r m -/ n II II O O O O O O a O O O a O V) 0 CO -4 II II II V A A II II II H II II .r II II -4 II 11 In i ; CO D II 11 II N N N N N N N NJ N • 0 11 II N) -. CO V o' VI r VI N O * it II II 11 II C II II COIA IA is• j. 4.. r 1.4 W 3 II 0 ) II— a o N r V IIii 0 O O A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -+ II II 0 0 0 o' 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 * < 11 II C) a II II r r VI -• rIN) V01 CO) 0O w 1 3 < IHI 11 H CO N) o CO COo VI 0 0 V n m r g n Ii N o r o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o -mi le II IH I O• 0 O• 0 0 a 0 a 0 VI •I m m r II II O O O' a O O a O O O O OII N O 0 < II II II II II C a II II II r N) II II 1N C II 11 'O 'O VI • .r II 11 Nd 0 0 p 0 < II II * II II < D II 5 n H II M 11 II r a U) 17 II u • -. P a VN)I VI n m M r II II 0 0 Ca O o r a 0 0 a 0 0 oD 0 = m m II II 0 0 N) 0C)o O o O a 0 0 -4V) -44 m 7o T II 1 O O CO 0 0 O O O O O O O 11 VI 0 0 0 IIH 11 II H C II II 1,4II 0'' III O' V' p N r r IN NQ` z II II CO0 r - - VI N N) r w II II O O O 'OO O o o O O O O 11 -< II It r n II II II CO 0 a II •o W IV m 0 H � -I C) II r Iris N IA O— VI tVlI VI toil r N -I o 77 II m m II CO O O 0 O r II 'O •* 11 O N VI O oD O O 0 p O O n0 z 0 m 11 0 •' N II 0 O W O 'o O O O a O O N --I m -4 m 11 II 0 0 CO 0 0 a a 0 0 0 0 OII V) 0 m 0 II V V) A 70 V C) A 1/17 0 z 73 n o 0 c) cn 3 •-. 73 70 --I I 0 m 70 V) m N C T 3 V) C) .( VI r W N - m N m O .O CO V P VI r W * it ^ 700 M m n n n P a C) £ V) n _ _ co co co - _coco 2 CO W W N = rD O T O O O _ _ _ (D 7 7 7 < m C) = C) = CO = C) = U 7 r. C) 7 = _ 7 N N CO T a CA Vi Co co m rt CO S 7C V) V •O 'V < rt rt rt 3 V) 73 CO 70 CO 70 N A 2 S rt 0 n -9 - -- -p C) C) C) Cl •C) C) C) C) • C) U - D D r •- e- m - • < • < • - D ➢ N CD 3 co co cn 3 .- a rt C) co co N 7 C) P r C) v .. -o V 3 Q co D V) (/) CD CD CD fD 0 C _ 73 r C) rM 7 rt = (D rD £ £ £ •-. 7 •7- lg -2 -2 7 7 (0 C) 0 E ) rD rD CD r 7 0 0 0 U) 70 "0 •0 CD 0• .- to 7 .- CD CD -) -3 It • C C < < m 70 70 O • d �D . O O ✓ (o o co 0 rt - •- 0 2 0 D CD (D CD (1) -1 -. CO O C 0 D D Z c) CO • m £ £ £ £ a03 o n t -4 n (D CD O CD - OP r ) m z Z 0I .) O _N O v x. `< `< O • N co CD (D * * * rt * •O _ W 0 n •O C O co Q ➢ z •O z ➢ -/ CO VI < N > (D P P _ N -. Co P -, -4 C) P P V P - O W V VI O V) r < < ✓ N V) a a vi -. O co 0 a VI co V * N ✓ r r r- r r m r- r r r r m m m C C) > • ➢ ➢ ➢ z 0 -n T T -n -n T • T T -n -n ,I 7 • . • -I co N rt * * -) C C) rt O C 7 z -- n _ _ -i O •O 2 N N N N N V O W W W W W N 0 V VI W m O O to O r W N m O a O N O 70 COA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 n n 0 0 o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T < * N N m III n N r CO U) W N - r X Z W V .0 r N P QPVO - a V O "I -4 3 V) N P a a 4- a a Vt W CO O VI O O 0 m O --I O P V) O O •0 N O O r N m O O O O ➢ O z ➢ 0 0 O O 0 V) V) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O r m < n O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cil O N < I V V A A m CO 3 v to r W N - N m O •O CO V P to r tN * it 0 C W N CO V NI -. ➢ NI O N P `O -+ -+ tn VI W N 2 - O r O to - N N P V O W VI O < O O O O O VI O O O O O O O O 0 -f 0 o O o 0 P O o 0 0 o O O o O < * 0 C-1 CO y m 0 m O V W V PWO X < O P N CO P CO Nm VW to -i 0 N O O O 0 N m 0 0 to r CO VI V 0 0 T I- O VI o r o o W V O CO CO r O OO 0 0 . T C • N 0 -i co 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -4 m m r O O o O 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn 0 a < II 0 C •O z P < O -I O * -< --4 2 Cl m m 0 -.• X V) 3 •O N n T O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 2 70 m V) 0o O O o 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 < m m m O o 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 (n 0 0 0 II 0 0 C W N CO V m NJ -' ➢ N 3 O N P •O m m VI In W N z O r O m - NINJOIN O W VI O O O O O O VI O O O O 0 0 0 0 O -C O O O O O P O O O O O O O O O < CO 0 0 n - ➢ ➢ v_ m pp w < 0 O P W j O V j U) W N r N X < 3 m m CO 4-- N N CO P CO N V W P tN 0 fA -4 0 -0 \ N O O O N N O O V1 r 03 Vt V O n T r •O * to O r o 0 W V O CO CO r m O 0 vt 0 0 2 0 I o •' 0 O 0 0 0 O o 0 0 o o 0 0• 0 0• 0 -I m -4 m CO 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co a m a I V n A m 30 0 'I fl -I n o z mo 0 cn A - A A -i 3 -4 o m A > m N C _. _. -. 3 V) n Z --1 W N -. O 0 CO V P VI r W N -. Co V P * # CO P n co P W W N CO W A T x x D E n E ch Z 0) = _ = " m ❑ m ". •< •< -3 a 0 - 3 -I W- cn r r -) -7 r O. a `� m - t• rt rr; m m o O O rt C) C) C) n C < n < 7 -1 c O e C S n S 77 3 C C C) 0) C 0 0d N < CD m3- 0 - () 0 - rt .* - n -, n n -0 n• n 3 3 fD rt n n 0 -( rt rt 'I CD CD O" C 'p 0 cD -0 (D 0 rt rt Ro d CO 0) 113 m m O -3 0 -) CD "O R. n N co ( CD CO 3 3 < < CO D• 'v -) -0 -O > > A 0 r N r n (D- O 0) N r0 CI) 0 - • J• CD (n (n V) rt V) A r T O V) rt -, 'Q -c 0 N 0) D [) 3 3 3 •-1, •-• - < < 'O rt N fD (D CD (0 3 (O CO a A (n A A A rt CD (D 0 0 rt < (n (/ • -1 -( m A A O- 0 rt Ro -0 3 -• 8- 8- m n co - - 0 o 0 3 3 DO DO 0 to 0) N 3 0 z 0 '- ,- 3 co Q. V) 3 •< • CD (n N D) z C) A • m 73 (0 CO 0) 0 0 0 3 -4 n p- 'p co O 0 X W N (n • 3 S z -4 -2 (D X X 0 (0 0 0 • • (n (D * * * * _ •0 W D n •O C o w a > z •O z 30 D -I A VI < W (N - D CD •O -' W P P -I - lilO r r 0 O W < -( o O W 0 0 -+ O VI O VI O 0 00 CO r N •O * A 0 m m m m m m m m m r m m m m m CO C 0 CO D D D D D D • D D D D D z 0 -n T . • • • • • • T T . • • . • 3 -I N V) .t * * C rt 0 C 3 Z - n -( O VI r N -.1.VIV N Z O 0 V V N N O O VI lilO 30 < W P O O VI O VI 0 P P O O O C)O O A A D O O C) O 0 O C) O 0 VI O O O C) O C) n n 0 0 0 C) 0 o 0 0 0 O o O O o 0 o m < * V V N m VI n W P W -' -. O W •O r r V X D 0 W- V W VI r O 0 o W r P P O •O P O N -4 -4 3 Z Ui P 0000 vI O C o 0 o O r O o O O m O -I 0 O O 0 0 0 O O O 0 O O 0 O O C) -4 z C A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D 0 z D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 o m m < n O O O C) O C) O O O O 0 O O O O 0 O V) O V) -I 11 V V A A -4 M w 3 v W- N O •O CO V P Ui r W N -' 00 V P * # 0 0 r O -' N W N W CO r W Z W VI O r O N CO N CO VI -. Co W O VI •O -( N W O 0 O O O O O C) O O O 0 O O -( O O O 0 O O O O O C) O O O 0 O O -< * A C-7 A m O m -' N (A V N VI .0 •0 r O P V X 3 < •0 W •0 O P P vl V P N P O r N N to -I -. N O O VI P VI P W r O O V VI O n m m 0 -' r o O O o o O o V P O o •O o O o 0 z m C . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . N 0 --4 N P 07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 vi 0 0 O O o o O < m m m 0 0 0 o D 0 0 o o O o 0 0 o O o o Cl, 0 0 < I 0 C D Z -I * --4 x n m x (n .O -4 I N C)n m m 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O z m m N O A < O O 0 C) O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 O O -( m - m 0 o 0 0 0 C) o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 C) 1 0 0 W W C Vt D AD 4, C -' N W N W CO � W Z W VI O r O N CO N CO VI CO 00 C) VI •0 -I N W O O O O O C) O O O O O O O O < O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O < II CO O 'V C-1 D D vi N W V N 0t •O •O r N ON• V X -4 3 0 LA m m •O W •O O P P VI V P N P O W N N 0 •- ,0 -s N O O VP V I VI 0, CO r O O •O VI O C n m m r- •O * -a r O o o O O o o V P O O `O o O o O z o m o •• _p V) O > < P CO00 0 0 0 0 0 0 VI 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 -( m < m 0 0 D o 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O O O O V) o IT 0 II V V 14 AA T A 0 CI A / n 0 2 V) 4--40 G) A A --1 * < 0 T A m v) c -. -. -. 3 V) C) < o to t * # ... 0 CO r r w z = -+ m 0 C C) 0 3 (D Co C ,t rt CI 0 -1 (D n m m -1 V) 3 m < - n 'O n) (D A r C) n n Cl > < v v ) A v v A 2 2 2 () O -I -I -4 m A A N > > > ( 0 V 0 0 2 2 2 2 (D Pc. 7 0 Z 0 o G) G) L) 2 L) A • m M T m 27 CO v -4 n -I ,- 0 z -I O 0 0 0 < X D z 0 a 0 00 0 0* • * * * r m m m * * O W A A A • o n •o z z 2 C o 00 O. • • •0 > -o n -4 A U < w N -. D (D -1 C) N < -I * -+ - N * A (D m m r c c) > • 2 0 • T 7 -1 CO co K * * * C (1 0 C 7 2 -1 - n 0 N -1 o -1 r z D o 0 0 -. v -I ✓ 0 0 to A A II D O 0 O n n W 0 0 0 m -i * * Co V oV •0 m d+ n o O• w w V •O N X n 0 •0 r N CO r -. r w -1 -( 3 2 VI a O• 0 N w 0 0 V 0 T 0 -I In N 00 0 V1 to 0 O V1 -1 2 C A CO V1 NJ 0 O 0 0 0 0 r m 1 n N V In 0 0 0 0 0 0 V) 0 N -1 V II II V V A A A * H m- w _ 3 0 Cr, to r * # < 0 o C -, n n N 2 I- v1 -I II 0• 0 o < to o 0 0 -< * v OD On A w o m 0 m to N w •0 N N X 3 < _ O] N -. t w 401 --1 V-1 -. O w p. 0 0 V n m r Q P CO 0 CO R 0 0 V1 0 m C V) 0 ti V) OD N 0 to •O 0 0 0 -1 T T r - LA 0 O• 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 < II II -1 0 oy n D 2 r -I I I ^-• M < II * x n M 0 .O as 0'p. X CO CO 73 r a O. - n m v rv - N V 0 0 0 0 0 2 m m N 0 A < r V1 to V C. O O 0 -4 mm •0 V O N 0 0 0 0 co 0 O o 11 II 0 < 0 0 C n N z r to -1 II t• 0• 0 0 -I i+ 0 0 0 -< II II mrONO• z n s 0CO -4 w w 73 O JJ N) -4 m Sg V CO N0O O *oo �I CO 111 O z 0 m o • cri V) 0 D < 0' t11 V O N •O O o 0 < T < T O V to O CO O 0 0 0 co 0 m 0 v II I v v /Ij MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: City Hall Hours Christmas Eve Day DATE: September 14 , 1990 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: This year Christmas falls on Tuesday. Usually staff experiences less calls and requests from the public between Christmas and New Years. In the past, when Christmas fell midweek, Council authorized the closing of city hall at noon on December 24th. Employees could use vacation, comp time, take time off without pay, or come in and work. The office was closed to the public. Because Christmas Eve falls on a Monday this year, being open a half day may preclude many employees from out-of-town long weekend holiday travel plans. Productivity for the Monday half-day would undoubtedly be low. Typically building and planning activity is slow and it is anticipated, based on past practices, public business conducted that day would be negligible. Council may wish the consider officially closing city hall on Christmas Eve day, with employees using their choice of available leave time. It is City policy that at least one person in each department at city hall be present at all times and that at least two department heads be present. This issue is coming before Council at this time so that people who plan ahead, can know whether or not they may have the day off prior to Christmas. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Keep regular hours on December 24th 2 . Close city hall on December 24th 3 . Close city hall at noon on December 24th 4 . Other RECOMMENDATION: Alternative Number 2 , close city hall on December 24th. Employees shall use a vacation day, comp time, take time off without pay, or work. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the closing of city hall on December 24 , 1990 with the stipulation that employees use their vacation time, comp time, take the day off without pay, or that employees may work if they chose to do so. X-MASEVE l ' MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Committee of the Whole DATE: September 12 , 1990 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: When the City Council met as a Committee of the Whole on August 15th, they directed staff to prepare a resolution establishing a Committee of the Whole. Pursuant to your request, the attached resolution has been prepared. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopted resolution as drafted 2 . Amend resolution as drafted 3 . Do not adopt resolution - do not meet as a Committee of the Whole ACTION RECOMMENDED: Discuss and decide how Council wishes to proceed. // RESOLUTION NO. 3288 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WHEREAS, the City Council desires to meet as a Committee of the Whole when there are matters which require more than a minimum amount of discussion; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to meet as a Committee of the Whole on a trial basis before deciding to do so on a permanent basis. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS: 1. A Committee of the Whole is hereby established consisting of the City Council members. 2 . The Committee of the Whole shall consider matters which are referred to it by the City Council as well as any matters it desires to consider. 3 . The Committee of the Whole shall follow Roberts Rules of Order, as amended. 4 . The Committee of the Whole shall make recommendations to the City Council on the matters it considers. 5. The Committee of the Whole shall follow the same quorum requirements as does the City Council. 6. The Committee of the Whole shall meet on Tuesday evenings at 7 : 00 P.M. , whenever it decides to do so, unless City Council selects an alternate day which is better suited to meet the needs of the Committee of the Whole or the parties involved in the matters to be discussed. 7 . This resolution shall expire six months from its adoption. Adopted in adjourned regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 18th day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Shakopee Approved as to form this City Clerk day of September, 1990 . City Attorney //d MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk! _ RE: Approval of Minutes DATE: September 11, 1990 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: On August 21, 1990, Council directed staff to come up with a policy stating that when minutes are approved under consent business, and when a Councilmember was absent from that meeting, that approval of the minutes reflect that the Councilmember abstained, automatically. This will allow the approval of the minutes to remain under the consent business. Pursuant to that direction, staff has prepared the attached resolution for Council consideration. ALTERNATIVES: 1] Discontinue approving Minutes under the consent agenda 2 ] Adopt the policy outlined in Resolution No. 3284 3] Direct staff not to put Minutes on the consent agenda whenever a Councilmember was absent from the meeting the Minutes are of (this will allow the Councilmember to abstain when the vote is taken) - this has been the procedure, but occassionally staff errs RECOMMENDATION: Alternative No. 1 or 3 . Under alternative number 2 , staff could still err and Council would be less apt to pick up on it. I recommend that Council have the opportunity to abstain, because of absence, when prior Minutes are approved, or approve them if they so chose. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct staff to refrain from putting council Minutes under consent business whenever a Councilmember was absent from the meeting the Minutes are of. RESOLUTION NO. 3284 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY RELATING TO APPROVING MINUTES UNDER CONSENT BUSINESS WHEREAS, on October 19 , 1982 Council adopted the use of a consent agenda of non-controversial and routine items which included, among other things, approval of the Minutes; and WHEREAS, occassionally a Councilmember may be absent from a council meeting and may wish to abstain from approving those Minutes; and WHEREAS, it is Council 's desire to expedite the meeting process whenever possible. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, as follows: When the Minutes are approved from an earlier council meeting under consent business, the motion of approval shall read that the Councilmember abstained from their approval whenever the Councilmember was in fact absent from the said meeting. Adopted in adjourned regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 18th day of September, 1990. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this // day of September, 1990 . City Attorney /' /1/1/IC RESOLUTION NO. 3284 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY RELATING TO APPROVING MINUTES UNDER CONSENT BUSINESS WHEREAS, on October 19, 1982 Council adopted the use of a consent agenda of non-controversial and routine items which included, among other things, approval of the Minutes; and WHEREAS, occassionally a Councilmember may be absent from a council meeting and may wish to abstain from approving those Minutes; and WHEREAS, it is Council 's desire to expedite the meeting process whenever possible. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, as follows: When the Minutes are approved from an earlier council meeting under consent business, the motion of approval shall read that the Councilmember abstained from their approval whenever the Councilmember was in fact absent from the said meeting. Adopted in adjourned regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 18th day of September, 1990. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk � Approved as to form this // day of September, 1990. 1-1,172-7 City Attorney O1\ISENT //.) 1, TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police REF: Completion of Probationary Period DATE: September 12 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: Employee Raymond Erlandsen was hired September 4 , 1989, as a police patrol officer. BACKGROUND: A one year probationary period is required for newly employed police officers. Officer Erlandsen has successfully completed the one year probationary period. RECOMMENDATION: Appoint Raymond Erlandsen to the full-time permanent position of police patrol officer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Appoint Raymond Erlandsen to the full-time permanent position of police patrol officer. _/ , v!,1 i �a .--.1-*-'' �t=-/ Tom Steininge , Chief of Police 1 +' SENT //An._ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police REF: Completion of Probationary Period DATE: September 12 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: Employee Thomas Crocker was hired September 28 , 1989 , as a police patrol officer. BACKGROUND: A one year probationary period is required for newly employed police officers. Officer Crocker has successfully completed the one year probationary period. RECOMMENDATION: Appoint Thomas Crocker to the full-time permanent position of police patrol officer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Appoint Thomas Crocker to the full-time permanent position of police patrol officer. Tom Steining-r, Chief/of Police c901\ISENT / 2 al MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Release of Easement DATE: September 12 , 1990 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The City has received a request to confine or release an easement over Lot 3 , Block 1, Marymark Addition. As I understand it, the City received an easement in 1933 for constructing and maintaining an electric transmission line over and across a large tract of land. The exact location of the transmission line had not been determined so a blanket easement was given. Since that time properties have been platted and the line has been constructed. Shakopee Public Utilities has inspected the subject property and has determined that no easement is required across the subject property. It is therefore appropriate that the easement be released. The attached resolution authorizes the release of the easement across Lot 3 , Block 1, Marymark Addition. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 3289, A Resolution Authorizing Delivery of a Deed to Extinguish an Easement, and move its adoption. a. RESOLUTION NO. 3289 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING DELIVERY OF A DEED TO EXTINGUISH AN EASEMENT WHEREAS, under date of October 11, 1933 , an easement was executed by John Doyle and wife Anne Doyle running in favor of the City of Shakopee for the purpose of constructing and maintaining an electric transmission line over and across Lot 3 , Block 1, Marymark Addition to Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, and other lands, and said easement was filed for record in the office of the Register of Deeds of Scott County, Minnesota, on November 3 , 1933 in Book 93 page 616, and WHEREAS , the City no longer requires the above described easement and the same serves no useful purpose and should be released and discharged of record. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE Shakopee City Council that the easement above described and the same hereby is released and discharged. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a quit claim deed to discharge the same of record be made and signed by the proper City officials and delivered to the present owner of the above described property. Passed in adjourned regular session of the Shakopee City Council held this 18th day of September, 1990 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved this day of , 1990 City Attorney gab MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director \,/ SUBJECT: Muhlenhardt Road DATE: September 12 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3286, A Resolution ordering a feasibility report prepared for improvements to Muhlenhardt Road between C.R. 16 and C.R 18 . BACKGROUND: A petition has been received by the City Clerk to vacate a portion of Muhlenhardt Road located within Horizon Height' s 4th Addition. The portion that is requested to be vacated is shown on the attached map shaded in yellow. When Muhlenhardt' s Fourth Addition plat was approved by the City in 1987 , it was required that they dedicate a new portion of Muhlenhardt Road that would curve and intersect County Road 18 at a 90 degree angle, rather than the existing Muhlenhardt Road which continues straight and intersects with C.R. 18 at a very dangerous angle. Staff is of the understanding that the Scott County Highway Engineer requested that this re-alignment be a condition of the plat approval . The plat has been approved by Council and has been recorded at the County Courthouse. The alignment of Muhlenhardt Road now exists as shown on the attached map and actually there are now two segments of Muhlenhardt Road, one that intersects with C.R. 18 at a 90 degree angle and the old roadway still exists which goes straight to C.R. 18 . A petition has been received by the abutting property owners requesting that both segments of Muhlenhardt Road be vacated and a cul-de-sac be constructed, thereby eliminating any access to C.R. 18 from Muhlenhardt Road. The petition has been signed by 100% of the property owners abutting Muhlenhardt Road between Horizon Drive and C.R. 18 . The petitioners are quite clear in that they do not want Muhlenhardt Road upgraded past their property but rather vacated near C.R. 18 . The existing Muhlenhardt Road from C.R. 16 to C.R. 18 is an extremely high maintenance road for the City of Shakopee. It is a gravel road, on a severe slope, with very poor drainage facilities. After every rainfall, the Public Works Department spends considerable amount of time adding gravel to the road that has washed down to C.R. 16 and also correcting any erosion and washout problems along the edges of the road due to inadequate drainage facilities. In addition, during the winter time this road presents a continual maintenance problem due to the ice build up on this slope requiring constant care and attention by City crews. Based I z � on the high maintenance costs associated with this roadway, staff has proposed that Muhlenhardt Road be upgraded to City Standards by adding pavement and appropriate drainage structures in the recently adopted 5-Year Capital Improvements Program. Staff had further recommended that this project be included in the 1991 Capital Improvments Program. As a condition of the plat approval for Horizon Heights 4th Subdivision, the developer was required to submit a petition to the City of Shakopee requesting that Muhlenhardt Road be improved and waiving his right to a publc hearing and his right to appeal any assessments. That petition has been received and is on file with the City Clerk. The request to vacate Muhlenhardt Road and build a cul-de-sac certainly has some merits in regards to eliminating traffic on this road. With the recent construction of Horizon Drive all the way through to C. R. 18 , the connection of Muhlenhardt Road to C.R. 18 is not as necessary as before but the vacation also has some serious issues which need to be looked at such as drainage, access to all properties, Scott County Highway Department ' s concerns, etc. Staff feels that the entire issue of upgrading the road and/or vacating a portion of it near C.R. 18 should be analyzed and studied in a feasibility report. Once the conclusions have been reached in the feasibility report, the report can be presented to Council for further action which could possibly include a public hearing to consider ordering the improvements or a public hearing to consider the vacation of the street or a combined public hearing or some other alternatives. Therefore, since the feasibility report has not been started, staff feels that it is premature to hold a public hearing to consider the vacation of this part of Muhlenhardt Road without looking at the entire structure of the road. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3286, which orders the feasibility report to consider improvements of Muhlenhardt Road between C.R. 16 and C.R. 18, with the feasibility report specifically analyzing the request to vacate the south connection to C.R. 18 . 2 . Deny Resolution No. 3286. 3 . Rather than adopt Resolution No. 3286 which orders a feasibility report, direct staff to prepare a resolution setting a public hearing to consider the vacation of part of Muhlenhardt Road as requested by the petition. 4 . Other options. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to adopt Resolution No. 3286 and prepare a feasibility report on the upgrading of Muhlenhardt Road, with the specific intent to evaluate the request to petition the south end of the road. Without reviewing the entire road in a feasibility report, staff would be unable to offer a recommendation at the public hearing on the proposed vacation. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3286, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of a Report on an Improvement to Muhlenhardt Road Between County Road 16 and County Road 18 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3286 c I --i, - / N . N\ ).N - v- R T X AV ') io, L‘_ ( `,,_• CI lir- - - - - \ \ .p I q '"t jYi \ ` I ' I _ I LAKE I _ �'�'r ` , .,_-_......r. r\,_ :+A II - - - —r - - ---4 - _ _ - - -\s + �\ --r � 13TH AVE." I \ ), t• � � • RLS 24 \ MAR•S ' ADD' . "O \ 1 I - - - ` ` ` � 1 — O aotuMG I N 13 U 1 O 2 I J I I all C) N —� a z I T 14 3 I I—� zoscMIKE's soo'« --.......... un SUBJECT LOCATION ci cc Y I HORIZON RIVERVIEW a HEIGHTS ESTATES 4, IND A D c N `-,— CI. I M° HORi ~. 1 1 'vMy � � Zo F Da I-r G4 S r "' ` =Q HORIZ N `.� HGHTIS • is' ". - 7 ------ ---- 1— 23 (` ,/ 0 ."47 01 24 �r� , /Y' A / % ‘le c**... / \ •Il 441 tj 0 , '•'•' //•\ opo N1/,c / \•+0, • y v7 • O • Gp 4/ _ 7b' OF � _ 4 / !. P/ . :_jJB Ow- ,� y i r"--- 1\a6. --:---) /\\ 6 .' 4.'1111 N./ OF , • N..... , ;--. .--.., -., e,c tt.4) et' r, .. / 4 ./0. , • 1 -- ty \ oti ..; ico-)_ j/AT . • , • \�� (. / vi ,4 V \9F . O • %.\ \ \ ‘ e N n el \\ ,,NN • / / • _/. A .' ' , ' \\ 07 • 49 S. O r" Cl) \"�O�'Saa If)4, xl, z, ,.. ..coo. 01%044, ii, (; c / ` '4► o „ ° r. :ov �JO 7f )nN°. c' r.J o -,\N .. ,, , . 4/ f N -‹.-...' 0\,,, '` • O I *fly: IJ ` • • I - S 4, '',F 9Z OAF; ; �r°°s�, 6,9 oee S -0 es . ' a 6 I • m P .1. 'n b8'L01 &s Off/ c'6. 2, d _ / . .�••- �c-----3.' <t0 o-, i ���; 3„B4p4.6BS .OS,�9 �9�, 0.�/ • •�� L _ y_P I. — I re Oh' — _3..20.60 0 N Nis_ - .,.3 , ,• . -•-� _ , M I_d H W to 2 a r.:`,7'.:: ..;, /- 1j.C-RiVi'IN:2-1HIli"i spOZ*929Z — ri g 3„Z0,6000N,9 i 1-I)� In N J 1 • I . ' v � ,-, • -• 7� I • • July 24, 1990 • JUL 3 11990 Ms. Judy Cox -, Shakopee City Hall CITY op cam. . r 129 First Avenue East `'' AKOPME Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Ms. Cox: Concerning our petition to vacate a portion of Muhlenhardt Road, perhaps this letter can clarify our position even more, although we feel it is quite clear already. All we are asking is that the dangerous Y-type intersection with County Road 18 be closed, and that a new intersection that is being proposed across the Walter Muhlenhardt property not be built. That's it. That's all. We are not asking the Council to make it a private road. No way. What we are hoping for when this is approved is a quiet, unpaved, "cul-de-sac" or dead end street. This is all possible because Horizon Drive now extends through the Muhlenhardt property and connects directly with County Road 18. Sincerely yours, ,. 0 Michael L. Beard 8434 Horizon Drive Shakopee, Mn 55379 496-1106 I ñ `� C •< (' S� ! y FROM: TO: Dave Hutton CITY OF SHAKOPEE 129 East First Ave. City Engineer Shakopee, MN 55379 (612) 445-3650 Name: .Tudy Cox, Ci ty Clerk SUBJECT: Vacation of Part of Muhlenhardt Road DATE 9/4/90 I advised Mr. Mike Beard of our meeting today about his petition. He was appreciative of the update and suggested that one of the alternatives in the feasibility study be to upgrade Muhlenhardt Road only to Horizon Drive . He said that the folks on the petition do not want Muhlenhardt Road upgraded past their property. He also mentioned that the folks on Z—o McGuire Circle do want Muhlenhardt Road upgraded, at least t-lfe McGuire Circle and talked about circulating a petition sometime ago, but just BY DATE never did. The people on the petition for vacation were concerned about _ the petition turning into upgrading of the road. I assured Mr. Beard that the upgrading was in the works before they submitted the petition! ! ! There is a run off problem in ad.; the vicinity of Mr. Goode ' s property that I understand that you are aware of, which will have to be addressed also . RETURN:pARTT;=SENDER,METH'REPLY` BY RMCC 847-3 Z RESOLUTION NO. 3286 A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A Report On An Improvement To Muhlenhardt Road Between County Road 16 And County Road 18 WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Muhlenhardt Road between County Road 16 and County Road 18 by Pavement and Storm Drainage Facilities and to assess the benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be referred to David Hutton, Public Works Director for study and that he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 19 . City Attorney . ) 2, BEGET/F" PETITION FOR STREET OR ALLEY VACATION 'JUN ' 81990 CiTY i, DATE - 6- We -We the undersigned , owners of the following described real property , abutting on the street or alley in question, hereby petition the City Council of the City of Shakopee to vacate the following (Street) (Alley) : /ylu/-+LL:.NH',?,:)" i2�•,�t;; Tim :- r'''-= lying between r+7 v S . /Av-e-. , and between SC ' 4,0,71-./ c',426„ ( .i '-L• V HiQ- C Ems % PETITIONER LOT BLOCK ,-� : :.,1-.S / 4 A7 90,71/ 0/./-0 tOL e4 ///./i4/%-!/f4-, }7e. -S ,:2.7 -�'.2'4004 -Z j� , W . � . . �z. t ? - ,2 goo 3 -o MFERir •7 • I hereby verify that I circulated the above petition and that the above signatures of the property owners and petitioners were affixed in my presence . Circulator /Q.? f' Approved this day of 19 • City Attorney /;W41/ MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director ;) ) SUBJECT: T.H. 169 Bridge and Minibypass Project DATE: September 12 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3285, which approves of Mn/DOT plans and specifications for Phase I of the T.H. 169 Bridge & Minibypass Project. BACKGROUND: Prior to Mn/DOT constructing any highways they must first obtain the approval of the plans and specifications by the particular municipality in which they are proposing to construct the highway. We have received a request from Mn/DOT to approve of the plans and specifications for Phase I of the Downtown Bridge and Minibypass and they are also requesting that this approval be given by adopting Resolution No. 3285 by September 25, 1990. Phase I of this project consists of constructing the earth embankment on the north side of the river. As shown on the attached estimate of quantities, the main items that will be done during this project is the fill embankment and installing wick drains, geotextile fabric, erosion control silt fence and seeding and mulching the side slopes. Mn/DOT would prefer to have this embankment constructed at least one year in advance of the main highway and bridge in order for the embankment to surcharge prior to the highway construction. The bid letting for this phase of the project has been scheduled for September 28, 1990 . Consequently, Mn/DOT is requesting that the City of Shakopee approve of the plans and specifications by September 25, 1990. The actual construction schedule has not been established and it would depend on the speed at which the contracts are executed and the type of winter being experienced, but the latest date that the construction can start on is April 15, 1991 per the Contract. The actual construction may start sooner if we have a mild winter. Attached is Resolution No. 3285 which approves of the plans and specifications for this phase of the project for Council consideration. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3285 . 2 . Deny Resolution No. 3285. l) � 3 . Table Resolution No. 3285. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 to adopt Resolution No. 3285 and approve of the plans and specifications. The plans and specifications are available in the Engineering office for review by Council if desired. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3285, A Resolution Approving the Plans and Specifications for Phase I of the T.H. 169 Bridge and Minibypass Project, (S. P. 7009-58) and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3285 ��NHEsor4 tiO Minnesota Department of Transportation r y C� D ; Metropolitan District Transportation Building Fti St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 T OF TRW Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Reply to Telephone No. 591-4643 129 6 9�: l sT�l� s.p. 7i,r9 T.H. /4,:I /ff/41,CG,EZ, A/. S5 37? City e,,e i.,6 Attention: O44/ A/1/ TPi✓ Attached is a final plan and proposal, along with a resolution, for your council's approval. If further information is required, please contact /1/de/Ce SP/t54.4 fi1Ai, at 24 2-2 We must have one certified copy bearing the city's seal prior to ;%e/e2)- Z5, , 19 . Kindllyf return the certified and sealed resolution to: St Phan C. Bucko Agreements Specialist Minnesota Department of Transportation 5801 Duluth Street Golden Valley, MN 55422 Veleibt-e INNESOTA 1990 An Equal Opportunity Employer iZe - MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -- CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR GRADING • LOCATED ON T.H. 169 FROM 0.205 MI.N.JcT.II69 TO Q 36.yy,,, CT_TH. 10 STATE PROJ. NO. 7009-58(T.H.I69=005)_ - MINN. PROJ. NO. GROSS LENGTH_.j100 FEET Q2.98 MILES BRIDGES-LENGTH :0.00 FEET_0.00 MILES EXCEPT IONS-LENGTH 0.00 FEET_.0.00_MILES NET LENGTH IMO FEET_O2Q8 MILES REF POINT •TO REF POINT END S.P 7 :,: 9 N.B. STA. 113. coo - agifi" BEG. S.P. 7C r: • N.B. STA. IO2+5. illi ig ' • c.o./. _ _ _ _ /% BRIDGE N0. 1-SC°TT i -% �"� OVER MIN NES wit. . 411111111101.E0.-Tior ash-• O.__ . s. iSS ''-- • I -- - --zrataffilli,42‘ 4 1 - , gitivigissiimiguau 1iJ6. 1 jfl. 111,[1©(f` .Ilii' . iia_,I. [2 1 ILII ... 11111111t111111111' las c y„_, f /% .ral SI 11-11117 ..,-4., _ - ===�.--- --: _ - SHAKOPEE FOR PLANS AND UTILI' STATE PROJ. NO. 8 DESIGN DESIGNATION-TIER NO. _ --7�9- BY ADT(Current Year) = Design Speed 4O�MPH ADT(Future Year) = Based on_STOPPING_Sight Distance __ ____ _ DHV(Design Hr.Vol.) = Height of eye_3,5.9L Height of object_Q50'_ PROJECT LOCATION D(Directional Distr.) = _______ X Design Speed not achieved at:_.. _ SCOTT___. COUNTY T(Heavy Commercial) = ___ _._X STA. . _. _ .._ ..._ _.TO STA. __._ .....___...._____IIPN___. _ METRO DISTRICT STA. TO STA. /APR GOLDEN VALLEY OFFICE • STATE P • END CONSTRUCTION P.O.T. I13+50.00 END T.H. 101/169 ALIGNMENT P.O.T. 106+45 TH. 101/169• P.O.T. 0+00.00 TRAILHEAO ACCESS ROAD • P.O.T. 3+50.00 TRAILHEAO ACCESS ROAD 9"..—*N END TRAILHEAO ACCESS ROAD • P.O.C. 102+50 ' BEGIN CONSTRUCTION ' • • P.O.T. 94+42.43 T.H. 101/169 = P.O.T. 21+98.71 W.B. BYPASS LEVEE OR. P.O.T. 93+96.43 T.H. 101/169 = � gP.O.T. 21+98.83 E.B. BYPASS P.O.T. 8+70.00 BEGIN W.B. BYPASS ALIGNMENT —_ _ ALLEY -� ""••• P.O.T. 37+14.96 END E.B./w.B, BYPASS ALIGNMENT I, Men J• 195 /HO - • RAMP IRST AVE. P .--- P.O.T. 93+65.93 T.H, 101/169 = P.O.T. 54+44.54 ALLEY P.O.T 193+18.31 FIRST AVE. = P•0,T 90+00.00 P.O.T. 91+75.43 T.H. 101/169 BEGIN T.H. 101/169 ALIGNMENT P.O.T. 8+70.00 BEGIN E.8. BYPASS ALIGNMENT State Proj. No. 70C JzC.-- STATEMENT 0= ''' ITEM S.P. 7009 - 58 J Z I J NUMBER ITEM Z Z UNITS QUANTITIES ESTIMATED FINAL 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 2 2031.501 FIELD OFFICE TYPE D EACH 1 3 2051.501 MAINTENANCE AND RESTORATION OF HAUL ROAD LUMP SUM 4 2101.511 CLEARING AND GRUBBING LUMP SUM _ 5 6 A 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION • CU.YD. 3116(P1 7 A 2105.507 SUBGRAOE EXCAVATION CU.YD. 739 (P) 8 A 2105.521 GRANULAR BORROW (LV) CU.YD. 7710 9 A 2105.522 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (LV) CU.YD. 15496 10 A 2105.522 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW MODIFIED 7% (LV) CU.YD. 13755 11 A 2105.523 COMMON BORROW (LV) CU.YD. 45491 12 D 0105.602_ SETTLEMENT PLATES EACH 5 13 0 0105.606 WICK DRAIN LIN.FT. 156240 14 0 0105.609 GEOTEX11LE FABRIC SO.YD. _ 13530 15 2130.501 WATER 1 M.GAL. 100 16 D 2573.503 SILT FENCE, PREASSEMBLED LIN.FT. 1870 17 C 2575.501 SEEDING 2 ACRE 6.4 (P) 18 C 2575.502 SEED, MIXTURE 500 POUND 320 19 C 2575.511 MULCH MATERIAL TYPE 1 TON 12.8 20 C 2575.519 DISK ANCHORING ACRE 6.4 (P) 21 C 2575.532 COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER ANALYSIS 10-20-20 3 POUND 2610 NOTES: 1. PROVIDED FOR USE AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER FOR DUST CONTROL. 2. SEEDING ACREAGE COMPUTED BY MEASURING HORIZONTAL DISTANCE AND ADDING 10% FOR SLOPE DISTANCES. 3. FERTILIZE ALL SEEDED AREAS AT THE RATE OF 450 POUNDS PER ACRE. (P) PLAN QUANTITY MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION BUILDING ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55155 ****************** P R O P O S A L ******************* FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE PROJECTS WITH BIDS RECEIVED UNTIL 9 : 30 O'CLOCK A.M. ON September 28, 1990 Proposal of • (NAME OF FIRM) (ADDRESS) (AREA CODE TELEPHONE NUMBER) TO FURNISH AND DELIVER ALL MATERIALS AND TO PERFORM ALL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACT, THE PLANS AND THE APPROVED DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION" , 1988 EDITION, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION EXCEPT AS STATED OTHERWISE IN THE SPECIAL PROVISIONS WHICH ARE PART OF THIS PROPOSAL, FOR STATE PROJECT NO. 7009-58 (T.H. 169) MINNESOTA PROJECT NO. BRF 005-2 (100) LOCATION: In Scott County, on T.H. 169 from 0. 205 mile north to 0 . 385 mile north of the junction with T.H. 101 TYPE OF WORK: Grading LENGTH: 0. 208 mile STARTING DATE: CONTRACT NO. COMPLETION DATE: NOTICE TO ' BIDDERS : In submitting a bid, you must return this complete proposal . You must initial changes made in the Schedule of Prices in the Proposal and acknowledge addenda on the back cover sheet. I certify that this Proposal was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a registered professional engineer under the laws of the State of Minn sota. v ( i -74Z7--gYt5-31-4-5Z2-"Yl) Reg. No. 7412 Date: August 21 , 1990 BID RIGGING IS A SERIOUS CRIME. IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING COLLUSIVE BIDDING, EVEN A REQUEST TO SUBMIT A COMPLIMENTARY BID, PLEASE CALL THE MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE AT TELE. NO. 612-296-2650 I State Project 7009-58 (169=5) Fed. Proj. BRF 005-2 (100) RESOLUTION NO. 3285 A Resolution Approving The Plans And Specifications For Phase I • Of The T.H. 169 Bridge and Minibypass Project At a meeting of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, held on the day of , 1990, the following Resolution was offered by ; seconded by , , to wit: WHEREAS the Commissioner of Transportation for the State of Minnesota has prepared: plans, special provisions, and specifications for the improvement of Trunk Highway No. 5, renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 169, within the corporate limits of the City of Shakopee, at the Minnesota River; and seeks the approval thereof; NOW, THEN, BE IT RESOLVED that said plans and special provisions for the improvement of said Trunk Highway within said corporate limits of the City, be and hereby are approved including the elevations and grades as shown and consent is hereby given to any and all changes in grade occasioned by said construction. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City does hereby agree to require the parking of all vehicles, if such parking is permitted within the corporate limits of said City, on said Trunk Highway, to be parallel with the curb adjacent to the highway, and at least 20 feet from any crosswalks on all public streets intersecting said trunk highway. Upon the call of the roll, the following council members voted in favor of the Resolution: and, the following council members voted against the adoption of the Resolution: • whereupon the mayor and/or the presiding officer declared the Resolution adopted. Dated: , 1990. Mayor Attest City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF SCOTT ) CITY OF SHAKOPEE ) I do hereby certify that at said meeting (of which due and legal notice was given) of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, on the day of , 1990; at which a majority of the members of said Council were present, the foregoing Resolution was adopted. Given under my hind and seal this day of , 1990. City Clerk 1,4411951AG.r1 g\ o' . MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director �6 SUBJECT: Killarney Hills Project No. 1989-7 DATE: September 14 , 1990 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3287 , A Resolution which sets the date for the public hearing to consider the special assessments for the above referenced project. BACKGROUND: The Killarney Hills project is approximately 95% completed. A public hearing must be held prior to levying any special assessments on this project. In order to include any assessments on the 1991 tax rolls the assessments must be certified to the County by October 10, 1990. Staff has estimated the remaining construction costs and the remaining administrative/engineering costs. The total construction costs for this project are $103 , 134 . 84 . The total engineering and administrative costs for this project are $33 , 344 . 85. The total project costs are therefore $136, 479 . 69 . At the public hearing ordering this improvement, the City Council adopted the special assessment strategies that were to be utilized on this project. Those strategies consist of the following: 1. For that portion of Tyrone Drive that had existing pavement, the new street would be assessed 50% to the abutting properties. 2 . For that portion of the plat where there was no existing pavement (Sharon Parkway) the new street would be 100% assessed. Utilizing the above assessment policies, the total amount that will be assessed on this project is approximately $99 , 243 .75 . Staff will give a presentation on the assessment calculations at the public hearing. The feasibility report had estimated the total project costs to be $172 , 000. 00 and the total amount assessed to be $125, 073 . 00. Attached is Resolution No. 3287 which declares the cost to be assessed and sets the date for the public hearing for October 9, 1990. il:IL CI ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3287 . 2 . Deny Resolution No. 3287 . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3287, A Resolution Declaring the Cost to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments for the Killarney Hills Project No. 1989-7 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3287 11d4L i RESOLUTION NO. 3287 A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessments Project No. 1989-7 Killarney Hills Project WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of: Killarney Hills (Sharon Parkway and Tyrone Drive) by pavement, curb & gutter and storm sewer and the contract price for such improvements is $ 99 , 251. 50 , the construction contingency amounts to $ 3 , 883 . 34 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvements amounts to $ 33 , 344 .85 so that the total cost of the improvements will be $136, 479 . 69 and of this cost the City will pay $37 , 235 . 94 as its share of the cost. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be $99, 243 .75. 2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3 . That the City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That a hearing shall be held on the 9th day of October 1990, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 7: 30 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and place all persons owning property affected' by such improvements and proposed assessments will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 2 . That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two weeks prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvements. He shall also cause mailed notice of such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. 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 I .36L, MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Metropolitan Council Regional Meeting DATE: September 14, 1990 The Metropolitan Council will be holding one of a series regional meetings that they have typically held in the City of Shakopee. The meeting will be held on Friday, September 28th from 7 : 30 AM to 9 : 00 AM at the Canterbury Inn. The cost of the meeting is $6. 00 which includes breakfast, tax and gratuity. Any member of the City Council desiring to attend this meeting should contact either the City Administrator or Toni Warhol at City Hall. 13 SCOTT COUNTY 1111/11111! HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST JORDAN, MN 55352-9339 (612) 496-8346 FAX (612) 496-8365 BRADLEY J. LARSON Highway Engineer DANIEL M.JOBE Asst. Highway Engineer-Design DON D. PAULSON Asst.Highway Engineer-Construction September 11 , 1990 Dave Hutton, P .E . Director of Public Works City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re : CSAH 16 @ CR 83 Dear Dave: Scott County has continued to monitor the intersection of CSAH 16 and CR 83 to determine if additional traffic control is warranted, per previous City request. The traffic counts taken in August and September, 1990 do not warrant any change in the traffic control at this time . The traffic count distribution on the roadway approaches , however, indicate that as traffic volumes continue to increase, a traffic signal warrant will probably be met before a 4-way STOP warrant is obtained. We will continue to monitor this intersection and keep you informed of any changes . Sincerel (.1311 Bradley J . Larson, P . E . County Highway Engineer BJL/kmg An Equal Opportunity'Affirmative Action Employer /3 Of TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Refunding Bond Issue DATE: September 17, 1990 Introduction The City has the opportunity to save $80,000 by refunding the TIF bonds issued for the track. Background Dave MacGillivray of Springsted raised the question of whether the City wanted to refund the $4,200,000 Special Obligation Tax Increment Revenue Bonds issued for the track. Interest rates have gone down and the City can save about $80,000 by refunding the remaining bonds. This is not an advance refunding, the bonds are now callable and the final maturity is 1994. The refunding bonds would be similar bonds. Mr. MacGillivray will consult with bond counsel and the City Administrator on the 18th to review negatives to the refunding including the assessment agreement and debt support pledge that started with the original owners. There does not seem to be any significant negatives to doing the refunding other than the slight complication of having a refunding bond issue versus the original issue. The advantage is gaining $80,000. Alternatives 1. Status Quo 2. Refund the $4.2 million bond issue. Recommendation Review this issue with Council after conversing with bond counsel and fiscal advisor. If Council decides to go ahead with the refunding, the action at this point is to authorize Springsted to prepare documents setting the sale of the refunding bonds for Council action. MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator RE: Appointment of Negotiating Team for City Hall Purchase DATE: September 18, 1990 The appraisal process for the Marquette Bank building is presently underway and Marquette has also appointed a person from their central operations to represent Marquette in the negotiations. I am suggesting that the City be represented by Mayor Gary Laurent, City Attorney Karen Marty, and myself. Absent dissent by the City Council on the composition of this negotiating team, the aforementioned will represent the City in the negotiations for the purchase of the Marquette Bank building. No action is required unless the City Council disagrees with my proposed action.