Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/01/1997 TENTATIVE AGENDA CITY OF SHAKOPEE REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 1, 1997 LOCATION: 129 Holmes Street South Mayor Jeff Henderson presiding 1] Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 2] Recess for an Economic Development Authority meeting 3] Re-convene 4] Approval of Agenda 5] Approval of Consent Business-(All items noted by an * are anticipated to be routine. After a discussion by the Mayor, there will be a opportunity for members of the City Council to remove items from the consent agenda for individual discussion. Those items removed will be considered in their normal sequence on the agenda. Those items remaining on the consent agenda will otherwise not be individually discussed and will be enacted in one motion.) 6] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 7] Mayor's Report 8] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS *9] Approval of Minutes: February 25, February 26, March 4, and March 11, 1997 *10] Approve Bills in the Amount of$533,178.58 11] Communications 12] Public Hearings-None 13] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions A. Request For Rezoning Property North of 13th Ave., West of Adams St. and South of 12th Ave. from Urban Residential (R1-B)to Medium Density Residential (R-2), Ord.481 B. Request For Variance From Minimum Lot Size For Property Located at 1205 East 10th Avenue In Multiple Family Residential (R3)Zone TENTATIVE AGENDA April 1, 1997 Page -2- 14] General Business A] Engineering 1. Order Feasibility Report for 1997 Street Overlay Project-Res. No. 4640 *2. Request Advance Encumbrance of State Aid Funds for Vierling Drive-Res.4638 *3. Maras Street Improvements and Right-of-Way Acquisition 4. Scott Ferrozzo Agreement B] Police and Fire 1. Discussion of Fire Station Site 1.1 Acquisition *2. Declaring Surplus Property C] Park and Recreation *1. Community Center Office Remodeling Expense *2. Resignation of Judy Salchow from Park and Recreation Board and Appointment to Fill Vacancy D] Community Development 1. Discussion of Establishment of A Community Development Commission 2. Request by Clean Sweep for Street Naming 3. Request to Extend Preliminary Plat Approval for Westridge Lake Estates 4. Set Public Hearing for Vacation of Apgar Street Between Thomas Avenue and Fuller Street -Res. No. 4639 5. Request of Mike Mobley to Waive Minor Subdivision Requirement 6. Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA), Metropolitan Growth Strategy, and Comprehensive Plan Amendments-West Dean Lake Area *7. Park 2000- Southwest Environmental Assessment Worksheet E] General Administration 1. Transfer of Property Within Blocks 3 &4 to Shakopee EDA 2. Excess Fire Station Property Disposition 3. Pay Plan Revisions *4. Conservation Easement(37.8 acres north of Memorial Park) 15] Other Business 16] Recess for executive session to discuss labor negotiations and matters permitted under attorney-client privilege 17] Re-convene 18] Adjourn TENTATIVE AGENDA CITY OF SHAKOPEE REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 1, 1997 LOCATION: 129 Holmes Street South Mayor Jeff Henderson presiding 1] Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 2] Recess for an Economic Development Authority meeting 3] Re-convene 4] Approval of Agenda 5] Approval of Consent Business- (All items noted by an * are anticipated to be routine. After a discussion by the Mayor, there will be a opportunity for members of the City Council to remove items from the consent agenda for individual discussion. Those items removed will be considered in their normal sequence on the agenda. Those items remaining on the consent agenda will otherwise not be individually discussed and will be enacted in one motion.) 6] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 7] Mayor's Report 8] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS *9] Approval of Minutes: February 25, February 26, March 4, and March 11, 1997 *10] Approve Bills in the Amount of$533,178.58 11] Communications 12] Public Hearings -None 13] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions A. Request For Rezoning Property North of 13th Ave., West of Adams St. and South of 12th Ave. from Urban Residential (R1-B)to Medium Density Residential (R-2), Ord.481 B. Request For Variance From Minimum Lot Size For Property Located at 1205 East 10th Avenue In Multiple Family Residential (R3)Zone TENTATIVE AGENDA April 1, 1997 Page -2- 14] General Business A] Engineering 1. Order Feasibility Report for 1997 Street Overlay Project-Res. No. 4640 *2. Request Advance Encumbrance of State Aid Funds for Vierling Drive-Res.4638 *3. Maras Street Improvements and Right-of-Way Acquisition 4. Scott Ferrozzo Agreement B] Police and Fire 1. Discussion of Fire Station Site 1.1 Acquisition *2. Declaring Surplus Property C] Park and Recreation *1. Community Center Office Remodeling Expense *2. Resignation of Judy Salchow from Park and Recreation Board and Appointment to Fill Vacancy D] Community Development 1. Discussion of Establishment of A Community Development Commission 2. Request by Clean Sweep for Street Naming 3. Request to Extend Preliminary Plat Approval for Westridge Lake Estates 4. Set Public Hearing for Vacation of Apgar Street Between Thomas Avenue and Fuller Street -Res. No. 4639 5. Request of Mike Mobley to Waive Minor Subdivision Requirement 6. Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA), Metropolitan Growth Strategy, and Comprehensive Plan Amendments -West Dean Lake Area *7. Park 2000 - Southwest Environmental Assessment Worksheet E] General Administration 1. Transfer of Property Within Blocks 3 & 4 to Shakopee EDA 2. Excess Fire Station Property Disposition 3. Pay Plan Revisions *4. Conservation Easement (37.8 acres north of Memorial Park) 15] Other Business 16] Recess for executive session to discuss labor negotiations and matters permitted under attorney-client privilege 17] Re-convene 18] Adjourn 2TENTA27YEA NDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR"1"13E CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA Regular Meeting Tmsday,April 1, 1997 1. Roll Call at 7:00 p.m. 2. Approval of the agenda 3. Approval of February 26,and March 4, 1997 minutes 1 4. Financial: 11 a.) Approval of Bills 5. Informational Items: a.) Documentation of Blocks 3&4 Properties 6. Other Business: 7. Adjourn edagenda•doc OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SHAKOPEE,MN FEBRUARY 26,1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. 1. Roll Call New EDA Commissioners DuBois,Henderson and Sweeney were sworn in. a. Election of Officers A motion was made by Mayor Henderson and seconded by Burl Zorn to nominate Robert Sweeney as President. Motion carried unanimously. The gavel was passed to President Sweeney. A motion was made by Jane DuBois and seconded by Mayor Henderson to nominate Burl Zorn as Vice President. Motion carried unanimously. The position of secretary was declined to be voted upon at this time. A motion was made by Cletus Link and seconded by Burl Zorn to nominate Jane DuBois as Treasurer, Motion carried unanimously. b. Previous Actions of EDA. Mr.McNeill noted it would be appropriate to ratify the previous actions of the EDA. A motion was then made by Burl Zorn and seconded by Mayor Henderson directing Staff to prepare a resolution ratifying the previous actions of the EDA. Motion carried 5-0. 2. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved with the following addition: Mayor Henderson requested that a letter from Susan Stolarcek be acknowledged during the public hearing. A motion was made by Burl Zorn and seconded by Jane DuBois to approve the agenda with the above addition. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Public Hearing-Blocks 3 and 4: a. Physical Design and Proposed Uses Bill Jaffa from the Scott County HRA was present and introduced the following: Frank Dunbar,project coordinator,Laura Eckholm of Miller Schroeder,the bond underwriter,Barbara Portwood of Leonard, Street&Deinard,the bond counsel and Gary Fields of Springsted. Mr.Dunbar discussed the history of the design,including a discussion of the parking. He noted that modifications were made in the size and design of the units to accommodate the parking. He also stated that the Design Committee recommended an all brick roof with a link connecting the second and third floors. The Design Committee also requested to abandon the balconies so the project will now have a combination of windows including bay windows and french balconies. Mr.Dunbar also stated that the preliminary numbers and drawings were being updated and more firm numbers will follow. He also stated the soil reports were received. Mr. Dunbar stated that the project is now in the beginning of the second phase of the design process which is called the design development. Mr.Dunbar was asked why a flat roof was more expensive to build and said that it would possibly be due to the design and materials but that the architect would be better able to answer that question. Harry Olson,the project architect then took the podium to show and explain the drawings. He stated that the Design Committee requested a 60-foot span between the buildings. There will be one stall of underground parking per unit. The first floor has a community room for apartments and an apartment office. The retail will be broken up into flexible spaces. Mr. Olson noted that Maxfield reviewed the drawings and there is now a washer and dryer in each unit plus each two- bedroom unit has two bathrooms. There is also individually controlled heat along with a guest suite in the building which will be available for nominal rent. There will also be a library and individual storage on each floor. The signage is still being developed. The outside brick will be two or three different colors. When asked why the flat roof was more expensive,Mr.Olson noted the requirements for a flat roof were different,i.e.a wood back,black paper and asphalt shingles vs.a 4-ply built up roof on timbered insulation. Mr.Olson was asked about water drainage and stated that there will be interior drains which will bring the water below to the storm sewer. There will be two internal systems and scuppers in the event of excess backup. Mr. Sweeney asked about holding ponds. No answer was available at this time,however,the issue will be addressed. Mark Miller, 1189 Jefferson,Shakopee,then approached the podium. Mr.Miller inquired what the purpose of the 60-foot span was to which Mr.Olson replied it was requested to be a way to keep from having to build an entire wall on the approach from the north so that there was better visualization into the downtown area. Mr.Miller also inquired how much will be able to be seen through the shrubs and trees and what the cost of the span. Mr.Olson replied that visibility should be adequate but that the cost of the span was unknown. Mr.Dunbar noted that the skyway was bid for 80 feet but is now being rebid for 60 feet. The 80-foot skyway cost$230,000. Eldon Reinke,2569 Howard Trail approached the podium to voice a concern about the parking issue. He noted that in the late 1960's,parking lots were built on the north side of First Avenue and the property owners in the downtown area were assessed for those parking lots. He then noted that when other construction was being performed in the last few years that those parking lots were removed and state statute requires the same number of parking spots be replaced. Mr. Reinke stated that some of the parking spots have been replaced but the majority of the spots have not been replaced because of the redevelopment. Mr.Reinke stated he thought it was important that the EDA and City Council check all the records to determine any legal ramifications and/or obligations have been met before building on the site. He noted that there were written Agreements executed between the State and City regarding this. Marge Henderson,905 South Holmes,Shakopee,approached the podium to state that she was the chair of the condemnation commission for the State at the time the properties for the bypass were condemned and noted that the condemnation award procedure did take this matter into account and did pay a pro rata share of the parking assessments. Mr.Reinke stated that while some property owners were reimbursed, others that were not part of the condemnation were not. Staff was directed to look into this matter. Susan Stolarcek,514 South Holmes,Shakopee approached the podium. She stated that she did not think one parking stall per unit would be adequate and also asked about security. Mr.Dunbar stated that there will be security access in the lobby and cameras will monitor the garage doors. He also stated that Maxfield opined that one stall per unit was adequate. Mr.Miller returned to the podium to voice a concern that the surface parking was inadequate for both the retail and the residential. Mr.Jaffa stated that that concern had been addressed. Mr. Leek noted that if Mr.Miller's question was referring to the current zoning ordinance requirements in other districts,that the surface parking would not be adequate but he also noted that the Block 3 district was specifically excepted from those standards. Maxfield will be asked to specifically address the parking issue. Mr.Jaffa reapproached the podium to state that there will be no assisted living, Section 8 or HUD subsidies involved with this project. Mr.Miller pointed out that Maxfield opined that some of the units may need to be discounted on a case by case basis and that perhaps it would be good idea to have someone from Maxfield appear to clear up any confusion. Mr.Jaffa noted that an individual may ask or need a discount on the rent but stated that Maxfield said that any discount is the HRA's option. Mayor Henderson voiced a concern that any rent discounts would affect the City,however,Mr.Jaffa assured him it would not. Since there was no further discussion,the hearing was closed as to the proposed design and use. b. Financing. Mr.McNeill noted that the City's fmance director was unavailable for the hearing so Mr. McNeill explained some of the financial matters for the project. The revenues for the project so far are$1.5 million and the current cash deficit is$230,000. Mr.McNeill then turned the hearing over to Gary Fields of Springsted. Mr.Fields noted that the only viable way for the project to work at this point was the following: As to the housing portion,$155,000 in HRA gross revenue bonds. The source of revenue to repay the bonds will be the tenant rent. There would also be HRA housing revenue bonds which would carry the City's general obligation pledge of$3.24 million. Again,the rents collected would pay the debt service. The third source of financing would be HRA limited tax bonds of$1.375 million. The source to pay those bonds would be HRA revenues outside of the project. The total for the housing portion then is$4.77 million. Regarding the retail portion,the total cost would be$3.77 million consisting mainly of an HRA taxable redevelopment bonds which carry the City's general obligation pledge. The source of revenue to pay those bonds would be the tenant rents and property taxes collected. Mr.Fields noted the City is incurring costs to acquire and demolish the property and the project revenues would also pay back that$900,000 cost. The City's general obligation pledge assumes that a master tenant would lease the entire retail space with a guaranteed lease and then re-lease to other tenants. Springsted is currently seeking a master tenant. Mr.Fields stated that over the life of the project there is some residual cash flow from both the housing and retail components. The residual cash flow from the housing would be approximately$33,600 per year and go to the HRA. The residual cash flow from the retail would be approximately$35,750 per year and go to the City. Springsted also looked at the project from a private developer's standpoint and found that,regarding the retail only and under normal circumstances,a private developer could probably only leverage$2.65 million in debt and equity and thus the project would be left with a$1.1 million gap. Mr.Fields noted that the HRA owns the project so it would lease out the residential space. Springsted would not recommend going to bond issuance without a master tenant because a master tenant is vital to this project. Mr. Sweeney asked if there was a statutory limit on the amount of debt a city can issue and also asked whether the debt from this project would count against the statutory limit. Mr. Fields replied that housing,redevelopment and TIF bonds are not subject to the statutory limit,but there is a statutory limit on how much a city can guaranty of housing bonds. Mr.Fields noted that the$3.24 million from this project would be the City's limit. Barbara Portwood approached the podium to point out that as the bonds are paid down,additional bonds could be issued to the City's limit and also that as the City grows,so will its limit. In the worse case scenario,the payoff of the bonds would not impact the City's general levy statutory limit. As far as an impact on the City's credit rating,if the project goes as planned,there would be no impact on its rating. If there is a problem and debt service is met by debt levy,that would be treated like other general obligation debt of the City and would be part of the debt load calculations. Issuance of revenue bonds themselves would not initiate a rating impact. The same thing applies to redevelopment bonds for the retail component. Revenues for the retail are applied first to the taxable redevelopment bonds,then to the City internal loan and then to the City or EDA. The$900,000 loan is not part of the residual cash flow,it is in addition to it. Mr.Fields stated he would check to make sure the calculations are not extending the fmancing beyond the life of the district. The retail is expected to be open by March 1, 1998. The debt services begins as soon as the project is operational whereas the increment takes a few years between construction and assessment and levy. The$900,000 would be paid on January 1,2025. The total City pledge is$6.1 million for the housing and retail combined. The lease of the master tenant would hopefully coincide with the life of the financing. For every dollar of housing debt service,there is$1.10 of revenue thereby including a 10% cushion. There is also a one-year built-in debt service reserve and six months of operating costs. The retail portion is different because a master tenant is involved. Gary Morke, 1042 Merrifield, Shakopee,MN approached the podium to confirm that the City's pledge was$6.1 million and the HRA's pledge is$1.375 million. Mr.Fields noted that the City's general obligation pledge is not required but is needed to make the project viable. If the City does not make the general obligation pledge,then the bonds will be sold at a much higher interest rate so less bonds would be able to be issued although the rents would remain the same which would cause a gap that the HRA cannot handle. Mike Beard, 8434 Horizon Drive,Shakopee,MN approached the podium to confirm that going through with the project would not affect future council's bonding limits but may affect the City's credit worthiness. He also inquired if a referendum question needed to be called to which Jim Thomson replied no. Mr.Fields noted that in lieu of taxes,approximately 5%of the housing rents minus the operating costs would be paid to the City. The pilot payment starts out at$26,000-$27,000 per year and the City's share would be approximately$4,000 which is reimbursing the project so the City would not be capturing the pilot payment. The retail taxes are estimated to be approximately $120,000 per year and the increment captured is approximately$48,000. Mark Miller then stated that the City is giving increment to the project which is the same thing as a private person coming in and the City having a pay as you go TIF and also noted that the City would have a net loss of $800,000 in TIF dollars. Mr.Fields stated the City has to be realistic about what it wants to get from the site and stated that the City is not going to get every dollar out of it that it has invested but there are tradeoffs. Mr.Fields assumed that if a private developer would be involved,that developer would be building the same type of project with conventional financing. Mr. Sweeney noted that projects financed with TIF dollars are break even projects and do not produce dollars. Mr.Miller stated that there are opportunities to generate TIF dollars in Blocks 3 and 4 and when initially established,there was anticipated cash flow. Mr. Miller noted that initially there was not risk to the City but now there is and wondered if the City should consider keeping ownership of the property and have the project go forward. He also inquired if there is anything being done to compensate the City for the additional risk. Cole VanHorn,437 East Fourth Avenue,Shakopee,MN then addressed the EDA. He also noted that when the project began it was zero risk and now since that has changed,maybe the rewards should be changed. He also wondered if the City ever did a TIF project before that did not return dollars or lost money to which Mr. Sweeney replied to the best of his knowledge,no. Mr.VanHorn also inquired as to what happens to the project after year 28 and that perhaps something could be done then for the City. Mayor Henderson stated that there are some things that could be negotiated in the Developer's Agreement. Mr.VanHorn suggested that until the City recoups its cost that all cash flow should go to the City, He also questioned how other similar housing projects coming on line will affect this project. Mr.Dunbar stated that Maxfield took that into account. As to qualifications for a master tenant,Mr. Fields stated that no specific financial thresholds have been established and that it would depend on the tenant. Mr. VanHorn then asked if the inclusion of the$900,000 was to avoid a referendum to which Mr. Sweeney replied it was a cash flow issue whereby the EDA asked the City Council for a loan to cover cash flow during demolition. Bill Mars,741 Scott Street,Shakopee,MN approached the podium and stated that projects do fail and he did not think the City should put its general obligation pledge on the project because the project should be able to stand alone. He was also concerned about the City maxing out on its bonding authority. Judy Case, 812 West Fifth Street,Shakopee,MN approached the podium and stated that she thought the City should work on a project that will bring in tax dollars and was concerned that the City will get itself in a bind. Ms.Portwood stated the increment from Blocks 3 and 4 would not be available to use for housing elsewhere in the City and this project does not keep the City from establishing another tax increment housing district elsewhere in the City to provide assistance to a developer. Mr. Thomson added there is a small portion of the increment that could be used from this district outside of the boundaries for another project but the date this district was established has a bearing on that. Susan Stolarcek reapproached the podium to state she was concerned about expenses such as law enforcement and thought the City is taking most of the risk without knowing what happens after year 27. Mr.McNeill noted the reason for establishing the tax increment district was for redevelopment and people need to realize that property values will stabilize or increase with redevelopment. Mayor Henderson stated that he had hoped to see positive cash flow. When the numbers came in,he looked at the project and its purpose. Mayor Henderson stated that he believes we need to save the downtown area and have a narrow window of opportunity in which to do it. He also noted that if this project is tight for an entity such as the HRA,it would be even tighter for another developer. Mayor Henderson noted that the purpose of TIF is to generate,revitalize and rehabilitate areas. He opined that if this type of project is not done and the City would end up with a park instead,the City will lose taxing capacity and incur maintenance. Eldon Reinke reapproached the podium questioning a conflict of interest in that the City Council members and EDA members are one in the same. He also noted that the Mayor has a family member in the agency involved with the project. Mr.Reinke thought it was important for the council and community to know that this may be a problem. Mr. Sweeney replied that a conflict of interest in this instance means a personal fmancial interest in the outcome of the project and he does not see any conflict of interest in this project. Deidre Hultgren,a Minneapolis resident,approached the podium with an article written by the editor of the Preservation Matters Newsletter and thought the Council may be interested to know that the buildings in Blocks 3 and 4 may be in a historical district and that the Council may want to think of the long term and visitors coming into the City. Gary Morke reapproached the podium to ask if there was any legal reason why the matter could not go to a referendum. Jim Thomson replied he did not know of any and Mr.Morke then asked the Council to put the issue of the general obligation bonding to go to referendum. John Albinson. 5240 Industrial Boulevard South,Shakopee,approached the podium to express his opinion that he lacked the opportunity to review the data to support the numbers and would like such as opportunity. Mr. Sweeney replied that there are many questions that still need to be answered which Springsted will be working on and subsequently reporting. Mr.Fields stated that there will be some changes to the numbers and that he understood the City Council would be holding another public hearing at which time some of these concerns would be more appropriate. Mr.Albinson stated that he is very concerned about the implications of the project and its effect on his company and the City. Cole VanHom reapproached the podium to ask if the HRA has paid the TIF application fee. Mr.Leek reported that it had not because no analysis had been done by the City at this time. He also noted that the City was not looking at whether the area is viable for TIF but whether or not this specific project is viable. Mr.VanHorn asked that the HRA submit an application and fee. He also stated that if this project is not done,there are other things that could be done such as using the Downtown Rehab Grant fund and that the City should keep its options open. Mr.Leek reported that the total available funding in the Rehab Grant fund was$45,000 but that he understood that some of that money was to be used for the B-1 district. Steven Smith,Shakopee resident expressed his concerns about the project and his involvement in the Arts Council. There being no further discussion,the fmancial aspect of the public hearing was closed. Zorn/DuBois moved to adjourn to Tuesday,March 4, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. Janet Freeman Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA MARCH 4, 1997 President Sweeney called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with commissioners Jane DuBois, Mayor Henderson, Cletus Link and Burl Zorn present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk and Jim Thomson, City Attorney. Henderson/Link moved to approve the agenda with the following additions: 5a. Farmer's Market and 5b. Shakopee Community Arts Council. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/DuBois moved to adopt Resolution 97-4 ratifying the actions of the EDA as previously constituted, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McNeill noted the EDA needs to determine its regular meeting night. Zorn/DuBois moved to change the EDA meeting night to coincide with the 7:00 p.m. City Council meetings. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Henderson nominated Judy Cox as secretary of the EDA. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Henderson moved to adopt Resolution 97-3, a Resolution Electing Officers, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Henderson moved to direct Staff to begin negotiating a Developer's Agreement with the County HRA regarding Blocks 3 & 4 for the EDA's and City Council's review. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McNeill noted that one additional bill in the amount of$3,500 related to right of entry for Blocks 3 and 4 (Imperial Wok property)was not included in the agenda packet. Henderson/Link moved to approve the bill list of 2/20/97 ($1,184.64 for General Fund and $269,961.12 and$3,500 for Blocks 3 &4 Fund). Motion carried unanimously. Henderson/Link moved to approve the bill list of 2/27/97 ($379.17 for General Fund and $93,854.09 For Blocks 3 &4 Fund). Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Link moved to receive and file the revenue report for January, 1997. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Zorn suggested the possibility of using Huber Park in the summer as a Farmer's Market. Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee Economic Development Authority Page-2- Zorn/Henderson moved to direct Mr. Snook to prepare a pro forma outlining what the City may be willing to do and what a contractor would have to do to provide for a Farmer's Market. Gary Morke, 1042 Merrifield, Shakopee, MN approached the podium to suggest that the sooner this would be done the better. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Zorn stated that the old train station was sold to a person in Prior Lake who is discussing its possible use with the Shakopee Community Arts Council. Zorn also noted that the Shakopee Community Arts Council is considering purchasing the operation and that the new owner is considering moving the building. Mr. Zorn asked City Attorney Jim Thomson if it would be allowable for a city inspector to inspect the building as to its status for the Arts Council to which Thomson replied that it would. It was the consensus of the EDA to allow staff to inspect the building. Mayor Henderson noted it should be identified as to whether this should be an EDA or City Council function. DuBois/Henderson moved to adjourn to March 18, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Judith S. Cox EDA Secretary c et Freeman ecording Secretary [3-4-97ed.doc] CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: President & Commissioners Mark H. McNeill, Executive Director FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: EDA Bill List DATE: March 27, 1997 Introduction Attached is a listing of bills for the EDA and the Blocks 3&4 project for the period 03/13/97 to 03/26/97. Action Requested Move to approve bills in the amount of $20.19 for the EDA General Fund and $163,260.34 for the Blocks 3&4 Fund. El 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 II Q . . . . . . . • • II GTl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II fyi U 01 01 01 01 0 0 0 0 0 H m 0 0 0 0 d Cr) H H H H 0 0 0 W 0 CO m O ^ ^ l0 l0 l0 M Ul E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 01 0 0 00 00 H H H O O H N N N N N CO O N d• m a0 0 O O N N N sp CO Gq l- m N 0 1.0 0 01 ON N N N N N w NHtn N N N M M A N N VD l0 .-1 1--1 .-1 E II W rn II • co jl Q rn HH HHHOO H 0 d' d to c0 N lfl N Ln l0 H lfl Cl) l0 d' d' Lfl In I l0 10 LI) In CO m m m m N a0 O m o7 iy CL m t11 III In Lfl 01 M M l!1 m P4 w 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 O E. a O 0 0 0 o N 0 0 0 0 Z ) UU a 01 X H 00ww a Xw E. as w ,-a H H H Ul U) 0 wa 0 a0IH E-1 E a x E+ a s r> UUa Nx O HU) Z\\ ,-7 0, 04 rAw ZwEE'' 4 4 z Z 0 X w Q 4 H 4 0 0 H H O• N HH a \ E+ H X Z Cn m DC 0 C11• 0 H a E-. C.) 0002 IX H Dfx wEUww w F. H 0 m Z O44Zwwzz z z H w U 4 x w 3 X H H w 0 • m 0 Z Zrn 3cnC7XX 3 U H CIS E. * -1C •C * rC -K U o d' c0 d Q 01 N m l0 a1 LO 01 Z H N H 01 01 d' N N 01 0 ril N l0 0 0 c0 m m 0 d' H m H Ei E+ H m m El H Q4 A W m N d' N a 0 N N l0 01 >4 00 OHHLrlin 0 N U In In In In In in in in in In w w .4, Tr wwd' wd w w A A uZ 0 00 00000 0 0 0 C4 as P4 N N N N N N N N N N al co rnrno mO CA 01 al al rn alma-Immo) o1 H HHHHHHH H H \ \\\\\\\\ \ W In d' d' d' o o to in d' in G:4 w N H H H N N N N H N a E \ \\\\\\\'\ \ ¢' m m m m m m m m m m Q O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O .K * * * * * * * * H in 01 Ln 01 O1 01 H m 0 d' H m * H H H d' 0 l0 d' d' * 0 01 1.0 * ZZ A 0 * Z Z A * F� Z O FG H .7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 H a I-) m fx co cx H H H H H CO c0 H (Y., Cl) Ln a' Cl) a 4 O m O H m m m m m m m in C) H m 0 H H d' 0 > a' d' d' d' d' d' d' d• d' 0 >a H ' a H 0 0 c) c4 0 Q H a 0 Gc, al 01 01 01 01 0) 0) 01 a 0 in a 0 r.L 01 m m m m m m m m d' Q a 0 0 0 4d' d' W d' .4. d' d' d' f]4 a' to p4 r44 7�I 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 004 El CZ.. 1z4 l0 CI40 0 H IX 01 �' �' 0 o0 00000o H 0 0 O H a a E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 w 4 4 Q E In ms.' E., * 01 01 01 01 rn ON 01 01 El E' 01 H H * * Z H 0 0 * m m m m m m m m 0 0 m 0 0 * rra H H E. * d' d' d' d' d• d' d' d' H E+ d' H H * * 5 . a . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: EDA FROM: Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Photographic Documentation of Blocks 3 &4 Buildings DATE: March 27, 1997 INTRODUCTION To ensure thorough documentation of these properties, a professional photographer has been retained by the City. BACKGROUND In February,the EDA requested that staff document the properties of Blocks 3 &4 for archival purposes. The following information was reproduced for Scott County Historical Society's records, and for retention in the Blocks 3 & 4 project file. • Information cards for each lot and building which indicates property identification number, year built, owner name, etc. • Photographs of each building, front and back sides; dated December of 1996 The following is a summary of the additional photographic work being done and related cost estimates: Work to be done: • Overall view of the two blocks • Individual exterior shots of each building, focusing on detail where appropriate • All sides of the exterior(north, south, east,west) • Interior shots as needed Cost: Labor: $85/hr. x 2-3 hrs $170 - $255 Film(includes processing): x 2-3 rolls $50 - $75 TOTAL $220 - $330 ACTION REQUIRED No action required. This item is informational. Paul Snook Economic Development Coordinator 3&4photo.doc OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 25, 1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. with Councilmembers Jane DuBois, Burl Zorn, Robert Sweeney, and Cletus Link present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and Jim Thomson, City Attorney. The following changes were made to the agenda: 4) New Copy Machine was moved ahead of 3) Continuation of public hearing, 5a) Proposed CDC was added to the agenda. Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McNeill explained that the Council had requested additional proposals before making a decision regarding a new photocopier. He said three firms for similar photocopiers submitted proposals and that it is the recommendation of Deputy Police Chief Poole to go with American Photocopy. Sweeney/Zom moved to remove discussion regarding a new copy machine from the table. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/DuBois moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to enter into a lease and service contract with American Photocopy for the photocopier. Motion carried unanimously. The public hearing on whether or not the City of Shakopee should modify the enabling resolution that created the Shakopee Economic Development Authority (EDA) to provide that the members of the City Council shall serve as the board of commissioners of the EDA was opened. Mayor Henderson asked if anyone present in the audience would like to address the Council on this matter. Diane Sullivan, 126 S Holmes, Antique shop owner, approached the podium stated she was in support of saving the buildings (in Blocks 3 & 4). However, if this is not feasible she would be in favor of keeping the current yEDA as an insurance that the best for downtown will be determined. She urged to keep the EDA as a checks and balance and asked the Council not to rush into something that the people might not use. Bill Mars, 741 Scott, approached the podium and stated that he is opposed to the elimination of the EDA. He said that more citizen input was the goal when the Mayor was elected and it would be a disservice to eliminate the citizen input and to consolidate the power back to the Council. He asked whether it would also be a duplication if the EDA were all Councilmembers, and whether a developer would be required to make a presentation to the EDA as well as the Council. He said this would be an unbalanced political move and asked to keep the EDA open to the citizens. Official Proceedings of the February 25, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mayor Henderson explained that the EDA is a statutory body with powers similar to the Planning Commission. He said the Met Council is an appointed statutory body. He said the proposed change is not an effort to eliminate citizen input but to return the citizen to an advisory format. He said that changing the structure does not change the input. The power in the decision making process is being consolidated, which is why the EDA was created. He said the question is whether this process is working in the most expeditious manner for the City. He said he believes in citizen input and intends to expand it. In response to a question as to where the EDA has failed the City, Mayor Henderson said that he has not seen initiatives and the concern is that the process is flawed. He said he had hoped to see a definite charge, expectations, and stronger action. He said the only way to serve the citizens is to insure that the process moves forward to the goals. In response to a question as to who would control the final actions on Blocks 3 & 4 should the resolution pass. Mayor Henderson stated that the Council does the financing on this project. not the EDA. Gary Morke. 1042 Merrifield. EDA member, approached the podium and stated that the EDA had asked for consideration in changing the meeting date to before City Council meetings to allow proper Clow. He said the EDA had decided by consensus that this would be a good idea. Mark Miller, EDA President. approached the podium and stated that it takes many people to make a successful city project which includes interested citizens working with the Council and developing a consensus. He said this has not happened with the current project as two sides are forming. He said it was time to ask what would be best for Shakopee and to begin developing a consensus so there will be a project supported by all. He said there is a good development and asked that the time be taken to develop a consensus with the developer and the citizens of Shakopee. A discussion ensued as to whether a consensus could be reached with a majority of the citizens of Shakopee. A discussion ensued regarding the disbandment of the EDA. Cncl. Sweeney said that the best outcome would be to recognize that the Council did not sufficiently charge the EDA and the EDA did not sufficiently discuss what their role should be and how to make that role function in the overall city government. Mr. Miller stated that the project has moved forward without disclosure of information. In response to an inference that the EDA was stalling, Mr. Miller said the EDA is trying to get answers to unanswered questions. A discussion ensued regarding public statements relating to not bui!ding a consensus. Official Proceedings of the February 25, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Eldon Reinke, 2569 Hauer Trail, EDA member, former Mayor and Councilmember, approached the podium and said that based on comments heard, all discussion relates to Blocks 3 & 4 versus restructuring of the EDA. He said that the EDA worked successfully on earlier projects (i.e.: Centres Group, ADC Telecommunications, Excelsior-Henderson) but with this project there appears to be a devision between the EDA and the Council. He said when the issue of restructuring the EDA came about he questioned the validity because the president has a disagreement about the handling of business. He said he has been involved in downtown development for many years and that it takes time to put things together. He asked that we look at why we are holding the public hearing, is it for the good of the City and overall development. Mayor Henderson explained that he did not want the opportunity for Blocks 3 & 4 to fade away. He said his concern is that Blocks 3 & 4 have pointed out flaws in the system. Mr. Reinke said that the EDA and the Council did not have the opportunity to sit down together and work to come up with objectives and initiatives to make the program work. He said before any dismantling occurs it is important that the EDA and the Council work together to keep an advisory board open to the Council. In response to a question as to how an EDA composed of only Council members would be more efficient, Mayor Henderson said that the intent is not to eliminate citizen input, the EDA will be replaced with a board, and the ultimate authority has always been with the Council. Judy Case, 812 W 5th, approached the podium and stated that she felt the Council members had made up their minds on this project and the EDA members have not. She said the process, more than the project bothers her most. She said she does not believe there will ever be a consensus or that the Council will do the best job for the City. She asked what was good about the project and that she likes private enterprise and wants what is best for the downtown businesses. She asked that Councilmembers not make up their minds before all the facts are considered. Dolores Lebens. former Mayor and Councilmember, approached the podium and said that she has sat through discussions since 1984 and that since this project began a large sum of money has been put into the downtown area. She said the money was put into the downtown area to save 1st Avenue which is now closed and now there are plans to take out the north side. She asked if the south side would then be taken down. She said the Council would hear fewer complaints if they listened to the people and that a few more months would not make a difference. Mayor Henderson said that a few more months is critical, that if a decision is delayed the HRA would have to back out. He said a project can continue to move forward while working on finding answers to questions. He said he was concerned that there has always been a mythical developer for Blocks 3 & 4 and the individual effort was eliminated with the moratorium. He said a developer was found and they have spent a lot of money on studies. He said that not keeping the project moving forward is the flaw in the process that was previously mentioned. Official Proceedings of the February 25, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Mary Jean Estenson, Owner Shakopee Trading Post, approached the podium and said she has not personally made a decision as to what would be best for Blocks 3 & 4. She said the project seems to keep changing and that many of the business owners would likely support the project if they knew what the project was as it relates to the entire city. She said she would like to see the small town feeling preserved and fears that what is known as Shakopee will disappear. She said she would like to support the project if she could see a phased plan as to how the government center fits in with Blocks 3 & 4. She said it would be easier to blend everything together if there were an overall plan. Mayor Henderson agreed there is a need for a long term plan or concept. However, the problem is that the time frame to develop Blocks 3 & 4 is narrow. Carolyn Felix. 825 S Fuller, approached the podium and said it seems that the Council can speak with citizens but when those citizens have some power, like the EDA, behind them they are unable to work together. Mary Shea, Shoe Repair & Cigar Shop, approached the podium and asked what would become of the site should the project not move forward, and where it would tie in with the downtown area if it moved forward. She said she was concerned about looking at a vacant lot for an extended period of time. Mayor Henderson explained that the buildings will be removed and if the project does not move forwardgrass will be planted. He said there is no formal plan for downtown at this time. Having no other interested citizens the public hearing was closed. A recess was taken at 8:25 P.M. The meeting re-convened at 8:40 P.M. Zorn/DuBois offered Resolution No. 4610, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Resolution No. 4206 Regarding The Creation of an Economic Development Authority, By Changing The Membership Of Governing Body Of The Authority, and moved its adoption. A discussion ensued regarding the present structure and the proposed restructuring. It was suggested that this situation could be dealt with by a joint effort between the existing EDA and the City Council. It was also agreed that while debate makes a good healthy government, not moving forward is the problem. Mayor Henderson acknowledged that if passed, this would be viewed as eliminating citizen communication. He said the EDA, as it was created was an upgrading of the CDC and was the beginning of a flaw. He said the current system has some serious flaws and supports debate. However, he said regardless of who is on either side, the flaw is such that while Blocks 3 & 4 has become a focus, it also points out that there is a body, who through inaction could prevent the Official Proceedings of the February 25, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Council from taking any action. He said that the creation of a body with little or no action can cause the Council not to be able to exercise its authority and is a serious flaw. He apologized for not giving the EDA a clear charge and thanked everyone for their participation. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Sweeney dissenting. Zorn/DuBois moved to direct staff to formalize the creation of a CDC proposal and to bring it to Council for discussion. Motion carried unanimously. Zom/DuBois moved to adjourn to Wednesday, February 26 at 6:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:58 P.M. ?),„.LA J_ 01\ . dith S. Cox City Clerk Esther TenEyck Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 26, 1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Jane DuBois, Cletus Link, Robert Sweeney and Burl Zorn present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Paul Snook, Economic Development Director; and Steve Bubul, City Attorney. Mayor Henderson stated that the City Council would recess to convene as the Economic Development Authority. Mayor Henderson re-convened the City Council at 9:30 p.m. There was no action that needed to be taken by the City Council at this time. DuBois/Sweeney moved to adjourn to Tuesday, March 4, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. • h S. Cox Clerk Janet Freeman Recording Secretary • OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 4, 1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Jane DuBois, Cletus Link, Robert Sweeney and Burl Zorn present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Paul Snook, Economic Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk and Jim Thomson, City Attorney. Resolutions of appreciation were read by the Mayor and presented to Bill Anderson, Cable Communications Advisory Commission, Community Access Corporation Board of Directors and Energy and Transportation Committee; Larry Moonen, Cable Communications Advisory Commission and Community Access Board of Directors; Paulette Rislund, Shakopee Community Recreation Board and Shakopee Park & Recreation Advisory Board and Anne Seifert, Park& Recreation Advisory Board. Zorn/Link offered Resolution Nos. 4621, 4622, 4623 and 4624, Resolutions of appreciation to Bill Anderson, Larry Moonen, Paulette Rislund, and Anne Seifert, and moved their adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Henderson also extended his personal appreciation to each of the above citizens. At 7:01 P.M., the City Council recessed to convene as the Economic Development Authority. Mayor Henderson re-convened the City Council meeting at 7:30 P.M. Mayor Henderson explained the items on the consent agenda. Three items were removed from the consent agenda: 12E6) Shakopee Community Access Corporation By-Laws Amendments, 11B) Shenandoah Place Planned Unit Development No. 10, and 12E3) parsons Brinckerhoff Consulting Contract Extension. Added to the agenda was item 11D) to appoint Dave Thompson to fill Joe Wolfe's unexpired term on the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (until March 31, 1997). DuBois/Zorn moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve the consent agenda, as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Liaison reports were given by Councilmembers. Mayor Henderson stated he would deliver his report later on when the relevant topic was to be discussed. Mayor Henderson then inquired if there were any interested citizens who wished to speak to a matter not on the agenda. Scott Ferrozzo, 584 Vista Ridge Lane, Shakopee, approached the podium and stated that he had tarred five feet of a road in front of his house on his property and 1 Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -2- received a letter from the City stating that the City was going to sue him because of this. He stated that he did not know he needed a permit and also received approval from his neighbors. Mr. Loney stated that the tarred part was on a city right of way which did require a permit and that the matter was brought to the owner's attention last summer. It was suggested that Mr. Ferrozzo contact staff regarding the matter and then report to the Council. Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve the minutes of February 4, 1997. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve bills in the amount of $267,800.94. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve a request from Barb Trowbridge regarding an overnight at the youth activities building. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) Mayor Henderson then opened the public hearing on the proposed improvements to Vierling Drive from CR-69 to Presidential Lane, Taylor Street from Vierling Drive to the north plat line of Arlington Ridge First Addition, and Polk Street from Vierling Drive to 13th Avenue. Mr. Loney approached the podium and summarized the project which is the building of Vierling Drive from its present location to County Road 69 and also to connect Taylor Street to Arlington Ridge and to connect Polk Street to 13th Avenue. Improvements will be roadway, trail and sidewalks. The cost is estimated at $1,165,400.28. The cost for Polk and Taylor Streets would be approximately $129,000. The project will include sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and watermain. The assessments are listed in the feasibility report. Stone Meadows will be doing some of the grading work. A basic storm sewer assessment will be needed for the street and surrounding development and will be assessed to the property owner. A pond will be constructed. The area where the sanitary sewer will be located is very low but a lift station should be able to be avoided. Councilor DuBois asked about traffic control in the area to which Mr. Loney replied there will be stop signs on all public streets. A traffic signal will be looked into later if needed. Shane Wolf, 1152 Polk Street, Shakopee, approached the podium. He stated that the project is wonderful, however, he was concerned about the increase in traffic. He noted that there is a private secondary drive behind the mall (Shakopee Town Square) which is his backyard and he was concerned about the increase in traffic on that private drive with the new construction. He realizes there are speed bumps but did not think that they have much effect. Mr. Wolf asked why this drive would have to stay open if the proposed improvement is made. Mr. Loney replied that that area was not specifically addressed in the project, however, he thought that traffic would lessen rather than increase. In order to appropriately address the question, a traffic study would be needed. Mr. Wolf thought the private drive was being used more for public use than private use. Mayor Henderson stated that the mall does have access and that the City has limited powers Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -3- to address this as private property but it can look at how the road is being extended to Vierling Drive. Ralph Lenzmeier, 212 West Fifth Avenue, Shakopee, approached the podium to reconfirm the cost of the project. There being no further comments, Mayor Henderson closed the public hearing. Zorn/DuBois offered Resolution No. 4611 Ordering the Improvement and Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Vierling Drive from County Road 69 to Presidential Lane; Taylor Street, From Vierling Drive to the North Plat Line of Arlington Ridge First Addition; and Polk Street, From Vierling Drive to 13th Avenue, Project No. 1997-1, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Henderson then opened the public hearing on the vacation of Lewis Street north of 1st Avenue between Blocks 3 and 4. Michael Leek approached the podium and summarized the reason for the vacation. He reported that the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the vacation. The proposed resolution approves the vacation of right-of-way but reserves certain drainage and utility easements. Mr. Leek also noted there are some alleys in the area which will also need to be vacated (for the Blocks 3 and 4 project) and would require a public hearing also. Mr. Sweeney questioned where the easements were located and Mr. Leek replied that the easements were over the entire area. Staff was directed to double check that point. Mr. Sweeney also inquired what the gas main was servicing. Mr. Leek replied that he was not sure but would check into the matter. Mr. Leek did state that the gas main would not affect the easement. Harry Weinandt, 1259 Maxine Circle, Shakopee, approached the podium to inquire if the plans for Blocks 3 and 4 were finalized enough to go ahead and vacate the street. Mr. McNeill stated that if there is a question, it would be appropriate to continue the public hearing to the next meeting. Mr. Sweeney said that if the only question is the easement question, that the hearing could be closed rather than continued and the question can still be answered. There being no further comments, Mayor Henderson closed the public hearing. Sweeney/Zorn moved to table action on Resolution No. 4626, vacating Lewis Street north of 1st Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. DuBois/Sweeney moved to take off the table the vacation of Fuller St. and Atwood St. between 4th and 5th Avenues. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Mr. Leek noted that this matter had previously been tabled after the public hearing because of the need for additional information. He also noted that a memo was prepared and distributed regarding the cost of utility relocation and the alternatives. Mr. Leek also noted that the Planning Commission had voted to rescind their previous recommendation to vacate the streets. Mr. Leek stated that depending on council action, there would be a need to direct staff on how the relocation of the utilities would be paid and how the design alternatives for the roadway in the area would be handled. Mayor Henderson noted that this was not a public hearing but that people will have a chance to speak. He also stated that there have been many discussions regarding this project and he will address those. He then approached the podium. Mayor Henderson stated that the county had requested the closure of Atwood and Fuller between Fourth and Fifth Streets. Mayor Henderson did have discussions with St. Mark's Parish and with the county as to why the county felt that closure was necessary. He stated that what the council needs to act on is the impact the closing of the streets would have on the neighborhood and not to debate the design of the building and asked those in attendance to refrain from discussing the design. Mayor Henderson stated that the City believes that Atwood would not need to be closed at this time and the county stated it could develop the parking lot to enhance St. Mark's. He noted the City was concerned about where the traffic would go and thought that the traffic would be handled by Holmes. He also stated that most of the people coming to the courthouse would be coming from the south and east portions of the county or in-town, from 4th and 6th Avenues. Mayor Henderson stated that closing both Atwood and Fuller would be a significant change but if only one block of Fuller was closed that there would probably be a reduction in traffic along 5th and there would be a loss of traffic between 5th and 6th on Fuller. Traffic coming to the courthouse would either go down Fuller directly to the parking lot or approach from 4th Avenue. Mayor Henderson continued, he opined that closing Fuller only would have a minimal impact and may be a positive impact. He noted that traffic coming from old 169 still has a straight shot to the courthouse as does traffic coming from the new bypass and that the Council also needs to consider the cost. He believed the above was a workable solution and did not see a large inconvenience for the residents in the area. Mr. Zorn asked if Atwood could be removed from vacation per the county and also asked to consider the items one at a time. Harry Weinandt reapproached the podium to opine that both Atwood and Fuller be kept in the agenda because there is a PUD being considered which includes both streets. He thought that either both streets need to be closed or none at all. Mayor Henderson explained that approval of the PUD does not commit to the vacation of Atwood. Mr. Thomson stated that either one or both or neither could be closed. Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Norm Schmitt, 963 Atwood, Shakopee approached the podium to inquire how the school buses are going to get to and from school without going up Fuller. He stated that getting on to 10th Avenue is a problem already. People would now have to go over to Scott and then come back to Fuller. Mayor Henderson stated that problem could possibly be controlled with additional stop signs. Zorn/Link moved to deny the request for the vacation of Atwood Street between 4th and 5th Avenues. Motion carried unanimously. Ralph Lenzmeier reapproached the podium to inquire what the benefits were to the residents in the neighborhood regarding the (courthouse) project. He said that the residents are opposed to closing Fuller and that the building should be redesigned to keep Fuller Street open. He also stated that in the long run having two separate buildings would be safer. Dawn McQuillan, 1585 Monarch, Shakopee, approached the podium. As president of St. Mark's Parish Council, she stated that the parish appreciated the progress that had been made but still had some concerns. She stated that the parish enjoys being a neighbor of the courthouse and will work with the county to make as many parking spaces available as possible without foregoing church business. She stated that Parish Council opposed the closure of Fuller Street until such time as the county could show that the benefits outweigh the costs and inconvenience. Ms. McQuillan stated that St. Mark's would continue to assist for the mutual benefit of all and offered a petition with 600 signatures to support the Parish Council's position. Fr. William Stolzman, Pastor, St. Mark's Parish, 333 West 4th Avenue, approached the podium. He stated that he is a moral leader and does not get involved with political issues but became involved in this issue because he sees it as a moral issue. Fr. Stolzman feels the moral value being threatened is justice. In forming an opinion on this project, Fr. Stolzman took all the different aspects of this matter and weighed them on a scale. He found that the prejudice and fear regarding the consequences of not closing the street was that the county would move to the country. He also noted that cost is another issue because the county already has city property and moving to the country would force the county to have to purchase additional property. Fr. Stolzman noted that when everything was put on a scale, that the greatest common good would be to have the justice center on a block of its own and not close Fuller. He recommended that if the Council weighs the solid evidence, it will do what is right. Lawrence Samstad, registered engineer, approached the podium. He stated that the Council has a responsibility and care as to closure of dedicated streets and that the Council needs to have a good reason, not just to close a street because an architect says it is needed. He opined that the City needed to look at the alternatives. He also stated that the project supervisor did not speak with Fr. Stolzman as previously represented to the Council. He stated he knew there are other routes but those routes cause permanent detours. Mr. Samstad stated that intimidation on anyone's part should not enter into the decision that is made. He opined that diverting traffic will Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -6- also cause the City cost. Mr. Samstad spoke with two other professional engineers who also agreed that closure was not a good idea. Those engineers were Bo Spurner and Dave Hutton, both former City Engineers. He also noted that the City's traffic consultant said that Fuller is the ideal street for a north-south collector in the area. Gary Morke, 1042 Merrifield, approached the podium. He noted that the county had been a contributor to the economic health of the City and that it would affect the downtown and the new Blocks 3 and 4 redevelopment if the county moved. Bill Pieper, 1410 Fuller, Shakopee, approached the podium to note that the new community center has a lot of hockey games and outside activities which carry a lot of out-of-town traffic and that closing Fuller would necessitate a lot of jogging around for those outside residents. Ralph Lenzmeier reapproached the podium to state that it was irresponsible for the county commissioners to say that either the road closes or the county will move to the country. Art Bannerman, County Commissioner, 1708 12th Avenue, Shakopee, approached the podium. He stated he wanted to keep the courthouse campus downtown and does not know what will happen if the City votes against closing Fuller. He stated he would not vote to move, however, he did not know what the other commissioners would do. Mr. Bannerman stated he knew it was an inconvenience but thinks the costs that have been discussed are exaggerated. He opined that the inconvenience was not as great as the inconvenience or cost of not closing. He sees savings in cost and convenience because people will be entering from one place (into the facility) and if there were two separate buildings, some people would end up going to the wrong building and have to be redirected plus it would be inconvenient for the county employees to have to go from one building to another. Mr. Bannerman encouraged the Council to vote for the closing of Fuller. Gary Cunningham, County Administrator, approached the podium. He stated that he enjoyed his experience of 3 1/2 years in Shakopee and that people need to look at the history of this project. Mr. Cunningham stated that it was not just the county's idea to close the streets and that in 1995, then mayor Laurent presented a map to the county with the streets closed. He also noted that Resolution No. 4386 developed a transportation plan and vacation of necessary streets to implement the plan and that the present Council reaffirmed that resolution. He also noted that a citizen's committee who was appointed by the county board looked at the plan and seven different sites. Mr. Cunningham stated that part of the reason the county moved forward with the purchase of the St. Francis Hospital property was due to representations made by the City. He also noted that a meeting was held with the City Council-elect regarding the situation and that the county commissioners acted on conversations and discussions with the Council. He noted that if the county had to do it over again, maybe something different would be planned. Mr. Cunningham stated that the county intends to work with everyone, but the City needs to understand that staff recommendations are based on the criteria and costs that included the vacation of Fuller. He concluded by stating that he had every respect for citizens and wants to work together with them. Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Mr. Zorn stated that he will cast his vote for what is best for the City of Shakopee. He believes there are two objectives in this project, those being that the County remain in its present location and that Fuller remain open and does not believe that these objectives conflict. He stated he had not been convinced as to the value of a single point of entry. Zorn/DuBois moved to deny the request for the vacation of Fuller Street between 4th and 5th Avenues. Ms. DuBois stated she also believed this was a moral issue and has been a difficult decision for her. Mr. Link stated that he agreed with Mr. Zorn and Ms. DuBois and added that it would be a great injustice to taxpayers for the county to tear down the St. Francis building and then decide that if it cannot have Fuller Street it will move. Mayor Henderson stated that this vote had perhaps bothered him the most since taking office. He noted that he was very reluctant to reaffirm the previous Council's actions but that he was in support of the county campus and thought items were still up for discussion. He opined that the county failed in not making details of the project public until the past winter but also apologized to the county because he believes the City misled the county. He stated that this is a no win situation for the Council and that he does believe the impact has been exaggerated. Motion to deny vacation of Fuller Street between 4th and 5th Avenues carried 4-1 with Sweeney opposed. City Council took a break from 9:10 P.M. until 9:23 P.M. Zorn/Sweeney moved to grant the developer of Market Place 2nd Addition an additional 120 days in which to file the Final Plat with the Scott County Recorder's Office. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) Sweeney/Zorn offered Ordinance No. 469, Amending the Zoning Map Adopted in the City Code Section 11.03 by Rezoning Land Commonly Known as the Property South of Eastway Avenue Extended and West of Shenandoah Drive, From Urban Residential (R-1B) to Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone No. 10, and moved its adoption. Mr. Leek noted that the Planning Commission had reviewed the matter and recommended adoption subject to a 17.54% open space rather than the 20% required by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Zorn stated he was not pleased with deviating from the 20%. Mr. Sweeney noted that the developer had made a number of adjustments to the plan and that only so many adjustments can be made. He also opined that if the request was turned down again, the property would probably end up being park land. Ms. DuBois stated she felt there was diversity and the developer has Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -8- worked with the Planning Commission and the City Council. Mr. Link asked if the 20% was going to be flexible from this point on to which Mayor Henderson stated that the 20% stands but is given some flexibility. Motion carried 4-1 with Zorn opposed. Discussion was held regarding Ordinance No. 479, Fourth Series, Amending Chapter 11, Zoning, By Adding Regulations for Communication Towers and Apparatus/Devices. Mr. Leek stated that this ordinance regulates telecommunications devices and towers. He stated that the matter had been reviewed by the Planning Commission and they recommended its approval. Mr. Leek stated that the ordinance creates definitions and establishes communication service devices or apparatus as permitted uses in the enumerated districts. It also identifies light industrial and heavy industrial districts and addresses the potential lease of park areas or facilities. Mr. Zorn questioned why only the Park & Rec was designated to receive money and not other entities if a tower were to go on their land to which Mr. Leek replied that the Park & Rec had a specific concern if a tower were allowed in a park and under what circumstances. He also stated that other city departments had not been approached about the matter. Mr. Sweeney stated that revenues generated from the parks need to stay there because that is where they are needed. Ms. DuBois asked if the towers were fenced and Mr. Leek stated that there were provisions for that. Tim Keane, an attorney with Larkin, Hoffman representing American Portable Telecom (APT) which is one of the two licensees in the area, approached the podium. He opined that the ordinance was problematic because of the limitations of towers in the industrial districts with conditional use permits. He explained that there are two devices that are regulated, one of which is an antenna which can be attached to buildings in existing districts. The other device is the towers. Mr. Keane noted that in the far east, west and south sides of the City there are very few citing opportunities. He also stated that the industry is becoming very creative in hiding installations of devices. Devices can be hid in shopping mall parking lot light poles. Mr. Keane asked that the City consider the districts in which conditional use permits would be issued and would like to discuss flexibility with staff. He stated that there are no plans for any devices now. Mr. Leek noted that there is some flexibility built into the plan. Mr. Sweeney noted that the moratorium had already been extended once. It is due to expire April 1st. Mr. Thomson stated that it could be extended for another short period of time. Mayor Henderson asked if the ordinance was passed tonight if it could be amended to which Mr. Thomson replied yes. Mr. Leek noted that there may be more opportunities for devices in the rural residential areas. Sweeney/Zorn offered Ordinance 479, Fourth Series, An Ordinance of The City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Chapter 11, by Adding Regulations for Communication Towers and Apparatus/Devices, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -9- Mr. Zorn asked if the City was covered for any right-of-way cuts in the lands to which Mr. Loney replied that a permit would have to be obtained. Mr. Loney stated that bids need to be obtained to extend sanitary sewer to the fire station site. He noted the grade needs to be lowered to build the fire station and that the current gas line runs diagonally through the site and may need to be rerouted. He noted it would be possible to add an addendum to the fire station project (for the sewer extension) so that the cost could be pro rated based on the acreage served. The remainder would be paid from capital improvements. He also noted that it is unknown how the adjoining land would be developed. Mr. Sweeney stated that the public utility is planning on installing an oversized waterline because the site may be a desirable location for another bypass cross. He suggested that Mr. Loney contact Joe Adams to find out what the public utility is doing and return to Council with a package deal. Mr. McNeill noted that doing that would eliminate the opportunity to include the sewer extension with the specifications that are currently being bid out for the fire station. Mr. Loney noted that the current bid opening is scheduled for March 27th and it may be tight to get this information out to the bidders. Mr. Loney explained that the reason he wanted the alternate bid item was because if the City did not like the alternate bid or changed their mind, the Council could deny the alternate bid and bid it out as a separate contract. Sweeney/Zorn moved to authorize the city engineer to prepare plans and specifications for a sanitary sewer extension from County Road 16 to the fire station site and include this work in the fire station plans as an alternate bid item with funding prorated based on acreage served from the fire station account and the Capital Improvement Fund. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Link noted there is a steep drop on the property. Mr. Sweeney moved that staff be directed to contact Minnegasco for the gas line work to be done (for the entire site) at one time to which Mr. Loney replied that would make sense if a plan for development for the undeveloped property was known at this time. Mr. Sweeney then withdrew the motion. It was suggested that the adjoining property be looked at by staff regarding what, if any, future development could be planned. Staff will look into the matter to see if this would be a City Council or EDA matter. Chief Tom Steininger approached the podium with the request to hire an additional police officer to replace Don Bisek who recently retired. Mr. Zorn asked what the current ratio of police to citizens was and thought that the City did not need extra police officers at this time. Mr. Steininger stated that the City was in a growth mode and wanted to be more involved in pro active areas such as working with the various apartment complexes in educating them as to what is acceptable behavior and what is not, etc. Mayor Henderson noted that there is an increase in the City's population during the summer. Ms. DuBois asked whether a replacement for Mr. Bisek was already included in the last police hiring to which Mr. Steininger replied no. It was also noted that the transportation and entertainment in the area does impact the police department. Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Sweeney/Zorn moved to table the hiring of a police officer. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/DuBois moved to award the City's towing contract for the period of April 1, 1997 to December 31, 1998 to Shakopee Towing. Motion carried unanimously. City Council took a bread from 10:28 P.M. until 10:38 P.M. Zorn/DuBois moved to appoint David Thompson as Shakopee Public Utilities Commissioner to fill the unexpired term of Joe Wolfe(ending March 31, 1997). Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Sweeney moved to authorize payment in the amount of $4,702.50 to Tim's Lawn and Landscaping for work done at the Shakopee Community Center. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Sweeney moved to adopt Resolution No. 4625, Resolution Accepting Work on 17th Avenue, from County State Aid Highway 17 to Sarazin Street and Sarazin Street from St. Francis Avenue to 17th Avenue, Project No. 1996-1. (Motion carried unanimously under Consent Agenda.) Sweeney/Zorn offered Resolution No. 4628 Ordering Preparation of a Report for Storm Sewer Improvements for Valley Park 6th Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. DuBois/Sweeney moved to authorize staff to utilize Scott County personnel in the advertising and hiring of one maintenance worker for the Public Works Department. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve the application and grant a temporary on-sale liquor license to the Church of St. Mary's for March 16, 1997. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) Zorn/Sweeney moved to end the probationary status of Mark McQuillan and grant him full time status as Park and Recreation Director effective March 5, 1997. (Motion carried unanimously under Consent Agenda.) Mr. McNeill noted that the proposed changes to the Shakopee Community Access Corporation By-Laws (as presented) need to be amended. The By-Laws need to be revised to include a Board of Directors of not less than seven persons. Sweeney/Zorn moved to revise the Shakopee Community Access Corporation By-Laws (Sec. 2.21) to: "The Board shall be composed of not less than seven (7) persons..." Motion carried unanimously. OffiShakopeecial ProceedingsCityCouncof il the MParch-41,11997 age - Mr. Zorn asked why a person can be a director if the person does not subscribe to cable. Mr. Sweeney stated he did not see where that requirement would enhance a person's interest to be involved in the matter. Mr. Zorn was also concerned about the standards and thought there should be some type of censorship to which Mr. Sweeney replied that that was not a matter that needed to be contained in the By-Laws because the Community Access Board still had a right to set standards. Mr. Zorn replied that he thought the Council should have some say. Mr. Thomson stated the Council delegates authority to the Community Access Board for that reason. Ms. DuBois inquired what recourse the City has and Mr. Thomson replied that if the Council is unhappy with decisions being made that it can re-make the Community Access Board. Zorn/DuBois moved to amend the Community Access Corporation By-Laws to leave in the sentence under Program Standards: "The Board will maintain access programming which is consistent with community standards." Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Zorn moved to amend the Community Access Corporation By-Laws (Sec. 2.21) to: ". One (1) of the Cable Company's representatives may be included on the Board of Directors..." Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Zorn moved to amend the Community Access Corporation By-Laws (Sec. 2.24) to: "A Simple majority shall constitute a quorum." Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve the changes to the By-Laws of the Community Access Corporation, as amended. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McNeill noted that three new applicants recently sought appointment to the Cable Access Corporation Board and that he and Messrs. Zorn and Link had interviewed two of the applicants. They were recommending that Joel Cole and Trish Grose be appointed to the Community Access Corporation Board of Directors and that Mr. Sweeney stay on the Community Access Corporation Board of Directors through one financial cycle. Mr. McNeill explained that doing so would bring the membership to eight people but noted that there will be one resignation in August. Judy Cox noted that the proposed resolution before Council also includes the appointment of Barbara Banios to the Cable Communications Advisory Commission and Gene Jeurgens to the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board and the Building Code Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Sweeney/Zorn offered Resolution No. 4627, Resolution Appointing Individuals to Various Boards and Commissions, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Link moved to approve the extension of the agreement with Parsons Brinckerhoff for consulting planning services to expire March 4, 1998. Motion carried unanimously. • Official Proceedings of the March 4, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -12- Zorn/Sweeney moved to end the probationary status of Mark McQuillan and grant him full time regular status as Park and Recreation Director, effective March 5, 1997. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) Mr. McNeill explained that staff had been directed to negotiate a lease amount with Scott Joint Prosecution Association (SJPA) to include a new rental amount. He explained that the lease is being increased from $550.00/month to $850.00/month. With the remodeling of the community room, he explained that this equates to 1,400 sq.ft. at $7.29 per square foot as opposed to 800 sq.ft. at $8.25 per square foot. Mr. McNeill also explained that in Section 10 of the proposed lease there is an addition that is needed: "After the initial three (3) year term,". He also recommended that SJPA be authorized to select the architect for the remodeling, since it is our building. Link/DuBois moved to approve the revised lease agreement with Scott Joint Prosecution Association, including a rental amount of$850.00/month; and, to concur with SJPA's use of JEA Architects for design services. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Link moved to adjourn to Tuesday, March 18, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:07 P.M. tkottik ), 62c J dith S. Cox ity Clerk Janet Freeman Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 11, 1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 4:30 P.M. with Councilmembers Jane DuBois (at 4:34 P.M.), Burl Zorn, Bob Sweeney and Clete Link present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Sweeney/Zorn moved to accept the special call of the Mayor. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Link moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McNeill explained that Mr. Bruce Bonebright and Mr. Ralph Schmitz from James Development Firm are present seeking a letter of support from the City for a tax credit program and that the deadline for their submittal of information is Thursday. Since the next scheduled council meeting is not until March 18th, they asked for this meeting so that Council could hear their presentation. Councilor DuBois entered and took her seat. Mr. Bonebright explained that what they are proposing is exactly like the project they built behind K-mart. They would like to build four 16 unit buildings on a piece of property lying along Eagle Creek Drive between Sazarin and Roundhouse Streets. He said that this is an 11.7 acre piece of property between Sarazin and Roundhouse. He said that they plan to put in a proposal to Minnesota Finance Housing Agency (MFHA) Tax Payer Section 42. He said that they want to do a combined apartment complex with some low income housing and some conventional. Mr. Bonebright explained that they would be utilizing the same concept of the townhomes, not a three story building, at this time and that they would be utilizing about 6.4 acres. The four 16-unit buildings would be built towards Eagle Creek splitting the piece of property along the center. Along the back side of the property towards the drain ditch they will put the conventional units, probably about 64 units. Mr. Bonebright explained that the letter of support that they would like to have shows MFHA that the City of Shakopee is willing to take a look at and would support a project of this stature on this property. He explained that of the 64 units that they are proposing only 48 of the units would be Section 42 tax credit units and that the other 16 would be conventional, or about 75%. Mr. Bonebright answered questions on what a Section 42 tax credit project is. Mr. Schmitz answered questions on why they have selected Shakopee for this project. Official Proceedings of the March 11, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Sweeney/DuBois moved to authorize the Mayor to write a letter to the MFHA stating the City's support of the concept (for a 64 unit Section 42 tax credit project as proposed by James Development Firm, Inc.). Motion carried 4 to 1 with Cncl.Link opposed. Sweeney/Zorn moved to adjourned to Tuesday, March 18, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 5:08 P.M. ' tixia 4_ eiic J dith S. Cox ity Clerk Recording Secretary CONSENT � o CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: City Bill List DrTE: March 27, 1997 Introduction and Background Attached is a print out showing the division budget status for 1997 based on data entered as of 03/27/97 . Also attached is a regular council bill list for invoices processed to date for council approval . Included in the bill list is payment to Scott County for the participation agreement for County Road 18 in the amount of $266, 899 . 75 which is 90% of the total estimated cost that the city will pay. Included in the check list but under the control of the EDA are checks for the EDA General Fund (code 0191-XXX) and Blocks 3&4 (code 9439-xxx) in the amount of $163 , 280 . 53 . Action Requested Move to approve the bills in the amount of $533, 178 . 58 . 11110:1. 1(30 twoi CITY OF SHAKOPEE EXPENSES BY DEPARTMENT 03/27/97 CURRENT YEAR ANNUAL MONTH TO PERCENT DEPT DEPT NAME BUDGET ACTUAL DATE EXPENDED 11 MAYOR & COUNCIL 89,410 3,871 12,708 14 12 CITY ADMINISTRATOR 249,980 21,705 41,497 17 13 CITY CLERK 166,720 12,689 33,738 20 15 FINANCE 322,780 19,636 55,889 17 16 LEGAL COUNSEL 217,320 5,001 11,452 5 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 451,290 27,927 63,071 14 18 GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 146,940 7,685 22,828 16 31 POLICE 1,703,140 146,524 384,991 23 32 FIRE 448,990 26,472 62,901 14 33 INSPECTION-BLDG-PLMBG-HTG 245,070 17,979 48,019 20 41 ENGINEERING 425,780 29,438 73,827 17 42 STREET MAINTENANCE 781,860 48,458 149,833 19 44 SHOP 126,540 11,464 25,272 20 46 PARK MAINTENANCE 350,420 14,859 37,832 11 91 UNALLOCATED 622,630 -69,429 -1,036 -0 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 6,348,870 324,279 1,022,821 16 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 496,770 9,316 23,416 5 TOTAL TRANSIT 496,770 9,316 23,416 5 H w rn ns a a 4 A a a a as a a a a a a a a a aaA A AA H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 0 0 0 0 z Cd w 0m aZ z 0 z Cr) U V' H 1/40 N a0 H N M V N in W N Li)Lc) O V' V' V' In U) U) LnI in Ln UI 1/40 m a0 > m m m m m m m L- m m as M a0 a0 Z Ln Ln LC1 Ln U) in U) 01 a) a0 Lfl Lf) a) a) M a0 M M H 0 0 0 0 0 0 OI N N 0 0 N N 0 N O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N M M 0 0 M Cl 0 rI 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 N H 0 a) M H 0 a) a) 0 0 H H E. H M H H H L-- a0 H L� a) 02 H N N or) N N Z a M V. (I Li) M H H M H H H M H H M N M M A W V• V' V' V' V' N N V N N N V' N N V' V' V.V. 0 m I I I L L L I L L t I I I L I L O E a1 H a1 A 01 a1 N N 0) N N N O1 N N V H H H U 0 M N M H M M H H M H H H M H H a) V' N N 4 z V' Lo V' 0 v' V' rn ON V al CA o1 V rn CA H a M,-I a1 0 O1 > 01 01 0 0 0) 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co w W U W U Z M Cl) .7 H z 0 Cn a Cr) 4 a Cr) H Cr) k k a CO HH H C.) � G` Cl) z z > Cr) w w w z o o 4 Cl)wE w w 0 .a ..a H ao H H a Z z z W m pq a) Cl) 0 W H m >+ W 0 0 C7 4 4 a t` m 0 M 4 0 E X AA 4 > > W in WI o1 U H a a s A Cl) 0 A A 0 0 N Cr. W co N 0 a1 V .) H W W ao 0 Lo N LO .a O V' H 0 a s C4 M LI) 0 W M M E 01 W W COH0 H 0 4 0 H U U a V' N U a N N 0 W El E C4 N mCn E" U) U U U U V O• Cr)• a Cl) Cl) PI a> X4 X Z CaH Ea-' 0 a Cl) Z 01 CI) Cl) U E F 4 El mm 4 0 z a Z �H4 z W C.4 a a a, Ci Cli VI 4 a as H Z pq W x El Z 0 w Ci)E. m a w a s > A 0 � FG 0 a a U H w w 0 H H Ci W 0 H H U 0 H Z 3 3 W E. 33 El X X m F 0 Z0 0 w H E. U Z Z W 4 U H H > 4 E.E-. W a 0 Z Z 0 0 a Z X W N A w a w w U E U a E. F. a m ...It“I 01 OL 0 E A 4 .a KC E. W X X m a 4 H Z Z .a a w X w 0 w U U 0 ,x E+E ,-i 4 Z X p w W w 4 Z U U 3 to Cl) 0 X g Cl) > 3 3 4 U 0 H a Co CO 0 0 N 4 44 N N * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a)a) H H 0 0 N N H H 0 0 0 0 N N 1/40 1/40 a)a) a0 a) U)a1 z 00 0 0 00 00 00 M M MM 00 U)II) m M 00 L010 00 0101 LDLO NN Na) 4 • • • • Z a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 a) a)a) 0 0 HH Ln LI) a0 a) a) a) H H Ln U) M m L�L� Lc)0 0 NN HH a0 c0 00 00 NN HH V'V' NN NN NN NN 00 01 CA r-r-• MM HH t-L- V-t? M m 0 0 N N LO LD N N U)Lc) N N Ln LI) N N 0 0 a0 a0 N N N N +/1-VI- v)-4/1- 0 )-Vf0 4 V}+I- V}1? in.in- • • in-4/)- . . V).41)- . • • • Lr V? V}V} `,L' LO LO N N N N LI)LI) N N ,-I r-I LO LO E ^,4 i?i? N N N N Vf in- H H in-V? VI-TA- Ci I L}Ci ,-I rH i?VI 4./1-4./). W +h X a u PI E. Cl) Cr) w V' w w a w V' 0 0 0 0 O o o 0 0 H H H H I-1 El H r-I H r-1 r-I H H N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 W 0 M M M M M M• M M M M M M• M M• M M V' V'• V'Q' P4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • U N N N N N N.• N N N N N N• N N• N N N N• N N O W a1 a1 cA 01 a1 O1 01 a1 O1 a1 a1 a1 O1 01 01 a1 01 a1 01 01 Cx) x 01 01 01 a1 01 a1 01 01 01 a1 a1 01 a1 01 a1 01 a1 a1 0)0) X U H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H U 0 .a Z N M V' U) 1/40 N 03 a1 0 H N M V' U) 1/40 l a0 of H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H r-L H r-I H r"I r-I .--I .-I H U U1 A U) A Ln A LI) A LI) A Ln A LI) A U) A Lf) A LI) A Ln A LI) A L) A Li) A L) A U) A L) A U) Z U V'* V* V* V * V* V* V* V* d'* d'* V* d'* d'* V'* a'* w* V•* C A W Ln V U) V to V Ln V LP V to V Ln V in V U) V in V U) V N V Ln V Ln V U) V Ln V U) V U) 0 = U U 7lMlI.II.MMl.lMl.I.l.l.11.Il.MI......l...l.Il..lIZ alxx xx x x x x x x xxx x xx x xxxx00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 00 0 0 00 00 Ln L.f) lO lO H M V' U) 1 n V3 a0 n a0 a\01 ap a0 aD O H a0 a0 aD a0 H M 0 H a0 UI O Ln U) a0 a0 on ci 0 CO CO 03 O O O O H 01 en on on 01 01 OD 0 p ci C0L0 0 0 M M M MMH,'7.. MM0 0 O 0 <r M O O 0 01 H H H O O O O O n O O OH�"�H O OO O O H2 OON N HHH H HCD H H n H0 HHHMO O o O O O O OMM M M N N M n H H V' VcMHH M V' V' N N N M M M M N N N M M O 01 1 1 1 1 , , I I I V' V'V' w w <r V' I i 1 1 1 I I i i i <r<r Ux H01 H HHH on PH'I H H Ln N H 000 H U)H H H N1 HH V H 0 N H 4 2 H M M n n M V' Lo a0 d' N O a0 a0 N W M H H N n H O O O O O O O O l0 n O 0 01 01 01 MO LO W H M M 0 H 0 \001 O O 00 00 to cn (/) Cl) W 41 0 w W Ul Ul 0 U U U 0 0 z0 HH Cl) Cl) H H aaa w 00 �y Kr uu a'> H HH W Z ZZ 1 H H C4 KCKCFC 2 xx 2 W W W CS ' E. L4 Cl)U] a' Ci)dal) a a CO al H CO 4 4 4 E. H H w Z H E-+ Cc7 w HEl U KC KC m C4 4.11 .1 H a aaa Cl) CO CQ H 'C KC -]a FC WWW CO 1 U] Z EX FCFC w wwww 00 0 0 Z E, m 0 aaa �� zz x A 0000 mu] H H r4 4 4 0) ZZZ UUU �7 HH \ W WW HH xxxx v]U) H E. Cl) H .7 £ z z v]ul aaaa Ell 41 W W W G.Cx. CK a Cc. El W 5 > 2 2 H H H kwas ° o0o 44 44 s a ao KC x a as axE-THE4 E' as 0 0 a >i X a UUUF wa El 41 41 41 as U]a,U]U] wwww 0000 U z2 H H H H2 0 HH C4'fx LL' H Z H H Z Z 01 0) WWWW 0)cnrmv] UU a a H > E-'E-. Ln HHHH >'' iuIi zz 0 0 0 x 44 t:4 C4 M a 0) 0) H H U U Z Q rwn as A aaaa 00 F > a a 0 x PQ PQ a oaao 00 H w 51414141 C)C.) °x w El u a' H 0 zz a C4 X00 ww 0o mm CA 3333 a CO a 0 El 00 Z EC�1HEE, a �E H H UU W W EyHHH A.A. Z E+ H IX MMM z DD W HH u1 c4 r- s,s ,sud �W 0 a M 2 2 www FC as h x HH urn rn HE4E+E-i 01ICh E C) W ,..a 4 H >i 0 HHH ,� ZZ >G El W 1:4W as H 0G ICG X H Cl a a' '�7 441 CO a, CO W W UUU 0 00 0 A WW WW n N * 91 91 91 91 * * is 04 0101 N co N CO N in MM Ln U) 00 00 MM 00 0000 0101 000 HH 00 000 Mp M L4 z aO W H O N H H M V'V' 01 01 00 00 Nr... 00 0000 W L0 w OTD 01 01 0 U) LT).;"LT.0 V'01 i X 8 O o Ln,,-.1 LU V'cr 0 H H V'V' 0 0 0 0 510 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 OD a0 H O H 0 0 CO OD 0 0 0 Ln N OD H H N OI V'X 510 10 10 M M O O H H H H O O U)Lf Ln U) VD LO n N O1 U)U) ri H LD N M N M Ln t41 L?V H H H H N i?L� r?i/} O O V}4f H H N N <r[r V'M H H N cr 10 •u)-(c)- al V} H V N i?i/}th x t?t/} +'?t?+? . . 4/)-V)- i/1-41)- i/}(/)L} . 2.0-4/). 4/)-i/T-411- El M CV H VT- 04 i/>• VD- C.) s-�' W M 04 U W El H E+ 0000 00 0 0 H H H H HHH H HH H H H HH "1.--1 H 0 0 0 000 O O O 0 O O O O O 0 \\\\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \\ L7 A V'V'V'V' d'V' V' V' Tr TrO O O H'V'V' 0 0 W d' �r 0 V' V'0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O U W 01 a al CA O1 01 O1 01 Ont Ont Onl al n n n n n n n n n n Li n w x 0101 CA 01 ,01 01 O1 Ch O1 CA al O1 01 O1 CA O1 01 CA 0101 UU H H H H H ri H H H rH-I rri H H H H 01 01 CA 01 01 O1 01 01 0\ H HHH H HH H H HH HH 0 H Z H 0 H N M V' U) LO n a0 rn 0 H N M 2 0 10 * U) A U) A to U) A U) A LO A U) A in A N N M M COM U) A Ln A U) A U) A L) A U) A al 0 mU) V U) V LO V U) V U) V LO V U) V U1 V U) V V'* V' * V'* a' * 10 4c <M Ln V U) V U) V U) V in V U) V U U Cl . a) fi 0.5a KC 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 E M W 0U) a£ D z 0 z W U H O O 01 0 H 0101 N Cl C H N Ln O 01 a) Ln to rn O a) at N U) a) a) LO U) a) 01 01 01 01 T 'J a)O a0 a0 a0 0 a) CO O N a) a) a) O 00 HZ 0 0 Cl o 0 Cl l� a1 01 Cl H H 0 Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl U)l9 lO LO LD H 0 0 0 01 0 0 N 0 0 0 N CO 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N 0 0 un l 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 O O O 0 0 O O O O O H M M H H M d' d' M M d' H W Cl H H 01 H M M M M M ,7..i w' N N N Cl Cl N N N N N N N Cl Cl N Cl Cl N N N N N D W d'd' C d' d' d' d' d'd' W d' d' d' W .r d' d' d'd'd'Sr W a m i I I I I I I i i I I I L L I L I L l l i i U Z H d' d' Cl Cl H H CO CO N H N H H H H a' C H N 01 0 U 0 CO Ln N N Lf) N d' N N H M H N Cl Cl N N Ln CO CO N M 4 Z H N Tr H N M Q' LD LO Cl M Cl M M H H H N H H W LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 z H z H Cil Cr) 41 Cil CI) U1 a W Z H W F4 4 a) FG W H U] \ H U Z Z Z H Z 0 > H 0 n' O w Z H H H a H W W a o W H HH m H Z Z HH Z a Z El a a U U) Z2z2Z (x HH a H 4 4 HH 4 D 4 H a D tn \ 4 KC HHFi HHH U Z Z m XX £ a) UW Z W Z ZEZZZ En W m Z 0 H H H 0 H D 0 C7 0 0 00000 0 00 a H V) Z Z 00 Z Z Z c/a l Z Z Z FC V) \ W W ZZ W H CI) U) H W U] ZZZZZ H H H V) a X Z H H X H E a U) H a Cl) H H H H H 00 04 W W a a 00 n, g4 w W W 4 W W 0CIC]C]Ca H H H 0 FC D D H H D W D g4 0 W "Z+ 0 H H H H H MIDI E a H 0 w Upa w Cl.. w H Cl.. Cl.. ° a 011011MIDwaao 00000 U U 0 U H H H H H H H H H U Z VI ZOD H H 414141411411 Z W H 41 00 Z Z z HH 04 W HKC rn En rC FC FC FC H H H El W 1 a al H 0 z z z z z znaa FH WW WWW H i a � UK4x a hA El zz on 0 x 4 h> o W X W zz > zz z U 4 as W Cl) U > HHHHH CA HH 0 U o w C4 Z KC a) 0 K 00XXZ E. a C4a H Ke w KC x Ul Kt W W Z Z z Z x Cr) L 0404 x a W 04 >4> W D W Z H W D C14 C4 Cu HH U a a W 00 Ca m z H Z H CD x _ . cs as Cl) X a a Z 00 a Cl Z W 0 Z >>>» H H H H 0 0 4W 0 0 hi) a ww w w w 0 0 00 0 0 x x x a a a Z Z Z£Z N N * * * * * * * * * * * * H d'Ul 0-C"... 00 00 MM NN H N Cl 00 U)L() L-L- Ln U) 00 d'd' 00 00 a1 Cl O Cl U) O p4 H a0 0 a0 01 01 0 0 a0 a0 01 01 N N 00 01 L- 0 0 01 01 H H U)LO N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 T. H H H M X D OHH NN un U) d'V' LOU) d'd' d' a1 TM Ln Ln Ln Ln 0101 V'a' MM IflU) 1011) 00 :41L Cl Cl LMLO 0 NON NN NN NN T'd' 00 H01H NN HH HH 00 HH d'd' d'd' lfl Ln Ln 01MHC H 1.0 L- Cl Cl l-N in-1i)- Ui U) U>L} U>LTH V1-2/1- 411.4.0- 4.0-t11- N CI LT N N 4/1-4.0- V)-V)- V> N.Zr Tr H H d` D t/?U L? U>U> . . L}2? 4H N x LOU) H x 0 W X Cl! 0 W H Ul W H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H Et 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 W 0 C'I, V' Tr V' C C' C'a' v' C d' v' d' V' d' d' d'd'd'V'C' a o 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 U N N N N N N N N N L- l- N L- L- N (-- N r-L-f-N r- (..) U hi) a1 01 a1 a) a) a1 01 a)a) a) a) a1 a) a) a) a) 01 0101010101 G) x 01 01 rn 01 rn a1 a1 a1 01 01 m a1 01 on rn rn a1 a1 a1 01 a1 a1 G U H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H U 0 a Z d' LI) LO L. a0 01 0 H N Cl d' Lf) LD N O a) H Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl d' C a' W To W Tr Tr Tr W O x L<) A U) A in A In A in A In A U) A Ln A LC) A Lf) A Lf) A Lf) A Lf) A in A Lf) A Ln Z U d' * d'* d'* d'* d'* d'4. W * d'* d'* d'* d'* d'* C'* d'* d'* V Cii in V U) V U) V Lf) V Ln V Lf) V Lf) V Lf) V Lf) V Ln V U) V U) V LI) V In V Ln V Ln V O x U U m rn m a x x x xxx MM xxxxxxxxx xxx x x x xxxxxx x 0 0 0 000 0 0 000000000 000 0 0 0 000000 0 a w 0w al z 0 Z w U NN 0 N H m d'mrTr t0 M NNNl`NNNCSC LnLDL� ao 01 cM vN O a0 x100 a.0 VV) 01 N 01 01 0\Cl 0 01 01 01 01 V0 10 10 � 10 a) 0 Z H M M M M M M Ln O a0 O OD OD CO OD 00 a)00 CO a0 00 00 00 10 00 01 to N 0 0 00 MMMMMMMMM MMM M M w LOolHNOO a0 H Ln co O 0 0 0 O H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N H H H H HN H 0 N 10 O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N H H H H H H 0 N H H H H H H 0 Ei O HH M M M 0 0 H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 CO a000 CO 000000 CO a)OD co 01 H H H HH HHH H ZA r1,1 cx m m d' M M N m N M M M M M M M M M M M M m m N N N N N N N M OW Tr Tr Tr d'W W cr Tr cr cr cr Cr cr Cr V'cr cr WC'V' W Tr Tr NNNNNN cr UX VO N H HHH H H H00NHHNHM Cr 0)0)a) H H H 000000 N UD cr N N 01NN N H NNLnHNa0a0LnIn MMN H H H Cr W W Crct,Tr M 4 10 H H HHH M yr 0110L�McrHHh h Tr.CM 10 M M M 0003 CO CO CO CO 10 10 0 0 000 O O 000000000 0)010 O O 0 01 Cl CA 010101 10 z H Z rn co H U U oma co cn 41 Z H H W W CO W CO \ H CO a awl.wl.W-7.41 4 W-1 H > a UUW U W w camaocawwHwa H 0 a KC>I >4 04 El ww al www 0 w >4>4 >4 w EA E-4 Ea UUUUUUUUU 000 CO CO a KCKC44KC4 MH Cil al .a a FO H al CO a H H H H H H H H H H H H U a w a a a a a coUz 4 WC CO cn W CO aac404�a'aaac4 0x as 4 ccnn wwwwww 4 wwwwwwwww www w Z 000000 z A 0 0 �mz CO z cncncococnmcococn cnCacn U 0 0 0404(24 0404 0 cnEn H >+Ji>+54>+'i'i 7+>1 >i'i>i Cl) CO H x x x x x x CO.11-E4 a 41 41 El E-1 EA EA EA EA EAEAEA ESEIE• c4 u) E-i 000000 cn HH FC HHHHHHH HHH Ci] Ci) KC W w Cr., CO >C>a > x as a a a a a as aaa w w a w 0 0 41 FC4W 4N al HHHHHHHHH HHH Z 0 Cl) 000000 0 C4 a 0 HE�-lO EE-+ O ���MMMMMM MMM OU a 0 000000 W 0 z H a C4 O a0 cn E.5 41 cn g4 CD CD H co H U O can M H w Z xxx aaaaaaaaa aaa a COw 0 0 C4 x x w CO \\\\\\\\\ \\\ U �gtx4 9 w 4: z �4 4 4 4 00 a w xxxxxx m w XXX w EA 000000000 000 M 000000 co O1 El CO 000000000 000 co W ECO-1 a 0 aaa CO >1 u]cnu)01010/CnCnco cncnul 44 U wwwwww gg 4:4 KC 4 FC FC KC 4:4 Q Cr) H X Cc Cx,Cc Cc ELI fs4 t! t` H a .a.a a C7 C9 C9 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C9 C7 C7 C7 H 01 H Z WWW � 0 WWWWWWWWW WWW CO 0 Z ^.4x^.4CLxx X O1 a ZZZZZZZZZ zzz U a 0 ,:,4444,4 H z z Z Z El ZZZZZZZZZ Z Z z !x > >>>>> u] H 4 4 U U U W W H H H H H H H H H H H H X £ Z Z X Z X E ZEXEX£XEX X X E X E E ZZZZZz 0 N N # K K # # * K K # K K NN 00 00 01 M 01 LO NN Ln In W L'1V0 TrO1Ntn OLS O HM100 00 M M Ln Ln 0000000 O c. Z LOU) 00 00 HNNH Ln Ln Ln Ln 0\M LnHNWNLn N CO CO ML-01 00 0101 Ln Ln N10a0NH0 cr W X CD NN LOLn MM 0011010 NN CO a0 01 L.CAI N crNH01H0 010 x0 CO LOU) NN h.h. 000H00 MON h 0 LA10 Ll1W NN N0W N HH HH C)U1 d'L-VrH 10NM10 Mai N cr MM co W NN MOLD 01H10N Ln t?t? CO OD 00 t?Ht?H 40-.M. 1010 L-NHN L1HHM CIM M-40-01d' NN HH NN cr cr M Ma'77. 10 CO t/}t? m.m. t? i/} t?. i?t?t?t? .t?t? . . • t?t/} t?40- t?t? t/}M. t?+?t/?t/}t?t? EL t/}4n- Jd N O N M t? t?L}H t/} M- C) w x PC U W E co H W H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HH H H H H H H HH H x0 Q \ \ \ \\\ \ \ \\\\\\\\\ \\\ \ \ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A O 0 0 000 0 0 0Tr 0cr 00 cr 0000 V ` 0 0 0 w 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 U N N N LsL-N L- N NLN L.NNL-L-N NL-L- N r- N L-L-L-L-r-r- N U W 01 0) 01 01 0)01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 Cil CO H H r0-1 H�Hi rri rr4 rHi HI H rrA O H rr4 rCA H1 H H rri rrA CA CA CA CA O rHi H rcs Hi cn H H CA rri H H H rrA O a Z 0 H N M cr LO l0 H Ln Ln N Ln in in Ln Ln 0 01 0 H N 0 Cf, Ln A In A Ln A Ln A Ll A MA Ln Ln Ln 1.0 10 Z U W* Tr* Tr i4 Tr * A Ln A U1 A Ln A Ln A in A Tr U COM 41 Ln V Ln V Ln V Ln V Ln V Ln V Ln V Ln V V Ln V Ln V Ln V Ln * C In a) rn a 00 00 0 0 000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z Cx w 0 P aX A z N O O� Z CO W I U N M d'd' O Lo H i) N In H H '"I cs O t`m m d' t` C` N.t` O t` m t` C` M on> co M W N m N m M co W co c0 m 00 co co M 'Z H H M 01 M CO W N M W M M M M M M 0, MO MO M O H H H O O O LO N m m Lo O O O O O O O M M O H O In tO l0 to r` O O 00 O O U O O m 00 00 O O 000 O O O 00 O O O O O O O H H H M M M d' H H M H M N d'd' M H M H W d' M Z(x N N N N M N N N d' N M In NN M M In M N N M A W cr d' a414 d' d' d'd'd' d' d' d' W d' d' d' d' d' W d' d• OU CO H H HH H Al H H H H M c0 M d H H H rN d' rn U A H H co ld N Ln In N H N N M Ln M N N N co In In N 4 z M M H H M r` N H H M H d' NN M d' d' H r` H M O O O O O O 0 0 0 O O m 0 0 O O m O O O O m A O m W W U W U U cn W W Z U U H U Z ww v z MC.,), w 0 zz 0 > w w z H H H z W H H W H z W W Z W H as w H aaU a w HH W W 01z z H a a s HH H z aacn a H Z E" m H H H H as ZZ m H PACWH a H 44 H a m �1 4 C.) AA HH H X AA£ A U mm 4 4X2 m mm m m M Z z z A W CO A H COW C7 A m HH A O W O H P UA] A HH ZZ \ W HH4 H \ Z WW \ m W m W W \ HE-1 H H a X HH z H 4 H EX a m D m E Z 1-7 44 AA W a StgCc7 4 W A as W W 0 w a a w R4 a' t-1•l > H r4 a'H W 'J `-7 H H 'J W a' rI4 H H W W HH 4 A W W m W 4 H A A 4 0 a O A A 4 as AA x 01 aaW a Cx A 010+ oG a X a 01 01 x 00 ell CLI H w 00A o H co WW H a H a w w H X O a U H Z() O0 w w H C)C_) m oU o w E-1 c4 Upp W O O HH as EO-' H mmm H EH En 44 A A A 4 w W 44 WW H AAA A z z >> W m m A e4 0, O HH 00 a C4 C4 A >A O W W 4 H z AA C)C..) a a 4 gr•C4 0 a U as W W x w D4 H W W a Cx Cx w H a a M £H We4 Q 4g44 a W m a H F'41 C4 c4 4 > H H W an H EA EA 4141 w a XX£ O X as W v > 41 C H �A mm z m www H , w A UL7C7 W x m At 4 H H H .a x 0 rn X ZZ m rx a H 7wa 444 a W x HH 3 H H H m NN WW H ggg 44 X U ZZ Z O O O X H 00H WWW W W H 00 U U U U H O H 00 00 0o a x xxx x C>; CL' mm m m m m m m m N * * * * * * NN 0 000 OH H d'.:* 00 Lnm DON 00 MM 00 In LnO NN MM MM 00 010\ 00 a' H co 000 00101 mm Mm mmm(fl W W W aO 00 d'd'm NN NN NN OO Ln In co OO X ZZ- N Ln M O 000 W OD 00 HNNN W W r`C` NN aD DO tO NN CC`H 0101 00 NN U)In 00 0 Ln L?O1 0 O I-I. H H Al M M H M I H H H H Ln In H H M 00 00 01 01 m m tD lO H H In In NN LO i?H t0 N CO N N i/)}t? {.0-4/0-2/0-1.0- N N VI-V)- iid'd' H N H H O 0 CO DD in-in- +n � H H A V} in-in-i? i?i? i?i.ni? L}L} in- HH WW H xon NN 411-T.0- 4.0.4.0- WW N N U AO-sn- W Z I:4 0 W H Cl) W HH HH H H HHH H H H HH H H H H H H H E- O O co O O O O O 0 O O O O 0 0 O O O O O W A d'd• d'd' d' cr d'd'd' d• d• d' d'd' d' d' d' d• d' d' d' a Oo 00 0 0 000 0 o O o0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 U N N N N N N N N N rN N N ss N N N N N N N O W mm mm m on MMM on on m mm m an at o1 m an on w x mm mm on m mmm m m an mm m m on an an on m ,"t', 0 H H H H H H HHH H H H H H H H H H H H H U 1-1 '0Z M d' In t0 N CO m d 0 H N m ' to tO N co H to to to tD LO tD tD N N N N N N N N N U A In A In A In A In A In A In A In A In A in A In A LI1 A In A Ln A Ln A In A In A Z U * d' * d' * d'* d'* d' * d'* d'* d'* d' 4. d'* d' * d'* d'* d'* d'* d'* A W v in v Ln V In V In V In V In V Ln V Ln V In V Ln V InV In V In V Ln V In V In V O x O U m rn rt x x x xx xx x x x xxxxx 23 2g x x x xxxxxx 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 00000 00 0 0 0 000000 X x w 0m az 0 z 0 z w U H W 0 0 H rl NN N M de U1 U)In Ln U) W 0 0 N M 0 r r co OD 0) 00 aD 0 O 00000 01 ClM W l0 HH H000 > 00 aD O OD aD 01 01 a0 01 01 CA 01 01 01 O1 W as a0 O • . . . . Z M M CO MM MM M m m MmmmM NN Cl M M r-1.-i rW-I W W W H 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 00000 0 0 O O O 000000 0 O 0 00 00 0 0 0 .0000 H H 0 0 O H H H H H H E Lon O ClO0 O O O O O H 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 O4 Cl ae N NN NN N Cl N HHHMM 0101 H 040 M HHHHHH w W W W W W W d Cl N N N N N mm N Cl cr M M M M M M OW l i i l l I I W W I 7r W Wd a d d de Ve de <r Trdedede Ve O Ve H H H H H Cal U] ,I I r 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 N N H H R H H N rA N H H H H H H'<7,11 H H w HH 'T1 e"'1 N N N Tr Z,011 CV NN r-i �i r d' W 00 00 O p Ve W 1.0 Trm V'de H r H 100- 1.0 de W W O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O 1.0 01.p000 0 22 z H ZZ H HH E U 4 H H 0 m m En m m H�Um0H a wWWwww HUHUUO H W z WW W z mm \ m a HHHHH x W HH Hw WWW 44w C m E444Ew 4HH 00 x axaxaLx0) w a Ill wCTI wwW H a H as aH H E aaaElE xx a U \ mmmmmm C4 w 2 D D )� FC Cl) aaazz CJ CJ a H Cl) 0 x 0 X mm m U) cxn���� �� Cl) 0 444444 m a H 4444FC4 W \ E E 0C9 0E E C) W WW 000000 Q O a z zz zz z m 000C)C) 00 0 a H 000000 Zi zzz00 zz z a HHHHHH H a X EE EX X 4 x EEEHH as E E H mci1 (11 ci1 (11 mmmmm E M FA C4 W (24 FA FAU a FC a a W 04 Kt FC Kt Q Q W W KC H U W Ha ap+ 01 m Cx W CWx W W WCx,w CL407 ] W aW x W W W H 0ap C0~0wC0� W aa04 D 0 a Cl) W C)C) Ow W E E 000U)aa U 0 4 2 04144 0404040404 H a m w 0 zzzzz 0 H HHHHH U a 0 >>>>> H 0 W ti Z a m a m a X X E CI 0 FIE-10 H H 0 QQ w z 2ZZZZZ Claa W 0 '7.04 m 44 UU E Z FC���� 00 H Zx HHHHHH O1 > H H U UU HH U U 00 zzzzz �›+ 0 4 H 000000 124 1:4 4.4 FtHH WW H m E 0aaaa HH E-1 EA E 4 mmmmmm CY1 mmmmmm E E x m m W C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 a s a a FC FC FC FC FC 041 CL' 14 U as W Wra, Cl) H '� 00000 WW 0 W HE H 0 [-e00 04 x m HHHHH HH W Cl) m ZZZZZ ZZ WWCOCOU)CO 3 3 w mmmmmm m m m mm mm E E p 00000 00 3 3 3 333333 r N * 1e ie ie ie ie * 00 00 0)a0 000 �r U)0) MM 00 LD10 000100 * * * * 0048:0 * EE-+ lflIn NN l�I� NOt11 N[�O� Lf1Ln NN MM ).00-L-(�1WOcr p00 NN mm d�W OOOOOUIm Cg NN 10W NN c00)N M10O, NN HH CA CA Tr U MMr1a1 U0U) ri rl NN Ln or; 1�M1000NCl O Lf Lf 0101 H H L?1.O N i/}t>ii L)U) H H N N CO 01 M W 01 cr 10 0 10 N N M M 'cr[r 0 01 0 0 0 01 co CD <?L} L?+? H i?H t/}i?Ln i/}N N i?i/ NN NN H 1.0 M N N H N E NN H r 0 r/r - yr W x CLQ U W H E O O O 0 0 0 0 H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H FC \ \ \ \\ \\ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q O O O OO 00 0 W W 0CP cr[rW W W Yr yr W 0 W 0 0000 O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 U r r r NN r r r r r NNNNN r r r r r r r r r r O W O1 01 O\ 01 O1 01 01 01 01 rn 01 01 01 041 01 Q1 O\ 01 01 O1 0)01 041 O1 01 C4x 01 0) 01 01 O1 01 01 T Q1 0) 01 0 01 Q1 Q1 0)01 01 01 01 01 O1 01 01 01 01 U U H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 0 HZ 0 0 HH N Cl �' Ln 1.0 r 00 co a0 a0 a0 01 0 H N 1.11 A 0 U W* Ln A U) A In A Ln A Ln A Ln A Ln A O O CO 01 O1 01 [le* W* W ie W * lf7 A Ln A LOA LOA If) A LI) A O x U) v Ln v U) v UI v Ln v Ln v Ln v U) v W * W * W* W* ae* ae Ln v Ln v Ln v Inv Ln v Ln v U U N ' Zs) ro R, a 4 H H H H H H H z c4 Cr) O R1 aE D z 0 z w U H CO 01 0 H CO W LO O Ln Ln lfl W C mm m m m m M Z 1 in Ln a) Ln Ln Ln H 0 0 O O O 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 CD O O O O O M E. N H CO 01 01 co W Zx H M M M M n) H O N N d' d' a' .4, d' N i 1 U x N C0 H M H N N UH N N N N N H Q Z 01 H H H H d' 01 O O O O 0 O O z z H H z z H H u4 W U El E" Z H W 0 H a Z0 Z0 E-. CWi] F 0 0 U H x a H Cl) Cl) 0 zN 0 Q U U Cl) L] 3 Cl) W Z ?' H Cl)I a a' a Et in 0 W W W W H I LLUH 0 4 Z Z H co U• w Ems-, 0 0U Fi LO p N C4 a Q al H CI) Z X co U Cl) 0 Es N C4 4 O MI H > Cl)CTI a 0 W H o x ,4 w El H 3 CA COz0 0 U Z POG H Cl) - H 4 4 r U N H Et w al 0) > ; > a w H alo uv � Cl) a' N N * * * * * * * 00 0101 00 00 00 N N 00 00 Iy„ El Ln U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N 0 0 Ll) XNN 0)01 00 00 00 MM HH 00 O H H l0kr, 00 NN %.0\O m M NN n 00 a)0) H -4 in-V} HH NN NN ,--1 t?i? VI-U1- VI-ti)- VI-VT x s-IH <I''4' M E. x N N Vf VT M U 4/3-V- un W Z P4 U CLI E+ Cl) N N N N N N N N H E+ N N N N N N N W G1 M M M M M rn M W O O O O O O O U N N N N N N N U [11 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 [z] N 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 X U H H H H H H H U a 0 M d' Ln VD N CO 0A H 0) 01 ON O) 01 0) 01 U '`.�i In A Ln A Ln A Ln A Lf) A Ln A U) A Z U <}'* d'* i}'* V* C* V* .4'* Q N Ln V Ln V LnLt al )) Ln ‘i Loy LnLr O x U U ro M N O O O O O O U1 O Op (rl O N m N O O 0 0 N r-I (N CO (N l0 O1 U1 10 N 0 111 M d' N t. h VI- 01 d' d' N N M N f'1 N HI N 1/40 t? CO- N t} N t? CO- .CO- V} CO- v.) (r1 t? - U'1 EA- ' O1 N Z O1 ci ri t` A N Cc. E E H H 1-1 Z Z Z H H X D ."1. D A X x w z E Z a a w 0Z w Z A a' 0CL. H H E ,a H Cl) H Z Z 0 a a a u m KC >4 Z a w Z W H E. U 4 01 x X KtE. A W al 0 tX WA rna X O w U t H H Cl) U C7 W U r-1 U W Cc. to tipa a G] H Ui H N CO 01 .-1 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 H N M M M 0 .-1 cM d' d' V l N N N N CO H Xt 3t 3t kt 3t 4k 4t 3t = it Yk 3t U Z A 00000000000 0 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ° wwwwwamtewww wC.. c. r.. 13A . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Request of Cletus J. Link to Rezone Property from Urban Residential (R-1B)to Medium Density Residential (R-2) MEETING DATE: April 1, 1997 Introduction: Mr. Link originally requested approval of a zoning map amendment to rezone Outlots A and B of South Parkview Addition from R-1B to R-2. By letter dated March 19, 1997, Mr. Link amended the request to rezone only a portion of Outlot A from R-1B to R-2. Discussion: At the time the preliminary plat of South Parkview Addition was approved, the subject property was zoned R-1B. In 1994, along with a major zoning ordinance text amendment, this and several other properties were rezoned. The effect of the rezoning on the subject parcel was to prohibit the development of two-family dwelling structures, some of which were originally planned but never constructed by the applicant. The applicant's intention is to develop duplexes on the lots which would front on proposed Quincy Street. Attached for the Council's information is the staff report to the Planning Commission. Alternatives: 1. Approve the amended request for zoning amendment. 2. Deny the amended request for zoning amendment. 3. Table the request for additional information. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this request on March 20, 1997, and unanimously recommended approval of the amended rezoning request and amendment of the comprehensive plan to correspond to the zoning amendment. The Commission's findings are set forth in the draft meeting minutes, a copy of which is attached for the Council's information. REZLINK.DOC/RML 1 Action Requested: In the event the Council agrees with the Planning Commission recommendation, a motion to approve Ordinance No. 481 approving the rezoning request. In the event the Council disagrees, a motion to deny the request should be passed. /('R. Michael Leek Community Development Director REZLINK.DOC/RML 2 ORDINANCE NO. 481, FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ADOPTED IN CITY CODE SEC. 11.03 BY REZONING LAND LOCATED NORTH OF TAHPAH PARK AND WEST OF C.R.15 FROM URBAN RESIDENTIAL(R-1B) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(R-2). WHEREAS, the owners of the land described as: Outlot A, South Parkview Addition, City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, submitted an application requesting rezoning of a portion of that parcel from Urban Residential (R-1B)to Medium Density Residential (R-2); and WHEREAS, notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on March 20, 1997, at which time all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the rezoning of that portion of Outlot A from Urban Residential (R-1B)to Medium Density Residential (R-2)to the City Council. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1 - That the zoning map adopted in City Code Sec. 11.03 is hereby amended by rezoning Outlot A, except approximately the westerly 121.00 feet thereof, South Parkview 1st Addition, City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, from Urban Residential (R-1B)to Medium Density Residential (R-2); and Section 2 - Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: , City Clerk Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of , 1996. Prepared by: City of Shakopee 129 S. Holmes St. REZLINK.DOC/RML 3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Amendment to the Zoning Map-Rezone property from Urban Residential (R-1B)to Medium Density Residential(R-2) MEETING DATE: March 13, 1997 ITEM NO.: 6 Site Information: Applicant: Link Construction Company Site Location: At the northwest corner of Vierling Drive and C.R. 15; West of Lions Park and North of Tahpah Park Current Zoning: Urban Residential (R-IB) Adjacent Zoning: North: Urban Residential (R-IB) South: Urban Residential (R-1B) East: Urban Residential (R-1B) West: Urban Residential (R-1B) Comp.Plan: Single Family Residential Area: 7.0158 Acres(including area of street) MUSA: The site is within the MUSA and can be served by municipal utilities . Introduction: The subject property is Outlot A and Outlot B of South Parkview First Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. Exhibits are attached as follows: Exhibit A,Zoning Map; Exhibit B, Reduction of South Parkview 2nd Addition Exhibit C, R-IB Permitted Uses Exhibit D, R-2 Permitted Uses ZONLINK.DOC/RML 1 Exhibit E, Additional Information (Provided by applicant) Considerations: At the time the applicant platted South Parkview First Addition the subject property was zoned R-2. This zoning, and the terms of approval of South Parkview First Addition, permitted the development of 10%duplexes/twinhomes. Subsequently, the property was rezoned to R-1B, which permits single-family detached housing, and existing twin homes. As a result the applicant is no longer able to develop twinhomes on the site. The applicant has indicated that the change to R-1B took place without their knowledge and was in error in that the original zoning was correct. The development plan submitted by the applicant for South Parkview 3rd Addition proposes the construction of 6 duplexes along County Road 15 and single-family houses on the lots to the east of Quincy Circle. The R-1B zone permits single-family detached houses, but does not allow new duplexes/twinhomes. However, the R-2 zone allows the construction of of duplexes/twinhomes, but not single-family detached houses. Thus, it does not appear that the zoning change requested would accommodate the development plan anticipated by the applicant. The applicant refers to changes in neighborhood, development and retirement housing which have occurred since South Parkview 1st Addition was approved in 1985. Specifically, staff believes that the applicant has in mind the location of Tahpah Park and STH 169 to the South, Lions Park to the East, and the property's location on C.R. 15 which has an interchange with 169, and thus presumably will experience increased traffic. The two parks were in place at the time of platting of the first addition of South Parkview. In the additional information provided by the applicant, it is indicated that they are also seeking the vacation of various streets and plat approval of South Parkview 3rd Addition. At this time the applicant has not made specific application for these actions, and will need to do so before they can be considered by the Commission and City Council. Findings: A zoning ordinance amendment may be granted in the event that one or more of the stated criteria is met. These criteria, with staffs proposed findings with respect to those criteria, follows; Criteria#1 That the original Zoning Ordinance is in error; In the event that the Commission agrees with the applicant that the R-1B zoning is in error, it should so find. In the event that the Commission does not agree, it should find that the R-1B zoning classification is not in error. ZONLIN K.DOC/RM L 2 Criteria#2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place; The Comprehensive Plan is perhaps the clearest statement of a community's goals and policies. The underlying goals and policies contained in the previous plan and the current plan do not appear to have changed significantly. Criteria#3 That significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred; or In the event that the Commission agrees with the applicant, it should find that the location of 2 major city parks and the 169 interchange have resulted in significant changes in this neighborhood, which in turn make medium density housing more appropriate on the subject site. In the event that the Commission does not see significant changes, it should so find. Criteria#4 That the comprehensive plan requires a different provision. This request does not comply with the current Comprehensive Plan. In the event that the rezoning request is ultimately granted by the City Council, under City Code Sec. 11.83 (Zoning Ordinance Amendments) Subd.7 (Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan), the Comprehensive Plan would automatically be amended. Alternatives: 1. Recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to rezone the subject property to Medium Density Residential (R-2)from Urban Residential (R-1B), and thus also to amend the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Recommend to the City Council the denial of the request to rezone the subject to Medium Density Residential (R-2)from Urban Residential(R-1B). 3. Continue the public hearing and request additional information from the applicant or staff. Action Requested: 1. Offer a motion consistent with the Commission's findings to recommend to the City Council the approval or denial of the request to rezone the subject property to Medium Density Residential (R-2) from Urban Residential (R-1B). R. Michael Leek Community Development Director ZONL[NK.DOC/RML 3 fir. -, a _ b..1.1.1,-.1 "— Sl oft1 i M i y • .cE'lp i tl1 '�` illk. 10 c,a gal ( . _ . tt ©e13 '• . �m' or.am sem •'' 0��1�1. ea; L 0. „ani VI�-. ''-:.y� N.,$a ... :.'.s.�' . ...umase a az lion • ea .0 � � ' ii I sa El fes'.nail • o la3 ,Infniq - .ate,-i. SEE - •=4 fad ' a "Milli !fes i t. 0 cd ]! MEW g'iq' yv - will Win. MD Mal L / k I ,-... : , `— �s i• gig i sT" T r'...- r 4� � : iii9iii� i ,may. a c i�0' woo an w r i :. w a. .a _ ' moor. - V ". Ali • `'- ''•Eli=:Ira •I '' f_. �— ; ... ' -\ �2 .Sills . t 3,2_,-... ...1--,L.‘ alortria. VE! rein WEE7 111387.::' . . I i - , `* SUBJECT SITE> :a c j f �... vgan+e 's iO MM iIIL, 1iiiiiii/[%i:=Eii IIl TNIa' R I BPA ` r. R 1 B LEGEND AG ..:�er!y,no Zones ;IC, �arc'u:t'ure : A RR R�rci ReS.de^t'ci .� � �� R' . Low De-..styResde^tial RI B. Urbcn Residentci 116R 1 C Old Snckopee Residential ..� R2 Medium Density Residential ' R3 Multiple Family Residential Highwcy Business =2 Office Business "---T7-77 Central Business 11 : Light Industr`ai ' , '2 1 Heavy in•dustrici EXHIe(r A MR ':1c;cr Recrecticn 'c-v Zones —S— .-creicnd ocdnicin District a § 11.28 SEC. 11.28. URBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONE (R-1B). Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of the urban residential zone is to provide an area for residential development where public sanitary sewer and water are available. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the urban residential zone, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. single family detached dwellings; B. existing single family attached dwellings; C. existing two family dwellings; D. public recreation; E. utility services; F. public buildings; G. day care facilities serving 12 or fewer persons; H. group family day care facilities serving 14 or fewer children; or 1. residential facilities serving six (6) or fewer persons. Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within the urban residential zone, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. churches and other places of worship; B. home occupations; C. cemeteries; D. public or private schools having a course of instruction approved by the Minnesota Board of Education for students enrolled in K through grade 12, or any portion thereof; E. bed and breakfast inns; F. utility service structures; G. day care facilities serving 13 through 16 persons; H. residential facilities servicing from 7 through 16 persons; 1. relocated structures; J. structures over 2-1/2 stories or 35 feet in height; pogo rsas.a m 1996 1127 EXNI5IT § 11.28 K. developments containing more than one principal structure per lot; or L. other uses similar to those permitted by this subdivision, as determined by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Subd.4. Permitted Accessory Uses. Within the urban residential zone,the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. garages; B. fences; C. recreation equipment; D. gardening and other horticultural uses not involving retail sales; E. swimming pools; F. tennis courts; G. solar equipment; or H. other accessory uses, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. Subd. 5. Design Standards. Within the urban residential zone, no land shall be used, and no structure shall be constructed or used, except in conformance with the following requirements: A. Maximum density: five dwellings per acre. Streets shall be excluded in calculating acreage. B. Maximum impervious surface percentage: 50% C. Lot specifications: Minimum lot width (single-family detached): 60 feet; (existing two-family dwelling): 70 feet Minimum lot depth: 100 feet Minimum front yard setback: 30 feet Minimum side yard setback: 10 feet Minimum rear yard setback: 30 feet D. Maximum height: No structure shall exceed thirty-five (35) feet in height without a conditional use permit. page rev a d In 1996 1128 § 11.32 M. structures over 2-1/2 stories or 35 feet in height; N. developments containing more than one principal structure per lot; or 0. other uses similar to those permitted by this subdivision, as determined by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Subd. 4. Permitted Accessory Uses. Within the medium density residential zone, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. open off-street parking spaces not to exceed three spaces per dwelling unit; B. garages; C. fences; D. gardening and other horticultural uses not involving retail sales; E. swimming pools; F. tennis courts; G. receive only satellite dish antennas and other antennas; H. solar equipment; or I. other accessory uses, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. Subd. 5. Design Standards. Within the medium density residential zone, no land shall be used, and no structure shall be constructed or used, except in conformance with the following requirements: A. Density: a minimum of five and a maximum of 11 dwellings per acre. Streets shall be excluded in calculating acreage. B. Maximum impervious surface percentage: 60% C. Lot specifications: Minimum lot width (single-family detached): 60 feet; (two-family dwelling): 70 feet; (multiple-family dwelling): 100 feet Minimum lot depth: 100 feet Minimum front yard setback: 35 feet Minimum side yard setback: 10 feet Minimum rear yard setback: 30 feet P.O.missed in t996 1152 EXI-4IDrr § 11.32 SEC. 11.32. MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE (R-2). • Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of the medium density residential zone is to provide an area which will allow 2.5 to 8 residential dwellings per acre and also provide a transitional zone between single family residential areas and other land uses. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the medium density residential zone, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. residential structures containing two to four dwelling units; B. existing single family dwellings; C. public recreation; D. utility services; E. public buildings; F. day care facilities serving 12 or fewer persons; or G. residential facilities serving six (6) or fewer persons. Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within the medium density residential zone, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit A. multiple-family dwellings containing up to 6 units; B. home occupations; C. hospitals and clinics; D. cemeteries; E. churches and other places of worship; F. public or private schools having a course of instruction approved by the Minnesota Board of Education for students enrolled in K through grade 12, or any portion thereof; G. nursing homes; H. bed and breakfast inns; I. utility service structures; .1. day care facilities serving from 13 through 16 persons; K. residential facilities serving from 7 through 16 persons; L. relocated structures; p.qie rewind in 1996 1151 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Since the overall plat was approved in 1985 we have experienced significant neighborhood, development, and retirement housing changes to the South and West. My request is! 1. R-2 Toning 2. Restore the 10% twinhomes for the entire plat of South Parkview. 3. Vacate road dedication of Quincy St. , Park Circle, Parkview Terrace and relocate these streets because of the Co. Rd. 15 condemnation and the realignment of Vierling St. 4. Preliminary plat approval of South Parkview 3rd. Addition. The fact that MnDot took a 30 foot strip of land for the by-pass I felt it was good planning to put the 10% allocation for twin homes abutting Co. Rd.: 15 rather than having twin homes scattered throughout the sub-division, something the existing property owners and potential buyers don't want. This is my reason for requesting replating and it makes good sense and planning. ecH1b1T E City of Shakopee Planning Commission March 20, 1997 Page 4 A. Encouraging the planned and orderly development of residential, business, industrial, recreational, and public land B. Providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property. C. Limiting congestion in the public right-of-way. D. Preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of population and structures. E. Providing for the compatible integration of land uses and the most appropriate use of land F. Encouraging the development in accordance with the City's comprehensive plan. G. Conserving the natural beauty and environmental assets of the City. H. Protecting water resources and water quality. I. Facilitating the provision of water, utilities and sewage disposal to property as appropriate. J. Protecting the population from fire and other hazards to public safety. K. Providing for the administration of this Chapter and amendments to it, defining the powers and duties imposed by this Chapter and prescribing penalties for violation of its provisions." This variance request is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance in that it would be intensifying an existing nonconformity. Criterion 3: The request is not for a use variance. Draft Finding: The request is not a request for a use variance. Criterion 4: Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will ensure compliance and to protect the adjacent properties. Draft Finding: No conditions are proposed to be imposed as the criteria are not all met. Vote: Motion carried unanimously. 7. PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 11, THE ZONING CHAPTER, FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM URBAN RESIDENTIAL (R-1B) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-2) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF 13TH AVENUE, WEST OF ADAMS STREET AND SOUTH OF 12TH AVENUE. Mr. Leek stated the original application was to rezone the outlots. A letter from the applicant, dated March 19, is on the table to amend the request to rezone only that portion of Outlot A City of Shakopee Planning Commission March 20, 1997 Page 5 bounded by County Road 15 on both sides of Quincy Circle. Mr. Leek clarified the area in question. He stated the original plat was approved in 1985. The zoning at that time was R-2, but the zoning was changed to R-1B. The applicant is requesting the property be rezoned to R-2. Mr. Leek reviewed the criteria for approval of the request. He stated staff is not recommending a specific recommendation. Mr. Joos asked if the preliminary plat was inactive for a while, and if the final plat was approved within the last few years. Mr. Leek stated he did not recall when the final plat was approved. Cletus Link, 1215 Jefferson Street; discussed the platting history. He stated the delay was due to the lack of trunk sewer in the area. Mr. Brekke asked what the zoning on the second addition was. Mr. Link replied it was R-2 which mysteriously disappeared. Mr. Meilleur asked what impact this zoning has on the existing roadways and dedicated rights- of-way. Mr. Link stated if approved, proposed Quincy Street would have to be vacated and rededicated 30'farther west. Mr. Meilleur asked if there is any information when the rezoning took place and if the applicant was notified. Mr. Leek stated he didn't find anything relating to communication after the fact, and he stated the map changes took place in 1994 at the time of the adoption of the new zoning ordinance. Mr. Joos asked if there have been any conversations with residents in the area about duplexes. Mr. Link stated the duplexes are upscale units. He noted they are one level units. Mr. Meilleur asked how many units are proposed. Mr. Link stated there are 24 units proposed. Commissioner Mars asked Mr. Link if he has any conflict with the criteria. Mr. Link discussed building homes on shallow lots adjacent to County Road 15. Mr. Leek stated in determining whether a rezoning should take place, the applicant does not have to meet all the criteria. Commissioner Link stated there is a big market for these kinds of homes. City of Shakopee Planning Commission March 20, 1997 Page 6 Motion: Mars/Link moved to close the public hearing. Vote: • Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Leek restated at least one of the criterion must be met for approval. Mr. Joos discussed Criteria#3. Motion: Joos/Link moved to recommend to City Council the approval of the request to rezone the subject property to Medium Density Residential (R-2) from Urban Residential (R-1B)based on the following criteria: Criteria#1: That the original Zoning Ordinance is in error. Finding#1: The Board finds there is not enough information to support the fact that the original Zoning Ordinance is in error. Criteria#2: That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place. Finding#2: The Board finds the Comprehensive Plan is the clearest statement of a community's goals and policies. The underlying goals and policies contained in the previous plan and the current plan do not appear to have changed significantly. Criteria#3: That significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. Finding#3: The Board finds that significant changes in City-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred due to the proximity of the interchange from Highway 169, which in turn makes medium density housing more appropriate on the subject site. Criteria#4: That the comprehensive plan requires a different provision. Finding#4: The Board finds the request does not comply with the current Comprehensive Plan. In the event that the rezoning request is ultimately granted by the City Council, under City Code Section 11.83 (Zoning Ordinance Amendments), Subd. 7. City of Shakopee Planning Commission March 20, 1997 Page 7 (Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan), the Comprehensive Plan would automatically be amended. Vote: Motion carried unanimously. 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Revise Planning Commission Schedule Ms. Klima discussed the need to revise the Planning Commission schedule in July. Due to the proximity to the 4th of July holiday, it is recommended the meetings in July be moved one week back from the previously anticipated meeting dates. Motion: Mars/Romansky moved to change the submittal and meeting dates in July, 1997. Vote: Motion carried unanimously. B. Updates Mr. Leek updated the Planning Commission on staff activity and review of future items. Three EAW's are being reviewed at this time. He also updated them on recent City Council actions. 8. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Brekke adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. i:\commdev\minutes\1997\pc\pc0320.doc 13. 5. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Request for Variance from Minimum Lot Size DATE: April 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION Tru Built Construction, Inc. has submitted an application for approval of a variance to the required minimum lot size within the Multiple Family Residential (R3) zoning district. The minimum lot size for this zoning district required by the Zoning Ordinance is 1 acre (43,560 square feet). The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a lot size of approximately 10,000 square feet. The subject site is the Church of the Higher Ground property, south of 10th Avenue and east of Naumkeag Street. DISCUSSION A copy of the March 20, 1997, Planning Commission staff memo has been attached for your reference. At this meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial to the City Council. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the variance to the minimum lot size. 2. Deny the variance to the minimum lot size. 3. Table the decision for further information from the applicant and/or staff. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission has recommended denial of the variance to minimum lot size (Alternative No. 2). ACTION REQUESTED Direct staff to prepare a resolution for this variance consistent with the City Council's decision. ulie Kima Planner II i:\commdev\cc\1997\cc0401\varwigin.doc CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Request for Variance from Minimum Lot Size DATE: March 20, 1997 SITE INFORMATION Applicant: Tru Built Construction, Inc. Contact Person: Dick Wiggin Location: Church of the Higher Ground Christian Fellowship Property(South of 10th Avenue and east of Naumkeag Street) Current Zoning: Multiple Family Residential (R3) Adjacent Zoning: North: Multiple Family Residential (R3) South: 10th Avenue Right-of-Way East: Multiple Family Residential (R3) West: Naumkeag Street Right-of-Way Comp. Plan: 1995 Comprehensive Plan: Institutional MUSA: The site is within the MUSA. INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting a variance from Shakopee City Code, Section 11.34, Subd. 5 (C)(minimum lot size)to permit a lot with an area of 10,000 square feet rather than the minimum 1 acre(43,560 square feet)required under the cited City Code Section. Please find attached as Exhibit A,Zoning Map and Exhibit B, Proposed Site Plan. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Usually, variance requests are heard and determined by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. However, because this variance is being requested with an anticipated land use application, the variance falls under the discretion of the Planning Commission and City Council. Section 11.89(Variances)of the Shakopee City Code states"any variance which is closely related to a land use application shall be under the jurisdiction the Planning Commission and City Council'. Therefore, the Planning Commission will need to forward a recommendation to the City Council regarding this issue and the City Council will make a final determination. The subject site is currently unplatted property and is approximately 3.5 acres in size. The church and a pastoral home currently exist on the site. The applicant has expressed an interest in subdividing the property and constructing multiple family dwellings on site. As a part of this overall plan, it is the desire of the applicant to create a separate lot for the structure that currently serves as the pastors home. The property is currently zoned Multiple Family Residential(R3). This zoning district does allow, as a permitted use, existing single family homes. However,the Zoning Ordinance also requires that all lots within the Multiple Family Residential (R3)be a minimum of one(1) acre in size. The applicant is, therefore, requesting a 33,560 square foot variance from the one acre(43,560 square feet) requirement, in order to plat a lot that is 10,000 square feet in size for the existing single family home on the property. The property is currently a nonconforming use, as defined by the Zoning Ordinance, in that the pastoral home does not meet the front yard setbacks required by the Multiple Family Residential (R3)zoning district. Granting of the variance would not eliminate or reduce this nonconformity. The applicant has provided staff with several lot configuration options for developing this property. If the applicant wishes to proceed with the configuration depicted on Exhibit B, three(3) additional variances need to be requested. These variances include: • a 5 foot variance to allow a side yard setback of 10 feet rather than the required 15 foot setback; • a 70 foot variance to allow a 80 foot lot width rather than the 150 foot required lot width; and • a 75 foot variance to allow a 125 foot lot width rather than the 200 foot required lot width. The applicant will need to either revise the lot configuration at the time of Preliminary Plat application to eliminate the need for these variances or the Planning Commission and City Council will need to address those variances at the time of Preliminary Plat review. FINDINGS Section 11.89, Subd. 2, of the City Code contains provisions for the granting of variances only if all of the following circumstances are found to exist. Staff has provided draft findings on each criterion. The Planning Commission may use or modify these draft findings as it sees fit: Criterion I The strict enforcement of the ordinance provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship means the following: 1.A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls; Finding 1.A.. The Commission finds that the property can he put to a reasonable use. This reasonable use being other options that are available that do comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. These options include, but are not limited to the subdivision of lots that comply with the Ordinance limitations and/or obtaining a Conditional Use Permit for multiple structures on one lot. 1.B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property; Finding 1.8. The Commission finds that the circumstances of having a church building and a single family home on a large piece of property are unique. However, this uniqueness does not provide a basis for the variance due to the fact that the property can be put to a reasonable use by the legal options discussed in Finding I.A. 1.C. The circumstances were not created by the landowner; Finding 1.C. The circumstances of having a church building and single family home on a single large lot were not created by the landowner. However, the need for a variance for a smaller lot size than that required by the Zoning Ordinance is the result of the landowner wanting to create a lot which is smaller in size than the requirement. 1.D. The variance, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality; and Finding 1.D. The Commission finds that the variance would not alter the essential character of the locality, in that other single family homes in the Multiple Family Residential(R3) Zoning district exist across Shakopee Avemie from the subject site. I.E. The problems extend beyond economic considerations. Economic considerations do not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Finding 1..E The problems are related to economic considerations. There are options that are available to the property which comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and therefore do not require a variance. The applicant feels that these options pose an economic hardship for the property at a future date. Criterion 2: It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. Finding 2: The purposes of the Zoning Chapter are stated in Section 11.01, Suhd. 2, as follows: "This Chapter is enacted to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the City of Shakopee through the following: A. Encouraging the planned and orderly development of residential, business, industrial, recreational, and public land; B. Providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property; C. Limiting congestion in the public right-of-way; D. Preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of population and structures; E. Providing for the compatible integration of land uses and the most appropriate use of land; F. Encouraging development in accordance with the City's comprehensive plan; G. Conserving the natural beauty and environmental assets of the City; H. Protecting water resources and water quality; I. Facilitating the provision of water, utilities and sewage disposal to property as appropriate; J. Protecting the population from fire and other hazards to public safety; and K Providing for the administration of this Chapter and amendments to it, defining the powers and duties imposed by this Chapter and prescribing penalties for violation of its provisions" This variance request is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance in that it would be intensifying an existing nonconformity. Criterion 3: The request is not for a use variance. Finding 3: The request is not a request for a use variance. Criterion 4: Conditions to be imposed by the City Council will insure compliance to protect the adjacent properties. Finding 4: No conditions are proposed to be imposed as the criteria are not all met. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend to the City Council the approval of the variance request. 2. Recommend to the City Council the denial of the variance request. 3. Table a decision to request additional information from staff and/or the applicant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION This application does not appear to meet all of the above criteria for granting a variance. Therefore, staff is recommending the denial of the variance(Alternative No. 2). ACTION REQUESTED Offer a motion to recommend denial of the variance to the City Council, and move its approval. 4144 0. LL Julie Klima Planner II i:\commdev\boaa-pc\1997\mar20\varwigin.doc 1 �111l _ B1 In u 1 liiiiii , to-3 'it B!tjj! ii.illetpsiniran •.� EXHIBIT A Kim pour A Ind' ♦ ��00 �EEN AY Vina Alik Ali E. 1 1 Ili NI' ' '4 ,Iiii... _1 E.:I • ________iiARKW•• Alf sE.,..s, itoptii , 444111.741 n 7 . a 111-.21:11147AA 1,41401 �`'a ales0 • - ri 1Pa tbr , i a ma•=ea CM * / mot, •-•444%,,,, III m1 NNIh�! .' �s III1 Iiiib,dici "*,,,-,,, 44111,. . 11= 4 .O ' ,... , ., , .. 4 113 „re4 "4 11191 :. .., ,,,b_Ar ,,, 1.., 5.,..m.... 7.1: i : Ina: „,.....4 ... ,,,k,,w,„1,,.. • CZVC l's o. an •' • - �a0 gUB --- /if,* O, �:� ' Mit. . ' Nu 0 .. ' �� '� '� �� Mins . imam • - Mins Mins ism mg" s l��4e •�' Iiii 3 , •� imam 6' z. WIN NMI NM �� erns: . ,� ; . . nom. • ' aMEMO MR lb.,,A � ' i+ .• . [ . • Eli! a o nal v s imi sr moor TrialleTilli .11C1 4v* / I - 41‘4 �! wow� Aigg • . 4 Q PAMn�a,ll,: �� El ��ieNsisisso �:� �a1�o��o �� r ` 1111 710 411 14.:!•IN=Viiiikledaffilit I v � ��.amok��� opo . MAK t © �e ` L�.r�C'_ is I' M ea OITLR. C 1 �`T lMI �� =J •:.,...c.„.......•_, 4 b dpla - de aIICIli _ Mins. l' 44ir 41,4111 ars 1 kr "am MilitLi iid • 441 Ar0•�: � 7-7 ':ec „ Dens:t _ -04%'/A10431"12.. ,. �,3;,. : }lo _ B I H;c^wcy Bus cess Mins ----,7 { :ice Business . -:9] re I FiPi• ) tR2 PillIllrw''- __,_,_ _--.y !rdus. ick ice..e r'o v Zones 1 I -- - ..:' ^1C , i,s;. 'C. e- r- 0 kDurr erns'., EXHIBIT B _sh --�,z al�iG' 02.( so W • ---, . • ._. 6'•b`tA NvM E Apr 3 1O, " sgFC I >I1-ot 2 t ,I-e • M I . 0 • 0 I I Z1-%5 i30' l) t�f ps-ri ad& ParK1w tOT h I l0T ? tflf 0 '4 f 4,6' 14/. 6. 1 . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Authorization of Feasibility Report for 1997 Street Overlay Project DATE: April 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4640, which orders the preparation of a feasibility report on the above referenced project. BACKGROUND: On January 7, 1997, staff discussed the merits of a street overlay project versus street reconstruction project for 1997. The main reason for considering a street overlay project was due to the County Courthouse expansion and the unknown of what streets would be available for reconstruction in this area. At this meeting, Council moved to direct staff to proceed with the larger street overlay project for 1997 and the motion carried unanimously. Also on February 25, 1997, a work session was conducted with City Council to discuss the street overlay assessment policy and direction was given to staff to change the policy to assess 25% of the street overlay project costs to benefiting property owners. On March 18, 1997, Council did adopt a revision for the street overlay assessment policy which by adopting Resolution No. 4637. Staff has reviewed the bituminous street pavement in the City of Shakopee and have included six(6) areas for consideration of a street overlay and be included in the feasibility report of the 1997 street overlay program. The six areas are as follows: 1. Streets east of Marschall Road from Shakopee Avenue to 11th Avenue. 2. Streets west of Marschall Road from 10th Avenue to 1 lth Avenue beginning at Dakota Street and streets east of there. 3. Streets south of 10th Avenue and west of Apgar Street in the Prairie View Subdivision area. 4. Presidential Streets south of 12th Avenue and west of Monroe Street in the Minnesota Valley Subdivisions. 5. Rural bituminous streets in the Industrial Park from CR 83 to Valley Park Drive. Street names are Valley Industrial Blvd South and Industrial Circle South. 6. Rural streets located south of CR 16 and west of CR 18 known as Foothill Trail, Horizon Drive and Horizon Circle. The total length of these streets to be overlaid is estimated to be 5.4 miles and the total project cost is preliminary estimated to be$400,000. Of this total amount $100,000 would be assessed and$300,000 would come from the general tax levy. Staff had included for the 1997 CIP a reconstruction project for an eight(8)block area in which funding included$300,000 tax levy. Staff has included these six project areas for consideration to be included in a feasibility report. City Council can always reduce the project size but cannot increase the size of the project area in which assessments are involved. Staff is requesting authorization to prepare a feasibility report on these project areas by adopting Resolution No. 4640. Per the 429 assessment statute a feasibility report must be prepared on the improvement project in which assessments are involved and the City Council must accept the feasibility report prior to conducting a public hearing. City Council has the opportunity to reduce the scope or size of the project at anytime during the various steps required with a 429 special assessment project but cannot increase the project. At this time staff would recommend preparing a feasibility report for all six areas and bring back a report for Council for further consideration. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Offer Resolution No. 4640, A Resolution Which Orders the Preparation of a Feasibility Report for the 1997 Street Overlay Program, and move its adoption. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4640. 3. Table for more information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1,prepare a feasibility report for the 1997 Street Overlay Program. Funding of the project will be from assessments and general tax levy. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4640, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of a Report on the 1997 Street Overlay Program, and move its adoption. %f'(-41 Bruce Loney, P.E. Public Works Directo H:\tami\engineer\overlay RESOLUTION NO. 4640 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF A REPORT ON AN IMPROVEMENT TO CITY STREETS IN THE 1997 STREET OVERLAY PROJECT WHEREAS,it is proposed to improve the following listed street by bituminous overlay and appurtenant work and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement,pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429: Polk Street from 12th Avenue to South Terminus Tyler Street from 12th Avenue to 13th Avenue Harrison Street from 12th Avenue to 13th Avenue Presidential Lane from Harrison Street to Minnesota Valley 8th Addition Presidential Trail from Presidential Lane to Terminus 13th Avenue from Polk Street to Minnesota Valley 8th Addition Pierce Street from 10th Avenue to 200' South of Thomas Avenue Clay Street from 10th Avenue to South Terminus Shumway Street from 10th Avenue to McDevitt Street McDevitt Street from Pierce Street to East Terminus Thomas Street from Pierce Street to Apgar Street Jackson Street from 12th Avenue to South Terminus Dakota Street from 10th Avenue to 1 lth Avenue Prairie Street from 10th Avenue to 11th Avenue Naumkeag Street from 10th Avenue to 11th Avenue Shawmut Street from 10th Avenue to 11th Avenue Legion Street from 10th Avenue to 11th Avenue Sibley Street from Shakopee Avenue to 11th Avenue Ramsey Street from Shakopee Avenue to 11th Avenue Swift Street from 10th Avenue to 11th Avenue Miller Street from Shakopee Avenue to 11th Avenue Merrifield Street from 10th Avenue to 11th Avenue Merritt Street from Shakopee Avenue to 1 lth Avenue Valley Industrial Blvd. South From County Road 83 to Valley Park Drive Industrial Circle South from Valley Industrial Blvd. South To South Terminus Foothill Trail from C.S.A.H. 16 to Horizon Drive 20th Avenue at Foothill Trail 21st Avenue at Foothill Trail 22nd Avenue at Foothill Trail Horizon Drive from Foothill Trail to Muhlenhardt Road Horizon Circle from Horizon Drive to North Terminus NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be referred to Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, for study and that he is instructed to report to the City 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 , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk h:\tami\engineer\overlay2 • 1 // .0 jj 7,4 /e, iiio , illi irn //1/// .111 ,11----- .1 N ..-s, N. \ i / `--...._....--- ., 7/ t, \ A \\, /7".-,\,, c) o /It 1 1 . r___________ c-` //' 0 \// N .1 (11 IIMIrmi II 11 II II111 II,1 i 1 IIILV\ 1, ' • 111 7 _____ 7.-'.---11 II% rill., i 11 '1 IA -, i i \(I sPRuiL*. 1. 1 ////"..(is://14-i4.i,,,,m.'',A\ \;, e—I 1 I I ii."---',•, '\ Vt.._.LA, g• '4 1 s\ • ti-A7111:711t 4, //: -,, ----- 0.-,-., 1, \\ ..ts.,..,..„,_,-,,\ i ,,,,, \ ... ..H., /7/8 zI,11?ill r...;\ . 13,mva 1 t • ' \t‘‘ , ,,,,, ., It I _I - --), /r..7. v,„--.-4 .1,..„ -7,w-13r 1 §FF 11 / \ 11 II \\ ..,../ L_, I' r__J 0.-.,..,_—_ .1,-;'• 11 11141\ avad I I ----JE----f(Z t•• %/ 4f,/ 'Mir— -Ni'14,-*J I, IQ 111/2f, ,-.-._----1 1/21/2...-..,1/2.Z...A:21., / 4 01/2. i\A 1 I 12 Ilin, (Q\it ,. 1331.:,nradiA I 1-1,77/4 -----: 6/, -itis 31-77'11 ,..,. l,i 4\'+ ‘ \\0 , 1,A I I . 3, ,--1 I 111'41 . , v I re.-.J.-s-..."--3‘T Nred fi':/i4i:'7 '''''liriT-1 1417‘s3 11 2 •Lr,.1.+,4!---3 -ilAS II il'tI::. I ............""S) ...............) it i \i J1 11e,42.,...•:id! CX W W4t It ,............... 1--------____. ,__,t—T____---,\ !I ‘c-N, i \,, ;I , 4-4r.,-;Vt'l-N53,101,11 I L_. .',, '., 'wit...,',,ri 1 L,_______„_—_,// I! ,.---1-_,,, 1!is I, 3.0""Sfr----- .7.3.i..,--_,,.3.)-4—.1"_,.1-3,7:7:2,751t,'.t ,...,...5 1W 0 F— A \,. t, n. ,:nu..in,.!-.9,i if--_IL il ,,,,,---c,-- .vi ill •-•:-.-- cLi -,t4-.,I,A il b 1 maivad 1;1,4+, '.' "",:zz-)I:A_f..!-:• `Zz.....,JElit:: lin V) \\—, ri----ii :1 .4.H,,-;,, .i31.3'317:3 •••. -. \ 2 „Ali-4-.4.\•iit-ACT'1,\LI fril i i .J 1.---I, v 1 11 t\r17,:sk‘1S.31_13 k- -,-------n pr;II -=,L______1_4 --. 'z,,.... •,,,t \•1\• *,\-.' _-_,.,!1 4 < )'' • 41,L._.3,c„,\,;I\ty;L______, rti 1 ,13Lcl.,7.7-715 f \\1:.,:, -'-' 11 1 < • \‘-r,t7\\LIA-Le ----- T-1 ITL i ±I •-.1 i-',,i ---)II -, . ','",,' --;/:.%$•.' 0 1 II I \--,- 1--Oira-11_______._ — 1 r------7,1 trt 0 1,1.1.-wt' t., -=-_-_--- r"----1,-------71-1 rTz'i 7-15=4,1'-- :r...., ..,...,....,,i. .41AS k ', L..._ Iti 1 R,t_ 1 I •% — - - I '4.:11...r. ,--,1-7\,--- a . \1--11V.)k .' W' mr,, ,,-7=a .' \\--'1--1-7,;\11.E, i I, HI I I 111 _FirL—_—ii-f.-- ---- Is. ,. , 'Vt ' 'v 1 ' n...\...x., J, ---i, ,• c-r., ,6 L__....17. ---,▪ -1 3\\„, -.--, (c., ,:•. • z- 117 a,i - < ...\!, i_A.....,..-_,„.0,, r„, . , 7r_i-,_ sr.-Tail, , ,,,,-....,--:-. ...,......- Cilr I'l\ L__-.L.-. ,&:.t.E;7-3 ,ig. -;-t----- I— Ct da-ret, ...., I, •-,;.. 11. _- ,s,. \, „. - .\--,-„,r--1' 4"'•\ ._.. ..„.. •-•4- t, -4 L.,-Ai: =-4.\--,--c;\ 1 1, `t," '''A,--t-IL,-,1---tkr-r-st\--i;\\if ,1 5:43 -,-",;•-,- _,L_------"="--EL: "--\\ U .;:-' 'I,‘13-4 ii, i\AIL!,+._-•-_-1 cv.---',1----,1 1 AIL-k' .7.9 c-----.--s•,==1.,== ..._\,....,,,,..___10,..I.i'Ol../,, ?,NTU.,..-4...,ZLIdit..1 [ ' • IF-_, .'. 4-.' 0% -3-11,t1:3: E\--L.t13 lir-Lit —.,in.,:ntis , ' 1 ii_.II ril, 'III ; , Iv ,. !II .... ,.., ,..„ ,ip II, , .„, ...., , . .,.....„.... . .3 c1I, .-- IS,3.dd ,l__,/ Ili 3 I',If,'I.----.c-' 1,ClAili tv-rovr Ai •,. -- . •••••• ' \, , \rctiv 7,',TI ad)4dvp4.131 r J ii \ ..i 7° xi ,i. A, \...131 .--_3 1 41 :? I - I, IR-I.., \ -- ',,, il I `‘, •,:, .,'\A \\ ' \ ',-'( ' \-'-' DR\ ' \ \\1 ' -,,,.--,.,1-----,•—• I I No.,a3,4.., ., :. I ,, ; 1 1 \'''`-..' ,.:‘.4• .' \Y‘t, , ',-...-..„4 "-,.....;"--., \\ ---,,Fiadid-odLA. ,v, g 1 v., ,.. .-, ;,...)..,,,,,,',-:::;\ -- -.;-,_,i------,,''----=-----="1-'re `;' — ..., Ii ,..,, ,s \‘. -v..., El f-7.7—:, j pdas,,:.,--1 ,, I L /II .‘..--'.2-...."...• s'.. \."--1, .i.; i 1 c.r7S-•ina dv,.,i 1 -;,,,,,,,,, /.' ..":,\'Al.j.i •• .-.%. ..47 ;..-''.• \\N \`‘I.. ;..IIIV-4,,' Ni .`:.'Ii:‘I''. •I:I' ... I/ . ., .1: A HI II:II we :) Iin-- 1ir L SPRINGS LA. )) W 1 S Stie/W sk .‘\ • ,.: ',, / , - ---_—_3„------- ----. „ I ‘, \ \\<•'.‘,. .,,7,/7 ___ ---s— is 1 co• `T'--- • ----:-.-_,...-__ _ -- 4_, 7( \\ e JP '.. , ,//.N.„.....\ \ .,,,,,, //// 2 .. .-- , _---- , _.... ,_ ... ,,, ,. . , ,....7. _ _.__ ,T____ _ , _. ... , ...„ ____. : c,....6,...,_ t, 1. c ,, TrP2111H) ir, Gil ,se .-.•.. /4/ 1 (ii'LH ,.'::•• ,, . I ... A// **-N / \A 174/ 1 .. II' 'di N / A\ \ '1 I\ 'ZI.I. 111111001 iti 11 h//// 'f'',11 t .11 -./ ' 1 1 1 /' 11111 A/ 4.,i \\ La CC 1 .1 . / , 1 / LU I / _.; 1.4.1 >.- 1 1 .— II ,,...-- ----, , I 7/_____________________ ._ - 11:1 34V1 311,:i CA I II 11 il I V/ 0 ""' I I 1 II IV ,1- , C4 i I I 1 jll 1 / I'' // 11 < )-. 1 1 li 4;0 z.,.-i iii ,/i I <...i 41ci 1,/1 -,, ,,,i I 111 7 I 1 (4 ex IJ i 1 I I/ Li // /7 LI- > / 1' 1 i./ 0 1=3 1 // I 1 1111 La N ii ..-1 < 1 II i _i / >" ce ii il / I11 li ilk/ Hf, z ‹ E-,g i ,--...._—_,-,==•---------- ...,.._.-- _______ 16-4 Ce :- ..,, „, ,-.- 12 'ON / ' NI Lza --7, ' / 1-----4' 11 ll n 6141/ r 0 / d ' 7-71 fill is g))/,, ..,,, 6.7 11.-2 e .1 • _______ -J A /i ;/ C) I/ Y A2PId II ii C> / / - 11 P I a al / ., 11\ I I / <1 C ) I !\11,\I •:.../,1 I i.,007. ) / 47/ •••••-4'RIO I s:lam J I 5/ •L (di .'\\___‘___ —.1/ nw _, _ "-- Et-ai -01 -I r-----('; .111 If ----7, I '.14 '0) I a'lki, 'ti \\\ I ri . 1 i I ‘‘ \ p ,/ 1 F11; \i!A /17. II , ij 19\ /1 111 I/ / i i OV/41t'f. II ---- I • .i..,,, ,.;:„ 1• i' , . I I / it,,‘ NcA0. H, ,, .\ /./ . 2/ ___ __________ •., t,..) -,..-. CONSENT / II. 6.a . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Advance Encumbrance of State Aid Funds DATE: April 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4638, a resolution requesting advance encumbrance of State Aid Funds. This resolution is needed to secure funding in excess of that currently available in the City's State Aid account. BACKGROUND: The recent revision to the State Aid Rules allow Cities to advance encumber State Aid funding up to $500,000, or three times the previous year's allocation,whichever is less. For the City of Shakopee, this will make available an additional$500,000 for construction of State Aid projects. These funds are available to the City interest free. The attached resolution reserves the right of the City to advance encumber funds. The actual funding requests are done on a project by project basis. The funds which are advanced are repaid with the next year's allocation. The estimated 1997 allocation for Shakopee is$477,891, of which 75%(358,418)is available for construction and the remaining 25% (119,473)is transferred to the Capital Improvement Fund to finance roadway projects. Next year's allotment will become available in the City's State Aid account in February. Currently,the total project costs which are eligible for State Aid funding will exceed available State Aid Funds by$100,000. By advance encumbering these funds, the City can receive payment from Mn/DOT, and the money can be deposited in the Capital Improvement Fund, and can draw interest until needed for paying project costs. The remaining advance encumbrance funds will be needed to construct projects in 1997 such as Vierling Drive from CR 69 to Presidential Lane. The projected 1997 apportionment will not be able to fund this project with State Aid funds unless an advance encumbrance is utilized. T1381100 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4638. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4638. 3. Table for additional information from staff RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4638,A Resolution Requesting Advance Encumbrance of Funds from the General State Aid Construction Fund, and move its adoption. late ` 0 /4 Bruce Loney, P.E. Public Works Director ' h:\tami\engineer\memo463 8 RESOLUTION NO. 4638 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING ADVANCE ENCUMBRANCE OF FUNDS FROM THE GENERALSTATE AID CONSTRUCTION FUND WHEREAS,the City of Shakopee isplanning on implementing Municipal State Aid Street Projects in 1997 which will require State Aid funds in excess of those available in it's State Aid Construction Account;and WHEREAS, said City is prepared to proceed with the construction of said projects through the use of advance encumbrance from the general State Aid Construction Account to supplement the available funds in their State Aid Account; and WHEREAS,repayment ofthe funds so advanced will be made in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 162.14, Subdivision 6 and Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8820. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: that the Commissioner of Transportation be and is hereby requested to approve this advance for financing approved Municipal State Aid Street Projects of the City of Shakopee in an amount up to $500,000 in accordance with Minnesota Rules 8820.1500, Subparagraph 10b, and to authorize repayments from the following year's accruals to the Construction Account of the Municipal State Aid Street Fund for said City. Adopted in session of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk h:\t ami\engineer\r e s4 6 3 8 IL/A . 3 GOSENIT.. . . ..... - CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Discussion of Maras Street Improvements and Right-of-Way Acquisition DATE: April 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION: Maras Street Improvement Project was ordered by City Council on July 16, 1996 by adopting Resolution No. 4468. On February 18, 1997, City Council adopted Resolution No. 4614, a resolution authorizing acquisition of certain property by eminent domain for the Maras Street Improvement Project. This agenda item is to update Council on the status of the Maras Street Improvement Project and right-of-way acquisition and ask Council if they concur with stars proceedings with quick take condemnation in order to construct the improvements this year. BACKGROUND: In order to construct the Maras Street improvements and regional pond associated with this improvement project, staff needs to proceed with the condemnation process known as quick take in order to construct the improvement project this year. Attached to this memorandum is the following items relating to this right-of-way acquisition. • Memo from Coreen Thomson on the time line for condemnation. • Map of the improvement project area showing the streets to be improved and the regional pond to be constructed. • A drainage map of the area serving Eagle Creek Watershed, which requires a regional pond to be constructed in the area east of Maras Street. For the acquisition of easements by eminent domain, the City has prepared legal descriptions of the easement needed and has ordered an appraisal to determine the value of the property taken in order to make an offer to these property owners for those easements. In order to have the property by July 1, 1997, the quick take process required a petition filed and quick take notice sent on March 25, 1997. The Engineering staff is Titee1400 nearly complete with the design for this improvement project and will be presented to the Council at the April 15, 1997 or May 6, 1997 Council meeting for approval and authorization to advertise for bids. The quick take condemnation process allows Cities to obtain property approximately 2 - 4 months faster than the regular condemnation. Also per the 429 Special Assessment Statute, a contract for the improvement project must be approved by City Council no later than one year after the adoption of the resolution ordering such improvements or a new public hearing is required. Staff will be receiving the appraisals for the easement to be acquired by March 28, 1997, and preliminary indications are that the right-of-way acquisition costs will be approximately $122,000.00. This cost can be broken down further as $92,000.00 for the regional pond and $30,000.00 for the roadway improvements. Also, staff would like to point out that a Joint Powers Agreement with the city of Savage needs to be reached for a for the stormwater flow between the Cities, and this is being negotiated at this time and will be brought back to Council at a later date. In the feasibility study, staff had estimated a cost of $40,000.00 for right-of-way acquisition. The right-of-way acquisition costs is much higher due to a larger area needed for the regional pond than previously estimated, and also due to the rising land values in this area. This additional cost of right-of-way is a stormwater trunk charge, as this regional pond serves a greater area for the Eagle Creek Watershed area on the east end of Shakopee. The Stormwater Trunk Fund currently has a $50,000.00 cash balance. The cash balance in the Storm Drainage Fund is $1,818,000.00. Staff would recommend a transfer of funds from the base Storm Drainage Fund to the Stormwater Trunk Fund to cover this expenditure. The Stormwater Trunk Fund would then be reimbursed in the future by developing areas in the City of Shakopee. This regional pond was identified by the Eagle Creek Watershed Study in 1993 and has been implemented by the City of Savage to control the runoff and divert the runoff from Eagle Creek. The City of Shakopee's portion of the plan required considerable ponding in order to maintain a flow rate into the City of Savage. This regional pond will be necessary when the commercial area west of C.R. 18 develops in the future. Material excavated from this pond is needed to construct the road improvements for Maras Street road from 13th Avenue to C.R. 18. Staff believes it is best to acquire the entire area needed for this regional pond at this time and to construct the pond in its entirety to complete the stormwater improvements for this area. Staff did conduct an informational meeting with the property owners on the design and has received input in completing the design at this time. Staff will continue with this project with the following steps: 1. Acquire the right-of-way and easements necessary for this project using the quick take condemnation process, as outlined by Coreen Thomson of Kennedy and Graven. 2. Obtain a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Savage for a stormwater connection between the City of Shakopee and Savage in the Eagle Creek Watershed. 3. Complete the plans and bring to City Council for approval on April 15, 1997 or May 6, 1997. 4. Obtain bids for this project and begin construction in July and estimated completion by the end of September. Staff is asking for Council concurrence with this procedure to continue with the quick take condemnation and proceed with the project as outlined. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve a motion concurring with staff's procedure on acquiring easements by the quick take condemnation process. 2. Do not concur with staff on this process. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a motion concurring with staff to continue with the quick take condemnation process for easement acquisition required by the Maras Street Improvement Project. The easement for the roadway and ponding are necessary for the improvement project and future development in this area. ACTION REQUESTED: Approve a motion to concur with staff to continue with the quick take condemnation process for the acquisition of easements required for the Maras Street Improvement Project. Bruce Loney Public Works ector BL/pmp MARAS 470 Pillsbury Center Kennedy 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612)337-9300 telephone &Graven (612) 337-9310 fax e-mail:attys@kennedy-graven.com CHARTERED CORRINE H. THOMSON Attorney at Law Direct Dial(612)337-9217 MEMORANDUM TO: Shakopee City Council FROM: Corrine Thomson CIU" DATE: March 25, 1997 RE: Maras Street Improvements Timeline for Condemnation Bruce Loney asked me to provide you with a timeline for the acquisition of the easements required for the Maras Street improvement project. Date Action to be Taken Comment 3/25/97 Petition filed and quick-take The filing of the petition commences the notice sent action. The quick-take notice informs the owners that the City will acquire title by June 23, 1997 (and that the City will pay the approved appraised values to the own- ers or to the court prior to that date). 3/25/97 to Service of the petition During this time period, a process server 4/10/97 will be personally serving the petition on each of the named parties. Before 5/6/97 Approval of approved ap- The council needs to approve the praised values appraised values of the easements to be acquired. These are the amounts that will be paid to the owners or deposited into court as a condition of the use of quick- take. CAH119960 SH155-28 5/6/97 Hearing on petition and This is a court hearing, where we ask the quick-take court to approve the petition and appoint commissioners and to approve the use of quick-take. 5/6/97 to Commissioners take oath The commissioners are appointed by the 6/23/97 and conduct viewings. court and take an oath of office. They should conduct their viewings prior to the date when the City takes title under the quick-take process. 6/23/97 Pay quick-take amounts. City needs to pay quick-take amounts to Quick-take date. owners or deposit with the court. Upon payment, title to the easements will be transferred to the City, according to the court order obtained on 5/6/97. Once title has passed, as a practical matter, you cannot abandon the condemnation action, because you have already acquired the easements. After 6/23/97 Hearings and awards Commissioners conduct hearings and render awards. If the awards exceed the City's approved appraised value, the City has to pay the difference, plus interest accrued on the difference from 6/23/97. After awards Appeal period expires An appeal must be taken within 40 days after the commissioners file their awards. If an appeal is filed in that time period, other parties have until 50 days after the filing of the award to file a cross appeal. Appeals are heard by the district court and are conducted as jury trials. CAH 119960 SH 155-28 cot „l ,,,,,+s f I� I i, i m xi 1 mm ® ® ' Av i 1 ; __, r-, , H > 0 q _ .: _ _l _c_ri II 1 ft\ h /,/, o i rn .i ,-' ] ---T , / ' C n rn o � r,,,,,„ ,,, zv,13 oII �, �, f i --I -- •,.........,..,4_® SHAKOPEE CITY LIMITS - � I n n r) ql LI, I-, ,-, SAVAGE CITY LIMITS I Ing Xx Ni D > x �+aa, M I III. i> 0 0 o i ,,, I I ii..., o1 ... , �dJ0 1 .,, ..._v.) 0. v _ N h CZ A n. 0 CL r= j /Id ON/W0.(M . o N / O r^ J IrV ° '•C 4'.7.....--...'`-....0 .4.' 4:;; : C‘t/ a „,. , v - ko,d„v, , , _. , L. ,/, - 3 Ar 3 .. I' , -: I iroppprtilINS ...',.-, / / . or, .....:4,..4 Li a-- C 2y oTc) k L) I- LO .14 ti 0 al w Q \ \0\�',FAs�� re) A3d30N1 - - \\\ ���\\\ \ , Wsewn ALIO��� �� W Y \\\ w\\ \\\ ....:--1Wo Lk T� ELAN ; _.: �( U ; O *' 1 v to " v „ES,” CC) oc 11* Lr., 0 Q Q w 1 CZ ON ^l ;ice A Ge a^�_T~ 129 210 374077 /H O 1 F x a \�o� coo CITY OF SHAKOPEE / 17/ /q• c/ Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Scott Ferrozzo Agreement DATE: March 26, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The City Council is asked to approve an agreement by and between the City of Shakopee, and Scott Ferrozzo, 584 Vista Ridge Lane,relative to work improperly done within the City right of way. BACKGROUND: At its meeting of March 4th, Mr. Ferrozzo appeared before the City Council and told the Council that he needed to "work something out"with the City,relative to a court date that was scheduled for him. Mr. Ferrozzo had paved a portion of the shoulder of his rural section ditch, and placed large landscaping boulders in the ditch in front of his home. Because this is in the public right of way, a permit was required. The work was discovered after it was completed, Mr. Ferrozzo refused to remove the work. He was subsequently charged with doing work in the public right of way without a permit. The judge directed that he try to negotiate a conclusion with the City prior to this being heard. From the City's standpoint, there is a problem with property owners doing work such as this for a couple of reasons. First,the should was paved with a"driveway mix"type of asphalt, which is not as substantial as is the remainder of the asphalt road in front of Mr. Ferrozzo's property. When it breaks up,the only maintenance that can be done is to repave it, or remove it, both at higher expense than the normal maintenance done on a gravel shoulder. Secondly, the boulders will make any normal maintenance work, or utility installation more expensive. Likely, a utility company doing work in the area will not know of the arrangement and that he has agreed to remove the boulders within five (5)days; it is probable that they will have the work done, at greater expense to whatever project that they are doing. While this is not ideal,the alternative would be to proceed to court, and seek to the material removed as a result of court order. As a compromise, we are proposing that he agree to the items listed in the attached agreement, including paying a double fee for a retroactive permit for which he must apply, and pay for the attorney time in drafting the document($150.00). We do want to make it clear that there is a need for a permit to be issued before work is started in a public right of way. However, we feel that this is a workable compromise. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the attached agreement be approved. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the agreement by and between the City and Scott Ferrozzo. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the City of Shakopee ("City") and Scott Ferrozzo ("Owner")as of , 1997. Recitals 1. Owner owns the property at 584 Vista Ridge Lane in the City("Property"). The legal description of the Property is attached as Exhibit A. 2. Owner has received a citation for work that was performed without a permit in the right of way area in front of the Property. The work consisted of constructing a four-foot wide asphalt paved shoulder in the right of way and placing several large boulders in the ditch area within the right of way. 3. Owner is desirous of resolving the pending citation. In consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this Agreement, the City and Owner agree as follows: 1. Owner will apply for a permit for the work that has been done and will pay a fee of$70.00 for the permit. 2. Owner will maintain the asphalt area that has been paved in good condition and shall keep the right of way area neat and free of debris, including weeds. 3. Owner shall remove the boulders and the asphalt in the shoulder area within five (5) days after receiving notification from the City that such removal is needed in order for the City to perform maintenance, utility work, or any other public purpose in the impacted area. If Owner fails to take such action within five (5) days,he must pay the City the costs incurred by 1 the City, or its contractor, in doing such work. Payment from Owner is due within thirty (30) days of the receipt of a billing from the City for such work. If payment is not made within thirty (30) days, Owner agrees that the cost of such work may be assessed against the Property and Owner waives all rights to notice of the adoption of such assessment and waives all rights to appeal from such assessment. 4. Owner agrees to pay all costs, including attorney's fees, for the preparation and drafting of this Agreement. Said costs and attorney's fees must be paid simultaneously with the signing of this Agreement. 5. The City's attorney may dismiss the pending citation when Owner has obtained the permit and paid the fees and costs required by Paragraphs 1 and 4 of this Agreement. 6. This Agreement shall run with the land and bind the heirs, successors, and assigns of the parties. OWNER CITY OF SHAKOPEE By Scott Ferrozzo Mayor By City Administrator By City Clerk 2 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1997, by Jeff Henderson, Mark McNeill, and Judith Cox, the Mayor, City Administrator.and City Clerk, respectively of the City of Shakopee, a Minnesota municipal corporation on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public Scott Ferrozzo STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1997,by Scott Ferrozzo. Notary Public 3 / 6. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: Fire Station Site 1 . 1 DATE : March 19, 1997 Introduction and Background The 1997 CIP and budget has $50, 000 allocated to acquire a site in the area of the civic center for fire station "1 . 1" . Development pressure is high in this area and a purchase or at least an option should be secured to provide a site for the future construction of a replacement station near the older urban section of Shakopee. It is recognized that staff and the Fire Department management are very busy. However, there is concern that unless there is timely action on this issue, any potential site may be acquired by a developer and either not be available or have a higher cost to the city. Recommendation Promptly begin the selection and acquisition process for a site for the replacement fire station 1 in the area of the civic center. Action Give direction to staff . )lk/ Gregg Voxland Finance Director is\finance\docs\gregg\sitel CMSENT /y 13 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Surplus Property DATE: March 26, 1997 INTRODUCTION Unclaimed property including recovered bicycles and property which has no value to the City has accumulated at the police department and should be sold. BACKGROUND: Throughout the year, items whose owner is not known come into the possession of the police department. Although every effort is made to locate the owners of this property, much of it remains in our possession. From time to time, this property must be disposed of because of the room it takes up. Auctions and similar sales present a good opportunity to dispose of these items. Before this property can be disposed of, it must be declared surplus by action of the City Council. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to declare sixty-five(65)bicycles surplus property and authorize the City Administrator to sell or otherwise dispose of these items. Th38P103 CONSENT A ly. c. 1. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum To: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board From: Mark McQuillan,Parks and Recreation Director Subject: Community Center office remodeling expense Date: March 24, 1997 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND The construction project to remodel the former Family Net offices into office space for the parks and recreation staff is now complete. However, there was an unexpected expense in which the contractor was not able to reuse the existing steel door frame as previously outlined in the Request For Proposal. Therefore, the contractor had to order a new door frame so it would fit into the new doorway. The additional cost amounted to $158.16 (Attachment A). ALTERNATIVES 1. Deny the request to reimburse the contractor for the additional expense. 2. Pay the contractor$158.16 for the additional expense. RECOMMENDATION Alternative#2. ACTION REQUESTED Move to pay Rick Sames Construction Company an additional $158.16 for work performed at the Community Center to be allocated from the Community Center Project Fund. 0. `e 971/6 / i Mark . McQuillan Parks and Recreation Director na321noa New Hunk; BILLING STATEMENT Cabinets Remodeling NICK SHMES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY A R pair it i 1266 Blue Heron Trail a rot Shakopee MN,55379 445-7084 • • Date 3-17-97 NOTICE: 1.5% CHARGE ON UNPAID BALANCE PAST 30 DAYS1 Shakopee Community Recreation Department C/O Mark McQuillan 1255 Fuller Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Remodel Family Net Office area as estimated $2452 . 00 Extra for One New Steel Door Frame $ 158 . 16 Note: new door frame was needed because the one removed and initially planned to be reused was not applicable-see Mark McQuillan for further explanation. Total amount now due $2610 . 16 CONST CITY OF SHAKOPEE / C' ,2_, Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Resignation from Park and Recreation Board and Appointment to Fill Vacancy DATE: March 25, 1997 INTRODUCTION: It is appropriate that Council accept a resignation from the Park and Recreation Board and fill the unexpired term. BACKGROUND: The City Council has received a resignation from Judy Salchow from the Park and Recreation Board, copy attached. There is one year remaining on Judy's term. Applicants who expressed interest in other boards and commissions and who were not appointed to a board or commission in February were contacted and asked if any would be interested in being appointed to this unexpired term. Mr. Sean Laughlin, who originally applied for the Planning Commission, would like to be considered for appointment to serve the remainder of this unexpired term. Members of the interview committee (City Administrator, Cncl. Zorn and Cncl.Link) recommend Mr. Laughlin's appointment to fill this unexpired term. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Move to accept the resignation of Judy Salchow from the Park and Recreation Advisory Board, with regrets. 2. Move to nominate and appoint Sean Laughlin to the Park and Recreation Advisory Board to fill the unexpired term of Judy Salchow ending February 28, 1998. Ju• S. Cox, glcClerk h:\judy\p&r-open maaiioa RECEIVED MAR 2 1 1997 CITY OF SHAKOPEE March 20, 1997 Shakopee City Council, As of April 1, 19971 will be resigning my seat on the Shakopee Park and Recreation Board. My husband and I have sold our home and will be moving out of the area. It has been and exciting and fulfilling*years. I am very proud of:he Community Center and the Parks of this fine city. I hope you will support the Community Center and help it to grow. Thank you for the opportunity to serve the city in this capacity. Sincerely, ,2\ oJlc o Judy Salchow 14, D, 1. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Community Development Commission MEETING DATE: April 1, 1997 Introduction: When the EDA was restructured recently, concern was expressed that avenues for citizen participation in economic development issues be preserved. The following presents a couple of alternatives for the Council's consideration. Discussion: At the time, the City Council was considering restructuring the EDA, a proposal was put forward for a Community Development Commission. The elements of the proposal were as follows; 1. The commission would be a 5-person, citizen advisory body; 2. Members of the commission would be appointed for 2-year, staggered terms; 3. Funding would be budgeted annually by the EDA, and its expenditures would be approved by the EDA; 4. One EDA commissioner would be appointed as a non-voting liaison; 5. The commission would meet at least once a month; 6. The commission's work would focus on the Hwy. 101/C.R. 17/Downtown corridor; 7. Staff support would be provided by the Economic Development Coordinator. Another alternative would be for the EDA to establish an ad hoc committee to advise it on the Hwy. 101/C.R. 17/Downtown corridor, and other issues it deemed appropriate. This alternative would not require an amendment to the City Code. Community Development staff contacted a number of communities, including Burnsville, Prior Lake and Savage, to discover whether they had community development commissions. The communities contacted all had EDAs, and either did not have, or had thus abolished their community development commissions. CDC.DOC/RML 1 Alternatives: 1. Amend City Code Sec. 2.50, (Boards and Commissions Generally except the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission), to add a Community Development Commission. 2. Recommend to the EDA that it establish an ad hoc community development committee with specific responsibility to address the Hwy. 101/C.R. 17/Downtown corridors. 3. Do not change the existing commission structure. 4. Table the matter for additional information. Action Requested: Direction to staff regarding the alternative Council wishes to pursue. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CDC.DOC/RML 2 CITY OF SHAKOPEE ` Y- D. / Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Community Development Commission MEETING DATE: April 1, 1997 Introduction: When the EDA was restructured recently, concern was expressed that avenues for citizen participation in economic development issues be preserved. The following presents a couple of alternatives for the Council's consideration. Discussion: At the time, the City Council was considering restructuring the EDA, a proposal was put forward for a Community Development Commission. The elements of the proposal were as follows; 1. The commission would be a 5-person, citizen advisory body; 2. Members of the commission would be appointed for 2-year, staggered terms; 3. Funding would be budgeted annually by the EDA, and its expenditures would be approved by the EDA; 4. One EDA commissioner would be appointed as a non-voting liaison; 5. The commission would meet at least once a month; 6. The commission's work would focus on the Hwy. 101/C.R. 17/Downtown corridor; 7. Staff support would be provided by the Economic Development Coordinator. Another alternative would be for the EDA to establish an ad hoc committee to advise it on the Hwy. 101/C.R. 17/Downtown corridor, and other issues it deemed appropriate. This alternative would not require an amendment to the City Code. Community Development staff contacted a number of communities, including Burnsville, Prior Lake and Savage, to discover whether they had community development commissions. The communities contacted all had EDAs, and either did not have, or had thus abolished their community development commissions. CDC.DOC/RML 1 Alternatives: 1. 2. Amend City Code Sec. 2.50, (Boards and Commissions Generally except the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission), to add a Community Development Commission. Recommend to the EDA that it establish an ad hoc community development committee with specific responsibility to address the Hwy. 101/C.R. 17/Downtown corridors. 3. Do not change the existing commission structure. 4. Table the matter for additional information. Action Requested: Direction to staff regarding the alternative Council wishes to pursue. Z L�0 i R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CDC.DOC/RML 2 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Street Naming Request of Clean Sweep MEETING DATE: April 1, 1997 Introduction: Clean Sweep has requested that a new street which is part of the Maras Street Improvement Project be named Clean Sweep Lane. The City does not have a street naming policy. Alternatives: 1. Approve the request to name the new street"Clean Sweep Lane." 2. Do not approve the request. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission reviewed the request at its meeting of March 6, 1997. The Commission did not make a specific recommendation, but several commissioners expressed a preference for neutrality in street names. A copy of the relevant portion of the March 6, 1997, Planning Commission minutes is attached for the Council's information. Action Requested: Offer and pass a motion consistent with the Council's determination in this matter. 7,,c v R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CLEANSWP.DOC/RML 1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Clean Sweep Street Renaming DATE: February 28, 1997 ITEM NO.: 12.a. Introduction: Clean Sweep has requested that the name of the new unnamed road, which runs east and west on the Maras Street Improvement Project, be named Clean Sweep Lane. The City has no Street Naming Policy. Action Requested: 1. Make recommendation to City Council regarding the request. 2. Provide direction to Staff as to whether to research a Street Naming Policy. RENAMING.DOC/SB • City of Shakopee Planning Commission March 6, 1997 Page 12 Jon Albinson Valley Green Business Park identified the location and surrounding uses. Mr. Joos stated he would be more in favor of rezoning or creating a new zone rather than diluting the Heavy Industrial area. He stressed the importance of having a mix of business uses in the community. Mr. Meilleur asked if averaged out, would it be about 25%. Mr. Pope agreed. He stated the parking is there to support the use. Mr. Meilleur stated the question becomes how to direct staff to make this happen given concerns of diluting the Heavy Industrial districts. Mr. Joos stated he is all in favor of this type of project, but maybe a different district is needed. Mr. Leek suggested staff take a closer look at other communities with this kind of development and find out what district the uses are located in. Jon Albinson discussed the history of the Heavy Industrial district in Shakopee. There has been very little development of multi-tenant uses. He stated there has been a slow shift since the Bypass has opened for heavy industrial use. He discussed permitted uses. He noted outdoor storage is not permitted in Valley Green. Mr. Albinson discussed the protective covenants in Valley Green Business Park which restricts the uses. He cited several examples of uses which would not be permitted. He reviewed a site plan for the Valley Green Business Park. Mr. Brekke believed the protective covenants and additional conditions can handle the proposed uses on the site. Mr. Joos also believed uses need to be identified and set aside areas for these uses. Mr. Stoltzman asked for a description of what an office-showroom would be currently existing in Shakopee. Mr. Albinson cited an example of a cabinet building business and other businesses in Burnsville. 12. OTHER BUSINESS A. Clean Sweep Street Renaming Mr. Leek stated Kyle Hanson from Clean Sweep has requested the naming a street, to be constructed by the City, to Clean Sweep Lane. He asked if the Planning Commission had any further direction for staff to pursue any additional requirements to the street naming policy. City of Shakopee Planning Commission March 6, 1997 Page 13 Kyle Hanson. Clean Sweep reviewed the request to name the street. He noted the location of their building in relation to the street. He stated neighbors are in favor of the street naming. Mr. Brekke asked if the roadway aligns to anything to the west. Mr. Leek stated he did not believe so. Steve Soltau, Shakopee Crossings (property owner to the west), stated it does not appear that any roadway would line up at this time, but his development plans are not at this time complete. He stated he would not be in favor of continuing to the west with Clean Sweep Lane, but he would prefer a more historical or neutral name. Mr. Brekke stated this is a difficult issue. He stated he would like to look at this from the viewpoint of whether streets should be named after businesses. He stated street naming should be used to recognize accomplishments or contributions to the city, and he did not want street names to become "mini-billboards" for businesses. Mr. Mars stated he did not think the Planning Commission should be in the business of naming streets. He discussed the need for more neutrality in names. Ms. Romansky cited an example in another city where a street was named after a business which is no longer there. Mr. Meilleur stated he respected the reputation and growth of the business but agreed the Planning Commission should not be in the business of naming streets. Mr. Brekke stated he would be more in favor of a more neutral name. Mr. Leek asked for direction to establish policies based on comments made. Mr. Brekke suggested Clean Sweep suggest another name. Commissioner Joos agreed. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the street should not be named Clean Sweep Lane. Motion: Brekke moved to recommend naming the street "Clean Sweep Lane". Motion failed for lack of a second. Mr. Mars stated he did not believe a negative recommendation should be sent to the City Council. He believe the decision should be made at the City Council level to begin with. D. 3, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Request for Extension of Time to Request Approval for the Final Plat for Westridge Lake Estates DATE: April 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION The City has received a request from Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea, President of Gonyea Land Company, to extend the 12 month time period for filing a request for approval of a Final Plat after approval of the Preliminary Plat by the City Council(Please see Exhibit A). The City Code states that the City Council may extend the time period of Preliminary Plat approval upon written application by the developer. Each extension cannot exceed a twelve(12)month period. BACKGROUND On August 17, 1993, the Shakopee City Council approved the Preliminary Plat for Westridge Lake Estates. City Code Section 12.03, Subd. 3.G states, 'Approval of the Preliminary Plat by the Council shall give the applicant the following rights for a 12 month period from the date of approval: 1) The general terms and conditions under which the approval was granted will not be changed by the City; 2) That the applicant may submit on or before such expiration date, the whole or any part of the approved plat for final approval; 3) The Council may extend the time period of preliminary approval upon written application by the developer and for good cause shown. Each time extension shall not exceed a 12 month period" On May 16, 1995, and May 7, 1996, the City Council approved 12 month time extensions for the approval of Westridge Lake Estates Preliminary Plat. A series of additions are planned for the Westridge Lake Estates Preliminary Plat, but only the first and second additions have received final plat approval. The City Council approved Westridge Lake Estates 1st Addition on November 16, 1993 and Westridge Lake Estates 2nd Addition on March 19, 1996. The timing for platting of subsequent additions has not yet been determined. ALTERNATIVES 1. Offer and pass a motion extending the 12 month time period for approval of the Preliminary Plat by an additional 12 months. 2. Offer and pass a motion extending the 12 month time period for approval of the Preliminary Plat by a shorter period of time. 3. Offer and pass a motion denying the request to extend the 12 month time period for approval of the Preliminary Plat, and require the developer to resubmit the Preliminary Plat for approval by the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED Offer and pass a motion granting the developer of Westridge Lake Estates an extension of the 12 month time period for approval of the Preliminary Plat by an additional 12 months. r YA Julie K i a Planner II i:\commdev\cc\1997\cc0401\tmexwl e.doc 411 EXHIBIT A RECEIVED IVED - MdR 1 1997 March 17, 1997 Julie Klima City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Ms . Klima: As you are aware, at the May 7, 1996 meeting the City Council approved a motion granting an extension for approval of the Westridge Lake Estates Preliminary Plat. I hereby request that the Shakopee City Council extend the Preliminary Plat expiration date for an additional 12 months. In the PUD process for Westridge Lake Estates, the phasing plan called for a series of 5 additions. Last year I platted Westridge Lake Estates Second Addition. Under the present ordinance, it is my understanding that I will have to continue to request extension for these future additions, as they are all part of the Westridge Lakes Estates First Addition. Sincerely, WESTRIDGE BAY COMPANY /727 Darrel E. Gonyea President 1 /44D. 1 i CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Initiating the Vacation of Right-of-Way MEETING DATE: April 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The attached Resolution No. 4639 sets a public hearing date to consider the vacation of right- of-way. The right-of-way proposed for vacation is Apgar Street as depicted on the attached drawing. DISCUSSION: The City has received a petition for the vacation of right-of-way from Gold Nugget Development, Inc. The attached resolution sets a public hearing for May 6, 1997. On that date, comments from staff members and utilities, as well as a recommendation from the Planning Commission,will be presented to the City Council for their consideration. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4639, A Resolution Setting the Public Hearing Date to Consider the Vacation Of Right-of-Way, and move its adoption. •.4011 - R. Michael Leek i:\commdev\c61997\cc4197\vacphapg.doc Community Development Director VACPHAPG.DOC/RML 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4639 A RESOLUTION SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF PORTIONS OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF APGAR STREET SOUTH OF TENTH AVENUE WHEREAS,it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council that portions of the right-of-way of Apgar Street south of Tenth Avenue, City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, serves no public use or interest; and WHEREAS,a public hearing must be held before an action to vacate can be taken and two weeks published and posted notice thereof must be given. WHEREAS,two weeks published notice will be given in the SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS and posted notice will be given by posting such notice on the bulletin board on the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse, the bulletin board at the U.S. Post Office, the bulletin board at the Shakopee Public Library, and the bulletin board in the Shakopee City Hall. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,that a hearing be held in the Council Chambers on the 6th day of May, 1997, at 7:00 P.M. or thereafter, on the matter of vacating portions of the right-of-way known as Apgar Street south of Tenth Avenue, City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, held the day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk PREPARED BY: City of Shakopee 129 S. Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 VACPHAPG.DOC/RML 2 2 i1 ? I < < << if 93.. tss ICsui i . ti Ii!!Ii !iiHtj!!I1 11 ii 1 2 . 1 , ; 1 1 I 14111/ I il'i; Isi! ,, g :1510J gi 1 il A iii -a '1' ' -- tg . . , hio : r . 4111:sill!lifillig! e w �n iZ ■v. • aq ..*4, 0M0 : 1121111 112111411$1110111!1!! O --� ��� �� � �'? !um e �ii i# aIll1Ii1 01 o H O s uui s y1 41 `4 S i ` dIa , ' X i it Wi m 1 41:111;-1;iiiffifill ,,,,, i t o m rk _i 1 ig I v f i ., 1 isismi ullii. idifilo LI i ''/. I111 oa. Jk[ J I r r • W �j i .Mill 1 II I "4r I "L- 1 H w Q, q I i Is, I Z O o .. r1 i 1" 04 1 1 Z I I 4 - `-: I I I ' I O.a I— —T- Tr Z I II z W Q' a 4 --------4-- t� iiii - -1 E V T —( —1 T- -__--- �� I I I I I I I i \ 1 .. ``-'ri \ ill _ J L L J _I_ L L 1 r �'_ '� { ••%'' - 1 ETT —I— FT ! of,' ``,'. ' : '� \ ' r` .\ \ ' 1 ' ,``` _ J ,1-- - - _J _I- -1- -d) i ; - % , .,\`` \\ 4 —-—-—---—---------t. - -,—Eitarsi_. ----...::44, / LI ; A„ " I I I I I I I I 1 11 , , �� '� <, °', = `, _ l L1 _I- . , - i L__ , Il 4 \ r j - 1 I- 1- T -1 -I- i �:`. \`,, - .� I I ', , , „I or , C.. .„i `� ,� v,...: / N I , I , it_ J LLJ _I__ L ] 1--. 1---.1.,__,... 1 i / i : ., Pi)s, \y- ev I, \ \ \ '‘it--- ...., tz..k..... 4.....v—i_ / ‘i',, ,,,,,' ,/'\ \\'`k''P,y.c.\\ \ \ i i bl L 1 / 1 I „I i / / /1 ‘ (''' 1 „ A 1 :- i\\ Ndik N cL. : _1 L _1. _1 _ L _I_ --- r-----. ::::- - i I f iiii /A, j.,,.,,,,, .,,,...„ i 4.\ \ \,.. 4. \\,,,,:41,,....0%. ........... 1 1 - - 'L.... i 1 ! I "I I I/ 1 al i I to �.. _ L1* i1i' J ; I ' -I ;o ,J I L 1 —I !: 2 •M� I ,' IIi..1 w, tr : — ,------- Ai= amen T — f ` 4 1--k — - I r- r I r I I I j 9 \ I L _ JII i - JfI 1CDI �� I _ 1 I 1 I I ' I--- _1_ 1 —J" _ I - 1 1 r I r - � - 1 i — — 1 — J I � I � - -1._ - -ISL _ _I_ _ JiE T 7Ir ; _. I_ _ JII 1 ISI I Iii _ I — 1 II- - • r- - - -1 r- - --I- - -1 I i- -- -I 1 i I I I I 14 RESOLUTION NO.4639 A RESOLUTION SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF PORTIONS OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF APGAR STREET SOUTH OF TENTH AVENUE WHEREAS,it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council that portions of the right-of-way of Apgar Street south of Tenth Avenue, City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, serves no public use or interest; and WHEREAS,a public hearing must be held before an action to vacate can be taken and two weeks published and posted notice thereof must be given. WHEREAS,two weeks published notice will be given in the SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS and posted notice will be given by posting such notice on the bulletin board on the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse, the bulletin board at the U.S. Post Office, the bulletin board at the Shakopee Public Library, and the bulletin board in the Shakopee City Hall. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,that a hearing be held in the Council Chambers on the 6th day of May, 1997, at 7:00 P.M. or thereafter, on the matter of vacating portions of the right-of-way known as Apgar Street south of Tenth Avenue, City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of 1Vfinnesota. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,MVfinnesota, held the day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk PREPARED BY: City of Shakopee 129 S. Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 VACPHAPG.DOC/RML 2 IY0 . 6' CITY OF SIIAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Request of Mike Mobley to Waive Minor Subdivision Requirement MEETING DATE: April 1, 1997 Introduction: For a number of years, Mike Mobley has desired to split his property at 838 E. 4th Avenue into 2 parcels. Previous planning staff had identified 2 issues preventing him from splitting the property by the use of the minor subdivision process. First, the proposed lots would not have met the minimum lot size requirement. That issue has since been abrogated by a change in the zoning ordinance which eliminated the minimum lot size requirement. Second, City Code Sec. 12.08 (Minor Subdivision Process) Subd. 1 (When Allowed), only permits minor subdivision in the case of"...platted, recorded lots...". Mr. Mobley's only other alternative is to go through the expense of a formal platting process. In working with staff, Mr. Mobley has had a survey prepared, and is asking that the Council waive the restriction on the application of the minor subdivision process. Section 12.13 of the Subdivision Ordinance deals with variations to the ordinance. At this time staff has not required that Mr. Mobley follow the procedure outlined in Section 12.13, as that would require the preparation of a formal plat. Action Requested: Offer and pass a motion relative to Mr. Mobley's request to waive the restriction on the use of the minor subdivision process to "platted, recorded lots." '.• R. Michael Leek Community Development Director MOBLEY.DOC/RML 1 March 10, 1997 Shakopee City Council & Mark McNeil, City Administrator 129 S. Holmes St . Shakopee, Mn. 55379 RE: Parcel A & B as indicated on enclosed survey. To Whom It May Concern: I wish to split the parcel on Dakota and Fourth Avenue into two parcels 60'X142 ' . I had the sewer and water extended into both parcels at the time 4th Avenue was recon- structed. I have owned the property since 1955 . Other homes in the area are built on unplatted property. The platting of the property would be a large expense for a person in my financial position. I can appreciate the need for the platting of property but do not believe it should apply to my property because only 1 additional parcel will be created. Your thoughtful consideration of this matter is appreciated. Thank you. Sincerely, '-7'/'''re:‘)%-Yre''0(--e(: ;,v Michael Mob ey Enclosure § 12.08 A. Lots adjacent to the roadway right-of-way shall be sized wherein a 125 foot buffer strip be provided as additional setback to lot depth or width standards supplementary to the minimum lot size and setback of the zoning provisions of the applicable district. B. An earth berm or other acceptable barrier technique shall be constructed to abate noise impact adjacent to roadway right-of-way equal to or below the 70 DBA standard accompanied by the following: • 1. A plan showing the existing and anticipated noise levels in DBA that are or will be expected on the site and in the immediate vicinity of the site. 2. A description of the site plan construction techniques, architectural designs, and other measures expected to be taken to reduce ambient noise levels. Such description shall include sufficient plans and other drawings to enable the City to accurately identify the noise reduction Measures expected to be taken. 3. Prior to approving a preliminary plan as required by this Chapter, the City shall determine that the noise levels will be successfully reduced to meet the ambient 70 DBA standard. (Ord. 58, May 7, 1981; Ord. 233, December 10, 1987; Ord. 246, June 17, 1988; Ord. 287, January 16, 1990; Ord. 302, January 25, 1991; Ord. 338; August 6, 1992) SEC. 12.08. MINOR SUBDIVISION PROCESS. Subd. 1. When Allowed. The City Planner has the authority to approve minor subdivisions where(1)a platted recorded lot is being split into a maximum of five lots, or(2)a maximum of five lots are being combined into four or fewer lots. For such a minor subdivision, the following requirements must be met: A. The minor subdivision process shall not be allowed in the following situations: 1. Any lot within an approved Planned Unit Development (PUD). 2. Where the subdivision includes the dedication of additional right-of-way or easements, or a change in existing streets, alleys, easements, water, sewer, or other public improvements. 3. Where new streets, utilities, or other public improvements will be needed other than to directly serve the lots created and to provide a direct connection to an existing and approved system. B. All resulting lots must meet the design standards and other requirements specified in Chapter 11. C. The City Planner may require the normal preliminary and final platting procedures for any reason, such as unusual complexity or special circumstances. D. The applicant shall provide a sketch of the lot or lots as they exist before the minor subdivision, and a sketch of the proposed lot or lots. P.O.revised in 1996 1599 § 12.08 • E. The applicant shall provide proof of ownership of the property. F. When the proposed lot split meets all the requirements established in City Codes, the Planning Department shall notify the applicant. The City shall record the minor subdivision. The applicant shall pay for the recording. • Subd. 2. Unplatted Lands. When the proposed minor subdivision involves any unplatted property, the regular preliminary and final platting procedures shall be followed. (Ord. 81, February 11, 1982; Ord. 299,.November 20, 1990; Ord 419, July 11, 1995) SEC. 12.09. REGISTERED LAND SURVEYS AND CONVEYANCE BY METES AND BOUNDS. Subd. 1. Registered Land Surveys. It is the intention of this Chapter that all Registered Land Surveys in the City should be presented to the Planning Commission in the form of a preliminary plat in accordance with the standards set forth in this Chapter for preliminary plats and that the Planning Commission shall first approve the arrangement, sizes and relationship of proposed tracts in such Registered Land Surveys, and the tracts to be used as easements or roads should be so dedicated. Unless such approvals have been obtained from the Planning Commission and Council in accordance with the standards set forth in this Chapter,building permits will be withheld for buildings on tracts which have been so subdivided by Registered Land Surveys and the City may refuse to take over tracts as streets or roads or to improve, repair or maintain any such tracts unless so approved. Subd. 2. Conveyance by Metes and Bounds. The City may refuse to accept the dedication of streets or to improve, repair or maintain them adjacent or abutting upon any tract conveyed contrary to law. (Ord. 1, April 1, 1978) SEC. 12.10. RURAL INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL AREAS. Due to the threat of premature development without adequate urban services, all commercial and industrial zoned area designated in the Shakopee Land Use Plan for future urban service expansion shall not be allowed on less than 20 acres to subdivide until the urban services of sanitary sewer and water supply are provided. Subdivision may take place in the future urban service expansion areas designated industrial or commercial once the Council orders the necessary improvement projects. (Ord. 58, May 7, 1981) SEC. 12.11. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. Planned Unit Developments shall conform to the provisions of City Code, Section 11.40. (Ord. 219, July 2, 1987) SEC. 12.12. Repealed. (Ord. 272, August 15, 1989) SEC. 12.13. VARIATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS. Subd. 1. Hardships. Where the Planning Commission finds that extraordinary hardships or particular difficulties regarding the physical development of land may result from strict compliance with these regulations, it may recommend variations or exceptions to the regulations so that substantial justice may be done and the public interest secured, provided that such variation or exception shall not have the effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of this Chapter, and further papa revised in 1996 1600 § 12. 15 provided the Planning Commission shall not recommend variations or exceptions to the regulations of this Chapter unless it shall make findings based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case that: A. The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. B. The conditions upon which the request for a variation is based are unique to the property for which the variation is sought, and are not applicable, generally, to other property. C. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of this Chapter. D. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the • applicant. E. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. Subd. 2. Conditions. In recommending variations and exceptions, the Planning Commission may require such conditions on a plat of subdivision as will, in its judgment, secure substantially the objectives of the standards or requirements of this Chapter. Violations of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Chapter. Subd. 3. Procedure for a Variance. A petition of any such variance shall be submitted in writing by the subdivider at the time the preliminary plat is filed for consideration by the Planning Commission. The petition shall state fully the grounds for the application and all of the facts relied upon by the petitioner with specific attention to the conditions stated in Subdivision 1 of this Section. (Ord. 1, April 1, 1978) SEC. 12.14. APPEALS. Any person aggrieved by an objection to a plat or a failure to approve a plat may, within 60 days of notification of such objection or rejection of the plat, have such decision reviewed by an appropriate remedy in a proper court of record. (Ord. 1, April 1, 1978) SEC. 12.15. AMENDMENTS. For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety and general welfare, the Council may from time to time amend the regulations imposed by this Chapter. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on proposed amendments and make recommendations thereon to the Council. Proposed amendments may be initiated by the Council, the Planning Commission, the City Administrator or petitioners. (Ord. 1, April 1, 1978) page revised in 1996 1601 L t l 0CA S D:1 Sr r lI. i Za l 0 — 14-2.000 10 2.3�4p�� — 0 f p nrt- 12 p 9 /� m ;-• .t.. L 4 CD �, O o z- ini 1 0 7--- ;s- - ---(_ 4 - ...., J7, ) ii -7- --.1 0 `Oz O 1 G 11 CKD 4 rri I ' ' .11171 n t iSo,00 i -n 12.+ o - \ 3 — , zx. W s03 $ N1002 '4(51) , , OD o,s i y 01 -� r al r* -- g / R D -� QoDi . - Zv it 0 4- s 3 CD c+�, 0, eG x V V 1 \, ., ,`N _____._.... , D t1 70 A ii ,----- 7 773 142 oO NI I Do 231 1"1�W y, 4 5000 V�f s ,VJEST- LIME gilA,KGM ST2EEr C— •-• Cr) iC \1K OM P . =:rRE�--T' ��' �'V o .3 -,--------- 17.,ezC7 m L 0. 0 q g E cn0 ` cm cn S, S^ rn �+ oa ,....(..1_,N, '��J i( 0 O a 1 N TI aa) N 1 _� m $ --j _ <v C\--J y CA t) ID. L . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Discussion of MUSA, Metropolitan Growth Strategy and Comprehensive Plan Amendments MEETING DATE: April 1, 1997 Introduction: The attached letter was received from Jon Albinson, Project Director for Valley Green Business Park. In the letter, Mr. Albinson indicates that Valley Green would like to, and needs to bring the West Dean Lake area into its inventory in 1998. Valley Green has received inquiries from firms interested in that area for corporate office sites. This would require bringing the area within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA), and thus would require an amendment to the City's comprehensive plan. Mr. Albinson asks in his letter that the City move forward with such a plan amendment. I have held some initial discussions with Karl Schenk, of the Metropolitan Council staff about implementation of the new growth strategy, his agency's views on land demand within Shakopee, and what would be required to implement such a plan amendment. In the event the Council directs staff to move forward with a plan amendment, I will continue those discussions. Alternatives: 1. Direct staff to initiate consideration of a comprehensive plan amendment to add the West Dean Lake area into MUSA. 2. Do not direct staff to initiate consideration of a comprehensive plan amendment to add the West Dean Lake area into MUSA. 3. Table consideration of the request for additional information. WDEANLK.DOC/RML 1 Action Requested: Direction to staff regarding whether to initiate consideration of a comprehensive plan amendment to add the West Dean Lake area into MUSA. /J 11' U R. Michael Leek Community Development Director WDEANLK.DOC/RML 2 on - licy BUSINESS PARK February 25; 99.E 3�f 4 , i Y T i Mayor'Jeff'Henderson• ;r t • Shakopee City Council Members • CITY OF SHAKOPEE 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379' ,Re: - Shakopee Growth Dear Mayor and Council Members: Over the past number of months I have shared with you anecdotal information about thelevel of interest we are experiencing from prospects for development opportunities in Valley Green Business Park. We thought the enclosed articles from the Minnesota Real Estate Journal and CityBusiness publications may provide you additional information on how the marketplace is perceiving development _ opportunities in the Shakopee area. 1996 was an excellent year. We would suggest that 1997 will be even better. Your leadership and guidance during this very important period in Shakopee's life is greatly appreciated. I hope the attached of interest. Valley Green Business Park sells a product which is an integral part of the development process, one that is necessary for economic development to take place; serviced, developable land. With the sales activity we experienced in the past year, and that which we have booked and/or will be booking for 1997, it appears that our inventory of available product (developable land) will not be able to keep up with demand. We have opened up all the land currently zoned industrial north of the bypass owned by Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership. We still have one section we haven't developed around the Canterbury Inn, but this area is zoned Major Recreational, and the market for this type of zoning is somewhat limited at this time. ` To accommodate additional industrial type inventory, we will need to move forward in opening up the area we define as the West Dean Lake area. WSB and Associates has provided us a proposal for a feasibility study to define our expense to open this area for development. We bring this to your attention because this area will require a MUSA expansion. With the recent adoption by the Metropolitan Council of the new "Growth Strategy," the stage has been set for this additional expansion. ;1 el ` } { n J sY. 4, .« Mayor Jeff'Henderson" Ci ty Councd,Members � f Page Two ,1; , �, Febh' ` 1,997 :�f�,� �` nary 25, ', ':. � 4 J j I liJ �c,-,-.1- � L jf ��S Y � Z kX .� � fi - To accomplish MUSA expansions based'ph,the guidelines"defined in,the (Metropolitan Council's Growth`Str�ategy,-the City of'Shakopee Will be required to complete a Major Comprehensive Plan Amendment.-=We would appreciate the idef`promoting and'implementing'•this Plan -1,99-6,,„w mendment as soon as'possible to`provide for whet will_ be much,heeded inventory in"",'1998, which we are 'ready and willing to bring on"line in the West Dean Lake area we stand ready;to assist the City;and:the City,staff in any wvay the City believes appropriate, to promote and imp nent a'successful P_ lin Amendment to accommodate the'City's future development needs 1, Respectfully, V` GREEN BUSINESS PARK r` Jon R. Albinson Project Director JRA:jmc Enclosure cc: Phil Carlson Dahlgren, Shardlow & Uban (w/encl.) Brian;Brennan -- City of Shakopee (w Allianz of America (w/o1 encl.) Mark McNeill /encl.) C:1Wo04TA\West Dean lakeu mnon&Caaci,)w,ters re MUSA espnsion&Vd sTATE ... Guisslildi ,--,,,,,, ,1114 t .. 114 4,AI_ ,. i. i tri—‘,-- ... „. • . • ©1997 Minnesota'Real Estate Journal, Inc February10, 1997 _ . .. . :,. - - - _ - fr • • . ., , - f-u !, . .t.--trial • , des its .` op .,.. . tions south .•.., . , . :-.1._::: _ ; . , REIT CONSIDERS LAND IN SHAKOPEE by lesiG carzz�s Not satisfied with merely noting a , , '-...-_: , , : ' -, ', .. : '-,' trend, First Industrial Realty Trust Inc wants to be one of the first in line_ Recognizing that fully leased buildings in the southwest metro mill cause tenant spillover toward thesouth. the Chicago based real estate investment trust (REIT) Y r entered into an option in December to pur- l chase 52.6 acres in Valley Green Industria! Park. Bill Ritter and Tony Weinstine of T., Welsh Cos.are representing Valley Green. Although several other industrialpio- leets are onnine in Shakopee this year,none rivals First Industrial's in terms of size.The REIT plans to build ,apprt�ximateiy n 750,000. square feet of office/warehouse 1.. rsktowroo on she s.,,ie Located z ,..�511f►KOPEE -''s1 e , fag 70 S 1 r 1 ¢ �� , .' ON a 4 L+ _ - 3 ; Ms.) ENOTN PO p z t' l a TAXES d xra r'.� .F "x :c.i^6 -„'St ..,rs.i`'on�in , • o as- CDci � � 3 c .'�^.cr COO aC. o CD r� o y rD sc F. s y C. o c �� c; —-,_ ---,--0-,g,--5-----,--a-- t, O :a,,.t .Cr.;., G -n E* :� -z - (- E' -1 n C 7.:"a QG - C .rs �. 77 n C !Y i ry v' ..="'-. R- c : ri O -, ✓' Ci. r ry C^t' A N rb y �" CD s'Cv T= J 2 n. ,. ' S"ti, ry _.O- ,-r•,`.+ 'T .T Fs A .-, iD �p c`'.T coo .-e.'x O .: _ 2 S..,,c� v O Ct3.�,"C,°0-.• -?,-:-., r., W"0'D N O •-' ' .'O+,5'_= �' _2 2 -G: ->':_(.7:, ° V=5 ` ; s�S ,: -ryi A O_ ry E d� N f0-='1'�< -A C � D� � b p.-(4-;47--g-:,-.:- t ', (D C . ��-s�- p; i� (*i O 6,.A! ry r`3 ry 8 A _T----,--8 6-7 ,:.%(j S�, O -n. VJ ry.,R. : „, �. t ,. '-s`" 0 vE 02 » 3a r7 O ry sO " O C?'i '45,<:.,-, = �-' a . _ �.. � r c to s is .-r ?S* a `a'l w (o (� , O A �� � C f_).. O CO t� p- �' :n.� � cv (p ; ., t� .O L'' ^* ry ©"e (.�p En ;n ry=-,`"�. O O ^'<'� C'_``< `-<_-,8 C '"-' (� p CD C C> �S> =� (71 :n j v� "t (�D p + yyCCA p' „ ry •D• O Q' (4-. ,Z.j v: T3 ¢,v - .'� ,`ij` �1-�^ s ✓. w j E.(D rES` r-.N 4'SH .II,n ,'7. E-1-;-,91----F4 -O W .t • a. C\ry N ry c:, .y.1f3k .�M.a}3,= ice •� (J•ry ''R. a• r �, c Aa- (Ao"c e,• a g a. — -c o F, u' y :.0-x`-3 ti. � � l o :� x ry� 5 � 1:7,�_ �• o o �a.f Si rya� ~"°�ro0 . `C co. ,1,,, .Ooo�a "J. -- coCD ry0 fO : < � � n :� o �o Q`. z✓ O r - -ry '-e V, c < - .-e;'E O -(j O Ci dti t. G'.'. (9 O G r 77---• `-5.?-------- .Vi �. !�--yy -W _ Ci �,ry ry 5 d 0 a: ,-D �- .ng "ry v' .7 � ^l r7• v: ry �'_ (� (L � '{�1,Cr. QO 4fD � a.�wY-� � ,5t' y.. '-'3,J.:-.-P-------=---n,-..-,s:.--7-' :M GN ry co @ -- D G-p p '-, ca---,--ry co O :a (D C'G t� :. . �' -9 cm 3 . y a ,M y L3 '--.--.'----,,,-.4-'5,- --.:€1.--..,:------'---(7).-- O =. �-(17-0 @ OP' L7{`C ro '�' .a 17"w O R>Q" a -- �-' r E "---e.'",-."--,'-'O .� = i'- ;' -t 0 (� Q.. • ra 4' ry "��.O.,F,. ti a 'G D....< OO • F °C1z= :ry g----,!7::. O (➢ '}S 'py, r� rip .N.e A a'U. '�°N , ,� ,-G'.`�`p„ N O - (D En 0-OA O U ''-, ' '0, 4,, h- „r'. . �� c,..: rs.ry OG e. „�• O A C x i a: ,-..R. g g.,--_,1ryG'. y — `<- c (p ('a.0. c m =- -( :4 q # x 0•t� ---..,,...o,.- A (l1 'ryt !. K'•j� "U CA r,":7... fu `� co �. d tios, (D0. r . 'C3e.Q.r y fD .-.� ry A ^+�� ug c. ,^'a' nr. •.�?to = to '"'y F.-C. '~'�n. `EJG a:CD A= ^g" .'7 (� u n1 iDk `. 0t.0 Z - .- �< 2 - 0 7c•rl O o a a o r C m =" A = O -.`O- O --.. ;r*ty cr -:_ • ^' n �' n m ry ^�°�'ooa Q ....1 _.- -_ca 2,, a o • a y� cs.°.0 ' aus ry o CD o �o A ry Nr �. a a 0-V ao. c c .x°t3..-4,, - v, g ea,. `0 0 w �-g Li o 5.--c5-o ° `° � tl cry `� o .��•v iry �,}o � y ` o Ao aaC � c a � aa ,,,,=7-‘,<*---,-;__ c� wri � � a 0=:c -ry 'o c �, oxoy c o8xg a c a °? o•� r a-' :: 0 cro ..,- T- < = 2.t ✓hilfift Or) . •'= , ^ G y W r.'+i': — , O -` p. a O ,, ' ,0• Cr 'c` ^ ' a .0GaGcoi v ow a2-� a' anv, O" 0' waA rY n _ c N'•D.x O _ (_ = x J a•. -, C �J a'c.-r .•.,0 0 o0. o - . S C E7 c^ n t, _ry rUC-", (_ryo O - o'•C7 _ ry < U`:<-1,:;(u..'-'------4';4'^� n-4-,.,._,0 C p A`< --1..,c° _ T J f' J n A 0.� ' ;r ry Ta O_r.D -'D • _ � -7 F ^ _ GL r�(� =(o .» 4.);..."4-. s, ry ii y r A'Vv", ca a 7 s N(rd:QQ_0„—._,:-E.., o S T G _ cv o G ( D o I .--: R.:" f..' �. C_� C )•.„ ODS o- ('� ---'-'-'63---.. �IF'^" � - V/ PAM( ..><CE - ' • - ( D~ 2 , n ,,. r. D ' ( oN • n m y C u ,2 ati&C n 2 1 0 i .:_-:--- .-,..,: tr. g c -q. ' ala y =Y' _ D _ ,i' --. I RrNT�K c r Rc r P a -,ftU -- .i. ,'''„'F,,. N n y 44- 4 it , 1 ..fD *. .. •: -X �' D Sam Y P... ', ` ¢!z 8 kAkiE1,LLn'S 0 ry !'> is3+• 'a? - 1 .e:.E> _ tr P4RK C''''''E CONKUN , - ` _ D m - 1 o z . rp c r - ' t. -.,._ .4fr '-i 77 i y zI ry c-cai - tee` n m 0 r. ■ %� C - �-s -' /// F - G a - �, sem: _ > 1■ C'O oor ��. t(arewn.uPivE) ill n F 8 '----.1.0--t-,1% i1 �;' mini 1■ 1 * vs ' s c d � Z � ■ ■ ter ■ ■ .�■ ■o�+l �� LEL) }3Y' ",Y/1; ■ - _ _ c C C ■ rriside CONSTRUCTION `2�/97 A , , CityBL, Ais South oth • a 1''�ver . • NOW THAT'S BUYIN In a volatile fuel market, 0,s, boorntov,ns rise District Energy represents M����on a 23.3 million-square-foot purchasing collective 23• our customer base! b By Frank Jossi Contributing writer Bridge helps make We choose and use thet11 For years the suburbs south of the � �, most economical of aWII Minnesota River have grown at a slower Shakropee-Savage variety of fuels. And that pace than their counterparts directly north of means lower, more stable the river due to the lack of a bridge high area a future mecca heating and cooling costs. enough to avoid being waterlogged at least Call today and ask about part of the year. Only a handful of bridges group buying power. Distri carried traffic and only one, Interstate 35W easy access to Interstate 494 and suburbs on through Burnsville,could be termed a high- the other side of the river, according to Jon way artery. The old Bloomington Ferry Albinson, the park's project director. Valley Bridge, the main crossing for Shakopeans, Green's remaining 850 developable acres spent three to six weeks partially underwater draw plenty of interest from firms looking for and closed to traffic each spring. expansion opportunities. But the traffic headaches of yesteryear "We are getting frequent inquiries on ® 1:1:-, eased with the opening in 1995 of the new development possibilities, available build- . $42 million Bloomington Ferry Bridge con- ings and so forth," said Paul Snook, the ' ® G. necting Shakopee and west Bloomington on city's economic development coordinator. iNIT�rII�� (± { U.S. Highway 169, replacing the old flood- "We're getting metrowide recognition for ® �fl+a� prone bridge with an attractive four-lane the new ease of access we have to the south rill model.Trips across the river from Shakopee of the river. It's really opened things up for or Savage to the suburbs north of the river new business and development." N11•1 were reduced from 18 to 35 minutes to Valley Green is the main beneficiary of around 10 minutes, depending on traffic. the new interest and activity. Under con The other major improvement is the four- struction or slated for development in Valley Witcher Construction Co. ® Te`. lane Highway 169 Shakopee Bypass, which Green are the following: starts at the Bloomington Ferry Bridge and • Minnetonka-based ADC Telecom- 9855 West 78th Street, Suite 270mi, D runs around the south side of the city before munications Inc. is building a 90,000- Minneapolis, MN 55344 turning directly south toward Jordan and the square-foot distribution center and a • R far reaches of Scott County. Travelers head- 280,000-square-foot manufacturing facility 612-830-9000 ®' "" ing south now can use the bypass to avoid for its broadband connectivity group. 612-830-1365 Fax ■ R; laborious and time-consuming travel through • Brad Hoyt of Plymouth-based Hoyt downtown Shakopee via State Highway 101. Development Co. is building a 12.5-acre, i "We're seeing Savage and Shakopee as 200,000-square-foot spec distribution center. two hot spots because of available land," • Bloomington-based Capp Industries said Cindy Bagaus, director of marketing Inc. is using a 12.5-acre site for three spec -0.0"..- and research at Minneapolis-based Towle buildings totaling 70,000 square feet. Real Estate Co., a subsidiary.of Colliers •First Industrial Realty Trust Inc. in Eden International.Both communities have plenty Prairie plans to build a seven-structure, of land "zoned appropriately," she said, and 800,000-square-foot business park on 52 the transportation improvements are making acres. them an attractive option to developers. By the end of the year Albinson expects 80 to 100 acres of sites will be gone but he Shakopee draws more than tourists predicts the park won't reach capacity for at Shakopee was turned over to white hands least seven to nine more years. Parts of the when the federal government bought 24 mil- park still require streets and sewers before lion acres of Indian land in the Northwest they can be marketed, but all indications are Territories and forced Chief Shakopee, the that, once ready, they will sell. .a. +- leader of the Sioux, to move his tribe up the "Our activity level is at a degree,or,pace, • river in 1853. At the turn of the century the that we've never seen before," said NewsRaeho city installed water, electricity and sewers Albinson, who recalled only growth in the and grew gradually, reaching a population of mid-1970s came close to today's fervent more than 13,000 in the 1994 census. pace. "There's an amazing amount of inter-, The city,unlike many suburbs, is a tourist est. At Valley Green we provide an excellent magnet. For example, some of its frontier environment, a quality environment, for heritage can be viewed at Murphy's development. But the reality is also supply- Landing, or visitors can see a har ce race at and-demand and there's not a large supply of CanterburyPark, get a roller coaster ride at vacant developable land left in west . -p Valleyfair Amusement Park or gamble at Bloomington or other suburbs " Mystic Lake Casino Hotel. Shakopee While the bridge plays a major role in K' 4, IA/elt"gam_/ I t receives 10 million visitors a year. attracting development, the bypass opened i v �'V �tnv� %�`� Shakopee has an active business commu- in November of last year gave Valley Green nity, too, the majority of it located in Valley a new look. Before the road was built visi- Green Business Park. The largest industrial tors to the park came from Highway 101 and park in the metropolitan area at 2,250 acres, saw mainly older developments from the late Valley Green places second to Eagan's 1960s and early 1970s. "The bypass gave a Eagandale Center in developed square new front door to the business park,"he said. footage, with 4.9 million. The sprawling "Now it's easier to show developers that we park contains 35 of Shakopee's major have a higher-amenity environment and bet- MNN employers: Valleyfair_Amusement Park, ter entrance from the bypass to the park on 1330 News Radio Kmart Distribution Center, The Toro Co., County Road,83." Tsumura International Inc., Anchor Glass, Shakopee directly benefits from the Canterbury Park and many others. strong business'community in the suburbs to Located at Highway 101 and County its north, whose fast-growing industries are Road 16 and accessible from the Highway often',looking for land for expansion and 169 Shakopee Bypass, Valley Green makes have a strong preference for staying in the P an ideal location for companies that want FUTURE to page 21 `It seems that most of the people who live nies had purchased land to build their own - 'hi this area typically like to work close to structures,she said, '' home,"he said.'We're finally } getting a con The-same holds..true for Carlson-Real sensus building that people would rather be Estate Co., which has developed 560,000 closer to their workplace if possible,so busi- square feet of industrial s ace at the corner ; nesses are analyzing their work forces and of I-394 and I-494 on land falling under the ` key people before choosing the location for jurisdiction " of` •both Plymouth and 7`----.- -;-,:-...1.-:,„.....,,„7*-� , . expansion." Minnetonka �... Moen said other developers who ques "We had this whole idea of staged con '..,::4;4*,,:.: g .j tioned whether spec buildings could sell struction`but we'decided to. eta gaggressive �..�.�;�: i ,� ���t_.,"_ :,•,--A-,':�..,,:-..-,,,i,,11 have jumped into the Plymouth market look- because of the market wewere seeing 'said . ing for sites and projects; We were the first Matt VanSlooten, managing director-.'of 1 to go in but a`lot of*others followed, and investments for the Minnetonka-based coin- 1 fast," he said. pany.The business park"has been a treinen ,ti ,. , One of those competitors has been dous success," but finding any new land to Minnetonka-based Opus, attracted for many develop will become a challenge,he said.■ • 1 44 t r L. ` [" • t FUTURE i U T U R E built before any more land or buildings can i -" t" from page 19 be sold,Reese contends.Only one structure, a ' ti. r" 1 E ` r a 100,000-square-foot spec building,will be 1 x • finished by the end of this year,Y pushing 'r r f southwest section of the metropolitan area, activity at Eagle Creek into 1998,he said. according to Towle senior sales associate Stock said other sections of the city are Raymond Reese. With the only major land beingidentified for •^ 1 growth as:tratisportation c �< '�_ parcels left in the southwest quadrant locat- issues become resolved.He expects growth at ed in Shakopee and Savage, companies a proposed alignment of County Highways 9a � located in this section in search of land nat- 27 and 42 will attract retail,as will the inter- r d 1 1 ural ly gravitate toward those two cities. section of, County Highway 42 and State ,r,,,,.::„., " " ' j "This is the single biggest overnight Highway 13. That intersection:in particular • surge of industrial activity in one general appears ripe for development,with'125 acres 7- a B00 O --- ' On location I've seen,"'..said Reese, who has available on three corners in Savage's juris- been marketing and in Savage for Towle. diction (the fourth,in Prior Lake;;has been- 'TheBookofLists isanannual referencesourc,ellke'noother. Need While he believes the boom will continue in developed): Big-box merchants and food" valuable corporate statistics,key executive contacts,address Shakopee for several years he thinks eventu stores see the intersection as agood location, information,and more. A dvtual of data for For a research,direct marketing,and"sales prospectinga num ally neighboring Savage will see an upswing he said. L se 'dervice ' TopList,the software version of the Book of Lists;takes -docume • i o commercial and industrial growth. Stock said the fortunes of Savage partial- a popular product from a premiere publication...and lets 1;0.11 itp:/ Shakopee may be the better known of the ly rest upon what-happens in Shakopee to You access, manipulate,and put its powerful-contents to w cities but Savage actually has a few hun- the west and Burnsville to the east:If big; work for you in minutes.Use TopList or quickly extract the Fo data for use in ACT!and many other popular programs. question died more residents than its neighbor. Since box merchants or light manufacturing corn- - the Bloomington Ferry Bridge opened, - paries don't locate in either of those cities, What's more,ijyou liked earlier versions of TopList,you'll Savage economic development director Barry the chances increase that they will in love the improved version 3.t7jorWindows or Macintosh. or http Stock has received as many as three inquiries Savage.Deals made by Savage's two neigh: r a day from businesses looking for land.Once bors "could have a substantial impact" on 1 QV 1 reading about#I love what n TopList dd 6.50 sales tax rrra my a residential community, Savage now demand for land there. Shakopee's or • TopList Version Add shipping/handling u°e, developing its commerciaUindustrial Burnsville's loss, in other words, would be I 3.0.Please rush me my order. Add for next properties as a primary focus for the future. Savage's gain, said Stock. 1_I use a: Totalausiness day($8.50) "Ribactivity ❑PC 0Macintosh ht now we have but it's Stock,`for his part, sees developers who � Credit card# nowhere near that we're going to have in buy into Savage now getting good deals on a 1 Signature tRey,,,reat„rccorder) Ex; future," he said. Most of the interest in sure-bet boomtown. 1 Name ,camo or building light industrial and ware- "We expect to see significant growth in 1 Company nu,e structures is in the 160-acre Eagle residential development and as that occurs 1 Address ( [,..L•k Business Parkwe would seem to be strategically positioned 1 City f)r'`eloped by Minnetonka hared Opus for major commercial and industrial activity 1 State C_eq .u�d marketed by Towle Real Estate, to follow," Stock .said. "Arid it's a buyers' Lone Fax :lie park still has infrastructure that must he market now." • /7c). A(."---(1?)/) /11>Air , CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE I L' D, '7, Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Park 2000 - Southwest Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) MEETING DATE: April 1, 1997 Introduction: State statute and Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules mandate the preparation of an EAW for industrial projects or expansions which exceed 200,000 square feet. Once the EAW is prepared the City(as RGU) must publish notice in the"EQB Monitor" and to distribute the EAW for review. First Industrial has proposed a project called Park 2000 - Southwest, which would involve the eventual construction of 700,000 square feet of office - warehouse/manufacturing in Valley Park 13th Addition. The Planning Commission has previously reviewed the concept plan for a PUD for this project. A PUD is proposed because the project is designed to permit a higher proportion of office space in some buildings than is currently allowed by the Heavy Industrial (I-2) design standards. A draft EAW has been prepared for the proposed project. If the Council approves distribution of the EAW, notice in the"EQB Monitor' would be published on April 7th, and the 30-day comment period would run to May 7th. Action Requested: Offer and pass a motion to authorize publication of notice in the"EQB Monitor" and distribution of the draft EAW for review and comment. Council is not asked to approve the EAW at this time, as it will be brought back after expiration of the review period. AcYs. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director EAWPARK.DOC/RML 1 mie0011 Cf) ;1'4, I ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR THE PARK 2000 - SOUTHWEST DEVELOPMENT RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENTAL UNIT CITY OF SHAKOPEE F:\W P W IN\PRW\EA W.ClR 1 Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) NOTE TO REVIEWERS: Comments must be submitted to the RGU(see item 3)during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. (Contact the RGU or the EQB to learn when the comment period ends.) Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information, potential impacts that may warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS. If the EAW has been prepared for the scoping of an EIS, (see item 4), comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information and suggest issues for investigation in the EIS. 1. Project Title: Park 2000 - Southwest 2. Proposer: First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. Contact Person: Todd Geller Address: 7615 Golden Triangle Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: (612) 943-2700 3. RGU: City of Shakopee Contact Person: Michael Leek Title: Community Development Director Address: 129 Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Phone: (612) 496-9677 4. Reason for EAW Preparation: Mandatory EAW If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category number(s): 4410.4300, Subp.14A Construction of a new....warehousing or light industrial facility....in excess of....300,000 square feet of gross floor space for a third class City. 2 5. Project Location: N 1/2 Section 10 Township 115N Range 22W County: Scott County City/Township: City of Shakopee Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW: a. a county map showing the general location of the project: Figure 1. b. copy(ies) of USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map (photocopy is OK) indicating the project boundaries: Figure 2. c. a site plan showing all significant project and natural features. Figure 3. 6. Description: Give a complete description of the proposed project and ancillary facilities (attach additional sheets as necessary). Emphasize construction and operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or produce wastes. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. Provide a 50 or fewer word abstract for use in the EQB Monitor notice: Abstract for EQB Monitor First Industrial Reality Trust, Inc. is proposing a commercial development (Park 2000 - Southwest) on a 53 acre site of undeveloped land in the Valley Green Business Park, Shakopee. The development would include 7 buildings with a total gross floor area of 749,000 square feet. Proposed uses include office, warehouse, and manufacturing. Project Description The property being purchased and developed by First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. is proposed to eventually consist of 749,000 square feet of office/warehouse/ manufacturing space which will be built out over the next 3 to 10 years depending upon market conditions. The proposer anticipates long range development of two platted blocks of property totaling approximately 53 acres in the Valley Green Business Park. The plat of record is Valley Park Thirteenth Addition. The northern parcel (Lot 2 on site plan) consists of approximately 35 acres, the 3 southern parcel (Lot 3 on site plan) is 18 acres in size. The proposed site plan is schematic, and will be subject to modification as the design process moves forward and perspective tenants lease the property. Development of the northern parcel is anticipated to include four buildings ranging in size from 117,000 to 146,000 square feet of gross floor area. The total square footage proposed for the parcel is 520,000. The buildings will have a clear height of 24'. A building area and parking analysis is provided on the site plan (Figure 3). The southern parcel will have 3 buildings total. Two of the buildings will be office warehouse structures each totaling 92,000 square feet in size. The third will be a two story, 45,000 square foot office building. The total square footage of office/warehouse for the parcel is anticipated to be 229,000. Total building area projected for both parcels is approximately 749,000 square feet. Parking is provided in accordance with Shakopee guidelines for a total of approximately 1,750 spaces. The proposed buildings and land use are consistent with City codes and will provide a higher green space ratio than strict industrial park standards. The initial stage of construction anticipated for 1997 will be 2 buildings which would total approximately 263,000 square feet, occupying approximately 18 to 20 acres. In 1996 a plan was approved by the City of Shakopee and contracts let for the construction of 11th and 12th Avenues and Gateway Drive along with the installation of infrastructure of sanitary, water main, and storm sewers within the public right-of-ways of these streets as they occur on the subject site. Construction activities associated with this are in progress and have resulted in alteration of areas in and around the street right-of-ways including grading, filling, and excavation. The development plan proposed by First Industrial Reality Trust, Inc. assumes completion of the streets and utilities by the City according to their approved plan. The 53 acre site proposed for development is primarily open with two small isolated areas of woodland (Figure 4). The proposed development project will result in the conversion of brush/woodland and open grassland(some of which is formerly cropland) to a business park setting. Infiltration will decrease and the runoff rate and volume of stormwater generated on the site will increase. The proposed percentage of impervious surface is approximately 70% which is below the I-2 zoning district limit of 85%. All stormwater ponding (to NURP standards) and storm sewers are constructed and existing within dedicated public right-of- ways or outlots. 4 Wastewater will be produced by onsite users and conveyed to the trunk line sanitary sewer system existing within street right-of-ways. Intended users of the site are primarily warehouse and office which will not generate high volumes of wastes. Non-recyclable solid wastes will be hauled off-site by licensed waste haulers to approved landfills. Site preparation before construction will involve selective clearing, grading and installation of necessary utility connections. Site preparation and project construction will generate dust and noise. Best management practices will be implemented to control dust, erosion, and noise. No other lasting impacts to the environment are anticipated after construction. No significant or rare natural features (wetlands, geologic features, pristine woodlands, prairies, etc.) are known to be present on the property (see Figures 5 and 6). Increased traffic resulting from the project will contribute to a minimal increase in noise and carbon monoxide levels in the immediate area, but are not expected to cause any significant environmental impacts. 7. Project Magnitude Data: Total Project Area (acres) or Length (miles): 53 Acres Commercial/Industrial/Institutional building Area (gross floor space): Total square feet: 749,000 Square Feet Indicate area of specific uses: Sq. Ft. Percentage Office 256,000 35 Warehouse 419,000 50 Manufacturing 74,000 15 The City of Shakopee has identified this area of the Valley Green Business Park as I-2 zoning and limits the amount of office square footage to 25% of each building total. However, the recent opening of the 169/101 bypass which abuts the southern property boundary provides for a higher visibility and an opportunity for an expanded office and office/showroom market. First Industrial will be requesting a higher concentration of office (up to 35% of the total square footage) as a condition of the Planned Unit Development(PUD) approval process at the City of Shakopee. 5 8. Permits and Approvals Required: List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals, and funding required: Approval/Permit Agency PUD overlay zoning district approval City of Shakopee Site plan approval City of Shakopee Building permits City of Shakopee NPDES permit MPCA Grading permit City of Shakopee 9. Land Use: Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land uses; indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks. Currently, the land is vacant and undeveloped. Surrounding land uses include existing business and undeveloped outlots to the north and east (guided and zoned industrial), Highway 101/169 bypass along the southern boundary, industrial park development to the west(on the west side of Valley Park Drive), and a small commercial building (Chem-Rex) adjacent to the northwest corner of the site. Aerial photographs from the years 1937, 1957, 1964, 1987, and 1990 were examined for past land uses of the area. The area appeared to be primarily open grassland with scattered trees. A portion of cropland extended into the southeastern portion of the site. In the 1987 and 1990 photos, cropping appeared over almost the entire property except for a few clusters of trees. The nature of the observed past land uses on the site do not suggest a potential for pollution, contamination or other significant environmental concerns. Minor environmental effects typical of fanning activities (application of herbicides and pesticides, minor erosion, etc.) are all that would be expected. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment by Nova Environmental Services, Inc. (2/11/97) (see Appendix A) concluded that there was no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Site. 6 10. Cover Types: Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development(before and after totals should be equal): Acreages are approximate based on conceptual site plan. Before (acres) After(acres) Types 2 to 8 Wetland 0 0 Wooded/Forest 3.5 1.0 Grassland/Bare Ground/ 49.5 0 Cropland Urban/Suburban 0 14.5 Lawn Landscaping Impervious Surface 0 37.5 Total 53 53 11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources: a. Describe fish and wildlife resources on or near the site and discuss how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. A February 1997 site visit in combination with a tree inventory and recent aerial photography indicates that there will be minor impacts to wildlife and wildlife habitat. Most of the property is open grassland or bare ground that has been graded and/or impacted by heavy machinery. Nearly all natural habitat components have been removed except for the following 2 areas. A fairly dense 1 acre area of young oak, aspen, and red cedar with a well developed shrub layer is present along the western edge of the site adjacent to Valley Park Drive and between 11`h and 12`h Avenue. The diameter of most of the trees in this area is less than 8 inches. : 7 Asecond area of trees south of 12th Avenue is about 2.5 acres in size. The trees are scattered, larger in size (up to 38 inches in diameter), and the understory is relatively open. Tree species present include oak,maple, aspen, and red cedar. Scattered clumps of honeysuckle and raspberry shrubs were observed along with quackgrass, aster, and avens in the herbaceous layer. A large culvert at the intersection of Valley Park Drive and 12`h Avenue routes stormwater into a narrow channel that runs from west to east along southern property boundary and within the Minnesota Department of Transportation(MnDOT) right-of-way. Some young willow trees and reed canary grass are present in the ditch near the culvert. Wildlife species likely to utilize at least some portion of the existing habitat include those associated with grasslands, farmsteads, and farm woodlots. Bird species might include woodpeckers, sparrows, meadowlarks, yelllowthroats, cowbirds, chickadees, cardinals, blue jays, finches, crows, blackbirds. wrens, nuthatches, flycatchers, bluebirds, doves, hawks, owls, various migrants, etc. Killdeer may use the bare or sparsely vegetated areas on the site. Cottontails, voles, mice, shrews, ground squirrels, squirrels. garter snakes, gophers, skunks, weasels, etc. may also use habitats on the property to some extent. Given the lack of relatively natural habitat components on the property(3.5 acres of woodland) it is reasonable to assume that only a small number of individuals of each species use the available habitats on a regular basis. The proposed development plan would convert the described habitats into pavement, building, and landscaped lawn. Wildlife species would be replaced by those adapted to developed conditions such as house sparrow, American robin, chipping sparrow, etc. All species that would be potentially adversely impacted by the project are considered "common" in Minnesota. They would likely utilize other available habitats within the Minnesota River Valley (including nearby wildlife refuge areas), and their populations at the local or national level would not be noticeably affected. No specific measures are proposed to minimize or avoid minor impacts to wildlife other than maximizing greenspace given the nature and scope of the proposed development. Greenspace is being proposed for 30% of the property rather than 15%that is allowed within the I-2 zoning district. 8 b. Are any state-listed endangered, threatened, or special-concern species; rare plant communities; colonial waterbird nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat; or other sensitive ecological resources on or near this site? No. If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources was conducted. Describe measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. A March 3, 1997 letter from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (see Appendix B) states that a review of the Natural Heritage Database found no known occurrences of rare species or natural features in the area searched. A February 1997 site visit by a professional wildlife biologist revealed no unique natural features or rare species of plants or animals, and indicated a very low probability for their occurrence given the past and present disturbance on the property. 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources: Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, impoundment) of any surface water(lake, pond,wetland, stream, drainage ditch)? No. If yes, identify the water resource to be affected and describe: The alteration, including the construction process; volumes of dredged or fill material; area affected; length of stream diversion; water surface area affected; timing and extent of fluctuations in water surface elevations; spoils disposal sites; and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. 13. Water Use: a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells? No. There are no records of wells on the site and none were observed during the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment. The development will 9 be served by the existing municipal water system and will not involve the installation of any wells. For abandoned wells give the location and Unique well number. For new wells, or other previously unpermitted wells, give the location and purpose of the well and the Unique well number(if known). b. Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water (including dewatering)? No. No appropriation of ground or surface water will be required. No dewatering is expected to occur. If yes, indicate the source, quantity, duration, purpose of the appropriation, and DNR water appropriation permit number of any existing appropriation. Discuss the impact of the appropriation on ground water levels. c. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? Yes. If yes, identify the supply, the DNR water appropriation permit number of the supply, and the quantity to be used. Water will be supplied by the City of Shakopee Public Utilities Commission which has DNR appropriation permit number 80-6205 and utilizes groundwater aquifers as its water source. Assuming a typical daily consumption rate of 800-1500 gallons per acre per day for commercial uses, total water consumption for the site would be 42,400-79,500 gallons per day. This is a reasonable estimate given that no "wet" industries are proposed for the site. Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) is in the process of revising the Comprehensive Water Plan to address water appropriations issues associated with the growth of the City. 14. Water-related Land Use Management Districts: Does any part of the project site involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100-year flood plain, or a state of federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? No. 10 If yes, identify the district and discuss the compatibility of the project with the land use restrictions of the district. 15. Water Surface Use: Will the project change the number or type of water craft on any water body? No. If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other users or fish and wildlife resources. 16. Soils: Information on depth to groundwater and bedrock was obtained from a series of soil borings on the site in 1996 and 1997 and from off-site well records on the County Well Index. A total of 29 well records were examined from Section 10 (section in which the site is located) and the surrounding 4 sections. Thirteen of the 29 well records had information on depth to bedrock and 4 had information on depth to groundwater. Approximate depth (in feet) to: Ground water: Off-site: Depth to groundwater ranged from 31.5 to 47 feet and averaged 38 feet for surrounding wells. On-site: Groundwater was encountered in only one of seventeen borings taken on the site in 1997, and it was at a depth of 20 feet below the surface. Boring depths ranged from 15- 20 feet in 1997, and some perched layers of saturated soil were encountered. Depth to seasonal high water table is listed as>6 feet for the Zimmerman soil series mapped on the site by the Scott County Soil Survey (Figure 7). Bedrock: Off-site: Depth to bedrock ranged from 3 to 49 feet and averaged 27 feet for surrounding wells. On-site: Borings from 1996 and 1997 encountered bedrock from 8.5 to 28 feet below the surface. 11 Describe the soils on the site, giving SCS classifications, if known. (SCS interpretations and soil boring logs need not be attached.) Soils are mapped on the Scott County Soil Survey as Zimmerman fine sand with varying slopes. The Zimmerman soil series has a representative profile of 10 inches of fine sand underlain by 18 inches of loose fine sand with the lower part having irregular, weakly cemented bands 1/4 to 1 V2 inches thick. Permeability is rapid and available water capacity is low. 1996 soil borings found 6-8 inches of partly organic sandy topsoil underlain by fine, coarse grained sands with varying amounts of silt. Recent soil borings in February 1997 found V2 to 5 feet of topsoil and fill underlain by sands with layers of silty sand or clay. Differences in the soil borings reflect recent changes associated with grading activities for the installation of roadways, curbs, gutters, and utilities for 11'" and 12`h Avenues and Gateway Drive. Boring logs and associated reports on which the above information is based are available upon request. 17. Erosion and Sedimentation: Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: acres: 53 cubic yards: Approximately 170,000 cubic yards of soil could be moved to accommodate the development assuming a 2 foot excavation depth over the entire 53 acres. The 1997 soil boring report by Braun Intertec Corporation(March 7, 1997) recommended excavating to depths of 1/4 to 2 feet at their boring locations to remove unsuitable soils. Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. There are no steep slopes on the site, however, the sandy nature of the soils makes them subject to erosion. Describe the erosion and sedimentation measures to be used during and after construction of the project. 12 Best management practices will be used to control erosion during project construction. Practices will include but are not limited to silt fencing, rock construction entrances, stormwater inlet protection, and establishment of temporary vegetation on exposed soil surfaces. The project will involve conversion of at least 70% of exposed soil surfaces to impervious surface which will reduce erosion potential after construction. 18. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff: a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe methods to be used to manage and/or treat runoff. Storm water runoff from the site will be directed to a storm sewer system that will carry the storm water runoff into the Kmart Linear Pond. This pond is a designated storm water storage and treatment system that was constructed by the City of Shakopee. The system was designed to provide full rate control and treatment for storm water runoff from this site. Storm water rate control and treatment to Nationwide Urban Runoff Program standards will be provided by this system. This storm water management design is an integral part of the City's Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan which has been approved by the watershed districts and water management organizations within the City. b. Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site. Estimate the impact of the runoff on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the runoff may affect a lake consult "EAW Guidelines" about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.) Storm water from this site will be directed to the south to the Kmart Linear Pond. This pond will then carry the storm water runoff easterly through a series of additional storm water storage and treatment ponds located on the east side of the Valley Green 13`h Addition and then, northerly through the Dean Lake outlet channel to the Minnesota River. 19. Water Quality - Waste Waters: a. Describe sources, quantities, and composition (except for normal domestic sewage) of all sanitary and industrial waste water produced or treated at the site. Proposed uses are office, manufacturing, and warehouse. These uses are anticipated to produce normal domestic sewage only. b. Describe any waste treatment methods to be used and give estimates of composition after treatment, or if the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of the site conditions for such 13 systems. Identify receiving waters (including ground water) and estimate the impact of the discharge on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the runoff may affect a lake consult "EAW Guidelines" about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.) No onsite waste treatments are expected with these proposed uses. c. If wastes will be discharged into a sewer system or pretreatment system, identify the system and discuss the ability of the system to accept the volume and composition of the wastes. Identify any improvements which will be necessary. All waste waters will be discharged into the sanitary sewer system which has been designed and sized to accommodate this site (with I-2 zoning) as well as the entire business park. The sewer system carries the waste water to the Blue Lake Treatment Facility operated by the Metropolitan Council. The treatment facility has a design capacity of 32 million gallons per day and currently receives about 23 million gallons per day. Using the Service Availability Charge Procedures Manual (Metropolitan Waste Control Commission 1992)the following maximum potential daily wastewater flow volumes were calculated based on the proposed uses. Warehouse (419,000 square feet) 16,400 gallons per day Office (256,000 square feet) 29,200 gallons per day Manufacturing (74,000 square feet) 8,450 gallons per day' Total 54,050 gallons per day 'Assumes the same flow as office since there is no manufacturing category in SAC manual The estimated 54,050 gallons per day maximum potential daily wastewater flow volume is well within the 11 million gallons per day of excess flow capacity of the Blue Lake Treatment Facility. Valley Park l3th Addition consists of approximately 126 acres of industrial zoned property. Approximately 95 acres is available for development, with the remainder consisting of ponds and streets. The lateral sanitary sewer system connects to the Chaska Interceptor at Valley Park Drive. The connection of Valley Park 13th Addition to the Chaska Interceptor at this point assumed an average daily flow increase of 0.23 cfs, which is within design guidelines. The Chaska Interceptor is located along the south edge of Valley Park 13th Addition and connects to the Prior Lake Interceptor, which is located along the east side of the project. This EAW is projecting a flow of 0.08 cfs of the total anticipated 0.23 cfs for 52.5 14 acres out of the 95 acres that is developable, which is within the projection. 20. Ground Water- Potential for Contamination: a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: Depth to groundwater ranged from 31.5 to 47 feet and averaged 38 feet for surrounding wells. Groundwater was encountered in only one of seventeen borings taken on the site in 1997. It was at a depth of 20 feet below the surface. Boring depths ranged from 15-20 feet. Some perched layers of saturated soil were encountered. Depth to seasonal high water table is listed as>6 feet for the Zimmerman soil series mapped on the site by the Scott County Soil Survey. b. Describe any of the following site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations/karst conditions, soils with high infiltration rates, abandoned or unused wells. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to and of these hazards. There are no known abandoned or unused wells, sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, or karst conditions on the site. Soil borings indicate that sand is a significant component of soils on the site. Sand has fairly high infiltration and percolation rates which could allow the downward movement of any hazardous materials spilled on the soil surface. The risk of hazardous material reaching groundwater would be minimal after site development since work areas will be converted to impervious surface. Remaining areas will be landscaped with layers of soil, sod, and plant material. These actions will significantly reduce the risk of hazardous materials contaminating groundwater. c. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present on the project site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating ground water. Proposed uses of the property are primarily office and warehouse which do not produce or handle significant amounts of toxic or hazardous materials. A small amount of manufacturing (74,000 square feet) is proposed which could conceivably produce or handle potentially hazardous materials, 15 depending on the specific user that eventually occupies the space. Such a user would have to conform to all existing environmental laws and regulations in place at that time. 16 21. Solid Waste: Hazardous Wastes: Storage Tanks: a. Describe the types, amounts, and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes to be generated, including animal manure, sludge and ashes. Identify the method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste indicate if there will be a source separation plan, list types (s) and how the project will be modified to allow recycling. Proposed types of site users are anticipated not to generate significant amounts of wastes that would be considered"hazardous". Types of solid wastes generated by proposed users would include those common to offices, warehouses, and manufacturing such as paper, cardboard, newspaper, food wastes, film plastics, glass, yard wastes, metals, etc. Data from studies conducted by the City of Los Angeles (Los Angeles AB 939 Solid Waste Generation Study and Source Reduction and Recycling Element, 1995) and by King County, Washington (Waste Monitoring Program: Large Generator Study Final Report, 1994) were used to estimate the following composition and quantities of solid wastes produced by intended users of the site. Assuming a 20% recycling rate, 137 tons of solid waste per year is conservatively estimated to be disposed for each of the 6 proposed buildings yielding a total of 822 tons per year. This estimate is conservative (based on available data) since it assumes that all buildings will generate wastes similar to large offices which are the highest average commercial solid waste generators in the Los Angeles study. The typical composition of solid wastes generated by proposed users (based on data from the King County study) is as follows: Manufacturing: Paper 43% Plastics 24% Other Organics 11% Other Wastes 11% Wood/Yard Wastes 6% Metals 3% Glass 2% Hazardous Wastes <1% 17 Office: Paper 68% Other Organics 14% Plastics 11% Metals 5% Glass <1% Other Wastes <1% Wood/Yard Wastes <1% Glass <1% The City of Shakopee has no recycling program or applicable recycling ordinance in place for businesses. Individual businesses will be responsible for their own source separation plan, and recycling will be coordinated through their chosen solid waste contractor. All unrecyclable wastes will be hauled off site by licensed waste haulers to approved landfills. b. Indicate the number, location, size, and use of any above or below ground tanks to be used for storage of petroleum products or other materials (except water). The proposed development project is not anticipated to include installation of storage tanks for petroleum products or other hazardous liquids. 22. Traffic: Parking spaces added: 1750 Existing spaces (if project involves expansion): 0 Estimated total Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated:5,762 Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and its timing: 822, weekday 4:30 - 5:30 pm For each affected road indicate the ADT and the directional distribution of traffic with and without the project. Using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation, 5th edition, the traffic generated by the proposed site is estimated to be as follows; 18 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Type of Use ADT Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Warehousing 2,045 172 67 239 109 201 310 Manufacturing 285 54 4 58 30 26 56 General Office (Lot 2) 1,811 220 27 247 41 200 241 General Office (Lot 3) 1,621 196 24 220 37 178 215 TOTAL 5,762 642 122 764 217 605 822 The main roads affected by the proposed development are 12`h Avenue from C.R.83 to Valley Park Drive and Valley Park Drive from C.R.101 to 12`h Avenue. 12th Avenue and Valley Park Drive are designated collector streets. The proposed site is located near the 12`h AvenueNalley Park Drive intersection and will have direct access to these two collector streets. The primary access points from the proposed site to the regional highway system are the C.R.83/12`h Avenue intersection and the C.R.101Nalley Park Drive intersection. Manual turning movement counts were conducted at these two intersections from 6:00am to 9:00am on March 10, 1997 and from 3:30pm to 6:30pm on March 11, 1997. From these counts, the average daily traffic (ADT) for 12`h Avenue and Valley Park Drive were estimated. The proposed development will be built out over the next three to ten years depending upon market conditions. For the traffic analysis, it was assumed that the proposed development will be completed within the next three years. Therefore, 2001 is the year chosen for the traffic analysis for the proposed development. Based on discussions with Scott County, an annual traffic increase of 3.5 percent per year was used to increase the 1997 traffic to the 2001 analysis year. Traffic generated by the proposed development was distributed to the adjacent roadway system based on the directional distribution found from the March 1997 manual turning movement counts. Figure 1 in Appendix C shows the ADT for both 12`h Avenue and Valley Park Drive for 1997, 2001 without the proposed development, the site generated traffic, and 2001 with the proposed development. Both 12`h Avenue and Valley Park Drive are expected to be able to adequately handle the proposed site traffic with little or no delays to traffic. The PM peak hour was found to be more critical than the AM peak hour for the traffic analysis purposes. Figure 2 in Appendix C shows the weekday PM peak hour traffic at this C.R.83/12`h Avenue intersection for 1997, 2001 without the 19 proposed development, the site generated traffic, and 2001 with the proposed development. To determine the impact of the proposed development, the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) procedures were used to estimate the level of service at each intersection for the year 2001 traffic without the proposed development and for the year 2001 traffic with the proposed development. The level of service (LOS) analysis indicated that the C.R.101/Valley Park Drive intersection is expected to operate at LOS B in 2001 both with and without the proposed development. The analysis for the C.R.83/12th Avenue intersection indicates that the left turn from westbound 12" Avenue onto C.R.83 is the critical movement at this intersection. This left turn goes from LOS C without development to LOS E with development. The C.R.83/12th Avenue intersection is currently controlled by the stop signs on only 12"Avenue approaches; there is no control on the C.R 83 approaches. The installation of an all-way stop sign at this intersection will allow the intersection to operate at LOS B for the 2001 traffic with the proposed development. The HCM summary sheets for the level of service analysis are in Appendix C. Valley Fair amusement Park has direct access to the C.R.101Nalley Park Drive intersection and Canterbury Park racetrack has direct access to the C.R. 83/12'h Avenue intersections. Both of these businesses are seasonal operations with the main traffic impacts during the months of June, July, and August. These businesses will have little effect on the traffic on 12" Avenue and Valley Park Drive, and therefore, were not considered in the traffic analysis for the proposed development. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements which will be necessary. The proposed site traffic will not create any significant traffic congestion on 12" Avenue or Valley Park Drive and will not change the level of service at the C.R. 101Nalley Park Drive intersection. The proposed site traffic may adversely impact the C.R. 83/12'h Avenue intersection if no changes are made to the traffic control at this intersection. An all-way stop or a traffic signal at the C.R.83/12th Avenue intersection will allow this intersection to operate at acceptable levels of service with the traffic generated from the proposed development. Traffic volumes at the C.R. 83/l2'h Avenue intersection should be monitored to determine when the warrants for an all-way stop or traffic signal are met. 20 23. Vehicle related air emissions: Provide an estimated of the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. (If project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult "EAW Guidelines"about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.) The proposed site generated traffic is not expected to create or worsen traffic congestion on the affected roadways for the project. Therefore, the proposed development is not expected to cause any significant decrease in air quality. An Indirect Source Permit(ISP) is not required for this project since it involves construction of new parking facilities with a capacity of less than 2,000 cars (1989 Minnesota Rules 7001.1270, Subp. 2.A.). 24. Stationary Source Air Emissions: Will the project involve any stationary sources of air emissions (Such as boilers or exhaust stacks)? Yes. If yes, describe the sources, quantities, and composition of the emissions; the proposed air pollution control devises; the quantities and composition of the emissions after treatment; and the effects on air quality. No boilers or exhaust stacks are anticipated for the development, however, there may be installation of small, natural gas-fired space heating devices in new buildings. Natural gas-fired space heaters exhaust small amounts of PM,NOx, CO, and HC. These emissions are not expected to adversely affect air quality in the area. 25. Will the project generate dust, odors, or noise during construction and/or operation? Yes. If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration, and quantities or intensity, and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify the locations of sensitive receptors in the vicinity and estimate the impacts on these receptors. Construction of the project is expected to generate dust. However, construction operations will involve water spraying on dirt roads to suppress it. Typical noise and odors associated with the use of large machinery and construction equipment 21 are expected. Such temporary impacts are not anticipated to be significant given that there are no sensitive receptors (residential areas, hospitals, etc.) in the immediate area. 26. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site: a. Archaeological, historical, or architectural resources? No. A letter from the Minnesota Historical Society has been received that indicates that, based on available information, the project is unlikely to affect any historic properties. b. Prime or unique farmlands? No. c. Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? No. d. Scenic views and vistas? No. e. Other unique resources? No. If any items are answered Yes, describe the resource and identify any impacts on the resource due to the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. 27. Will the project create adverse visual impacts? (Examples include: glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas, and large visible plums from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.) No. No intense lighting, cooling towers, or large exhaust stacks are allowed by covenants within the Valley Green Business Park. All buildings will be designed to be compatible with adjacent buildings in the Valley Green Business Park. The 22 planned facades of the buildings will be a combination of brick, stucco, and colored masonry units and glass. All truck docks and loading areas will be screened from public right-of-ways as shown in the plans. Valley Park 13`h Addition and the new design guidelines being placed on this property will result in a higher quality building facade than the existing buildings located west of Valley Park Drive in the same business park. Maximum building height is 24 feet. 28. Compatibility with plans: Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive land use plan or any other applicable land use,water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state, or federal agency? Yes. If yes, identify the applicable plan(s), discuss the compatibility of the project with the provisions of the plan(s), and explain how any conflicts between the project and the plan(s)will be resolved. If no, explain. The projected use of the property (office, warehouse, and manufacturing) is consistent with the existing zoning, comprehensive plan, and transportation plan prepared for the City of Shakopee. The project proposer anticipates a higher percentage of office in this area of Valley Green Business Park due to the recent opening of Highway 169 Bypass to the south. The applicant is requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay district which would guide the entire 53 acre phased development. The PUD will allow the City of Shakopee to control the scale and placement of the buildings and ultimately the development of the site to be consistent with an approved plan. The proposed plan is in compliance with Shakopee's 1995 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. The location is identified in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as an Industrial Park site. In addition, the Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan has been implemented so that anticipated storm water generated from this site will be treated in a regional storm water detention and treatment basin located in an outlot to the east of the site. 23 29. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services: Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure, or public services be required to serve the project? Yes. If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure/services needed. (Any infrastructure that is a "connected action" with respect to the project must be assessed in this "EA W";see "EA W Guidelines"for details.) Lateral storm sewer, water main, sanitary, and electrical utilities will need to be constructed to connect this site to trunk services which have been designed for industrial use and are located in the right-of-ways of 11th and 12th Avenues and Gateway Drive. Plans for Gateway Drive, 11th and 12th Avenues, and associated utility trunk services have been approved and are under construction by the City of Shakopee and are assumed to be existing for this project. 30. Related Developments: Cumulative Impacts: a. Are future stages of this development planned or likely? No. First Industrial Reality Trust, Inc. only has control of this 53 acre site which it plans to fully develop over the next 3 to 10 years. No future stages are planned. If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing, and plans for environmental review. b. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? No. This is an independent development proposed by First Industrial within the Valley Green Business Park. If yes, briefly describe the past development, its timing, and any past environmental review. c. Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or outlots? 24 Yes. There is additional property guided for industrial development which is outside the 53 acres being proposed for development by First Industrial. The anticipated time frame for First Industrial to build out the 53 acres is projected to be from 3 to 10 years. At this time no other development by First Industrial Trust, Inc. is planned or projected for the property outside of the 53 acres being considered for this project, however, it is anticipated that other developers will eventually acquire and develop adjacent lands dependent upon market conditions. d. If a, b, or c,were marked yes, discuss any cumulative environmental impacts resulting for this project and the other development. First Industrial Reality Trust, Inc. has no known specific plans (actual or conceptual) for development of adjacent lands on which to base a discussion of cumulative environmental impacts. 31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts: If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts which were not addressed by items 1 through 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. None identified. 32. SUMMARY OF ISSUES: (This section need not be completed if the "EAW"is being done for "EIS"scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document which must accompany the "EAW".) List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or maybe considered for these impacts and issues,including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. Potential impacts identified by this EAW include a minor loss of wildlife habitat, an increase in traffic levels (and resultant CO emissions), increases in noise and dust during construction, and an increase in noise after construction due to more traffic. Based on available information and projections, it appears that none of these potential impacts are of the magnitude to require further investigation or additional mitigative measures beyond those that have already been incorporated into the plan. Other consequences of this project(such as an increase in wastewater generation, an increase in stormwater runoff, etc.) can be adequately handled by existing and planned infrastructure. 25 CERTIFICATION BY THE RGU: (all three certifications must be signed for EQB acceptance of the EAW for publication of notice in the EQB Monitor.) A. I hereby certify that the information contained in this document is accurate and complete to he best of my knowledge. t Signature: ,L L. (iDAL,,, .,,._..i ' B. I hereby certify that the project described in this "EAW" is the complete project and there are no other projects,project stages,or project components,other than those described in this document,which are related to the project as "connected actions" or "phased actions," as defined, respectively,at Minn.Rules,Pts.4410.0200,subp. 9b and subp. 60. Signature: _ �A., C. I hereby certify that copies of the completed "EAW" are being sent to all points on the official E " AW" distribution list. k ) g \1. x .�CQ„� Signature: Title of signer: g.,k.,,� ,�.. �. +ss.3 1-1-p. 4.o-1--c, r ?.g.f._, 1_4 Date: 3/07-7/c(7 Minnesota Environmental Quality Board. Revised June 1990 I FIGURES :. -"fi: ; "*ay' .� *--', j©. .. , rle maw, l .' f y� L. _ :rte .._ f _. 44 .. ,-s - le .'01,0 . e _. __r_a •.- . R-tp,- - •,‘, 4e, - . 1=4_, ,iiii. -1_. 7 , .\ y lite ;+„1i $ �num 1 6," . y�.r1 _l- 10 - �'�l 1411a101111.1til,V6"1-111111111111. 11.11::- cm 46.:::-Z-Lisce ,,,,*,-4- ,. -. . •-;100"I‘10-1,:,,illif• - ,• 4 ..„,, E300 F,. '„".I LIOHINGQMB tip ' i. 3 • A �� - AE. l] 1-• ' �HANHASSEN '4 �,_a.� � i t,� E .4r, . ' .i514C1 ''' ' 1 '' tf OA,, P.4117:ndit 1!•11: :. a:17:1", ' a I -•:!•IFt- iiiihd.":: 06.4_;,. _ 6, E.3 .. ... :4 a -_.i6 M.•,.i.hi., � .dfi4L . 121. FM ,r�•[t/w F: MENNFRI ^ • _ iaiiiss S� ! « 7 '''CI:: p '-‘•441••, sus- ..,,,..F—, -�, :,i -4-I' � G ;..'-/, (lb '- ••'..-A-S;,,, „.,,,,-44 egA 4, i --- i {Fir,.;,,4_,:iyi_:,, ,,,-Nziwq;_:•_- .__ �. .. , „..„...„:,....;„ • , .....4._„v.,_,,,.: •._..t.,..4,1,„•4••„,„_-,,,,,o— _ ` . -I 0.T 4�,.Water Tan iFillii 700 ��-- L•.� t� \�111111151Lf.::::: .......------..., ----____,_.___ • waterworks l ... GI) 'k iii :..*:.::%::::::::. ..ipik----...i......._ ..-___„,,_ , ic 720 Is u ;-_________i , litl rLai*141 112 iia =� -ip, ,,,,, utu' q� �Ilir\4 SITE , I_ *f 764 40-L-. a... „.-1-' V- ````\ \ Fig A X50 Q 4 .-, — .i o , .... ) / •\ N \ kirk u, cp _.A -- GP\N i i-ft--. AI ' 7. , . )4 e 1 , _ ,,,,,..- n j• • a it =�i�_ 150 n �� p .�`- M D Q 758 4110,40 .I -�— 7';� SO .,- _ 1 f-- 2 ; w �. I 4- __-..-•-• ----• ---.----14i . :_27.____....._ _ 7...1. .: CZ-IN a U. ...b..__._ _ i':-,3.- • *------C-.--- 41-- Ilkr, * • '" .‘,..-.7_"--€. ___,_....„....,,7 ' -'141 - ---!A-74. Ai.--,...__ 1 1 • 8/2 opo 8•i, y` --�L_.—�' r� -a• -- 0 1 • - I % • ° I 830 16 I C... -•••- :33 C:) Ir I 43 o ° -I . o �I, 1 /Nr 7- 0 i ‘V-411.11:J� 1 820 �1, _, 1,1 ° -^0. I V.J. • • /� ._ `�\ • I.r/.l.-'1./%�TJf•�..-.nN/f� ...�t s . FIGURE 2 U.S.G.S. MAP 4� 0 II C ,$ 3etz 11 g 1 `; E3i : j 11. 11/ 1 11. 11 iu 0 cciuturaa.0 t t t t t t t ' z b 4444 444 4 1.11 1116 ill I I_ - s ; ' a <'p 6 1p t ' — -".........—,_ , ` " --"N I !E • lin 1 Ilitil �" 1 1 0 , . • I I aitiotC/DX MING avMazrO I • / JIulnnnnuniln- i 1 ' _ ' �, ..-..L. 404 1 ' JIIIIIilII1111111111I�'a1llilliiliiliiiiiii0 '( 6 I;ilIII1111I11111111111 I IIIH IIIIIIIIIIIIt IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIr ' u u m m m- 1 1 • 11111 ,..1 I I 1 1 I _ I W4 I 1 1 I r. 6 i ( I <I I 1III I u. I 1 1 I I t a. I ' I a I I I i if 1W V 1 1 C I 1 4 Lug ' 6, _ 1 I I •� 1 I t �sf 1 j1II 1 1 '1 27: WI i 1 •1 I fl I •1 • . I I JIIIIIIIII11111Y1, JTMITTTgfirmmkt JIIIIIIII IIIIIY� 1 i` 1,f ��f71�n 1 '�nf� 1 I 1 1141 I I o-}}ffff ffil a}},�`" ii} [13 tUlrfffili{ffffgl 1 1 I 33 • 1 ,1 J1 1 1 1 1 O, '41 i •• � �t I (I 4 • , t I Ye' __---- 1 , \ ' IIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII_- g • • 1 �� \ IIIIIIIlI1111111IIIlllllll 0 I IA h Vr t ---1 I 1 1 1 1 L� i 41 61 nmmu ii '' ' -� ' a++++fi+fa++++f� ' I _---T ---�h 1 I I I I,I I I 1111111111111 ii_ 111111II I I I 1111111111111 I I I ' I , ; t I ' ,:l, CI I - la+f++++ i+++ I ' I = 1 I 1 r. �.-- --�, / L n''.,......,����,�., S �JlJjllllllllllllllllr__.__! I i J .... .-.._ _ 1 1 f` 6y l7 'I Iii I ¢ TELL L I M 0 iT ' C = O 1 tIi• rA _ FF'j b x . , W , Oa Nti1 CC <o ti.b) 1 0 , t 1 I I _ Isl s ,e_tiv \ / ,•A ilitil i N 1 . ...- I I 1 � I I 1I er-_-: ... ....,... .,.. .. •-.... \f I II i ,, - --.� �)Jl � j II I ,, , "I I \ I,: \ E , I III 'IL 1 , + 111111 1! i II I, ill, a' II I :i11iIIHI1m i ;ia ciii 4 ti; k I iat 3 dg $1 a ati 1 (3) \I\ \\-\:-\\ II \‘‘4..„ j - i l ' 111 1 _ • 1 i if i _A)k ; 2iT -./..._ : — ., _..... X, , I . 1I- 4 L �/ . , --- / / PEMG F WOG + �: 1 K Ot744 �" `w ��`, tip'„ . T',,,`r�� -. X10 q�L);J ^' \- %-••••. tr-"N.\ a'' --�'�`S Btu's Lake. ) .I, ,� � . 1;.� •• Plea •\, \ PS psmals71::it • \, _ Z�' 1. n,,�A, Ste- (� t fly' fa ` l'r / 7,►1 rAt ::';'._ 4 .,j�.. ; �IY ..tet • , \ p ,y. ^ '. 0( 1 SITE "� _. . �: 1 4.., �.. �: ;Isis. PRoge- Y __„, ; 1 -P' �� ;EMC '' �.�o� ly ST B8�"den.4 ♦*' r Y��M�T�a� ---., � </ � .ter -, N. '��...(1.r$ t•'. 1 .j�►i _ ► \ J�1 f'f • r` 4 - r dt.a; a'-•-.^4o _ �t adid � _ . •- ,L - i ` — �.a . ' ' — M ( 1-OPmc i\ yl( i T . ,_\,1 :.1 .1i ..•- , , .4,./•••• •-•, i.:„}-. c• ;Iry t I • .1 **,'..... a, ? 1 s + e- 7 P£IAG�:. J1 t ,•.�� 1'f �'^ Vii T q �....-tet. i .lam . w +r%^ •„� • 11. r� `t. • .J'] - "� -u • , 41 �... 4 .i f _ �L . ,�.�aa li, . Ii- '14/CG"''- r.411'.16 ` .� q�2 .eve-. 00,----,---; - - _ - �7 PEIAC 4 \\tom ,; -t=.1.,, rpt a C1 ''''.-.-..,,,,,,,_::-;:''. -- ,_---/-- g v 1 - sr ! d _ _ QEMCd a PEMC � .�.._ i /- a : -e'” t n - sC ✓ ' .i.••__,..0‘ 1 M( C, yl,i. a ice:.•• � • ' - ;( • sR� A m i,� i= =. . .� ,----:-..„7-1`.,-,;11,L'irrri,j;,,..:\: i _ ii --:--u--- __-----4—., ' -1�ikL ..' 1S�R. �" '^Y (^ `l '_:',I '.. '; (f).� .. r_ti 81• , !tf.,. ' n \ ala.. .. " " . FIGURE 5 N.W.I. MAP A 0790' • . • MENNE PIN CO. N� > N.ItA7Rli .�:. iN „...*: • % wr I ,f, ---,.- Eise ,.,6t , -,-,...,.., i......:.. ......0...:41 :;..., _: ----___ 3 \ .4 iii -tel �.,. „•.. ,` ,., I &., -4-�• • RYIW NW. ''..E , . 17tH -,To. t . i I• l. 1 •' •_, 11111: hrb ' v �•_r rte• ` .__.}'r r�r1' .'moii '::� -_ .�;, 7Yp SITE - _'- 4-It ' II Is • ~ g`� t:is t nipiy�� 1 Ute”", lr .p is V a ' • 11 , i :::x>N"�l•.t4'.:`.ia3Ec•• 'r'Ri:::::i:.>::i::• r .... � L761n - _ 19 r 4 i?'l..... -�::.:_: �.ilk* i •" „ ,.:4:::.4i.:..4 '• .til' • • le {2rfi:' PRIOR • A t• \ I. " s Iy9tJ i ! 7 • 1 '• .4177) , 111,4 '44 71.4 �,�,cz 'T„ 23 ?' • r ..;x,.: _ _ ,,,,,7„ . .) ,s 1k: i. '..1. h� . • �l , • • !7 / l x • • ,�� ]] • � vie ' + 171U it- ligi ilifij: -.• riffEIJ al. N. # `•If•n _ , - :.... • ., . • ( . 7A FE'"'• r+r ,, ^mow • maw L: .7: •°. - • 'r'' -• '5 • lir 3 0 _ _ - N, •12� ` 7ZP ,,::..,,gyp d-:hff-°:1f:::<.:..:f 1. y� ASC. • • . •' E�+.+��i..., ::� •t y,, �® i(911)• • - •/ i^ 41 Ise �`/' • % ✓, FIGURE 6 D.N.R. PROTECTED WATERS MAP r 1 MILAN » -r ; Ma BLUE Cc • Ma _ •'w�l,. AaA r.,' - - ,w LAKE _ t •t •a. u e ‘-74"' :- Z i aM. Pa t► fa Ma 4(i '• r ft 11,4 Ra ti _ I� .••' t d! µ `-'";.C'`tz+� 'i Y o�` .r,, CdA o Ft ..X.asr` -;---;1.. ."-•°i" � , • " A.-r " CdA �� Q ., C, v J'.'�;- i +, ...„..,„... . . , —r,-t%,,,t4tiollti..,. ;:_ .!,,„ . t,,,.,_ .2; „,.,-, -1,i.: . - 4; 1,1 Ilik lhir: .,,,:- - -n-i-...,.......„.wpi.,,,I,N, .,, '3,-:-::;=_1412__.1,,,,' :',.' ''''1 1 .,- :: ''''liar.---1.7.'-: -a1:71- :::,,....;,.:,,,,.,,:i jpil: . ipt SITE •';-!1:;*„*.'; p . v.. ,-,. �' _ Q. • y -1_,',.. -, « ..rs.- m' "-_ j_�N.-9 00 t•t.tea`lire4'..-f, -.•••'.....-.,. _ .a,. ', CETNs ".a ._.LtlL ..�-,es�tr.,-','M ,�,,i '4 �s .. ,°" .► t i• ,ti-. f... ..,-.2'- ;.--.'�•. wC ra: a•:w� 9 -^ ,i �w fit•.,` '4�,' 4 .:- •,� �,+ fi 4 y�. cf i.-_ •aE'• -s__: „�_ ,,. •a s YT_ r �` 't-ir, e , .5.,W. �r� _ _ ` , . . es c .Mar F Da a- .�! :. e't t •\ /ate ,e xn �' �' _ { g� l'• a�tii. f •w.•, ' ^. ® ev4b P .'Y. .2', Z!� M1l• y ^# 1". Y#fl T 'J�'��i T y , aySr.',0.- :r 'k t L� , aYh Za n . ', w'ry •, rla P " ' ' r '• 7 tF • • ..+cA.P�:aS`dL.;,,,A.,;'--`...,...,..-47.` ` k* Y k ' �6iw- A .�r� X 4i / + r ---•= � tea,., r 4.ti •GAS =� a; - 'a •, -, 54 , �' ) _ i J4 rE•' r ,�_--e----r, 4--I I'Y i �t ---l.Y a' 'iT'.�'� ,.. ,-• • rri EyL, , - ..rt. �j �7 •\ M,.y!►c 'C` _ :t. ... aef r r t ';'} Z B Y i r;0 `�. t,`'.�7..r'''.y.I. ,• 1^ }� `; ,.,, .,7.' +}7 S^ •'div �v }: .: 0y 'Ir'll • +_.. • s .` �'._-. 'N''!:.- ,y., t , rvi ,zicikz, It,�� ti •II-ZaC2 '..r p. ".�� r. r•M ±,AQ G '. v", ` f • :_'' t •,a II • i04 1Za92 x';wr'• H ..n' C►; �\ eflit,.1 �� w•\� rte" � r: a cC .• �Yi 2 • D • .Y r: zae D662 ` iaa A'Ar a'. - ae '-1� ,x. z...a z. moi ?., -alk", r�'•:.t •. ‘144....... tilir ;# _r. �•e 4.1 Eau ~ - 14A, `' i� r v fi SOILS LEGEND: !P`b :Dal 8 Pb ` ``�, 'r,t ZaA= erman Fine Sand, 0-2/o slopes :U w.. ZaB=Zimmerman Fine Sand, 2-6% slopest. ;e� -t�Aigirventekwr . • Tai"t- „,, °" ZaB2= Zimmerman Fine Sand, 2-6% slopes, �� ..�;,,� Wa31 d : A, .„, moderately wind eroded s. --.r ; � ZaC2= Zimmerman Fine Sand, 6-12% slopes, !W W slightly and moderately eroded • Db6 • i a,. �' FIGURE 7 - SOILS MAP E. I , CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator SUBJ: Blocks 3 & 4 Properties DATE: March 27, 1997 Introduction and Background The EDA is in the process of executing a contract for the demolition of blocks 3 & 4 . The city is currently the owner of the properties on these two blocks . Since the EDA is the body executing the contract, the EDA should acquire these properties from the city. According to the City Attorney, title transfer can be executed as a routine matter through the use of quit claim deed. Action Required Direct staff to transfer title to the EDA as advised by the City Attorney. r g.► Paul Snook Economic Development Coordinator CITY OF SHAKOPEE J y �, , Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council. FROM: Mark McNeill. City Administrator SUBJECT: Excess Fire Station Property Disposition. DATE: March 26, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to give direction as to what it wishes done with the approximately nine acres that remains from the purchase of the fire station property. BACKGROUND: in August, 1996,the City purchased 1.4.51 acres from the Hauer family for the location of the new fire station. Only 5 acres was needed for the station itself; 9 acres additional needed to be purchased as part of the negotiation process. The cost for the entire 14.51 acres was approximately $380,000, including assessments. That was approximately $26,200 per acre. The recent discussion by Public Works Director Bruce Loney regarding extension of sewer to the fire station, and the potential relocation of a gas main through the property generated discussion as to what should be done with the remaining acres. (It was determined that the gas main would not be relocated in the excess 9 acre portion of the property at this time.) The property is zoned R-2 - Multi-family. OPTIONS: There are three main options for dealing with the property. 1. Use it for a public purpose, either now or in the future. In the past, this has been variously discussed as a future public works facility, potential police headquarters, or public park. None of these options are imminent- Council has expressed a preference for adding on to the existing public works/police facility at its present location. The park option is on a parcel that is too small, and too close to Scenic Heights Park. 2. Sell the property. The bids opened March 27th indicated whether or not cash flow is going to be a problem based on the project budget. If there is a desire to sell, it might be done in one of three manners: 1. List by a Realtor-typically, a 10%commission might be seen for raw land. 2. Advertise the property, take formal bids, and determine whether a sale is of interest to the City now. 3. Establish a asking price, and market the property ourselves thru a non-bid process. I've been told by a local Realtor that the zoning as R-2 makes this a desirable property now. Its location bounded by a County Road, U.S. 169, Vierling Drive, and the fire station may limit its marketability as single family property. 3. Don't sell; hold the property. Under this option,the decision would be deferred to a future time. DISCUSSION: One of the things that we found during the purchasing process of the fire station property was the value of land within the MUSA area. It is not likely to go down in value. Unless the Council sees a need to add money back into the cash flow for the fire station property, holding the property for a determination in the future offers few disadvantages to the City. It is tax exempt, which means that while it is not generating property taxes,neither does that cause the City an extra expense in holding. In effect, the holding costs would be the amount of interest income foregone that might otherwise be invested (approximately $235,000,times an estimated 6% interest yields about $14,000 annually). Given today's real estate market, it is possible that the increase in the value of the land will exceed that annually. RECOMMENDATION: Unless Council has other priorities, staff recommends that no action be taken at this time, and that the land be held for a decision in the future. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should direct that the property be held for the time being. alLtatt Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CITY OF SHAKOPEE 1 1, �"L . J • Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Pay Plan Revisions DATE: March 27, 1997 At the City Council meeting of March 18th,the Council was asked to consider a modification of the City's Pay Plan. Based on the City Council directives at the March 18th meeting, staff is preparing some alternatives to be discussed with you at the April 1st meeting. It is likely that those revisions will be distributed at the City Council meeting that evening. When changed from the previous City Council meeting is that we were notified that the Clerical/Technical Bargaining Unit has decertified, and is no longer represented by a union. That alone would necessitate a change from the old pay plan. v L Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Salary Structure DATE: March 14, 1997 INTRODUCTION: At its meeting of March 18th,the Council will be asked to consider a modification of the City's Pay Plan. BACKGROUND: In December, staff was asked by the representatives of the Clerical Technical Union to address an equity problem relating to some of their members who appeared to have been at a salary level less than what the comparable position would have been as a non-union member. In January, the City approved changes for the compensation of these positions regarding comparable worth issues. Both of those issues made the point that the City's existing pay structure was in need of revamping. The existing plan has been modified several times since its inception following the 1985 Pay Equity Act. It needs to be revamped. In response, in January,the Council authorized Fox Lawson and Associates to review the plan to make it equitable, and also to address comparable worth issues. A concept plan was reviewed with the City Council at a meeting on March 11th; at that time,the Council directed that fiscal impacts be done for a variety of alternatives. Those alternatives are expected to be reviewed with the City Council on Tuesday evening. RECOMMENDATION: Depending upon the results of the financial impact, it is anticipated that the Council will be asked to adopt a pay plan, if it feels comfortable with that action. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council feels that it is in the position to adopt a plan, it should do so. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Pay Plan DATE: April 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The City Council is asked to review a proposed pay plan for implementation in 1997. BACKGROUND: The City is obligated to look at its salary structure in order to have a plan which will be in compliance with the Minnesota Pay Equity Act. For that reason, and in the interest of having a plan that is fair and workable, in January Fox Lawson and Associates was hired to come up with a new salary structure. Staff has been working on several variations; one of these was reviewed with the City Council at a previous meeting. Council directed that staff review any revisions in terms of affordability for this year,and ensuing years. Based on the general direction given at that meeting,we have modified the Fox Lawson plan with the assumption that there would be a 2.5%increase in 1997, either as a cost of living adjustment, lump sum,or combination thereof. This adjustment is for discussion purposes, and maybe changed according to Council directive. With this, we acknowledge that there are still several issues which are not yet resolved: 1. Exempt vs. non-exempt employees in the same grade. 2. Engineering Technician III and IV in the same grade. 3. Market rates of pay may not coincide with internal pay equity for certain positions (i.e. Assistant City Engineer). 4. Pay compression between certain positions (Deputy Chief vs. Sergeants (arbitrated award); Building Official vs. Inspectors). One of the other tests for pay equity compliance is the number of years it takes to reach the maximum step. With the exception of part-time employees (which are proposed to be placed on 4 stens), the new plan puts all employees at 8 steps. The bargaining units have 2 and 4 steps; those will need to be subject of negotiation. It should also be noted that just because an employee is in a certain step on the current pay plan, it does not automatically transfer that employee to the same step under new pay plan(i.e., some one at the current top position may not go to the top step of the new pay plan,regardless of how long they have been employed. What is proposed is to move employees to the next higher step in comparison to their current pay, and then move up a step upon their anniversary date, if they are not currently at the top step of the new plan. ACTION REQUIRED: Council should give general direction on these concepts tonight. If acceptable,the plan would then be taken back to the non-contract employees and presented. Their input then would be used to make any final changes; this would then be brought back to the City Council at the April 15th meeting for final adoption. V' k utit Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw Recap Re-G,4/0 '-/ City of Shakopee 1997 Pay Plan Summary Data All Employee Groups Status Quo Basic Opt ALT 2 1 12/31/96 annual cost-all positions filled all year $2,768,330 $ 2,768,330 $2,768,330 2 Fox Lawson Adjustment 0 $24,582 $38,082 3 COLA cost 2.50% $63,577 $43,624 $11,002 4 Minimum/lump sum cost 0 $25,290 $36,915 5 Step increases $13,505 $23,050 $24,655 6 Partial year vacancies $ (73,140) $ (72,794) ($76,546) 7 Total cost in 1997 including step increases $2,772,271 $ 2,812,081 $2,802,437 8 1997 budget full time/regular employees-all funds. $2,886,840 $ 2,886,840 $2,886,840 9 1997 Budget surplus(deficit) $ 114,569 $ 74,759 $ 84,403 5 1998 total cost $2,884,971 $ 2,919,009 $2,916,022 6 COLA 0.00% 7 1999 total cost $2,924,075 $ 2,957,776 $2,956,721 8 COLA Non Union Employees Status Quo Basic Opt 1 12/31/96 annual cost-all positions filled $1,521,616 $ 1,521,616 $1,521,616 2 Fox Lawson Adjustment 0 $17,305 $25,058 3 COLA cost $37,039 $31,754 $5,254 4 Minimum/lump sum cost 0 $8,944 $18,056 5 Step increases $6,515 $18,070 $19,596 6 Vacant Position Difference ($33,838) ($33,684) ($36,254) 7 Total cost in 1997 including step increases $1,531,332 $1,564,004 $1,553,326 8 1997 budget full time/regular employees-all funds. $ 1,569,466 $ 1,569,466 $1,569,466 9 1997 Budget surplus(deficit) $ 38,134 $ 5,462 $ 16,140 10 1998 total cost $1,584,341 $ 1,619,498 $1,623,840 11 COLA 0.00% 0.00% 12 1999 total cost $1,602,577 $ 1,645,508 $1,653,806 13 COLA 0.00% 0.00% Page 1 Re-&, ' Recap Calculation Order Status Quo 1. Any COLA increase is applied to top step of pay scale and moves up all steps. 2. Regular step increases included in annual cost. Basic Plan 1. Employees moved onto Fox Lawson plan at same or next higher dollar amount step. 2. Any COLA factor is applied to top step of pay scale and moves up all steps. 3. Minimum/lump sum is a percentage of 1996 pay and prorated with pay change from 1996. 4. Regular step increases included in total annual cost. Alternative Plan 1. COLA percentage applied to Fox Lawson plan. 2. Employees moved onto Fox Lawson plan at same or next higher dollar amount step. 3. Minimum/lump sum is a percentage of 1996 pay and prorated with pay change from 1996. 4. Regular step increases included in total annual cost. Common Notes Employees may move forward or backward in pay step vs years of service. IE.employes with 4 years of service may move backward to pay step three. Exempt status not being addressed at this time,there are exempt and non-exempt employees in pay grade 11. Page 2 Yo n n n 0 _ � a �m wroa n�n nroro zgroo n ^ Or� D n - .0. 0AAQ•Q41. towli ali " Qv§ a4 q4P — A 5 s s.• 0&& ` - RSR i & a . € s >£ � go tz 0 ,1 A gi N a ^ A K O.� r1 x HH yy _ . yy yy yy Hy yy yy yy yy y y y y(y��{y� ((�� (y�O A A A U J A A A U N N N N H N N N N N W W W W W W w w W W N W A A W A W W A A A A w A n Ot m n q J y a N W Wtp w f+ 00 00 OD N ,.' J A A. 0p0t p.t. O r r r p� .f.).N+O U 00 A P!J 00 P.:- J w s P W OO V. O Y_ 7 OJD A A .. .. V tHO Qt N U.-00 W w W W A A 0 A A t0 01 A W W p(pmp W �Utpp b J J W A U w T rtp .e O pt W o Jp N m C �. w 00 00 O A A A N A U to A J J J V• V• U J J A N w w A A 00 w w w b O w U A 00 w W 00 W Ot A, ..a a AW UU"iJ ^N' •U"InONtD JNtO Nt0 NONOwlA r•r{wtipl Jwnrrrnrrr tl. J Abnrrrrnv "'wA ^ " 4AAA" O"OD •rA .N,PNJN N N JyG P qJAAO WWW DOoOOJJJ ppON pA• Oo00WbbW .. ... ... .) .. 41t4 . 4 OW WW 4. .NNN ? Op, Wa000N �. ,0 yD Z 61E9/ r ''' pp.� H H H H H H y H H H H H y H yyAA((,pper� yyAA((pper� yypp yypp yy yy yypp yA (per ryA�yA (per N APPPE A A a P A G J J v w W w w w w W U U"..O O O O O O O O O w W w O� O1 T T O�P LA P N U T J 00 N N N N . " r ~ b b O 00 J y=' Ot Ot 0 0 O. O O J 00 A A A A .. .. r. ... r .. .. w W W T a 05 T a a poi a 0At OND ONO OND O O O O O - A. OJt OJt V0. LLA V. .00 NNN00 w W A 05 05 a Ot Ot J J J J J J J J O O O N N N N N N N N N w W W W W W W w 00 00 N N J J OO 0 V H yy((�� yy .'. H r r .. . H Gq N0,�1 y..0 N A A A OHt OHt N y y.H-. J.H. tyj. U H:'� w y y J y J y V y U H H H y A A 0000 O O O w O O ... F.. b b b O O OO J b O b J rpp O \tOp y y H w N • w U A A w J O H v W w U A O N O W A J H V J J O O J 0 0 9 w y yy yy�� H y� y yy y{W� yy (yW�yyW y�yyy y{,p� (� y y y y W t O A,. w W W.J"OAD"OAD"OA0 w N J A A j 0 0 0 'N0 5N0 0 A.w+ tUI. to N w O to N A j.4 N"Ow0 w Ut 000 O$4 A A 000 w A N A O a O m O -.,..,., , . . ..p,.... . . .-. .. .. .-" ,.... . . . - .1... .. 0 W A W O J J N U J+. pt N i+00 Oi pppp tJ tJ IJ 04 pp pp�t paA O • 00 OAD 00 O A A A N N A .-. r U 00 OD 00 twp twp W J J w 0 0 0�N N OWD O N w w O b w J tUi. .U+ OHt Oft O U Ot r O b N b G O O O P O O P 0 0 0 0 .• .+ •' •-' N N O O O O N O .-P0 •" O O N O N O O N G O .+ N O O O N N O O A S �O S S S Op Q O Ot Ot Ot A A O S Ot N U 000 A N '''' 12M-'2 Q A w W N $ T .t. Ut a O A D 3 3 3 b aj N d N DD U e U N ^2 0D b 3 T 6 , "{ R O z1-1,. ., v e e � � � � � � � � ee ee a, a, ee e va eye eye eeeee � eeee a 640,616, n yHHHya SyW41yHH HyyyHyyHHHHHH y Hy ... M.. .. . nyHHH Hyy yy0 O ..to.,OOOO OOOJOWWNp WWUAUapwbpJ0TU8 OO J >WAOQtOOOWat0O0 AJOO 00U0AN A 0aJWO t0 's7 N 0 y H y H y y H H y H H y y H H H Nf H Vf H Hf H y H H H y H H y H H y y 4,4,4,444,4,4,4,4,4,4,4, a O A• x FA. AAA AAA .N. N N N N W W W w w.. W W W w W w .A" .A. W A.. .A� A. A. A. A.. A A A A A A U U .p.. C.. T T J Ot Ot O. J l V l l.- ."O+ Ot A A ..1 J J J J W w .O�O.P ( y = 2• ), .A A A�0 b b b 00 00 OD 00 0D 0 ao ae W W W A A A A A A A A A W w w N UN U N N 00 0D N N J J w O.., .,. A A A W W W DOD V J V J VI U U Vs U u VI tbi. Ot Ot O. A A A A A A A A A U V. tJ. N N V. w N 0 0 0Ut OUt DUD OUO A C imm S A _ W PPP PPP O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N " !4N, N O O N O N N N N N N N N O O N N N N �J :O 0 8 a4 .U. as intAUAP l4tn0A iA UO0UFU. i le V4 iw Q A"44 .A W A A A Qi Ot OE N 4 t" w $ $ to oo U 4 P W D\ 4 b i e 0 vo e. O, $ veeeeeeeee v a eee v e e ev e eeee e e � eev ae env a HH Si yw a a a b o 0 o A w .D o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J o 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0$ 0 Ho - 0 0 0 0 0 uw.L. 0 0 0 o F 3 O N N b A 3 C i9 N N N O O O N W N N W A A A A A N A A W A N O A LA N W N N A W A w N A N W A N N N U A w N y OJ A top UoOie SUq4. $e O' InGC j J U uJ He lA A W OO o q aUQeUb vn '4 OJ6 w 9 A b Op 2b k8bD0DOD OUt UcaDD $ ^dcdAeSv e eee eeeeeveoeeeeeeeeeeeeee eea enaA • HO w r HA. 0 _ HNHNHH " JJ SiH44 . rH . H ' yHy T T?O y H ON N H Oy O. 0H H H y w H. WOOO OOONW0N00 O OOOOO Ot OOUN ONOtWOTN A O Wb AWp " OA O t0 Nw WJJ J t0 tO O O J ^ m yAWW yyAyyyyyypUUJAU� NNNW UWAp 0wap AvW AUWUWqwNY. V .b. ? O "O . '! OONNNOtO0QO OOV "O . 7 A UUUo"TNJwNNOtONwwwOAJUNttO *AtoU JAONNJUtOWUJwAUUU8UWbJwTwJUppUAUttNbW pOWwppJmwJJA aOOt0JOowwOa\ QWoAW AUN JbNONAN y yIA AUUU NV. N N Nto tp EA W W WN N N W w W W W D, W W yy,W A((11 b A 0 y{.HyyWJ J yA U W W N A W AA,, NAOpbrOJ VI w'tV UJObw wwD\ r. JOtOOO .+ UUA JOWA W b N A W0NpOO oOw 0 PJONw N OA swO .ALA J00 .- www - JJJwA AAOOUUtwOWGt0AtoO NANAwN NJA Ot �. 61 J WWwpwwW ((�� yy (,AWpUJ000 Nw wON ,1A NAOAW �a yHyypP p p U NOtNWOOO O OTAN A . Jt0t0 7,NNNWlAt. b0Owbb00000NwWwUAt0WJ000ONbOU OU NUr AJ JWAAWJbbAptQ� A � JJwLUOATWU ' WU00OOU DMM . N N V. iU A U A A W U O\ O ,C1 A bOWWt0 '0 LA QON aO0 co A w A . 00000000000000 A a a a a ; g. . RR555Ra , N ^O tc iAW N w WW w ,1* Ai V r. N N W w W w wN Ca OW OO. aor•...$•:— rrW wOr Orrrrr rr • 7 Os WS S6pV. Opp bA0AAOa cAA000Wp WH-,O .O o LA 0 V. n U U N a z b r.. 00 .. .. 06 00 + rv. 00 00 00 OO s T 1 O l i 64 (� H y H y(�y y y y y H y y q il so~ Jn tr..t.,QA W.r,W,t 2 N A A .w.. ... 44 A A A A A A A A A A A A A A p 1 Co t.l lA L.$ to to U U t.$ U U .�. :° SS St OHO OHO OS OHO OHO OHO OHO OHO OHO 0g0 OHO OHO OHO OHI 9 °` • 1J Iiny ry� �yHH(�Hyy(/O(� HyHt/O 00 N w w W W w w w W w W w w W A A A A A A A A AO A A A A SD in tp r, r r r r r r .- r r to I. U In J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C C C O O O G O to '&1OA. QA. OA. OA. OA. OA. CAA A. A OA. OA. A A OA1 0A. OI'O Opp G J J J J J J J J J 0 0 0 0 so N N N N N N N ON N N 1,, 1.4 N N A N y, y{.�1 yy x 113,A O N 00000 -4000 ,0 ,0Nw p AO 00 ,0001408'0-0000A00NO LNG 9 0 !' HNNWW in W W WW0. NWAW AAAAAWA bv W W W W W W A to O1Nw O T OO .:-.r-Pr- rrW W O N AO N N N r N N r 0 • pp�� p, ppp. py v, SUV. V. Upsoo.pwNHH00HHHH-,IN ^ N O 00 to to to b , .D O OO O O OO 0 0 OO OO CO O co OO ry I O 9 :-. 9 .99 .-' 999 O r O w r O O W W 0 0 0 r O O S S oo SOJSS ooA ooH $ n e e . e e e e 0, ee ee e e1 ti- E 103 A. tO o W H V)H H H H H H Vf H H H H t.4 H H H H H H > fl G O. H as 63 t4 N N J N N N 00 00 J co• 00 H 00 CO H H 00 00 H H H b H 3 Q A A A U A A A W w to O O O O O O O O O O O O U O rPJs0,0 . . 7 C. _ O O S 'O 0 .21 el 0T 0 [�^ N H H R H Vf H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 4.4 k Iry a » O w w w ww61616) 64 64 144 44 41 Y C. Y Y y � .d_ _ _ _ _ r as a a.o. � � � Y � YY � � Go Oo 00 00 OO Oo lo 00 00 W s W W A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 'O Qr4 . so am10 UV. aV. amO -4 -4 A O lee t/. LA l. 1.4 V. V. V. V. QO. O. A A A A A A A Q A N y N N O O O N O O O N N N O N N O O N N O O O NA O O N (7 A 'prtoJJ Jin 0 J J to to tafR N .Ia SO bW OD 1C, .D N W On C 00 A H On see e e s e e s e e \ \ \\ $\\ \ \ \ \ C\ \\ a •w a H 6, H H H H H H H H 6 JJJJJU A H H H J 4,H A ^ H H•r.r. H H "' ""+' H• " q 2.I'3 ▪ O O .O .G .O O VO O•D\ 200220028 2022 ::%., o ... 'a � St 'a vLA to LA o to 3 J a 3 4.16163616161636/ 61611.4611.4 U N U W N N N to N N N W N N en S 00 lA N N N Co N N N ^ ''J N W 00 to 00 00 in V. 00 00 lA to lA iD U in 9 ....M t^ N `8 .8 `80 .8 `8 `e N 191 °399119 9199 0 o e v o 0 o 0' o e e e e e e e e e 0 e e e e e e e a e e.gas 61 tn0. H VI 61 rW b sO J Op U O O O O O O O A O N NO O N NO O O q O O A ' L IOWr N OJ °J p• H w HHpNNA A W W A 12 12 A A A O 0 N N W w w w w w W W ` W W A A O i';..' VD N N N r N N N J r W fl:', i...: N W W N N W N N N O N N S' t ' O U $ N w 0S0 OVo Or,, J W 0�o O G O r N A w ^ W W -4 W W W O. W W .6O I.0 Co w a\ N O. T a U !T a Q\ W W .O O r .O U W W W N W H W W J m GI N1• 26,6fHNwHfHffAHHw41wAAWwAAW en H NNwNwAAAAA m OO O 0 A. N N•OO N N N w w O w U 1 A O. W to N A W A lA to W R A C IJ" A b LA to r ... r W La O.O. U O.O. N 0p0.OO O.00 N O W C. 0• b 8;,0, 07. 177, 0001, 00007:77.7 6:3 163 m OJ. 1:,'", W w .O A w A N N N A W w a N A 1 NDJ r r En I N "N WMWWWWWWtoo J `AWHAWW A A A A A A s pp " W W W W W NA pp O 00 O r . rr r r r O. p. N A O A r A A A A AA O A .0 On JJWWJJJNJJ A i▪ t;1,1 AA .o O. O. Oo Oo p\ Q OO co co OO in OO o A00 07 46 A 00 00 00 .O co 00 .3 G n o o o o CO CO 0) n A a CA CO ./ '-1 t() "C .0 .0 7O 9 5 5 y H W 9 4p� ')9 a. n V go y 'z7 0 'd 'O 0 y r"' N .1 C4 O O • N N V (5 • g r" K. vc vc x sc• • co co a " 5 0 oC ^ c) 'g J.' O c.n o y =' 'q g P".c g i °'.q A 7v�v�v vvy �� � '- `y4 � = W ab S < t� o id. ,C; ^ !�" ! (��Jdo § r,---,O u O 4 69 '-' 69 4A CA 69 69 69 69 CA 69 (A 69 69 69 69 69 69 CA CA 69 69 69 69 64 H CA 69 69 69 CA CA CA 69 64 H r � N N N N N N N N N 1J W W 4) W W W W W W W N W A A W A W W A A A W A U co, U U 0, V CA Y 1J .N.. --. V A A N ,O ,O ,O 00 00 O .- .- A U N N ,O U 00 A. N N V w..A 00 O A A �1 W A N W oo U 0 90 O Q V1 V1 00 00'la.4 J.4 C, (4- r- C,A NO NO W..1 LA N 00 00 i.)10 ^ 0 6)'4 N U A 0 NO.4 In 4e C — Q. U oo .- --' W W W W A A 0 A A NO O, W W 00 A b CO V V CO V W A U W ON ,O 10 0 O, W O, N A N C N A U U ? V J .4 U U U �1 V A 0 N W W A W A 00 W W 00 ,O O W U A 00 ,O W 00 CT •- .1 00 0% A C' ON 69 "% 69 69 69 CA 69 N4 69 69 69 69 64 6) 4A CA 69 69 63 61 A A W W W 69 69 EA A A A W 61 A A A ' A A A A A U ON ON a a V 1.3 ►. C, N N N N N N N N N N W W W W W W "La NO .N.. V A A A O 10 ,O 00"00 O0� O .- A A U .- .- ,O U U N N N V W W N V 1 7.3 J .NO , 6) N '4 to as C, U 00 in'b.* -Iso W W W AO A 0 A A ON 0 .A-' O, O, W A A v V 00 b J .- la N N N NO 1.-. ...3 N O, W W 0 A A * cA O N ?. U U U V V V U U A V V 0 0 N O, O A W W lJ W W 00 '0 W A A A '0 O, A O, •- •- A O, W A O, 7 b MC) 000XXXX XXXX 7C 7r 71 rrr � � zzooba rray e B. 439 GA Gy XIAG63 N j N N N N N N N N N N N CO CO CO W CO W W CO W W W W W �� W W A A A Ao1 C� 0) y0) A A A A A A A A0OO0% NNN N N N N N N A 0) 0) 0) 0) O) 8383V -1 AAf. ms 69 413 44 EA 69 V V V V V co-co OO 00 Co 00 Co O W W co W W W W W W O CA CA OO 00-CO 00-co O O-co co Co 'p COO co CO CO CO CO CO CO A CO CO CO CO .la A A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V V V CO W CO W CO C)l �C)ll 4.0 0 0)) 0) V 6469644A 6961646464 EA EA EA 6 EAEA446464 EA EA 644A 464A 646448 fA 406469694440 A A�9 CST IA N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CO Co W W W W W W W W CO W CO CO CO W CO A A f01) W ✓ N N N N CO CT CA 01 0' CT 0' CT 10 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO W CO CT CO CT CO CO CO CO CO W CO CO CO W W CT in in 01 V V V V V V V J W 4O W V1(T n in(T in in(T C11 CO 00 CO IV IV N N N in 0l 0I 01 co co —' lV. r) 0) 01 CO CO CT CO CO W COOW W CO CO W V V V 0) 0)00)) 00)) 0) 016.1 0)) ON) 0) 0163 0)) 0) W W CO 0 0 0 0 0 01 01 V V CO CO CO C H r'► MI 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 44 61 69 40 44 4A 4A IA EA 64 64 484A 69 64 484A 49 44 64 444 44 4A 44 44 4A 6 401 4A 40 64 40 49 N N N N N N N N N N N N W W W 41 Ct3�.� CO CO CO CO CA CA CA CO CO W CO O) W W W A A CO CO 0 % CT CO V W W W Cr) 0% 0%0 CA 0)0 0) O O O O A A A A A A A A A V V V CD CO CO CO CO 01 CT CO CO CA Ca A 1-1 A n-G.,-,..., W-co G)C) O C)C) O Cf 01 41 C�0 tJ C) O) -•:- N C7,N N tT O O N IV W 4)-CO 'p 0 0.1 CO CT CT 01 CT V V V V V V V V CO 0) 0) CO CO CO CO CO 03 02 CO CO O 0 0 N N CO CO CO Oa y W A A A A N N N N N N 1V CJ CO CO CO N N N N N NNN N 0 0 0 V V V V V 01 0 01 01 CT CT CO t I 44 EA 64 4A 4A 4A 44 48 48 44 64 44 64 64 EA EA E,64 64 64 69 64 64 64 69 49 64 4A 4A H 4A 44 44 4A 44 69 64 4A V4 0 O C, 00 A A A A V V V V V.4 V V -. - -" 0T CCa W)1 CC71 Ca 0'-0'-C43 WT•CW11 CWT 0W1 co co Cr 3 WcoW0 0 0 0 0 0 CD CO N O 0) CO -CO *AD CA CA W A -• In in In in in CT in in W W W CO O O O CO 00 CO CO) )la W Co 0000 CO CO CT U CO CO N N O A A C0434343430) 010) 00) 0) 00/ 03C0034) W W W W (J W W W W W W W 0(�,� W W -. W W V V CO 'O 0 O CO N N N N 00000% 00 0) 00 O 0% CID V V V A A A A A 0�0y N N CO CD O co M A N N N N N N N N N EA N N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W A A A A A A A C�)1 44 t0T1 0)W V 19�y 0 CD A A A A CO CO CO O 02 00 Cb 00 N N N W O) 0) 0) O) O)W 01 CD so f0 N N N N N OO co A A N N O CA ��'! ril b O(c0 CCD C0 t0 A J►,A A A A,-CO W W CO CO CO CO m CO 0) CO l0 CT U CTWQ tilCO 01 CT 01 01 01 01 01 01 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CD CO CO V V V CT CT 01 CO- CT O' O— A A N N CO+O N'O O' 0) -+ -+ -+ -" 0 0 0 0 0 0 006) 4/ 4/ 464646 A A A A A A W W W CO CA O O A A CO CO et. CA 64 64 6,4A 4,4844 4864 64 64 64 64 64 64 69 E,6)64 64 64 40 6)64 64 40 64 64 49 49 44 40 64 VD 64 64 64 64 44 69 - N N N N N N N N N N N N W CO C.) W CO CO CO 03 CO W Cr W A A A A A A A A A A CT CT A A V CA C0 CT CO 01 01 01 CO CO CO O CO CO CO CO W W CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 00 0 op W W W W W CD CD O) 0) W a g 'p C)T CA W co 4)-co W W-co-co A A A -+ -.00-co j% A A A A �01 in co it) -. O 'O co COO COO CCOO Co CCOO CCOO CCOO O CWD CO CCOO CCOO 00) 00)) 00) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO COO CO COO CO V V V V COO 003 N 64 4A 44 64 64 64 64 64 6)64 O 4A 44 64 44 64 4A 64 69 44 64 44 4A 4A 4A 60 48 64 6)69 4864 40 69 EA 64 64 64 61 69 N N N N N W W CO W CO CO W CO CO CO CO CO CO CO W CO CO CO W C.) A A A ,p A A pp,, A CT 01 CT CT O V (p O CO O O CT O O O O 0 0 0 0 A A A CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO N N N , A A A A CO CO CO 0) CT V A IV A A A A N N N N N N N N A W W W W W W p W la W O v) V V V V 0 0 0 C 0 -• —'N 'd CO CO V V V O CCOO CONCONCONCONO0O CONO CO CO CO0CI) CA00) CO 00) 00) 0) 0) 0) 00)) O) 0 CO CO CO CO O V �1 A A N N U 69 FA (A CA ..pp 6969 6969 69 69 69 69 69 69 CA 69 69 69 49 CA 69 69 69 A A A A A A A A A A A O,A a N N...QV L VOON-OOO J y C, N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W W A A A A O V V V V .- U U U O O O O O O O O O W W W OP O, v ib No r4 IQ 1J 1--':-:-.-:-:-:-A A A AAA A A A AA AA A IJ'ti IJ "U.'UI V V 0 0 A O )C V 00 A A A A W W W O, O, O, O, O O, O, O, O, 00 CO 00 0 0 0 0▪ 0 O O, U U U '0 A O O, O, O, O V V V V V V V V 0 0 0 N N N N N N IJ N N W W W W W W W W 00 00 N N V V 00 CN CA _ EA EA Z v 69 69 CA 69 N A A A ON T 69 69 69 6�9 J 6-9 69 U " W W 69 CA J 69 J 64-' y W U b 69 69 4A 6�9 W N y a 0 O O O A b ,O ,p A 46 w O O .3 0 W W w .4 " .4 ? 0 0 N 0 W A V W v O V O O w O N 4 VI V' ~ . .� O 69 .- EA CA 69 49 69 69 69 69 6) 6) EA 49 CA 4.9EA69 4A 69 69 A W W W A A W A W W A A A A W A Vii EA 00 Vii Oa, EA J Cl) -1 N N N N N W W W N N W W W W W W W W 'a W •-V 1 A A N 0 0 0.NO..NO O '-• .- •- U U N W O U N A N N 00 W V1 00 O N A A. Oo W A N A 0 0, O m OP in U NO NO A N N N W W N- • W A A W in A"co"o..."a,Oo Oo 14. o0 a O '-'"-.4-4 N in A- ) .-I0 m U 00 .- .- 4 h) N N W W N A A CO00 W W 'l N 01 W J 00 -4 .1 U V O, W U U CO00 00 0 '--' O, W A -4 �1 V. 1,,)) N A •- - U o0 00 00 ,o b 0o V V .-• 0 0 0 0, N 00 0 N W W 0 ,0 W V U -• O, O O U O, •- O ,O N ,O `< 0 K O CO. M- 0 0 0 O -- - - N 1J O O O O N 0 •- N 0 "- 0 O N 0 N O 0 8) 0 -• )J O O O N N 0 0 Q O O W W O O, Cr, Co, A A 0 0 0 ON N O 00 'l (4 O O O O O U O N O W A O 'O N U ? C, ,r 0 O ,O ,O 00 LA to Cn N N 00 0 0 0 N U0 A V N 0 0 0 ,0 .- 0 N A W W N 0 O 0 O, •- O, N O. e e e c'' o e o 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. o „.. g .1e ,:;. e ,.. . e e , e N 71 vXX m m 4 r. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �y �, (0 coo A Wa AOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO .C' 0 ,WWWW4.. 8P. P. P. P. R. RRARaPWff = 8888888888888880a ,. w a 0 Cn o o non o non D o n fT u X 60 {y �9 y� 9 tJ A 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 V 69 69 69 Gil 69 fA 69 69 60 A A A 69 69 A A A A W N N W W W N W W W W W W W V N W A W W A A W W W A, A A V] Y O o\oo .p-� .p-�. .p.r� w w o .- b O .... .. .-. ... w w W. 00 00 0o m o O A N A A A 0o a\ C�C O �D W .o�1 V is is J V oo Oo 00 �07� C �+ O U 0 0 0 Cl. 0 w 0 Cl. 0 0 CA Cn 001 ' 1,4 b - 0 - 00 000o .A+ .A+ 000 OWo O000 000 000 W 000 OAo OAO WO 0O V:, A ‘.0 '! ^ w 69 69 0AA 6, 4, 4 WWWWWWwwAAWwVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ) )O .-. .-. .-. N ... .-. .. .. - _. ,- W w .-- ?0 3.2,Q`Q�Q�Q�a,Qs o. '0.0 V v J J�)�)�1�)"4"C4J�1�)V�l -1 ,0 %o W W W y b 1n N 04A A A A A A o0 .0 % A A Oo W 00 00 00 00 W 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Oo A A A A A A O% v w H CA t., In to to to H to .-- .. 00 00 Co 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0o N A A A ,0 ro Oa x x x x x x x x x .. .. .. .. .-. .., . . . . . . L. ... ti .~ C. .. .. .. r r r m c A A CU 4043404,4,4,4,4040404,4,4, 4044434,4,EA EA EA EA EA EA EA 69 69 EA EA EA EA EA EA N N N N N N N N N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W A A A A A (A WA A( WA00 W C0N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0OW 00 0 JJJJJJ JJ4JJJJ 0rA 9OOWOO0O0AAAA JJJJ 000 A A A A A A A A A A A A A 00000000000000000 W W W 4340434040434343404,4,404, 434040434,404,4,434343404340434043 494340 N N N N N N N N N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 0) M 01 CJI C0) 0) 01 CN CJI c0 CO CO CO W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 000w . mV V V V V V V V V W 4) W W C)1 U U C71 G)1 01 00 CD1 01()1(T C11 0 0(r())tl) N N) N m 0000000000000 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 000 0 W W W W W CO W W Cd V V V V 0000000000000000000000000000000000 000 4,434,434,4,434,434,434,40 EA EA EA EA E4 EA EA,1 EA 69 EA E�A,1 4�1 !6�9 69 ECC.A�0�EC�A0 ECC,A�0 .69E469 00 00 00 00 0) 00 00 0i 0i O O O O A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A CWWW O (0 (000 w Cl) 1--1 n O W O)O)O)O) W W W W O1 W W T C)O)W W W W W O) -0...f)1 W . C7 — V V V V V V V V V 00 O CO 0) 00 CO Co CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO Co CO W CO CO Co - a Oi N N N N N N N N N CO CO CO CO N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N -4 -4 -4 '; a 0 EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA E)69 69 EA EA EA EA EA EA EA H EA EA EA EA 69 69 EA EA C M N N N N N N N N N W CO W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W A A A q *11O 0o V V V V V V V V V Ot 01 01 C11 .4 01 01 Of CT 01 01 C/1 01 Of O1 01 CT O O O A W 0 01 O Oi 01 C)1 CU 00 W 01 W W W W W W 00 00 00 00 00 W W W W 00 00 00 W W 00 -03-c002A A A .p o = N 0 0) O O) 0) 0 0) 0) W 00 00 00 00 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W ,z 1[�^ 000000000000020000 CD 434040434043434,4340404,43 69 EAA EEA EA EA EA EA 69 EA EA EA 69 69 EA EA EA 69440# �' 0 N N N N N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 444 .1 000000000000000000 N N N N W o1 W O) 00 O O) O)O1 W 00 0) 0) O) 0) 0) 0) N N N Cl)to x �d A A A A A A A A 4.W W W W f0 CO ClpO o C(pO tO o CO t0 o o CO CO CO CO CO lO — •p QO cam 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 CO W W A A AAA A A A A A A A A A A A A -a ... -. €D M 4343404,404040404,404,4,4, 404343434,4,4,434,434043434340434, 404343 .- N N N N N N N N N W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 4 .1%. 4 Cl) CD CO CO CO CO CO CO c0 CO CO W W W W 0000000000000000000000 (00) 0) (00) W W W a A msW W W W W W W W 41.p. A A A vs W W W W W W W W W 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000 :t.- -4 OA) 0A) 00 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 CO CO COO) 0) O) 01 00000000000000000 CO CO CO 40404,404,4,40404340404,40 404,434040434,434343404,43434,4,40 6969.69 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 44. 4 Cl) 000000000 A A A A (0 (0 (0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO CO ' AAA A J N N N N) N N N N N j j 00000000000009000 w W w W W W W W W W W W W W W w -.4 -4 -.) v N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O O O 000000 0000000000000000 (000 (00000 0000000000000000000000000000000000 0) 0) 0) -0,, ,,, w w w W W w w w W w W W W 66 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A A A 4) ''' '" '- -..!A•- 1n In to V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 Cl) 1A •-' •..^•'�-- �--•.--• A A? A A A? A . A A A? A A A A? . Co FC A 0 v V V V ,1 ,1 ,l -) V 0 0 0 0 v, N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 00 000 W W 47 N 69 EA 69 69 69 69 zn 4P 604' 69 69 69 W 69 69 69 W W NA 69 A 69 69 6969 69 C�i1 69 696969 69 69 69 V9 69 w C9 O 1_,, — q) 00000 ...-1000 ,0 ,o .- 40 N O N O O so N N O O O N O O O O O O O O O �p „yam O eo W A 00 %O '.O 1/40W • �j, O 69 Pr6sErnO ONO 696, 406, 696, O W W W w w O N A O N A N N A A N N A A A A A_ A_ W W W 646,140, A 00000 00 a �p . O 00 H p� D\N Qt p00p� 00 A A t.9 W '.O .1 J W �l 00 .0 0o m A .. . A .. . . . N .1 00 �l 4 D0 00 V V Co 00 00 to oo 00 W A A W b . 1b y e „ . .. . . . . , . 0 . 0 . . . 000. . . . . . . . .WOo A,P A `< 4. K O 0 000000 0 .- 003 - 000303000 - 000 0 0 000 N 00 C4 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 J W O N w O O N N O O O A O O O O O O O O yQ to A 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 - ,n O 00 A 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e A 1 • 1{e3 Recap Re t;ae City of Shakopee 1997 Pay Plan Summary Data All Employee Groups Status Quo Basic Opt ALT 2 1 12/31/96 annual cost-all positions filled all year $2,768,330 $ 2,768,330 $2,768,330 2 Fox Lawson Adjustment 0 $26,272 $40,444 3 COLA cost 2.50% $63,577 $44,380 $13,364 4 Minimum/lump sum cost 0 $24,191 $36,210 5 Step increases $13,505 $24,519 $26,161 6 Partial year vacancies $ (73,140) $ (72,794) ($76,546) 7 Total cost in 1997 including step increases $2,772,271 $ 2,814,897 $2,807,962 8 1997 budget full time/regular employees-all funds. $2,886,840 $ 2,886,840 $2,886,840 9 1997 Budget surplus(deficit) $ 114,569 $ 71,943 $ 78,878 5 1998 total cost $2,884,971 $ 2,922,252 $2,921,405 6 COLA 0.00% 7 1999 total cost $2,924,075 $ 2,961,180 $2,963,620 8 COLA Non Union Employees Status Quo Basic Opt 1 12/31/96 annual cost-all positions filled $1,521,616 $ 1,521,616 $1,521,616 2 Fox Lawson Adjustment 0 $18,994 $27,420 3 COLA cost $37,039 $32,510 $7,616 4 Minimum/lump sum cost 0 $7,844 $17,351 5 Step increases $6,515 $19,539 $21,102 6 Vacant Position Difference ($33,838) ($33,684) ($36,254) 7 Total cost in 1997 including step increases $1,531,332 $1,566,819 $1,558,851 8 1997 budget full time/regular employees-all funds. $ 1,569,466 $ 1,569,466 $1,569,466 9 1997 Budget surplus(deficit) $ 38,134 $ 2,647 $ 10,615 10 1998 total cost $1,584,341 $ 1,622,741 $1,629,223 11 COLA 0.00% 0.00% 12 1999 total cost $1,602,577 $ 1,648,912 $1,660,705 13 COLA 0.00% 0.00% Page 1 CON CITY OF SHAKOPEE I j. , Y Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: Conservation Easement DATE: March 19, 1997 Introduction and Background Council previously authorized pursuing funds for placing land north of Memorial Park into a conservation easement with the Scott Soil 'and Water Conservation District and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The City has received a draft easement from the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District and a copy is attached. The City will receive $48, 795 . 67 for an easement on 37 . 8 acres . The City Attorney has reviewed the easement document with the comment that the signature block needs to be changed to reflect Mayor, Clerk and Administrator. Recommendation Proceed with easement . Action Move to authorize proper city officials to execute a conservation easement as proposed with the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District for 38 . 7 acres north of Memorial Park in exchange for $48, 795 . 67 . u ' Gregg V.xland Finance Director is\finance\docs\gregg\rima Tpealti()3 GRANT OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND COVENANTS This GRANT OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT and these COVENANTS are made by City of Shakopee, residing at 129 Holmes Street South, Shakopee, MN. 55379 (hereinafter referred to as the "Grantors" ) to the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee" ) . WITNESS THAT: • WHEREAS, the Grantors are the owners in fee of certain real property located in the County of Scott, in the State of Minnesota, described more particularly as follows, and referred to herein as the "Riparian Land Preserve" . Legal Attached This Conservation Easement covers only that portion of the parcel delineated as the "Riparian Land Preserve" identified on Exhibit "A" , which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Conservation Easement area consists of a total of 38 .7 acres . The legal description may be refined, expanded or reduced as a result of examination of the abstract or title insurance documents, or as the result of other legal or technical requirements. The Grantor will be responsible for obtaining all necessary signatures to convey the Conservation Easement to the Grantee. WHEREAS, the Grantors desire and intend that the natural elements and the ecological and aesthetic values of the Riparian Land Preserve be maintained and improved in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Conservation Easement and these Covenants; and WHEREAS, the Grantors and Grantee both desire, intend and have the common purpose of conserving and preserving in perpetuity the Riparian Land Preserve in a relatively natural condition by placing restrictions on the use of the Riparian Land Preserve and by transferring from the Grantors to the Grantee, by the creation of a Conservation Easement on, over and across the Riparian Land Preserve affirmative rights to ensure the preservation of the natural elements and values of the Riparian Land Preserve and WHEREAS, the Grantors have received valuable consideration for the granting of this Conservation Easement and the making of these Covenants . NOW THEREFORE, the Grantors, for valuable consideration received, do hereby give, grant, bargain and convey to the Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever, a Conservation Easement in perpetuity over the Riparian Land Preserve consisting of the following: a . The right of the Grantee to enforce by proceedings at law or in equity the Covenants hereinafter set forth. The right shall include but not be limited to, the right to bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction to enforce the terms of this Consrvation Easement or these Covenants, to require the restoration of this property to its natural condition or to enjoin non-compliance by appropriate injunctive relief . The Grantee does not waive or forfeit the right to take action as may be necessary to ensure compliance with terms of this Conservation Easement and these Covenants by any prior failure to act . Nothing herein shall be construed to entitle the Grantee to institute any enforcement action against the Grantors for anychanges c anges to the Riparian Land Preserve due to causes beyond the Grantors' control and without the Grantor' s fault or negligence (such as changes caused by fire, flood, civil or military authorities undertaking emergency action or unauthorized wrongful acts of third parties) . b. The right of the Grantee, its contractors, agents and invitees, to enter the Riparian Land Preserve, in a reasonable manner and at reasonable times, for the purpose of inspecting the Riparian Land Preserve to determine if the Grantors are complying with the Covenants and purposes of this grant, and further to observe, study, record and make scientific studies and educational observations . c . The right to install, operate and maintain water control structures for the purpose of protecting, re- establishing and enhancing wetlands and their functional values . This includes the right to transport construction materials to and from the site of any existing or proposed water control structure . d. The right to establish or re-establish vegetation through seeding or plantings . • GRANT OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND COVENANTS This GRANT OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT and these COVENANTS are made by City of Shakopee, residing at 129 Holmes Street South, Shakopee, MN. 55379 (hereinafter referred to as the "Grantors" ) to the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee" ) . WITNESS THAT: WHEREAS, the Grantors are the owners in fee of certain real property located in the County of Scott, in the State of Minnesota, described more particularly as follows, and referred to herein as the "Riparian Land Preserve" . Legal Attached This Conservation Easement covers only that portion of the parcel delineated as the "Riparian Land Preserve" identified on Exhibit "A" , which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Conservation Easement area consists of a total of 38 . 7 acres . The legal description may be refined, expanded or reduced as a result of examination of the abstract or title insurance documents, or as the result of other legal or technical requirements . The Grantor will be responsible for obtaining all necessary signatures to convey the Conservation Easement to the Grantee . WHEREAS, the Grantors desire and intend that the natural elements and the ecological and aesthetic values of the Riparian Land Preserve be maintained and improved in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Conservation Easement and these Covenants; and WHEREAS, the Grantors and Grantee both desire, intend and have the common purpose of conserving and preserving in perpetuity the Riparian Land Preserve in a relatively natural condition by placing restrictions on the use of the e. The right to manipulate vegetation, topography and hydrology on the Riparian Land Preserve through diking, pumping, water management, excavating, burning, cutting, pesticide application and other suitable methods for the purpose of protecting and enhancing wetlands and wetland vegetation. AND IN FURTHERANCE of the foregoing affirmative rights, the Grantor' s make the following covenants on behalf of themselves and their heirs, successors and assigns, which covenants shall run with and bind the Riparian Land Preserve in perpetuity: COVENANTS a. USES . There shall be no commercial or industrial activity undertaken or allowed except that the Grantors may • install and maintain trails within the Riparian Land Preserve for activities including, but not limited to, recreational hiking, biking, cross-country skiing, hunting and fishing in accordance with the specific restrictions set out below. b. BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES. There shall be no buildings, dwellings, barns, roads, advertising signs, billboards or other structures built or placed in the Riparian Land Preserve. c . TOPOGRAPHY. There shall be no dredging, filling, excavating, mining, drilling or removal of any topsoil , sand, gravel, rock, minerals or other materials . There shall be no plowing, disking or any other activity that would alter the topography of the Riparian Land Preserve . this paragraph shall not be construed as- preventing the authorized agricultural activities specified in paragraph f . d. DUMPING/DISPOSAL. There shall be no dumping of trash, ashes, garbage or other unsightly or offensive material , especially including any hazardous or toxic waste . e . WATER. The hydrology of the Riparian Land Preserve will not be altered in any way or by any means including pumping, draining, diking, impounding or diverting surface or ground water into or out of the Riparian Land Preserve . E . AGRICULTURAL USES. No plowing, tilling, cultivating, planting or other agricultural activities may take place within the Riparian Land Preserve . No haying for or grazing of domestic livestock may take place within the Riparian Land Preserve . g . NOXIOUS WEEDS . The Grantors are responsible for compliance with all federal, state and local laws governing the control of noxious weeds within the Riparian Land Preserve . h. MOTORIZED VEHICLE. There shall be no operation of any motorized vehicle or equipment within the Riparian Land Preserve except in conjunction with the authorized activities set forth in paragraph a. and f . above . i . VEGETATION. Except in conjunction with the authorized uses set forth in paragraph a. and g. above, there shall be no removal , cutting, mowing or alteration of any vegetation or change in the natural habitat in any manner. RESERVE RIGHTS The Grantors and their invitees may hunt and fish in the Riparian Land Preserve so long as they comply with all Federal, State and local game and fishery regulations . Nothing herein shall be construed as limiting the right of the Grantors to sell, give or otherwise convey the Riparian Land Preserve, or any portion or portions thereof , provided that the conveyance is subject to the terms of this Conservation Easement and these Covenants . GENERAL PROVISIONS The total obligation of the Grantee for all ' compensation and reimbursement to the Grantor under this Conservation Easement shall not exceed the total amounts shown below. Any changes thereto shall be agreed to by the Grantee and Grantor prior to executing the Conservation Easement . The Conservation Easement payment shall be made by the Grantee as follows : A Conservation Easement Total Payment of $48 , 795 . 67 shall be paid to the Grantor upon recording and final acceptance of the Conservation Easement by the Grantee and certification that all cropping or grazing authorized under this Conservation Easement has terminated. This Conservation Easement and these Covenants shall run with the burden the Riparian Land Preserve in perpetuity and shall bind the Grantors and their heirs, successors and e . The right to manipulate vegetation, topography and hydrology on the Riparian Land Preserve through diking, pumping, water management, excavating, burning, cutting, pesticide application and other suitable methods for the purpose of protecting and enhancing wetlands and wetland vegetation. AND IN FURTHERANCE of the foregoing affirmative rights, the Grantor' s make the following covenants on behalf of themselves and their heirs, successors and assigns, which covenants shall run with and bind the Riparian Land Preserve in perpetuity: COVENANTS a . USES . There shall be no commercial or industrial activity undertaken or allowed except that the Grantors may install and maintain trails within the Riparian Land Preserve for activities including, but not limited to, recreational hiking, biking, cross-country skiing, hunting and fishing in accordance with the specific restrictions set out below. b. BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES . There shall be no buildings, dwellings, barns, roads, advertising signs, billboards or other structures built or placed in the Riparian Land Preserve . c . TOPOGRAPHY. There shall be no dredging, filling, excavating, mining, drilling or removal of any topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, minerals or other materials . There shall be no plowing, disking or any other activity that would alter the topography of the Riparian Land Preserve . this paragraph shall not be construed as preventing the authorized agricultural activities specified in paragraph f . d. DUMPING/DISPOSAL. There shall be no dumping of trash, ashes, garbage or other unsightly or offensive material , especially including any hazardous or toxic waste . e . WATER. The hydrology of the Riparian Land Preserve will not be altered in any way or by any means including pumping, draining, diking, impounding or diverting surface or ground water into or out of the Riparian Land Preserve . E . AGRICULTURAL USES. No plowing, tilling, cultivating, planting or other agricultural activities may take place within the Riparian Land Preserve . No haying for or grazing of domestic livestock may take place within the Riparian Land Preserve . 1 ' assigns . This Conservation Easement and these Covenants are fully valid and enforceable by any assignee of the Grantee, whether assigned in whole or in part . The Grantors hereby warrant and represent that the Grantors are seized of the Riparian Land Preserve i_n fee simple and have good right to grant and convey this Conservation Easement and make these Covenants, that the Riparian Land Preserve is free of all encumbrances, and that the Grantee and Its successors and assigns shall have the use and enjoyment of all of the benefits derived from and arising out of this Conservation Easement and these Covenants . The Grantors agree to pay any and all real property y-axes and assessments levied by competent authority on the Riparian Land Preserve . The Grantors agree that the terms, conditions, covenants and restrictions set forth in this instrument will be inserted in any subsequent conveyance of any interest in said property. The Grantors agree to notify the Grantee of any such conveyance in writing and by certified mail within 15 days after the conveyance . The Grantee may assign or transfer this Conservation Easement and the rights and Covenants contained herein to any Federal or state agency or private conservation organization for management .and enforcement . The terms "Grantors" and "Grantee" as used herein shall ire deemed to include, respectively, the Grantors and their heirs, successors, personal representatives, executors and assigns, and the Grantee and its successors and assigns . TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described Conservation Easement and Covenants together with all the appurtenances, rights and privileges belonging thereto, either in law or c>qu.ity, for the proper use and benefit of the Grantee and its successors and assigns, forever. EXECUTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In WITNESS THEREOF, the Grantors have hereto set their hand and seal this day of , 1996 . By: Title: City of Shakopee State of Minnesota The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1996 by _Grantors . Notary Public My' Commission Expires : _ ACCEPTANCE The foregoing Conservation Easement and Covenants are here by duly accepted by the Grantee, this day of 1996 . By Title: Scott Soil and Water Conservation District State of Minnesota The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1996 by ---- ___-- - -___- Notary Public _�__^~_^_ My Commission Expires : assigns . This Conservation Easement and these Covenants are fully valid and enforceable by any assignee of the Grantee, whether assigned in whole or in part . The Grantors hereby warrant and represent that the Grantors are seized of the Riparian Land Preserve in fee simple and have good right to grant and convey this Conservation Easement and make these Covenants, that the Riparian Land Preserve is free of all encumbrances, and that the Grantee and its successors and assigns shall have the use and enjoyment of all of the benefits derived from and arising out of this Conservation Easement and these Covenants . The Grantors agree to pay any and all real property taxes and assessments levied by competent authority on the Riparian Land Preserve . - • The Grantors agree that the terms, conditions, covenants and restrictions set forth in this instrument will be inserted in any subsequent conveyance of any interest in said property. The Grantors agree to notify the Grantee of any such conveyance in writing and by certified mail within 15 days after the conveyance . The Grantee may assign or transfer this Conservation Easement and the rights and Covenants contained herein to any Federal or state agency or private conservation organization for management .and enforcement . The terms "Grantors" and "Grantee" as used herein shall be deemed to include, respectively, the Grantors and their heirs, successors, personal representatives, executors and assigns, and the Grantee and its successors and. assigns . TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described Conservation Easement and Covenants together with all the appurtenances, rights and privileges belonging thereto, either in law or ngtii_ty, for the proper use and benefit of the Grantee and its successors and assigns, forever. CITY OF SHAKOPEE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION A Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) conservation easement in, over and upon two parcels of land situated in Government Lot 1 of Section 32, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, and the north 250 feet of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West; all in Scott County, Minnesota; described as follows : Parcel 1 - Commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 5 , Township 115 North, Range 22 West; thence, at an azimuth of 270.1° , a distance of 1545 feet to Angle Point 1, the Point of Beginning (POB) ; thence. at an azimuth of 257 . 2° , a distance of 357 feet. to Angle Point 2 ; thence, at an azimuth of 325 . 2° , a distance of 673 feet: to Angle Point 3 ; thence, at an azimuth of 354 . 2° , a distance of 766 feet to Angle Point 4 ; thence, at an azimuth of 112 . 4° , a distance of 883 feet to Angle Point 5 ; thence, at an approximate azimuth of 180 . 4 ° , a distance of 897 feet, more or less, to Angle Point 1 , the Point of Beginning (POB) . Parcel 1 contains 17 acres , more or less . Parcel 2 - Commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 5 , Township 115 North, Range 22 , West; thence, at an azimuth of 293. 6° , a distance of 1042 feet to Angle Point 1 , the Point of Beginning (POB) of Parcel 2 ; thence, at an azimuth of 334 . 8° , a distance of 392 feet to Angle Point 2 ; thence, at an azimuth of 272 . 8° , a distance of 326 feet to Angle Point 3; thence, at an azimuth of 178 .5° , a distance of 484 feet to Angle Point 4 ; EXHIBIT A Page 1 of 2 thence, at an approximate azimuth of 76.8° , a distance of 493 feet, more or less, to Angle Point 1, the Point of Beginning (POB) . Parcel 2 contains 4 acres, more or less. Said conservation easement, including both parcels, contains 21 acres, more or less, with the basis of azimuth and distance being determined by a Precise Lightweight GPS Receiver (Rockwell PLGR) . END OF DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 2 aF ., Y ea -?te f r_ F � x '14:1117iii' sd �.`� �,.•,, p f•':t •'-''tis- ''r:'..4''''''''''''''044' ' ' �: £ f�� «fie .3`.: t 4. ry r x. i ii i'h'..,,.4.:',41-c-,-%-"•'''' te* � ., sy 1., x :94: - •,' r ve+.A'a f'a �g 111Ei j1 y ' ,S ' S ‘ ,A.4*:. ,toli.s 1:',„1,1'..,,,,,,,, :.4:,,i,,,t,'''',. ,,..,.. . ' \-',,,:.1'.::Vt'' t 1 ,, � c � a a"� ,4::7',i.,,,1 „,,i,,,,,,....›•;-'7,,,,,,,,, : � was i• te”" *n+� 3s m- ' gr-. p" •aa �' �9"' 'fir �` �+ .z. -Y. ':.. T .. k. $ ,'-^� Scale 1" = 6900' CITY OF SHAKOPEE ACCESS DESCRIPTION For the purpose of access to the above described conservation easement, an easement is also granted across a strip of land 20 feet in width to allow for motor vehicle access, with the center line described as follows: Commencing at the north edge of the right of way of the west bound lane of State Highway 101 at an existing roadway located 1223 feet, more or less, at an azimuth of 234 .9° from the north quarter corner of Section 5; thence, at an azimuth of 345.6° , a distance of 500 feet; thence, at an azimuth of 322 .4° , a distance of 450 feet; thence, at an azimuth of 295 .0° , a distance of 125 feet; thence, from this point proceed at an azimuth of 34 . 7° approximately 140 feet to Parcel 2 or to access Parcel 1 proceed at an azimuth of 270° approximately 40 feet. 1/15/97 EXHIBIT B SCOTT SWCD 4923885 P.01 OPTIONAL FORM 99(7.90) I at payaL �. FAX TRANSMITTAL To Fr°m FAX 414. 6122903375 P. 02 PI ✓ C /j,. 1 fir p0lr. • l ' OIRP011ono* Pnone s , %0 Pax I, NSN 7!4.01-317.7368101 GENERAL,• •VIC A M,IN16TPATION Dt SCavf oil EasLr.6;d'casco Pt prl -----— t:I rx"uF -SBAKOPEE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION A Reinvest in Minnesota (RIM) conservation easement in, over and upon a parcel of land situated in Government Lot 1 of Section 32, Government Lot 1 of Section 31, Township 116 North, Range 22 West; and the north 250 feet of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota; described as follows; Commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22, West; thence, at an azimuth of 293.6o, a distance of 1042 feet to Angle Point 1, the Point of Beginning (P03) and located at Angle Point 1 of Parcel 1 of the Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) Easement (attached) ; thence, at an approximate azimuth of 256.8°, a distance of 493 feet, more or less, to Angle Point 2, located at. Angle Point 4 of Parcel 2 of the WRP Easement; thence, at an approximate azimuth of 200.06, a distance of 321 feet, more or less, to Angle Point 3, located at Angle Point 1 of Parcel 1 of the WRP easement; thence, at an azimuth of approximately 257.2°, a distance of 357 feet, more or lees, to Angle Point 4, located at Angle Point 2 of Parcel 1 of the WRP easement; thence, at an azimuth of 267.4° , a distance of 426 feet to Angle Point 5) thence, at an azimuth of 326.8°, a distance of 299 feet to Angle Point 6; thence, at an azimuth of 299.3°, a distance of 251 feet to Angle Point 7; thence, at an azimuth of 271.0°, a distance of 188 feet to Angle Point 8; thence, at an azimuth of 291.3°, a distance of 173 feet to Angle Point 9; thence, at an azimuth of 042.0', a distance of 239 feet to Angle Point 10; thence, at an azimuth of 013.9' , a distance of 720 feet. to Angle Point 11; thence, at an azimuth of 025.9°, a distance of 458 feet to Angle Point 12; { SCOTT SWCD 4923885 P.02 MAR-05-97 WED 13:54 NRCS FAX NO. 6122903375 P. 03 thence, at an azimuth of 044.1°, a distance of 423 feet to Angle Point 13; thence, at an azimuth of 068.5', a distance of 185 feet to Angle Point 14; thence, at an azimuth of 119.6°, a distance of 289 feet to Angle Point 15; thence, at an azimuth of 137.5°, a distance of 426 feet to Angie Point 16; thence, at an approximate azimuth of 153.3°, a distance of 865 feet, more or less, to Angle Point 17, located at Angle Point 2 of Parcel 2 of the WRP Easement; thence, at an azimuth of 154.8°, a distance of 392 feet to Angle point 1, the Point of Beginning. Excluding parcels 1 and 2 of the Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) conservation easement between the City of Shakopee and the Natural Resources Conservation Service, part of the US Department of Agriculture. (Attached) Said conservation easement contains 38.7 acres, more or less, with the basis of azimuth and distance being determined by a Precise Lightweight GPS Receiver (Rockwell PLGR) . END OF DESCRIPTION 1 , , - i ✓ . , Scale: 1" = 6900' PP NET TAX CAPACITY AND RATES PAYABLE IN 1997 COUNTY OF SCOTT, MINNESOTA TAX MARKET TAX MARKET CAPACITY VALUE CAPACITY VALUE CITIES: **VALUATIONS RATE RATE SCHOOL **VALUATIONS RATE RATE Belle Plaine 1, 451, 574 31.173 Burnsville 7, 850,202 73 . 684 Elko 140, 178 42 .268 Lakeville 3, 275, 062 62 .305 .05963 Jordan 937, 312 31.943 Bloomington 114, 785 49.589 .00960 New Market 105, 490" 50.732 Le Sueur 29, 402 54.520 New Prague 1, 393, 257 44 .193 Henderson 16, 765 45. 992 Prior Lake 9, 687, 278 32 .721 . 02707 Belle Plaine 2, 158, 388 63 .455 Savage 9, 602,912 26.385 Jordan 3, 091, 540 53 . 944 .05176 Shakopee 12, 067, 969 23 . 098 .04245 Prior Lake 14, 868,418 60.710 . 06141 Rural 14 .333 Shakopee 13, 197, 484 64 . 174 New Prague 4, 225, 390 62 . 917 . 06003 TOWNSHIPS : SPECIAL DISTRICTS: Belle Plaine 525, 534 9. 632 EDA (Shak) 12,.067, 969 .749 BP Fire 404, 803 2. 603 County HRA • 48, 827, 074 . 630 JDN Fire 7, 968 7 . 819 Met Council 47, 433, 817 .769 NP Fire 112,763 1. 678 Mosq Control 48, 827, 074 .249 Blakely 320, 387 11.372 Met Transit Cedar Lake 1, 521, 192 10. 139 District 31, 358, 159 1 . 837 NP Fire 1, 148, 636 2 . 193 *Area 16, 075, 658 . 363 NM Fire 372, 556 4.400 Lo MN Water 13, 691, 531 . 295 Credit River 2, 721, 597 8 .781 PL-SL Water 10, 946, 027 2 . 085 , Helena 965, 150 9. 022 Cedar Lk Imp 556, 527 . 718 JDN Fire 243, 478 8 .266 Region 9 Dev 1, 393, 257 . 151 NP Fire 721, 672 2 . 145 W/M/O 965, 150 . 040 Jackson 608, 226 4 .200 Louisville 818, 837 2 . 549 COUNTY 48, 827, 074 41 . 683 New Market 2, 115, 863 17 .370 W/M/O 1, 546, 379 . 154 CR Water 131, 627 1 .001 *********** SC Water 437, 857 .301 Sand Creek 928, 286 8 . 904 NOTES St. Lawrence 341, 566 15.720 BP Fire 132, 761 4 .467 *********** JDN Fire 208, 805 3 . 426 SC Water 110, 216 .756 ' Spring Lake 2, 574, 466 9.280 * COUNTY EXCEPT PRIOR LAKE, SAVAGE, SHAKOPEE, NEW PRAGUE ** VALUES ARE ADJUSTED TAX CAPACITIES FROM TABLE X FOR TOTAL RATE ADD: COUNTY,CITY OR TWP, SCHOOL PLUS FIRE AND SPECIAL DISTRICT AS APPLICABLE U Q NET TAX CAPACITY AND RATES PAYABLE IN 1996 4111-eS COUNTY OF SCOTT, MINNESOTA RECEIVED TAX MARKET AP AR 5 1991ARKET CAPACITY VALUE CITIES: **VALUATIONS RATE RATE SCHOOL **VALUATIOM ka Belle Plaine 1,277, 380 29 .174 Burnsville 6,967,409 75 . 177 Elko 123 , 182 38 .528 Lakeville 2, 932, 063 60 .949 .05991 Jordan 836, 002 41.191 Bloomington 115,741 57.174 New Market 98, 507 49 .590 Le Sueur 26, 198 64 .390 New Prague 1, 253, 647 43 .979 Henderson 12, 312 52 .588 Prior Lake 8, 327, 844 33 .901 .03209 Belle Plaine 1, 884,421 65 .401 Rural 23 .730 Jordan 2, 746, 650 53 . 228 .05298 Savage 8,426, 968 26 .573 Prior Lake 12 , 877, 687 58 .001 .06098 Shakopee 11, 236, 342 22 .458/ Shakopee 12 , 142, 325 64 .917 '' Rural 11.299 New Prague 3 , 795,442 70 . 870 .05831 TOWNSHIPS : SPECIAL DISTRICTS : Belle Plaine 451, 518 9 .269 EDA (Shak) 11, 236,342 . 911- BP Fire 346, 585 2 .704 County HRA 43 , 500,248 .727 JDN Fire 7, 008 8 .376 Met Council 42 , 246,601 .763 " NP Fire 97, 925 2 . 124 Mosq Control 43 , 500,248 .245 " Blakely 273, 788 12 .580 Met Transit Cedar Lake 1, 340, 562 11. 197 District . 27, 991,154 3 . 173 NP Fire 1, 016, 727 1.971 *Area 14 , 255,447 . 379 NM Fire 323, 835 3 .020 Lo MN Water 12 , 936, 016 . 313 " Credit River 2 , 334, 115 9 .434 PL-SL Water 9 , 538,811 1 . 600 Helena 863 , 596 9 .567 Cedar Lk Imp 493,059 . 802 JDN Fire 212 , 176 2 .423 Region 9 Dev 1, 253,647 . 180 NP Fire 651,420 2 .262 Regional RR 43 , 500,248 . 248 W/M/O 863, 596 . 145 Jackson 527, 677 3 .960 Louisville 688 , 425 2 .985 COUNTY 43 , 500,248 46 . 060 "' New Market 1, 969 , 925 13 . 347 NM Fire 1, 969 , 925 4 .405 W/M/O 1, 432 , 304 . 164 CR Water 125, 871 1 . 034 *********** S SC Water 411, 750 . 316 jd',4L /39,g� Sand Creek 881, 891 9 .532 NOTES St. Lawrence 280, 105 13 .466 BP Fire 110, 947 2 .335 *********** JDN Fire 169 , 158 1 . 862 W/M/0 83 ,467 .799 Spring Lake 2 , 308, 775 9 .300 * COUNTY EXCEPT PRIOR LAKE, SAVAGE, SHAKOPEE, NEW PRAGUE ** VALUES ARE ADJUSTED TAX CAPACITIES FROM TABLE X FOR TOTAL RATE ADD: COUNTY,CITY OR TWP, SCHOOL PLUS FIRE AND SPECIAL DISTRICT AS APPLICABLE