Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03/21/2000
• TENTATIVE AGENDA CITY OF SHAKOPEE ADJ. SPECIAL MEETING SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 21, 2000 LOCATION: 129 Holmes Street South Mayor Jon Brekke presiding 1] Roll Call at 7:00 p.m. 2] Pledge of Allegiance 3] Approval of Agenda 4] Mayor's Report A] Award presentation for excellence in development for affordable housing, by Commissioner Katherine Hadley of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (Evergreen Heights Project) 5] Approval of Consent Business - (All items noted by an * are anticipated to be routine. After a discussion by the Mayor, there will be an 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] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS - (Limited to five minutes per person/subject. Longer presentations must be scheduled through the City Clerk. As this meeting is cablecast, speakers must approach the microphone at the podium for the benefit of viewers and other attendees.) 7] Approval of Minutes: August 26 and November 9, 1999; January 3, 4, and 18, 2000 *8] Approve Bills in the Amount of$688,043.67 9] Public Hearings A] Proposed vacation of a portion of Webster Street between and 4th Avenues—Res. 5323 B] Proposed vacation of easements in Killarney Hills for day care facility—Res. 5325 C] Proposed 2000 Reconstruction Project No. 2000-4 - Res. No. 5319 10] Communications: 11] Liaison Reports from Council Members 12] Recess for an Economic Development Authority meeting 13] Re-convene TENTATIVE AGENDA March 21, 2000 Page -2- 14] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions: *A] Final Plat of Classics at Southbridge 2°11 located north of Southbridge Parkway—Res. 5328 *B] Final Plat of Orchard Park West PUD 4th located north of Vierling Drive and west of Fuller—Res. No. 5329 *C] Final Plat of Pheasant Run 4th located east and west of Pondsway extended and north of Valley View Road—Res. No. 5330 15] General Business A] Community Development 1. Distribution of Draft AUAR for Valley Green Corporate Center *2. Contract with Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc. for Dial-A-Ride Services *3. Extension of Preliminary Plat Approval for Westridge Lake Estates 4. Initiating Vacation of a Portion of Scott Street and Alley south of 1st Avenue for Stemmer Farm and Garden Supply, Inc. Res. No.5335 B] Public Works and Engineering 1. Property Acquisition and/or Landscaping for CSAH 17 Project No. 1999-7 2. Approve Plans for Gorman Street, from 4th to CSAH-17, Project No. 2000-1 —Res. 5331 *3. Engineering Consultants Contract Extensions *4. Request of Centex Homes Regarding Hourly Restrictions on Construction Activities for Classics at Southbridge 2°d Addition *5. Accepting Work on the Downtown Alleys, Project 1993-9 —Res. No. 5334 *6. Purchase of Portable Sewer Pipe Inspection/Location Camera *7. Purchase of 16-Foot Mower C] Police and Fire 1. Adopting 1998 :Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and Standards of the National Fire Protection Association—Ord. No. 566 2. Adopting Policies of the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau—Res. No. 5332 *3. Surplus Property Declaration D] Parks and Recreation 1. Tree Trust Project for O'Dowd Lake Park *2. Lease Agreement for Photo Copier R TENTATIVE AGENDA March 21, 2000 Page -3- 15] General Business continued E] Personnel *1. Accept Resignation of Tom Voll and Authorize Filling Engineering Tech II Position 2. Authorize Hiring of Maintenance Workers for Public Works Department 3. Authorize Advertising for New Position in Finance Department F] General Administration: *1. Apportionment of Assessments for Condominiums of Shenandoah Place 2 —Res. 5333 *2. Application for Pawnshop License -TBOF, LLC dba/Shakopee Pawn *3. Intoxicating Liquor Licenses - TL Foods, LLC - tabled 2/29 4. Small Cities Development Program Policies and Procedures 5. ADC Telecommunications—Application for Business Subsidies (Tax Abatement) 6. City Participation—Water Treatment Plant Feasibility Study *7. Lions Park Youth Building Repairs 8. Elementary School Site/MUSA 16] Council Concerns 17] Other Business 18] Adjourn TENTATIVE AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Adjourned Regular Meeting March 21, 2000 1. Roll Call at 7:00 p.m. 2. Approval of the Agenda 3. Approval of Consent Business-(All items noted by an 4 are anticipated to be routine.After a discussion by the President,there will be an opportunity for members of the EDA 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.) A.) Approval of Minutes: , , 4 o 18, of c c.) 4. Financial A.) 4 Approval of Bills 5. ADC Telecommunications—Application for Business Subsidies(Tax Abatement) 6. TIF Review 7. Other Business: 8. Adjourn edagenda.doc OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 4,2000 Members Present: Acting President Brekke,Morke,Link,Sweeney Members Absent: Amundson Staff Present: Mark McNeill,City Administrator;R.Michael Leek,Community Development Director;Bruce Loney,Public Director/City Engineer,Judith S. Cox, City Clerk;Paul Snook,Economic Development Coordinator;Gregg Voxland, Finance Director;and Jim Thomson, City Attorney. I. Roll Call: Acting President Brekke called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. Roll call was taken as noted above. II. Approval of Agenda Sweeney/Link moved to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously. III. Approval of October 5 & 19. 1999 Minutes Link/Sweeney moved to approve the October 5 and October 19, 1999,meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimously with Commissioner Morke abstaining. 1V. Financial Approval of Bills-None V. Election of Officers. Brekke/Link nominated Commissioner Amundson for EDA President in the year 2000. Sweeney/Morke moved that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballot be cast for Deb Amundson as President. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Sweeney moved to appoint Gary Morke as Vice President of the EDA. Motion carried unanimously Morke/Link nominated Bob Sweeney for EDA Treasurer. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Morke moved that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballet be cast for Bob Sweeney as Treasurer of the EDA. Motion carried unanimously. Vl. Other Business There was no other business. Official Proceedings of the January 4,2000 Shakopee Economic Development Authority Page 2 V11. Adjournment Morke/Link moved to adjourn to January 18,2000,at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:16 p.m. • litalk , 0..th S. Cox i A Secretary Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA ADJOURNED REGULAR SESSION JANUARY 18,2000 Members Present: President Amundson,Brekke,Morke,Link, Sweeney Members Absent: None Staff Present: Mark McNeill,City Administrator;R. Michael Leek,Community Development Director; Bruce Loney,Public Director/City Engineer;Judith S. Cox,City Clerk;Jim Thomson, City Attorney;Gregg Voxland,Financial Director I. Roll Call: President Amundson called the meeting to order at 825 p.m. Roll call was taken as noted above. II. Approval of Agenda Sweeney/Link moved to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously. III. Approval of Consent/Agenda Sweeney/Link moved to approve the consent agenda. Motion carried unanimously with Commissioner Morke abstaining. 3.A.Approval of November 3,1999 Meeting Minutes Sweeney/Link moved to approve the November 3,1999,meeting minutes. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). 1V. Financial 4.A Approval of Bills Sweeney/Link moved to approve bills in the amount of$1,967.64 for the EDA General Fund and$98.29 for Seagate. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). V. Auditors's Tax Increment Financing(TIF)Review Gregg Voxland,Finance Director,approached the podium and reported on the Tax Increment Financing (TIF)activities. The volume of paper that the auditors needed to go through for the city far exceeded their expectations. Their report is very detailed. The auditors are asking for additional compensation from the EDA. They are asking the EDA for an additional$2,000 and the auditors themselves will write off another $1,000. Originally,the estimate of cost to the EDA was$8,000. The bill arrived for$10,821.The total cost was$11,428. The excessive amount of paper was brought to Mr.Voxland's attention at an earlier date. Mr.Voxland felt the auditors proposal was fair and they were due the additional$2,000. This funding will come from the Tax Increment Fund. Sweeney/Brekke moved to authorize payment for the tax increment review to Kern,DeWenter and Viere in the amount of$10,000. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the January 18,2000 Shakopee Economic Development Authority Page 2 VI. Other Business There was no other business. V11. Adjournment Sweeney/Link moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously The meeting adjourned at 8:35. J dith S. Cox A Secretary Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary //A CITY OF SHAKOPEE ( Oy\ eJAJ Memorandum TO: President & Commissioners Mark H. McNeill, Executive Director FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: EDA Bill List DATE: March 16, 2000 Introduction Attached is a listing of bills for the EDA for the period 2/25/00 to 03/16/00 . Action Requested Move to approve bills in the amount of $774 . 14 for the EDA General Fund and $0 . 00 for Seagate (code 9450) . F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O II � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 II U CO 10 0 0 0 0 d' dr d' W I F • ▪ 19 O O 0 0 H H H H I I H O CO O u) u1 u1 '4' d' d' d' 1 111 N H In O N O N N N N I CTIA HH HM N N I".• N I F II W U] II • >-1u axxxxx co co II H00000 0 0 0 N 10 M N rn x H 01 In N In U N H CO N M W c4 a0 a0 co co 1D H g KG Z o o 3 o N O H x 0 M U F W �a O W 0 F W U O 4ZZx -0 W U W xu; m cn rt. a W\ 111 H W W W 0 a W O ZU A ZF " a w 0 HU W0 O Z w m a' 0 PC OU H 0 A H 0 H F a U A 0. a 0 H Z W 0U Z 0 w N a0 [X 0 3 H4 4 U F U El 0 CO El H W FC � AAW H ro aww 0 Z � a' F U 4 a' O M 0 10 OI� NO W VVOONNN Nu1F (NI NN I I I` N 00 H H O1 U I l0 CO N N N '.O U Z I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N \\\\\\ W O H H H H H F ������ FC M M M M M M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 k i. k 4. H 1.1"/ 01 01 H * H H H k 0 k 1'] N H O O M M cI H M N O1 01 M M 4 U] l CA 0 ww � ww `"w 00 H 0 0El HHHHHH rn rn rn rn a1 a A w a HHHHHH a a 000000 0 0 a F H O1 O1 O1 O1 01 O1 0 C. E0 HHHHHri I. HHHHHH F H i. is CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: EDA Chair and Commissioners Mark McNeill, Executive Director FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: TIF Review DATE: March 14, 2000 Introduction The Tax Increment Financing Review by the auditors and Springsted has been completed. The report from Springsted is attached. Background The TIF review by the auditors and Springsted resulted in a few very minor comments on things to correct and refile 1998 reports . Two items involve relatively larger amounts. The first involves the first year of excess TIF settlement being receipted into the respect TIF district when it should have been put into the General Fund. The amounts are $1, 790 from District 7 (MEBCO) and $14, 760 from District 9 (FMG) . These amounts should be transferred from TIF funds to the General Fund. The second item is part of the administrative expense charged to district 9 (FMG) . After checking with bond counsel at that time, $45, 000 was charged for administrative expense. This amount, plus bills paid equals about 10% of the TIF project costs, which is the maximum amount allowed. No other districts were handled this way. There is no documentation to support this transaction. To correct this situation, the EDA should return $45, 000 to the TIF pool . Just for information and a reference point of the magnitude of the amounts above, when the last of the older —pooled" districts (#1 through #9) is closed, there will have been about $84 million dollars processed through TIF accounts. Alternatives 1. Status Quo. 2 . Make modifications as shown in the auditors and Springsted reports . Recommendation Alternative 2 . Action Move to accept the Tax Increment Review report from Springsted and direct staff to proceed to implement the items identified in the Springsted and Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. reports . U Greg ox nd Financ Director G:\docs\taxinc\review3 85 E.SEVENTH PLACE,SUITE 100 SAINT PAUL,MN 55101-2887 651-223-3000 FAX:651-223-3002 SPRINGSTED Public Finance Advisors MEMORANDUM TO: Gregg Voxland FROM: Nick Skar' l�Bruce Kimm9} k DATE: February 23, 2000 SUBJECT: City of Shakopee—TIF District Compliance The City of Shakopee has requested that Springsted perform a review of their compliance with Minnesota Statutes in regards to the City's TIF Districts. This was to be done in preparation for a potential future TIF audit by the Office of the State Auditor. Springsted has relied upon information supplied by the City and findings from an independent audit performed by Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. (Kern audit). This was to be an overview of the internal audit, and additional documentation, and not intended to be a projection of the financial position of the individual districts. The following is a summary of the individual districts and our findings. TIF District No. 1 TIF District No. 1 (County #501) is a Pre-79 District established in 1979 for the K-MART development. This District is within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on January 23, 1979 and certified by the County on February 20, 1979. The 1998 Municipality Report states the Request for Certification as being February 14, 1979. TIF District No. 1 was established prior to August 1, 1979 under prior statutory provisions to the HRA Act. This District is not generally subject to TIF Act requirements except as redevelopment activity extends beyond the scope of activity set forth in the Redevelopment Plan under the HRA Act after May 1, 1998. This district has fiscal disparities being contributed from tax capacity outside the TIF District under the provisions of M.S. 473F. The 1998 TIF Report lists December 31, 2002 as the decertification date. The District had a base year of 1979 and first increment was received in 1980. This results in City of Shakopee, Minnesota February 23, 2000 Page 2 decertification after the 2002 receipt, as the debt service obligations will be fulfilled at that time. Multiple modifications have been made to this TIF district. This includes a geographic enlargement on July 18, 1979, and most recently, a budget modification on December15, 1998. District No. 1 is the conduit district for two pooled debt issues. The two outstanding issues are the $1,885,000 G.O. TIF Refunding Bonds Series 1992B and the $1,015,000 G.O. TIF Bonds Series 1988B. The pooled funds transferred in are from TIF #3 Downtown, TIF #7 MEBCO, and TIF #9 FMG. TIF #7 MEBCO was decertified on December 31, 1998. The District also has approximately $2,020,000 of outstanding non-pooled G.O. debt at year-end 1999. At year-end 1998, this fund is showing a healthy surplus of $1,229,302. There appears to be sufficient increment available to satisfy all future debt service payments. All of the budget line items, and total budget, are within the TIF Plan budget constraints. There does not appear to be any changes necessary in this District's documentation beyond the auditor's findings stated in their documentation. These were the adjustments to the reported totals through year-end 1998 for various categories, the $40 discrepancy in budget totals, and the adjustments needed after reimbursing the General Fund the excess increment that was included in the TIF #7 and TIF #9 increment totals. The City should continue the excellent job it has done tracking expenditures, particularly administrative charges, as the State Auditor's Office has become adamant in requiring specific documentation of this line item. TIF District No. 2 (Decertified) TIF District No. 2 (County #502) was a Redevelopment District established in 1979 for the Elderly High Rise housing project. This District was within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on August 8, 1979; the City requested certification on August 31, 1979. The District was decertified at year-end 1997. Multiple transfers were made out of the TIF district over several years. Transfers totaled $340,602 to TIF District No. 1 and $43,800 to TIF District No. 6. Multiple modifications were made to this TIF district, including a final budget modification on December 23, 1997. This final amendment reconciled the TIF budget statement of sources and uses of funds to actual revenues and expenditures. As a result, the TIF budget and the final TIF report for the district are in order and need no further modification. TIF District No. 3 TIF District No. 3 (County #503) is a Redevelopment District established in 1982 for the purpose of downtown redevelopment. This District is within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on June 29, 1982; the City requested certification on October 10, 1982. The District is required to be decertified at year-end 2002. City of Shakopee, Minnesota February 23, 2000 Page 3 Multiple transfers have been made out of the TIF district over several years. Transfers to TIF District No. 1 have totaled $357,730 through 1998. Multiple modifications were made to this TIF district, including the most recent budget modification on December 15, 1998. This amendment reconciled the TIF budget statement of sources and uses of funds to actual revenues and expenditures. No further TIF plan budget modifications are needed at this time. The Kern audit notes that reported "TIF Revenue" and "Transfers Out" should be reduced by $32,278 to reflect actual amounts per tax settlements. This revision, which may be made in the Fiscal Year 1999 TIF report, appears to be the only change required for District No. 3. The Kern audit also notes that $151,915 of TIF revenue, $242,941 of streets and sidewalks expenses, and $54,240 of administrative expenses are non-vouched amounts. This situation appears to be due to the fact that invoices were not available for 1979 through 1985 and most of 1986. Similarly, tax settlements for 1979 through 1988 were unavailable for review. TIF District No. 4 (Decertified) TIF District No. 4 (County #504) was an Economic Development District established in 1984 for the Canterbury Downs racetrack project. This District was within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on November 20, 1984; the City requested certification in November, 1984. The District was decertified at year-end 1994. Multiple transfers were made out of and into the TIF district over several years. Transfers to TIF District No. 1 totaled $2,268,436 and transfers from TIF District No. 1 totaled $2,369,691, for a net gain of$101,255. It appears that multiple modifications were made to this TIF district. The last amendment on record was approved on December 1, 1987, seven years before the district was decertified. TIF authorities were first required to submit detailed TIF sources and uses reports for fiscal year 1995. Since this district was decertified in 1994, no historical to reported comparison may be made. However, while budgeted and actual line-item amounts do not agree, the total actual budget amount is less than the cumulative modified TIF plan budget amount. It does not appear, therefore, that any further modification is necessary. TIF District No. 5 (Decertified) TIF District No. 5 was a Redevelopment District established in 1985 for the purpose of downtown redevelopment. This district was merged into TIF District No. 1 in 1986. All historical sources and uses are included in financial statements for TIF District No. 1. City of Shakopee, Minnesota February 23, 2000 Page 4 TIF District No. 6 (Decertified) TIF District No. 6 was a Redevelopment District established in 1986 for the Motel project. This District was within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on May 20, 1986; the City requested certification on May 23, 1986. The District was decertified at year-end 1997. Multiple transfers were made out of and into the TIF district over several years. Part of the bond proceeds were loaned to District 7 and repaid. Transfers to TIF District No. 1 totaled $222,147 and transfers from TIF District No. 1 totaled $138,576, for a net expenditure of$83,571. Multiple modifications were made to this TIF district, including a final budget modification on December 23, 1997. This final amendment reconciled the TIF budget statement of sources and uses of funds to actual revenues and expenditures. As a result, the TIF budget and the final TIF report for the district are in order and need no further modification. TIF District No. 7 (Decertified) TIF District No. 7 (County #506) was an Economic Development District established in 1989 for the MEBCO project. This District was within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on May 16, 1989; the City requested certification on January 22, 1990. The District was decertified at year-end 1998. Multiple transfers were made out of the TIF district over several years. Transfers to TIF District No. 1 totaled $133,089. Multiple modifications were made to this TIF district, including a final budget modification on December 15, 1998. This final amendment reconciled the TIF budget statement of sources and uses of funds to actual revenues and expenditures. The Kern audit notes that $1,790 of excess TIF for District No. 7 was erroneously included as tax increment and ultimately transferred out to TIF District No. 1 debt service. Since this amount should have gone to the General Fund, the City's books should be adjusted to reconcile with the revised TIF budget included in the Kern audit. In addition, although the district is decertified, it would be advisable to submit a revised Fiscal Year 1998 TIF report showing this small change to the "TIF Revenue" and "Transfers Out" budget line-items. TIF District No. 9 TIF District No. 9 (County #507) is a Redevelopment District established in 1990 for the FMG project. This District is within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on January 16, 1990; the City requested certification on February 13, 1990. The District is required to be decertified at year-end 1999. Multiple transfers have been made out of the TIF district over several years. Transfers to TIF District No. 1 have totaled $346,427 through 1998. City of Shakopee, Minnesota February 23, 2000 Page 5 Multiple modifications were made to this TIF district, including the most recent budget modification on December 15, 1998. This amendment reconciled the TIF budget statement of sources and uses of funds to actual revenues and expenditures. The Kern audit notes that $14,760 of excess TIF for District No. 9 was erroneously included as tax increment and ultimately transferred out to TIF District No. 1 debt service. Since this amount should have gone to the General Fund, the City's books should be adjusted to reconcile with the revised TIF budget included in the Kern audit. In addition, it would be advisable to submit a revised Fiscal Year 1998 TIF report showing this small change to the "TIF Revenue" and "Transfers Out" budget line-items, and to incorporate this change into the final TIF report for Fiscal Year 1999. The Kern audit contains an error concerning TIF District No. 9. The revised TIF report mistakenly indicates that the TIF plan budget needs to be modified to reflect actual land/building acquisition expenditures of $1,064,098, as opposed to the budget amount of $1,053,034. The City's internal pay-as-you-go note documentation demonstrates, however, that $1,053,034 is the correct amount for this line-item. We recommend, therefore, that the City revise "Accounted for in Prior Years" line items 27 and 28 to read $1,053,034 and $17,293, respectively. No further TIF plan budget modifications are needed at this time. The 1998 TIF report states that the most recent TIF plan budget modification was made on December 15, 1990. This date should be corrected to December 15, 1998. TIF District No. 10 TIF District No. 10 (County #508) is a Redevelopment District established in 1995 for the Block 3 & 4 redevelopment. This District is within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on November 8, 1995 and certified by the County on May 7, 1996. The 1998 Municipality Report states the Request for Certification as being April 19, 1998. This is in contrast to the April 17, 1998 date that the County states on the Certification. This discrepancy is insignificant but should be changed so the County and City records reconcile. The City will want to verify this date and adjust records accordingly. This district has fiscal disparities being contributed from tax capacity within the TIF District. Under M.S. 469.177, subd. 3, the City had the option to also have the captured tax capacity determined prior to applying the fiscal disparity provisions in Chapter 473F. M.S. 469.176, Subd. 1 b, paragraph (a), allows for 25 years of increment collection from the date of receipt of first increment. M.S. 469.176 Subd. 1 b, paragraph (b), adds that any increments from taxes payable in the year the district terminates shall be paid to the authority. The 1998 TIF Report lists December 31, 2024 as the decertification date. The District had a base year of 1996 and first increment was received in 1999. This results in decertification after the full 2024 receipt. Delinquent taxes (paid after district termination) can also be collected if they are needed to pay outstanding bond debt service or other contractual obligations of the district. Two modifications have been made to this TIF district. The first was completed on September 16, 1997 (approved October 7, 1997) to reallocate individual line items within the total budget, amend the statement of objectives, amend the development plan, and City of Shakopee, Minnesota February 23, 2000 Page 6 amend the buildout/timing of the project. A second modification was done on August 18, 1998 to reallocate individual line items within the total budget. District No. 10 has two outstanding debt issues. Both are Scott County HRA issued bonds. The first is the $945,000 Series 1997D and the second is the $1,170,000 Series 1997E. At year-end 1998, this fund is showing a surplus of $305,664 resulting from bond proceeds (along with interest) not expended. There was a small amount of increment of$4,740 received in 1999. The State Auditor's Office has taken the position that any increment received in a payable year constitutes a year of receipt and cannot be waived. This should be applied to the August 1, 1999 and February 1, 2000 debt service payments. The City has chosen to make a local contribution to the district in order to avoid the LGA/HACA penalty. The contribution has been deemed satisfied (as per City Bond Counsel) by the HRA's levy supported Series B (principle amount of $1,720,000) as per the September 1997 modification to the TIF Plan. TIF District No. 11 TIF District No. 11 (County #509) is an Economic Development District established in 1998 for the Seagate Technology Development. This District is within MN River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1. The District was approved by Council on February 2, 1998 and certified by the County on May 18, 1998. The 1998 Municipality Report states the Request for Certification also as being May 18, 1998. This is in contrast to the March 9, 1998 date that the County states on the Certification. The City will want to verify this date and adjust records accordingly. This district has fiscal disparities being contributed from tax capacity within the TIF District. This District is under M.S. 469.177, subd. 3, paragraph (b), which requires that all economic development districts with requests for certification after June 30, 1997, must choose this election. M.S. 469.176, Subd. 1 b, paragraph (a), allows for nine years of collection, either from the date of receipt of first increment, or within 11 years from approval of the TIF plan, whichever is shorter. M.S. 469.176 Subd. 1b, paragraph (b), adds that any increments from taxes payable in the year the district terminates shall be paid to the authority. The 1998 TIF Report lists June 15, 2007 as the decertification date. The District had a base year of 1998 and first increment was received in 1999. This results in decertification after the full 2007 receipt. The City will need to be aware that actual decertification will not occur until the full 2007 payment is received. Delinquent taxes (paid after district termination) can also be collected if they are needed to pay outstanding bond debt service or other contractual obligations of the district. A modification was done on April 21, 1998 (resolution 4897) to reallocate individual line items within the total budget of $4,600,000. The uses for the modified budget only add up to $4,470,000, falling short of the original budget by $130,000. The city will want to do a second administrative amendment, no public hearing process required, to correct this situation. City of Shakopee, Minnesota February 23, 2000 Page 7 District No. 11 has an outstanding Taxable TIF Revenue Note, Series 1998A, in the amount of $3,591,195. The district is using a pay-as-you-go financing option in which a percentage of the tax increment received annually is reimbursed to the developer. The developer has documented $3,766,372 of eligible project costs through year-end 1998. At year-end 1998, this fund is showing a deficit of $9,755 due to administrative expenses paid prior to any increment collection. The City has a breakdown of this expense on file. If this was balanced internally, the City may want to reflect this transfer (a specific reference) in their TIF Reports. There was a smaller than anticipated increment of $8,643 received in 1999. The State Auditor's Office has taken the position that any increment received in a payable year constitutes a year of receipt and cannot be waived. This should be applied to the fund deficit and/or the August 1, 1999 and February 1, 2000 contractual payments. This results in eight additional increment collections for this District. The City has chosen to make a local contribution to the district in order to avoid the LGA/HACA penalty. The contribution has been deemed satisfied by the waiving of the storm sewer assessments and certain other charges as stated in the TIF Plan. Summary The City has done a thorough job in tracking its revenues and expenditures for each District, aside from a few housekeeping items. It would be advisable to ensure that accurate documentation exists on actual (past and present) City administrative costs. We commend the choice of using an auditor to reconcile the district's financials back to the origination of each District. With the revisions recommended in this report, it is our opinion that the City's TIF District financials will fully reflect actual revenues and expenditures. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. We look forward to working with you in the future. izvs cto444.;. - " CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Economic Development Authority FROM: Paul Snook,Economic Development Coordinator SUBJECT: ADC Telecommunications-Application for Business Subsidies(Tax Abatement) MEETING DATE: March 21,2000 Introduction: The EDA and City Council are asked to proceed with processing ADC Telecommunications' Application for Business Subsidies (tax abatement) and take the following actions as mandated by the 1999 Business Subsidy Law(MS 116J.993— 116J.995) o Direct staff to prepare a"Subsidy Agreement"between the EDA,City, Scott County and ADC for consideration at a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement (the agreement outlines the parameters for the tax abatement),and o Set a date of May 2,2000 for a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement. Background: ADC is requesting tax abatement participation on the part of the City of Shakopee and Scott County for the development of a Broadband Connectivity Group facility and Fiber Group facility. The development will be located on a 106-acre site known as the Camas property,just east of the intersection of Valley Industrial Boulevard South and Valley Park Drive, next to Conklin Company's corporate headquarters. Exhibit A shows the location of the proposed development. Scott Renke, Director of ADC's BCG Global Facilities, Roger Christensen of CRESA Partners, and Manos Ginis of HGA will be at the EDA/Council meeting to make a brief presentation and answer questions. Discussion: Staff has reviewed ADC's proposed development and corresponding Application for Business Subsidies—Exhibit B, and finds that the project essentially meets the City's goals as outlined in its Business Subsidy Policy-Exhibit C, including: • The project is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. • The company will enter into a Subsidy Agreement with the City that is consistent with statutory requirements, including a commitment to remain in business at the site for a adcabaterequestmo minimum of five years after the benefit date and compliance with the specific job and wage goals established for the project(in the Subsidy Agreement). • Promoting economic development that will expand the commercial / industrial tax base for the City; • Improving the community's economic vitality through the creation and expansion of"basic sector"(manufacturing-related)livable wage jobs; • Provide significant economic impact(multiplier effect)within the community; • Encourage economic and commercial diversity within the community; • The project is consistent with environmental regulations and does not create an environmental hardship for the community. • Construction of the project will not commence until the City and applicant have entered into a Subsidy Agreement and Contract for Private Development. ADC has submitted along with its application the required $5,200 application fee to cover administrative costs. For a more detailed overview of project benefits, see Exhibit D -Analysis of Proposed Project Property taxes collected from the value of the improvements would be abated over a six-year period from 2003 — 2008. The City would abate up to a maximum of $122,760 annually, for a total of $736,560 over the six-year term. Scott County would abate up to maximum of$215,753 annually, for a total of$1,294,517 over the term. The City and Scott County would round these figures to $120,000 and $215,000, respectively. The total abatement from the City and County would therefore be $2,010,000. Only the property taxes collected on the value of the improvements would be abated; the property taxes collected on the value of the land would not be abated. The estimate of tax abatement is outlined in Exhibit E - Tax Abatement Projection, prepared by Springsted Financial Advisors. Options: 1. Proceed with processing ADC Telecommunications' Application for Business Subsidies (tax abatement) by directing staff to prepare a "Subsidy Agreement", and set a date of May 2, 2000 for a public hearing on the proposed tax abatement. 2. Table the matter and request additional information. Recommendation: Option 1. Actions Required: 1. Offer and pass a motion directing staff to prepare a"Subsidy Agreement"between the EDA, City,ADC Telecommunications,Inc.and Scott County. adcabaterequestmo R ' 2. Offer and pass a motion to set a date of May 2, 2000 for a public hearing of the Economic Development Authority / City Council on the proposed tax abatement for ADC Telecommunications,Inc. adcabaterequestmo c-) o I g I a 0 I < 1., '° ic w 7// 1 I H:LaON ; , • - L_____I 00 4: ,i 00 k . . . , 4 . 8.„ u, I c c 1 'A • / --1 -4- 7 0 0 • .. -. 1/ - .• •.•:•: :•:• ii 1 -.Ns'"g...... • 8 0 ,,•, MO • • 00 ::::::::::::Ce •: : / ./E floovt A < Cd a_ D 0 •:•: :•:•: •:• i cn 0.?4 ' i UU •' ::::::::::::ct :. L.1 : :•:•••• • • : , ' cn 2 z LT) vi 1-z cr . : UU * 0 co El 0 Ocn r-6- • • • • • . . . . . Z 4J 0 ILLi° 3 .... -1 .N. / Z 0 0 . 1 Iii'I :::::.•: : • : • • • CO.. -0 UZ LICC -L, 0 l . . . . . . . . <4 CnL6 i • ' • , . . •.•.•. . Iii r, ' • •. .• . . . . . //1 ::::•:- tx : :::::::::: r,:, mc..) <0 z :•::H .,,c, : :::::::::: I ::::::: : :::•:::-.:: • act OD C3 :::::•: g • :•:::,::: c c? ta zi ,, , • • • - • • • • • • ,,/ • • • • • :•:•:•: : • :•:••::• , • , i • :• :• : : •• 1 -•:::•: • • I ,, , —I . i___,___, ,/ ..._.....__ • -,- 7 ._...,„_.,... ....,....„,=„7, ..... A F----. :. --1________c , . . . . ::.• . / to • ,-. EN r4 I 1.111!: / 1 7 01 • 1 c.) o A G.1 C/3 0 • ;i; :i:i\, , ir 1.4i , , oa. J1)/ • C C 1.' ' . ;. = . I /P-91,11 ----r- * 1 . 01 -- ) . • z /1/ *. Afkrip 5 Z :/c73 P :, CV /1 I.. I , elI 0 air ."--\„.. o ff . ) 7:::•A -•••••—., . -- 1.,, --............. .,._., - -•..J 7 rii:iii:H,i c- ei I av 'N•11,1,511a• ca •: :... .....•:•:•: ::: __ 29 zi- z ii .,:ii:•:;•: ii.iH ::i ::: a; tu 0 J......'.....\-... NelVd I\J• • i: :::::.:::.•: j...-L-1/ \ .1- -`,................ to ............. ____ • t ' V * 1 .._ ___ i — i I i CITY OF SHAKOPEE SHAKOPEE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Business Subsidy Policy SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,MN 55379 Phone(952)445-3650 Fax(952)445-6718 CITY OF SHAKOPEE SHAKOPEE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BUSINESS SUBSIDY POLICY I. Purpose This document includes the criteria to be considered by the City of Shakopee ("City") and the Shakopee Economic Development Authority ("EDA") to evaluate requests for business subsidies. In adopting these criteria, it is the intent of the City and EDA to comply with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993-116J.995 (the "Act"). The City and EDA hereby adopt the definitions contained in the Act for application in the criteria. The City and EDA have each adopted these policies after public hearing in accordance with the Act. Henceforth, the term "City"includes the City and EDA unless the context requires otherwise. II. Goals and Objectives It is the City's intent to advance the following goals and objectives in granting business subsidies: a.) All business subsidies must be consistent with Shakopee's comprehensive plan and any other similar plan or guide for development of the community. b.) Recipients will be required to enter into a subsidy agreement with the City that is consistent with statutory requirements, including a commitment to remain in business at the site for a minimum of five years after the benefit dateand compliance with the specific job and wage goals established for the project. M. Business Subsidy Criteria The City recognizes that every proposal is unique.Nothing in these criteria shall be deemed to be an entitlement or shall establish a contractual right to a subsidy. The City reserves the right to modify these criteria from time to time and to evaluate each project individually. The following criteria shall be utilized in evaluating a request for a business subsidy: a.) Increase in tax base. While according to the Act an increase in the tax base cannot be the sole grounds for granting a subsidy, the City believes it is a necessary condition for any subsidy. b.) Jobs and Wages. It is the City's intent that the recipient create the maximum number of livable wage jobs at the site. This may include jobs to be retained but only if job loss is imminent and demonstrable. City of Shakopee Business Subsidy Policy Business Subsidy Criteria(continued) c.) Economic Development or Redevelopment. Business subsidies should promote one or more of the following: 1. Provide significant economic impact(multiplier effect)within the community; 2. Encourage economic and commercial diversity within the community; 3. Contribute to the establishment or reestablishment of a critical mass of commercial development within an area; 4. Provide basic goods and services, increase the range of goods and services available or encourage fast-growing businesses; 5. Promote redevelopment objectives and removal of blight, including pollution remediation; 6. Promote the retention or adaptive reuse of buildings of historical or architectural significance; 7. Encourage full utilization of existing or planned infrastructure improvements. IV. Compliance and Reporting Requirements. a.) Any subsidy granted by the City will be subject to the requirement of a public hearing, if necessary according to the Act,and must be approved by the Shakopee City Council, and by the EDA Board of Commissioners if the subsidy is granted by the EDA. b.) It will be necessary for both the recipient and the City to comply with the reporting and monitoring requirements of the Act. V. Tax Increment Financing Program Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is a financing tool whereby districts are established for development or redevelopment and the increased property tax revenues, or increment, generated by the improvements is captured to pay back the bond debt or other fmancing provided for the project. TIF is useful for the attraction and retention of businesses by the City of Shakopee. The fundamental principle that makes Tax Increment Financing viable is that it is designed to encourage development that would not otherwise occur. The City shall consider TIF in cases that serve to accomplish the City's economic development goals, and to assist projects that would not occur"but for"the assistance provided through Tax Increment Financing. In addition to the general criteria described in Sections III and IV above,requests for TIF assistance will be evaluated according to the policies in these Sections. subsdpolicy.doc 2 City of Shakopee Business Subsidy Policy Tax Increment Financing Program(continued) Program Goals 1. To promote development or redevelopment that would not otherwise occur. 2. To promote development or redevelopment that will build a strong tax base. 3. To improve the community's economic vitality through the creation and expansion of employment opportunities. 4. To assure that development projects are constructed and maintained with quality consistent with the goals of the City of Shakopee. 5. To enhance the competitive position of the City of Shakopee regarding new and expanding businesses. Program Eligibility Criteria Qualified projects (applicants) must meet or exceed the following criteria to be eligible for TIF assistance. Meeting the threshold of eligibility does not mean automatic approval for the applicant. The Shakopee Economic Development Authority and City Council shall make final approval of TIF assistance. The applicant must complete an Application for Business Subsidies as one measure of project eligibility. 1. If the project is a manufacturing or warehouse / distribution use, the following criteria apply: a.) The project must be located in an I-1 (Light Industry), I-2 (Heavy Industry), or BP(Business Park)zoning district. b.) The project must occupy a minimum land area of 5 acres. 2. The project must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3. If thero'ect involves redevelopment, p � the applicant mustP rovide evidence of the building and site conditions needed to evaluate whether the project qualifies for establishment of a redevelopment district or renovation and renewal district. 4. The project must be consistent with environmental regulations and not create an environmental hardship for the community. 5. The applicant must be willing to enter into a developer's agreement approved by the City. 6. The applicant should at all times retain and be assisted by qualified financial consultants and/or underwriters,and by legal counsel. subsdpolicy.doc 3 City of Shakopee Business Subsidy Policy TIF Program Eligibility Criteria(continued) 7. Construction of the project shall not commence until the City has approved a TIF plan for the project. 8. The City reserves the right to select a third party administrator/consultant to assist in the review and project development process, the cost of which will be paid by the applicant. 9. The applicant must submit preliminary plans of the project and evidence of ability to finance the project. 10. The applicant must provide security to the City to cover all costs paid by tax increment,unless the TIF plan is a"pay as you go"agreement. 11. The City reserves the right to deny any application for TIF financing for any reason at any stage of the proceedings prior to adoption of the final approval of a Developer's Agreement. 12. The developer will provide a minimum of 10% owner and/or developer equity in the project. The City reserves the right to deny projects which substantially comply with the eligibility criteria, but which fail to have a significant positive impact on the community or to accomplish the City's economic development or redevelopment goals as determined by the Economic Development Authority and City Council. The City reserves the right to consider and approve projects which substantially comply with the eligibility criteria, as set forth in the program providing other tangential items such as building materials, building quality, etc., meet or exceed minimum standards and have, in the Council's judgment, a significant positive impact on the community and have accomplished the City's economic development or redevelopment goals. Costs Eligible for Tax Increment Financing Assistance Project costs qualifying for TIF assistance, as defined under the Minnesota TIF Act,include without limitations the following: 1. Acquisition of property 2. Clearing of land 3. Relocation and demolition of existing structures 4. Site preparation 5. Soils correction 6. Removal of hazardous waste or pollution 7. Installation of utilities 8. Construction of public or private improvements 9. Administrative costs directly related to the parcels identified 10. Other similar activities subsdpolicy.doc 4 City of Shakopee Business Subsidy Policy VI. Application Process for Business Subsidies The applicant will complete the City's Application for Business Subsidies; submit with the application a deposit of$5,200 to cover City administrative costs; and provide other information as requested by the City. 1. City staff or the City's agent shall review the application materials and make preliminary recommendations to the Shakopee Economic Development Authority and City Council as to compliance of the application and proposed project with City goals and eligibility criteria. 2. Final evaluation of the application shall include, in addition to items subject to preliminary review,a review of applicable credit analysis,financial structuring and legal compliance. A formal recommendation shall then be made to the Economic Development Authority and the City Council. 3. After a review of the fmal evaluation and formal recommendation,the Shakopee Economic Development Authority and City Council shall consider final approval of the use of business subsidies and hold the appropriate public hearings. 4. All applications and supporting materials and documents shall become the property of the City. subsdpolicy.doc 5 ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS,INC.PROJECT • In 1996,City entered an agreement with the company to provide up to$95,000 annually for six years (1999—2004)in"Local Effort Assistance"for development of the existing Broadband Connectivity Group facility in Valley Green Business Park.A total of$56,585 was remitted to the company in 1999;this is lower than the agreed/estimated amount because of lower C/I taxes. Costs Financing"costs"to assist funding whatever is agreed upon(land acquisition, site improvements, installation of public infrastructure,etc.) • Taxes"abated"over the abatement term(depending upon how the abatement is defined... specific dollar amount each year;the increase in property taxes resulting from improvements; etc.). Cumulative(all abatements)limit for Shakopee in any one year is 5%of current levy or $161,704. Benefits Below is a summary of estimated benefits to Shakopee of the project. • A$24,000,000 increase in estimated market value for the subject property and the attendant increase in property taxes attributable to the project(post TIF or abatement term) • Investment activities directly attributable to facility development: Land Purchase (fully improved) $ 7,600,000 Building Construction 68,000,000 Machinery&Equipment 40,000,000 TOTAL $ 115,600,000 • The project will bring a significant number of new jobs to Shakopee.The company will be establishing approximately 1,200 new livable wage jobs(with benefits)in Shakopee upon completion of the project.Following is a breakdown of the number of jobs: Position Category Pay Range Number of new Jobs Manufacturing/Assembly $21,000-$31,200/yr. 700 Engineering/Administration $35,000-$85,000/yr. 500 TOTAL 1,200 • The average annual pay for the above positions is estimated at$41,000,compared with Shakopee's median household income of$38,800 and per capita income of$15,150(1990 Census). • The project will also increase the diversity of job opportunities for Shakopee residents.The project will add to the well-paying and growing information technology job base. Adccstbn2.doc/02u • The project will add significant new payroll in Shakopee.It is estimated that the new facility's payroll will be$49,000,000.This figure does not include benefits.This will increase as the company adds positions in the future. • Based on Shakopee's current population, it is estimated that the new facility will have an employment multiplier effect of 2.0.That is,for every 100 new manufacturing-related jobs created by Seagate, 100 non-manufacturing jobs(services,retail,etc.)will be created throughout the local economy. Based on the 700 manufacturing jobs anticipated for the new facility,this translates to 700 non-manufacturing jobs that will being created,much(but not all)of which will be in Shakopee. It should be noted that the geographic area of the multiplier effect will include some areas outside the city, given that Shakopee is in the metropolitan area. • An increase in the development of new service and retail businesses(new/additional goods and services)attributable to the influx new employees;attendant spending in Shakopee from resident and non-resident employees. • Employees moving to Shakopee and their attendant spending(i.e.houses, goods from local merchants,etc.).Note:this company's existing Shakopee facility has been operational for only three years,and currently it is estimated that 50%of that facility's employees live in Shakopee. • Purchases by the company within Shakopee(materials, supplies,etc) • Based on a"holiday-shortened"335 day year,the company estimates that its out—of—town employees visiting the new facility will equate to 500—1,000 lodging days per year.This is significant because new guests would be lodging at Shakopee's hotels and purchasing other goods and services from Shakopee businesses on those visiting days. • The project fits within the City Council's goal of facilitating the attraction of high quality industrial development(i.e. Seagate,ADC),as identified in the City Council's 1998 goal setting workshop. • The project fits within the City's recently adopted business subsidy criteria/policy in that it(the project)would increase the tax base,create a significant number of livable wage jobs,provide a significant economic impact(multiplier effect)within the community,etc. Adccstbn2.doc/O2u 2 MAk-1b-OW llb.10/ JItUM=5Yh'1NI;S11=U 1N(. 11.1:bbl 'L'L.S .110W.5 Assumptions Report IX j b;- i ' City of Shakopee,Minnesota Tax Abatement Projection C/I Project Scenario A Type of Project Tax Abatement Maximum Duration of Tax Abatment 10 Years Current Year 05/01/00 First Abatment Year 12/01/03 Final Abatement Year 12/01/08 (6 Years of Abatement) 1999/2000 Land Value $637,200 Times:First $150,000 2.40% 3,600 Excess 3.40% 23,365 Net Tax Capacity(Land) $26,965 Non-Abated NTC(Land) $26,965 Assessment/Collection Year 2000/2001 2001/2002 2002/2003 2003/2004 Land Estimated Market Value $837,200 $837,200 $837,200 $837,200 Increase in Estimated Market Value 0 0 24,870,800 24,870.800 Total Estimated Market Value $837,200 $837,200 $25,708,000 $25,708,000 Times:First $150,000 2.40% 3,600 3,600 3,600 3.600 Excess 3.40% 23,365 23,365 868,972 668,972 Total Net Tax Capacity $26,965 $26,965 $872,572 $872,572 Local Tax Capacity Rate 114.765% 1999/00 Fiscal Disparities Deduction 29.4827% Abate City Tax Rate? Yes 20.587% Abate County Tax Rate? Yes 36.182% Abate School District Tax Rate? no 53,546% Other Tax Rate 4.450% Current City Levy 5,000,000 @ 5% 250,000 Max.Abate- 250,000 Current County Levy 40,000,000 @ 5% 2,000,000 Max.Abate- 2,000,000 Present Value Date&Rate 05/01/00 5.00% Bonds Note(Pav-As-You-Gol Bonds Dated 05/01/00 Note Dated 05/01/00 First Interest Date 02/01/01 Note Rate 9.00% Underwriters Discount 1.50% Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated(printed on 3/15/00 at 1:27 PM) Tax Abatement3.xlsAssumptions PINK- LO-IOW LO = /J/ rKU1'1=0 r-cc I I4%. 1Lu 1 L' .. au-c.J..1a «..I .r.0 u., ar-,u. ..., . O O O M M M M M cM 0 0 0 0 0 CO r s- r- S r- .-- N- O to LO to If) 1c) 1f) O y (6 X N CI (C) W 00 O C. X C6 M Cr) M M M M M M C C --- M M Cr) M M M O SZ O co CC U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O X FA CC Cl) co F-- E X cDE O C as as O Q U co O O O M co M M M M 0 0 0 0 0 h = I') to to U) If) t() S Co .z. I1� h h h h h O E )4G to to t66- 45 ,6 Q a)C O r- s- r- r- O X F- F' O `-• N N N N N N cV QU T C O O O C00 I00 C00 ON C00 C00 00000 o C>E h h ( h h h IC) C X N O N N N N N N O 4.0 M .( F- N C.) `-' r- .t.- m—,—c—.- .- r- h 69 0 S` Q Q 4) 0 0 0 "47—q— C C Mrt `M'' C')) 0 0 0 0 0 O _ �' c') C') C•) M con O m o O c z I6 X 'a C'C ' co co a CO co co co co co co o is m (0 0 (a co Co 0 4-. a' Q ~ as S2ct cu 4 aa)i o �( 0 R o * e o c 0 0 0 0 e e 0 0 o 0 ,00 n- � OOmcOCflOmC0 (0 0 U Od (> XU hhhhhhhhhh - NhhO O yE - v v v eQ c v v ed r rV slow ... I - a .Q 1- cG - - r - rr- - sr- r- rr r - - r - , - r - - r - - t~ a U o O --• .LST ctr a aV F- 0 X O O O N N N N N N O O O O O h ZN CA W m c0 (0 g f0 O CA 0 <- w U Z U t) v.0Ito IC) toto t6 O O tC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 t,) h MMMMMM C 0 as vv-4-4—‘1,1. - ONQc0 Cv-4 C (' y QNNNNNN...ILL — - OW Q to IL-) u) tf) 1n to to to tq N N N N N C) Y CO CO CO C0 CO CO CO c0 (0 h h h h N ( 0 0) 0 CA Q) W 0) O O to 1.0 to 1.0 10 y OC F- 2- m CO c0 CC (0 CO (0 C0 c0 N Na N N o Z p N N N N N N N N N N h h 1,- 1`.. Q Q Z (p CO CO CO PO 0 U C) C II) to to N Cv N CV N N N N N N N +O. X >, CD O CD h h h h h h h h h h h In CA O C3) 1A tfi tc") to to O to 1() tL) tf) to M V '-, (fl cc c CV c. N Ni N N N N N N N ._ O F n�' '. v N N N h h h h h h h I� h h h Q 1- Z co co co co 00 co co O c0 CO OO 00 COU >. to O .- N M C LO CO h CO O O r- N M m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r- r- .- O G In CA r- e- s- s- . r- r- .- .- s- s- t- r- r- R M M M M M C') M M M c'r) C') M C') M 2 C a c N N N N N N N N. N N N N N N i1 r- ti r- r- s- r- c- s- s- r- s- c- a- .- !net ed Pay-As-You-Go NoteReporE City of Shakopee,Minnesota Tax Abatement Projection C/I Project Scenario A Note Date: 05/01/00 Note Rate: 9.00% Amount 51.212.300 Semi-Annual Loan Net Capitalized Balance Date Principal Interest P&I Revenue Interest Outstanding (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 1,212.300.00 02/01/01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 81,630.25 1,294,130.25 08/01/01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58,235.86 1,352,366,11 02/01/02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60,856.47 1.413222.58 08/01/02 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 63,595.02 1,476,817.60 02/01/03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 66,456.79 1,543,274.39 08/01/03 99,809.14 69,447.35 . 169,256,49 169,256.49 0,00 1,443,465.25 02/01/04 104,300.55 64,955.94 169.256.49 169,256.49 0.00 1,339,164.70 08/01/04 108,994.08 60262.41 169,256.49 169,256.49 0.00 1.230.170.62 02/01/05 113,898.81 55,357.68 169.256.49 169.256.49 0.00 1,116,271.81 08/01/05 119,024.26 50.232.23 169,256.49 169256.49 0.00 997.247.55 02/01/06 124,380,35 44,876,14 169,256.49 169,256.49 0.00 872,867.20 08/01/06 129,977.47 39,279.02 169,256.49 169,256.49 0.00 742,889.73 02/01/07 135,826.45 33,430,04 169,256.49 169,256.49 0.00 607,063.28 08/01/07 141.938.64 27,317.85 169,256.49 169,256.49 0.00 465,124.64 02/01/08 148,325.88 20,930.61 169,256.49 169,256.49 0.00 316,798.76 08/01/08 155,000.55 14.255.94 169,256.49 169,256.49 0.00 161.798.21 02/01/09 161,798,21 7,280.92 169,079.13 169,079.13 0.00 0.00 08/01/09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0,00 08/01/10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/11 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 08/01/11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 08/01/12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 08/01/13 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $1,543,274 $487.626.13 $2,030,900.52 52.030.900.52 5330,974.39 Excess Tax Abatement 177.36 Total Net Revenue 52,031.077.88 Prepared by:Springsted Incorporated(printed on 3/15/00 at 1:27 PM) Tax Abatement3.xls OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 26, 1999 Mayor Brekke called the meeting to order at 4 :30 p.m. with Councilmembers Deb Amundson, Jane DuBois, Cletus Link (5 :00 p.m. ) and Bob Sweeney present. Those absent : None. Staff present : Mark McNeill, City Administrator, R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Greg Sticha, Accountant; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Dan Hughes, Chief of Police; and Mary Athmannn, Fire Chief . Also present were Larry Meilleur, Planning Commission; and Jeff Kaley, Park & Recreation Advisory Board. Sweeney/Amundson moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion on the FY2000 Budget commenced. Mr. Voxland explained that "A-1" of the handout outlines the projected 2000 general fund budget revenues from taxes and fees. Referencing page "C" of the handout, he explained that the net taxable tax capacity for 1999 was $14 million and the preliminary net taxable tax capacity for 2000 is $16 million and is an increase of about 16%. Page "B" is a summary of the general fund. A 12 . 7% increase in the general fund levy limit from 1999 to 2000 equates to $429, 000 and he said that he is projecting an increase in the balance for 1999 . Page "D" shows a decrease in the general fund only tax rate for pay 2000 from pay 1999 by about 3 . 7%. Discussion ensued on the amount of dollars to transfer in for the Park and Recreation Department . Mr. Voxland stated that this budget is based on a transfer in of $70, 000 less than the deficit shown in the Recreation Fund Budget . Mark McNeill stated that Paul Tucci from Oppidan was present to discuss the Target/Oppidan Developer's Agreement . Mr. McNeill indicated that the Council first needed to revise standard language in the Developer' s Agreement but it also needed to address the Maintenance Agreement . Mr. McNeill explained that the standard language revision was contained in the Plan B improvements section of the Developer' s Agreement, involving County Road 17 improvements . Mr. McNeill indicated that when a default is involved, the City is allowed to go in and remedy the problem and assess the costs back to the benefited properties, however, Target did not want to be included and therefore Target proposed to be exempted. In exchange, Mr. McNeill indicated that Oppidan agreed to guarantee improvements at 100% rather than the normal 75%. Bruce Loney approached the podium. Mr. Loney stated that improvements will be made to 17th Avenue and Sarazin Street which will include a traffic signal . Mr. Loney stated that the developer would be installing the signal and working with the other property owners privately regarding assessments for the signal . Mr. Loney also indicated that the City would be reimbursing the developer for 25% of the cost of the signal . Regarding the Maintenance Agreement, Mr. Official Proceedings of the August 26, 1999 Shakopee City Council Page 2 Loney indicated that Oppidan would enter into a recorded agreement stating that it would pay for operation and maintenance of the traffic signal which payment would not be more than $300 per month or $3, 600 per year. Mr. Loney stated that major repairs will be done by the City. He also indicated that Oppidan would be taking g 1 care the of maintenance of the pedestrian path, however, Oppidan path to be on the east side f stated that the City is mostly responsible Mr.Street for safety reasons . Loney sta responsible to pay for power of signal lights. Bob Sweeney questioned whether $300 per month was adequate. Bruce Loney indicated that it should be. Mr. Loney also stated that Opp n will be doing its own snow removal for the pedestrian path. Paul Tucci approached the podium. Mr. Tucci indicated that the $3, 600 only pertains to maintenance of the traffic signal . Mr. Loney indicated that some months may cost more than $300 to maintain, however, some months may be less . Mr. Loney also pointed out that the Developer' s Agreement references Sarazin Avenue and it should be Sarazin Street . Deb Amundson asked whether the agreement was for a set amount indefinitely or if a cost factor was built in. Mr. Loney stated that a CPI has been built into the agreement. Mr. Tucci indicated that there was also an agreement between the City and Oppidan for the City to bill Oppidan as it was convenient for the City. Amundson/DuBois moved to approve the revised Developers Agreement . Sweeney/Link moamend Agreementnce�o�oonSarazin carriedAvenue unanimouslySarazin Street in theDevelopers Motion to approve revised Developers Agreement carried unanimously. Bob Sweeney requested the record reflect that the Developers Agreement is subject to staff cleaning up any language inconsistencies . Amundson/Sweeney moved to approve the Agreement for Maintenance Costs for the Operation of Pedestrian Path and Traffic Signal subject to staff review. Motion carried unanimously. Bob Sweeney requested the record reflect that Oppidan agreed to billing of the maintenance costs at the City' s convenience. Discussion on the FY2000 Budget continued. Dennis Kelly approached the podium. Mr. Kelly stated that he appreciated the opportunity to speak. He stated that the Murphy' s Landing Board of Directors is addressing the cash flow concerns. Mr. Kelly introduced Dr. Rolland Pistulka. Dr. Rolland Pistulka approached the podium. Dr. Pistulka reviewed the history of Murphy' s Landing. He stated that the project is very labor intensive and has extensive building repairs. Dr. Pistulka stated the project had never been debt free. He indicated that the highest debt was $140, 000 and was reduced to $86, 000 after an organizational chart Official Proceedings of the August 26, 1999 Shakopee City Council Page 3 was developed. Dr. Pistulka indicated that a full-time fundraiser- type person is needed. He also reviewed some of the comments of visitors, which included the admission being too high, not enough buildings being opened (which Dr. Pistulka indicated was true because the buildings were not safe to be in) and not enough interpreters and crafts people. Dr. Pistulka stated that the Board would like to see the debt paid and membership increased. He also stated that some of the buildings need to be restored and benefits need to be given to the employees. Dennis Kelly stated that the site has enormous potential but with that also comes enormous needs. Mr. Kelly indicated that attendance was down in July which cost the site $20, 000 . He stated that currently Murphy' s Landing has $93 , 000 in long and short term debt . Mr. Kelly stated that the good news was that the existing buildings are ripe with history and the interpreters are top notch. He also indicated that Murphy' s Landing had received $90, 000 in grant money to expand and enhance its educational programs. He stated that school attendance during April and May was up 36%. Mr. Kelly also stated that Murphy' s Landing puts on a program entitled "Professor Wiley' s Magnificent Moving Panorama" . He also stated that the site had received first time grant money from Target and monies from the Carolyn Foundation and Stans Foundation. Mr. Kelly stated that he hopes the City could also contribute funds . Cletus Link stated that he would like to see the City help Murphy' s Landing. Mr. Link indicated that the site cannot just close due to the huge investment. Jane DuBois stated that Murphy' s Landing is a valuable asset and the City should do whatever it can do. Ms . DuBois stated that she was not opposed to an annual contribution. Mr. Link stated that Murphy' s Landing would like to build a new entrance to draw people in. Mayor Brekke asked whether Murphy' s Landing could develop partnerships with similar societies. Dennis Kelly stated that Murphy' s Landing does have good will partnerships with some similar societies. Mr. Link stated he believed the City had a responsibility to help the project. Ms . DuBois suggested discussing the matter at the next meeting. Mr. Kelly stated that about one-third of Murphy' s Landing income is earned and the rest comes from other sources . Mayor Brekke stated that he would rather assume debt because when government starts making annual contributions, it seems like it cannot stop. Bob Sweeney agreed with Mayor Brekke. Mr. Sweeney stated that he does not have a problem with physical improvements and suggested that staff review the matter to see what impact a contribution would have on the budget . Dave Thompson suggested that Murphy' s Landing make a presentation to Shakopee Public Utilities, which could discuss helping with the utilities. Mr. Kelly thanked the Council and staff for its time and help. Discussion ensued on the fire marshal position. Mr. McNeill noted that other cities do not charge for inspections as they encounter a significant public relations problem with doing so. Mr. McNeill also noted that $20, 000 was included in next year' s budget for fees which Official Proceedings of the August 26, 1999 Shakopee City Council Page 4 may not be able to be obtained and that this should be kept in mind when reviewing the budget. Bob Sweeney stated that currently the Fire Department provides fire review plans at no fee, therefore, he would feel comfortable using general levy dollars for the fire marshal position. Mr. Sweeney noted that there should already be a carryover from the current year. Jane DuBois questioned whether periodic fire inspections are done. Fire Chief Mary Athmann approached the podium and stated that the process is basically confined to multi-family and apartments on a voluntary basis. Mayor Brekke stated that the position could be funded from the general fund and that there could be plan check fees if they are not charged already. Mr. McNeill noted that the duties of the position needed to be finalized. He also noted that the starting salary is to be $36, 000 . Cletus Link questioned whether there were any other ways to raise funds via fees or services. Chief Athmann stated that had already been looked at and nothing could be found. It was the consensus of the Council that the budgets for Community Development, City Clerk, Government Buildings, Unallocated and General Fund Revenues were acceptable. Discussion ensued regarding the Scott County Joint Prosecution. Mark McNeill stated that he did not see a lesser cost option. Mr. McNeill based his opinion on numerous factors including the following: There have been increased tickets on U.S. 169, however, if the matter is taken care of at arraignment, the state receives the fines; in addition to many of the judges not being consistent with levying what the state directives dictate. Paul Snook approached the podium to discuss the EDA budget . Mr. Snook pointed out the new items, those being a downtown market analysis in the amount of $25, 000, a downtown riverfront master plan requesting a 20% contribution ($30, 000) and $15, 000 for the Vision Shakopee operating budget . Bob Sweeney stated that usually contingency fund items are for unexpected expenses or emergencies and are not to be used for other things such as professional services. Mr. Snook stated that the rest of the budget was pretty much the same as last year. Mayor Brekke suggested that other consulting firms be contacted. Mr. Sweeney indicated that the Council had been asked to make a one-time contribution to Vision Shakopee in the past which it did but was now being asked to contribute $90, 000 more. He stated that he is not willing to fund any position that would not report to the City Administrator. Jane DuBois stated that doing nothing would not be supporting the downtown vision and the City would be rewarded with continued support . Mr. Sweeney stated that he had talked to people who thought the City had already spent too much on downtown. He also noted that $800, 000 in grant money had been received and should be used before the City makes any further contribution. Deb Amundson stated that the Blocks 3 and 4 project had a consultant who said certain things would not succeed in the project, however, the project is successful . Mayor Brekke indicated that the City gave significant contributions to Vision Shakopee of staff time, however, he would like to see some incoming support also. Official Proceedings of the August 26, 1999 Shakopee City Council Page 5 John Perry approached the podium. He stated that if the City government does not feel it has the responsibility to support Vision Shakopee, then he did not know who would feel responsible. Mr. Perry stated that Vision Shakopee was not about increasing marketing or sales but was about creating a downtown that will be an asset that a lot of cities do not have and wish they did. Mr. Perry indicated that Vision Shakopee had raised money and a lot of people have taken time off to get involved. Mayor Brekke stated he was not trying to be anti-supportive but that the City took a lot of risk with the Blocks 3 and 4 project and invested a lot of money and staff time. He did not feel it was the right time for the City to contribute another $90, 000 . Ms . DuBois stated in looking at other cities such as Savage and Chaska, the downtown areas were not all completed with private funds . She stated it was disappointing to have the lack of support and would cost more money in the long run. Mr. Sweeney indicated that $630, 000 of the $800, 000 grant had been earmarked for improvements to the downtown and it should be used first . Mr. Perry stated that Vision Shakopee has the fear of making a mistake without a grand plan. Ms . DuBois stated that the matter was an important item and needed further discussion. Mayor Brekke adjourned the meeting to Tuesday, September 7, 1999, at 5 : 00 p.m. Meeting adjourned at 6 :32 p.m. u ith S. CjcV ty Clerk Janet Vogel Freeman Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA NOVEMBER 9, 1999 Vice Mayor Bob Sweeney called the meeting to order at 6: 00 p.m. with Councilmembers Deb Amundson, Jane DuBois and Cletus Link present . Those absent: Mayor Brekke. Also present were Mark McNeill, City Administrator (7 : 11 p.m. ) ; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director (6: 17 p.m. ) and Judith Cox, City Clerk. Amundson/DuBois moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. R. Michael Leek approached the podium to discuss the ordinance regarding Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) for the City. Regarding his November 9, 1999 memo, Mr. Leek stated that it would be simpler to turn permitting and management of IST systems for new and existing systems to Scott County. Jane DuBois questioned how the county monitors and checks systems. Mr. Leek replied that the County sends out notices to individual property owners with ISTS and requires them to report back. There is no charge to City as inspections for the ISTS are paid by the homeowner. Bob Sweeney stated that he had heard that there really is no enforcement at the County level . Cletus Link questioned whether the issue involved existing or new systems . Mr. Leek replied that the inspection issue was for existing ISTS and the permitting applied to new systems . He also stated that the County reviews the ISTS before issuing a building permit. Mr. Link stated that builders find it difficult to work with the County on this issue. Ms . DuBois stated that she was concerned that there was no enforcement. Mr. Leek stated that the County is going to have to do more work but he believed that staffing was a problem. He stated that he did not know if the City would be in any better position if it did the permitting and inspections itself. Deb Amundson questioned what the cost of an inspection was and Mr. Leek thought it was between $100-$150 . Ms . Amundson questioned whether it would be cost effective for the City to do inspections itself. Mr. Sweeney stated that the revenue for such inspections would only be approximately $23, 000 based upon the number of ISTS in the City. Ms . Amundson stated that such a position would not be full-time. Ms. DuBois stated that she would like something in place to require that systems that are a certain number of years old and do not pass inspection would be required to be replaced. Mr. Link indicated that another building inspector had been hired so it may not be a problem for the City to do inspections itself. Mr. Leek stated that performing inspections would require the inspector to be ISTS certified and the City had no inspectors who were ISTS certified although that could be done. He also indicated that performing inspections could take a fair amount of time and the City would probably encounter the same type of resistance the County does. Mr. Sweeney suggested that Ms. DuBois obtain draft ordinances from other local cities and submit them to Mr. Leek. After Mr. Leek has a chance to review the ordinances, he will report back to the Council with additional information. Official Proceedings of the November 9, 1999 Shakopee City Council Page 2 Bob Sweeney discussed Gregg Voxland' s November 3, 1999 memo regarding year 2000 budget changes . He noted that the Council did not need to take action but did need to recognize that some additional expenses such as vault fire protection and a fire alarm system were going to be appearing. Mr. Sweeney stated that some of the additional expenses appeared to be discretionary. He noted that the Council could make changes to the 2000 budget before it was finalized or do budget amendments as the expenses come up. Mr. Sweeney stated that it made more sense to correct the budget now rather than do budget amendments. Gregg Voxland agreed with Mr. Sweeney. Amundson/Link moved to direct staff to incorporate the additional expenditure changes noted in Gregg Voxland' s November 3, 1999 memo into the 2000 budget. (CC Doc. #280) Motion carried unanimously. Gregg Voxland noted that based on current revenues, the City was running ahead of budget and it would have a $400, 000 surplus . Mr. Voxland questioned whether the Council wanted to reflect the new figures in the year 2000 budget. Bob Sweeney stated that the Council could either revise the budget or just let it be . He noted another option would be to put part of the surplus into buying down levy without a lot of risk. Jane DuBois questioned what effect buying down the levy would have on the building fund. Mr. Sweeney stated it would reduce the potential surplus in the 2000 budget but it would not make it zero because the City uses conservative numbers . Deb Amundson stated that she did not disagree with buying down the levy but she was concerned that the building fund took a significant hit this year. Mr. Sweeney stated that when the time came to address the library issue being paid out of the building fund, the City had sufficient latitude within its surpluses to move funds, other than moving funds from the Capital Improvement Fund, which was not permitted. Ms . DuBois questioned if taxes would be kept at the same level if the Council decided not to buy down the levy. Mr. Sweeney stated it would depend on the tax capacity and the tax capacity rate. He did not think the tax capacity rate would increase significantly because of the big increase in tax capacity. Mr. Sweeney suggested a $300, 000 buy down of the levy, which would still leave $100, 000. He noted that another factor to consider was the special assessment coming back on appeal which would have to be over 10 years and done through debt service levy. Ms . DuBois stated that she would rather have the surplus there and then buy down later in case there was an unforeseen need or event. Mr. Sweeney indicated that there are already surpluses if a need or event would occur. Amundson/Link moved to direct staff to incorporate the increased revenues noted in Gregg Voxland' s November 3, 1999 memo into the 2000 budget. (CC Doc. #280) Motion carried unanimously. The Council entered the Work Session at 6:40 p.m. Official Proceedings of the November 9, 1999 Shakopee City Council Page 3 Planning Commission members present: Gary Morke, Larry Meilleur and Michael Willard. R. Michael Leek reviewed the progress and strategies made to date regarding the moratorium on new residential plats, conditional use permits and planned unit developments. Mr. Leek distributed proposed zoning text amendments based on the work done so far. He noted that the Planning Commission had recommended text amendments in the following areas : Definitions of Types of Residences; Amendments to Residential District Uses and Design Standards; Amendment of Screening Standards and Addition of New Commercial Zones . Mr. Leek stated that the Planning Commission did not recommend an amendment of the conditional use permit process . He also stated that public hearings had not taken place yet regarding the addition of a Planned Residential District and Tree Preservation and Replacement, therefore, the Planning Commission had no recommendations regarding those items at this time. Regarding an amendment of the Conditional Use Permit Process, Mr. Leek stated that the city attorney advised there was case law which could affect the proposed amendment . He stated that staff did not have a strong feeling either way. Jane DuBois questioned which was more restrictive, a conditional use permit or planned unit development. Michael Leek stated that a PUD was probably more restrictive. Regarding the proposed amendment for Neighborhood Commercial, Subd. 5c, Ms . DuBois stated that 20 foot sideline setbacks seemed small . Bob Sweeney stated that it would make sense in the last line of a CUP to have language stating that final decisions come at the City Council level even though the Planning Commission may make a different recommendation. Larry Meilleur stated that the Planning Commission understood that and when it makes a ruling not in favor of someone' s request, it advises them that they have the right to appeal . Bob Sweeney stated that he had reviewed the text amendments and did not see anything he could not live with. He suggested that the Council not try to perfect the amendments because that process could take an indefinite amount of time. Mr. Sweeney stated the Council could amend the amendments if it needed to in the future. Jane DuBois questioned the definition for single family attached dwelling units . Michael Leek stated that the reason the definition was changed was because the Met Council keeps track of housing units and has a specific category for single family attached dwelling units . Mr. Leek stated that the Met Council wanted to make a distinction between townhouses and multiple family dwellings . He indicated that the definition does have some long-term significance for the City when it is discussing density and developing. Ms . DuBois asked whether the proposed definition was the same for the 7-county metro area. Mr. Leek replied that Official Proceedings of the November 9, 1999 Shakopee City Council Page 3 there may be slight differences in the wording but the reporting was consistent. Bob Sweeney noted that the definition specified that a multiple family dwelling shared a common wall as well as a common ceiling and/or floor and that a townhouse shared a common wall but not a common floor. Bob Sweeney stated that it was the consensus of the Council to direct staff to bring the text amendments to the Council in final form. Mr. Willard suggested that a follow-up meeting be held in three months to see how the text amendments were affecting the City. Jane DuBois agreed. Deb Amundson questioned whether staff was concerned about an influx of matters coming to a head once the moratorium ended. Michael Leek stated he did not expect a big backlog. Larry Meilleur stated that the Planning Commission had only scheduled one meeting for each of January, February and March. Michael Leek discussed the draft Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Leek stated that he would like to send the draft plan out to adjacent jurisdictions, i .e. Scott County, the townships and school district for a 30-day review period. He further stated he would like to see the Council adopt a resolution in December submitting the Plan to the Met Council without preliminary approval because of the relatively short time before the submission deadline . Mr. Leek stated that doing so would still give residents the opportunity to discuss the Comp Plan through public hearing. Bob Sweeney suggested that the Council pass a resolution to distribute copies at this time because the Met Council was going to review and probably suggest revisions anyway. Gary Morke noted that many of the maps attached to the plan were dated 1993 . Bruce Loney stated that although final adoption of the maps occurred this year, the maps were drafted in 1993 . It was suggested that the Jackson Township issue should be blended somehow into the Plan. Mr. Sweeney stated that Jackson Township had to modify their Comp Plan and submit it to the County Board. Michael Leek stated that after the Met Council reviews the plan and the City works further with Jackson Township, the map would change. Mark McNeill stated that there was a small area highlighted in white, which was the old Gopher State Truck Stop for which the City was acquiring the adjacent parcel. Mr. McNeill stated the Council needed to decide if the parcel acquisition was part of the overall annexation plan or should it be dealt with in a minor operation. Cletus Link suggested that the City let Jackson Township know what the City' s intentions were. Mr. Leek stated that the City needed to give a formal response to Jackson Township' s annexation agreement and would suggest that the two bodies meet. Official Proceedings of the November 9, 1999 Shakopee City Council Page 5 DuBois/Amundson moved to authorize staff to distribute copies of the draft Comprehensive Plan for review and comment by adjacent jurisdictions . Motion carried unanimously. Amundson/Link moved to adjourn to November 16, 1999 at 7 : 00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7 :31 p.m. Bob Sweeney thanked the Planning Commission for its contribution during the moratorium. Respectfully submitted, di v,cail, ci , %ith S . Cox ty Clerk Janet Vogel Freeman Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA JANUARY 3,2000 Judith Cox, City Clerk, administered the oath of office to Gary Morke, Cletus Link, and Jon Brekke. The Council is now under oath. Mayor Brekke called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. with Council members Link and Morke present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator, Dan Hughes, Chief of Police, and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Council members absent were: Cncls. Amundson and Sweeney. Link/Morke moved to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Brekke opened the public hearing on the proposed Card Club at Canterbury Park. Mayor Brekke announced that the public hearing is to discuss and review the operating plan of Canterbury's Card Club. We hope to learn more about this operation and answer some questions of the Council members and citizens of Shakopee. We will have some dialogue with Canterbury and the Minnesota State Racing Commission this evening. Mark Buesgens, Representative who lives in Jordan was announced to be in the audience. Mayor Brekke now turned the discussion of the Card Club over to Mark McNeill, City Administrator. Mark McNeill approached the podium to report on Canterbury's Card Club. Mr. McNeill mentioned the attendance of Cynthia Piper, of the Minnesota State Racing Commission and John Farrell, also with the Racing Commission. This really is not a formal public hearing but the City Council wanted to discuss this at length and wanted to have time to explore this in depth and therefore a separate public hearing was proposed separate from the regular council meeting. Monday, January 10, 2000, the Minnesota State Racing Commission will conduct their hearing regarding this issue. Staff members have attended many meetings with Canterbury Park Officials, and with the Racing Commission. There are still some unsettled issues but the City still wanted to hold this public meeting and have dialogue with Canterbury and the Racing Commission. Randy Sampson, President of Canterbury Park, approached the podium to outline what was proposed in the operating plan for Canterbury's Card Club. The State legislature gave Canterbury the approval of the Card Club and it was Canterbury Park's responsibility to produce a plan for this card club and submit the plan to the Racing Commission. The Racing Commission meets January 19, 2000 to make the final decision of this Card Club. Pat Cruzen and Deb Jardina were in the audience and available to answer questions. The operating plan was quite voluminous but they would try to highlight some issues and the framework to operate a successful Card Club at Canterbury thus generating revenue for the horse industry. The purpose of the Card Club is to be successful and thereby increasing the purses for the live horse meets, and liven up Minnesota breeders. On December 1, 1999,this operating plan was presented to the Official Proceedings of the January 3, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 2 Racing Commission and they did recommend some minor changes within Canterbury's plan. The Racing Commission did meet with staff, Shakopee Police and the gambling enforcement agency. The Racing Commission will provide an updated copy of the operating plan to City staff as soon as possible. The Racing Commission is interested in getting community issues raised and settled. With this Card Club, Canterbury Park has a large responsibility, and they are engaging experts in the various fields. Canterbury has worked hard to establish a good working relationship with their neighbors and the City. They had a meeting at Canterbury to show the neighbors the plan. Many "experts" have been hired. They intend to keep their integrity at a high level and run a first class operation. Mr. Sampson felt some of the benefits resulting from this Card Club would be: 1) and increase in the purses for live racing, 2) an enhancement of the Minnesota Breeders Industry, 3) securing the longtime viability for Canterbury Park, 4) an increase in the economic activity within the City of Shakopee. This is seen as a win/win situation for the State, City and Canterbury. Cort Holton, attorney and counsel for HPBA, said the Legislature was responsible for this initiative. This actually has been around for quite some time. It is not a new idea at all as some people think. Some of the issues regarding this initiative were: to level the playing field, expansion of gaming, and horse racing survival. Other states have Card Clubs. This one change at an Iowa horseracing track made that track very successful when before the gaming was allowed it was bankrupted. Canterbury would be using a California model based on the success of Hollywood Park racetrack. This model would be styled slightly different, thereby allowing more revenue for the horse industry. The anticipated revenue was the driving force for the legislature. The legislature would map out the framework and Canterbury Park needed to fill in the details and the Racing Commission needs to review and approve/disapprove the Card Club plan. The Canterbury Card Club has an "unbanked" format. That is to say the card players play against each other, the house has no interest in the stakes. This has federal legal significance. Some of the wagering limitations have been scaled back from the original limitations. This plan hopefully allows flexibility for operation within the guidelines of the State Legislature. Pat Cruzen, representing a consulting company which specializes in gaming, approached the podium with a few comments. He showed a diagram of the proposed layout of the card club within Canterbury Park's structure. The two entrances to the Card Club would have security guards as each door to check I.D. and for general security purposes. One door would be opened the entire time and the other door would be on the apron of the track and would be open only during the live racing meet. There will be runners to place bets on the horses for the card players, there will be three different locations for the card tables, (thus differentiating the wagering levels), there will be an outside company running the ATM machine within Canterbury, there will be TV's placed throughout Canterbury, and there would be an extensive surveillance system. The top three security issues were the integrity of the games, happenings in the cage, and happenings in the parimutuel arena. A separate surveillance staff will monitor Canterbury full time. The integrity of the track is one of the top concerns. Deb Jardina, Gaming Manager, said proper conduct would be demanded. Canterbury will have signs posted with the rules of conduct, so everyone will know what is expected of them. There will be no abusive language, swearing or fighting allowed. The conduct code will be enforced from the start making it easier to enforce at a later date. Proper etiquette helps to keep the incident levels down. The integrity Official Proceedings of the January 3, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 3 of the game is very important. The surveillance systems will know what is happening at all times. Training of the staff to observe when an incident is approaching and how to diffuse the incident is extremely important to Canterbury's integrity. The training is addressed in the security plan. There are requirements that are laid out. The security personnel of Canterbury are all involved in law enforcement in some way. The supervision and decisions need to be consistent. We have a wide variety to out betting structure. However, the lower betting stakes will be in the majority. The Racing Commission has very tough security checks that they require. The City's goals are basically the same as Canterbury Park's goals. The low betting tables are the focus for Canterbury, they will be the major income producing area. These tables will be used mainly by recreational bettors. Studies and experience show that there is very limited cheating at the low stakes poker tables. The Racing Commission will do checks on all employees and these checks are very thorough along with the requirement that no one convicted of a felony can work at the race track. The Mayor asked for more questions from the Council. Deb Jardina explained what back line betting was. Back line betting only takes place in California style games. These games will be heavily supervised. The City is concerned about this type of gaming. This type of gaming has been scaled back considerably at the Canterbury Card Club from what Canterbury had initially proposed. Now Canterbury is proposing only two back line tables in their Card Club at this time with one additional surveillance camera. Also, only English will be spoken at the gaming tables. There are hand motions for all games and, therefore, you really do not need to speak. There will be no discrimination. Mayor Brekke asked about the reputation that gangs like this type of game. Canterbury Park does not foresee that gangs will be a problem at this time. Cncl. Morke asked if all dealers would be green to start with. This was thought to be NO. There would be some experienced dealers. There were many applications on hand and the positions were still being advertised along with a job fair that was coming up in the near future. Deb Jardina believes there will be a good mix between the experienced dealers and the"new"dealers. Dick Kruger, Executive Director of the Racing Commission, approached the podium to bring the Council up to date on a few matters. Since November 16, 1999, there have been 11 meetings regarding Canterbury's Card Club operation. The operating plan and the security and surveillance plans have been filed under two separate covers. The Racing Commission is working on language with Canterbury so the Commission on its own motion can make amendments to the operating plan without concurrently involving anyone else, however, the City would be consulted. The Racing Commission is expecting to review this Card Club monthly once it is opened. The Racing Commission will have their public hearing on the Canterbury's Card Club Monday, January 10,2000, Chief Dan Hughes, Shakopee Police Department, approached the podium and said there was a good relationship between Canterbury and the police department. The police department at this time is not Official Proceedings of the January 3, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 4 called out to Canterbury very often. He is estimating that the police may be needed at Canterbury with the card club Thursday through Saturday in the evening hours and Sunday during the day. If this is the case then, these hours would be contracted out with the police department. These contracted out hours would be over and above what the normal entitlement of police protection would be to a taxpaying citizen. Only a few of the Canterbury security officers will be allowed to carry guns but they need to go through training and licensing and file the weapons with the City Police Department. To carry a gun the security person needs to be licensed. There are also license requirements of the Racing Commission. There will be many internal control systems. At this time he was unsure if this would present staffing problems to the police department. If a gambling incident occurs then the gambling enforcement agency is responsible for handling this problem. The Shakopee Police will support prevention, assist with criminal prosecution and collaborate with State Officials whenever possible. Randy Sampson initially made the comment that Canterbury would compensate the City for police costs related to the Card Club. Mayor Brekke asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak on this subject. There was no response from the audience. Mark McNeill again approached the podium. He said there were many issues from the public hearing that needed to be addressed by the City. These issues are: 1) backline betting; 2) betting limits in conjuction with the back line betting; 3) hours of operation; 4) age limits; and 5) reimbursement to the City for start up costs. These concerns can be acted upon tonight or if the Council wishes to think about this overnight, this issue is on the agenda for tomorrow evenings City Council meeting and these concerns can be addressed at that time. Mayor Brekke felt it would be best to wait until the following evenings Council meeting to address the concerns when hopefully there would be a full compliment of Councilors present. The main thread running through this discussion seemed to be the integrity of Canterbury Park. This is still desired and therefore a clean Card Club would need to be run. Morke/Link moved to adjourn to Tuesday, January 4, 2000, at 7:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:38 p.m. rtititj. (1/& dith S. Cox ity Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA JANUARY 4,2000 Mayor Brekke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Link, Morke, and Sweeney present. Cncl. Amundson was absent. Also present: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director, Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Mark McNeill, City Administrator and Paul Snook, EDA Coordinator. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following items were added to the agenda: 15 E.6. Discussion of Shakopee Alternative Water Supply analysis and the DNR comments. 15.E.5. Canterbury Park CUP activities for 2000. Jim Thomson, City Attorney asked that at the end of the meeting there be a closed session to deal with pending litigation. Morke/Link moved to approve the agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously Mayor Brekke commended R. Michael Leek, Larry Dushek, Police officers, City staff members, and volunteer firefighters, etc. for their successful work on the Y2K possible problems and coming into the New Year successfully. The following items were removed from the Consent Agenda: 15.B.1. Continental 95 Fund Sign Variance for Kmart Store - Resolution No. 5301 and Approval of minutes of Sept. 7, Adj. Regular Session and October 5, Regular Session, 1999. The following two items were added to the Consent Agenda: 15. C. 2. Traffic Control Signage Along 5th Avenue and Lewis Street and 15.E.2. Assistant Finance Director Appointment. Link/Morke moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Brekke asked if there were any interested citizens in the audience who wished to address the City Council on any item not on the agenda. There was no response. Sweeney/Link moved to approve the Minutes of Sept. 7, Adj. Regular Session and October 5, Regular Session of 1999. Motion carried with Cncl. Morke abstained. Link/Morke moved to approve the Bills in the amount of $751,356.00. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) There were no public hearings on the Agenda for this evening. A recess was taken at 7:10 for the purpose of conducting the Economic Development Authority meeting. The meeting was reconvened at 7:16 p.m. Official Proceedings of the January 4, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 2 Link/Morke moved to accept with regret the resignation of Ron Stellmaker as Facilities Manager at the Community Center. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Mr. McNeill, City Administrator approached the podium and reported that there was a City-sponsored public meeting held in the Council Chambers on January 3, 2000 on the proposed Card Club at Canterbury Park. At this meeting Canterbury Park gave presentations. Five (5) issues were primarily discussed. There were five (5) issues that staff felt very strongly about and wanted to go on record saying that they felt strongly about these issues. These issues were regarding: back line betting, betting limits, hours of operation, age limit and City expense reimbursement relative to Canterbury Card Club expenses. The City Staff felt perhaps these concerns should be addressed in a letter to Cynthia Piper, Chair of the Minnesota Racing Commission. The Council felt that now would be the appropriate time to discuss the contents of this letter. On January 10, 2000, the Racing Commission is holding its own public hearing and Mayor Brekke will read into the record the contents of the letter. The State Legislature will actually control the laws of the Card Club but the Racing Commission will control the rules of the Card Club. Canterbury Park and the Racing Commission are very willing to work with the City regarding Canterbury's Card Club. Cncl. Morke was not agreeable to the back line betting, he felt the back line betting would only present problems. Mayor Brekke agreed with Mr. Morke and felt the letter should state that it is the City's preference that there be no back line betting and also that the City preferred that the hours of operation be from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. The City wanted Canterbury Card Club to close from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. in an effort to combat compulsive gambling. Cncl. Link agreed with Cncl. Morke and Mayor Brekke regarding the hours of operation and he supported the letter to the Racing Commission. The issue of the betting limits was discussed. The City saw where, at times, these limits could get quite high. This was of concern to them. Cncl. Morke was concerned about the age of the gamblers. He felt the age limit should be 21 because liquor was being served and everyone should have to follow the same rules. This particular issue was deferred to Jim Thomson, City Attorney for clarification. Mr. Thomson said card participants could be in the Card Club Room if they were there for the purpose of playing cards but not for the purpose of procuring alcohol. He said the Racing Commission can impose these age limit restrictions for the Card Club room and he recommends it. The City Council would prefer that only people age 21 or better be allowed in the Card Club room. Cncl. Sweeney felt the letter of change referencing the back line betting, betting limits, gambling age limit and the hours of the card club along with expense compensation to the City regarding the set up of the Card Club by Canterbury was appropriate. Sweeney/Link moved to direct Mayor Brekke to write a letter and sign it incorporating the concerns expressed relating to the proposed Card Club and send it to the Racing Commission on January 10th. Mary Pat Munson, Special Events Manager of Canterbury Park asked that the City delay voting so this can be discussed with Canterbury officials. Ms. Munson was advised that there is no Council meeting scheduled before the Racing Commission hearing on January 101 . Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the January 4, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 3 Mark McNeill approached the podium and reported that each year Canterbury comes before the Council to let the Council know what special activities (that they know about at this time) would be coming up for the year. This year Canterbury has only scheduled snowmobile races, an outdoor concert and the live racing meet. Canterbury can have up to five (5) non-racing events and still be in compliance with the CUP. He explained that there was no action needed on this agenda item. Canterbury seemed to be in compliance with their CUP. The Continental 95 Fund Sign Variance for Kmart Store-Resolution No. 5301, was removed from the Consent Agenda by Cncl. Morke. Cncl. Morke stated that he felt many appeals from the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the Planning Commission were being overturned by the City Council. Something must be wrong someplace in the ordinance and perhaps we need to take a look at the ordinances again. Mayor Brekke commented that the Target variance that was granted was consistent with the sign ordinance. It wasn't long ago when the sign ordinance was brought forth for changes and the Planning Commission voted to leave the ordinance as it is and the Council went with their recommendation. The Kmart sign variance that the council overturned on the Board of Adjustments and Appeals was considerably different from the variance that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals (BOAA) saw. It was now consistent with what was done for the Target store and Mayor Breeke felt it was wise to get all the signage on the west side of the building. Cncl. Link wondered if there was some way the BOAA and the Planning Commission could be given more authority. Perhaps there could also be a liaison between the Planning Commission and the City Council and vice versa. Maybe we need to make a change in the code to allow this additional authority for the Planning Commission. Staff will work with City Attorney to get language that will allow some flexibility to grant sign variances by the BOAA and the Planning Commission. This flexibility will most likely be via language adjusting the square footage allowable on signs. Staff will also look at how other communities handle this problem. Sweeney/Link offered Resolution No. 5301, A Resolution Of The City of Shakopee Upholding The Appeal of Continental 95 Fund L.L.C. And Granting A 166.6 Square Foot Variance To allow A 366.6 Square Foot Sign, Instead of The Permitted 200 Square Feet, On The West Side of the Kmart Building At Vierling Drive And CSAH 17, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Morke wanted follow up on Cncl. Link's and the City Attorney's comments. This further discussion was deferred to the January 25, 2000, workshop. Mr. Leek approached the podium to discuss the three issues regarding the Amcon Construction (Precision Collision) Conditional Use Permit for a Vehicle Repair Facility at Crossroads Center. At the last City Council meeting, this CUP for the vehicle repair shop was approved at least in concept and staff was directed to come back with a Resolution upholding the appeal of Amcon Construction and granting the CUP with conditions that were already attached plus the new conditions that the Council imposed at the last meeting. The conditions that may need discussion this evening are the hours of operation and the air pollution. The applicant is requesting that Saturday hours be included. Official Proceedings of the January 4, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 4 The revised text for Condition "k" (air pollution condition) is suggested to read that Scott County Environmental Services would do an inspection and the applicant would be required to comply with any corrective action requested by Scott County Environmental Services with respect to pollution control. Also the screening issue addressing residents, other than the Meadows South Townhome residents, many require some discussion. Staff did this, but before action on the resolution, staff would like discussion on the two new conditions and the screening issue that Jay Lyle brought forth in his letter. This item was not put on the Consent Agenda because staff proposes discussion before the resolution is acted upon. Bill Platto, Attorney for the applicant, approached the podium and addressed the Council. He said all the conditions were acceptable except the condition relating to the hours of operation. Precision Auto would like the flexibility to be open a few hours on Saturdays. He had a letter from the Meadows South Townhome Association President, Chapin Therres, stating that they were not opposed to the Saturday hours. Usually Saturdays were used for estimating purposes. Some emergency bodywork could be done. The applicant would like condition "m" amended; this condition pertains to hours of operation. He would like some Saturday hours included. Also the applicant has no objection to Condition "k" being amended to have Scott County do an environmental inspection. All the permits that were required were pulled, however, no permits were required by the MPCA or the PCA. Cncl. Morke asked Bill Platto if the doors would be closed when body shop work was being performed. In the summer the doors would be open but all the overhead doors face the by-pass. The major noise would be from the air compressor intake, however, that noise would be very minimal. He was also interested in what was coming out of the chimney stack. Joe Ryan, President of Oppidan and developer of the proposed project, approached the podium to address the council on Jay Lyle's fence issue. He stated he was looking for direction from Council on Mr. Lyle's request. This fence extension pertains to Cub Foods, not to the Precision Auto project. The Council thought as a good will gesture that the extension of the fence to the pond would be a very good idea. Joe Ryan said extending the fence would be a significant cost, but he would do it because Oppidan wants to be a good neighbor to Shakopee. Mayor Brekke and Joe Ryan view this as a separate issue that refers to Cub and the other stores in the Crossroads Center. This fence is not just a Precision Auto issue. This offer of a fence is made to the City separate from the Precision Auto deal. Mayor Brekke said the City appreciates the goodwill efforts of Oppidan. Sweeney/Link moved to waive the building permit fee for the entire fence for Oppidan(on west side of Crossroads Center). Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Link offered Resolution No. 5302, A Resolution Of The City of Shakopee Upholding the Appeal of Amcon Construction Of a Decision Of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, And Granting A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) For Operation of A vehicle Repair Facility In The Crossroads Center, and moved its adoption. Official Proceedings of the January 4, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 5 Cncl. Morke felt this was not a good use for this location. He was opposed to the noise, air pollution and the use. He said he would vote against the CUP. Brekke/Sweeney moved to amend condition "m" the condition pertaining to hours of operation to include Saturday hours. Motion to amend carried 3-1 with Cncl. Morke dissenting. The main motion passed as amended. Motion carried 3 -1 with Cncl. Morke dissenting. Mayor Brekke stated that this conditional use permit for Precision Auto was considerably different from what the BOAA saw. It now had the approval of the Meadows South Townhome residents. Mr. Leek approached the podium and reported on the cost of the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for proposed Valley Green Corporate Center. There is a substantial expansion of cost from the original cost projections. Therefore, this issue is brought before Council for comments on the scope of services and direction as to whether or not to proceed with an agreement based on the scope of services with Bolton and Menk. It was originally estimated that the cost would be somewhere in the neighborhood of$7,000 to $9,000. After the meeting with Ron Roetzel of Bolton and Menk the new cost estimate is now between $35,000 and $37,000. This estimate does not include the impacts of the Shiely mining dewatering impacts. We are looking at impacts on this property. He stated that Valley Green Business Park is willing to participate in the expanded costs on a 50:50 basis up to $35,000. Cncl. Morke asked if an AUAR would be sufficient or would an EAW still be possible. Mr. Leek responded that the AUAR would serve as a substitute for the EAW and/or EIS unless a use comes forward that is not included in the AUAR. Cncl. Sweeney said the studies previously done by Barr and Associates for the Shiely mining operation should be used for the AUAR report. These were extensive studies and if new studies were done it would be just be overkill. Mr. Leek agreed with Cncl. Sweeney on the Barr and Associates studies on the Shiely mining operation. Cncl. Link suggested that the City wait and let an EAW be done at the developer's expense. It was noted by Mayor Brekke that there was a petition and the city staff recommended that an environmental review be done. The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) recommended that an AUAR be performed because there really was no project for an EAW. Mayor Brekke said there was a developer who was willing to pay up to half of the costs of an AUAR; this is a reasonable substitute for an EAW or an EIS. According to Mr. Leek an EAW or an EIS probably would not accomplish all the objectives that the petitioners would like to see. Cncl. Link said he could not support using the taxpayers money for this development at this point. There was a memo from Mr. Leek outlining the scope of the AUAR. The petitioners were concerned that the scope of the AUAR would not meet their concerns. There also was a letter from some members of Shakopee community that suggested that the scope of the AUAR may not meet the concerns of the community. The Shakopee Environmental Protection Association felt the developer should bear the entire cost of the AUAR. They would appreciate a written response. Official Proceedings of the January 4, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 6 Mayor Brekke said there was a public purpose to this AUAR study. There was discussion as to what the end point of this study would be. Mayor Brekke said brief comments would be allowed from Dave Czaja, the petitioner, and Jon Albinson, the property owner representative. Dave Czaja introduced Gary Sorenson, who read a letter from the petitioners, members of the Shakopee Environmental Protection Association, into the record. They are concerned that the AUAR may not meet their concerns. Jon Albinson, representing Valley Green Business Park, said there was no project. A project requires a building proposed to be built; right now all we have is a legal grading permit. The AUAR uses the hypothetical of what could be proposed to be built on the property. There could be a positive outcome of the AUAR. Mr. Leek clarified that the EQB does not require the developer to pay any of the AUAR. The City Council will ultimately make the final decision whether to accept the AUAR's findings, not the residents. The City Attorney clarified that an EAW had been ordered and therefore one had to be done. However, an EAW cannot be done without a project. At this time, there is no project. Mayor Brekke wanted to proceed with the AUAR, which was recommended by the EQB. He felt there was a public purpose to this review. A review had been ordered and this legally needs to be done. He is comfortable with this expenditure for an AUAR. Cncl. Morke asked if the group of citizens, who are the petitioners, are not happy why go ahead with the AUAR? Kathy Gerlach said if all the questions of the EAW are used it will be accepted because all of their issues would be addressed. The Citizens of the Deans Lake area want to be involved in the process. Kathy Gerlach said the AUAR allows you to take into account the cumulative effect. Sweeney/Brekke moved to approve a motion to direct stag; to proceed with the AUAR consistent with the scope of services outlines by Bolton&Menk, Inc. The costs are to split 50:50 between the City and Valley Green Business Park. Dave Czaja approached the podium and stated that if the AUAR covers a parcel as his petition stated, then it will be supported, he wants to be involved in the process as much as possible. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Brekke gave a few comments on the EAW for the Q Prime Site for the Proposed Amphitheater. He said he had recently received word that the comment time had been extended 14 days. He received some new information this evening that he wanted staff to review before commenting. There will be the need for road improvements. Sweeney/Link moved to direct staff to prepare a proposed response for Council's review on the EAW for the Q Prime site for the proposed amphitheater, for the next meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Oficial Proceedings of the January 4, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 7 Bruce Loney approached the podium and reported on the street lighting on Sarazin Street and the lighting for Shakopee Valley Marketplace. Shakopee Valley Marketplace is where the new Target Store will be located. When the site plan for Shakopee Valley Marketplace was approved, this site plan showed street lighting on the plan for Sarazin. This is a public street. There will also be street lighting on 17th Avenue into Target. The fixtures that are proposed to be used are not the standard street lights that Shakopee Public Utilities has in the approved Street Lighting Policy. Therefore, these lights can not/will not be powered or maintained by Shakopee Public Utilities Commission(SPUC). The site plan may have been approved but, there had not been approval from the City Engineer, for the street lights. Bruce Loney noted that there are two options. First, the Special Lighting District created by Oppidan lighting fixtures will be allowed to remain if there is a special lighting agreement between the City and the development for the operation and maintenance cost associated with the street lights. This would result in a cost savings that would be the responsibility of the City or SPUC, thus there would be a savings to the taxpayer or rate payer. The second alternative would be that Oppidan be told they cannot use their street lighting as proposed, but will have to follow the street lighting standards, as per the Street Lighting Policy. The City Staff feels the City is getting a benefit if the developer is allowed to use his type of lighting as long as an agreement is entered into regarding the operation and maintenance of the street lights afforded by Oppidan for Shakopee Valley Marketplace. Sweeney/Morke moved to allow the street lighting system as proposed on the site plan for Shakopee Valley Marketplace in the Sarazin Street right-of-way, and authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an agreement for the street lighting on Sarazin Street, as approved by the City Attorney. This agreement will recognize that SPUC will not be responsible for the power or maintenance of this special lighting district. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Morke moved to direct staff to make the traffic parking sign changes on Lewis Street and 5th Avenue, as per the School District's request letter. (CC Doc. #281) (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Link/Morke moved to recommend authorization of the Performance Pay System as an alternative for use by the Deputy Police Chief position. (CC Doc. #282) Motion carried unanimously. Link/Morke moved to designate the Shakopee Valley News as the official newspaper for the City of Shakopee for the year 2000. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Link/Morke moved to authorize the hiring of Jason D. Bullard for the Assistant Finance Director at $45,540 annually, Step 2, Grade J of the 2000 Pay Plan, effective January 31, 2000, subject to successful pre-employment physical, background and credit checks, and professional assessment. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Sweeney/Morke moved to appoint Clete Link as Acting Mayor for the City of Shakopee for the Year 2000. Motion carried unanimously. The appointment of other officers was deferred to a future meeting. Official Proceedings of the January 4, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 8 Mr. Sweeney addressed the City of Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Alternative Water Supply Analysis and the DNR comments. He provided copies of a letter that was received by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission relative to the application for deepening Well #10 into an aquifer which has been restricted by Statute, except for uses approved by the DNR. He reported that Wells 6 & 7, which are close together, both have relatively high nitrate levels, which have never exceeded the allowable level. Well #10 was drilled, with a permit from the DNR, with the intent of providing blending water for Wells 6 & 7. Well No. 10 is from the Mt. Simon-Hinckley aquifer which is a restricted aquifer needing DNR permission. The water flow from Well 10, in the aquifer where it is presently located, which you can not go below without DNR permission, is not sufficient to allow blending that was intending at the time the well was drilled. Mr. Sweeney explained that SPUC has spent half a million dollars in the Well and has asked the DNR for an exception. Savage was ultimately granted that exception and is in this restricted aquifer, with conditions. The City has serious interest in this issue as well as Shakopee Public Utilities. He suggested that staff; in concert with Mr. Lou VanHout, prepare a resolution for Council discussion supporting the position of SPUC that the City needs the water. The Mayor recessed the meeting at 9:17 p.m. for an executive session to discuss pending litigation. The meeting was re-convened at 9:30 p.m. No action was taken during the executive session. Sweeney/Link moved to adjourn to Tuesday, January 18, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:31 p.m. dith S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 18, 2000 Mayor Brekke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Link, Morke, Amundson and Sweeney present. Also present: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Dan Hughes, Chief of Police; Mark McQuillan, Park and Recreation Director. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following item was added to the agenda: Item No. 16. Council Concerns and the Mayor's report tonight would consist of 4.A. Update on the City of Shakopee Snowmobile Ordinance and 4.B. Plowing of streets and sidewalks on collector streets. Sweeney/Amundson moved to approve the agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Brekke deferred to Police Chief Dan Hughes to update the City Council on the Snowmobile Ordinance. Dan Hughes, Chief of Police, approached the podium to report on the Snowmobile Ordinance for the City of Shakopee. He stated that handouts were available with a summary of the Snowmobile Ordinance at the Police Department. He highlighted some of the points of the Snowmobile Ordinance. The most common complaints against snowmobilers are complaints regarding trespassing and speeding. The Snowmobile Ordinance has not been updated since 1992. This is an opportunity to clarify some new areas where snowmobiling should not be allowed. The City of Shakopee has no snowmobile patrol but does have access to the Scott County Snowmobile Club. Cncl. Sweeney thought perhaps the police department should move in the direction of buying a snowmobile for controlling the snowmobilers. According to Chief Hughes, the police officer most trained in the snowmobile area is the DARE officer, and she is too busy for this snowmobile work during the school year. Policing snowmobilers presents a staffing problem. Mayor Brekke said, we have a responsibility to enforce this snowmobile ordinance, if this creates overtime then overtime is necessary now and this needs to be addressed at a future date. Cncl. Morke asked Chief Hughes if he had any suggestions or modifications for the snowmobile ordinance. Chief Hughes replied that he had none at this time. Mayor Brekke deferred to Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, to report on the City's Policy of Plowing of Streets and Sidewalks, Resolution No. 4786 - A Resolution Adopting A Snow Plowing/Ice Control Policy For the City of Shakopee. Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 2 Bruce Loney approached the podium and reported on City Council Resolution No. 4786. There is a growing need to meet the snow plowing and ice control needs of the citizens of Shakopee. Mr. Loney explained that the City is divided into routes to best serve the population of the City in a timely fashion. The designated snow emergency routes are to provide access to residents and emergency vehicles. There is a priority list for the Public Works Department to assist them in knowing which streets need to be plowed first. The critical hours for the snow emergency routes are the morning and evening rush hours. The most important piece to keep plowed and keep open are the emergency routes. There are three different storm classifications. The City is not staffed for the heaviest snowfall. If the snowfall is around two inches or less only sanding and salting may be required. If the snowfall is between two inch to 8 inches then the policy and the Snow Plowing and Ice Control Policy takes effect. The City of Shakopee does not have a bare pavement policy. Some sidewalks next to collector streets are plowed. Streets are plowed to within two feet of the mailboxes. Landscaping materials are the responsibility of the residents. The City will fix the sod they damaged that has been called into their complaint log regarding sod damage. The City should be receiving two new trucks any day. These trucks each have a wing and a plow and were ordered over one and one/half years ago. Cncl. Amundson asked if residents were responsible for plowing non-City streets and sidewalk removal. The response is yes. The following three items were added to the Consent Agenda: 15. C. 1. 1999-2000 Police Liaison and Educational Services Agreement; 15.E.4. 2000 Liaison Appointments; 15.E.5. Council Meeting Objectives and Procedures. Sweeney/Morke moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Brekke asked if there were any interested citizens in the audience who wished to address the City Council on any item not on the agenda. Mike Hawkins, 1776 Canterbury Road, approached the podium to request a burning permit for two days. As of January 1, 2000, all open burning was banned within the City Limits. Mr. Hawkins had a permit but it expired and he only needed two days to burn a large pile. The permit expired before the burning could be finished because Mr. Hawkins was waiting for the right time and the right time just never came. Cncl. Link suggested that the Fire Chief be contacted on this and then the Council will make their decision. The next Council Meeting is February 1, 2000, and Mr. Hawkins was directed to attend. Sweeney/Link moved to approve the Minutes of September 14, October 12, October 19, and November 3, 1999. Motion carried unanimously with Cncl. Morke abstaining. Sweeney/Morke moved to approve the Bills in the amount of$843,652.86. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 3 Mayor Brekke opened the public hearing on proposed improvements for Gorman Street from 4th Avenue to County Road 17, Project No. 2000-1 - Resolution No. 5303. Bruce Loney approached the podium and reported on the above mentioned improvements. The City Council did order a feasibility report on March 6, 1999 on the proposed improvements for Gorman Street. On December 7, 1999 a report was received and a public hearing date was set. The proposed improvements are for the reconstruction of Gorman Street, from a rural roadway to a urban roadway with utilities being installed. These utilities being: sanitary sewer, storm sewer, installation of watermain, sidewalks and street lighting. Also, proposed is the reconstruction of a 12 inch clay pipe. This pipe needs to be reconstructed whether or not Gorman Street is improved. Gorman Street now is designated as a State Aid street because it connects 4th Avenue and County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 17. This proposed street would be a minor collector and would serve to relieve traffic from CSAH 17. Parking is proposed to be on one side only. This street also serves some commercial property. Most of this property is owned by the City but there are other commercial entities involved. A traffic count was obtained; not all council members agreed with this traffic count. The main issues of this project are: City cost, Shakopee Public Utilities cost (SPUC), and other property owners support for assessments. The cost of this entire project is approximately $796,000.00. The (1) assessments for Gorman Street, (2) the City watermain Loop and Police/Public Works Building, and (3) the Tax Levy for Gorman Street come to a total of approximately $318, 207. The water main loop between the Police Department and SPUC is required by SPUC. The reconstruction of the 12 inch pipe for the sanitary sewer which is in bad shape and needs attention whether the street is improved or not would total approximately $141,500. It would cost approximately $95,000 for the clay pipe improvement and approximately $46,000 for the storm drainage improvement. The total City costs for this project would be approximately $459,700. What is being proposed this evening is of significant Official cost to the City but sooner or later this entire improvement needs to be done and this project is included in the 2000 budget. SPUC met on December 6, 1999, and gave their approval to the support of the entire project. Staff conducted an informational meeting on the Gorman Street project on January 11, 2000, for the property owners. They were sent waivers of assessments based on the feasibility report for the property owners consideration. A total of four persons were present at this meeting, representing five property owners out of the seven that are proposed to be assessed. Out of this meeting came the following issues: 1)Property owners wanted sidewalks on both sides of the street because this was a commercial area [this could be done according to Bruce Loney], 2) the property owners felt the City could do the snow removal and sidewalk maintenance. [Bruce Loney felt this was possible], 3)Parking on Gorman Street was discussed. The property owners preferred parking on both sides. However, parking on the residential side of Gorman Street would be acceptable but not both sides if we use State Aid, [Bruce Loney said parking on the residential side could be done for the property owners]. Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 4 At this time, four out of the seven property owners have signed off on the waivers. One assessment waiver was received by the City. Because of all of the future activity this street will be serving, Cncl. Link thought perhaps the street should be wider than it was being proposed for at this time. There was discussion on the traffic count. Bruce Loney, this evening, was asking the Council if they wanted to support the cost of this project at this time. Staff is recommending that Council order the project plan preparation and provide direction on design issues for concrete sidewalk or bituminous trail, sidewalk maintenance and street parking on one or both sides of the street. Mayor Brekke asked for comments from members of the audience. Laren Holcomb, manager of Gorman Estates, approached the podium and stated that he had concerns regarding entrance/exit for his tenants when this project was up and going. Mr. Loney said it would be written into the contract that access would be provided at all times to the properties on this street. The property owners are in favor of this upgrade. Jerry Hertel, Shakopee 84 Partnership, approached the podium. He owns the convenience center which is anchored by Tom Thumb. He reiterated what Laren Holcomb had said regarding access during construction. He also has some vacant land in this area and has been unable to sell it. He had other commitments and was unable to attend the informational meeting on the Gorman Street improvement. He would like to see his share of the assessments spread over 15-20 years. He was advised that it is City policy to spread assessments over ten years. Mayor Brekke declared the public hearing closed. Morke/Amundson offered Resolution No. 5303, A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And Preparation Of Plans And Specifications For Gorman Street, From 4th Avenue to County Road 17 Project No. 2000-1, and moved its adoption. Cncl. Sweeney felt that this was an extraordinarily expensive project for the taxpayer. As far as he was concerned this street went nowhere for the general taxpayer. He would not support Resolution No 5303. Cncl. Amundson said a reliever to County Road 17 was needed and this would work. Along with this being made a reliever to County road 17 it also was a safety issue in her mind. Mayor Brekke felt the improvement to Gorman Street was necessary and that the trail improvement was important. Cncl. Link thought perhaps the street was undersized but he would support the Resolution. Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 5 Cncl. Morke felt this improvement was needed now. Motion carried 4 - 1 with Cncl. Sweeney dissenting. Mayor Brekke introduced the Canterbury Card Club discussion. Mark McNeill, City Administrator, approached the podium and reported that on the first two Mondays in January, there were two public hearings on the Canterbury Card club issue. The first public hearing was hosted by the City of Shakopee and the second public hearing which was held on January 10, 2000, was hosted by the Minnesota Racing Commission. At this second public hearing, Mayor Brekke read into the record concerns of the City relating to back line betting , betting limits, hours of operation, age limits, and City expense reimbursement. He also questioned what would transpire with a change of ownership. How would this impact Canterbury's Class B License. Dick Krueger, Executive Director of the Racing Commission said there will be safeguards put in place so the transfer of Canterbury's Card Club was not automatic to new owners. The Class B License of Canterbury is being amended now. The Racing Commission decided that back line betting would be allowed on a trial basis. Only two tables would be permitted until it is determined whether back line betting is Official Proceedings of the desirable to fully implement. This could be determined within in six months. As far as the hours of operation are concerned it was determined that the card club would be open 24 hours rather than the 20 hours the City proposed. This hour issue would be reviewed annually. Staff recommends that Canterbury's Card Club proposal be endorsed by the City Council along with the City Council acknowledging the discussion on license transfer, back line betting, and hours of operation. The Minnesota Racing Commission is expected to act on the proposed Plan of Operation of Canterbury's Card Club tomorrow (January 19, 2000) in the City of Shakopee Council Chambers at 1:00 p.m. Cncl. Morke went on record opposed to back line betting even at this time. He felt there was just too great of an opportunity for problems. Also, he was opposed to the 24 hours of operation. He wanted the card gamblers to have to leave. He was pleased with the way the transfer of ownership had been addressed. Cynthia Pieper, Chair of the Minnesota Racing Commission, approached the podium to make a few comments. John Farrell of the Racing Commission and Randy Sampson, President of Canterbury, along with Deb Jarniana, manager of the Card Club at Canterbury and Dick Krueger, Executive Director of the Minnesota Racing Commission were also in attendance at the meeting to respond to ideas related to the Canterbury Card Club. She said the Racing Commission had the same strong concerns as Cncl. Morke and that is why the Racing Commission is asking for a monthly review for all of the Canterbury Card Club. Cynthia Pieper told the City they would like to hear input from them after the Canterbury Card Club has opened. The Racing Commission sat down with the police chief and discussed the security. The Racing Commission has no problem with the way the change of ownership, if that occurs, is addressed. Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 6 The back line betting is only being permitted on a trial basis and the Racing Commission would like the city's input on this when it is being reviewed. The City is to call the Racing Commission if they receive any complaints on this type betting and this will be reviewed monthly. It was felt if there was not a 24 hour opening perhaps a hardship would be created for the club because not enough players would be present when it would reopen. She asked that these hours be given a fair chance and this would be reviewed annually. Also, give Canterbury a fair chance to handle this type betting. Cncl. Amundson felt it was reasonable to give Canterbury this opportunity as long as the City has an opportunity to review and have dialogue with Canterbury and the Racing Commission. She supports Canterbury's Card Club. Mayor Brekke discussed why he is comfortable giving his acceptance to the Plan of Operation for Canterbury's Card Club. There have been many and good compromises. Sweeney/Amundson moved to accept the Plan of Operation for the Canterbury Card Club with the understanding that any transfer or new management would require Racing Commission review, with input by the City; backline betting will be allowed, but on a trial basis with two tables initially; it will be a 24 hour operation, but will have annual review of the hours; and with the modification that there will be monthly review of the operation by the Racing Commission. Mayor Brekke asked Cncl. Sweeney if he would accept a friendly amendment that at the end of the trial period the City would have reasonable notification and opportunity for comment to the Racing Commission. Cncl. Sweeney was not agreeable to the amendment because the Racing Commission would be reviewing the operation monthly. Mayor Brekke/Amundson offered an amendment to the motion requesting that the City have reasonable opportunity for comment and notification of the end of the trial period for back line betting tables. Motion failed 2-2 with Cncl. Sweeney and Link opposed and Cncl. Morke abstaining. Cynthia Pieper asked the Council how long they wanted the trial period for the back line betting tables. Mayor Brekke deferred this to Chief Hughes of the Police Department. Chief Hughes felt that six months would give him enough time to make a recommendation on problems that would arise if the number of tables is expanded. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Morke dissenting. There were no communications or liaison reports this evening. Cncl. Sweeney deferred his liaison report to later in the agenda. Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 7 A recess was taken at 8:25 p.m. for the purpose of conducting the Economic Development Authority meeting. The meeting was reconvened at 8:35 p.m. Mayor Brekke introduced the Q Prime Amphitheater EAW Comments. R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director, approached the podium and reported on his draft of comments on the EAW for Q Prime Amphitheater EAW. He explained that a copy of the comments was requested by the Scott County Administrator, David Unmacht, by January 12, 2000. This was provided, however, it was earmarked"Draft Only, Subject to City Council Approval." Mr. Leek asked for comments from the Council members. There were no changes offered. Sweeney/Amundson moved to ratify the comments on the EAW for the Q-Prime Amphitheater as drafted by Michael Leek and authorize the appropriate officials to submit the comments formally to Scott County (CC DOC# 283). Motion carried unanimously. It is noted by Cncl. Sweeney that Mr. Leek addressed issues in Q Prime's Amphitheater EAW that would have a direct impact on the City of Shakopee. Sweeney/Morke moved to approve the promotion of Elizabeth Handrich from Planning Technician to Planner 1 at Step 1, Grade G, effective January 19, 2000. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Sweeney/Morke moved to withdraw the proposed text amendment to the Shoreland Overlay Zone at this time as recommended by the Planning Commission, and direct staff to schedule a new public hearing before the Planning Commission after completion of at least the draft AURA for Valley Green Corporate Center. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Amundson/Link offered Resolution No. 5305, A Resolution Of The City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Granting Approval Of An Appeal By Continental 89 Fund And Granting a Conditional Use Permit With Revised Conditions For a Retail Facility In The Highway Business (B1) Zone, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Morke moved to accept the resignation of Lynette Walsh from the position of Office Service Worker effective January 21, 2000. It was noted that less than the required two week notice was given. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Leek approached the podium to report to the Council on the request of RLK/Daimler- Chrysler for a concurrent consideration of a preliminary and final plat located south of STH 169 and west of CSAH 17. He explained that under the new ordinance the Planning Commission no longer reviews final plats, therefore, if this is to be reviewed concurrently then a concurrent review would have to occur at the City Council level. There would still be a public hearing before Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 8 the Planning Commission on the preliminary plat. Originally a conditional use permit application to allow multiple structures on one lot was submitted. Staff recommended that this property be platted first because of traffic and roadway issues that would arise because of the three new potential car dealerships. The applicant has since withdrawn his conditional use permit application and is in the process of platting this property. Because this is expected to be a simple review and the timing is an issue, therefore, Daimler-Chrysler is requesting that there be a concurrent review of the preliminary and final plat. It appears that the plat application will include a request for a variance to the width of the buffer in exchange for berming and landscaping to accomplish the buffering between the residentially guided property to the west and the screening along 17th Avenue. The issue before the City Council this evening is the concurrent review of the preliminary and final plats. There was dialogue between Cncl. Sweeney and the City Attorney regarding the time line on preliminary and final plats. Fred Nieman, representative of RLK/Daimler-Chrysler, approached the podium to state the reason they need concurrent review is because these plats need to be approved by March 21, 2000. Mr. Sweeney suggested that this might be a very aggressive schedule. He stated the Council may agree to look at this request concurrently, it does not necessarily mean the plats will get approved concurrently. Morke/Link moved to approve the request of RLK/Daimler-Chrysler to have the City Council review the proposed preliminary and final plats concurrently but reserving the right to act separately on the respective applications. There was additional dialogue on the time line. The City Attorney suggested that the City not relinquish their right to take the full 120 days for review if necessary. The applicant agreed to this statement. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Morke moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute the Joint Powers Agreement for 2000 Traffic Markings, Street Sweeping, Crack Sealing and Seal Coating between the Cities of Burnsville, Apple Valley, Eagan, Lakeville, Rosemount, Savage, Prior Lake and Shakopee, and move it's adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Sweeney/Morke moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to utilize Scott County personnel in the advertising and hiring of two Maintenance Workers for the Public Works Department. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 9 Sweeney/Link moved to authorize payment of$117,500 to Klingelhutz Development Co., from the Sarazin Project No. 1994-10, with funding to be from the Capital Improvement Fund. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Morke offered Resolution No. 5307, A Resolution Accepting Work On The 1999 Sidewalk And Trail Improvements Project No. 1999-4, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Sweeney/Morke moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into the Police Liaison and Educational Services Agreement between Independent School District 720 and the City of Shakopee for the 1999-2000 school year. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mark McQuillan, Parks and Recreation Director, approached the podium to report on and answer questions pertaining to the architectural services for the new park shelter in the John P. Wermerskirchen Park. JEA Architects have offered to provide their services to design the park shelter for 12% of the estimated project cost. $150,000 has been budgeted in the 2000 Parks Capital Improvement Program (CI?) for a new facility. This firm has provided park shelters for many of the neighboring communities. This is to be a warming house with bathrooms and a small picnic shelter. Cncl. Link asked why the costs were so high. Mr. McQuillan explained that part of the reason is that the City has more stringent guidelines to follow because this is a public building. There are no estimated costs at this time for the sewer and water lines that need to be brought in. Mr. McNeill suggested getting some plans for other communities and have the park shelter issue brought back to the table when other plans from other communities are available. Cncl. Link thought the twelve percent figure was way out of line. Sweeney/Link moved to table the architectural services for the park shelter for John P. Wermerskirchen Park and directed that plans for park shelters and warming houses from other communities be looked at and have this issue then brought back to the Council along with additional plans. Motion carried unanimously. There was no motion on the floor when this item was tabled. Sweeney/Morke offered Resolution No. 5304, A Resolution Changing the March 17, 2000 Council Meeting Date, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Sweeney/Morke moved that the Pay Equity Implementation Report be adopted and directed the appropriate City officials to forward this report on to the State Department of Employee Relations. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the January 18, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page 10 Sweeney/Morke moved to affirm the 2000 Liaison appointments for the City Council as recommended by Mayor Brekke and outlined in the January 7, 2000, memo from Mark McNeill (CC Doc. #285). (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Sweeney/Morke moved to endorse City Council meeting objectives and procedures as outlined by Mayor Brekke in his report on the Council Meeting Objectives and Procedures (CC DOC# 284). (Motion carried on the Consent Agenda). There were no council concerns to discuss this evening. There was no other business. Morke/Link moved to adjourn to Tuesday, January 25, 2000, at 5:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. ,e,26, J th S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Corrections—March 21st Items DATE: March 20,2000 4.A. The revised agenda shows a presentation of an Award for Excellence in Affordable housing being made by Commissioner Katherine Hadley of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. This is for the EverGreen Heights development;the City and Valley Green Business Park will be receiving the awards at the Tuesday meeting. The participants in the"Partnership"who have previously received their awards include the Scott County HRA, Carver Scott Educational Cooperative, CAPP Agency, and EverGreen Development Corporation. 15.F.5. Revises the number of jobs being created from 1200,to 1000 (ADC feels more comfortable with the smaller figure). 15.F.8. The number of acres that would be requested for MUSA consideration would be "up to 18",rather than the 8 to 10 listed in the memo. /111J ‘La-ltH Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CHILD CARE PROJECT SCHEDULE Site Acquisition completed Financing Commitments Construction loan commitment June 1,2000 First Mortgage/Remaining grant commitment June 1,2000 Working Drawings and Specifications April 1,2000 Bids May 15,2000 Commencement of Selected Interior Furnishings/Off-Site construction April 1,2000 Site Grading June 1,2000 Site Utilities July 1,2000 Footings/Foundation August 1,2000 Commencement of modular unit construction October 1,2000 Move modules to site May 1,2001 Certificate of Occupancy/Rule 3 Licensing August 15,2001 :# COnsvn l- CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: City Bill List DATE: March 16, 2000 Introduction and Background Attached is a print out showing the division budget status for 2000 based on data entered as of 03/16/00. Also attached is a regular council bill list for invoices processed to date for council approval . Included in the checklist but under the control of the EDA are checks for the EDA General Fund (code 0191) in the amount of $774 .14 and for Seagate (code 9450) in the amount of $0 . 00. Also included in the checklist but under the control of the S.W. Metro Drug Task Force (code 9825) are checks in the amount of $4, 651.44 . Action Requested Move to approve the bills in the amount of $688, 043 .67. CITY OF SHAKOPEE EXPENSES BY DEPARTMENT 03/16/00 CURRENT YEAR ANNUAL MONTH TO PERCENT DEPT DEPT NAME BUDGET ACTUAL DATE EXPENDED 11 MAYOR & COUNCIL 80,130 1,711 17,019 21 12 CITY ADMINISTRATOR 249,600 18,894 47,170 19 13 CITY CLERK 219,290 11,753 37,634 17 15 FINANCE 429,990 36,524 66,550 15 16 LEGAL COUNSEL 298,500 9,180 78,077 26 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 574,780 35,123 83,770 15 18 GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 253,840 8,899 24,686 - 10 31 POLICE 2,173,740 163,526 449,602 21 32 FIRE 705,840 21,924 59,685 8 33 INSPECTION-BLDG-PLMBG-HTG 428,070 37,017 98,399 23 41 ENGINEERING 541,650 33,867 110,127 20 42 STREET MAINTENANCE 904,850 29,719 119,704 13 44 SHOP 156,240 15,759 34,871 22 46 PARK MAINTENANCE 535,430 21,307 62,190 12 91 UNALLOCATED 557,010 335 55,937 10 , TOTAL GENERAL FUND 8,108,960 445,538 1,345,421 17 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 509,990 7,566 49,130 10 TOTAL TRANSIT 509,990 7,566 49,130 10 19 EDA 247,380 5,107 14,019 6 TOTAL EDA 247,380 5,107 14,019 6 < H a) rn 1a w a as away a a a a a a a .,w a a a a aswwwwwww in HHHHHH H H H H H H H --I H H H H H H H H H H H H H H W O H W o 0 M o 04 o EN X Z 0 000000000 I CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tp W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 N a0 N N N N N N N N N H d'd'd'W d'U) t0 N 1.0 E CO :1 0 H N M 0 0 NNSS N N ri x N ( N N ---a) CO CO co U) xxxxxxxxx HHRH HI r1 CO 0 M H H H HH ri ri rl d' UUUUUUUUU t0 t0 t0 t0 l0 t0 N l0 H t0 l0 t0 CO t0 t0 to t0 M ri (k H 000000 ao r) U) 0 0 0 00 0 0 o H 0000 00 M r) d' O O o 0 0 0 0 0 Ol 000000 N to 0 CO O 0 N H H M in O O NNNNNNNNN H rI H H H H ri N CO U) N H N co co 0 co t` co rl r)M r)M M M rl M el �-1 Qi r)m r)r)M c) H rI U) H d' t0 H H H d' r1 r) N H Hl r1 HI HI H ri H H 1`�7 W 'W W d'di s!'v N N Hi N d' r) N N N Tr N d' d' V'd'dr d'V'd'si'd'4/r 003 11 l 1 I I I I I I I I I i 1 I I I 1 11 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 0 " HH r1HIHH N N H N U) H N N N r1 N N U) 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 0 0 C.) U)NMMNH H H O r1 N 0 H HH N H N N N01U)LsaDCAH01H 0 H H ri M M M 01 01 0 01 CO 0 61 01 01 t0 0) d' co rH r1 r)H H H M M d' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 01 01 0 0 0 O 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CA CO C)CO CA CA CD W W W W W W H UUUUUU Z HHHHHH 1� a w O D>91,17✓ FA 04 04 04 c4 g e4 41 M ril aa41 41 awww ° w °v COtflic)U)U ] 0 aH ° Cl) 4) H ZZa 0 q oo w > Mizzzz0WW 000000 ›+ Z U 0) W C) 0 (21 HHHHHH .t1 H Z cool Z AAAAAAAgqA U)U]t)Ulc)U) w A co .-1 m caw A >1 H FHE-iE-1HHEtE+H W W W W W W U Q 4 Q W H 0)N Z H H,� \\\�\\\\\ 000000 a z w t Z Cl) 4 HH Cl) 0 H W [w*+G4 P44 Gw4 w w G44444 aaaaaa 4 Q a dN4 a X X 0000 CI El 0 HHHHHHHHH mcnwcn0U)cococo 0 w zz 0 wwwwwwwww 0) O 41 41 w 1 DD9>>>>�> H El U w' 0 HHHHHHHHH a, 0 co >+ 0 U HHHHHHHEE° AZ Hxggggggxga s lxxxlx Z wa a 0 w 41 WW Z p 0 H 0. HHHHHHHHH 04 a afxa0W4' a H Cl) E+H U N w' 0 COU)ulcocoC]cou)co Ix '0".0'.7'0'00 1-1 w HFC G4 r4 H r) H U HHHHHHHHH 0 0)0)0)0)0)0) w Z w 00 Ix us U ZZZZZZZZZ wwwwwww as HHHHHHHHH 0 V) a z w xaaaaX EA w Z 00 04 w U QQQQQQQPPQEHHHHHH El G4 w' O U MM 114 W H UUUUUU A a 1-4 x HH w i-i1.� ZZZZZZZZZ HHHHHH 0 1t 1-7 U >4 ZZ W W F� W 000000000 HHHHHH 4 H H IHIW�� C.)C.) A H ,'> 1x HHHHHHHHH MC/IC/MC/1M A. A 0000000 lt.. r.1 I) .�4 Z 0al ZZZZZZZ.ZZZZ,'7Z.ZZZ K # 45 K 1c is K * # K ' K is V)d't005Is.0 rsN 00 U)U) 00 00 00 0101 000 00 00 d'd' 00 0 U)t�0o0 co0t-t� MCO010t0 CDU)t- d'd' 00 H r4 d'd' 00 00 t010 U)OU) 00 00 C`N 0101 01U)ln[-0d'HOr) MH01aod'N0)t0 Lir 00 H H Into 00 NN 0101 to(NI ao 00 0101 up ex) to t0 tflaoeCdlCTrNco O d'Nl-d'ri010 U)U) r7 r) MM HH 00 Lft/)- d'd' H to r, d'd' 0101 MM MM d'Mao 01HNNNUI U)N N M a0 op t0 r`N H H m M to to CO OD 4/}4/} N ri M 4/}4/} r)M 4/1-4/1- r1 H 4/1-r/}4/}r?4/1-4/1-U)r1 H .4/1- .4/1-4/1. . 4/}r/} V1-4/1-4/1- 4/1-4/} 4.1}4/1-L} H H N N ri H H H 0 0 H H H H 41-4/ U 1- r? 4/} 4/}r/} 4/}V} 4/1-rH/} 4/1-4/1- 4/}V} W M C4 U W El Cl) W M r)M m rl M M M Cr) ') M M V/ r)M M r) M m M M M M M r)r)M co H H 000000 O O O O 0 O 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C4 RC \\\\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\ W A m MMM rl r) M r) M M M In M el M M M M M M M M Mel MM m m 04 000000 0a 0 O O O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .'�. \\\\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\" 4 C.) 0 0 0000 O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; U m 0 0 0000 0 0 O O 0 O O 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' Wo 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 NNNNCV N N N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N NNNN N 0 a Z N co 01 0 H N M d' to to r a0 T H H en U) U) to to to to to t0 tO tO l0 l0 N Ua4/ to A t0 v.A t0 A to A t0 A to n to A l0 A tO A to A to A l0 A to A t0 nUWW t0 V to V to V W0 V tW0 V WV V tic W0 V to V to V t0 V llO V W0 V tW V to 0 x U U N 4) b1 M ruQ a a a a as aaa as as a a a a a as a s aaaaaaa a to H H H H H H H H H H H R H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H W ri C4 W O O al O C4 O p N z 0 Z Z 000000 I 000000 VO W 000000 ri U N NNNN N H a0 a0 00 W U1 VD r- O1 O H NN M d'Lf)inN co 010 H 0 MMMWMM ODoaOD aDCo000o CO 01 01 CA Ch CA CA cn cn CA CA CA 0 O U U U U U U H H ri rHHHH H ri Co N H ri ri rl rH H ri ri H ri N N H O O O 0 0 0 0 O O H Vr O O O Tr O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O NNNN t0 t0 HHH 0000 M M O O N 00 co C1 H Ci H rH ri ri ri H H MMMMtoto NNN CO OD CO OD CO CO V' I) N NN N Co NopNNNNN rH Zo HriH riHH MMM MMMM H - ri N in N MM H H MHMMMMM V• ri7D W d'dr d'dM N N W V W V'd'dr d' N N Vr dr d' Tr dr N N tN N V"V dr W dr M ODD 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I 000Oes)N r-I ri ri NNNN N N H ri in HV N N MN 41 riHH H U N V'NU)r4ri NNri N NNN H ri N N N If)Ll) H H tf)riNLf)Lf)If)N N 4 d'V'to t`O1 01 V'I`V' Vr V'V•W o1 01 V' V• co t`N 01 Ci M 01 a0 N N N M H 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O 01 0 0 O O 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 EA EI g H co U U I..L Z z H 41 El UUU a 0 QQ+ U U IW7�7 41 aatea'a�G 0 0 0 W W W �W1 H ciaA AAAA?+ ZZZ 14 41 41 41 tWpcW/1cW11cWi� Z z 41 41 al A W ZWZZZzz E+HE+E+a'FC 000 >4>4>4 O W W W W�i H 1 U 0000000 H 1-31-100441:4xxx HHH 0 In X X 0 0 0 pCOWZM]C]C A \\\\ a a a HHHH I I a a PS II 4 0 Cu 0 a Cu Cu a a WW WWWW WWW aaaa Co Co H H O ElElCi E4 WEA WW WWW 44wD4[c4[=r rc4 aaa HHHH N N p A Ei U)U) 0 a aaaaaaa HHHHHH PI El E-4� NNWWXasNC1WHHHWHa Hrp E4E0 000 000 U >r7 WWWWWW a Cam >>>aa> da HHHHHH W Cr)U) 4 I-�I.� H H H H H H 0 0 0 0 a ggggPGg HHH a HHHHHH HFH W W W 01 C1) 0 co cococo0co 444 asC4 HHHHHH UUU 0 as aaaa ti40 ZZZZZZ 0000700 El HHHHHH RAW (I)0) aaaaaaaEXXXXX W W a WW H aaaaaaa QQQQQQQH 11 x a HH CO WwWWWWW W H H CO I FC W 0000UUU a' Q �QQ UUU 4 4 0 0 >1 4 WW Q H UUUUUUU W ZZZzzz aaa 3 A,A X 0000000 0 000000 41w4 a a Ei El A WW \ x 0000000 CO HHHHHH HHH El H W HH X El H Ei El HH E1 }I HHHHHH >4>C>4 as as W W 0 0 W HHU H afxaa:wa:n: 44(4444 WW W W W CO W U 0 a CO HHHHHHH ZZZZZ ZZZ ZZZ a s co 0 c pp A 4 4444444 U * * * * * * * it * * * UI el.Lf N.O O V' O Lf)M aD CA U)Lf)Lf)V' Vr eN O O 0.0 M M U)U) O O O M M 01 01 N C1 M H OD H rl O O Ei tO N N to O a001 O CO t0 Vr Co in M Mrf in in Hri U)in 0101 NN OOO U)U) NN tO O 01 CO 01 Co co H O Eg N V'a,CONtoH CDCOLf)Vr L-CANa0 CO CO CO OD CO MM NN Cr V' 000 foto MM OCDCOr-co N�I-O N 0 rl M I-01 H dr OD tN M N Lf) t0 V)..41 dr t0 01 01 M M rH H 01 01 to tO O O O et/di V}if} cr CO M 4/1.1-1 tIHO rl ri X H t?Lf i?Lf L} H AA-H m i? H H C0 V eM N N 4A•L? M M1r)M f1f)Lf)0 If)U) N L.N 4/4-I• M LI- IV} i/} i/}t/} i/}i/)i/} . . i/}i/} t/}i/} i/}L} 4/3-40- . 41)VI-L} xr4 1.0 U) H t0 t0 H O 4/}40- �s? i/} W M C4 U W H up W MMIM CIM MMM MMMM m m m m m mm m 01 CA C110101010101 01 H H 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C7 4 \\\\\\ \\\ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\\\\\\ \ W A M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M • M Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O L \\\\\\ \\\ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\\\\\\ \ 4 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 O:0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O U W 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W '.T'. 000000 000 0000 O 0 . 0 O C) O0 O O 000000'0 O U0 N NNNN N N N N N N N N N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N N 0 a Z ri N M Vr U) to I- C. C. 0 H N C1 H N N N N N N N Co Co Co Co 0 t0 A 4D A 4) A t0 A t0 A 4) A WA to A ko A t0 A t0 A WA t0 PZ 0 d• * w * V' * dr* w* dr* dr* Vr* C * w* w* dr4. 0 rci - tD V l0 V to V to V to V t0 V t0 V to V t0 V t0 V t0 V tO V to 0 0 M 0 to n3 a p a a a a a a a a a a as a a a a as a a M M M M M MMM MM MM M W x Ul HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH H H H H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d' 0 H W o OW o 04 0 f7 N Z z 0 o I o kip W 0000000 O cr H U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N CO H 000000000'J'J'J'J'J>'J NN N L.N NJ NN N.N.N.N.to N 0100 N 0 000000000 W W W WWW W d'd' 0 M H H HHH HHRH HH NH cr in HHHHHHHHHAAA A A AA CA CN N d' 0 NNNNNNNNNNN HN N M 000000000 CA V]W CqW W W CO OO CO W CO 00 CO OD OO OD co CO OD OD ('Q \0 H p4 G4gr4124c4(1: a,SI}4'>4>4>4y4'1 0 a v' 101 0 N FC 00000000000 00 gg FC4FCFCFCFCggFCv]v]ulv]cocom ww o w E 00000000000 00 >1 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ul O H O o H H H H H H H H H H H 0 0 O M H HrHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH CO ri ' H NNNNNNNNNNN HM d' M R4 d'cr d'd'Cr d'd'M M d'd'd'd'd'd'd' M N in tD d' M M M M M M CO M M CO M N M VD V' W Cr v Cr Cr d'd'W W d'd'd'd'd'd'd'Cr cr M cf. Hd' d'Cr d'Cr W cr V'cr d'd'V' d'd Hst' 0 CO I i i i i I i i i i i i i I i i 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 l l I I U NMlOrINrid'N00NMrINtOrid' H0 H 0 d' HNcrHHHriHHHH HH 0 H O ' co UI UINN M Ul 0..L.in UI L.L-UI Min ri rl in c0 co in OO N N Ul MLS M NN ri UI UI co 01 (y' riririririMNrirHririririrHMN NN ID L- H L,rlmd'riririMririM NC N H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O1 l0 O1 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O1 O CA CA WW 0 0 Un H a'ix a'WH Z a CWpaa)H ) 4 aH U WCa En .) CO W CO Z Z � to W 00 )O H WWWWWW�*7WEll WW 0 t H A HH FC Z. ZZZZZZZZZZZ Zn) Z CO a)WWWWC/)cnc�n�W,��,��ra��,0�,�� El Cl) ai MWMWMMMWcMMM eH'a 04 HHHHHHHaaaaEA�HHHEH+EH-+ O4g H N WWWWWWWWWWW PD H Cl) ZZZZZZZOOZZZZZZZ cuH 3 0 Z aaaaaaaaaaa Wg D W wwwWWWwo4xwWWWWWw DW o a W WWwwwwWWwWW a 0 D C4gc4g xgge4aao4xxa4gg 0X a4 W a HHHE-'HHHHHHH OH W A >> Z O PC WW H U)u wq W] CdFA 0 C)C) li HH a' O4 p4 0 ZZ x a H X 0 El CI) 4 k ila-i H w w a H H ql 0 R: 0 nn O H 0 ZZ 0 H 00 a 0 w c°nc°n w 0 E.)C.) U 1> HHHHHHHHHHH Z co co co Cn CO Ul cn co co co co co fA co cn co 0 Co w H a as.a as as,s as as Oa ua as�a ' U HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH u4c>~ a H 1-1 W C70000000OC70C70C700 HH W 0 o HHHHHHHHHHE-' P a°aaa°°O°°a°a°°° aU4aaaaaaaaa XZ cA 0 F 4444 F 44444 0 riO N000000HNd'0WDO00i( 000 00 IOIO NN M4ONO1 N NNr-d'LON d' UI NI- 00 0 O M00 Ui CD OOOO C3 l0 OMO UI IDNID 000 0O tD lO CC l0 r4 Cs l0 UI 00 OO MOIDOO CO NlW O OO O N ID M d'001 N Ul O O lD O 00003 l0 Ul ri ONN 00 ID ID ID ID M co Ul O CO 00 M 01 M 01 N H M d' 00 OD Ul O H N co N N O l0 lD d'co N co N l0 l0 O N t0 O ID ID O O lD ID Ul Ul M in-,'V?V}Lf Lf+?01 M OO N H Ul ID OD OD O L? ID O co N N ri N cr co OD O tD d'd'd'N rl ID ri N UI in OO 0101 Ch. V} VJ•i?i?N 441•4/4.4D- 0101 M ..CO. ..(/). .4/1-4/} .L} .i/} V}U} L}VT I 4/1- Lf ri ri N ri N Ul N ri ri ri M H M d' ri ri Ul Ul VD-CA- i? VI- VI-L}i? t? V}V?N 01 ID Ul i?V} H H O V} V}V}H VD-i/f sxW 4/)- M IX 0 W H Cl) W O1 O1 O1 01 01 O1 cn 01 01 O1 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 Ul Ln ul Ul Ul ut Ul Ul Ln Ui Ul In U)Ul Ui to H H 0000000000000000 00 0 0 H HHHHH HHH ri HH HH H H C7 FC \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \ \ W 0 M M M M M M M M M M M M CO M M M M M M m M M M M M M M M M M M M M co co M (Y. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00000000000 O O O 0 Zi U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 00000000000 O O O O U W 0000000000000000 O O O O O 00000000000 O O O O _ W "M 0000000000000000 O O O O O 00000000000 O O O O O• 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNNNNNNNNNNN N N N N 0 a Z in ID N CO 01 0 ri N M H 0 co 00 co _ co 01 01 O1 01 0 .4 A ID A ID A ID A ID A ID A lD A ID A ID A ID U .K V K a' K W* a'* d'* a' .K d' .K d'.K d' O 41 V l0 V l0 V ID V lD V ID V IO V ID V W V ID U U , w (1) rn I(( a Ln 0 0 0 0 00 000 0 0 00 00 00 000000000000 w Z H P4 w o o al o Cu X o N Z a zo ko w rl 0 H 0 N H H H N N N M In 10 LO O)0)O)O)0)O)0)O)0)O)01 0) 0O N C.C. OOO L Ln Ln Ln V4 ODO r4 ri rl ri HHH ri riHH M H M in 0)CO H H HO N Tr Tra0 ri 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N 0) co N .4..4. OOO N N U)U) IO NN c0 c0 co a0 00 c0 CO 00 O cc)a000 H H O M H 00 000 H CO UD LO Hri a)OD 000000000000 N O to to 0)0) 000 0 IO HH r4 rl ri 000000000000 0 r-I O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 0 CD LO 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 O H Tr N M Tr H H H H M M CP rl ri N U) ri rl H ri H rl rl rl H rl H H H H .gra C4 N m N N N N N N M M N N N N N M M N N N N N N N N N N N N '.�W V cr w cr cr cr w W V dV CP cr cP dV cr cr cP cr V V cr VP cr CP Kr Tr cr cP cr 0 CO 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 UX H H V H HH rlHri Cr) ri Hcr riH r4 r4 riri W rirlHHHriHrHH N N LnN N N ri ri 1--1HM U)U) cr cP r4 ri M N In in HU1 M Hri N l,N M M l� M IO d' d�M Hri to Nle er cr. d�'d' HHNNHOIHIV O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0) O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W al 0 0]0] 01 01 Z w u]co al U)W W U]co HH CO co CO 01 CA co cn U]Cil co U1 W HH HHZ Z W HH g0 WWW HHHHHHHH Plal HHH HHHHHHHH H al al al al G1 41 41 41 H H H as aaw w H as al al aaa aaaaaaaa a Z H Z as CuCH H Z as coin aaa as Cu a a Cu as H H H �� ��H H H as aaa aaaaaaaa En gU UlUl cnCOpagl �U) Z mai ww `I t CAA00)00 c00 onu)U)coiU)viiU)ci W H W H 0 0 0 0 7 D El 0 0 H H 0 O C7 C7 C7 Ul 0 C7 C7 0 C7 0 C7 C7 A Z Z C7 Z ZZ ZZUI U) Z ZZ qz HH ZZZ..IZZZZZzzz o a a 0 a F'E' EHi\l a01 HH vim HH1FHtiEE+NE+HElEH+[H-� H W a H H 41 C4 g Z 00 Ga G. gggf/gggggggg of w of 1-1 01 aa 0401 01 as ww a°a aaag4aaaaaaaa W El CO W 00 OOH H W 00 ZX as 000 00000000 H U rrl ill Z H P H El itt EE 0 Cil C.) PI H 0 H Of lxi rxi W C7 a s IX C4a s H 00 WUlU1U1UlWUlWUlUICnUl Z P4 r400 co CI) 00 000000000000 H El W 00 H H 00 HH L)C.) VUVUUUUUUUUU 0 0 Z H 00 0 0 C.)C) l 0U 000000000000 qo H H 0 zx H w w a s w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 11 C7 U El ZZ 0 iaa x�4 as as as a a a a a a as H U H H H 0 01 a �� 0wHzwwwwwWwwWwwwU COs HUa 44 C4 C4 000000UUUCIVC.)a Fi F4 F4 Fi FA FA F4 F4 F4 F4 FA F4 3 3 C.)C.) HH HH G+G+G+GaD4a aD4D4D4CT4D4 0 0 04 0 01 a ww CO z ww lx P4 000000000000 U COoas aPw4P4 UHl x HH ci)c41 ,1wi,'si' �� alPw0 Fq PWq c11rei wm Pw0 Pwq P00 POO 0 0 POO c0 CO CO PPO 01 COEl CO CO PEA El PO COil a CA Ho 01 M * * * * * O O0 10 IO O0 0O IO UI ri O M ri er MM OO 000 I.IO M 000 H Ul L)UI M N M 0)H 000 U)U) O 00 MM 00 00 00 H OrHNM 1010 00 NNcP IO crH 000 r-iN00NInU1UlN 10crNP U) u)Lo 1010 U)U) Tr Tr MM to 0TrNI0 r-r- U)Ul HHN I-NO 000 crTrU)LnOIODNu)MNmTrM 0 M 0 0)0) ri H IO IO 10 10 cr VI CO N'V?M U) M M O 0 Ul U)O M N rl O O 0 ri CO cr TP OD In U1 N CO 00 U)M I- in-in- (Qi? moi? i?t? -Win-in- N Lf in- in- in-in- rl rH 40- H rl M Ul N M U) i/?i?i/}i/l•i/ti?M cr rl N t/}M O) tn' in t? t?t? t? t?t?i/? .i/} . in-VI-WC? t? .�(. rl rl ri 0 4.0- i/)} i/)• W M P4 0 W El U) W 1.0 U) U) Ln LO 111 U)U1 Ul U) Lf) N Ul U1 In U1 U1 U)Ul U)U1 In U1 U1 Ln U)U)Ul U) H H H H H H HH HHrl H H r4 HH HH riHrlH rI riH rlHH HH W 4 \ - - - \\ \\\ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ A M MM M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 4 U O O O O O O 0 0 0 O 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°0 0 0 0 U W O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 W '.Z.' O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 UC.) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 a Z w U) IO N 0) 0) O H 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 0 '0 0 Cr 0 0 Xn 10 n IO n 10 n 10 n to A IO A L- n NA N A I-- A N "77Z U A.44 L- * V* dl* V* V is V * cr * * 4, * * 4. V0 3 V l0 V IDV 10 V l0 V IO V to V IO V IO V IO V in V IO _ V IO V U U U) , (1) to RS P4 M xxx xx xxxxx x xx x xx xx x x xx x x x , 0 000 00 00000 0 00 0 00 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 I. X 0 H W o 0u0 0 aI0 aN 0 X z 1 10 W 0 H 0 0 H 0 N N N 00000 M MH U)Ill N O N a0 a)a) N N N N N 0 a0 N 1.0 N b a0 N U) m N ,-1riH 0)0) NNNNN N riN U) Nle d' H Na) 0) N 0 [q a0 aD a0 N L` a0 a0 aD ao a0 CO a0 CO N a0 0 U)U) H Cl) 0)a0 N CA N H W 000 a)a) 00000 O 00 m H H MM a0 M 00 C` to 01 W 000 HH 00000 0 00 U) MM 0)01 N V' 0N N d' O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U)in O 0 0 0 0 O O M 0 O C` O H r-1 H H M M M H H H M M M H H 01 H H H H ri U) M 41 H N H g{x m NNN NN NNNNN M NN M NN NN N in dM N )' N ' W d' d'd'd' d'd' d'd'v'd'v' w d'w v' w w d'w v' ri d'd' s1.' M a' O 00 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I C)g d' co M ri H M H H H H H H H -1 H H H d'H H H H H M ri 111 U CO NUlOO OD 111 Nd'N Nri N LOU) H N N LO CO N O 0141 N O N .iZ H l0NH HN d'd'tOd'M H 1-b M MM C`H d' 0 HH d' O a) O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 01 0 0 O N 41 z z H H z z H H rn KC W M a U H H Z H CU U) CO Cn 111 W \ M U] Ul Ci) Cl) \ Cl) Cl) 0 41 41 www 0 a WW 41 41 w a W w H 04 HH HHH '7. 0 HH HH H 0 H CO H El W as aaa W 0 as as a Cl) 0 a w a a cn aaH HH aaaE H H x as as Cu W x a H a H aaz Z aaazz 0) 0 as as a 0 0 a H a fyi 00H HH "a".701-11-1 H Cn '.7,'7 .�� ) J W 0 H 0 En XX��E CO a� X m W a)CO COCOw Cl) , H Cl) W 0 0 0 0 C7 0 0 CD CO U0 C7 0 0 C7 U U C7 H C9 A H ZZO 00 'zZZC50 Cn i]a z zz zz z z z U z Cil HH'Z, Zi Zi HHH,'Zz \ FCC W HH HH H A W H FC H HHHa CO HH HH HHH HH a HH HH El H Cl H H w ZFwA r4 c4 w w x w a as AA ��a�'aaa AA WW w p �a�a a CO Di. H 0 WWH HH WWWHH HH Z WW WW W W 41 W 0 W C4 0000 0ii00 as as a Ix 0 Cl' 0 a ▪ OOPO A000 f33 O Iz 0 00 00 0 a AC) 0 >4 0 C) C) Cl) 41 H 0 H W 0 0 >+ H a' C)C) Z U U a 0 a HH W W H HH 0 C)) PI P4 El LY. C)C) 0 0µO ,t! 0101 ,� FC C) ai r4 R [a-'-'H crcrwcrd' C) x a �Siyi W W Cl 0V z 0 W www U0 14 LO LC)LI)LI) wm Oa CU.CC) �� H Fa- 1 0 00 > XXX 14 111 NNNNN 0 000 as H AA Cl) IX Cnw H 0 w H W Z x x x W W 1 1 1 1 1 CW7 WW c 0)0)0) n z OO WW �� W z 00 4444iPC w ww H 00 as Cl) 4i a oo zzzzz Z corp ZZ CO C/2 HH Fp a AA w H C 000 00 C..)CC.))C))C) 0 C.)C..) A AA AA A A 41 14 w W W * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 00 NCsCOIs U)Lin O 0)OUINOUI M M NMU) - OO 000 NU1N MM O0 000 .:t.el. OO O H O 0 H U)N d' N N In N 00 M U)4)co ri ri d'd'CO U1 Ul U)O U) 'O O in H H Ln L0 0 0 0 O O O 0 N g00 MU)0)00 Cs1-U) 000U1H10N in LL) 01U)[r 101.0 riNM MU)Ol N N NN U)U)O 0)0) un in r- () to 1.O N M i/}1.0 C`N Ul Ul 00 O t0 0)00 M M c1'N N 0 0 H 0)0 d'O1 M 0 0 10 t0 0.040 N N N N (n XN N in-in- V} V}4/3-H N V}H ill V}%0 4/1-4/)- 4/)-4/}V} H H V}01 O V}V}H In U) H H N H H V}V} ri N N 4/1- 4/1-v3 0 W x a U W Cl)HW U) Ln 1.11 U1 U)In U)Ul Ul U1 L11 U) U)U) 1n In In In U) N U) 111 1n U) U) to H H H ri H H H H ri H H H H ri H ri H rH H H H H H H H H H H C7 1g \ \\\ \\ \\\\\ _ \\ \ \\ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ W A m M M M m M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M . M G1. O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O O X C) O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O C) W O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 Cl) x O 000- --- 00 00000 O •"00 O 00 00 C3 O 00 O 0 O M C) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C) 0Z a 1.O N CO 01 o ri N M d' Ln 1.O C` CO 0) 0 H O O O O H H H . H H H H ri H H N 0 C4 N A N A N A N ASAN Ar- AN At- ANANA N ASANA N z c) w* ' lcW * w * w* w i' w+ d' * w * w* w* w * w* w* a' O 41 1.O V 1.v V 1.n V 1.0 V I V 1.0 V 1.O V 10 V 10 V 1.0 V 10V 1.0 V 1.3 V 1.O V 1.0 O C) t0 w >s tta a 4 M x xxxxxxxx x M M x xxx x xxxx x x xxx to z 0 0 00000000 0 00 00 0 000 0 0000 0 0 000 w ) A CO o OW o aI o N 1214 4 0 x z LO W N H U ON H H d' M M M M M(.1M M 10 Lo L0 10 N t0 Ln Ln UI U1 O O 00 NNNNNNNN 1,1 CO 010 01000 00 0000 0 LOLOLO O N NNNNNNNN to LO ID U11� Ul HHH N NNNN M 0 NNN N CO 0)0)0)0)0)0)ao W N OO 01H U) 0010 a) N 000100 N H U)Lf)U) H al O 00000000 0l d'V' HM 0 000 M 0000 0 0 MMM V' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H M M 0 M 10 0 0 0 H 0 0 0 0 O I H H H O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 M O 0 0 0 H H N MMMMMMMM H HH LO U1 H d'd'd' H HU)Hd' M H H`-IH fX N N NNNNNNNN N NN NN N NN10 N NNNN d' N N N N Wd' M V'd'd'V'V'V'V'V' d' dddd' d' V'd' ' ' ' H V' V'd'd'd' W V' d'd'd' O CO i I Iii ) L l l 1 i i , 1 1 i i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 ) 1 1 1 UE U) O HNOHd•H0d' H U)U) HH H HHO N MHHH H M HHH U N H CO CO H N N N MLO N N N d'VV N N N CO N Ul V'V'N U1 10H H H Q,' co t` H H M M M d'10 N M 00 CO d'V' M M M t` H N d'd'M H M M M M 01 CT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O al Ol 0 0 O O 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WW CO 00 0 Z U) CO co co co IC co co CO co co U)UJ O CO CO W W W ZZ CO CO Wz CO W W W H H H H H H CO CO H H H W H H H H H a a as a HH a s aH a aaa a s E-1E-1E+E•E4E1ElEl a as a ZZ a a az a 010101 H a CO ZZZZZZ Z a as a HH a s 04 a aaa P A CO HHHHHHHH A A A A ig A A A A A A A 0CO CO p0H ggg g gg CO CO CO PIRI CO CO Ca 01 CO COU1W W 0 rC 0 0 0 H H 0 H H H 0 C7 H L7 H 0 C9 C7 C7 A z x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z E4 El H 0 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z H H H H W W W H H H W H H H H !fE�Gi �xa�x7] HHHHHHHH HA HA HA HA HA HA E�ij i s0 fEµ�i: aaa E+ E� ERµi:'a fEµ�i' El Epµi:'Ei CO 3 HHHHHHHH w COCA a'fY. CO AAA 43 DIp4W'A CO CO aWCO a CO a as WW a 01 01 01 a a 0401 A a aaa O co U) ) 1Z fl raw 0 00 ZZ 0 Www 0 0 '0W A 0 000 U i CO U H H O CO a a CO a Z H 4.8 H . . . . . . . . Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 0 0 W CO CO H H Z zW 0000 H UOU)co 0 CO 00000000 CO HH Z U)V]UJU] Z OO a a fxfxfxxafxfxfz a g a a 0al 0a 00000000 CO UU Wa a H� HHRH www > 0 0 00000000 H zz WSW z zzz 0 aO+Os C:1 g g R CO 01 HHiti i-7 H HHH 1.4 .'N W WW X^ WWW O >4 HHHHHHHH 00 comm Ai ZZZZZ 000 CO CO WWWWWWWW UU WW H 3 El HHHH co UUU A 017 NNNNNNNN CO NN UU Z aaa] CO 4 CO zzz iHHHHHHHH H HH 00 RS FG WWWW r� .-7 aaa CO Ci. [r.wWWfl.WWIs W fs4G4 ill NI W 000 0 0000 0 0 000 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 00 0)0) OooC M00010 in N 0 N d'N H NC 011010 H 1010 0100 U)N 00 00 00 Ln Lf) lflo OO 11100Ln Ht000l0 0101 U)10H 01 01 01 d'd' 0)0)0101 00 10Htr)HM 00 00 in U)t`t` 01010 HH N10010M01ML-0 Tr.:14 MNH d'ao( M M d'0010 U)UI rid'V'00 00 00 1--01 co to 0 NM 0101 01NLi)01MHHH01 CO CO V>Lnto 0 0-H 00 d't-d'U1 NN NNd't0(r) MM oo Lncrmcr in-in- M M U)d'10 II)-H M N al N H H Lf t/- V V H H t/}U)10 N d'd' V>Ln H t/?N H H Ln U) N H t?0) L?4n. 4I 4/f i/). 411-4/1-i/? . L} i/f i/}i/? . Ll•4? 4/1• 4/1-4/1- L}i/} (1)- H ?H V d'V H H H N N H H .Yi 4/)4/)- H H Lf i/) 4? 4/1-4/1- 4/1 4//- 0 f0 4/r 4//- PI /rW CO Ix 0 CO H CO CO U) U) 1010101010101010 U) UI Lc) Lc)U) U) 111 U1 Ul U) U)III Ul N Ul UI U)in 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 H H H H H O 4 ,,,,,,,,,,��� -,,. �- ��� - ��,,5- ,, �,,� CO A M m M M M M M M M M m M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M x O O O O O O O o 0 0 o O O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O • U 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 0 0 J CO o O 00000000 0 00 00 O 000 0 0000 0 0 000 CO CO o O 00000000 0 00 00 0 000 0 0000 0 0 000 CO U N N NNNNNNNN N N N N N N N N N N NNNN N N N N N 0 0 a Z 0 H N M d' U) to N 0) 01 0 H N H N N N N N N N N N N M M M O AL N A N A N A N A N A N A C. A N A N A N A N A N A N A n *d'* d'* d' * d'* d' 4c d' * d'* d' 44 W* d' * V'4c d'* V' O 1O V 10 V 10 V 10 V LO V l0 V l0 V 1.0V 10 V 10 V 10 V 10 V 1O V O 0 N w tnof li In 0 0 0 0000 0 0 00000000 0 z 0 00 0 0 000 yr laati .. x 0 H �- a W o O al 0 04 0 N 1 ZZ H 1 U) t0 W w < H U o to s H H H V V V'd'V'V'V'V' In 01 N tD V) N 0 I H N NtD tD H N N N N N N N N N N H N N N 0 NNIS 01 Co HHNN H NNNNNNNN N 'O Co NN N H 000 0 N M NNMM N N CO opOOop op aOO CO 0 Co opo 0 M 0 0 0 H N M 'o H H H H M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m M O O O M 0 0 0 H M N Ln 111 LI)Ln M N 00000000 0 M N 00 0 N 000 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H d' M N V'V'V'V N N M M M M M M M M M M U) Ln U) H LI) H H H Z a N in w N N N N N V' NNNNNNNN M M M M M N N Cr)M M WV' d' M d'V•V'V' V' M V'V•V'V'V'V V'V' V' V' d' V'V' V' d' V'V'V' 0 lx I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 ( 1111 1 1 I I I I I I I 11 1 UI MH H H H H H H H M V 0V'HV•N H H M H H 3. H H H H H U Ln to 0 0)0)HH N 0 LI)LnC`")NNCpo0Co H tD H LOU) N V' CoH I. 4 N to 00 MMMM M co NNt0MMHHH M M Co NN M V' HM V' 0 tD N 0000 O N 00000000 0 0 0 00 0 0 000 a) H W 411414W Ci)U)0) U 0000 0 H W W W 7- (Y W W Z ala Z Cl) H H H 0H 01 Ill a W W W W a) 0 0 H H H W >9> H H W HHRH 4 W W Z m 00 H WWW ISI z H ZZZZ H HHHHHHHH H H H HH a CACAEll H H H HHHH H z z z z z z z z co co 4 4 4 a U4 z H a > 000ZZ XZ w w a aw m coil ZZZ W H W H f-i HHE-A Cr) H 0 0 \ \\ 0 H 000 ZZZZ ",J 0 000000700 m co 0 00 z HHH A W W a WZIWWZIZZZZW W4 ZZZZ \ \ Z Z H Z CO cO co Z > ZZZX HHHHHHHH 4 4 H HH H Cnr]C!] Cu 0 M as as a x AAAAAAW W El HAAHwww H a H HHHH 0 H 00040000 > a Z ZZ U CLi 44 fL. 00 aI 0 000.'7 H ,'n HHHHHHHH Ay' g H HH a Ill W a 000Hs 0W ›'I W WWW Z i COaaal aaal al al H H w 0 Z 01 04 1110 H z Z H W 0 Cl) Z 0o 000 H H CO ZZZZ z 0 H l\r 0 W W W a H IH-1 HHHH H E 0 i-) HH HHH W a U W HHHHkk a H 0 W AA Z HHH a z W a1 00000000 W U 44 H xxx W W U H 00000000 0 0 H 00 ]C ,0 000 I a Z L�I1�L� Cn xxxxxxxx a raa. �0c�0c w w' FyL� 4 El N 4044 Z 00000000 CO 0 0U H H CO El HHHH W Z co co cocnu]Cncam W H co co g a 444 0 I g x 10 w`�wwwwwww 0 El Z 0 R.P. z x www :GEEMEMME E H HH H 1] I7 I7 I7 ix is iI is ix ii ix ix ix ix i. ix ix ix NN L11 L11 00. 0 N 0 0 N NN 00 d'V 3'01h•NN 3.19 00 tDtD SN 000 SN V V run,--1 CO CNN NN 00 OLEONO1 CNN 00 Wt001HNIf1NNt0 SN 00 NN 000 HH CNN 3'0)HW 00 SN MM V'O VILnM 0101 MM V'V'0If1NCo010Ln co Co 0101 00 VILI)01 MM SN 01L.N01 0faq to In 01 01 NN V'01 V'in MN N N N V''V'N II)(Ni+?H H NH H V'V' V'd' U)I`')co U)In N N N N r-N N t? H H N t/} ?iH V>Nin t?Ln f/} t?t? t?i?Cl)-7/}i/} H H V' Cl)-0)- V'V' H H H t/)-H H H t/}t/} Co V'm N t/}t/} . . t/} t/)t/} t/}t/}t/} V}til t/}Cl)- Cl)- t/} Cl)-Cl) (/}t/} Iyi Li)LI) M W0 v}v} VI-v} M0 a U W H co W Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln LI)U) Lf) II) Ln Ln 01 If1 Ln U)U)In In U) U) U)U) U) Ln Ln U)U) H H H HH HHHH H H HHHHHHHH H H H H H H H H H H 0 0 \ \ \ \\\\ \ \ \\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\\ W 0 m M m m M m M M m M M M M M M M M m m M m m m m m M.M a O O O O O O O O O 0 0o 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O Iy. \ \ \ \\\\ \ \ \\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\\ U O O O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 W 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W ]L; 0 0 0 0000 0 0 00000000 0 0 0 00 0 0 000 U0 N N N N N N N N N NNNNNNNN N N N N N N N N N N 0 4 Z M V Ln tD N CO 01 0 H N M w U) W H M M M Cr) M M M V V V' V' V' V' V' 0 D4 N A N A N A N A N A N A N A SA SA SA N A SA SA N A 0 V x VI x VI x VI iI d'* 1..is VI t V'iI VI iI V iI VI is VI i< d'ie V' 0 t0 V lD V tD V to V W V W V WV WV tD V tD V W V tD V tD V Wv 0 0 co a) rn as a a 4 xxxxx x x x x x x x x X w xxxxxxxxxxx x Lf) 00000 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 00000000000 0 ) x w o O U) o a 0 N ix I4 0 01 Z Z 01 0 0 0 0 0 Cr) lc) w 00 000 O1 0U) H U o0 000 () Co lD H Cs)NNNN 1/40 0 N a0 Co NN co c44 00000000000 d' 0O O N W H 00 N 00 H O1 00000000000 N M N o N 000 N H N NN NN NNNNNNNNNNN Co PICOCQ 11 CO Co Co a1 o MO1 H CO Co 0000 00 00000000000 N H W W WWW N 0 H 0 wHwwwCo 0 0 00 r-I 0 Co0o 0 l0 H NH O cv 0 0 OO HH 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O H HHHHr-I H M H H d'Lo M M M HM 1..0 l.0 HHHr-1HHHHHHri H aMMMMM M to m M to 01 N M M NN MM d'd'd'd•d'V Vr)0)NN N P W w d'd'd'w d' d' d' d' H w d' w ' w w d'd' v'w‘:ti w d'd'd'd'er d'd' d' 0 A mit I 1 1 i 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 UENtoHtOr-t H N H H OH 00 H d' 0000 wH NMt0HNHd'Nd'NN H O NIOto N ID to H 1-1 M CO.3. N N U) NN Nr-1 LOLO LCNN Mtt)L-LONN N4 l0l0l0tDH H lD M M Nd' lO H N 1.0 t.0 lDM rir-1riH r-iMNriNHri d' t.I)(0 lO lO 0 0 l0 O O 010 O O O 00 (00 00000000000 0 U)W U)U)U) W CO U) CO W 00U U UU0000 Z HHHHH H H H W W U) H H Co U) CO 0 >D9✓> > > > U U W >'JW14 W H 0444' f:4 1:4 1:6 w' P$ Z Z H p.'aSHH H H wwwww w w w w w a wwaa 104 CO to W CO U) U) U) co Haal to asaH z t ) a z tY, aaaaa CO H H H H 0H "�"� ') 1 U ����� H RC W U) co U) i U)W U) U) zzzzz z z z z W 00000 O W 0 0 HH O x 0 WW 0007C7 C7 A HHHHH H Z H H Z 0 U) U) z0 00 HHZZ Z U)U]U]CO U) U) W Cl) U] W Z \ \ H,Z U)U)U)CO CO CO CO U)U)H H H CO cocomU) W Cl) w H a a H QQQQQQ�W W�� H wwwww w 0 w W a A w w A wW w www w w a w w H U a D a x 0 H H F F H H w w 00000 0 a 0 0 0c4 H FC WH CO CO ZZZZZZZOOWW W 0404040404 a H 0 w wX H H 0Z HH aaaaaaaaaa,00 0 qq A U FEA-4) ,H-1 Z a txaaxx w UUUUU `� w a C.) UU 0 ZZZZZ H U Z HH H M H C4 W W W W ›. H Xq ,1+ H a U U 0 qO �D9>> [� H 'l) ix 14' ZZ H H HH FH W R �d�a�a�a`aIll W 00000 H W H H XZ H U L4 r4 00 El ,7 Z a U) a s 4 H Q CLI W IX a; H 'x'x,at,a,a w wx HH a X a Ww HH U y'>'>'>+D' W x U C.7001 001 0 a w U)U) to AWAAAA A nil U) Z W W0 z 00 ZZ U) ZZZRR a z o H w w zz c.)c.) 00C7C7C7C7C7C7C!00 ,4 ,-1 ".4 00 x �4 co D4 D4 HHHHHHHHHHH ` ` ` ` ` ` 0 0 a a H as as 0a0aa,0aa0aaa0a0aa x 00 O1 NNa0 0 0 00 a to 00 NM to NN to to to to 1001 to 000 HON000000 aO HN N 00/00000 00 00 1O(0 00 If/NN H H 0000 NN OlHH 0 'd' M00Lt)000000LI)Nd' 0 0 l0 0 10 O1 N 0 0 0 0 O1 01 Co CO N to N LO 1/40 0 0 M M H N O1 0 d'd' d'N d'O O1 Moto tow H to H 0 ID N M'O 1-t0 H H 0 0 N N N N d'O to LOU) d'd' t/!•+/? LO H IO 0 0 0 N In t-N O'O(O N co H a%CO 0 t?to Lo 01Hl0 NN 00 VI-CO- NN O1 N,-1 VI-tO HH MH d' Lfl.3.01 NOMNN r1C's N M40-til L- N NOlN NN NN V H N N N HH N H N O CR-t/?H tfr v)- CO-HI) t?t/} N N t/} 1Q• t?t? t? t/)• t/? H oWO tir if} in- 4/3- 41 x c4 U W H U) W in LO to to to in to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to Lo LO N to to Lon to H H HHHriH H H H H HH H H H HH HH riHHHH r-11-1H riri ri H C7 ,.4 \\\\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \ W A M MMM M m m m m M M m m m M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M • m c4 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 4 U 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O W x 00000 O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'0 O U U N N N N N N N N N NN N N N N N N N NNNNNNNNNNN N 0 047 Z N co 01 o H N M d' to l0 N Co 01 H d' d' d' to to to to to to to to to to O DG L- A NA NA NA NA N A NA NA NA N A N A N A N D2 U d'l0 * W* ' '* d'* d'* d' * W 44 d'* d'* d' 41 d1 * d' 4 d' 0Ccl V lD v l0 v l0 v lD v l0 V l0 v l0 v t0 v l0 V l0 V l0 V ,..0 O U 0, 0 M 0 a M x x x x x xxxxx x x x x xx xxxx x x 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00 0000 0 0 w X 0 H x W o Ow o aE0 N Z 1214 X• °Z w H 0 H a0 01 V' O 0) 01 01 0)010) H 0000 01 H 0 0 N N M M 00 00000 M 01 NN HHHH 0) l0 N N 0 HN H NNNNN N W V' d'W NNNN 1 W a) W 0) N a) co aD a0 00 O a0 l0 a) l0 V' d'V' 00 a0 W a0 CO N H O 0 l0 d' O O 00000 N 0 N 0 MM 0000 0 M 0 0 H l0 0 0 00000 V 0 U) H HH 0000 H 00 0 O O O H 0 HHHHH 0 0 0 0 00 0000 0 M H 0) H V' M N H NNNNN H co H M MM V'W M,-I 01 M BMM M N N M N CM M M M M m M N N NN NNNN M Cr W V• V' d' d' W d' d'V'V V'd' d' V W d' V'V V'V'V'd' d V' 0 W ' 1 ' 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 1 1 1111 1 1 U H H H 00 H H H H H H H V' W H H 0000 HHHH H H U M l0 CO N M H aD N N N)n l0 N H CO NN N VVV' N M 4 N M H l0 M M H H VH N M l0 M H WW (') I ' l0 M O O O O O O 00000 0 0 0 0 00 0000 O O H H H H EA U ril U U U0 g 0 a Z w w ZZ w a H 0 R: W H M' H Will H 0 H 0 w H a w w a HH a 0 a x Cl) Z la cn 0 a H HH ZZ a x H 0 H Z a a H a Z ZZ HH. a U UUi W z uu) a U) 4 HH U) Cl) W U 0 H W 0 W W W W W 0 EWn 0 HpH0 U A Z H Z 0 Z Z ZZZZZ H Z 0 00 ZZ Z Z W U) W Z 0 H 00000 'i H Z ZZ WNZH W fx M H x H xxxxx En H H H HH ZZ H�G Ix W Ga H A W C WWWWW Cza a g A0 00 A A H H 0 W W 0 14 01 A W a WWWWW p°4' H a H '.07.07 OOWa 00 0 0 a W E1 H 0 HHHHH a p 0 W WW WWZO 0 A R: U U 0 HH H U] 0 W 00 0 U) HH Z Ix • rwa W H m 0 MM 'a 0 P. 0 Z 0 P. wH w R HAaH A'] UU000 ZZZZZ 'x'x 0 WO< H HHHHH u) (4 00 MMMM O EW W u] ,��i 0 ,a U H H HH aHpHp�;�H;H; U r13 En W H A E E0 n 00000 0 4 El 4 MI CO 4 W aaaa H • 4 a `' °w °a zz zzz wz wz 0 W as 0000 A a 0 Q a Z H A zzzzz z z ZZXZ Z z N 00 NIS OO WW OM 00 NNNNl0 V 00 MM U)lfl NN 00 V'N 000)MON 00 00 M• O 00 vow Op MM NN 00 00000H 00 0101 00 MM10 a0 U) 00010O1000 00 rl 00 WW 00 00 0000 00 l0 W l0 W W N V'V' MM HH HH N 00 l0 l0 V'0 VUl MM MM 0 0 NN HH WW 010) M-W- NN M-M- -M-HV' NN 0000 0000 0000 HL?N aDMM V'O1 NN HH N HH NN HH f?M i?M- M ) MM NN MM M-V) V) V) MHNMO WW HH M- V)t? [?M- M-M- V)V) V)i? M-V)M-M- . V)V) M-M- H .'� V) UM P4 U W H Cn W U) U) U) U) U) U) U)L)Ln U)Ul Ul Ul U) U) MM U)U)Ln U) Ln Ln H El H H H H H H HHHHH H H H H HH HHHH H H 0 4 \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \\\\ \ \ W A m m M m m m mm M M M m m m m MM M M M M m m LY. O O O O O O 00000 0 0 0 0 00 0000 0 ' 0 X \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \\\\ \ \ 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00 0000 0 0 U O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 00 0 O O i.: ' W • N O O O O O O 00000 0 0 0 0 00 0000 0, 0 N U N N N N N N NNNNN N N N N NN NNNN N N 00 a Z 0 H N M V' U) l0 N CO 01 O H N M V H l0 l0 l0 l0 W l0 l0 l0 W l0 N N N N N 0 x A NA NA NA NA NA NA N A NA NA NA NA N A N A NA NA U 4' V'i' d'* V'4s d'i' V'* V'4' d' .k V'i' V'# V'a< V'k V' d' k d'is V' 0 • V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V W V l0 V W V O 0 0 H N CT) rd 04 M pC pCx M xx x x x x x x x xx xx x xx 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 00 ✓ £ J H a ....... w 0 CQ o aI 0 o N 1214 0 X W H H t0 U O 01 N O O H H N M H V• 0 H V• N 01 to to Cl at o m N N M N N t0 a0 V• 01 01 In 01 a1 01 01 to V• O to U1 N 0l Lf) V•H Ol N N W. H 01 H 0 H H N N d•N H N N a0 d• m N co co m 01 H a) H CO 0 a0 0 0 0 N b W. M M H 0 0 N CO CO 0 H H V• O H O O O O 1-a 17 N N 111 N N O H V• M M Cn t'7 f7 U7 O N O N O O XZ O O H H H O U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 El H 01 V• m m m H H H M H M H H 01 H H H H H H H Z a N V• (NI N N w CO m N t!1 m m N m m m N N N N N N 0 W V•V' V• V•V• d• V•V• V• V• V• fit• V• V• V• V•W V•V• V• V•V• O CQ 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 U HH HH H HH 11 00 H H V• H H HH HH H CO 14 U M M U) a0 co H N N N t0 H U1 N m a• V•1• V•H H 411 L11 a m m N H H H H H W. t0 CO t` V• N H V•V• V•m H N N O O O O O O o 0 O t0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cl) H U U W W W W Cl) a Cr) H zUU U U El U Z Cl)a a HH u) H W H \ HU) CO CO u) WW o wco z a >> w > 0 > a >w 43 41 w ww H H•0 W W as H a z a O c4 H H H H H E4 as EIC.) 01 14 a w w w 0 wa as a as Ha. az CO) H u) u)u) a CO El w OC c1)a as a as zz H a UI 0 a as a as O U)0 z iia U) Cl) H `a �a� aiU) Cl) U)U) CO H A z z z z cn z w z W C,H El W 0 0 0 W 00 W 0 U O C7 0 0 CDCD C7 A za z OO E-4 HH z Z H Cl) a H z Hz zz z zz H H W ZZ 4W W H Wal \ r.0 CO lx) U)H H H H H H Ha X HH Z u)u) El > Cl) a H u) a v)H HH H aH D U1) H tA-IA H fs?[WLa0 GWt• al W w w Cwl.a g g P4g ww 0 HH U) 00 w a 0 El 0 z 0w DI al w al al a0 0) 00 W as a Xa g 4 a 0 as as a as oU) w al al A as 0 H a H X a U a 00 0 00 Gil H 4 O U 3 U z z N N H a U U to to a as o H U zz Z z 00 a)a) HH IX 01 as H HH 0 H CO H UU as U) iU o w as cn U El w co C) a �� Z w ao ww p 0 0 4 can z 00 4 4 tto01 H >> 0 a A A i IX H H a4 1 H >> 0 R' tX r4 H H L•14 ww E' wzwz Cl) w C4 x a al Z ww 44 H mcn Z zz w 0 > ETI H a a 0 wm mm U CD AA 0,0, H En co co 00 El Z a a H 4-) 4-1 00 00 rO 03 zz z 00 Ci as 0fx ix 0 0 0 a a as as zz a as 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mtn 1.001.0 N N 00 to to 00 t0 to 01 O1 0 0 0 0 0 H a)a1 Mal 01N to E-1 NON 00 OtotO NN LOO LI ON to 111 HH 0101 LI)LI) NN 00 0,1a00 0aOH H H t0 a011) •'jr7~ NUON mm 000 NN Nin t. I11L[1 NN HH 4040 NN MM 00 010101 t110101 CT 01 CO 01 CO 0 N d•t0 ONN OO Ot0t0 Ll)Lf) Nt001 00 t0t0 in u) HH NN .3..4. UlN V•W a1 • 4l t0t0 411 L1) Ot0( HH t0 H N 41) N N In V•d• N N (441)- M H 4n tn-tn- O O m H H -N 4/1.4/1- V1'VI- H CO-H 4?4/r 4/1- v1-CO- Vr Lr W. v1-vr yr tl>- 41)- 4/)• 40- CO- HHN LOLL) HH MM X 41)-V?4? N t` VT 40- H H U t?t? CO-V1• W W a U w El U1 W 1n U1 to Lo U) to U1 Ln to to L1) to In U) U) to 411 LO U) al U)N H H H H H H H H HH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H C7 4 \\ \ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ W A 01 01 m m m m 01 01 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m % 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U W O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O W •.C•• O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U• U N N N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 a Z U1 to N 03 01 O H N 01 w U1 t0 N CO CI O H N N N N N a0 co co a0 a) a) a) a) a0 CO 01 O x N A NA N A N A t` ANANANANANANA NAN AN A NA N A 0 V• * W* V• * V•* V' * V•* V•* V•* d•* V•* d•* V•* d• * V• * V•* d• * O x to V t0 V to V WV to V WV WV to V t91/ WV t0 V WV to V 1.0 V to V t0 V U U H H 0 M M 04 Mx x MM x x x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxxx 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000 V' z 0 H a ._, W OW o a 0 0 N 0 0 4 z 0 L �] N M 0 0 CV H H M v v H Ln H Ln v kr) l0 N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 m M 01 H 01 a m l0 \ 01 M d' 01 HHHHHHHHHHH N N map H Cl H N N m H N 0 H N N N N N N N N N N N C) 0 0 O O 0) a0 CO 01 M O O 0 a0 W O U)U)CO W O(0 W O H 0 O HH 0 0 - 0 O N N 0 0 0 0 00000000000 0 0 NN O O O N O H V 0 0 N 0 00000000000 O 0 aa O O 0 0 0 0 O O m O O N M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H M M V H H H M H H V' H M Lo in N rc00000(000000 O0 Z P4 N N NN N N N cM N M N M V N N O O M M M M M M M M M 014 I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U I H d' M M H N H M H H H H H H H M M H N H Hct'H HNN U V• N t.f1Lt1 H N H H H H H H M cf. v HHU)o0HNNUNNN 4 V' m ss m lO v M c. m M M M v V' 01 01 H H M M M M v v l0 O O O 0 0 l0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 00000000000 Cl) 0 H W Cl) W Cl) H H 0 Cl) z Cl) w w a w H z H H W H H H W H Z W (x H a H La a a 0 0 W H W WWWWWWWWW H a z zH a a a Cl) a Cl) H C Cl) 000000000 H H H H H H H H H H Z C H H En CD �. En il) X 4 W W WaaMa'aoGMMMMa 0 z z Cl) rn ZWWWWWWWWWW W C7 H 0 0 0 W 0 0 H 0 H H zHCnCnCnWC)CnCnCnW 0 H H zW H 'H H Z Z Cl) W Cl ��' UZNHCLC- HH-iHHH H H HX H FHS H H Cl) X Cl) 0 AH Cx (� g H g uW., 04 H Ell GLI Cl) U 0 wwaaaaaaaaa W H H D W W W Cl) W 0 D 0 W a x H H H H H H H H H H H 04 D DOL a 04 a W a a OL D D W W 4IHHHHHHHHH 0 FO WW 0 0 0 0 0 a W a 0 x Z 33IDDDDDDDD 0 W 0 E EEEEEEEEEEE 0zz Es 0 0 00000000000 U 00000000000 04 H H 0000000000 Cl). - Cl) ( Cl)CCr) a o: a 0 HHHHHHHHHHH M 4 rx W W W 0 0 00000000000 0 E' 0 a H (Wx) a a a a Z Z 0 Z P C Cl) 0 0 fx CDn W Cl) m H H HHHHHHHHHHH z Wal zz 0 0 a a x 0 o 00000000000 a��aa]]��aaw H HH wa > a aH H H 0 0 w aaaaaaaaaaao H 0 Cl) 00 a 0 0 0 0 w W W WWWWWWWWWWW 0 W WW 9 W H 0 0 0 0 W W W WWWWWWWWWWW a0 II M al 0C HH M W E, El H El ,FY 0 0 0iiiii 0000000000 En H H Z > 0 01 D 0 0 U 0 U x a a as M a a co Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) mmCnCnCnCnC)CnCnmCn * * * * K * * * * * * * * MM 00 000 MM MM 0101 00 00 00 00 Loin 00 4.0W NN O0WLOHNc001NHN [-t ULo 00 ULI O WW MM IoW 00 Lolfl 00 00 HH 00 00 mm OOHNNNMLfO V4N gMM 00 00001 00 00 N5 00 00 00 NN 0000 00 HH 0101 U)NO W UMM N 010010 0 MMMMO1VW lOLn HH MM VII 00 HH MMMMHH WW HH NN MM Ln VCM V'lOO1MMM VCM H HH HM-M- M-M- HH HH M-V) 0)-0)- NN M-M- NN HH M-4A- U)l0H Vi V.M01m-H V4N 4.4.41)- Lf L? i?t?+/} L}V} m-4/1- 4/}m- .0 L} . .m- N UM a0 H HH W sA M Z U W El Cl) W Li) Ln MM Ln in Ln Ln Ln to Ln to to M Ln Ln Ln Ln N U)Ln Ln to Ln Ln Ln H H H H HH H H H H H H H H H H H HHHHHHHHHHH 0 4 \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\ \\\\ W 0 m m MM m m m m m m m m m m m M M M M M M M M M M M C4 0 O 00 0 O 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000'00 Z \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\ Z 0 0 O 00 O O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O 0 00000000000 ;, 0 W 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ W x 0 0 00 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 00000000000 0 U N N NN N N N N N -N N N N N N NNNNNNNNNNN 0 0 Z H N M V Ln t0 N 00 01 0 H N M V 1/40 H 01 01 O1 01 01 01 01 01 01 0 O O O 0 O 0Z NA n SA N A NA NA NA NA NA NA WA o0 n a0 n 00 n CO n 00 PZ 0 V'* V'K V' * Vk V'* V'* VV 4. V4* sr is cr* V'4. d'K V'K V''lc V' 0 x l0 W V W V V WV WV W.V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V l0 V W V WV l0 V W 0 0 N e H (1) (51 Cd GU l 000000000 0 0 0 00 0000 000 0 00 0 0 00 00 ✓ X 0 H a ..... w Ow o a 0 0 N 0 z ' W U1 H'D U) H N LO U N NO N H H NNNNNNNN Ul comfort NU101 OD d'LO N 0101 0 HHHHHHHH co co NH HHHH N M M 01 a0H co O 00 OD V)lD NNNNNNNNO CO W H 0) ) NN NN MMM H NN N to Tr d' SN a0 CO a0 GO co a0 a0 a0 N 0) M N N d' OD CO CO a) 0 0 0 a) 0 ci' a0 N 0 0 O O H 00000000 a0 O H M 00 0000 000 0 MM 0 M 00 v'd' 00000000 op H H a) U)U1 0000 UUU 0 Into 0 N H H H H 000000000 0 to 0 00 0000 000 0 00 U) 0 00 00 CO OD OD OD CO OD CO CO H a' H M H H HHHH U1 14 Ln LA H 1 M U1 H H H H a M M M M M M M M M l0 N N N N N N N M M M M CO N N w N N N N N w d'd'd'd'd'Cr d'd'Vr H d' V d''d' d'd'd'd' V'd'd' d' d'd' W cr d'd' c)'11 003 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I U E Tra00(NI Md'M01O) O H c1' HH HN14H d'V'V' H 1414 H H HH HH C) N N M U1 LA to 03 l0 U1 co U1 U1 d'd' U)U1 U1 H LO N LA M U)U) N d' N N H H Q LO lD UD L-t`N H lD l0 N t` t` d'd' r 5 h M r N h H 5 N V' d' U0 d' M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0101D 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O O 0 0 O O 0 O O O Z 0 H - El CO CO w 4 w w U U Z U CO CO CO CO CO H-I z z z z 0) H CO CO CA CO 0 ww wwCTI'J HHH H M 03 DI (I3 DI H a HH HHH0 MMM Z H 0 HH HH El 41 43 wWWWWww as 00041 U)U)U) w a 47 E-' a as as a UUUUUUUUW El 00 a0aC HHH H \ CU C4 as H HHHHHHHH z C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 ,-I*.1,-I a C4H CO C4 C4 CLI Di a99>D9>>>Fl H 00 000q 1Z %Z01 w 0 Z 00 00 U 00000000 mm Vwa 000 0 CO 0 41 am u,m U] wwWwwwwwz Z aaa C4 H w w Ca V)G)V)uacaC)C00 N a) CD C.7 07000 ��..., 0 WH El H 070 00 A N E L E� Com-+CO X H Z FZZ ZZZFA -I F-I E-1 El El CC)) HH H H Z CO H£ 0Hd N H CH-i/H� H H H H H H H H w a a A g g g g g w z z z Z g H Cl) U g g g Lx a 0000000 G4 H w .7 w HHHHHHHH O '.7 H H 41 41 www 0 H H H H 43 0 01 a w w w w a���HaHa�Ha�a w g 0 PI 00 OOOa aaa a ow Cl) Cil X 00 00 2:2:2: 2:E E 0 U ZZHHHH H 000000000 U UUU U UUU0U0UU0 Z a 0000 U H w 01 O1 01 O1 H H H H C4 000000000 z q w Ei HHH H U1 a as r.,) r...r.. 0 000 E-' 0 as wwww FC cu 44 H 04 U 00 aaaa 03 Cu as CO U 111 00 C4 UUUUUUUUU Z w w UC) 0000 aaa a U Z a HH 0HHHHHHHHH (11 U a E-'E-'E-'H 000 0 ZZ H H U)U) 7A 000000000 X Z a)En CI)U)U)U) MI Da al CCI HH H w 000000000 a 0 X 00 0000 coaE a a 43 s 0 ZZ Ca U) as a a a a a as a H 00 0000 4141 X W H HH aaaa HHH E-' EiEl w a ww as wwalb]Wwwww H AAAA a)coU) CO I U) H I ww WW asaawaaaa z W 00 aaaa MMM M I E-l . W HH HH 000000000 0 4 ,.a 1t wwww : Z a as HHE1 H HH > HH ww fit 0 X 44 PIPS 000 0 44 i (x3 HH as H H H ZZ 000 0 HH E•1 E-i HH HH 0)W U)u)co U)U)U)U) (l) U) Cl) U)U) co U)W co U)U)U) U) U)W U) to a)CO U)co * K is is K # * is # # K x UD d'CO OM a'O1 M VD O1 MM MM d'I. '0 oDNV IO N LA ID N 0000 0)0) Ma)H 00 HH 000 C's OD MONL-U)M01N V'UOO NN OO 0000 srt�N 0110 HMH ONOU) O0 laww0 c0 c0 M M 000 1001 1.11ODHNNaD03 ODHN LO Ln SN r-Cs V'L-N lOCsl0HN U1l 0)H 00 lDHaD HH VD l0 l0LON 1000 C) H 0110 N CP MN ID LOU) W to LOU) MU101 4/1.400)-N01 Hto UDTr M M N1--O1 HH [r tr NNtO ao5 t?H CA-CO-CO O t?M t1'r- H H N N M M H t?H t?CA- H t/)-t?N N N W-44-V3- H H ['ar H H N a)d' tQ t? . in-L)- t?t? t? t? CO- t? CA-4/1- L)•t? .to-to-yr t? i0•t/)- U t/)-t/} t/}t) CV CA-4/3-(Nt/N t/) D1 M C4 U w H U) w LA LA 0)01N to In Ul N to U) to LO U1LAA U1 U1 to to to to Ln In to to LOU) LO Lo 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 H H H H H H C7 4 \\\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \\ \\\\ \\\ \ \\ \ \ \\ \\ G7 A M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M m M M m m M M . CO M Y. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 \\\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \\ \\\\ \\\ ' \\ - \ \\ \\ .14 U 00 0000000 O O O 00 0000 000 O 00 O 0 00 00 U w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 W CC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 O UU N N N N N CV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 a Z l0 N CO 01 O H N M cr to l0 C. CO H 0 O O 0 H H H H H H H H H U CO A a0 A CO A CO A CO A CO A O A CO A CO A CO A CO A CO A a) U d' is d'is 'd'i' d'K 'd' is d' * 1' K d'K V is d'is d'i< <t' * d' V w LO WV WV WV l0 V LC. V LO V 40 V l0 V l0 V l0 V LO V lD 0 x U U M H a) tri as a a 4 TTxxx xx TTTTxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx x Ln 0 000 00 0 0 00000000000000000 00000 0 0 0 0 H a ., W om o at 0 0 N z0 r- 1 41 0 wo U H H d' 0100 LO 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 U3 101010 W VD 1010 000 W WOO H 0 H 01OO 10t, N H rt ri ri ri ri riH ri ri.-I ri ri ri rl ri ri ri MMMMM O N CO N ri N N Ol 0 N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V' 0 0 0000 NO H00 OD OD 0000400 Op 000000000000000 1700000 CO 03 0 co O H 0 0 0 0 N M t0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 o 00 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O m N M 10 0 10 0 0 O 0 ri ri ri H ri H H ri ri ri ri H ri rH ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri CO O O H M r-Ln I- HH H H NNNNNNN N N N NNNNNNN NNNNN M H - rt z�fl w H H ri N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M CO M M M M CO m CV Mm W d� N ri N d�d' cr Tr VcN TVdr Cr V TP TP dr W ct'V Tr TV 1.d' V d'V d4 TVCV dr er 0 1 I 11 t I I I I i i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l l l l l l l I I 1 1 1 I I I U H N N N cr d' d' m HH rH riHHHHH ri N ri d'ri ri M d' ri rlN riV H H H U H HHH In In N In 0 M HNN ri 01l001N OONN ritoto Ln MLON ri Ln N ri to 4 H 01 01 O1 N b \0 L- ri H H ri H TV M rH ri Tr H M M M C N L, M ri rl M N CO M 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 10 U] Cl) W W U U H H H H H D D ( Cl) 0 W W W W W W U] U] 0co aD N Q co U1 co Ul W FC 0 0 C7 0 4141414141414141414141414141414141 4341414141 00 00 A 4 O a z z z Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z H H N3 HH H H 00000000000000000 00000 U] U] Itx HH H H xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx U] CO Nti di E-1 4143 D1 D4 oii ow Di a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a al w o D HHW as a s wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwww 0 W W A UUx 00 0 0 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHH A a a y� :>> 00 vHHH �� i a H C4 ggg zz zzzzz m U m 0 wwa HH HHHHH H H Z [r�1 4000 CI W 41 ia0 HU]0 7H UEEEEEOEFEEOEE UUiUU H H H aa W OOOO 00000000000000000 UUUUU WH U hHH W El P El El El aQ U1 U]U] W W U U]U]U]U1 U]En U]U]U]U]U]CO 01 U]U]U]CO U]CO U]CO U] Cl) 0000 2C 2C 2C Cn C)Ci u] 00 XXaCX3333333333333 33333 H H m \\\ 4 U] W U]on U]U]U]U]U]U]CO U]U]U]U]U]U]U]U] U]U]U]U]U] Hz Hz Hz U] U]U]U] HH H H 00000000000000000 00000 0 0 0 ie it .k # it it it # * it it to 0 0 to N d4 10 0 0 0 dr cr cr cr 10 CO 10 01 0 10.N dI 10 01 0 01 01 co 0 L-H o If to L0 0 0 Ln 0 0 NN 0 0 H10 00 0000m o 000 co co NN 010110 N M 010 t0 toHMNHU)H co 10M NNNOON 00 00 00 l0 00 Nri Lo O CD 0D W Nb 0101 riUl CO L",M 01 O Tr CO M d'01 rites OO IDlo 10 0000000/0 00 MM 00 0 10 00 ri d'01 to W 10 d' H H NN ri to ri M Ch ri M N ri CO ri 0 N 0 to N 010 010101 to N co Mm t?Ll• to to M N N to Cl ri l0 H M In CO CO H ri ri t?VT 4/1-VE N H t?VT N ri H H OO 4/T ri dI O0 CO-LE LT CO-LT M in-tn. H H v)-4.0-V} L?L} 41)-V? Lf L}L} V}L}L)•L}V)• LT i0- . L} V}L} H H.-1 CO H r U L} CO-VT V}VT{N C/1 CO- al M lx U W H CO W Ln in Ln to to to to In to in to LO to U)to to to to to In to to to to In to to U1 In In In to Lo H H H rt ri H H H ri H ri ri rH rH ri ri ri ri rH ri ri rt ri ri ri rl ri ri ri rt rl ri H H H U' 4 \ \\\ .' \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\ \ \ \ W A M M M m M M m m M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M MMM M m m M W O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 O 0 O O O O O 0 0 O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O o '0 .'�. \ \\\ \\ \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\ \ \ \ !. U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 O O O O W O O O o O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O W x O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O o O O U U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 04 CV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 a Z 0) O H N m to 10 N co 01 H H N N N N N O '�(. A 0 A 00 A 00 A 0 A OO A 00 A co A co A OO A co A ril U it w it d' el. 41 dI 41 di* le de 'K V 91 l.4, '4'0 V l0 V to V to V W V l0 V W V lD V 10 V 10 V W V O U Tr H a) trias a ]C0 00 00 Wx0 0 0 00x 000xpC000 0C a C4 a a a .-. i LO 00 00 00 000 0 0 000 0000000 00 HH H H H V' 0 H a O W o CUE 0 0 N z MMM W i LO 0 Lnwd+ CO Na)w H H MO Nr-IH H H NW' NNNNNN N co c0 L- co 0 Mcr HH NN Wmel c0 V' • • • 0000000 UI LO 01 0 0 0 NN Hao MM OHH N N crTrV NNNNNNN U)H H N N N cOW WW 01O\ WWW N CO HHH oO0)o CO CO W Na) U) V) W N W H 00 MM 00 000 N O 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 N N V O O Ln 0 00 VV HH N N N H O H rl H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NL. H 0 0 TV 0 00 00 00 000 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 N N 00 H H HH HH HH MMM CO CO rlHrl McrHHHHH M V' rl co M N 0) 1Y4 NN MM MM NNN M CO MMM NNNNNNN NN N dV d' H H W VV VV VV cr cr W V4 V• cP d•cr CP cP VN cf.Tr V'Tr TP TV cr V• V N N OW 11 II1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I 1 I I 1 O1 C4 nil WClO HH Hri crri ri riOTrHraHHHN riN U) U) U) N N O U)Ll) Cl(') MM LOU)O V.4 V' MNL NNNMncrN CPM N N N rl H F* Lel` HH MM NNH ri N Lst0tp MMM M CP cP l0 cr L- a) co co al 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 O 0 0 V)LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0) 0) 0 0 UU WW 00 WW U U W W HHH ilMU)MM M z .. Zi >> ZWWwWW z w w W U)U] HH HH WWW WHHHHH W H 0 WW 'JD �� H HH WW MIX w w www H00000 H a A H a as for tot zzz 0 0 UUU) Hzaaaaa H aa PG 0'.7 HHH > > FGR Ai H 0'r7 0'r7 0 H 0 04 W W H 0 U)U) zz 7.z OMM f:4 IX W W zzz CQU]U)UIU) U1 co O 0 H W 00 00 00 U) U) OOO Ht7t7000 HH 0 0 A ZZ HH HH 000 HHH OZZZZZ 4 z z W W o HH MM MM ZZ z >1 U)U)U) z W H H H H H W H U) co co µHµEE tU) MM HHH El H U)COU)www HEHH�`HHH X H ,� N f�P4 WW WW 11414 aa Aa.A a a a a[ra ,aHg(�ggg OH 0 0 W co H WW 00 00 HHH H H 000 HOWWWWW ( W a c4 W H 00 004 0a MMM 0 0 WWW aw00000 WO 0 a a w o N U 0 U) w z [A1 H U H H H z w co 2 MM x 00 asa a 22 U)M H "L"G ,U £ H ^yam H 0 22 PP 2 000 0000000 S3 H a w 222 0000000 co co z 0 C7 C9 W W ft,ft.4 MM 41 aa W H H H W H H HCOCOH (24 MM C7 000 gg 000 gq3gqzp3Aq3Azqq3qqq3 v)u) W H a X a ,ET HH >1>4 000 U)U)U] xx�xxxx P:a' 2 0 U Pd U] UU tt)) HHH 2 U)U)U) U)U)U)U1U)0)00 PO PO U) U H HH WW �� aaa H 444 0000000. xx PO N WHW A u]U)WWU)U)W HH 0 H L>+ H i a HH U)U)U) H EW., �!�!t2! .A'padOa0 li H 0.7 a' 4 0 U]U] Q� HH COMM 000 Cil a L U)U)U) 0R', ,�Q', ,00 I a P° 00 �A ›� 59� › 3 S3S >4>4>4>4>4>4>4 NN A A A H X * * * * * * * * * * * * * 000 WO O W MO M UO N da cr to U) LO tO 000.0 Ul N U)W 0)M Lf)O CD Tr 11 U)U) 00 00 00 O ET V M co LO M 0)N MOM H(---cr Cl 0)0) %0 t0 0000 N Cl al 14 cr to W N U)co co Hri 00 00 Tr 14U) 0iHHN MNtO Cl).)o 01 U1 NL- t0Ua c0 c0 NcrNr-1 U)0)HrierMtOrl ONN rirl 00 00 to u) to 010)0) Nc00 ODOIN N.1.11 TV Cs NN MM MHL-N HHN rl t?V)-W01 01 W N NN 00 00 HrA H : Ariel crTr01 L?MTr rlMt?Ul OO riH HMWH L}L}Hi? HM NMW co U)• LOU) un to to to (I LftQL} V}t?t? V)-V) 41)-t/l- V} . . 4.0-4/1• V)• .i? . V} t/}t? V1•411-411- V}tQ 4/1-411- LJ-V)- U)- NN H N U U)-V} yr U)- W M O4 0 W H U) W MM MM MM U)U)U) M U) U)U)U) un un U)N Ln Ul Ul Ln U) to to t0 to t0 H H HH rH ri rl ri HHH ri ri riHH HrlHH rl riH Hrl H H H ri H 0 4 \\ \\ \\ \\\ \ \ \\\ \\\\\\\ �\ \ \ \ \ *--- w A co co M M CO M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M W O O O O O O 000 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 . 0 .4 0 00 00 00 000 0 O 000 0000000 00 O 0 0 0 0 0 W 00 00 00 000 O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 UW �" 00 00 00 000 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 ' O 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 N N N N N N N N 0 a 2 0 H N CO V U) LO N CO 0) 0 H N M H M M M Cl M Cl M M_ m M cr Vr Va Va O 0 a) * V1 * 1. * a)1. * co n co n co A co A 0 A co A co n co A co A 00 0 .W'Li t0 V W V t0 V t.1) V tWO V W V • W V cr to * .44 * .44 t0* lc V'* V'it V' V W V t0 V V WV WV W 0 0 in H IV rn Ai a a a a a a a a H H H H H H H N d' 0 H p i _. W 0M o aX 0 o z N 0z z W 10 0 H H d' In O1 10 O O o O O O d. N N N N W 10 VD N N 01 H 0 0 0 0 in In H O 0 0 0 V V, 10 H M H N 0 00 0 M H H M dN ' H H P rzl0 CCI N N V V, N N 1 U N N L!) U) N N N. O H H (N N H H N A' 01 0l 0 0 0) O1 0 o o 01 01 O O 0% W U O W W H A H H H 0 04 > a H W a 1:4 H x U 0 w Cl) Cl) to 0 A 01 z W z ✓ O 0 Cl) (fl H CO 0 x g 0 E I a o 0) W U 01 d, H N 1-1 rx o w W o u) W A m m a O N E' a N N 0 E-r z W C0 0 4 Cu A . 0 H g a a a E0 7 a w H H U 41 0i w w w w Fa 3 3 w PI 0 ▪ a A A 0 H E-i z X Z c7 M a z w - - z 0 W Cr: 0 0 00 g E a aa. Cl) co a * * * * * * * * 00 ‘1,V HH 00 Mel 1010 Mel N E1 0 L N N U)In OO in Ln 0101 00 10 V NCO m(I) 0101 00 1010 0a) MM M 0 d'd'10 N 01 01 N N 0 0 01 01 In In 10 10 VV HM 0O inN NN N V} N VT 0 i?i? CO-V} V?V} CA-t/} In N tO 10. a0 C+4 H H (?VT 00 O 40-V? 10 O th- x a 0 W H H H H H H H H H H W A M M M M M M M Q: O O O O O O O . .�G U O O O O O O O 0 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . x 0 N N N N N N N 0 0 1-1 Z in Tr In 10 N CO 01 7c0 0 *DG aH Oo n w A UUo n cogA cocA ao A Coo n . �* * * * * * O 'WI' 10 V 10 V 10 V 10 V to V 10 V t0 V O 0 H. . a) to ro w l cr 0 H 0 0 0 N z t0 H • O Cl t!) d1 CO M N U) 0 a0 Cl l0 'd' N 0 dl N H 01 H 1/4.0 M O lD 01 CO H N M U1 d' l0 d' N 1/40 et, LI) 0 .D H to Cl N 03 00 03 N H Cl O N0 N l0 O O tD LI) H 01 H 10 N N 1.0 -31 . • L} . t/f • . 41)- co. O N V N V LI) LI) U) N N t!) d, OD DD 4/)- LI) i/? 40- L} LI) H H l0 N 4/} aD N 4/)' H 4/1- 4/)- L} i? 1p ZM W w E E 0 H H 0 H e. a a G4 ww zz H a s � W z w a >+ W H H a' a HHj O U) G+ A co W 04 a M V, H s-] C7 0 til [4 E--, a . H H A H 04 z a E W Ti H H W A a, m ch rn Z C]'+ 0 LEW.� I-1 U C7 A H W Cu U H H H C!) u3 a a H v3 a) w .r. H M er U) O H N 01 N O O O O O H LI) 0 O H H H N N M cr U) H M cf. LL) co co N O H H H cr eN d', er sr is t� t• t� N [� aD a H 4t it it it it it it it it it it it it it it it n 0E000 0 0, 0 x 0 wwwwwwwwww wwwww 7. • CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Jared D. Andrews, Planner I SUBJECT: Vacation of a portion of Webster Street Right-of-Way APPLICANT: Shakopee Services MEETING DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: At its February 29,2000 meeting the City Council set a public hearing to initiate the vacation of a portion of Webster Street Right-of-Way in the Original Shakopee Plat. This portion of right-of-way is between 3"and 4th Avenue. It has not been improved. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed vacation at its meeting of March 9,2000, and recommended vacation of the right-of-way with a unanimous vote. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve Resolution No. 5323 approving the requested vacation and move its adoption. 2. Deny the request to vacate the subject right-of-way. 3. Table the proposed vacation to allow time to provide additional information. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and approve Resolution No. 5323. . ed D. Andrews Planner I i:\commdev\cc\2000\cc0321\VACshakservrs.doc NO. 5323 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE VACATING A PORTION OF WEBSTER STREET IN THE ORIGINAL SHAKOPEE PLAT, CITY OF SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY,MINNESOTA WHEREAS,it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council that the portion of Webster Street which is north of 4th Avenue and south of?'Avenue in the Original Shakopee Plat,City of Shakopee,County of Scott, State of Minnesota, serves no public use or interest;and WHEREAS, the public hearing to consider the action to vacate was held in the Council Chambers of the City Hal in the City of Shakopee at 7:00 P.M. on the 21d day of March, 2000; and WHEREAS, two weeks published notice was given in the SHAKOPF.F, VALLEY NEWS; and by posting such notice on the bulletin boards on the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse, at the U.S. Post Office, at the Shakopee Public Library, and in the Shakopee City Hall; and WHEREAS, all persons desiring to be heard on the matter were given an opportunity to be heard at the public hearing in the Council Chambers in the City of Shakopee. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA: 1. That it finds and determines that the vacation hereinafter described is in the public interest; and 2. That the right-of-way over the following described property in the County of Scott, State of Minnesota, serves no further public purpose: That part of Webster Street which lies north of 4t''Avenue and south of 3"d Avenue, all in the Original Shakopee Plat, City of Shakopee, County of Scott,Minnesota 3. That the right-of-way described above is hereby vacated subject to the following condition; That the City reserves to itself, its licensees, and frau hise holders a perpetual drainage and utility easement on, under, and over the area vacated for utilities, with the right to install, maintain, repair, lay and relay utilities by the City, its licensees andfranchise holders. 4. After the adoption of the Resolution, the City Clerk shall file certified copies hereof with the County Auditor and County Recorder of Scott County. RESOLUTION NO. 5323 Page 2 of 2 Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, Held the day of , 2000. Jon P. Brekke, Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk PREPARED BY: City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 5323 I, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the attached is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 5323, presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the 21d day of March, 2000, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. Dated this day of , 2000 Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SEAL ,.ii1l EXHIBIS u T A . lt"Wsi1111111 0 too ---R4,4'Ii lPai1vi7P06M11AK1E1il1Rt1iIi6iE V1iItvisiilti1ffilIliT1C5 I„- d,i-.-i1*:T4-0.i11l7111a\i1iit\id1iI gI"I tZ�1 i, tis,.. , 1 �1111>, t/t1 it14i °St6 ” tlt0S i1tl _ �'1 ittttt lIttt�- - 1��t111 111 �6 1111.,x-=-. 611111 s. 111th ,��ttttt: ��t����'- 1,1111�11 w tti itl �11i /It.• � ;; A Atti t�r�, ,�., 11i� tit � t5lttoi" 0titt n5E B, W \" / di I R 1 G'�`-- --'- i Mk,r�saota Corrsetlanai _.-�^ Facmyr H1 ,moi -4- ! , L___1 --- 7 i �� W E SHAKOPEE S �.�ettr�aao� Proposed Vacation of Right-of-Way Parcel Boundaries (� Zoning Boundaries 02/29/00 /3 • CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Jared D. Andrews, Planner I SUBJECT: Vacation of easements in Killarney Hills Addition APPLICANT: EverGreen Real Estate MEETING DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: At its February 29,2000 meeting the City Council set a public hearing to initiate the vacation of easements in the Killarney Hills. These easements were dedicated with the Killarney Dills Plat for rural residential lots and street rights of way. The rights-of-way have been vacated,but the easements were not. This vacation is necessaryfor the child day care facility which is planned for the area. PLANNING COMIVIISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed vacation at its meeting of March 9,2000, and recommended vacation of the right-of-way with a unanimous vote. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve Resolution No. 5325 approving the requested vacation and move its adoption. 2. Deny the request to vacate the subject easement. 3. Table the proposed vacation to allow time to provide additional information. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and approve Resolution No. 5325. Jared D. Andrews Planner I i:\commdev\cc\2000\cc0321\VACeasements.doc RESOLUTION NO. 5325 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE VACATING EASEMENTS DEDICATED IN THE KILARNEY HILLS ADDITION, CITY OF SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY,MINNESOTA WHEREAS,it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council that the easements in the property as described in Exhibit A, City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, serve no public use or interest;and WHEREAS, the public hearing to consider the action to vacate was held in the Council Chambers of the City Hall in the City of Shakopee at 7:00 P.M. on the 21'day of March, 2000; and WHEREAS, two weeks published notice was given in the SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS; and by posting such notice on the bulletin boards on the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse, at the U.S. Post Office, at the Shakopee Public Library, and in the Shakopee City Hall; and WHEREAS, all persons desiring to be heard on the matter were given an opportunity to be heard at the public hearing in the Council Chambers in the City of Shakopee. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA: 1. That it finds and determines that the vacation hereinafter described is in the public interest; and 2. That the easements on the property as described in Exhibit A, serves no further public purpose. 3. That the easement as described above is hereby vacated subject to the following condition: a. That a new 10 foot easement will be dedicated along the north property line adjacent to Eagle Creek Boulevard for drainage and utility purposes. 4. After the adoption of the Resolution, the City Clerk shall file certified copies hereof with the County Auditor and County Recorder of Scott County. RESOLUTION NO. 5325 Page 2 of 2 Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Held the day of , 2000. Jon P. Brekke, Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk PREPARED BY: City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 3 Exhibit A Attachment to Application for Vacation of Easement- Shakopee Legal Description of Parcels That part of Tracts A and B described below: Tract A. That partof Lot 1, Bl , Killarney lls and vacateSharon Parkway, shown as Parcel 65 on Minnesotaock1DepartmentHiof Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 70-8 as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota; Tax ID No: 27-047001-0 Tract B. That part of Lots 2, 3, and 4, Block 1, Killarney Hills and vacated Sharon. Parkway, shown as Parcel 66 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 70-19 as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota; Tax ID No: 27-047002-0 Tax ID No: 27-047003-0 Tax ID No: 27-047004-0 which lies northerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Commencing at Right of Way Boundary Corner B2 as shown on said Plat No. 70- 19; thence run southeasterly on an azimuth of 119 degrees 46 minutes 05 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 232.12 feet to the point of beginning of Line 1 to be described; thence on an azimuth of 255 degrees 20 minutes 45 seconds, 460.42 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B709 on said plat and there terminating. 4 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 5325 I, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the attached is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 5325, presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the 21d day of March, 2000, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. Dated this day of , 2000 Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SEAL 5 coto -----"--_ 0 fr La art OPP, RZ silk ot \�` MR 4.009'°‘ ,c , % wit :‘,,,, , , A4 *416.I 4.4"1/ Highway 169 II W‘h a 2 Mmib RR 1 Q t 2RR MS AG • 111 Plblibil SHAKOFq Proposed Vacation of Easements cuviitza,(1 ci‘n a ccr . cadcce. Zoning Parcels 03/20/00 q• G • CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney,Public Works Director SUBJECT: 2000 Reconstruction Project No. 2000-4 DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 5319, a resolution ordering the improvement and preparation of plans and specifications for improvements to 3rd Avenue, from C.R. 69 to Shumway Street; Shumway Street, from 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue; and Harrison Street, from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue. BACKGROUND: On November 3, 1999, the City Council ordered the preparation of a feasibility report for the 2000 Reconstruction Project. This report has been accepted by Council. The proposed project area includes the following streets: • 3rd Avenue, from C.R. 69 to Shumway Street • Shumway Street, from 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue • Harrison Street, from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue As mentioned previously in the February 15, 2000 memo, with this feasibility report, the main issues are as follows: 1. Sanitary sewer&watermain utilities to existing commercial area. 2. Harrison Street improvement alternatives. 3. 3rd Avenue improvements. 4. Shumway Street improvements. 5. Timing of assessment hearing. 6. Cost of project. Staff also conducted an informational meeting on this project with the property owners on March 13, 2000 and the following questions or comments were raised at this meeting: 1. Should the City pay for the portion of 3rd Avenue adjacent to C.R. 69? 2. Truck Routing Signs need to be incorporated with the improved streets. 3. The residential property owners were in favor in reducing Shumway Street form 44 feet to 36 feet. 4. Can Harrison Street right-of-way be reduced from 100 feet? 5. Harrison Street's alternative No. 4 was supported by the property owners. 6. Watermain Alternative No. 1 along Harrison Street was supported by the property owners at the meeting. In summary, on Issue No. 1, staff has assessed the improvements of 3rd Avenue based on 25% of the street and storm sewer cost and 100% of the concrete curb & gutter to the benefiting properties along 3rd Avenue. A portion of 3rd Avenue, from C.R. 69 to Harrison Street, is adjacent to County Highway right-of-way and no assessable frontage was given to Scott County. The question raised is whether the City as a whole should be assessed for this portion of roadway. In the feasibility report, staff has incorporated this cost to all assessable properties along 3rd Avenue. Issue No. 2 can be incorporated in the design stage. On Issue No. 3, the street width can be reduced from 44 feet to 36 feet and would provide additional green space to residential property. On Issue No. 4, the right-of-way width for Harrison Street is 100 feet due to this roadway being old T.H. 169. A reduction of right-of-way width is possible. However, a vacation hearing is required and must be initiated either by the property owners or City Council. On Issue No. 5 and No. 6, these were comments stated by the property owners at the meeting. Staff will make a presentation on the various issues mentioned at the public hearing. Based upon the informational meeting, the property owners were in support of the project. The commercial property owners along 3rd Avenue, from C.R. 69 to Harrison Street were in favor of sanitary sewer and watermain — Alternative No. 1 along Harrison Street. Based on the public input received at the hearing, Council can decide to proceed or not with this project. The project cost for Alternative No. 1 watermain along Harrison Street and Alternative No. 4 for improving Harrison Street along with 3rd Avenue and Shumway Street is $1,298,868.71. A breakdown of project funding sources is as follows for this project scenario: Funding Source Feasibility CIP * Assessments $ 487,221.88 $ 264,000.00 Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund $ 75,806.50 $ 100,000.00 Shakopee Public Utilities $ 128,713.75 $ 75,000.00 Storm Drainage Enterprise Fund $ 75,227.63 $ 75,000.00 Tax Levy $ 531,898.95 $ 566,000.00 PROJECT TOTAL $1,298,868.71 $1,080,000.00 * Includes Trunk Watermain Charge as requested by SPUC. It should be noted that the CIP costs did not have Harrison Street improvements included in the project area. Staff has calculated the street lighting costs as requested by Council and this cost is estimated at $10,000.00 and, per policy, would be 25% assessed and 75% paid by the City's general tax levy. Staff believes the 10% contingency amount in the project will cover this expense. At this time staff has received one letter of objection which is attached for Council review. Other property owners have indicated support for the project. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 5319. 2. Deny Resolution No. 5319. 3. Table for additional information. 4. Provide staff on design issues as outlined in memo. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 and No. 4, to order the project plan preparation and provide direction on design issues for alternate for watermain installation and Harrison Street alternate. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 5319, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the 2000 Reconstruction, Project No. 2000-4 and move its adoption. dtsryBruce Loney Public Works Director Seller to Buyer Consignment Lot CARS BY OWNER° 1480 THIRD AVE. WEST • SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 Phone (612) 445-4393 • Fax (612) 403-1326 March 3, 2000 Mr. Bruce Loney Public Works Director City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379-1351 Re: Sewer&Water Proposal, Third Avenue Street Improvement Dear Mr. Loney: Since our February meeting of land owners who would be affected by extending city sewer and water on Third Avenue west, from Friendship Manor to my property, I haven't heard any updates or revised proposals or assessment figures. I have consulted with a number of people regarding how city sewer and water at this time might benefit my property, including my attorney Rod Krass, (commercial)Realtor Dave Brown, Gene Brown, Ron Swanson of Valley Surveying, Mark Stromwell(appraiser), Brian Norris (Citizens State Bank President), and others. Based on the proposal as I understand it, I see no benefit, whatsoever,to my property. I have no plans at this time, and see no benefit, to subdividing my property. I can understand why it could be beneficial to Councilman Link, and possibly one or two of the other owners, if they plan on further developing or subdividing their property. As we discussed, I put in a state approved septic system, well, and drain holding tank barely one year ago, at a cost in excess of$15,000. At that time, the city engineering department said not to expect water and sewer"for at least 10 or 15 years, if ever"because "it's all rock" and"nobody wants the cost". I certainly agree the extreme cost isn't justified, particularly to my property which already now has the new, state approved, water and septic system. The present and anticipated use of my property simply doesn't require these city services, and they offer no benefit. - 2 - I'll keep an"open mind"on this topic, but as now proposed,I am opposed to this water and sewer proposal. Regarding the upgrading (for heavy loads) of Third Avenue west, I see no benefit to the concerned property owners, with the exception of businesses using semi-trailer trucks, particularly Rahr Malting. Because only they benefit by the upgrade of Third Avenue, it's only fair they should be the ones paying for that upgrade. Obviously,the resurfacing of Third Avenue, and of Harrison benefit all of us. Sincerely, Michael N. Gilbertsen Owner/CEO c: Rod Krass RESOLUTION NO. 5319 A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And Preparation Of Plans And Specifications For Then 2000 Reconstruction Project No. 2000-4 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 5314 adopted on February 15, 2000, fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of 3rd Avenue, from County Road 69 to Shumway Street; Shumway Street, from 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue; and Harrison Street, from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue by installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, concrete curb & gutter, street reconstruction, street lighting and all appurtenant work as described in the feasibility report. WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held on the 21st day of March, 2000, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA: 1. That the improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible and is ordered as hereinafter described: 3rd Avenue (Watermain Alternative No. 1), from County Road 69 to Shumway Street; Shumway Street, from 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue; and Harrison Street (Alternative No. 4), from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue by installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, concrete curb & gutter, street reconstruction, street lighting and all appurtenant work as described in the feasibility report. 2. Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvements. 3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 2000-4 Public Improvement Program. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held this day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Seller to Buyer Consignment Lot C, , CARS BY OWNER° 1480 THIRD AVE. WEST • SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 Phone (612) 445-4393 • Fax (612) 403-1326 March 15, 2000 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mayor and Council Members: As you know, my wife and I are owners of Outlot A, Longview Estates upon which we operate our business, CARS BY OWNER, INC. We have received the Notice of Hearing on Proposed Public Improvement Project 2000-4, 2000 Reconstruction. We understand from this Notice that the Council is considering this Project, which could assess $635,692.53, much of it to our property. Pursuant to our obligation under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, we are hereby giving you notice of our objection to this public improvement and to any assessments related thereto. It is our firm conviction that the Public Improvement Project will not benefit our property and that the assessments proposed to be levied against our property are not uniform in their application nor justified from a standpoint of benefit to our property. We will appeal any assessments levied pursuant to Minnesota Statutes against our property as a result of this proposed public improvement. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, "Re;e- Michael N. Gilbertsen Owner/CEO c: Rod Krass file RESOLUTION NO. 5319 A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And Preparation Of Plans And Specifications For The 2000 Reconstruction Project No. 2000-4 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 5314 adopted on February 15, 2000, fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of 3'd Avenue, from County Road 69 to Shumway Street; Shumway Street, from 3`d Avenue to 2nd Avenue; and Harrison Street, from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue by installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, concrete curb & gutter, street reconstruction, street lighting and all appurtenant work as described in the feasibility report. WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held on the 21st day of March, 2000, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA: 1. That the improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible and is ordered as hereinafter described: 3rd Avenue (Watermain Alternative No. 1), from County Road 69 to Shumway Street; Shumway Street, from 3'd Avenue to 2nd Avenue; and Harrison Street (Alternative No. 4), from 6th Avenue to 3'd Avenue by installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, concrete curb & gutter, street reconstruction, street lighting and all appurtenant work as described in the feasibility report. 2. Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvements. 3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 2000-4 Public Improvement Program. 4. The City Council shall let the contract for all or part of the improvements as authorized by Minnesota Statutes 429.041, no later than two years from the date of adoption of this resolution. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held this day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk (3, C 3-20-00 1-p I till To: Mr. Bruce Loney, P. E. j Public Works Director;; 2 2000 { , City of Shakopee { I 129 Holmes St So CITY OF SHAKOPEE I Shakopee, MN 55379 _ From: Mr. Bill Jirik MINNESOTA PLBG & HTG INC. 1420 3nd Ave So Shakopee, MN 55379 (952) 445-4444 Re: Year 2000 street reconstruction project for West 3"d Avenue in Shakopee. Legal Description of property: Lot outlot Block C Husman Addition P/O outlot B & C. Dear Mr. Bruce Loney, The proposed estimated assessments to the West 3rd Avenue improvements for our property includes both sides of the street. There are no property owners on the opposite side of the street. We feel that this assessment is not right and this letter is written objecting to this proposal. We believe that the only benefit for curb & gutter on the opposite side of 3`d Avenue is to provide uniformity to the project. We believe that one-half of the 3n'Avenue proposal for curb & gutter assessments should be the responsibility of the City of Shakopee. Sincerely, 64(,(8-,4k Bill Jirik Vice-president MINNESOTA PLBG & HTG INC. �y. /9, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Final Plat of the Classics at Southbridge 2d Addition MEETING DATE: March 21, 2000 Introduction: Centex Homes has made application for final plat approval of the Classics at Southbridge 2nd Addition. The final plat as proposed is generally consistent with the preliminary plat approved by the City Council on(Resolution No. 5328). Considerations: The Scott County Highway Department has indicated that the proposed final plat has no impact on its road system. The Scott County Environmental Health Department has commented that stormwater retention ponds should meet federal NURP standards. The City currently requires that ponding meet NURP standards. The following comments have been received relative to the final plat; 1) The City Attorney has commented that the declarations sheet must be amended from "road"to"curve and circle." 2) The City Clerk has commented that 1)the declaration sheet should be revised by deleting the signature block for the Planning Commission chair, which is no longer required under the new subdivision ordinance. 3) The engineering department has made the following comments, which are incorporated into the proposed resolution accompanying this report. a) Prior to recording of the Final Plat, the following actions must be completed: i) Execution of the Developers Agreement, which shall include provisions for security for the public improvements, engineering review fees, Trunk Storm Water Charges, and other fees as required by the City's adopted Fee Schedule, and : ii) The Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be approved by the City Engineer and/or SPUC Utilities Manager prior to commencing construction. The applicant is proposing a change in the grading plat for this plat related to noise mitigation. The original preliminary plat of Southbridge showed a berm. The applicant proposes a wall to act as a barrier instead. Staff required that the applicant conduct a further analysis related to this solution, and believes that it is an appropriate solution. Final approval of the City Engineer will be required for the grading plan, including the proposed noise wall. Park dedication was completed at the time of the original platting of Southbridge. Alternatives: 1. Approve Resolution No. 5328, a resolution approving the final plat of The Classics at Southbridge rd Addition with conditions as set forth below. 2. Approve Resolution No. 5328, a resolution approving the final plat of The Classics at Southbridge 2nd Addition with revised conditions. 3. Do not approve Resolution No. 5328. 4. Table the request for additional information. Action Requested: Approve Resolution No. 5328, a resolution approving the final plat of The Classics at Southbridge rd Addition with conditions as presented, or with revised conditions. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director RESOLUTION NO.5328 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF CLASSICS AT SOUTHBRIDGE 2D1D ADDITION WHEREAS,Centex Homes is the Applicant and Owners of said property; and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as follows: Outlot G, SOUTHBRIDGE 1st ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof Scott County,Minnesota; and WHEREAS, all notices of the public hearing for the Preliminary Plat were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,as follows: That the Final Plat of Classics at Southbridge rd Addition is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: A. The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: 1. Approval of title by the City Attorney. 2. Execution of the Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Sound mitigation measures(eg. Noise walls, STC 30 rated windows, climate control systems) shall be installed in accordance with the recommendation of the City Engineer or engineering consultant. 3. The dedication language on the final plat cover sheet shall be revised from "road"to"curve and circle." 4. The final plat cover sheet shall be revised to delete the signature block for the Planning Commission chair. 5. The Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be approved by the City Engineer and the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission prior to construction. 6. The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code, including access easements to the ponding area, if necessary. 7. The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water charges, Trunk Sanitary Sewer charges, engineering review fees, and other fees as required by the City's adopted Fee Schedule. B. The following conditions shall apply after the filing/recording of the Final Plat: 1. Building construction, sewer and water services, fire protection and access shall be reviewed for code compliance at time of building permit application. 2. The developer shall install all subdivision monumentation within one year from the date of recording the plat. At the end of the one year period from recording of the Plat, the developer shall submit to the City Engineer written verification by a registered land surveyor that the required monuments have been installed throughout the plat. Monumentation may only be installed on a per lot basis at the time of building permit issuance with prior approval of the City Engineer. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, held the day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 5328 I, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the attached is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 5328, presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the 21d day of March, 2000, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. Dated this day of , 2000. Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SEAL FPCLASS.doc/ML 5 VI I 4147111 11111"..111114111 I 11 12 — . 111141 — III . 12 miul•m. 0\ I w,,,, lig S.T.H. 69 trillillh. :HH RR SHO S 1111111110 ;„ timmil.:1: o's'•.�v4.0 iii�` 11 0.1..._A r ib •l� IOW �� dp, ___ •��, ��� ��aim A .I _ Amik alma , .4-_,., ws 1,,,,-.%;t1 -4; ;,..;--to Nry ik%—m-r•- ,11., Via A. Nile L, s onsimmin LI as — -4iiik 4 p il LI.1 .I al I I ItilW1 MU cs4I.y �. .G �`I�t MEN Nor AGmLI igl iul• 't■ 10 �=j11 are Rik g. . II 111104,, oar,10600. N PlWaitAl J/ SHAKOPEE W %IN E COMMUNf1YPRR)ESINCE 1857 S Proposed Final Plat of Classics at Southbridge 2nd Addition Parcel Boundaries MI Zoning Boundaries 03/15/00 //s CITY OF SHAKOPEE CONSENT Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Beth Handrich, Planner I SUBJECT: Final Plat of Orchard Park West 4th Addition MEETING DATE: March 21,2000 REVIEW PERIOD: February 11, 2000—June 10, 2000 Site Information Applicant/Owner: Laurent Builders,Inc. Location: West of CSAH 77 and north of Vierling Drive Current Zoning: Urban Residential(R 1B)/PUD Overlay District# 13 Adjacent Zoning: North: Urban Residential(R-1B)Zone South: Urban Residential(R-1B)Zonei Hghway 169 East: Urban Residential(R-1B)Zone West: Urban Residential(R-1B)Zone 1995 Comp.Plan: Single Family Residential Area: 10.779 acres MUSA: The site is within the MUSA boundary. Attachments: Exhibit A: Zoning/Location Map Exhibit B: Orchard Park West 4th Addition Final Plat Map Exhibit C: Orchard Park West Preliminary Plat/Site Plan Introduction Laurent Builders, Inc. is requesting approval of the Final Plat for Orchard Park West 4th Addition. This development is located north of Vierling Drive and west of CSAH 77(Exhibit A). This Final Plat (Exhibit B) is in substantial conformance with the approved planned unit development(PUD) and preliminary plat. Considerations 1. This development will plat twenty-one(21)lots for single family detached residential development. 2. The Engineering Department has reviewed the submittal materials and has provided comment. Staff has incorporated these recommendations into the conditions of approval. 3. Building site plans, setbacks, materials, and landscaping will be reviewed by the Building Official, City Planner, and City Engineer at time of individual building permit application. 4. The Finance Department has commented that the developer shall pay existing levied special assessments. The developer should contact the Finance Department for further details. 5. The Scott County Environmental Health Department has commented that the proposed area of development is highly susceptible to ground water contamination and that precautions should be taken to minimize the potential for such contamination. Alternatives 1. Approve the Final Plat of Orchard Park West 4th Addition, subject to the following conditions: a) The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: i) Approval of title by the City Attorney. ii) Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Street signs shall be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$270.00 per sign pole. f) The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water Charges, security for the public improvements, engineering review fees, and other fees consistent with the City's Fee Schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. g) Park dedication payments shall be required in amounts consistent with the City's adopted Fee Schedule. The payment of park dedication fees shall be deferred to the issuance of building permit. iii) The City Engineer and Shakopee Public Utilities must approve the Final Construction Plans and Specifications prior to the commencement of construction. iv) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. v) The developer shall provide the City with a trail easement, by separate recorded document, along the south side of the plat. vi) The conditions outlined in the Planned Unit Development approval resolution(Resolution No. 4728) shall be adhered to. vii) The cover page of the Final Plat shall be revised to include Way and Court as public dedications rather than Lane and Circle. The signature block should also be revised to eliminate the Planning Chair's signature, as final plats are no longer reviewed by the Planning Commission. -2- viii) The developer shall install all subdivision monumentation within one year from the date of recording the plat. At the end of the one-year period from recording of the Plat, the developer shall submit to the City Engineer written verification by a registered land surveyor that the required monuments have been installed throughout the plat. Monumentation may only be installed on a per lot basis at the time of building permit issuance with prior approval of the City Engineer. ix) The developer shall pay existing levied special assessments in the amount of$13,454.95. 2. Approve the Final Plat of Orchard Park West 4th Addition with revised conditions. 3. Do not approve the Final Plat of Orchard Park West 4th Addition. 4. Table action on this item and request additional information from the applicant and/or staff. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, approval of the Final Plat of Orchard Park West 4th Addition, subject to the conditions. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 5329, a Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Orchard Park West 4th Addition, subject to conditions. Beth Han. i Planner I g:\cc\2000\cc0321\fpopw4.doc - 3 - RESOLUTION NO. 5329 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF ORCHARD PARK WEST PUD 4TH ADDITION WHEREAS,Laurent Builders, Inc., is the applicant and owner of said property; and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as follows: Outlot A, Orchard Park West PUD 3"Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County,Minnesota; and WHEREAS, all notices of the public hearing for the Preliminary Plat were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA, as follows: That the Final Plat of Orchard Park West PUD 4th Addition is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a) The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: i) Approval of title by the City Attorney. ii) Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Street signs shall be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$270.00 per sign pole. f) The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water Charges, security for the public improvements, engineering review fees, and other fees consistent with the City's Fee Schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. g) Park dedication payments shall be required in amounts consistent with the City's adopted Fee Schedule. The payment of park dedication fees shall be deferred to the issuance of building permit. iii) The City Engineer and Shakopee Public Utilities must approve the Final Construction Plans and Specifications prior to the commencement of construction. iv) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. v) The developer shall provide the City with a trail easement, by separate recorded document, along the south side of the plat. vi) The conditions outlined in the Planned Unit Development approval resolution(Resolution No. 4728) shall be adhered to. vii) The cover page of the Final Plat shall be revised to include Way and Court as public dedications rather than Lane and Circle. The signature block should also be revised to eliminate the Planning Chair's signature, as final plats are no longer reviewed by the Planning Commission. viii) The developer shall install all subdivision monumentation within one year from the date of recording the plat. At the end of the one-year period from recording of the Plat, the developer shall submit to the City Engineer written verification by a registered land surveyor that the required monuments have been installed throughout the plat. Monumentation may only be installed on a per lot basis at the time of building permit issuance with prior approval of the City Engineer. ix) The developer shall pay existing levied special assessments in the amount of$13,454.95. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held the day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk ����r►--: il0m � p j 11111 1 -to::1.. ' d►► pllllinin 11111 11111 11►1► ' �� - � rd n►:►: inm 111 tun no mn 11►►►nn um m°I — _ P nnn►n ►u►1111►nn°II 11„► .. mm■ n►ml►:e►iul .. __: /',nnn 11mn ►►► m►1 mnl:■111►► _ — __ ,, um nm:1� _ ,i„„11 ui ►►Ifl nnm111n nm 1,►1 ammo mn .` - �7111--".”. nin►m►1 OW❑Inn•:►n OMIT e:_ '�. uu►nm!m►null❑ nW 11111 il►:: , ..;nm =■ �-�1�= � unn °II 1►m mn mm nm►u° ,. 1 : • :11• ;e;um Biu ulll 11■1�. �'j nn►nnn• WI C. a►► •► rl111111 WO II* ';'1 Inll Illn►► � ,Inn IIn1 1111;��::n::::1:: : 11111 11�I11 1111111 11111 11.11 -,.`..,II„� 11111 1111 111.• 1111►►111►art •,••:•1•• .u111111 111111 11111 11111 11111 11111 1111111 111:;::C:7 •• ::►::- .- ►�mn 11111 ..1111!11::►►1 i n %la u l wwww� �/;,'''�ID •/ m ,not jr, ag r- zIL�� mllll._ a_ c�- __ .w ■ 1111 ' �� - �= -- Iluii'■iw u C= _i -_ E._--"- •:.7• 1111111 1111111 1111 11111 • -'� irk,.L i -- . -. - --- 1111 :7,7.. iii::: \I.\\1-2.� ii-11P.El°I17.72- IM w jIEIii -. ,: � ,♦ --w11110 2. 1—w a � = I0-- " _ _ •�1B-w ■=111 1 Cgmblii�CC BE EC IU1 11111111p1 i i�•-4404.0• Si' `!/1'11■ . .u1uU ww ww. �� I gyp■ �� ►=lim2.1":711 ._p1.1w . . 1111p� �,� �i v ui�� ���'. . 1 Off.I gui _�. �� p• .,V . 1�► ► imk1��i �- N 1111",���,,,iil ■ nuamm�nlly �i �l(alga'al ssiovo. -s.Ii ••••:00 mom ammo;.2, =i■:g�4 000 �t m,nn-n . )■ 1 11111111111111,1.91��� 1 =1:2"j/ • y.'j'' is .t;••:;. As 2 SII' i ■,1■■■ �� up O IL ■/tI= v �O m murk 47 ■ ...�1 No.�I��I i �•• C�= ■1111111 1■11■■..fir ��i1���. •.1v-, =.I•' is nu-L,141 •11/IIII�I lllllllllllllll1 ■mai•■■11 hut_'"Iiii� ` ' 1111111111111^.••t�L"mmuummi 11.0., d, 'maw,/lllllml., S.T.H.169 - 11011LAI N SHAKOPEEW ` E COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 S Proposed Final Plat of Orchard Park West PUD 4th Addition Parcel Boundaries Mil Zoning Boundaries 03/15/00 Fythibil- ft-- /15/00 WED 08:46 FAX 612 546 0885 R.A. ANDERSON & ASSOC. 0 4r ti if il N i ivto; i 4"� �� a" 31 I I e a I ;- PR a I ' qAqA¢ $Lg¢'p7 IIsi $s it I q$t i$ : ti it 1 ([ k7 r r s t :Ea Ii. 33 2 II Q s I Rsg '7 I # $ ♦3 t.t iz i ci I 1 # a i g 1 11 7 ; n It c 6 s t e i II r$I it i ► 1 xt " I 1 .c a ti ii - R' g $I a 3 ss �_ a �$ y I 3 f ; e k 8 0 • 1i • n k i� ( 2 g t MI • 99 S i ! k aar$ .g _ I 4I ni 0 -4 1ba I' f iiia i a; aq 13111 . I! g k I ••Zallil r P! € ` 4 1 —1 U 3 if J $ a $ I $gz 6 , g = ^s 343a g $ 1 1 i I s g-t i t s r at i a) J i 1 t Diss g >E $ """I ..< i� •c ti r r3 i p ♦ $ ... !� �: cl ii a IL z _ ` 1Full— i- 3i i g al 3 it F d ♦r I t I1 f"...) # t $ f e a L L . o 1 g IT I t itat I X I I 1 qi 0 xa I $q,- F Exitb;i- '3____ N 110 WED 08:46 FAX 612 546 0885I ORCHARD R.A. ANDERSON & ASSOC. 11002 1 x1.' I b •ARKw r-rc • I » r•CCJ, 0,,n Ca C7 •: v ann,r,nNO4'4p'38'E ( rrC1 _Q f r_'"_k-3 r r_?.11 _ p.n- 524.19 .�.... 1 $ ,�� ! 1 I 1 ; 721". 1 _ .......r--- si§21. c7 ^ I g 1 1C, ! I, UI1, 11 I , Aiai I s°a I C� -A ! , dt Y.y ro gel lE m II"'' art uvl 1 v; isxe/ 1 i tM�` 1 ! 1 C)13 t 1�i el I ld.� S ,1I w i r NL ` 11.1• 3 .J of%• r. v'l / PrW ! 1t ? U Od !; i.: T, f s s APPLEVYOOD a C) 1,73•Aciew �":' '`,"o•'.'..% %a `i. rO�',>' I 14 8 .. I TI C7 wora.l•t a ". d .d S x'47 *1 ,' wos Is°rw _ du 7 30 I 1•".11 (.1f,..1:,95:2 4 wt,'::.,„ ;.,; L-- -{ -I) I I I-" ,..1I I fo•,w.%K...q•reg4%. •r.-".. •`. 1 I 11 �� m 7. " -� I I t1 _ 1 t 8 E t 1.•. s• W 1 $ 4R" C7 n I �I r ani-+2 Lr I % p• g XJ14 a 2 i C w !=I st ..� � 11�=° ''¢• I I %'.t. +,;. as s tQ, • r? B.`i .R -, -11 , 1 i; 1 IE N N^• 0 Nv 1 1 r s, 'bs,�. + - / v 3g Y illy.A .. -4 1 1 -o` I I It< Y.�L'm 1 Iv J�• ` Jf I / I I t r 4 SI t� r ;i -- I - L 119 0'J.Y'.- I I _ 11 W aI Im �'f` µi,oy i 4 ZC t r-- 4.; i4;-:.ss sa ,,,of J t' .4Y�,„.. J . w-_,..A.: I /4. , 3 lA� � HARVEST 5 $ I I '"re,- , e` 1 1 3 1 1 77. ✓ 4,r•` cj 11;2 LANE .ANE I 1 itn .2 um - m ofi.1 m ` b v , •% 5 //. 1 // Imp NN I I,: 1 i { i/‘" 01 +,-Ti 17}11 'G f I 1 D,.) itlfr1k O.•/b/f -I .:•- /.i5.PY' I f m g V .d• 1�D/. ``'fir•'.(a. t: / < If! At••g I Ir1(1-. 1 .•6.' ',T.1( r 0 .—17.76'� . ? `- -.,-- ,r 1,_ / g 2+ I Ir, Nom ''ti at t: C- .tj !`� g W' I4' / i §'o IFYRESIDEs COURT ig7 •c c1- // 1 :I / Z n a� ,�r;a.,. 1 ,TORT, _ Y `- • / .4 ''••D'I / 7.°R 'l - •111 as"s f' _' 4':dsaaz• • ... 1.../ 2 •g1 Y ' -, r 1 .ti11` 'slo° •r . _ C I io r-V+- l ros 11 I Ie 1� � / / � 7J / $ • Ei` I l es 1 1 1 l ¢11 / ��'4/ Af •` ci i 1 ', 1 1 1 1 °�11 / .. . / I 0 41 I -'S0:r"tsM--,- .raise" , K 1 ori•I - a /�.` �, t / i i v oR,ouc2 / `•, / i ~, i. ..-- / 1 f — 1 / 'f/'--- ssse f� l ,x11 r, _" / ..� --_' -� .........._.......------....-- 300"34.55"g 515.02--=-----..-------- .---.-------• O I SDO'34 SSPE r >! aln -�—` B — -T'' •�NESO,Y1 HIGHWAY �1)Cl{ OF WA' PlJ•., NO. V_ ;'r1 �� bl MINNESOTA iiI'iti:i.; RI)HT vI ::A' PtAI• NO. 70—w 6 *^'...r. ROAD Nu. ,i,1 R (FULLER STREET') �] T K II Til. IYICann1„� 1"� �CA ni I r11 r,1 �{� 4:C..,N,...., 1.,•,vvr•,� IiLJi G Vf- I C r C7 4� < n 71 I r uv�iC7 R,Q:: n iST n O < . _i C' •'^L nVVIIiV°� i.Venlil Vii rn 1 Pi 13 I � � ,s 0 di 0 N (0 D N n •11 .'{ ► • it g 1 co R ti 1. 11 �1 y1 11x1 raw v., O M ra Sib3t$$ 8 , p r- hUl v 1 w Fi 1 a A ,- a lil � III II Is,,I ,11),....,0,..•, ,,.., • Mil ' F n N ..d . 1:111111111111111i11:;!1!;:;!;11lreleli�.Iil {fq 4.5 yr el 0 ag U, • 4 �A w ~ j,,,, I I a xblz$$ s g a •L. r. Ce I ply 8 va ' �. P, I =�1 131 7W .•f N i- O { I I _ o `da- ,. R 14 a IcPP Q a ijd ��-is = hI!I! to _�� ri (51/§ o ' .� �� 17.vf n !I8 vry rnnyvir-j4�i@Z�' i • ` 1,5 0000. re I J I i'1 D 0. I Zl :.,:.• --• '1 _ - .�ill(I Ili" a: a h v) J)1,. :il..'!...11,1 ..--,1 ..,r,r. .w., • cn La ow C) , / ° I r� r II �yvlz_ �/:r: '1 11 �1 ! ! • I 1. N `` ��.`r «r/�^�`7.....,....:...".'..,..... / ` 1 CO .,� w Z ...i . ,c.:-. 4 ,4...,,, , 7., , .. . ,.,,, . .... irr Ne D , „...., , ,,, ,,........ ....., ___... ,- , ,,,.„ , ; • . .. . .,,,, :, , \ —..../... ,...._ — ,.,,,,,,,, 7 ,, , ,• -- ■ /:, %�` `-- , .. 111 1 ,) i !' i ,, = _4çv -> J 0 II U ca. . ;t7 li � 1:-.-j,, 1 I / ., ;;i'{ ' /10'' 1 ml 1 L_ J to "��-44 -4 1. I r • I/to: I iiii;c ,, 1 ▪ El .... ......: -..„ , ir---_-_r_j_ . . El. ,. . -, • (I �-•—*l 1 ice•"��•�I l•igei 1.:11-. r I -r•� 111 . I. 11 1 f if.......... , C.f) U1 ._ _ ,.....: L_ L.., .. .. • -• ' 14 r. ti .....,,,,,mg!!, w. 1 '/ Y•M:.}:a::SFJ! ^ I I .: .n.• r..Y�, •aa 9N1.O�I� (n 4...Ti?i,.:::':0',.'400,110ip /7 f•...... . ip .•.fit...;.•... / :Yi::.:J'.::�.Y.Y::':.' . 11•'' •17'- �'l,` 1 ...... � � / . , , 1...._ ............ 1 ,...,,,„„..,,,.._.__•,,,11.,,i .... 3 .,, „_,.. , „ ,,., , ...,, , I. II(t , z Pili...9:17.iff../, , :,,,..,,,,,,,,,di • •AN'''!:!:!Iiii,1,111.:,'''hb . mil: . 1,1 \ -Iti ';-.71.1.) .-\' A 4 ) x1�1,J Iy1 CC t, j ,� I< I is5'C^yC:i: : yi3r' i :ri:, / . .y�./ ,.:.....:. I , ;i. C:1— / c\...., , 1 , i rt A :. r / � � /mo . ••••••••••••••••••••••• .•. ..•,..•...........,.... . 1 rillipi ::'-1.!..:'',:f•'.:::.::?::::':4:1!.1.:::•:1:ii-::•:.;::::.1..i::.'::.;::..1::•1..l.:-.7...:::::::::.,:.:::11:6;....:':.;,;.'::::::::,/.../:,. ...,..l...,:,:.:..,?....:`?...;•:..,..:.::....1.::!...i.::-:.:..,:....::,...::......::::i:,::.!.i.,::;:,...,.......,...:,i:.........E.;.:.!..,:...:..,.:!.:.....g.......:..... , . II mil iiii mg ito.'.:11i.1.,!"...4.1,1:i '1‘!,11 p:,,..„...,,...... ..,, :ii ., / ::::::::;:::: 1 limmac! . a , v,„ :,\ i::::::;i::::.:.k.::::.:.:.:::::.:;....::::...::„:::.;::: :::.:,:.....,.. .. , 15v ..... 2 • .".4C1) elA _ ., ::.J �- e� { h , : e2 0 bb §- �r-4PCC , 1 / ■� III • ,, —_,-- `.. ‹>., . i �.._.. \`d nO r . , •.— 4171 I t 1 1 o,\ 'oJ ' �, 1:" r � 1■��y'6 rl� 'I I � • m 1 n r / �� ^ -'--w-1 I+ O — — .I . tsQ a 1 iii`•;. .4(1 .::•'::. -)Sla110,7 HSo1HIJ1'1" ,;,,,,:iii: 1 2 3N .....,... „„r. ........ .. .. . : .. (..) . r'1 1 ...• < K:: . / .. ....,..;;::::. ��� t. g .,,,,..,:f4::„4„„:::,,,..„.::.:::;::::::.,,....:::::..,..,....,...:;.:.,...,.,...i. Ii_____Iat, i,ie,„„...,iii (Ili 1,. ,z.iti,:4„, i . 1 1,,,,,,,,,, , , , ,,,., . , .. 41. 0,• 34 S..k :., --. vi I " , ,' ...' :1:4:. - -, ''' .':'' ...'..'::':::::''' 12, '......." {iIIIIIII I 1i 's �4 • / " 1 ": ►.. / / i 1� a. Car I A� , l� .I:I I I;i ••' 1, A < ta i=�ii✓.... .:1:. ! / `. it V. -t�..r \\ :7 I 1 <:i:::,:.;ii:iiii,i.i'• 1 . ..y•„:::::::::::::„.,,,:,,i : : : !Sf 1 I 1i 1!4 .:4!.4. i_wa o iiiiii;ii;; a . . .. iiTiii;;ii:i:ii::.. +: !:iii;i;iii •iii;i: I y ..\:,:: 1 7:1 •y��{tr 1' ...:::,;',,iii!iii;i!i!,:i:,.::::!,..:::::,..,..:..,•... . 1 I \ CILat _ 1� I I• • F ;? i'iiiii;?:�jiiiii!i'iii!`i�i��'. i f. �i �1 ,y •11:i I . , i .. g I li ,,yyy��'' - � '? tri;;:`i`i`i'{;.,..... 1 - c r - - 'i - 8 1 - ,.. ii 1 , 1 _� •, •_—:_•_▪._-•7::-__ .._. .-.._. - .. 02.09 -•- ---� 9.39 !i:: :;SSI q,ya: i �.. i l.,. A 2 �"" &-• ,-�'_� ;W.-+- iiii i iia?;it �l l..1'I '1 ��1%'�•, �� ( 1`-• • _T • -fur.-._.. ... -_sR9�e'srw- �oouo - ii` ,11, .0,1, ,y • lK N.ff moi. '1 r_ 'M M. y:ll.1 1 1 _ ___..---_-_- I N VN,^.oi .;_ .•:. . . y X gs •�.c�-r-�r-..'i__ ^___•a++l/`" . . .p nru •-3�.a„r--•. ._ ..._.�.:."_„ _-�T v _1_ °,!,� •/' 1 �'T C 0{ _ g),1 I-- . �� � r. _ a f3 — - . 1 _ -.t:".::,-..71;'.::,:7-4.-- --. .�::- 68t Ali+ al�lioetsv3 S H -.._ 'I� ,..ems r• �rs:= �.VP .``.M1 .. ..:e.....-:.ni ._ . i. __:•' - - J /11 { 11, G, CITY OF SHAKOPEE �- Memorandum F3 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Beth Handrich, Planner I SUBJECT: Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition MEETING DATE: March 21,2000 APPLICATION DATE and REVIEW PERIOD DEADLINE: February 17, 2000—April 17, 2000 Site Information Applicant: Pheasant Run of Shakopee,LLP PrairieVillageDevelopment Location: North of Valley View Road and east of Current Zoning: Urban Residential(R-1B)Zone Adjacent Zoning: North: Agricultural(AG) South: Valley View Road/Rural Residential(RR) East: Agricultural(AG) West: Agricultural(AG)/Urban Residential(Rl-B) 1995 Comp.Plan: Single-Family Residential Area: 14.1552 Acres MUM: The site is within the MUSA boundary. Attachments: Exhibit A: Location/Zoning Map Exhibit B: Pheasant Run Fourth Addition Final Plat Map Exhibit C: Pheasant Run Preliminary Plat Map • Introduction Pheasant Run of Shakopee, LLP is requesting Final Plat approval of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition. The property is located north of Valley View Road and east of the Prairie Village plat(Exhibit A). Considerations 1. The Preliminary Plat for Pheasant Run Addition was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on May 7, 1998, and approved by the City Council on June 2nd, 1998. The Final Plat for the fourth phase is in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary plat. 2. The entire Pheasant Run plat proposes 263 single-family lots within 105.9 acres, to be developed in five phases. The first, second and third phases consisted of 61, 68 and 49 platted lots, respectively. The fourth phase consists of 43 lots. Therefore, 42 lots remain for the last phase. 3. Outlot A of the first addition was dedicated as park land in lieu of park dedication fees. 4. The Engineering Department has reviewed the submittal materials and has provided comment. Staff has incorporated these recommendations into the conditions of approval. 5. The Scott County Environmental Health Department has commented that the proposed area of development is highly susceptible to ground water contamination and that precautions should be taken to minimize the potential for such contamination. Alternatives 1. Approve the Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition, subject to the following conditions: a) The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: i) Approval of title by the City Attorney. ii) Execution of the Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Street signs shall be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$270 per sign pole. iii) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. iv) The signature block for the Planning Commission Chairperson on the cover page of the Final Plat shall be eliminated, as final plats are no longer reviewed by the Planning Commission. v) The street name shown as "Ponds Way Court" shall be changed to "Ponds Way", or any other name of the developer's choice, as approved by the Planning Department. vi) The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water charges, Trunk Sanitary Sewer charges, engineering review fees, and other fees as required by the City's adopted Fee Schedule. b) The following conditions shall apply after the recording of the Final Plat: i) No building permits shall be issued for any of the proposed outlots until such time as they are replatted. ii) The developer shall install all subdivision monumentation within one year 2 from the date of recording the plat. At the end of the one year period from recording of the Plat, the developer shall submit to the City Engineer written verification by a registered land surveyor that the required monuments have been installed throughout the plat. Monumentation may only be installed on a per lot basis at the time of building permit issuance with prior approval of the City Engineer. iii) Final Construction Plans and Specifications, building construction and locations, as well as sewer and water services must be approved by City Engineer, City Building Official and Shakopee Public Utilities prior to construction. 2. Approve the Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition with revised conditions. 3. Do not approve the Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition. 4. Table a decision in order to allow time for the applicant and/or staff to submit additional information or make any necessary revisions. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, approving the Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition, subject to conditions. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 5330, a Resolution approving the Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition with conditions. eth Handri Planner I g:\cc\20001cc0321\fpphrun4.doc 3 33 a RESOLUTION NO.5274— A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF PHEASANT RUN FOURTH ADDITION WHEREAS,Pheasant Run of Shakopee, LLP is the applicant and owner of said property; and WHEREAS,the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as follows: Outlot A, Pheasant Run Third Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County,Minnesota WHEREAS, all notices of the public hearing for the Preliminary Plat were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,as follows: That the Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a) The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: i) Approval of title by the City Attorney. ii) Execution of the Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Street signs shall be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$270 per sign pole. iii) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. iv) The signature block for the Planning Commission Chairperson on the cover page of the Final Plat shall be eliminated, as final plats are no longer reviewed by the Planning Commission. v) The street name shown as"Ponds Way Court" shall be changed to "Ponds Way", or any other name of the developer's choice, as approved by the Planning Department. vi) The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water charges, Trunk Sanitary Sewer charges, engineering review fees, and other fees as required by the City's adopted Fee Schedule. b) The following conditions shall apply after the recording of the Final Plat: i) No building permits shall be issued for any of the proposed outlots until such time as they are replatted. ii) The developer shall install all subdivision monumentation within one year from the date of recording the plat. At the end of the one year period from recording of the Plat, the developer shall submit to the City Engineer written verification by a registered land surveyor that the required monuments have been installed throughout the plat. Monumentation may only be installed on a per lot basis at the time of building permit issuance with prior approval of the City Engineer. iii) Final Construction Plans and Specifications, building construction and locations, as well as sewer and water services must be approved by City Engineer, City Building Official and Shakopee Public Utilities prior to construction. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held on the day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Z7 00• • • 4 —,/ —, I�iuiClu� ILI �om U - • 00 % unm®®®mn ® _pin pp � wIo . M _� 111 . YY1b _in a.,s el' STH 169 WI II 11111111111 MOFll' otYL---F . III olo0® ®® I!_ � HON MU I'2 ®® . ���' ool ®®®i , -0 �� �\_1%146 a IC \ • ----- ItirkS4 1 #%441110 a AG /IIIIIII s. willul 7 1 R1 B ���TC P4, air... ill mu. sor- ________ OW * ' "" l RR 44,0 ` Vallay View Rd. ,T' 1 'a . N Ilibli&AllJ, SHAKOPEE W �- E S Proposed Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition Parcel Boundaries IIII Zoning Boundaries 03/15/00 ) h iJ ° MAR-15-2000 10:25 JAMES R. HILL, INC. 952 890 6244 P.02/03 1---1s/. /rte\\ : J•: :N\ .17' a/ \,�`.t /:s / \ ta ER-11 -,:..2J < h�'" S ! I \ Ce N I' &tt t ='-'-'4r t., ra % 2 < 1\ _ 1.y�fpr.. / _ i 1 a `.ray`^ / / , _... ys ti Xi t ; / / a342! b! til4 e .,"t, n=tz I;i --I / � f Fad EI kl .- 1r. Il C (,7 / Tit l * i �J bil Tit I .pxlK..m. 1 , / c C / .i G- m _ _ __°. J. r.' / RKez. 's vis / 1 -, 1 9 .i i! Y`ffi I <- -, 1 'a g1Vf ;' ' r t, C� i x / EC.0 11 �$Y a Vcalm mlf. 1 Z .; ; R 1431 A J Ica I O Ss oar eou, ; ti Is _ is •a F 1 I I, `3 is --.. X C� 0 i 1 , Q I - rc-- ,e - _ • I . !J_ r--__ -- II IS , .7 I CC ill O 1 4 ti £ L :;: i-.21 , = sp LL -I tT g 1 - m«. 1 / / Z ; 41 ap IS , g .. I 1i i r---aa -- - g L u:,sa+s J ,' Z A' t .-a r---am;----1 N c $a N I Q SI I, e- • �L ,a.a.' J ��s N -1 /. I- j - ) 1 i Q �m>r mvr. 1 L in,.wan J I p Iji 17.' iii 42. 1 fr.. I V 1 i c a_ 41.... .L'Xi�W--J "1 �. 13 t r prat, Fl.. I 1,_i�i),IG,E J S 2! i0 ,c.g f o mw. -1 ✓ I c("l: I SI IS L la.C.et 11 (.7J l I^ F' f� , , .. Vi met. `J1 L tacK..w J 7 :4i 211 1, • m.c. '1 • c f r‘ t'i. 1 a1 Q Ig ) t:l n V 1 W...wS V I .i is `C 12 by.: I c Q o R "-r. ---1 ---� .,- - a-•I — { .'d ir Q c ^I I I t r wa. I L la''‘W; J ..+J .0 . .6'£'°229 gl ,7 19 me.. .� L'< I Q1Q •'le ,1 I- I I J 1 0 t 1 aSmSyC i L amus J t N ly, g1 5 1 1 1 m... I . .. ` .>.. I IS • I 1 L 1..........;0-'—...J lj. it, i-. ii J , m'at aY, --,� _I ..'l�t -� Cve,I--- 1 m4„ S ''''''..."."*a o.n...e. 4h9 h1 1.1. 3 MAR-15-2000 10:26 JAMES R. HILL, INC. 952 890 6244 P.03/03 N� oo 1� o J cn .... r_•-•-_,_--, CC i?„ c=_� 1 a Yvei•AOs e D El i :i Taz£_t 8 il We-'bil iP .s? ;14111Z-• idg ✓o L i; 221ZEI in _ \ 2. _ aer ''`••....... x .,.` :n lysar .1a 'aiolV ..•••• �* 0 1.4 I it `\• 4y�•` ', '1 0 ' ,/ �,`Sr 0 M a y 1' ('� \\,N), ! 1,i; O/,/ 1`' N. Q ./ f.-\.5 1 i4� :4 4/!:'4 `, `.- •:-., NN CC N CJ > 'et sZY.), .t: .ya '.. ti �\ /„ .- // Q ' tip-'/ ' •,;�� r 3 WAY °�.. �, ���;.,9„," 0 , a� /,' t0 ,a Via '."° ° A' ,, �/ X .1., \ I ` y� . r / I• .t`��. .e q�6 + 1 \ ���• Z,L Yi ....:44., 's,, V i it , i. VI ^'.- rt 1 1 31+1, PI s 1 i I 9' 1 / iii -K' r I I p1 u ei N I u Ir O i iu r� 1 Aid I, IV °$= 1 a!: IL• .2 Qa y J i 1 x men 11 12 a 133a1S d . /1 ,....., N ----- , 1d31 ' TOTAL P.03 1 Mil JR4 MOD-011/01 OVA MI Trimly.Woo COMM YO rt>s wt'mon m an a r.•1 x as SPIV QNOIftCYZ1 SWAM/sonata/Sa9RINN1d 1 LY'Id .L2IYNIYiPI d 4 `IN 1 sewer i MI 'Marna _ NMI ILNVSVald 1! (/ I AIL6- ^�� -�-�-\\ NE ,.+CF THE ti.. .. I li 1 I 1 Z T lij F 1 I 1 0 4 171.IC C2 I T Q ��.``�� r4P�/\�• O\ LCOURT111 "� 0o • e a 33 / / ��.,S /Sy N ?.. / , V \ , 110 :, I , x .- c, ..... 7HIM/ w AA ‘,".i%,,‘ I" Iv*w '-//r •'�1k IVCC — / 1 \� 444 "// v; </ h ‘ • , ' mV _i ...VP I Itik . or ` tvd s lig s� :/< 1 1 1 ,per i 55q 5 if li t ri 4 1 1 1 di id Oil WI , , _ \k� / ./-- w • ovoa 1 i 1 1 w%y-c� qc// ►� <: --, t\ L'S � 1 \ \\ 1� r 3iI.S r ii I, --11- -1 IV ' tn ' I la . • y \ I - IN/ so fan . : \� \ \ \Ill � 1 51; _- IT ' it I Iv Itoasti 1111, i -- rr - ir �\ �y� 1 5 I Ving ft. 4 _ , r ig� S.Q�N cbi \ , 4J\ 1 1 Its�a o I \. 1 jA;r1 i � .h. �••.wCO W �, ' dI '`a __-I it N 1 I 1 � W, 4'1:, yo ,; * 1 - "" ..r rat M . '" I ax 333.3.33.V11 MX 3311130 Ij h- .1I, , , I Y d r I 3.30,•33 m,,.333 1 . 0/. haihrimitlit tt limi „ ,,, 1, 0,..;_.&. zin 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I •:: r 'giat. Mw H a l 1 ECM 111111 I I $.�� €1 �- ___.J L L L L L L L L Man MEM 6 N W Din 400133 6N.306 S_ w®Ijir M Z MI6 r DEM Ila ME iliCIE I MEM 'i ;• € III I = WWI a MC layoff n ,4x3333 310.ON ! ! iPJ4I C i il -__ 4” - per , � oar=—— �o, g CC E t:H; \ R1 MEM e ._„ if 1 zi ti- 4 IF -a i mi., a i 8 6 ' cilhil - 111111 1 TEAL 3 .44 .46 N, PK ' P Argil ""Nali 1 s� 41( r*4* ' ' • MI LIM \ c , 4 t �8 as,� $11z ggS5al p3'#5gg�1 E o're iga 4teBit I - B R a it I _a.7I d$.� 584t a 1,1 611 •,, �'1 �, 1B. „�9; E9x Shot i If \ Will i s . . 14013 iia 11 Eit B # li .1s111104Ei$ yFT qe E $$ €{ 111 g e 3 \ O� ^ . Atl 11 '" 14 BE1" 1 1- B,-°if 335.1 / sA „ $2Sli� A .4 g ,A X �/y a R 1P s8 is"-I' 3 .1�� y �! ; to 1 s !IJI1iill ia// 4'. r r ESdb aq418441 ;§( tg9 of/ a SNE {{ p.RaZ� ff s i--" . �ga & 1114 1:)! ;11tit- ! ! ir; if !II i1i!iIRi1h // \ -( d r i,R V I! 1 113'b1 1:1:f V sailing' 1; :If g 8 l lI F kir $ \ a / 1 / / .4 q• 1 — L-- — 4 4 - - is RESOLUTION NO. 5330 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF PHEASANT RUN FOURTH ADDITION WHEREAS,Pheasant Run of Shakopee,LLP is the applicant and owner of said property; and WHEREAS,the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as follows: Outlot A, Pheasant Run Third Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof Scott County, Minnesota WHEREAS, all notices of the public hearing for the Preliminary Plat were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,as follows: That the Final Plat of Pheasant Run Fourth Addition is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a) The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: i) Approval of title by the City Attorney. ii) Execution of the Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Street signs shall be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$270 per sign pole. iii) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. iv) The signature block for the 'Planning Commission Chairperson on the cover page of the Final Plat shall be eliminated, as final plats are no longer reviewed by the Planning Commission. v) The street name shown as "Ponds Way Court" shall be changed to "Ponds Way", or any other name of the developer's choice, as approved by the Planning Department. vi) The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water charges, Trunk Sanitary Sewer charges, engineering review fees, and other fees as required by the City's adopted Fee Schedule. b) The following conditions shall apply after the recording of the Final Plat: i) No building permits shall be issued for any of the proposed outlots until such time as they are replatted. ii) The developer shall install all subdivision monumentation within one year from the date of recording the plat. At the end of the one year period from recording of the Plat, the developer shall submit to the City Engineer written verification by a registered land surveyor that the required monuments have been installed throughout the plat. Monumentation may only be installed on a per lot basis at the time of building permit issuance with prior approval of the City Engineer. iii) Final Construction Plans and Specifications, building construction and locations, as well as sewer and water services must be approved by City Engineer, City Building Official and Shakopee Public Utilities prior to construction. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held on the day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Distribution of, Publication of Notice of Availability of, an Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR)Document for Valley Green Corporate Center MEETING DATE: March 21, 2000 Introduction: In response to a citizen petition received by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and referred to the City of Shakopee, on December 16, 1999 the Council ordered preparation of a draft AUAR. The City contracted with the firm of Bolton&Menk, Inc. for the preparation of the document. Prior to preparing the document, City staff convened a meeting of representatives from a variety of agencies, as well as the petitioners to try to fully identify the issues that should be addressed in the AUAR. The draft AUAR has been prepared, and copies have been provided for Council's information. Council is not being asked to rule on the adequacy of the AUAR at this time. Rather, Council is asked to approve distribution of the draft AUAR for review and comment. If the Council approves distribution of the draft document for review and comment, the remaining timeline for review of the AUAR would be as follows: March 21, 2000 Shakopee City Council authorization to publish notice of the availability of the draft AUAR in the EQB Monitor. March 27, 2000 Deadline for publication of notice in the EQB Monitor. April 3, 2000 Publication of Notice in the EQB Monitor, and distribution for review and comment. May 3, 2000 Comment period ends; preparation of the final AUAR Begins. May 16, 2000 Shakopee City Council approves distribution of final AUAR for 10-day comment period. AUARVGNotice.DOC/ML 1 June 6, 2000 Shakopee City Council adoption of final AUAR, if no objection is filed. If an objection is filed, then a public hearing will have to be set. Action Requested: Offer and pass a motion to authorize publication of notice in the"EQB Monitor" and distribution of the draft AUAR for review and comment only. 77 - L R. Michael Leek Community Development Director AUARVGNotice.DOC/ML 2 At the time of your packet delivery, the Draft AUAR was not yet available from Bolton & Menk. Your copy of the Draft AUAR will be delivered to your home on Monday, March 20th for your review prior to Tuesday's meeting. I I I I 1r DRAFT `�, I F .. ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREA-WIDE REVIEW .4� (AUAR) 0 a,, .. _ x= VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER 1 c Prepared for I I i CERTIFICATION I I I I I I I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. By: A-4( Ronald A. Roetzel, P.E. Registration No. 18986 Date: March 17, 2000 I 1 Bolton & Menk, Inc. 111 Consulting Engineers& Surveyors I t TIMELINE FOR VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER ALTERNATIVE URBAN 1 AREAWIDE ANALYSIS (AUAR) DATE ACTION/STEP December 21, 1999 Order for an AUAR by the Shakopee City Council January 20, 2000 Strategy Meeting to discuss scope of AUAR January 31,2000 Hold"kick-off'meeting with state, county, local agencies, and petitioners to discuss issues that should be addressed, sources of information, etc. 1 January 31, 2000 Preparation of draft document(end date is dependent on publication date) through March 21, 2000 March 21, 2000 Shakopee City Council authorization to publically notify of availability of draft AUAR is in the EQB Monitor 1 March 27, 2000 Notice deadline for publication in EQB Monitor April 3,2000 Publication of notice in EQB Monitor; Distribution for review and comment ' May 3, 2000 Comment Deadline. Preparation of Final AUAR Begins. May 3- May 15, 2000 Complete Final AUAR May 16-May 26, 2000 Shakopee City Council receives oral comments, approves and distribution of final AUAR for 10-day comment period June 6, 2000 Shakopee City Council adoption of Final AUAR, if no objection is filed. I I I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 Notice of Availability of Alternative Urban Areawide Review An Alternative Urban Areawide Review has been prepared by the City of Shakopee for the development of a 332 acre business park. This environmental impact report was triggered by concerns over the effect of development on the West Deans Lake area. Submitted to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board on March 27, 2000 I I I I 1 I I I p I I Written comments on this environmental review document should be sent to: I Michael Leek, Community Development Director City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 (952) 445-3650 The public comment period begins 1 April 3 and ends May 3. Oral comments will be received at a public meeting to be held: May 16th , 2000, 7:00 PM at Shakopee City Hall 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 I I I I I I I • Petition for Valley Green Corporate Center Environmental Assessment Worksheet In November of 1999, the Shakopee Environmental Protection Association petitioned the Environmental Quality Board(EQB), requesting that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)be prepared on a proposed business park development near the West Deans Lake area(in the City of Shakopee). The EQB determined that the project would meet the standard in Minnesota Rule, part 4410.1000 Subp. 4 (Connected and Phased Actions) and would exceed the mandatory EAW category. The EQB also determined that the City of Shakopee should be the Responsible Government Unit(RGU), since the RGU should be the governmental unit with the greatest responsibility for supervising or approving the project as a whole and that the project is located in Shakopee. The EQB gave the City of Shakopee the option to either prepare a separate EAW on this connected and phased action or review it under this AUAR. Shakopee chose the latter option. I Alternative Urban Areawide Review The process and content for an AUAR, as a substitute for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), are set forth in Minnesota Agency Rules, Chapter 4410.3610, a portion of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Environmental Review Program. The Rules specify that the format and content of the AUAR should be similar to those of i an EAW but must provide for a level of analysis comparable to that of an EIS. Also, the City may review more than one potential development scenario, as long as one of them is consistent with its adopted comprehensive plan. Thus, this document covers a wide range of subjects, very similar to an EAW, but emphasizes the effects of urban development on water resources, particularly Deans Lake. AUAR Review Process This AUAR is subject to public distribution, review and comment just like an EAW. The City is required to send copies to the Environmental Quality Board's official EAW Distribution List, which includes a variety of state and regional public agencies along with public libraries and a newspaper in general circulation in the vicinity. The City of Shakopee in the Responsible Government Unit(RGU). The review process provides for a 30-day period during which written comments will be accepted by the City. Comments must address the accuracy and completeness of the information provided in the draft AUAR, potential impacts that warrant further analysis, further information Ii I I that may be required in order to secure permits for specific projects n the future, and mitigation Imeasures or procedures necessary to prevent significant environmental impacts within the area when actual development begins. 1 The City is obliged to revise the AUAR based on comments received during the comment period. The City shall include in the document a section specifically responding to I each timely, substantive comment received that indicates in what way the comment has been addressed. If the City believes that a request for additional analysis is unreasonable, it may consult with the EQB chair before responding to the comment. IThe City obliged obli ed to include in the AUAR a plan for mitigation that specifies the measures that will be imposed on future development within the Study Area in order to avoid or Ireduce potential environmental impacts. I The revised AUAR will be distributed in the same way as the initial draft and also to people who commented on the draft document and to Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Staff. IState agencies and the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council may file an objection to the revised AUAR if it feels it has evidence that the document contains inaccurate or incomplete I evidence relevant to the identification and mitigation of potentially significant environmental impacts or that the plan for mitigation will be inadequate to prevent potentially significant environmental impacts from occurring. The EQB Rules set forth a process for reviewing and Iresponding to a written objection to the revised AUAR. Unless such an objection is filed within ten days of receipt of the revised AUAR, the City I of Shakopee may adopt the revised environmental analysis and mitigation plan. Upon adoption of the AUAR, residential or commercial development projects within the AUAR study area that I may otherwise be subject to review under an EAW or EIS and that are consistent with the assumptions of the document and comply with the mitigation plan are exempt from review under parts 4410.1100 and 4410.2100 to 4410.2800 of the EQB Rules. IThe Rules also require that the AUAR must be updated if, after five years all development in the Study Area has not been approved by the RGU, or if certain conditions or Iassumptions change. I I I Iii I I I I I I I DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION I This document has been prepared following the guidelines established by the Environmental Quality I Board(EQB) staff for the preparation of the Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review(AUAR)document. It is based upon the directions of 4410.3610, Subp. 4,that"the content and format(of the AUAR I document)must be similar to that for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW),but must provide a level of analysis comparable to that of an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)for impacts typical of urban residential and commercial development." I The AUAR submitted is based upon the items of the standard EAW form(June 1990 version). The IEAW form questions are in bold, and the supplemental AUAR requirements are in italics. I I I I I Iiii I I TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Section Page 1 1 Title 1 2 Proposer 1 I 3 RGU 1 4 Reason for EAW Preparation 1 5 Location and Maps 1 I 6 Description 2 7 Project Magnitude Data 3 8 Permits and Approvals Required 3 9 Land Use 3 10 Cover Types 4 11 Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources 5 12 Physical Impacts on Water Resources 6 13 Water Use 8 14 Water-Related Land Use Management Districts 8 15 Water Surface Use 9 16 Soils 9 17 Erosion and Sedimentation 9 18 Water Quality- Surface Water Runoff 11 19 Water Quality- Wastewater 12 20 Groundwater-Potential for Contamination 12 21 Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks 13 1 22 Traffic 14 23 Vehicle-Related Air Emissions 15 24 Stationary Source Air Emissions 18 I 25 Dust, Odors,Noise 19 26 Sensitive Resources 24 27 Adverse Visual Impacts 24 I 28 Compatibility with Plans 25 29 Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services 25 30 Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts 25 I 31 Other Potential Environmental Impacts 26 32 Summary of Issues 26 33 Certification by the RGU 26 I References 27 I I I U Valley Green Corporate Center I T11.20132 TOC Page 1 I LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. Preceding Page I 5-1 Project Location 1 5-2 Project Boundaries 1 5-3 Land Use 1 I 5-4 Cover Types 1 6-1 Stormwater Detention Ponds 2 • 6-2 Alignment CSAH 83/CSAH16 2 I 6-3 Proposed Staging 2 10-1 Cover Types(as of June 1, 1999) 4 10-1B Cover Types(as of January 28,2000) 4 I 10-2 Overlay Map 4 11-1 MDNR Protected Waters 5 12-1 Impacted Wetlands& Mitigation 6 I 14-1 No Impact Zone 8 16-1 Soils Map 9 18-1 Preliminary Storm Sewer Design 11 Storm Water Pond Summary 11 I18-2 22-1 Major Roadways 14 22-2 Alignment CSAH 83/CSAH16 14 22-3 Trip Estimates(BP) 14 I22-4 Trip Estimates(OS) 15 25-1 Effective Tree Barriers and Residential Receptor Sites 23 ILIST OF TABLES Table No. Page I12-1 Summary of Impacted Wetlands 6 12-2 Modified Mn/DOT 33A Seed Mixture 7 1 12-3 Plantings for Additional Buffer 7 16-1 Soil Descriptions 10 18-2 Preliminary Storm Sewer Design 11 I 22-1 Level of Service& Que Length 15 23-1 MPCA Ambient Air Quality Standards for Carbon Monoxide 16 23-2 Intersections Examined for CO Concentrations 16 I 23-3 Adjusted CO Background Concentrations for 2017 16 23-4 Assumptions Used in CO Modeling 17 23-5 Projected CO 1-Hour Concentrations 17 I 23-6 Projected CO 8-Hour Concentrations 18 25-1 MPCA Daytime Noise Standards 19 25-2 Projected PM Peak Hour Traffic Noise Levels 20 I 25-3 Level Relative to Commercial Standards 21 25-4 PM Peak Hour Levels Relative to NAC-3 Standards 22 25-5 PM Peak Hour Levels Relative to NAC-1 Standards at IResidential Area North of CSAH 16 22 25-6 PM Peak Hour Levels Relative to NAC-1 Standards at Residential Area 22 25-7 Simulated Impact of Tree Removal on Noise Level from TH 169 at Residential 111 Area North of CSAH 16 23 Valley Green Corporate Center T11.20132 TOC Page 2 I APPENDICES Appendix A MDNR Natural Heritage and Non-Game Research Program Index Appendix B Mixed Emergent Fact Sheet Appendix C Traffic Impact Studies Appendix D Southbridge Development Phase I Archeological Survey I 1 t I I I 1 I I I I I r Valley Green Corporate Center T11.20132 TOC Page 3 1 1 Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review 1 for 1 Valley Green 1 Corporate Center City of Shakopee 1 i March 17, 2000 ■ 1 1 129 HolmesCityof StreetShakopee South Shakopee, MN 55379 i (612) 445-3650 1 Michael Leek, Community Development Director March 17, 2000 i 1 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following summary briefly explains the anticipated environmental impacts and proposed mitigation efforts for the construction of the Valley Green Corporate Center. The numbering of each section corresponds with the question numbers of the EAW document. 9. Land Use Current land use in the study area is a mix of agricultural land, wooded lot, open space and wetland. The property within Valley Green Business Park is guided for industrial use under the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan, and for business park use under the draft Comprehensive Plan. It is zoned B-1 (Highway Commercial) and B-P (Business Park). The zoning is consistent with the intent of both the adopted and draft comprehensive plans. 11. Fish,Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources The DNR has been contacted. Their response is summarized herein. Fisheries There are no Minnesota Department of Natural Resource(MDNR) fishery surveys recorded within the project boundaries. Low water levels in Deans Lake leads to winter kill which limits the stocking ability of the lake. Because of these low water levels fish usually can not enter Deans Lake, except during high water events. Wildlife A thorough biological survey has never been performed for the project site. The land around Deans Lake contains a diverse mix of habitats and natural resources. It is expected that a broad array of wildlife species known to exist locally could possibly occur in the area. Other non-game species such as hawks and other raptures may also migrate through the area. Development of this area, will more than likely have some effect on present wildlife and may cause some displacement. The increased presence of human activity may also displace some species or limit wildlife use in the project site. Mitigation efforts to lessen and minimize the potential impacts to wildlife include re-vegetation of disturbed soils with a mix of native flora, protection of several existing stands of trees, construction of a 1.2 acre wetland, delineation of a"no impact zone" around Deans Lake, as well as maintaining proper building setbacks. Ecologically Sensitive Resources An index of rare, threatened and special concern species has been provided by the MDNR's Natural Heritage and Non-game Research Program. This index can be found in APPENDIX A of this report. The index located 6 species of concern within a one-mile radius of the project site. They included the Bald Eagle, Hill's Thistle, Dry Prairie (Southeast) Barrens Subtype, Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose, the Plains Pocket Mouse, and the Gopher Snake. None of the 6 species mentioned above was located within the project site. Site plans for the tproposed development will not directly effect any of the listed species. 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota - T11.20132 Page ES-1 Valley Green Corporate Center-AUAR Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. 1 1 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources Grading which has incurred on site to date has filled two wetland areas covering a total area of 0.52 acres. An Army Corps of Engineers permit has been received for this work. In order to mitigate the loss of these wetlands a 1.2 acre replacement wetland is scheduled to be constructed. No additional impacts are anticipated according to the site plans. Other impacts to water resources include the possibility that site grading may disturb the "seal"of Deans Lake, thereby impairing the lake's ability to maintain its water level. According to studies conducted by the Lower Minnesota River Watershed and the MDNR, site grading ' should not have an impact on the water levels of Deans Lake. Deans Lake is not hydraulically isolated from surficial sand aquifers by a tight"seal." Instead water levels directly reflect the ambient groundwater levels. 13. Water Use Potable water for the proposed development would be acquired from the Shakopee Public Utility Commission (SPUC). The project site was part of a recent Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA) expansion granted to the City of Shakopee in September of 1999. 14. Water-related Land Use Management Districts The project site overlaps a portion of the Deans Lake shoreland. City of Shakopee ordinances call for 75 foot"no impact zone"and a"150 foot building setback." Non-water related uses call for a doubling of the no impact zone and building setback. The project site currently utilizes a 75 foot "no impact zone"and a 150 foot "building setback." 17. Erosion and Sedimentation Proposed construction of the VGCC would include grading, excavation, and filling of two wetland areas. Lot grading is anticipated to achieve proper design contours. A replacement wetland is scheduled to mitigate the loss of two wetland areas. Construction of the replacement wetland will include excavation and grading to achieve design elevations and slope gradients. In order to control and minimize erosion and sedimentation into Deans Lake erosion control should follow applicable Best Management Practices (BMP's) during all construction phases of this project. Following construction, stormwater ponds will be utilized to collect stormwater runoff. 18. Water Quality- Surface Water Runoff ' Development of a land area generally increases the quantities of nutrients, sediments, and other pollutants carried away from the area by runoff. Mitigation efforts to minimize runoff and retain the water quality of Deans Lake will include the use of stormwater detention ponds and ' other applicable BMP's. All stormwater detention ponds will meet National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards, as well as conforming with the City of Shakopee's Comprehensive iStormwater Management Plan. No storm water is presently proposed to flow into Deans Lake. 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota - T11.20132 Page ES-2 Valley Green Corporate Center-AUAR Prepared by Bolton &Menk, Inc. 1 1 111 19. Water Quality - Wastewaters Wastewater for the proposed project would be collected by the trunk sewer system of the ' Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services division. As mentioned earlier the project site was included in the recent MUSA expansion. 20. Ground Water- Potential for Contamination A property audit was conducted by the Minnesota Pollution Control agency for reports of environmentally contaminated sites within the project site, no reports were found. Local ' residents have raised concern on the cessation of dewatering at the nearby Shiely/CAMAS limestone quarry, and how it may impact groundwater levels at the project site. A recent ground water modeling study was conducted for the Metropolitan Council (Barr Engineering, 1998). This rebound was for the bedrock aquifer only, and did not include the surficial aquifer(water table). This study estimated rebound in ground water levels ranging from a minimum of less than 1 foot to a maximum of 7 feet, with the maximum occurring at the northeast corner of the project site. Other studies conducted by the MDNR(Beissel and Ford, 1981 and Drivas, 1997) concluded that the bedrock aquifer and surficial aquifers function as separate systems. Therefore ' cessation of the quarry dewatering is not expected to yield significant rebounds in the water table. 1 21. Solid Waste; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks Solid waste collection and disposal for the project site will be provided by independent private contractors. Each individual business will be responsible for contracting with a solid waste collector. Hazardous waste generation is not anticipated within the project site based upon the land use designation furnished by the Developer. A gas station is a possible land use within the project site, and would require an underground storage tank to store its fuel. Construction of this storage tank should follow all local, State and Federal regulations. 1 22. Traffic Construction of the proposed development would include the re-alignment of CSAH 83/CSAH 16 to provide for proper access to the site. This re-alignment would include the straightening of CSAH 16, which constitutes the southern border of the project site. The newly re-aligned CSAH 16 would then intersect with CSAH 83 south of its current intersection. Local residents have voiced protest over this re-alignment because it takes away their direct route to ' downtown Shakopee. A traffic study was conducted by WSB & Associates, Inc. to analyze the impacts resulting from proposed development. Trip generation data was calculated based on a 20 year traffic ' forecast and a growth rate of 1.5 percent per year. An additional study was completed by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. It is estimated that approximately 32,000 to 40,000 additional weekday trips will be generated by the construction of the proposed project. Because there are few parallel routes to the area, it is expected that 55 percent of site-generated traffic will travel either to the north or 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota - TI1.20132 Page ES-3 Valley Green Corporate Center-AUAR Prepared by Bolton &Menk, Inc. 1 I Ifrom the north. This results in peak AM hour volumes of 1,300 to 1,600 vehicles. This in turn leads to problems with the number of southbound left turns into the site. The traffic impact I study also indicates unacceptable Level of Service(LOS) at certain locations adjacent to the site. Mitigation to minimize these impacts includes a 35 percent diversion of southbound left-turns from the CSAH 83/Site Driveway intersection to the CSAH 16/Site Driveway intersection. IOther mitigation efforts could include the construction of a continuous left-turn lane starting from the CSAH 83/Shakopee bypass south ramp intersection and tapering to a second left-turn lane. 1 As stated above, the proposed development will generate a significant amount of traffic resulting in unacceptable LOS at certain locations adjacent to the site. Additional capacity I and/or alternative access points should be considered to more effectively mitigate traffic impacts. Furthermore, variations in background traffic growth and site trip distribution patterns could result in more severe traffic impacts, particularly on CSAH 83. I23. Vehicle-related Air Emissions Pollutant emissions will be associated with motor vehicles traveling to and from the project I site. Vehicle emissions were modeled for the project site using the MOBILE 5A emissions program, and numbers generated by the traffic impact study. The most critical pollutant associated with vehicular traffic is Carbon Monoxide (CO). The Minnesota Pollution Control 1 Agency (MPCA) and the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) have set 1-hour and 8-hour ambient air quality standards for CO. The MPCA standards for 1-hour ambient air standards were used for this report because they are slightly more stringent than EPA standards. Four key Iintersections identified in the traffic impact study were used as receptor points for the CO modeling. According to modeling predictions, all four intersections fall below the established standards for ambient air quality. No significant adverse air quality impacts are expected in I2017 because of the proposed development. I 25. Dust, odors, or noise Dust and noise will accompany normal grading and construction activities. Mitigation to minimize dust and noise will be included in construction procedures, and should include: • All internal combustion motors will be fitted with mufflers and other noise control equipment as specified by the manufacturer. • Construction procedures will comply with Minnesota Rules 7005.0050 on the control of fugitive particulate matter from construction and hauling activities so as to minimize adverse air quality impacts. I • Minnesota Rules 7030.0040 on noise limits during daytime and nighttime hours will be complied with to minimize any adverse impacts on the noise environment. IOnce the project is completed and operational, no unusual dust, odors, or noise will be generated except that associated with mechanical equipment located on or adjacent to some of 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page ES-4 Valley Green Corporate Center-AUAR Prepared by Bolton &Menk, Inc. the buildings within the project. ' The STAMINA 2.0 highway noise model was used with the numbers generated by the Traffic Impact Study to estimate anticipated noise levels resulting from the proposed project. Traffic noise levels were analyzed and compared to MPCA noise standards for residential and commercial land uses. The residential area most likely impacted by noise from immediately adjacent roadways carrying project traffic are those north of CSAH 16 and south of Deans Lake. Noise levels were analyzed for PM Peak Hour which represents the worst case daytime noise ' levels for comparison with the MPCA daytime noise standards. Receptor sites were placed adjacent to the critical intersections referenced in the Traffic Impact Study, along with residential receptor sites along CSAH 16. According to analysis of the model, the project is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on noise levels at future commercial areas adjacent to critical intersections or at the residential area north of CSAH 16 and south of Deans Lake. 26. Sensitive Resources A request has been made to the State Historical Preservation Office for a site review of the ' Deans Lake area to see if a Phase I survey is warranted. A Phase I archaeological survey was performed for the Eastern portion of Dean Lake in December of 1997. This survey included archival-documentary records research, a visual inspection reconnaissance of the project area, ' and subsurface shovel testing. The results of this survey indicated that the eastern portion of Deans Lake is considered to be moderate to good for the probability of unreported archaeological properties. However no significant archaeological/heritage sites or properties within the Southbridge project area of potential effect, and warranted no further archaeological reconnaissance. No prime or unique farmlands, designated parks, recreation areas, trails, scenic trails or vistas were found within the project site. ' 27. Adverse Visual Impacts Proposed development of the study area will alter its appearance from an agriculture/wooded open lot to that of a business park setting. Final staging for the proposed ' development should include the planting of trees, shrubs and other landscaping. Some local residents have voiced protest over the removal of several trees from the project area. Their concerns involve the fact that MTH 169 is now visible from their homes. Several trees were removed from the north border of the area. A portion of these were targeted for removal in comppliance with the City of Shakopee's Oak Wilt Suppression Program. 29. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services Construction of the proposed project will include water and sewer extensions from the City of Shakopee. No negative impacts on the City's infrastructure is anticipated, because this site ' was included in the recent MUSA expansion. Impacts to other public services are not anticipated. i City of Shakopee, Minnesota - T11.20132 Page ES-S Valley Green Corporate Center-AUAR Prepared by Bolton &Menk, Inc. I I30. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts Concerns have been raised about the cumulative impacts of this project and the proposed I developments at the Flying Cloud Airport. The Flying Cloud Airport is in the planning phases of a new landing strip that would direct air traffic near the project site. Because this landing strip has not yet been constructed and the scoping of the AUAR, it is not plausible to present Idetailed information regarding this-issue. 31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts IThe Shakopee Environmental Protection Association has been an integral part of the AUAR process. Many public concerns were voiced prior to the preparation of this report. I Therefore, at this time it is felt that all known environmental impacts have been addressed by the AUAR. Input and concerns of the Shakopee Environmental Protection Association are appreciated and helpful in assuring that every effort is made to protect the environmental quality 1 of the Deans Lake area. I I I I I I I I I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page ES-6 Valley Green Corporate Center-AUAR Prepared by Bolton &Menk, Inc. I Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) INOTE TO PREPARERS This worksheet is to be completed by the Responsible Governmental Unit(RGU)or its agents. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible date necessary for the worksheet,but is not to complete the final worksheet itself. If a complete answer does not fit Iin the space allotted,attach additional sheets as necessary. For assistance with this worksheet contact the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board(EQB)at(612)296-8253 or(toll-free) 1-800-652- 9747(ask operator for the EQB environmental review program)or consult"EAW Guidelines",a booklet available from the EQB. INOTE 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 I 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 the completeness of the information and suggest issues for investigation in the EIS. 1. Project Title Valley Green Corporate Center(VGCC) 1. Title. An appropriate descriptive title for the geographical area of the AUAR should be chosen. I 2. Proposer NA 3. RGU City of Shakopee Contact Person Contact Person Michael Leek Address And Title Community Development Director Address 129 S. Holmes Street I Phone Shakopee, MN 55379 2. Proposer. It is not necessary for A UAR purposes to idents Phone 952-445-3650 property owners within the AUAR area(although it may be 3. RGU. No changes from EAW form. I useful to use such names as identifiers of various land parcels). I 4. Reason for EAW Preparation 4. Reason for EAW Preparation. Not applicable to AUAR. 0 EIS Scoping 0 Mandatory EAW 0 citizen petition 0 RGU discretion 0 Proposer volunteered IIf EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category number(s) Note: AUAR is prepared under EQB rule category number 4410.3610,Subp.4 I 5. Project Location I S. Location and Maps. a. The county map is not needed for an AUAR. b. The USGS map should be included. c. Instead of a site plan, include: (1)a map clearly depicting the boundaries of the A UAR and any subdistricts used in the A UAR analysis;(2)land use and planning and zoning maps as required in conjunction with items 9 and 28; and(3)a cover type map as required by item 11. Additional maps may be included throughout the document wherever maps are useful for displaying relevant information. 1/4 Pt of SE 1/4 Section 9 Township 115N Range 22W 1/4 Pt of SE 1/4 Section 10 Township 115N Range 22W County Scott City/Twp Shakopee, Minnesota IAttach copies of each of the following to the EAW: a.a county map showing the general location of the project; NA. I b.copy(ies)of USGS 7.5 minutes, 1: 24,000 scale map(photocopy is OK)indicating the project boundaries; Refer to FIGURE 5-1 PROJECT LOCATION c.a site plan showing all significant project and natural features. NA 1. Refer to FIGURE 5-2 PROJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARIES I 2. Refer to FIGURE 5-3 CITY WIDE LAND USE 3. Refer to FIGURE 10-1 COVER TYPES I 1 1 — SIV I ';=;: -! Blue Lake 1 1 _ - _ _ _ . - ' Ess •� . - ... % /� f> a, -- --'--J. -- �_ .,. !,-1 TOO-\/~ _ \ Yi Water Tans _ J '" -� Waterworks �7 o TI a3 `,,,..;...,,,,.z.F..A: !, ----„—...,..,„---_-----„,_ -- t �,X20; -- ril t ,� ikEz _ r pu II I( - _ _ ■i,4 -�_ >l : - I o illi !I : . -. 764 c __(...----- 2,-.,[ 2a! ryCe �� �__ �T58 - \ ,,, // ,y ././,, 4,1,0 \\\:-:/- _ S c, it.- - - _ .,,,, .•*: 9,f''' / r..• t It' (;15 - _ -, e "", 1,./%17WX-r#' ''''' .. '4- - ,,• J ..r.. • : PROS T • I830- p M a• S CS — =a . • . '"-- _. � - 16 - - — _.-_T —�3s81/ � � i \,,P, r-,'--/ 1 y 1.`3 — '�� _.0"� } _. 1 __--852 :?i ', -,_ _- 820 II n o G. 97 11 1- ,, . I _ _EY GREEN CORPORA 'JT Sri: .GPEE, MN I 1 PROJECT LOCATION FIGURE 5-1 .=s i —i—c_—)f---.J :1, 1 it --1------1 .',--(1 , 1 1----,J Cl---_, 1n;jin nl j fJJIl1d�L'r: OW173W06£56 31130V3 J b LTA N y M J in fV AVG A8 03A0:ddv AMIVQNI1OH A.L}I3dO&Id II II In U tz, 31V0 A8 NMV20 N U W U) En ir - -JIiiII Ill I e Ot )) d /ill "J AO � UI r ` , - I, it ' . / rn , /� \ :\ ) J � \ �II I / III I I 1IH 1-1 ' . A Cy/ -!l nL , Ill 1+1 boo , / / ,-, N. .- i/ 1 J t:; I U U I \ � ,g`J 1' l� f �J ! III I I A r �+ n 4"I-, \ { I I. J11ItGIII' 7 vim' { n n ii 1 I I Ii / �'� -� yr PI l ) •/: J� I I I I ; I t n _� ---�J �\I 1 CIS o g{. ��, n �r . /1\ f U ^' `�^ III �I_I t 1 �! `--0-1 li ` / ✓ o m r .le O • o12 .N : uJu 1 I (L n 1 \ m n n I III I I / mks' _ ® I ® �� ®�®®cfficb•7 iii •r-C 33 I I I •• . -� ' \ �I \1 d (a/ (-) J { { III I I I" 'r" I fl-��� i IN:::=1) J Ili �� 1 (; .\J •` �` - — `'. ir. I l "^% � I III I I I � . �� i". ` �--� ti� p i i n • mTh I ---'----„,) II II i ``- •& / m \.,,i'H.H1 1 t 1,1 r ct _ I I I I y �� r3i, c\ i,/ / ... , I p ' / -- m �� t, . ,avnav mot _ III I I 1r _:riir _— 'c S 4_..'.. .ib AL1 I (���./ ' `` I ,� I II�t• +` t I m \ /Y iY` J � TIII III • \ r-- 1 0 I II \ `Jn Q 5 / ,.______ u i p i/ nI l y-'�6 444,1,; ' - n ,II I - nQ. ' n� 'n \ '^ m 1� � i � ) â �o�, _ II / (!� ? 1.� �� I I 1 V \ Z 'W" Ewa J i "' �. Jn rn I� � n � �`� � Air i 141, Jm di IP III�I . � � mom' l ( diiiillliirriallb \ IIII IIII hi 1-1 iLl e`v 6 / , \ / E I nil. 1 - �` i / -� _ II ' �' I r� 1. I LII \C� nY' . /� ,1 /. ' ,7 �I II III \, ?"i J �, lV/ - rill I s ` I I V h \oil, `moi i^ {iii 1 A 1., ii________) ,0.7 , ... i , / a { 1. Z1 v • z C_ — \ ---- f,� QPiii#141///7' �/�, , W m � 111 s % r2 I ^ , \; • >_ itt ,._ �`., ., ' I � � �!'(: ),) � � ��� ar 8 12 /1/.// Q �. ' AliMeggfred—,i' , c \ 1 , (i 40 ir 0 bi CO Li `'] , __.„,,,, ! �` i 1 ( el, , .-: ,/ i ,.. ,c-,;) , ,,,,, ,,„ m�vAG ,. t . ,—",,_ ,_ .01 , ,,, D 1— w z �i�6 ' �.. , ) \'' )/ ' •ter' \t ii ' N. / ff J/ a w ____,_ +._ _ ) ,,,,,_:::_..4 ,,ti.„li: tit.11,1) i I il5a);"''. F• '-, ,--‘,N._-- ,r- / ' -“s3-#94fr 0. 1 ' :, i_ f \ , /7 '-/ - ' C--'-'1‘ "61'14 r;dila% 1 \ F. ..,,, -„, • , 0,1-LI., ,_ ( . ,,,, \ . ____,- ..,3, 2 .., , .,,i_ • V / i / (n 1Nikusu.V9 AS n� {' 1 n ) n I --r1,- - I , ` 1 P(/ / tMo ( 9: ) liffj I r 4 \ \ /- . ( -, , , , ,( I -q-- E,4_,T, i� _ � 1 I \ \n ! 1 I . �' r 1 ' ) 1 / /I)I I �' C- o Z I \\,. .,,. ''2‘) '2104 ''. I I r\nk \\ -. 11 0 , -) „ ...u:;Li L 7---\_. Lip) / i r'. 0 I - 1 1 ) r . ,,,; 1 / I // 11 '-a. 1 E m Li Z �; , \ 1 \\ ,,Vr1 � I . I I S\ y,, v, ,...,w 5 z ;— 0 ., m a— 0; 1. i'i' ,,, z t, . \,_. . . \i i'' I 1 - \ 1')/ ) lif p, ^ ¢i II a i I / I \z (4-0,t, ------' % 'tel irr-2:aj 6 �f•r,=fit_/ I• $ n (lJ I \ I ( ' \� 'R` ` I \ ; \-' \,, X) 1/ I' ?/,j rr'1 •1 1 I I g nr-rr�f fi I•I• Ao it i I \ ' } � �� 1, ;',f1:1;11.'''''''/://-` 11 { I \ ' r ` • 1, i \ 1 �4.v I `�� /�!1 I��ij�'Iti ;if / ,,,11 r.: .______.----..- / //if!), - / „ r ,/ 11S k.. , } I K tl ,.,., II ,o / /s `,,� is _ __ --, ,, i , ,, i i C_ 6 I' i 1 / i I Li . - I J ///(n,�rk t • // r ., .4'--- _ 11-^,)I m ,1 • Aca Lo ' il bq i ___I i 1 i i ) ' i , yCI �'� . —4.- �>.'iiG -� '-_-`�F' ° _�� �' Alis liey �ff�-._.S -- : law- / I _,,;;;/-'// .r - vil8 A' • 4 w' 8f Q8 AIN i j I /f.j ) m C \ / \2 I f-- 4,,, , �7, J (' ;r -if J IMI Mi. 11111 11111 - - OM 11111 11111 11111 INN I MI 111111 r MI■ 111111 — 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. 6. Description. Instead of the information called for on the form, the description section of an AUAR should include the following elements for each major development scenario included: - anticipated types and intensity(density) of residential and commercial/warehouse/light industrial development throughout the AUAR area, - infrastructure planned to serve development(roads,sewers, water,storm water system,etc.)Roadways intended primarily to serve as adjoining land uses within an A UAR area are normally expected to be reviewed as part of an AUAR. More "arterial"types of roadways that would cross an A UAR area are an optional inclusion in the AUAR analysis; if they are to be included, a more intensive level of review, generally including an analysis of alternative routes, is necessary, - information about the anticipated staging of various developments, to the extent known, and of the infrastructure, and how the infrastructure staging will influence the development schedule. 1 Note: the RGU must assure that the development described complies with the requirements of 4410.3610,subpart 3(and also that it properly orders the A UAR and sets the description in that order as required by 4410.3610, subpart 3). a. The proposed project is intended to be developed into a business center to stimulate a balance of economic development, community values and the conservation of natural resources. The business park will contain a mix of office, warehouse, retail, light industrial, and commercial sites. Refer to Proposed Land Use Plan FIGURE 5-3. b. Potable water to serve the proposed center will be provided by extensions of the Shakopee Public Utility, water distribution system. Wastewater generated by the center will be collected and treated by the Metropolitan Council-Environmental Services Division. 1 c. Storm water will be collected and stored in several storm water detention ponds located at selected areas on the property. Refer to FIGURE 6-1. All storm water ponds should meet National Urban Run-off Program(NURP)Standards,and should be surrounded by a buffer zone to enhance the ambiance of the area and control erosion from the shoreline around the ponds. FIGURE 6-2 shows the ' location of the realignment of County State Aid Highways (CSAH 83/CSAH 16). FIGURE 6-2 also illustrates the location of the roadways within the Center. d. The proposed Center will be developed in three stages at the rate of one stage per year. Refer to FIGURE 6-3. I Provide a 50 or fewer word abstract for use in EQB Monitor notice: ' ABSTRACT: Project Title : Valley Green Corporate Center Description : The Valley Green Corporate Center is a proposed 332 acre mixed business park in the City of Shakopee, Scott County, MN. The business park will contain a mix of office,warehouse,retail, light industrial,and commercial uses. 1 RGU : City of Shakopee, MN Contact Person:Michael Leek,Community Development Director, 129 South Holmes Street,Shakopee,MN 55379,(612)445- 3650. Or, Ron Roetzel, P.E. Consultant, Bolton and Menk, Inc., 1515 E. Hwy. 13, Burnsville, MN 55337,(952) 890-0509, Fax(952) 890-8065 1 1 I 1 I I t, --- }.) \..., -_--, BLUE � , LAKE LEGE\ D _y .,ill , FIS"ER Single Family Res. U'- _ Medium Density Res. 4 ... 3, yy High Density Res. 'I rr Office `d ,, y{ 1 ) :::::: go _ - 14 tz Mc.: Light Industrial IIIti . ....„... . 1 1 „,,,-----g,- J; or BEAN , ,, ® :: 1:::stra LAKE nt l V ` \\ MI Park 1 I Open Space • g 1 g` -----'z2- ____—_____—� _ Entertainment : ; 9 i NORIEN Future Urban Area 4 TirLI 7. ".n4 Musa Boundary —\ Overlay F, F, I ��/ Mining Overlay �P� LAKE Q9 0- CITY W LA\ D „ S - IIli! LA\ Shakopee GRAPHIC SCALE Comprehensive Plan W FFcm , 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota 1995 � I � �. � E S - 3 ''I. =S n)I�-1-'�J�l I /1:::=_..—1---1 , 11 1 I! ;- �-�r,�uliir,y�nJic1 E ':parr yir� 000Z `8Z tiDnuop :94D J 6LESS NW 'aado>o4S D 1.o S a U u I W `a a d o>j r I S .;fed SKINISilaJalua3 alnJodao3 uaaJO �CaIIDA JO ltfld A2NNIW1138d .10 :2J3 NMO , — ' W '• i ,, _____7, : cLg ' °Afit'vb- :.,:,, '', l\r, ' i - il ,e''''"vc."':(6-• ,o_ : IF 4,,, --''' RA ,, . 1, D turawi 6 V)° Di. ` - - --" iIIfr' P' • �'`� I t. ,, .1 ' ' -' L.- r ,,, i,.. .. . .. . „ . il J ,HI - (8) 6 •• • ',\: ',.. \,,, ,' , "kll I: r . ' q) 11 Si ': a. z 1101 ij Cif A Z ! i / i i .,,, ;,. t Pli w 1 \ W II I .� : r 'taio -27 I ai t' :' ' t 1\ I 14.4riril` _._.,- .\.:. I , 11114) w 1 r'• i . . 1from 4 \41.S14.00- --::ilt112--- $ ,. ,: AIL, .„/ ,-!„ , N . ... , „,. k,i( vo,11.froi 7/1/1: 'At. - ;/ Ar --.. -Ze...0 , , ,, _ i ,,._ ../. PM [ �i1 \; /: ; 1 i ! tfi, . , ,\ / 1 ,,,,, „. -11 i I , L , i C) \ I 1 t. ( / / ii SII il s . . ‘,•.. y/f.4 )0ly L___40ti„ p fr,11/ .�\� 11 V,.,,VI\ �- � •( ./ � If r �„....,,„4. i , .��ilk, 1,fra\;� r cY (71, �J�/.g A\ r , !V\ ” 11Ld � ,/ !I W .i, i i 1 i t.,-,'\\\ ilk ! ! k ., , , z i \ \\ rf#7 "' 1 _J M hif I ' 011 i Bi \ ‘ , El 4 1.11 ii," ' Ill ,if Lati , ii, 5 ., ),1 r7 i 74 Ra \\' '\ A 1 iiii .,,,0- E 'i ‘ \ 1 4:1' Alvill'i.',,,,,,i; iivotrArilit-I,.,1- y 4r.41 Aso!..---"VA-a "111105.414 / i/ \ r • .i -;*:-Nt 410/ .''' „4,4,,„ _-'10,- _ ,._._ ______,41ti ,,irf-0.4Wimmi. ,_linf, -------r- - - sz:Z \411111‘1111111E4MWaTr Awr .r.. ..-:-___ . 7_,,\-„ lviitriiet\, 1.\:,\,\ ' \\„:..,\‘l-....k. • . -—l\l-Lqft.. hh.. ..,f,rfr.014\.0.if=.a.tv W'I'l'i.i.v,.r171,/O-,,_N..,..- 'VIlk ■s Mr NM MN 1111111 MA r — ON MI r MI In SE r — MN r MI Uri III.gym 01071• CS102 'O1•rl" c5-O[-t 'ur1 S 6L£SS NP(`o3 o 1qS SIONNY1d ' SMf3NIONII ' ilYll3fIN19YNl1I 1. I (HIM ,., t1,. . �1LOS�NNIIGII I d0)IdIIS wln��sYw��•T�C��oer/wmwtil rnoru oOLI-I►1'n, }/lbwTrOpOIIYP IIIIMMIIIMW W,7110W Ir.t mlllri I I l� �,y}�'l 1�y fit* Uo'v1jN ) ( iCin OOY►119-LN ,f7.- N eV irl ` clot WIC 111, Nina D'Y f �D i✓ ti .11 M1171 ..1 w4 A n•n w t70n ollvo llrosgpw v �T ^ R 1 ' �R B 1AA LLH'9 ��a or.3 A.I 1n r MI ir,l,al[ VI MAN 11.7.L1\13J.111.1 10d(L03 N RID A.7 1 1 A oi,wrvu 0 10{17Y n,a■n IMI w ltla,�nsiM ww wu,n°�",�i m Xi7 1� �yy .0410 owl POO NNM OCC • \. "' LI. 8 1 ! ,,,,., III 1' 1 1 1_--2a. I I 1 1 W I'i !x I I I z I ! I I,I Ii i II I ,I C 1 ' I I 1 1 I I it 1 OVII. I 1„ i« i r 1.1 2. I \ Q 7 \ 1 \\ h g I y I[V' Id I 1 I UiW.� \\ ' �r■ M1s 1 I ss I I U \M\\. J<[ i 1.1 /I•I _T- ` i wl I I W W W W W USW ,u p U _ ss W I -\ .�/ �I i r-'. \ Z I+Nf I+N1 N N N N N N N fNV N <� •y V"' ` '''j�J I ii /;14 \ v \ M1' \\ g nn ;;;;;;CP,' o0 0 i.. ^., UJ 1/ =S1 I SII .x§ ,\�\ :m \\ \ m o0 000 �� g ��� r� Z 2 . m. M M Ili ? J•[ �{`1/Y' I,�re ,\N\ J ZZ NNN NNN NNN NN ZU I If •// /I / < W I. >-! 1 I ( \ \ O r^ r 0 0 ^O r 0 •V P P e 0 n '^ I / \ 0 0 0 o h V O P•.N M N P r1 P 010 N V 5 tJ.. Q ' IL 1 l 'Ro\ g4.4,44.4„,!,,44.:44::,6.;.4 .: O I --r G / z n-NN� .•-PPotooP.- -o N0 I .R \ \ / 1: r N 0^N M r1 N r r.r P n N^o P M 1 —I—.y \\ / NW ryty N n A M M A M N M•2�n N N .... 1 Z �'l I• i I 'id i I "\—�— F� 000.0000000000 W,0000 O I •. \, F I I j•1 / 111 <W V �[ Z I a —• •II Y �1 � I'® ®1 I I, 1 ^i i NOO^NONoO 0N•Od ornr CC N N f N N^O^f A A..N h A P 1 W ZI ' I I I I 111 } I' -r M M 0 0 0 o N N N N A.N N h N 1 W ' I I I ` I �9 �' Qt ONo 1.100 f r„1N< oh 10 In W 1i "t 1§ .•NNNN N N NN N NNN .-N,.-.- • `\ VI 1 If-_--_.,I ' 1 "z. I NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN 1 I 1 1 u1' if /I / _ \I W 1'�I rI 1 11 I .•'.QjS 1 1 R 1fNyp •- 11 J [�I 1 I/i YI . 1 1,I N1 I a4 1 1 iN ••- ' = n h N I ` 1 ) I iy < N 0 11 CC ' Iii ; , x .�,.� '— r :a / , a 11 UI ' II I i 2. Z. // .� �,\'t, S•« 13 8 8 8 8 1 �: 1 II I\ I ••• •i1 /If / 1 �M1 I I is I ..�[ • ••• 71' 1 < I• ry g i g \ 7 1 III I 1 I/ \ i u , '� \ I I I I I 1111 J•[ 1 , I 1 1 S N n n 11 \ II\\ 11411 j ► ,_>W \ it II 00 - c o \ \, ` 1\ ' I iF§ , i I.� \ 11 p II' C P N R 1 1\ \ }47[ I I� 1 :eft ! ,/ , 8 0 o n- a o vl �?A o u P n 1.7.g; r N 1 1 \\\ 1\� X 1 x:l // I q�! 1 I ,�\ 1`.\1 \ 111 /;1 , t $ � Fill oO qa li o i a !I \ \,,\,I\ 1 J<� I N .Z2 .n.0 10 10 0 h 1�A r� h o Z 1 W Z8 1 5 ' I Z 1 I I ,j\\\ Ir iU ,\3 , J-.1.1 g mX`aua eauaXauakm m, a td I i I x:I ? / 5- 688S88'6-88°-""'""'' \ 1® ®I l� i I g NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN I Iis ii Ii I I� «Y I l i '/�' 0 I 1 I i ca =� ' I I 11 II 11 .- 1 � I� /' //� J 1.0 I • I 1 11 i , II = 1 1 i ///// W W W W 11 1 I I 1 1 P�//j' I^LL i ' I V p :1 u, w o 0 00 DO I I I 1 /' , / I I 1 N N N f \ I ' `�/�/' I I I g N g ¢Z M A r r I I 1 Q rP1 \ 11 I 11 I �\ / r / I ' I o o N o n ca m •• r r • \ 1 Neu MOD 1 I //// P P P N o lj z z z z `1 11 \ I ; a //�/ V qq yyf `\I I n ' t I .,,[ ////' W I I PMnO PrvN rNOPn N2S r 10 N; 1.000 N^ I /� U' v1A I-0 r O.-q V/NNh 1..m oM nron CO \I 1 1 ZW : I ' / y�J Z lo. 171 W W;2 C'SSoNrP000 O h o ^ r o I ' I I I I F 2223: 27,,7 h h rr O N N N fI^y N IOV N h Yf.fl h N Z al n N T 1 1 1 ' • 0 W t 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10.01010100 n n n n A n 4 `40100000 •'\ \ II , II I / / 0 r�y'1 1 zW Z I\ 1 1 I I I /' / WI I 32 n.Nn.On1=.12888, .71:;,zNII7...H'ri18m 1 I I 1 ' 1 a I„ Z h n.i'f1 0 o,v • _ —.- -----�_ ---- I(.iJ] i Y,N O P N P O h N o Xf F p0.p_N�N '8 .I+-•.�7 Z ort •trr,pn..Vf HV L{ PPP POq.h n/Pt NOOn00•0000 U NNNIVNN It ' I EH H`dS9 4 --------__.—.—.—^__/ -- aa�• NNNN ONNNNNNNNNNNNNN ((u NNN NNN 1 1 O 1 1 / N D N lyq" 1 1 �tMOn J : • 1 1 I IC Qd_ i I•J F : n I. n• H .'. n O r < Z ■w < P • a'. D P O N c T. 1 N n O W h N qa v u3 8 8 8 8 a " 5 g 4 8 8 U 4 C C M A N N R O in 0 ,- O IJ n n a O . C Nry O OM1 'r 10 pp 8,N 00, O.100 N 01 M unit co,0.1.On 10'1 b O O NM tv. 8h N NN0M P•ON A N,'Z ,•O1 <'b 80al TM N I Nr m .NN NNN Mein n '1:1.1 •• O O r 1. N co P Por P h i a$ Y'aau`d'a`Quk'aaekdnu25 o $a a u a g a h ZO 1,,nr.101•o p,O^Nnr rt0h o o O O O O O O O O P Zd a$ rrnofa' 4 66 d3S LO 06P 10.Of£90l\.P076•Nd\POD\O£T90IV 1j H 1111111 111111111 w .1 111111 MS r 111111 — MI MN MS — 11101 w — — — I 1 • II ;i II I �' 111 - =-__ J 12TH AV NUE . nn iv --- _�h —r I _� � /� a+.�r:ii!irJ�llil�l�lfA� ,r^ ...,.. � arn_.,i te 1 ISI i li I r _M. - ----- r I II TT ! 7- ! • Yi � � ,, GVAT4 7^ � ,/ - ,,,,.� i N£ ..1'� { 1 Lal�f, -c�--`mow.. ; ..1 t ill _ �4 t i � , ,-2:::_-_:,_44 41E --I � - - :. ='©9th �° s, ...46-' (--......,-----/---- IN FILL 0.52-ACRES.- I^ — l(LETIAND f I fs "aRiNAi.1� '_ V - II! -, ,�,= . DEAN'S ' ~` I, `` ---.. LAKE it '- \ ~ �•# • C' -,,, �-- `.� , ( IIS ` �es�+�g,q�� ` — : 1111141.11 +f c�UNrY_Roa I I NOTE; D � �. ADDITIONAL WETLAND._ BASE MAPPING ADAPTED FROM MAPS PROVIDED Bl(DAHLGREN, i BUFFER: SEE FIG. 6A' I Cil ( SHARDLOW & UBAN INC., SURVEY CONDUCTED BY PETERS PRICE & SAMSON LAND SURVEYORS; REVISIONS PROVIDED STAGE 1 BY W.S.B. & ASSOCIATES, STAGE 1 N2 STAGE 3 I n_100 ao 400 SCAL M' • INr APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING VEGETATION - I I IANTICIPATED STAGING VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER SHAKOPEE,MN I IFIGURE 6-3 I7. Project Magnitude Data 7. Project Magnitude Data. The cumulative totals of the parameters called for should be given for each major development scenario, I except that information on 'manufacturing", "other industrial", "institutional", "agricultural",and"building heights"is optional. Total Project Area(acres) 332 acres or Length(miles) n/a Number of Residential Units Unattached n/a Attached n/a Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Building Area(gross floor space) Total n/a square feet; I Indicate area of specific uses: Office to be determined Manufacturing n/a Retail to be determined Other Industrial n/a I Warehouse to be determined Institutional n/a Light Industrial to be determined Agricultural n/a Other Commercial(specify) Building Height(s) IDetailed information regarding the densities of specific land uses within the Valley Green Corporate Center are not known at this time. This report is based upon a high density alternative-as provided by the developer as a"worse case"scenario. All land uses will I be consistent with the proposed business park land use, and the associated City zoning ordinances. As mentioned earlier,the business park will contain a mix of office,warehouse,retail, light industrial and commercial uses. 8. Permits and Approval Required List all known local,state,and federal permits,approvals,and funding required: I 8. Permits and Approvals Required A listing of major approvals likely to be required by the anticipated types of development projects should be given. This list will help orient reviewers to framework that will protect environmental resources. The list can also serve as a starting point for the development of the implementation aspects of the mitigation plan to be developed as part of the A UAR Unit of Government Type of Application Status Army Corp. of Engineers Section 404 Permit,Clean Water Act Nationwide Permit received I City of Shakopee Preliminary Plat Final Plat Site Plan Approved Grading Plan Building Permits Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Water Appropriation Permit(construction dewatering) (MDNR) I Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit;National Pollution (MPGA) Discharge Elimination System Permit(NPDES); Water Quality(Sect. 401)Certification Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Watermain Extension Permit I Minnesota Department of Transportation Right-of-way Permit for County Road(CR)83 access (Mn/DOT) Metropolitan Council Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA)extension Approved I Scott County Right-of-way Permit for work on County State Aid Highway(CSAH) 83 and CSAH 16. Note: Permit requests will be submitted upon the completion of the AUAR. I 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 environment hazard due to past land uses,such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks. I9. Land Use. The A UAR does not need to include a section corresponding to item 9. The summary of existing and past land uses and discussion ofpotential land use conflicts should be included as part of the response to item 28. The identification of any existing areas of soil contamination or other hazards can be included under item 20. ICurrent land use in the project site is a mix of agricultural land, wooded lot, open space and wetland. A summary of existing and past land uses,as well as discussions on potential land use conflicts can be found in Section 28 of this report. A property audit conducted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency"'found no environmentally contaminated sites within the project site. Information regarding Iother hazards can be found in Section 20. 1 3 I 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): Before After Before After ITypes 2 to 8 Wetlands N/A N/A Urban/Suburban Lawn N/A N/A Landscaping Wooded/Forest N/A N/A Impervious Surface N/A N/A Brush/Grassland N/A N/A Other(describe) N/A N/A Cropland N/A N/A 10. Cover Types. The following information should be provided instead: a. cover type map, at least at the scale of a USGS topographic map, depicting: -wetlands-identified by type(Circular 39_ -watercourses-rivers, streams, creeks, ditches -lakes- identify protected waters status, and shoreland management classification -woodlands-breakdown by classes where possible -grassland-idents native and old field -cropland -current development b. an "overlay"map showing anticipated development in relation to the cover types; this map should also depict any "protection areas,"existing or proposed, that will preserve sensitive cover types. Separate maps for each major development scenario should generally be provided. a. Refer to FIGURE 10-1 COVER TYPES(June 1, 1999) NOTE: Because some site grading had already occurred prior to ' this report, FIGURE 10-1 does not show Grassland or Agricultural land as a cover type,but instead shows the soil types present. FIGURE 10-1B illustrates the cover types present as of January 28,2000. b. Refer to FIGURE 10-2 OVERLAY MAP 1 I 1 S I I r r 4 , ttIr (/1t ��. AIX , , -\,,,,,,,, ( i I . ( t ff y y v / 1 \Z;t< ,i. ' . - .1— 17 j ! /..,,,,,--: _ �'\ �� I t ..„) \)/-4----, - ... .,.. , 1 ,.... , NIN ,\,\s---k7-- --,:fe--- ,--7 ,,,11,,,, , ft ��� \ 1i` \` 4 • \ \ \ � 1 ' : \ / 31il�a ,-Kd 13lTdlt I - °1 t111/1111r 5�` 1 J *tà k \ k ' 1_,0_,..,. . \ ‘,.. , \ , , N I ,\ I/ 3., N./:= 4 •Imomionm / ii (')i i I 1 0 : ——LA./...... -;•--4';:::::-..c: I\,, 1' '‘'... fki .•... ' < / t! \�. i \ i----1(/' j} i\ ` `\d. lIt 'N \,..,„ t o�4\ :�" ce .�`4 i ti 4 • �• , r " Fid �t � w ' %'-.1 r'_.-t Eta t \\- !\ �,\� ! { \ ' I / t \ ` it.Iia \� , \.. b -1. to, \ T. 1 I ,� \ 1 f ��\�;:\\\\\\oma ���� ,��i:, f 1 / \ it ,,, ! "1"-- ', 1.,1% \' kk1:11 \ tis \ \�::r: ��� / �f =-ice i�, \ t \\.• \• \ l,t.a.a.��a�-� \ \ I Iiii 1 , / 1r �'� -.....:.. .\ .,t , `\� .t • �` / `� `�� '.t�`-�,ti• 1 / IL..asbtw t �J •` \ \\ .a , r. \' " ' i. \ Y• r-- -jj � ,I._._._..i.141.4• .!'in 1 .� ,e�7r�• ."'�s"V'r{y �, �• i o s Q\\ 7 �- ✓\ I ( 'kIM1 ,.-•-•••.-_, ° : a i 1 f 1 i i t \ � `g +: a \ f / 1 \,a �. + t ft t rs V � Ii11 ( � �� t t tt I t ! � q.A\ ' o • ‘ -- f——t-f---.-A%— / 0 1, fii ..1 11 4,1 14 ,t1f; , ,,_._,----C.—"" , •i / -J.: : ii j ca 1 if ) S. 11 I 1 A.. 1 i t \ tp- ?\ ii.e.. ' ' \ � i\ i ‘ ‘1 t .--s, --,'"liof I i \ 1. t i r - j 1 C_ — t. t 1 \i t i f ! jI �w e* I/ t. J 4 1 1 '•l 1/7 i /j tt j j t 1 41116,„ 1 1 1 I1� T1s 0/06 u14nv .., excf-,eicrael ..._ . J ' I,r�- 1 1 / _ 3 i / f.i'F 0 1 I Cn /• / t / f U %// It 1 1 �} 3/ 1 � i IP, ��� ? . 4 Iit t � 1 . ! i L__,i..D.wtl 1 1 ut l 1 4• 1 1<,t / j / ! r -v., 1111ir � r 4 ; 1� i 4-t 1:4t ' 1 vt�{, f \ ' 1• i `r 1 77 t / i / O % t JNA'% 1 t X t / •J / 1 Ld / ; 1 1. ...1 - /t7) * / • Z d' � J 11 t i7 / 1tCO /, J / t t o w •J aas _�� • . ._• ; _._ d P--' W l ` —a � frt QQ Z y f v o w in Gl Ill Wz0 1 .1 / � � �� ♦/ W tt w CIlligilla /1 € //, W w p JfX in e� fJ///" / a a z 3 z sn o z �m �•' tl, a W zg J / W ¢ F. ZZ W " Caslip / 2 J // a 4 '' W p E" F CI W 5 0 w �T�j LL j..„j (� '° ai / J r / Ix 4 fx d O O C7 E "" L7 A aa 4 U W I� U1 7 \� J J' 44 I H L... o 3 / ( 6 = a 1 I 1 11 b b I O I f --I t Awe 7awwn:WWI. f i M 111111 NM SU 111111 N 11111 NM S M 11111 11111 111111 MI MN N N SIMI i i' Cr-\) s ,4"------ - '. M 6,,____i 6.4 „,... -0----- 1), ,--- rt-CioN4, \ illtim f I fe3/ # /7 it , i 1 '�� lii g At : n ier I .,,. ‘,. .. ,. _., .. ..,, ,„ � ,„ „.:,_ ,,,,,, / () �t, itt •. -...I ,... -, ^ / Li..1„, „„ ,,, „ ,,,„,k gip ,. 1 „„::. ,,,_, ,, ..„ • // C.) 1 0 D . N-711 K . _ , ,, ; _..,, ,,,, iiii ''-' ( \- 11 l.'' I 4 4 -,_ A. - doltic.--- ,..: ' , 4'. ) 1 4 ) ) Mo.' N, ,,,,,,/ ' i - -/ ,, Iri 4vt,„..patill 10 . /, i ' .,. ii: .- 0 ( 1 Nt g 4, /4 th \ t 1 -..: in ..-1. - 111 "it ,0 i, ts r) Z ` it l Or. ,_,„ .. . , .. . ,. 0 0 €.,, i ; ,- ,,, . ,,,, . ---- -; 1 : 2 14ID 1 / ;jib./ . ° n `�. Z .4 H Z r W11116. 0 It — r i Q.) . i 1 ilp ,. ig., ., 1 ,, 8j is, .,,,,,\,,,, c I f :7,.... ,. _, ,,,,,, , m r ,. Aw , ,L ,Jo, ,,. �, s.,, ,,,,,... i ,,,,------** tili.,,,......r., '1,t\ .„,1 // , , • ,,, ,.. ,......„„,.__.,.m . ....„,,..„,*„,cr. ----,0,.: „._ liti . . N. rook itrif 1 , 0 tiLi-4.,o ,`, 1:: . --1.,,,_ .. _p -P 7rift `' `` L Ul 0 92 POO //// 1— Q Ia t 1 t . ! r \k\ii......,__ \ 1 !:-A illw LY CU ip. ,0,0 .11 .. 1. 1 L )17 4,!I 1 ,4\,,,‘‘,,, 1 L__:.\\,,_5_-:ii 1 1:. 1 ) (/// i vitiN1 1 ti 61/1.; ,I% A fil *11/11,/11, ii if .):/! LA CK ./toP / ?1; ' 1%. OA 4 4 s P ( E1)*(;:ii:1:11:17//iii � I. i CS -A 1" l. --41k,vel - " ��� 'AO {, \i„ j` I 1i 4n, .f: - • ----- .-- _,_, . ,4vii 4P.Itati ! Lg ,, , > 0 0 — .4 , th , c _. 111) ._ -4,,„\ 1 y I; ,,;3;: .if(i.” .,, iij \I 1 I := i it* t,-, RI 1 Pi r'. \\\---44- ltd ' /� , 10 . w . 1 rt II i (1/ .4). 11...: /".3. ik r , i its 0 Et g ; ; 1 r1,7;' i(ic,%4 .11----V>4-4. A.,/ .r z Z.J � � ...�. '`- .r:�,�LIQ —�� —_ � s�I�� �� .�.i>1rec . �-� ����w.�+�c Z (' '' '. - 1'7' ;ii1�_ ''�►�1,” ,t.irk•►,--'i•-►- �"'4._._ .4.'`"'�k' ��iwripont - _ Li_ --- F- 0 -\\ rP r 14...., ,i 11\ 17‘. -1* r . ' r r< ul --1 A .\\ \ \ I , r illip fI4# ,, :1""Aill 1 all 111111 N MN MO — In MO 11111 MI 11111 r 110 NM OM i 1111 UM r 000Z `8Z tiDnuDr :a}DQ 6LESS NW 'aado>104S D 4 o S a U U i W 'G a d o>1 D U S CU :46s.Y y''Y `r`'a as ua a oaodJo uaaa 1Ca n " f JO 1`d-1d A :IVNI1A1113e1d 0 :83NMO r--•1 Iir 11 ( i ....g., \) -7 W 'r __ i (C5) 4 1', ' it , t,,," „if _i„ ,,, ,_ . 'GI , \,„ ., , ,..... . , i, 0 tia,„._ , ,..„..... , , — it: 1 ' ' I 110441Ak / / 1401t3t . ,4 waft it A . 111110.11 1111111 ' o AV ,''' '. /... : ... . I1 � , '. .' I 0 .iv, ,, ; ..: ci /) (-, - i . ,. 0 1,,,k1 1 „, a_ '2. - iir.u)'\. .).:.,-.11,:" . \,,.- - 41 - 7.-1 7 Iiiii 11/' .,‹ , .6 ii 4,0111 z . i 1 S_&i,,,-if . 7 SP >--- 3 o .:,i ,__„,,,4 ..• Ii I Ill.:, 1 , niiii ...- 11°) �; (..%..., -. . . k r ..,_/ ,, 9'._„.....- i---- u ..\ i E� ,,f � r 1 / C / 0 t 1 . \\k\ . \\I . i—ar--Tikiiil .‘4411P \''''''--'''''..'1—ii (4/'-----'"1.7—4`•---.- '7 . N....4e.:''''Iri ,, ('‘'( °I itri /.: ' 1:1 ()&. ,, —iff41711)) - ..--,,N4. i igAlr,i0 ii 'flint:14 -:- o -.4 itbOltrit \\\ ,.r- . ...,- r ili i 1 '''` 011111 \ Nsc, _,,,---..-------- .., ,.44ii.......4111.w ,. ,,;("Horis miff _11 ,,,\,,,,,, ,:„.:4; 1 s ;,' lilt! ok /;.:0; fir i f elif / /,''',/,:ii \ i Lc;).,,. it ; f I I, hi' le r ilt-:-.11 1.-3 I 11, !xil 17 ii! „e,tit ,,,,, ) .ip 4 I.I .1110- if,1, &,- "`!; \\, 1. .' E **Ir. 4 V. /./I ,4141ill 1.1 T L "41, rid . : 111 . 1 ' h �,� y c, , i j(ir//114,./..41 )„ ,,, le a t ,-,,,,_,,:_.---_,1144,vrt,11 , ,/;../11/Ii/ exp .1 Yrr9 •� III ; ,10 1111) , „.., _______.,a 0 al, " # ic',11:14,1, r 10,!/,,i"'AY- /,., w 1 ill c \ tf4t• 7 c.i ao �� f ill \‘` i n • 4ptil J li i 8 • ,,,, , 1,,,1 ,$,/ , , . , 11:!,;# rj / 1, ) To :_n! -_ f 4, 10 I,: Ikl i 1I i ; ,(j_,,,0liel,f;',000, laff 6 '11Q_ \ \ 1 i', 0,01:i 01.0°Ar 1, W'AlPi°6411 I 1' /1:;;(1401,4541f4,1111thrifft ,.,),i,101"Hill Att 1111 J _ - - , ,t j .„,i , , /,,,Adopor vieki_tit \_.....h......4103411140s _. __�. Illrr / ° I �� ,` fi0 .v. , .. - _ )i IF \ i 11:\ r \ . ipkee- 111111 M MN i N r — r 1111 MS 11111 11101 E MP 1111 11111 111111 I 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. Fish, Wildlife,and Ecologically Sensitive Resources. Ill. a. The description of wildlife and fish resources should be related to the habitat types depicted on the cover types maps (of item 10).Any differences in impacts between development scenarios should be highlighted in the discussion. I As discussed previously,the project site overlaps a portion of land known as the West Deans Lake Area. The West Deans Lake Area consists of woodland,open space, Deans Lake and a complex of wetlands and marshes. Fisheries There are no MDNR fishery surveys recorded within this project's boundaries. The adjacent Deans Lake is an MDNR protected I water(Identification no.70-0074),and classified as a Type 4 wetland(FIGURE 11-1). With an average depth of 3 feet and a maximum depth of only five feet,stocking of the lake is limited due to the threat of winter kill. There are the possibilities of fish entering Deans I Lake from Prior Lake,Pike Lake or the Minnesota River. However,this would generally only occur during a high water event. Fish may migrate to the wetlands during the spawning seasong) Wildlife I The west portion of the proposed development is grassland that has been converted to agricultural land in past years.The land around Deans Lake contains a diverse mix of habitats and natural resources. Three principle cover types are predominant in making up the area: wetland,woodland,and grassland. Refer to FIGURE 10-1. It is expected that wildlife species known to exist locally could populate I or migrate through the project site. The most common are:deer,coyote,turkeys,rabbits,squirrels,racoons,muskrats,pheasants,ducks, and geese. Other non-game species such as hawks and other rapters do migrate through the property. A thorough biological survey has never been performed for the project site. According to Diana Regenscheid,MDNR-Division of Wildlife,there have been a few unconfirmed I cougar sightings in the vicinity,but stated that this would be"highly unusual and unlikely." According to Ms. Regenscheid, development of the property will more than likely have some effect on present wildlife. The increased presence of human activity may displace some species or limit wildlife use of the site.As it exists,the habitat would support wildlife populations through a variety of life cycle needs. There is the possibility that some of these needs may not be met in the specific 1 project site following development.(') In order to minimize and lessen the possible displacement of wildlife from the project site,efforts should be made to avoid negative impacts to wildlife. Where impacts are unavoidable,appropriate mitigation efforts should be implemented. These mitigation efforts 1 currently consist of re-vegetation of disturbed soils with a mix of native flora,protection of several existing stands of trees,construction of a 1.2 acre wetland,delineation of a"no impact zone"around Deans Lake,as well as maintaining proper building setbacks. b. Are there any state-listed endangered,threatened,or special-concern species;rare plant communities;colonial waterbird 1 nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat;or other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site? ® Yes 0 No If yes,describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources was 1 conducted. Describe measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts b. For an A UAR,prior consultation with the DNR Natural Heritage program for information about reports of rare plant and animal species in the vicinity is required. If such consultation indicates the need, an on-site habitat survey for rare species in the appropriate portions of the AUAR area is required. Areas of on-site surveys should be depicted on a map, as should any I "protection zones"established as a result. Ecologically Sensitive Resources 1 An information request was submitted to the Minnesota DNR's Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program to identify all known locations of rare,threatened and endangered species within the project area. The following rare,threatened and endangered species located within a one-mile radius of the project site have been provided by the I MDNR's Natural Heritage Program(Appendix A). All records for the following identified species were located outside of the project site area: Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocuphalus) I The Bald Eagle is considered a special concern species in the State of Minnesota, and labeled "threatened" by the federal government. Bald Eagles have been spotted north of the project site within a National Wildlife Refuge. Bald Eagles have not been spotted within the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development. IHill's Thistle (Cirsium hillii) Hill's Thistle is considered a special concern species in the State of Minnesota and was found in Section 5 of Scott County. Hill's Thistle has not been spotted within the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development IDry Prairie(Southeast) Barrens Subtype 1 5 I /'- art !I Ii., • — =tint II t ` �—`�X03 3 —.. ..,...7.0.....—•r_—_-__ I if I 1 °, fl Ih 1 7 >0 f1�•3 Z ° 1r 9 III % ] ;w • ,' O 4 I Yi ! S Im { .,-., - �E NO is p: I.i • � r , F. ill • • r A. . '-'.: .::-.F AlF * j /' a• ..::::C:4•i : '-'-.-, '. .4.- II 'a : .A1114vize i& . _ I.. .--. . ; :,:.,::.:.:?!.7. _•_ ,4••-, 4 °' m• "Ia. � • 1-�' a.r • ( r/ a ..ii : �' Q • • n • i51I II s.:. kr. 4 1 / -�." CC W 1 W , i 1 i. � 3z 4 W ,y., 1 m 1 1 1 / 1 rr .s ti 1 F— W ,,, a. xt 1 - _ . mi3v Q Q Z h1 , •,.....n , . •201, w • J I Z Z / -- ::..•:!''i;:::: J rt r Q Z fw �•'• r fn .�f..• 1 / 46 Q 3 ;*':•.t::::::::::::: i / 3 V 0 W 11 .. . .„........„. ..,..„.. ,„ , •.- /AU/ • % O W Qi , -rm.. I / 'A'S' I r; CiW d ' ci . Cl. I t I 1 . / llic J y Off: I� 1 , I Yom! Z Z t i 1 is I / x ..::::,•,,••:,.• v..,; . . II W 4,_. • '-. • �_'-L'— :� •'' - a II J 4ie ✓ t Ii vR I. • I z ` -` 11 e. _ fit i Ii "J g • - _ rrSu.� 1 >' i1 • -' wJ, , .. ...... , ..... .._,LI' t. co 0 'A°' i. lf�rt . a� I - .l • `q• -.yam • �� /K / I Z 1 I� c{ STS PROJECT NO. I >> ° e6. 95394-M •I I i # :j;: x i O .I I I iii STS PROJECT FILE 0 • J_ r`_ ::g T I 1 • SCALE ;::: I_ /<>.^ x i- 1 I c 1"=1 mile \': t x 1 �'I !. - .• ', .— ....- ..':' , 0 td 1- 1 . FIGURE 11-1 1 L68wiodI2O9'ou/'Bu/uni8930 A barrens prairie is located east of the proposed development. The dry prairie is a natural community consisting of sparsely vegetated grasslands,with often exposed patches of bare soil. It is given a state rank of 1,meaning it is considered in greatest need for conservation action. The barren subtype of the dry prairie occurs only on sand dunes of the Anoka sandplain, and are considered the most distinctive but also the least common of the Region's dry prairies. Rare animals commonly found in barren I prairies include the Plains Pocket Mouse and the Western Hognose Snake. The project site does not contain identified dry prairies. The dry prairie located to the east of the project site is not anticipated to be directly affected by the proposed development. I Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose(Oenothera rhombipetala) Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose is considered a special concern species in the State of Minnesota. It is a large,conspicuous biennial of sandy habitats. Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose was found to the east of the project site. Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose has not been spotted within the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development. I In addition,mitigation measures within the project site currently include the re-vegetation of the replacement wetland and buffer areas with several native species including Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose. I Plains Pocket Mouse (Peroznathus flavescens) The Plains Pocket Mouse is considered a special concern species in the State of Minnesota.This small,long-tailed mouse typically occupies arid to semi-arid habitats and feeds on the seeds of prairie plants(Coffin and pfannmuller, 1988). The Plains Pocket Mouse was found to the east of the project area and has not been spotted within the project boundaries. Thus it will not be directly Iaffected by the proposed development. Gopher Snake(Pituophis melanoleucus The gopher or bull snake,is considered a special concern species in the State of Minnesota. This snake prefers sandy soils,dry I prairies,oak savannas, and pine barrens(Coffin and pfannmuller, 1988). Evidence of this species was found to the east of the project area. The Gopher Snake has not been spotted within the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development. IThe land to the north and west of Deans Lake is considered a mixed emergent marsh and labeled as a natural community,although no record occurs in the Natural Heritage Program database. No rare species are known to inhabit this natural community occurrence. However,natural communities are considered rare features in themselves. A mixed emergent fact sheet provided by the DNR's Natural I Heritage Program can be found in Appendix B. Plans for the proposed development include a"no impact zone"around Deans Lake and minimum building setback distances set by City of Shakopee zoning ordinances to prevent any negative impacts to the shore land of Deans Lake. Additional mitigation measures have been described in the Water Resource and Water Quality sections of this report. ' 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)? ®Yes❑No If yes,identify the water resource to be affected and describe: the alterations,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 the impacts. 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources The information called for on the EA W form should be supplied for any of the infrastructure I associated with the A UAR development scenarios,and for any residential or commercial development expected to physically impact any water resources. Where it is uncertain whether water resources will be impacted depending on the exact design of future development, the AUAR should cover the possible impacts through a "worst case scenario"'or else prevent impacts through the Iprovisions of the mitigation plan. The site plan for the VGCC requires filling two wetland areas covering a total area of 0.52 acres. The impacted wetlands are shown on FIGURE 12-1 and summarized in TABLE 12-1. The following is a summary of the Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Documents(4)for the project site. A full copy of the Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Document is available upon request. This report indicates that removal of these wetlands is necessary to maintain Shakopee setbacks and comply with design lines, as well as conforming with safe roadway design practices for the streets and to accommodate the development of the Center. Neither of the two Iimpacted wetlands are adjacent to,or hydraulically connected with Deans Lake,or its complex of wetland and waters. TABLE 12-1 Impacted Wetlands I Wetland ID Acres Filled Comments 26-WM 0.23 Monotypic stand of canary reed grass with relict hummocks 29-MS 0.29 Bulrush marsh with poplar fringe. Numerous mature tree,sapling and seedlings were dying back. Total 0.52 1 6 JMO.5001469J\l46£96\46£S6\;x in r. I� 41) 3113arD ` IOSINNIW `33dO>1VHS NSI ,i 011' a t o b - -7 31V0 As 03AO2!ddV e131N 3 0 31d?10 d e100 N 33 H 0 A311VA 1,r W ~ " 1, —' 966 lit 1101 ors PA, '141,' '41' C°' w 0) 1-44 1 NOIld0111W ONb' S10ddWl GNb'113M ce ch a 31V0 AS 03NO3H0 U e, a a 0 w 966L/4L/0L NVl E v N t� 3 w MVO AS NMV210 III II j II I 1 II I'll I I i 11_0 I.II I \L I I ° fe �. r &I II 0 III 1 1111 OA ei I i I II ir, ' I S""'! co I I ,� I I Gi till a 1 I g I Z IrsiN N I �� Pi U I �g III 1,. e %%1°1 I I I :44/1, ! J oawI I =II >-11 'y •E• 1 W q �' 11 Il11 IIoI p.'") J�. Iit •.� G L 11 o I Z ) _ o�;� it I °Iz I o WZ s 11� Ih _ 1 Is I I o0 e � I i III �' I I ZI—I w ° li tl I II .LII !! ) ��% \\o I ' IC 0 a qr 111- II 0II I -M 1� , IIi °I.rg, J p z ____ _JII 1 11 0 iifez II I ' Q — _Ii, 11 a III ', )- I o III I I I , , 1 o /1"1"....°11441114)4 Alp z f''. s I I 1 5 :\ 1 i I I 0111 : i• uj Ii i z< op_. 11;111 I • 11;1 II II - - �I II L II . Is i• p (3i 's ;,,, — SII i I9 Ih j I I I ° o �1111 a/ �� --mot a !!� P• — ' 1 — —70-. f� lit IIS �' ''it �` ."o ." ©J oLai `, •1N3W35tl3 Stl0 OS lk - I 1 It o / O8 ` oc Q W _II ��� u I` T 4 C3� j! 8e 1 �O F! (n ri e' • ".. :0>--a_ �I� G i I \oo W o I h m `3 I •� 1 I I �' ,� IL' oo "� � N I1 Q �.; 9 I ' o wwz i I o� N.,\I, _> � ° r I • z ' azo I ° —1F U II 1' iI "`� III I I , j mWo II + W o III \ °1 I'; I1 da I I ° , ° • il I wN NiLd I II \\� I ! a , ° W(3pH 11 Iat Z �H e I �U QI 1 II - �z� .� 1� o• ti e°° / i . p =I w ,.I i q `I Ir I ..<co H d I �Isny` I o bs $ .. I U' N ,1 5 I V\ ` I I o I Z°'v. ekS o.I l i I �Q,1 I p m 1, ` I I 4 \ \ \ \ o 1 e, ' 11 1 M V1 \ lle /, ° "---- --1/ 3 i D ‘Ilz g, � "" . z $ W , i „I\ ' / F j1o I zL I1 1 I Io a I 11 u � ,ill' f s. r Alrvn❑II r —1 i ; ' ; _ - ' /`/ Qd❑ '(1S31Nd ' 1 III II.� \ I\ � l'il w= IIS — J, I \ , �� IIS �1. ISI ';�' �e >°4 i � i �,,; % ,. 1 I I : tri i1� c� Ir III, Q I II I = \ � 7 I1 N 11111 NE — UN N 11111 - - S — n — N MI — 11111 INIII 111111 I Mitigation for the loss of the impacted wetlands will be done on-site. Plans include the construction of a 1.2 acre replacement wetland surrounded by a 1.7 acre buffer. An additional 0.45 acres of buffer will also be created in conjunction with a storm water pond. The replacement wetland and buffer areas are illustrated in FIGURE 12-1. The report indicates that in total a net increase in wetland I acres will be created,along with 2.15 acres of public value credit. According to the Wetland Permit Documents construction of the new wetland will begin with the excavation of soil to achieve the design elevation. The ordinary high water(OHW)mark for Deans Lake is 747 Mean Sea Level(MSL). The replacement wetland will be graded in accordance with City of Shakopee grading standards to a design level of 748.6 MSL. The grading plans also call for a variety I of substrate elevations both above and below the design water level, as well as stable slopes. Slopes will be designed to maximize mitigation efforts. Erosion control will follow applicable Best Management Practices(BMP's)during construction of the replacement wetland. The Wetland Mitigation Plan indicates that BMP's to be used will include traffic control,erosion control,temporary construction I protection,and restoration seeding. Final phases of construction will include top dressing and re-vegetation of the replacement wetland, buffer areas, and all other disturbed soils. The replacement wetland and buffer areas will be re-vegetated with a wetland seed mixture shown in TABLE 12-2. Additional trees and shrubs located on TABLE 12-3 will be planted as additional buffer zones. ITABLE 12-2 Modified MnDOT 33A I Apply 50 lbs.per acre(PLS) Seed replacement wetland basin and storm water pond buffer area. Seed form elevation 750 MSL down to water(NWL=748.6 MSL) line at time of seeding. ISpecies Common Name %of Total Pounds/Acre Petalostemon purpureum Purple Prairie Clover 1 0.5 Koeleria cristata June Grass 2 1.0 I Sporobolus cryptandrus Sand Dropseed 3 1.5 Agropyron trachycaulum Slender Wheat Grass 3 1.5 Stipa viridula Green Needle Grass 5 2.5 U Lolium perrene(var.italicum) Annual Ryegrass 8 4.0 Bouteloua gracilis Blue Grama 12 6.0 Bouteloua curtipendula Side-Oats Grama 12 6.0 Schizachyrium scoparium Little Bluestem 13 6.5 I Cover Crop* 40 20.0 Forbs: 1 0.5 100% 50.0 Forbs are as follows,for each'/i pound forbs mix: Oenethera rhombipetala (Rhombic-leaved evening primrose) 4 ounces I Geum triflorum (Prairie smoke) 2 ounces Lupinus perrene (Wild Lupine) 2 ounces PLS-Pure Live Seed I *Oats or winter wheat,depending on time of year. Note: Purple prairie clover should be inoculated prior to seeding. I TABLE 12-3 Plantings for Additional Buffer Adjacent to Founier Property IShrubs-Viburnum trilobum(American highbush cranberry) Trees-Equal numbers of the following species: IOuercus macrocarpa Bur Oak Acer saccharinum Silver Maple I Celtis occidentalis Hackberry Some local residents have questioned,informally,if site grading activities could possibly disturb the"seal"of Deans Lake,thereby impairing the lake's ability to maintain its level. The answer to this question would appear to be no. A study by Lower Minnesota River I Watershed District engineer Lawrence Samstad(1975)on the source of water for Deans Lake and related issues found that Deans Lake is not hydraulically isolated from the surficial sand aquifer by tight sediments forming a"seal";rather,the level of Deans Lake directly I 7 • reflects ambient groundwater levels. This finding is consistent with two MDNR studies that focused on the potential for quarry dewatering effects on Deans Lake(Beissel and Ford, 1981;Drivas, 1997). In any case,the site grading is well separated from Deans Lake and the adjacent wetland. The possibility of disturbing such a"seal"even if it existed would be minimal and would not have an impact.(" 13. Water Use 13. Water Use. With respect to b and c, if the area requires new water supply wells specific information about that appropriation and its potential impacts on groundwater levels should be given;if groundwater levels would be affected,any impacts resulting on other ' resources should be addressed. With respect to possible individual appropriations by future projects, a general assessment of the likely need for such should be included,and if there is potential for major appropriations or environmental issues assessment of those should be included along with a discussion of mitigation for potential problems. ' a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells? 0 Yes 0 No For abandoned wells give the location and the 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). ' There are no wells known to exist within the project limits of the site. However, if any are discovered in the course of the construction,they shall be sealed in accordance with all local,State,and Federal regulations. b. Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water(including dewatering)?0 Yes 0 No 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. ' According to site plans the proposed development will require a temporary permit for construction dewatering purposes. Dewatering is anticipated to accommodate construction of the required infrastructure. Cessation of dewatering will occur once construction has been completed. c. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? @ Yes 0 No If yes,identify the supply,the DNR water appropriation permit number of the supply,and the quantity to be used. ' The Valley Green Corporate Center would acquire its water supply from the City of Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (MDNR appropriation permit no.806205). In September of 1999,the City of Shakopee received approval for its Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA)amendment involving the addition of 554 acres to MUSA. This 554 acres of expansion included two areas. A 222 acre property guided for commercial development located south of MTH 16 on both sides of County Road 18, and a 332 acre property guided for ' business park located south of MTH169 between Deans Lake and County Road 83 (Valley Green Corporate Center). The approval for expansion was evaluated by comparing future water demands with current demand. It was estimated that the new MUSA expansion would require 660,000 gallons per day(gpd).(6) This approval was reviewed and passed by the Metropolitan Council in September of 1999,and ' was contingent upon the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission's(SPUC)ability to supply sufficient water to the expansion areas. 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 state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? ® Yes 0 No ' If yes,identify the district and discuss the compatibility of the project with the land use restrictions of the districts. 14. Water-related Land Use Management Districts.Such districts should be delineated on appropriate maps and the land use restrictions applicable in those districts should be described. If any variances or deviations from these restrictions within the AUAR area are ' envisioned, this should be discussed. FIGURE 14-1 illustrates the proposed"No Impact Zone"around Deans Lake. The City of Shakopee shoreland ordinances call for a 75'"no impact zone"and a 150'"building setback." The ordinance also calls for doubling the impact zone and building setback distance for non-water related uses,making the"no impact zone" 150'and the"building setback"300'. Site plans for the Valley Green Corporate Center currently utilize a 75'"no impact zone"and a 150'"building setback." 1 I 1 8 `ox•3311 •IlrO 6LESS NI•VaadmI IS SU3NNYld • SU33NICNC3 • 3IniontitSWdNl cs10z 66-0C-6 C 1,113 '.11..x3 010331 V.1OSUN1TAI aaaCavHS 41noS pnAolnog PlAsnPuiAIPA 06ZS 00,,iii,S xvd 'mg irPiu'+Y 1' - •3'd •SS131 •r 1336 1{ O['[Bol MVO n 0061r1YS•Lle r R +yM 11+2 �� 11?JVd SS3NISf19 ,u,/a3row ,Al 33a0na 1 �7�.�r�7 �T i t� a4r l ►6-I-ol BY zr9 rwz Ilrls all lIt 1Q 9NRI�9 T A 6LP9S NW,,'Sll�0td5auu', fie' ' a-t-s vl 'A>171033 'AB lrld w Snl all 001 014713 l t1gSS3/0tld 1 � ��.�j y, ww�ll `N�•`�llll I♦•r•,'`9 "pl'°°, 11 u3 a w. 2IaLLl�i►�a a.L�'2IOd2I03 11iaDI9 AarI'IVA inwo 9I•,P iesAi ON '�' Igllrxrl.a3 ••101 iln3b 1131x"11r ,3,.35 4x L.31p.2.*kt SNI trNl All0a A0011 • •191 d -- rrZ.1 ,:1!11:3,:ti::i I:: j':I —� • + 1 11 I las ma ! ., ;11:31.:i:,,!I#:'!I , `1111® _. • iu:l:u.as,h;r! 11: 1 1111 1111._._11111111.__... rtr 11,!1,1;ohs ii 111 Is 1 t 1131!:,i,: I I i !00 I. ., Ip • O 10!11! I Iii ,,, )• _. I f I o '' ,\P Q. ::il'::1/:7"I i'i ::I: '.� 1111.'.. ff I 1}r + rlil:,l.11nS"; t' J r 111111111111.. ' I `I ` , �.y{• bi ,-' • :,',;iii ',palls 1;:p,,, +':i 1 `'•,3 I 1 t I •',\ •'+' ,j'Ya 4` i' / ! .2) ' piP ', !" ;!;! r 1 6 -'+. +-"1, I 1 �... -.' .JILT!Iii i I • ri 1-. t: :�ti., 1 }C �' / r. f Y !:,yk111 !1„1 ,r4,_ 1 �,..,% tl�S�l•I'r Fi w.'Y•_.. ' rifi;i,' ii Ir 1111 l 1 ),,•.'r 'I;t I "+, 1� , r, `. •:,: 1111. „ x 1 1 i:hlll :1„ j , r; 1�1 j 11 L.....,1111 j ` 3� /' O .11: ' ;1 � } E II � :f ( t , iii:,. , :: ..i 11' 1111. w.. 1 i %' +..I / rIr 1 (r t,�l" Q 1..., l'l Qi. v 1111. IL `` *( ✓'• 1 1 ) I I /,''''. . .! l ...1.1-1- I r� l 1 ,.L t • - ;j1 •11_11.... ..1 ',\\.`�`\ • '`w' I , S ^ - , �f'r, /1111 / I 1111 _ /`,/ 'F .i; k 1 ' 1 1 _ > . .•i♦.♦e••i r..�.i°i`sw I i r O u"ii n, !: :r .t , •i!i�:•ieo♦ii❖ii•♦•i♦iieiei I I r r +` II.i it !II r1 'j •e••o•••�•♦•♦ I Ij$4 ;` ' • "'r•: `( i'r' r ,Z • kk \1.1.:+:.:.°.:.:.:.2.:.:*....I:: 1;11, -w � `�:;i 1111 1;,i::' ;)f. '+ � �' iiiiiiiiii0�ii►. ;A ' �. ��..• -'" �' r§� ,.� '!4?'.. ,,':::. (`i•eOOO•oe❖O♦♦<•o`c-:;e,, 1 I 1111... %% �....!....� / , vi 1111:'1111!1111 : 'It • 11 1` ` �•'•.4+:+:41.:44,444‘ ••♦•i•i♦•oe ,••••o•e4 1 I • r .� stv t...:„s.,..,,,,,,.. _..._ 1 ,� .1111 f'......1" , .........: .;41.1.i.- , 1 +•♦♦•1.•♦••o . - .r..,,,.-.-,r- , s �. :*nto / t,C`,•1111 4. " n 1111 1111..... ;, •�•••••••oe••se••�r� f L- C`,..„ F 1 1111..... , : •••w•1 r•••. t • ••ee. .' lI 1E' i3 I-wr,...' • f >>V�►i; ►•e•••e •�•"• .1 z Et ci ,. ' t Z In 4 '►°311°1!°eii t 1 ; f s .- ;, 1 •••••i••••,,,+,4• tl( ' ' kiAl V) fi 1111_ Z O • {1yy�� I !;i 1 .••••••••e••v......'• , 1 ' ; N , to w I z ii+ { W F- i;i ; 1 •••••'►••♦ 111',',1' '� •;IIII f r F't W0 ' :I • ,r� 1 • C7 " f,; •ese♦eoe.❖•i t I I W ! ; \, i , Q -•t Z l is I 1.'" , 1•i 1 'I 1.° ',`'t'111111111, _' • ,,-,,,41,----, rS?.t�`r,...,t sY„' Q �+ ;, i r . ...d. 7 `I "is), 11_,1, ; ,AAttt �,..,1 w� .+"• �' ,`+' 1CI `r 1'• 1 • cr `,i \, It !. ��, .f{ j ,,11,1 i •1111 i, I ? , k£ ,l (1 '11 W ,.y 4 .'} .Vll , z `\ •, CI : , ai w\'' i,' , 1111 r\,. �;•r. !''\ r'' . ;, '11 W _ t ).i Z \ , {,`\�'` l'(4/ : .y�� ... '° :.55 1..1 •�i•. �I _1�.. � + «3' • W j¢ - t ,t1' t r 0s�:. 1;311 �: '.:W,•'11: ,.`t,. .. .,,• ..4�� ♦ .';' m3 •..,, - r•1111, ♦°e e I r f ,,�11+:4+47 •e ..;WC') i 1 r 1 $ ♦.! Y' `S \' 1•♦♦+ r 1 l,'1"[� r , •tr4�. 1 l AY ►•.�' T��;! t AP1 � lY't 'E'I k i ! Y,,, M f t t,� {i.. .., /111!1:i.%,•1I m H W,1 ` I1 .4 • ,fS ;11 ! r 3 F 1,h� » �'v:� !r+ Y. ,•'j 'v'�►— U !�! !! 1d: . ‘•`::7-11•+" t•, N� }1 s I ILULLJII C------7,::_',,...,,i N rig r br,' V1tr JT• Z + / t ►:' '� • r , / r r r Z W J CO Q n 11 ,1'' 11 3: {ix.i t< 1•• r t I G- i r Fi'".`.rl ' .r7 1 111 1 N ' I i ♦31,t♦s. :}'p. ,ti i 'l 114.4°• 1 I~, i' Ir• \' 'S.. ! , --- .',1/ ' r r /r,i z..._ ; C� ,1,,\ 1111 t .3 ''i !i'''e,{,� 11,'`i$, i' r \`I i' ►1!111 r._-` 1 I i ! 1 ,1 1 2 � , ,�r,• W^In W Z ♦ t i ', 1 \ •• t 1 i L 1 ,1 i• . t • % i ' y ,• CO CO H W 1 , kl ti { t,ipt 1 .�r.• ti.t ►•G' 71 , • 1,r� rr"+ S rL,+ t ,, r 41 ill >> �:,,x dll r T r'r ,-t•••e• ....,u' ! , ,' r ;\r ^ 3 r \ + r ,(•r 1111. �' Z l'�U ,,1 1' , t •ti�.,.0,,1:♦ \\ 1111, :•i•r< // 1:..... tI t j a i ' ,.r► r. J W W W Z • \�t �' 1 1113' tC '''Y' ;',..`> : ' +�1 t•••• / ./6>/i7�. rif \i,\ \ r� ,' 1 f •f t. ,n J Y it O O 1 i ♦ It / ..\11 > ��' .00, ▪\... .'•"' i . ,` '� .:hl , ¢i -4'!:�i Q W Z .•-•W S i ,` ' ti ,` Itr `\ ,V+ � _~ �♦•�7•, ,y ,+t` + \ ' } r`,•�+� F, ' s 1111+moi -' 2 2 Q O I-F- I y 1111• 5 I 1 Iq.1 t ` •• • •. ` �, � �. `` i „M/w�. • ^r•tl:" Y o 3 `,....4.�J,,.-, In 2 4 U Q 11 ' I, ,•` ♦ ! r ., 1 fq 2''' t r 4*444)1t , ''',.;1'; lit ,0• ♦• t' l'it ' •,• $/^k/r ,i, 6� `fie SIL.• _ .._1111. -A' i `r , ,,., irr' Y CO(Y I- J. 1 1 /i•i 4C 1. • I I� �O ►e ..� ; f NL, '% r• U W 0 V) 13 i ' i►>tt•� CO k+••• ? / • I lr j �, i •„1„,,,,i, :.1j► L 3 -''',.,:-..('s rr .:� W O CO W Z O V. ' 0.,W10:•: t. • 1 1 ' �`, / 1�'.�• r ,, 2 W.•• J O J • ;I; ; '. t ' a 4 I x t+' , 44,:•-)41,k,„*.,-,--.., yt` y :f•, ,e,, I. 1 . ;, U I-Ls_ J U W • LI ii" i•, i�4j.1•," r'y.' )i:r :I I III�,% •• • . �," ;,, (,,,, ,i ' ,./ i 7 ,`..',`-t ''' '' , iil 1131 WWOI•- YLL 1111• _ `ti .l i Rr f• li _ _ ? .r I 1'ii •• J 20 i/1U I I ll. 10'1 O' , `0- "( Y' i /` 0 / r <'i. ,� L 4. `. �' , �! J i 'R 10... .._'r ., j r N Q^O Z O W I) i1' :i 1•�G10tei$ t '' ` '' I ': • • ""'" ,'Fs+1 . '\. $ ; ,i; •A ',i.♦••'!r i,;t W CO 0 3 cc m i', 'il ••t: •, <.,1'` ■ III , - \ :, ., / ,.�e�♦♦♦� 1 + h 1 ,' ',l I•►i•••' ti!,`;1. ' [7 SII[ ' �,r y:i. . r v - ,, • �'-� e.•t4.•.•„< `P :;;:,',r''' O . • • y) ,►900• • \1111 I;_tti.• ! 1� 1111••.• • 1. 6 0, $ ';; ''''� ', `t :.. i' I •r „ i; 1. _3,11_1. :::::,.. ,;.;�: '';i.,ir;' r t., ri 11 : t„1 i i ,. ; ~� ,. ” '_'..:.•..... .11 ,....1.,;;:,:....� ,� .r,' r '►Vj Irr,rf.,rf r, I; ,' ,r' •,y ,,'`4,...J"C l :i ,'1 1`111.„, , \., r,,1 n•�tr h..._ ..,, 1 s..\ •^ yrS' \ ��4.. rygt'+r+ 1.*:.:::. '�!%raj'+i !:, ' 1114 1• ,.1 ....;‘,.1.;', ..t e, iP7I Ma . ' •^t.;1 Sy'',to i 1111.17"^ Y-, A l�' jr ', '/ j. '11 1, :I: I i '( P 'r! !t ` - 1 �L i r -,w VI �1 f I- ,qr r • ', 1 1 i •: 1333 10;,,____.• �I i•,,• "r ,,a.' r I�• ~ s Z . , r r ,e;i r , y • • {� 1,,.___ . 4!• 0'. ' !�'(1r�r f' 111+1„;,...,;,•4,;:;•,,,,,,,,i' '' ; \ \�� ��1 Y'r �-� ''►.1i?../ i .• t lI rI _1111 ��- , `► �'FtrlY'yrl,i +;,rtf; ,1 W : 3.y,. o.,r..,4:....---.. r ri 3,. tI.L.[]•,.........0 i•/ -''.. CZ'W / / r . r a^ I� / ,' ''0,'/,, 0 r F' Q • ' \ \\I \,,0.0 �ij'ii 1�o tit` ..rr 'r r;, 1- • V ,, ,I i rr i !r [ j t 'r, '',fs_'.� rt i I I 3}r�. C.. // Z\..J.U,' Z / _ •r • r [, •I ' i'”i t t ,r!' i Q • ,vt1' .\ .n id .1 II ' f: 3' F'! Q-, Q W •, 1 1.. -`4', i i -, ri '..4,j+isi r i In t J LI_`• J lA. +. 1 1, I- I r°••',t.'r t4 111',1 '; j, I 1 1 'rn;'f•1 r ‘,..,..1 Ip1 \ , i I � I ..l?; , F•- ra F- / ,.•l , 3 I t 1 r'l f O N • 1', $ Jr. W W .W I- IP \ ,ice t , , ' I I'' 11•.if r,: v .r r VI W i I , Y•, �w k .' .^, +' ii ',1:111 11`;1',1', I r ,t , 1 1 , l• 'J ° I1� I '4' - , 1111:CO n !3 J �`II�j ': i tt ,C ! i!; ,'u,;rr'i'•r r r N W : ,' \ 1 t 1 t / /\<�_� .. '� t 1 .�►� - .� r,"`r k , /1 W Cr t t.t14 !t 1 I�___ I / 1 i • t ! i'1:`rt;7•`:':r + , U 0 1- r• f :' ,, , \ 1 11 ,. 1 :- to �C , r.r 1111 l l + i�l t`.'.'Cl „"''I, \ '1 I n I I. i ! 1 1�• .,r�'�I�••,•�•� -'t:I/ � I t ri i;:...rtr iii% / �'' Z r [i. .: I,;,;t �. \ ,\ 1 y !1 r 1 r, • s 1 # )• I/4r :ti,'\I , r, %. •t . , #lII {. r , r + 1 N I 4 k3r it',''II�: \ i I 1 .el , I $ 1 ri: \ Lr:ii r f f l lf(.1 ' 4 •,t,•.1 .' t .. •! i \ t ry r,r, r�; l rr/%7" .J-. O_ O 1 ! ,,,;.,� \ \I o I;;iI ' / ', :\' 1frr;!,�r ;r .'i' r/4.J O Q'i !^ it,j• 1\ r 1•' `1`1 I $ '� i, ; 1d r•hrlirr,��t •ff� ` - to F- n- ,} i n \ \ tIl1: .�1 r `-4.,.-1111._. , ,11,1111 ;til r i% ,4 •••t '.+•'.. i 1,11 . \\ li t i 3 r ,,t I, ; 1�.. / •i t / \\ t I / 1„ 3 i1 /1 / ••dti ',t `1 311'1:'• ,I 1 .�it !\\ r• �.;' ►itR(I! I Lj•t'• / !.•.�'w._,,,,> -!' 1a 1\ :,� \\\�� 1 :t' , ', \� :/ ' �/i.', �l,rirrr, r,..1 I'f? 1 •••t t , \ ... ''/ rr�. 'k{ ,r„, r ' r•�t., ,:'i 11 � .�M \\\ !- i�$ / I! •.... 1 .,....,/,„.,,,,,..., • ,)1 +r y t,'1 '1. tri \I I .` \��,,,,Iii, ,l,, / �'rytl/ r'x r1'r;rr yIr , • '• it ,t.. ', 1 '1 �.'.R \�.�\ I •,4'1�....r•"'.';'.$,,,,•: .• r 3 a ' / I . - ' i Ii 1 7 1117',•',r ; j : ti ,t ,'i b ,\ \ ��1. \i-,...-144.,,,B# ---!,--.5• �. 111„7', 11!31 r i.,..,://:;;;;;:i.,,,, I i i • ;)i.,a. .; \! 1 J � .4 fie/%j •. r '.+ , -� 1 11 , r i •• • t, .,3111! I I i•it •�1�iP �•��= 11 1111 ,\ ,'C ' i/: , 4 / 1 .1 I i r 1 1_, t, I\ `'L... ;,�, 1111.. O'I�l� I �. i i! "I_>1L” i }r' 1 f I. i i•�/ , ! 1 •• • �� -i4,�' , j r 1' j 11 1 1 !1113• \ /1 , 1' ( ! , !� r } r ! • • ; r, \ 1111. ' 'I ', ' �rr``,W% r ,'.,::;.•.'f L r tl _)� , 7 Ij f �I :'r • .n t, 1 I 1 y \ I r i• i r rrl, 1 1 1 (fl '' r ; .i, ,, 1 1 ' 1 - ii f`,, f ( • % i ,f rr' J�F 'rY , $.: aI e- i/ ',i / ,r ! t I �� - \\,\ 1,../'.::c,r' , },J 51 r 1 i; T 1{ :" i r y 1„11'1 ' - 1 I ,T `1 i ` ,` `111!% ra.r'rtt:i a i '' 1' y If r,, r rl r 1 1 t, j I� , u,.rgr ,51:/' 1 A r i i ,, 1 ' 1 / :ilr , l r... I • 1', r i' i ,.,e,:.•,.:: 1 I `\i I �>'•p� r t''1111, ii j4" �, t: 7•'i,'. , 1 • r '' f I 1/,'S.. ! :i?'I 1 Iriiiir iN �i , ' ' ''; U �''; + 7 ,1111. tn.:.P:. 1 1 , i I I t• ( / 4Td 1'liy if,`1111 /rri:, 1 I r `• 1 t rl F a 1 i 11 11,,, l 1 �.-- Iri • r ll I l',/,,',..;• �e „,:,/ ' r,/,....-14 ,r it ,.� i ! .' , li i•• A-•. r) _•-- - !1 I If 'r �q i5>� Y ,,;,-,.',.'..1„ I , .W� i r u r i ' I �..}t' ! 1 r 1. ./ I j 1 r i I n :'64 i..1,',;;;P„, -, ;, ;',--',Iii,.1 I rr . ; • ' i r 1111 ill-s',' ,r'"+r/1 a,' ,,ry !r r 1 ' r ' ,,;,'r 1 1 r ICI{hf� \•::t N-w,•7,4 �1l r 1 �1 j/{ 1 , ' i ` ,:.p-:, 1111.1_n.. --- '1.,.1 - • ,,.,\•::.W1 '. il.',! ;:^r' 3 ; 1 rr I .... ., \ ' el 1 ± r `'� ,‘",,,,„24,7....;,:;......,' •r , i f• ; ; ii�i , rir i., i i 111,: •Vi 11 ...1 !I' ..'I':, •/; i4 f •%s;; I 15. Water Surface Use Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? ❑Yes 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. 15. Water Surface Use. This item need only be addressed if the AUAR area would include or adjoin recreational water bodies. IThe AUAR project site does not contain any recreational water bodies. Deans Lake is a shallow natural environment lake,and is not suitable for recreational purposes. 16. Soils Approximate depth(in feet)to: 16. Soils. A standard soils map covering the area should be included. Ground water: minimum 5 average maximum 10.5 Bedrock:minimum 5.5 average maximum 18 I Describe the soils on the site,giving SCS classifications,if known. (SCS interpretations and soil boring logs need not be attached.) FIGURE 16-1 shows a soils map for the project site. A brief description of the soil types is given in TABLE 16-1. I17. Erosion and Sedimentation Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: acres N/A ; cubic yards N/A . Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. I Describe the erosion and sedimentation measures to be used during and after construction of the project. 17. Erosion and Sedimentation The number of acres to be graded and number of cubic yards of soil to be moved need not be given; instead, a general discussion of the likely earth moving needs for development of the area should be given, with an emphasis on unusual 1 or problem areas. In discussing mitigation measures, both the standard requirements of the local ordinances and any special measures that would be added for AUAR purposes should be included. The project site does not contain any steep slopes. The location of soil types and their descriptions can be found in Section 16 of I this report. The site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center includes grading,excavation,and the filling of 0.52 acres of wetland. Extensive lot grading of a portion of the project site is anticipated to achieve proper design contours. According to the site plan, a replacement wetland will be built to mitigate the filling of two existing smaller wetland areas. The construction of this replacement wetland will include the excavation and grading to achieve proper design elevation and slope gradients. Erosion control will follow the I applicable Best Management Practices(BMP's) during all construction phases of this project to minimize the effects of erosion and sedimentation. BMP's will include but are not limited to erosion blankets,silt fences,staked hay bales.Storm water ponds will be utilized to collect storm water runoff to help prevent sedimentation into Deans Lake once lot grading and re-vegetation has been completed. All I storm water ponds should be surrounded by a buffer area and be consistent with NURP standards. The area also consists of flat well drained soils that will aid in the reduction of erosion and sedimentation. There have been special concerns regarding wind erosion during the construction of the project because of the sandy soil types. All I efforts should be made to minimize wind erosion during grading and construction phases. BMP's to mitigate this impact should be enforced. Following completion of grading and construction all disturbed soils should be re-vegetated to prevent future wind erosion. I I I I I I I I 9 9M0'£3NW6£S6 o 3lLi0V0 ' �� -:114: s o M ire: ` IOS3NNIVA 33d0AVHS o Z 31V0 A9 03A02iddV 1 3>1V1 NV30 1S3M A y3j w w dVIN SiIOS AIN1100 1100S r 31V0 A8 037103H� c-c 0_ a. J CD r+ 31.V0 A6 NMV21N mimmir N v` m j fn U iar 'f u��� 1 .1001111 4 ter*� !�_ ) 4411!/150 ( t \ f oil ! \ --J11 I (u 1i':A\ �f 'a's -- /i'�/ , , ... I �,o r 111 \ N\ 141r f/ ;` isv •' ' � !' r ull lu I _i : I .. + II �, \ II1 II iI4irtia� �,�/ :f / Ili Ii,f�1l II , N 7 II� III 1 I ` ta• �. p(^�}` ,��h) I; It- • `1, u 1 II , "'' /� " ,7"�,J_ _IA/ I f" _ II {iiii III If.' r`._=i _.... cav - .,-, -�114 r L/ '. a II It � � !\%\ I J l II \ 1 (`JJ ',i\\:)\--1 1 \ / -It. ) ,. ti, 1;)\ •,\_,,, -,. IIII ell i' k % 7it I / I U 1 111 i (...--, ) 2 I-14(6i...03 I) r•- -:".- -— ,\ 171t4) 1 ff i , n , - 7 1 r+f III j —�'t'.`v. I `4 � _. , 3 ��" F- 1 /,;--- )(44 1 - „__ ,,/, , i) ,, co 0 1.1,‘ Aui,.4. ..„..,_ ,.., / 1.2J a _• Y I 11i , Lsli:�' 11r� \ \ 1. n 1 1 z ...._, ,, \ i- ii.. \ \,/, ,,,...., \ .r . . ill 'i >,,,, )V.4?„/ („.„,.. a-... - ) / iiii .,,,,x- I ', i 1-A\ II 1 (.43/47 , cp-„,,,d , , ,, i ....... Ir. f sa l I, ��r _ V u 1 �' ` l = ii Q s.t " 6 rr i j'I ., 7 ,,, IIII (III ---\\.'z> 1- f"�', Ka. 1 ') . 1 i Air I � �! �I II, t ` r I I z \. 99 ,. 1,...., , ) -• ......,... ji..--- -r I t `� I I r vi-. ie \ .-/ \s, , N i \\ II I- I-11i• \ IIII IIII . V �'�`� i i 1-- — LII '�l. ' ' 'I 1 /, '� p►- !/J' — =,- -� , �I!, III' l , . �_ 1 / %1 ! Irl IIII ��. ftj ��r\� I J M ff/ / \ { ► ,1, J` tl 1. / / J) ,--- 1' a , Ia;; ` t t Ilr rJ �t-- : ' I • 1 ' � 111' 1 {f ; /://n;) t V _f"-,l 1 / j I it'' III I \t I \��o i I — ._.' j Z 0 \1 tcl ji ---,,, in, ef / Li j 1 / 7 11 II' i'l.1 1 \ f I -/_ - _i_ -NI ___1, ( S \ 1 \,.,, 0 NAl + Z I 17/z-c - . ,m, (ty. ., N17/7 /'-'' Os„j? pe iii _mi •- tim7 ---, , . . , \ 1 I i V, i l'y \ 7..____< 1 (,„ ...s,,4.\' — / i ( , , 0, (5 It //c< iiiii ,'sa,_: �� ' , `'/ 1 ' �/ miff ,., • s.- , / ..?„,„ / ' ' ,:f3 x , . \ ,,:'„._Iniet,;.% „ .,1 , ,//// / , - ,f, /if/ ., ice ' _s / AL - f 1 , AI, c_.3 ) s / ,'%i .m. ,_ :-.:.__._ii--,::1._ „,,: - :_-_ 1 �"'_ '..:;. _ 7,., -m 11 1 _ ,os .\\ 1.1 ` fl r/ l—M/ ,,f,• 11 {.:•!/i f� �1 •• Q f >it MtI \V I f Irf� I f >, /— �cJ 1 / 1 v. Q 3 0 I o f n, _,ii _--h \1\ j \ (L(,_\1,1 „I ( r .'7 / i ( ,3 - Q J i 0 il 1i 7 s I 9 r •t\\ \I I .---,\(:\I iTLi: � ,,)il )1 . ! .s J 0 W (XL .4( L., I' \, ,, c-oi ..1 \ Is -. i`, If; i / o o --l:i 1 re \" I I , \` i ,� 1! , 1, \ f i l l 4 s ) <® >-'O �. I I \�\ C i �'. tf ti� I a m W z f— l t I \ , ) La La C.1) ( 4i f t..,/,/ ,,/./, s ,,Y11';I 1 1 z m d fn O \-, S 11 0 q 1 , i r '5 i � y \ F I. 11 u I i i4/.47 _ y; (� 1_,---- t r sr, ' I {' -S, ) /'` i ///iii ``' /f lr IA a /,I(( ) /j iC i 11 f le,.,4:,, , 4 r„) r li s A:_i� I BJ w • (_•,..... ....„.____.../ _ , . rni. .„.„._., ......„...r.,,_,,...,.., . ', ,rte --• ,�x - s• _- - �_ �' aa -� - '-• __sq. �--"a ;,' _._ -� _ — .mss 11) v / r /a i /11 W t ni/ / I -) t +--ri NM OS — N — M ' NE 111111 M M NS MN r NM MI I — — r I 1 TABLE 16-1 Soil Descriptions I CdA-Copas Silt Loam, Well-drained,dark-colored soils derived from shallow deposits of silty or loamy outwash 0-2%slopes overlying limestone bedrock. Good drainage in most places,but in some areas drainage is restricted by bedrock. I DaA-Dakota Loam, Dark-colored,well drained to excessively drained soils that formed under prairie grasses. 0-2%slopes Found on sandy outwash plans and terraces. Underlain by sand or,occasionally,by fine gravel. I De-Duelm Fine Sandy Loam, Moderately dark colored soils of the terraces derived from wind and water assorted fine 0-3%slopes sands. Intermediate in drainage between the Isanti and the Zimmerman and Hubbard soils, with which they are associated. IDg-Dune Land Land consisting of loose sandy material blown about by the wind. Severe blowouts and fresh dune deposits have made these areas of little or no use. I EaA-Esterville Sandy Loam, Dark-colored soils that developed under prairie grasses on gravelly and sandy outwash plains 0-2%slopes and terraces. Extremely droughty,depth to gravel is normally not more than 10 to 12 inches. HeA-Hubbard Loamy Fine Moderately dark colored soils that developed on sandy terraces along streams. Soil consists of I Sand, loamy sand to fine sand to a depth of about 36 inches. 0-2%slopes I la-Isanti Fine Sandy Loam, Very poorly drained depressions and flats,chiefly associated with Zimmerman soils. Derived 0-2%slopes from wind and water sorted fine sands. Water table is high much of the year. Ma-Marsh Occupies shallow lakes and ponds that may be dry during years with less than normal Iprecipitation. Most areas,however remain wet all year. PbA-Peat and Muck,Shallow Organic soils located in very poorly drained scattered depressions. Shallow deposit of peat 0-2%slopes normally overlain by mineral soil at depths ranging from 18 inches to 3 feet. ISc-Stoney Land Located chiefly on terraces. It is non-agricultural land on slopes ranging from 1 to 36 percent. Limestone and sandstone bedrock underlies this land at depths of 6 to 36 inches. Numerous large granitic boulders are on the surface and throughout the profile. ITa-Terrace Escarpments Narrow,steeply sloping areas between the nearly level terraces and the bottom lands or between on terrace and another. Slopes are more than 12 percent.The material is sandy or I gravelly and has little soil development. TbB-Terril Sandy Loam, Gently sloping,well drained upland soils developed from materials deposited by gravity and 0-2%slopes water. Recently deposited alluvium and colluvium derived from higher lands. IZaA-Zimmerman Fine Sand, Light-colored,windblown sands on the timbered terraces between Shakopee and Savage. 0-2%slopes Slight wind erosion has occurred nearly everywhere. The soil is very droughty. IZaA2-Zimmerman Fine Sand, Light-colored,windblown sands on the timbered terraces between Shakopee and Savage. Has 0-2%slopes,moderately wind lost 3 to 4 inches of surface soil through wind erosion. The soil is very droughty. eroded IZaB-Zimmerman Fine Sand, Light-colored,windblown sands on the timbered terraces between Shakopee and Savage. 2-6%slopes Low,dunelike topography. Wind erosion slight in most places,but soil is very droughty. ISource:Soil Survey Scott County, Minnesota(7) I I 10 I 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. I18. Water Quality-Surface Water Runoff For an AUAR the following additional guidance should be followed in addition to that in "EAW Guidlines": -it is expected that an AUAR will have a detailed analysis of stormwater issues; -a map of the proposed stormwater management system and of the water bodies that will receive should be provided; I -the description of the stormwater systems would identify on-site and "regional"detention ponding and also indicate whether the various ponds will be new water bodies or converted existing ponds or wetlands. Where on-site ponds will be used but have not yet been designed, the discussion should indicate the design standards that will be followed. I -ifpresent in or adjoining the AUAR area, the following types of water bodies must be given special analyses: -lakes: within the Twin Cities metro area a nutrient budget analysis must be prepared for any `priority lake"identified by the Metropolitan Council(see Appendix E of"EAW Guidlines"(1990)or contact the Council staff). Outside of the metro area, lakes needing a nutrient budget analysis must be determined by consultation with the MPCA and DNR staffs; I -trout streams: if stormwater discharges will enter or affect a trout stream an evaluation of the impacts on the chemical composition and temperature regime of the stream and the consequent impacts on the trout population(and other species of concern)must be included. I Land development generally increases the quantities of nutrients,sediments,and other pollutants carried away from the site by runoff. Many factors contribute to the increases,including the enhanced conveyance of leaf-fall,grass clippings,pet litter,other litter of both natural and human origin,and pollutants from the atmosphere(both"wetfall"and"dryfall");fertilizer use;vehicle emissions Iand mechanical wear;sanding and salting of streets and sidewalks;as well as increased runoff volumes. However,stormwater detention ponds and other"BMP's"should be utilized to largely mitigate the increased pollutant loadings resulting from this development. A"Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan"was completed for the City of Shakopee last year(WSB&Associates, 1999); and although the plan is still under review by other government bodies,the developer has stated that the site development is following the City's plan. Among the water quality-related policies enunciated in the plan are several that specify ponding Irequirements for stormwater runoff from new developments: • All new stormwater systems must provide runoff treatment to NURP(National Urban Runoff Program)standards prior to discharge. NURP standards include: I - Permanent pool volume equal to runoff from the pond's drainage area from a 2.0-inch storm,plus an allowance for sedimentation;and Permanent pool mean depth of at least 4 feet but less than 10 feet. • New pond outlets must have oil skimmers that extend at least 4 inches below the water surface and that limit water velocity below the skimmer to less than 0.5 foot per second for moderate storms(1-year return interval). I • New ponds in the Deans Lake drainage area must limit the peak discharge rate to a maximum of 0.1 cfs(cubic feet per second)per acre in a 100-year storm and,as feasible,to 0.05 cfs per acre in a 10-year storm. (These requirements are primarily for flood-control,but they also enhance water quality because discharge rate limitations increase detention time and enhance particulate solids settling.) IThe City's plan also calls for conformance with(1)the Metropolitan Council's"Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution to All Metropolitan Water Bodies"(Frost and Schwanke, 1999), (2)BMP's for urban areas as recommended by the IMinnesota Pollution Control Agency(1989),and(3)revised shoreland ordinance provisions following MDNR directives.lsl Adherence to the City's stormwater plan,especially the ponding requirements,is strongly recommended to mitigate the greater part of the developed site's load increases for phosphorus(the key nutrient impacting lake quality),sediments,and other pollutants. Ib. 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 Ibudget analysis is needed). FIGURE 18-1 and TABLE 18-1 illustrate the preliminary storm sewer design. The majority of the stormwater will enter the central ponding areas adjacent to the replacement wetland basin. These ponds will be connected to additional ponding located Inorth of MTH 169 via a culvert. This connection will give the central ponding areas a"relief valve"during high flow(100 year) storm events. The ponds located along MTH 169 also includes a network of additional ponding adjacent to other created wetlands. This complex of ponds and constructed wetlands ultimately discharges into the Prior Lake outlet channel,a ditch that leads from IDeans Lake north into the Minnesota River. Special care will be taken to prevent direct discharge into Deans Lake itself!'" FIGURE 18-2 summarizes the storm water pond layout and shows overflow ponding located north of MTH 169. Impacts on receiving waters 1 11 ob 5 L7 ►r W F w a : E-+ o A w w a a O U a O E. • z m w A a w 3 w v) - ) g I l M � � a ilk \ ,.., \ 0 cV 3b, ~ 44 Ot ...,,. .././: I 3 ,1 :-s \\0. I 3 r:3li • E'A' I 1 \_ , C ��� c `3 , I® p fig 1 : ‘;9 i f(Y! lA 1 < 41 Lo ,� ®TIED fji .., I Q .ktill 3 7 bit : r, I 3 r 8 /II �`� Q o U o � a I ' 0 i w M • j £8213 )/ 1r X *31I 11 - - - - — — — 111111 Ell — — NM — — — NM OM — — 74 p77, (a F. gi t'-'. ,,:,, i.: A V F4ei ' LT ru) ot �§9uhkuYE4�}�x �I�g i�� ��� ��92�s�a�l�ms ����s��an�� � ��io�2nz� 111D1111114,9 ����F� ill ' II in i . ! II ]i I� � IC IIIEIIIIGEIIIIZ wWW 8 r ' ' ' ' ' Iliiiiii1111111111 „ ' ro l'ii,i A W V,--: :_ il ils)7v)111111":111 ..c.'7gr' ::', E-:: ::'..„ 1,,,. i ':: .. ,,,,, „1.,4, F . ., - iillin , _. il t'i:,,,,_ liz., 1-4 : � � � IIII ]III-111 '''''' '-':(111r Ili Iliiiii1111111111111011111111111 �I aYo I 11120- 2 = iir ,t l''' 1 ''''' 'l ii '' iliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ill.: f:t- 'qii [..1 :, 1 r1r42 !', '''',. $ ri -,i'''• irliK f1 ,110. 111 Iliiiiiiill 1 , , .. '41 gt can' i 4 4., 'pi'' h. . ' 1 ' ' . .... _. „ 0 .0 ., 2 0 .. _ it iiiiilliii11:::111:::11 1 Lillii --Lc'(° a _ .0 u 1.,,, ;,,1 ::); 0 it) •:' ci �-4: W .i1,,,... 11- ' � M P M : ,,, '„..: 1 4 . ... , .,_ 0.. . kis 0 4-.„-, , -, s,, zigg (41;A 16 - ::' ,:;. 7 ri pi, , 't. riwm cr .P ° airq23'''. 1 ' ''''':il ki..:1 1.-1''' ' lit c :: g 4 1 _V- r-14'14 c.) gr - - el ;],4 ' ' ' '''''41( 1-11 III - 11111111111111111111111111111111 I11 11 ! !II ''';:44, 1 g- '',!,, illiiiiiiiiiilli ii - :-..,AL ;4''' 4.- 4 '. .41113 El:, : ,11 ,44,i g `'. 0 , ill' 11, :li .?„,yli til ,- wf, th . - E i � Iilliiii 10.4 0., MitrIgilli” ill ] iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 111111111°) liWki, 4 d : ': .,i 1 1 ; ::''' ''''' • iiiiiiii iii'llOill -4 ill ' Iliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii. ,. it; ;:::.: v „ii 0miimew E-1 , H , q vii :41 .0 '13 ii .:iiiij-'' 0 ,...4 '''''' ''',.. q 4 a 1,.., . ,.. if.4 ,(f", . . 1 ;,,,,-ss, 1 ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHhIHIIIHhIII „ ‘,..., , 1 4,- i . „. rill 4 rli !'-' 1 ',,:- k V:, ''' '' g g c73 8 . iliiiiii I]illiiiiii'0'9* cq 0 0 n NN .# 0, 1 A °3 r Iliiiiliiiiiii ii, IL '"' '.' ii: - " 5: 11::!: ii ''':i4 1..':i,.'::. , :::, I ,,,, . �...Ft 0 EX' a1� � — — — - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — • (WT� MCr� M Ua Cr0t00Oopuiu)U)U) Nt[) OOtnv) Wnnnnnnnn nn nnIs. n m cc cc m cc mm OVC)C)CI 700 u. V000u u Ih- s e � M e s s A CO N CCOO COO N COO N N�COO COO N N� CCOO�N S b r°'iOmle. c"'vI:: g p:i? mrnv O CV CV CV CV CVM07Ne-01 rcV06 U Y a 0 OMOCOMtOMM 00 00000 )II CnMMtOMtL )C) UR v- 6etCn00 G CV CV N c)CV CV CV.- r C•) r .-CV CV U 12 103O1-NOu,UCD N 00 OR et OD go 4MettOC74C7c) pa CV CV e1 eh 1. os M ro CD 41 ) rrNNr CnNN 3 e4 el NNNN0000N 01- .- av � V2V2V2V V2 � U)I) OID� nnnnnnnnnn nnI,- 6 04g CD MMMCACO10rN Nr CA CAnn ' o N N CA n n N 00 CON OO rN- 01 0;yam+ 00300 n''t01 .-CT) 0O - U `n° n n n V2 n n V2 ti Ps n n CD d w � un° v � roDD 04 rncoCocootn ryr 1 t. NMMNtOtyrN� r00 NtOCON CQ PQ a coc ^rN � oO) o0dor� r-.: 1.-•A C7 A 4 N. NN. N'nnnn; NN. NN- tN. NNNN 2 A b EL O) N0N — N4ONrN et CD o t•R' M et tO WC)CA CO CA et CO NCO rtp . 00 00 10 6 M to Ir)et CC CO Ch CMC+) tr) C•) CNto pa qup 044 N b1 N to b -. tO H1 N 01 M O l� a S 'l C, C. 00007 C. '0M 4v1 CT tyaONCVON(Tm � tnNeFtn °� CV ml�• � • U Nu O O ,.."( `� coNCpCON .NNCC)OO .t Ntn1C) d' 1-4 14 N r r r -N r r r N O A In X CC 0 00MIC) pp0 00000otOc0 0tnt0 Q' e ntOn0CID 0001fITNt0 e1NON in 0 0 0 0 r 0 c4 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 co u)lcN �' 0 Nd.grn0pOO N�40. 22 07 � OD V)OO \ MFV• nCCA C6 N-: Co • rV"7C7)a 0 Cin W '0 01 h et n C M N 'l • eF eh et eh et'et el- eF et et et et eh Nter N OL OMNet 40006414) MtON E Nr co r/p ,- 01,-04 T••• Ne-r W F .9 O O O O O O O O O .- 0 O r 0 0 a0 . 01 C) 0C)0p00OM OM00O E nOCO � OCO000NM ONMG) F r tci ui c0 CO tti h tci tri tri ui a0 6 Id cO tG LO r r r r E.., U • j «O N' NCD4) W) dnrOtO6O0 N- NCO n; N •- rNCONNn .-. N CV t000 F U rOCV CV OCV 000 - 1 OO.- CV �r+Wr� L4O r OOMOMCnrOCO .- r nnMtO FFFiiilll U MNNONNNNnNN NNt0 V. g5.4 1, O O O C O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t gio 0 CO z to CO to 10 CO t0 to t0 t0 t0 10 t0 t0 D >AU nnnnnnnnnnn cOCONN C de. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 6 0 W W a o a1 N 0 0 .- CA Oo DD 0 0o 03 tri M u V;NMOMMNNONN 'or r••• `O .P ' O 0 6 0 0 0 O O .- O O O O O O CA 00 • Y OD sr E. 4.. N14C07TtNdN' 1.MNtO et ,_ mttco 01 O z y p J W J J W J W W J J J J W J J W iS O ete- i- eT1. �")..F. 0eteh0 '7 ) f� 0) O) O OOOMOr' 00Ion r 4 OOr r N N N N N N N N N( N N 01 CV U U 0 600v. 00CD000OCOCO 0000 . O N et VV a� CO C4 N + r r OO CO CO CD 0000 M Mr r + M NNNNCC)O3NNNnnn NNNN0 Z o O 00000000000 ICACN Ch COO Z a F o t) CO0tW) 1.010)Ot0Ot00t41 V/41 OOMN U O d OA o. 00053 00000 000 000 La ca N CI h rzi tr) CO Ct) to CO Cn CO in 10 to 10 CO 10 CO tr) CO CO P. 3 e IIIII MO r I M MI N Mr r r 11111 r MI MN - - M MI ON Ts'Mown Es Moo am •Omaimoi L. BM as Molisma's, gialia wawa 110......4 Ma PM on 11= Ma um miamoi owl maws C i MOM= 1000011 MB wawa POO Ws D D D de cf• ...um �CO �� "4"N ;v.0 r -- G7 co co d ..= ti' / al Q1 /// m W a) -- D mJOd —� o -- _r = Y O < WLL D > -- .tip L —_— - err a. dim I 1 1 ILL mm ism ai se CC • '!Wi '.•.,s,i F + fit •41, } 0 ��., 4x� �z 4C Z I 13 0 NI ..–. UJ CL il mws ,....'‘ ,:, le m = + xx" tip a O 41111111111111114 !" I LU mi as sum es on am amQ. x� , z I / M. OM 10 10 . C gi el IN WM •� Ss ����■ ` N;n,,t i CC W is so am— ' Z ''•' : W Z W ..• NOS Wiir W fir.. . Q W d as O W Z +t�`i*vim <3 Q unuuiituuunurI : — W W ' �^ • Valley Pk. Dr. — CC ; co0 } _ LU LU Q ��`�•* .• C1 • Q J CC • *t ,1/20-, a)0 '' > cc • °' •' � c. • C . •O I . IrrAp j ji . im 1004100 200 100 L 000.00 •Cn est to �y III IN 115 03 010•010 MB IDIf 00400a m p 1 . Lii (i.F.18:4111 r� OC It1i la s. lar m• slai� C la • STS PROJECT NO. m: �� — • I �I IN ��_slosia sm 95394-T (n- yi, O am a STS PROJECT FILE MI • I N ���� OP • SCALE : ��• NM Cl NTS ow imi r: :IOW. iIm • � ......• i mnnnnsossasuuudimiemq■ii1quumuuuu�uuu7luuu1uuu1111uu11■ (.j uuuuuu FIGURE 1&2 ILYBBWJOJ►7 O9 ui 8wun 8•*0 can be found in Section 18,part a. Deans Lake is not considered a"priority lake"and thus does not require a nutrient budget. The project site does not contain any identified trout streams nor will stormwater be discharged into an identified trout stream. 19. Water Quality-Wastewaters. 19. Water Quality- Wastewater. Observe the following points of guidance in an A UAR: - only domestic wastewater should be considered in an AUAR---industrial wastewater would be coming from industrial uses that are excluded from review through an AUAR process; - wastewater flows should be estimated by land use subareas of the A UAR area;the basis of flow estimates should be explained; - the major sewer system features should be shown on a map and the expected flows should be identified;; - if not explained under item 6, the expected staging of the sewer system construction should be described; - the relationship of the sewer system extension to the RGU's comprehensive sewer plan and(for metro area AUARs)to Metropolitan Council regional systems plans, including MUSA expansions, should be discussed. For non-metro area AUARs, the AUAR must discuss the capacity of the RGU's wastewater treatment system compared to the flows from the AUAR area; any necessary improvements should be described; - if on-site systems will serve part of the AUAR the guidance in "EAW Guidelines"(pages 16-17)should be followed. a. Describe sources,quantities,and composition(except for normal domestic sewage)of all sanitary and industrial wastewaters produced or treated at the site. ' Wastewater from the Valley Green Corporate Center would be collected and treated by the Metropolitan Council- Environmental Services division. Total anticipated volumes of generated waste are not known at this time,however as mentioned earlier the proposed development is part of the area recently approved for MUSA expansion. The project site was slated as a business park at the time of this approval by the Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council's Chaska interceptor also runs adjacent to the site. 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 systems. Identify receiving waters (including ground water)and estimate the impact of the discharge on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the discharge may affect a lake consult "EAW Guidelines"about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed). N/A 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. See Section 19,part A. 20. Ground Water-Potential for Contamination 20. Groundwater-potential for contamination. A map should be included to show any groundwater hazards identified under b. ' Under b include any relevant information on soil contamination due to past land uses within the area, as mentioned under item 9. a. Approximate depth(in feet)to ground water: 5 minimum; 10.5 maximum. 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 any of these hazards. There are no sinkholes or shallow limestone formations/karst formations in the site. Refer to Section 16 for references to soils of high infiltration rates. There are no known abandoned or unused wells on the project site. However if any are discovered in the course of construction,they will be sealed in accordance with local,State and Federal regulations. ' Local residents have suggested that the cessation of dewatering at the nearby Shiely/CAMAS limestone quarry could cause the water table to rise close to the ground surface,thereby making the groundwater more susceptible to contamination. Located about one mile northeast of the proposed development,the quarry began dewatering in 1967 and currently has a permitted annual dewatering volume of 2.75 billion gallons. The quarrying and dewatering occur in dolomitic limestone bedrock known as the Prairie du Chien Group. In the vicinity of the quarry(the proposed development,and Deans Lake)the Prairie du Chien is overlain by typically 10 to 40 feet of alluvial sand,with a thicker outwash deposit(about 60 to 70 feet)just to the south(Beissel and Ford, 1982). A recent groundwater modeling study conducted for the Metropolitan Council(Barr Engineering, 1998)includes predictions of bedrock groundwater level changes that will result from cessation of the quarry dewatering. Beneath the proposed development,the predicted rebound in Prairie du Chien groundwater level ranges from less than 1 foot to a maximum of 7 feet,occurring at the proposed development's northeast corner. 12 I However,the above predictions do not apply to groundwater levels in the surficial sand aquifer(i.e.,to the water table)in the quarry-proposed development-Deans Lake vicinity. In this vicinity,the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources(MDNR)has investigated groundwater levels as related to the quarry dewatering on two occasions: during November 1979-July 1980 initially I (Beissel and Ford, 1982),and during November 1996-May 1997 subsequently(Drivas, 1997). Both studies entailed groundwater level observations in the bedrock and the surficial sand during periods within which quarry dewatering ceased for more than a month and then resumed. Both studies found that,whereas bedrock groundwater levels clearly responded to dewatering changes, groundwater levels in the surficial sand aquifer did not. Both studies also found that groundwater levels in the surficial sand were I substantially higher than in the bedrock(6 to 23 feet higher in the 1979-1980 study,based on more than six wells each in the bedrock and the alluvium; 16 feet higher in the 1996-1997 study,based on the Czaja domestic well in the bedrock and an adjacent observation well in the surficial sand). IThe two MDNR studies reached essentially the same conclusion concerning the bedrock and surficial sand aquifers: the aquifers "function as separate systems"(Beissel and Ford, 1982)and apparently are"hydrogeologically separated"(Dravas, 1997). Therefore, cessation of the quarry dewatering is expected to yield no significant water table rebound in the area of the proposed development.°) Ic. 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. I During the construction of the proposed project,heavy equipment will require fueling with diesel fuel. Fuel is anticipated to be brought to the site as needed and that no storage will occur on-site. A fueling pad of clay with a slight berm should be constructed on the project floor to assure that any accidental spills will be contained to prevent fugitive migration of petroleum product. r21. Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes;Storage Tanks 21. Solid wastes;hazardous wastes;storage tanks.For a,generally only the estimated total quantity of municipal solid waste generated and information about any recycling or source separation programs of the RGU need to be included. For b,potential I locations of storage tanks associated with commercial uses in the AUAR should be identified(e.g.,gasoline tanks at service stations). a. Describe the types,amounts,and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes to be generated,including animal manures, I sludges 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 type(s)and how the project will be modified to allow recycling. The Valley Green Corporate Center would acquire its solid waste storage and disposal through private contractors. It will be at I the discretion of the individual business owners to contract with independent solid waste collectors of their choosing. Initial quantities of solid waste are not known at this time. Hazardous waste generation is not anticipated on the Valley Green Corporate Center property. I 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). IA convenience store with gas service is a potential land use within the project site. This convenience store would be located at the CASH 83/CSAH 16 intersection and would require an underground storage tank to store the fuel. This storage tank should be installed following applicable local, State and Federal guidelines(MN Rule 7150). 1 I 1 I I 1 13 I 22. Traffic Parking spaces added To be determined. Existing spaces(if project involves expansion) N/A Estimated total Average Daily Traffic(ADT)generated Refer to following text. Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated(if known)and its timing: Refer to following text. IFor each affected road indicate the ADT and the directional distribution of traffic with and without the project. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements which will be I necessary. 22. Traffic. For most AUAR reviews a relatively detailed traffic analysis will be needed, especially if there is to be much commercial development in the AUAR area or if there are major congested roadways in the vicinity. The results of the traffic analysis must be used in the response to item 23 and to the noise aspect of item 25. I Instead of responding to the information called for in item 22, the following information should be provided: - a description and map of the existing and proposed roadway system, including state, regional,and local roads to be affected by the development of the AUAR area. This information should include existing and proposed roadway capacities and existing I and projected background(i.e., without the AUAR development)traffic volumes; - trip generation data--trip generation rates and trip totals---for each major development scenario broken down by land use zones and/or other relevant subdivisions of the area. The projected distributions onto the roadway system must be included; - analysis of impacts of the traffic generated by the A UAR area on the roadway system, including:comparison of peak period il I total flows to capacities and analysis of Levels of Service and delay times at critical points(if any); - a discussion of structural and non-structural improvements and traffic management measures that are proposed to mitigate problems; I Note: in the above analyses the geographical scope must extend outward as far as the traffic to be generated would have a significant effect on the roadway system and traffic measurements and projections should include peak days and peak hours, or other appropriate measures related to identing congestion problems, as well as ADTs. The site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center involves the proposed improvement and realignment of CSAH 83/CSAH 16. This section summarizes the details of the Traffic Impact Studiee conducted to analyze the resulting traffic impacts. Full details on the Traffic Impact Studies can be found in APPENDIX C. IExisting and Proposed Roadway System The main roadways of the project site can be found in FIGURE 22-1. Major roadways include MTH 169(principal arterial), ICSAR 83(A minor arterial)and CSAH 16(B minor arterial). MTH 169 is a 4 lane divide highway,running east to west and acts as the northern border of the project site. MTH 169 is also the only major parallel route to the area. CSAH 83 is a 4 lane highway from TH 169 to CSAH 16. It connects with the City of Shakopee at the Highway 101 intersection,and serves as a major route to Mystic Lake Casino,which is located to the south. CSAH 16 runs east to west for the majority of the southern boundary of the project site. I CSAH 16 eventually heads in a northwest direction and acts as a major direct link to downtown Shakopee for area residents. The site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center includes the proposed improvement and realignment of CSAH 83/CSAH 16 in accordance with the City of Shakopee's draft Transportation Plan. An illustration of the proposed realignment can be found in I FIGURE 22-2. This proposed action would include the straightening of CSAH 16 along the southern border so that it would intersect with CSAH 83 at a 90 degree angle and farther to the south. The portion of CSAH 16 that runs through the proposed development would be removed. Local residents have voiced their opposition to the proposed realignment. Many residents along CSAR 16 are opposed to the realignment because it takes away their direct route to downtown.Thus requiring additional travel time I through the added segment along CSAH 83 and two intersections. The 5-year capital improvement plan for the City of Shakopee includes the extension of 17th Avenue(FIGURE 22-3),which would give local residents an alternative route to downtown Shakopee. However the City and Scott County need to agree on the extension of 17th Avenue taking place. ITrip Generation Data According to the report"trip generation data was calculated based on a 20 year traffic forecast,and a background growth rate of I 1.5 percent per year. This growth rate is considered reasonable for the area surrounding the proposed development. Data was generated assuming two different land use options,an"Office Service"land use and a"Business Park"land use. The"Office Service"land use assumes 25 percent office use and 75 percent warehouse use. These figures are based on reviews of similar uses in the area."(8) IBusiness Park Land Use ITraffic volumes for the trip generation estimates assuming a Business Park land use are illustrated in FIGURE 22-3. These traffic volumes include a diversion of approximately 35 percent of the southbound left-turns from the CSAH 83/Site Driveway intersection to the County Road 16/Site Driveway intersection. This diversion is for southbound AM peak traffic only. Traffic numbers being diverted were determined by calculating the reserve capacity at the CSAH 83/County Road 16 and CSAH 16/Site I Driveway intersection and rerouting the traffic from the overcapacity site driveway on CSAH 83 to the under capacity drive on County Road 16. This reserve capacity was calculated at each intersection using critical lane volumes. 1 14 t _ I C` _ �_ fir �' Blue Lake `; _`- - - `Y- .._.--- -`.•'� _ -•.. - }�•` . 696 \- _ I I . Water Tan s..^_.` (/�_ '' -Al- WatP.Ywarks u _ eye. '-11,,*.*' e.�_ _ `'1 Tr-----, _ .tib i1 _ '' ,1 736 m—._ :1-• F &,c �,, .8 �I =i2?. I `C�:7 •,ii H 101 �.. � �, �- _ -::7:-,77,..-1 ==if----7,7-a' f air sr • 7 t i 764 's- t. ( "X.c .� ' �+\•_ r ,... __:__ . t c ��: -"rte •' 1. k. ?'�/ ' ' •I �� - : \ \ i �, • ,r a • J y I 49 ryCemhi- ' — MTH 169 1 ; -- — iir---� "b \ r ^'- '0"- -/-� \ is __-•�` -- -'a ---1 .. 7 t ° . _ _ -, 1 � ru t ',`i Boa -2"------- Misr ' t-"---/ „�55 I 1 � ;t'83c .r en :-- ;.•\`, --mac-__-- '-o `"J•A�J , &2 a°a s d. j.:‘,..,,. ...-:-..------1 f`°�..--..' __. I \\ —- 16 ,5 ell -\ r 9 •` dry ._ OH ,r I I I 852 j _ B20 _ X97' • iii 1�� \ - n _ . I VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER SHAKOPEE,MN I i MAJOR ROADWAY S FIGURE 22-1 1 al I . ' .� It- @'%719.1l1171J� 71JJLl 97P �9'JTfa/J7: urs 1.1 MO ams! CSlOZ 1!1•mIl it-Of-t lun t 6L£SS �'0 d0 S 8N3NNVid • MI3310016 • 3Wu3mmasYMlNI os•tiol tre ,. I,;r > V1OS3NN1 �ad0}YHS IPnSPmeolnoH vu PUIhireAOiWC 002.1•1141 XVII 'ew*>ml tr ,,,es1a•+ „i m„w IMS”, IV �1�1011 � 7Nb/ddyS�S3NISflB Tt OOi►lK il9 ��� Of ZvA 1 vi nraw lel ld►llYl\l QAl l/d<>Iir��) ARIBA w•slsso s Inv a t!n w n!•I•amm sAamlow 11 // ]4" MN NW•NS M 7 011011,. 11M• U3D0 MAVlJO�•1 q/Ail WO 831N1a3 M 110(11103 N M9 A.3TIVA 1 rnw mi'WWI m o /I� mla�V pW01 P�INiDM OSf ' N R11lVn1A1 •OM 101 171 1101101011.0341•11.11111 1011 lJllfl7 Ai1Y)11 N N 8 w ..r . 8 IliI 1• ---1 a i11 I® ®I 1 111 1 I 1'1 :7 1 I 1 1 - • 2 1 I I Z '1 1 I 1 1 11 2 I I J 11 !W I I I Q 11'► Wie? I I WJ ,� «! 1 I �'o�ci r !W I I (IL I 1 I I , � VI+ � Ivo 11/ 1 1 I Si w. I Ri 0-uJl • k •R IN- 1 I I U \.M\\,J.! !W './ 1•• !W 1 I WW W W W =_ _ !>> UR �1 '� w 1 •\\ I J w \ \ O N N 000 N N N N N N N I. 2 N N 0.101N N N N ,y,.,,y N V \\ g nn nnn 100 .� . nr1On W CO 1 e- 1�/ I 111^Y78 �\ _? �o o.o ^41 111 x§ •\�\ !W \\ \ m o0 oa m SS 8 nnn Im`•I'D' Z i . I 1 y y • • AS tea, y/ fN• . �\ ... z NIAV1 NN VI NNN VI`11 ZV La c.1 I III / a >•! D O m 0 I.m a N I.N 11 N T N N m m N } I I I 17 . a 1 Ill .R.,\ ,\, 7 n�N n���o"'io�liovmm��o/vo OO. 31 — 1 -gg • \\ V n NMI VIN V V V N01N WIm NNCC 1 ' 11 —I i :8 ,\ ` ice+ 1 \�\—' W N u 10011 AO 0N0,'n000'n01100.000000 b'4 VINDNN Q 0 I I 1 Js vs t' z LL WI 1 1 I® ®1 I 1 �, 2 O 1 O 0 ro w 0 N^O^w m m -VI Vt r MI N K WI I I I ` ®-••1 I sy, Z I I I I 1 I ^ I/'' 1J f :11Afl n n o o iD o uNi v'AI vi o Ifl Ni v/1M1 1V z �1 N^Nr.-v1w ry 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 .N N N N N N N N N N N N m 1.N 1O. W / 1 «iii ^ ^^ ^^ • ` F UI I f�--7_.11 ' 1�1 !Y, NNNNNN N N N N N N NNNNN N 1 l 1 1 i W. 1 / A ` r1 11lt i--iI Ii 4 ss \ l�, x- n 1\I� LG I i 11 I .? ! 1 �r 8 J 0 111 N 01 1 OI 1 III I W , 1 W ~- 1 NI F = P N ,m •^ 11 ct. I Il I c . Mi ui 1 1---T) I 4n . `.t •�. 1 0py ,.. .0 N a 1 ~ IYi > % 01 ' I � I � F.F.1 - ''-,•�• �x ' 1 0 8 s s s d 8 8 8 1 V 1 1 1 -- 1 i'll RPS i".73 \ :W 1/ o m N vI 11 1 ii1 ?' I I III Jas n�R , I/11 1 , .p ar 1p 1 1 11 !W 1 11\ 1 I I I I 1111 JI! 1 1 /1 I J N M MI 1 �/ 11 %1\\ I I '$I OS I / 1� �1 II o eo • m N N V 1 11��\`\ 1}+u 1 • �I /1 r I 1 •, 8, u) o n- 1• I ' I 1 4l1 1 • O 8 m n O m N n' .':4;'," f N 11 1 \ \\, I\� I 'X txt / I f•w h 1444 h Vi e, 1 ' sVeN; I e I ► 4: 11 �' • N VVVI ^a0 mao P.a; h.1. 1D 10 P-mo NNP h.CO I z 1 Iw ps I / ' I 1 I , It''•1` - : ,\ ` "� g ." s'~`a'-u`aaau aO'aun% • ` \ . - I _ 7 1 O a O.u 6 d W • 7. 11 W I I i •_ ' ` � W / / I is; z Nn „...- Np^Nn.Nwnm \ a. I1• ®I I / .7 a z N 10.1 N n N N a N N N N N N N N N N 1 1 ' i Si �'" I I O // I s 1 I 1 i 'I 1 _ ! �a ,//'/Z I I A2,.4. 11 i I II s _a F. 111c //' / C7 • _ !Y 1 1 \ /0 I 1 I � „ , // I 1 1 1 / • 1 1 ', :W III / , /' CC I , ' W W W W 11 1 I I 1 1 1 IN ////// I 1 I • 1,.., 1 I 1 / . / I 4 N 1 N N N . li? Q2 1101 1101 f f 11 I II ill 1 6.P //// e_ I 1 I 4 111 . N 0 r. W 1NlI VQl' :4 1 1 1 II I I /�e/// I I� •I m coffN ONI ry f 1 I I v, $4 / J \\\11 'I 11 w-Q I i I 8• /////// � I 1 I mmNorvmulormrmolb+O. \1 I 1 n. ' ' .001Z // WI 1 N1/VIONNN^NNnV/m .7'443 Nmp10N••' O VI 0...1O V O^OYI0 NNA F 0100 NV 0)0 .10 \I \ 1 !W I ' / 2m MIVmO1^R OOmm Nf NOOm 0 1.0.-.-V O 1 ' I I I IpAP NpV O Rw1 O1(+y1NOOf-VI IAP Vl Z 0011.11 V r..r.N N 1 i I - O' �N 1001DSID1$INOINOIN01N010NbINommmmm ti W Io•o m m m,to .11\ \ 1 I / . 1 I / /' 0 a 1 ( Z w 1 1 1 ' I 1� .. ....„.„.,........,.....- \ 11 1 1 1 /,/ 1/�0.I 1 [[��]] II V1NN mOO m•o ON V N1.N0O N p= 1•IIN1 Vm1 m 01ni Y •T • ' --t_.I—I 1 _ �` 1fl N O 1•N N O 1•N O VVI 1. ••IO V1 N • • VI 8 F m VI 444 1 -—_T•— _�s_Q ��,,//�1/^� - __— �J ,j— _ IR�J'Y NNNNN 1•P IN1 f N O O 1101 V F 11.18�p t / 2TWV.I10 �V �VSJ __ p DO'S'Oo0 N N N N N N II I 1 � ' 1. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N • 1 I .1............... � I I r A N x O I 1 1...1 1f1 M' u ' I 31>RI ' N . W ▪ ap n • 1IPI 1.0 en J V w r 2 _p ' va Nt z • !W < V - r• O O• I•. 0,A W O i m T r• N o z Y! N V1 0 2 A 0 W '- N 0 i0 0 O 8 8 8 0 0 2 8 U @ d d 09 d In n N • 4 V N V p O O N V F▪ O W N N W ,_, o ^ n n . 0 N O 01 1A V IV •0 I ID z O V,miO ONtn0 .M m 0.0 Z O O.,,,O, gown mm VI M1 VI 1 .1 O o8 Opp E '4111 <•F 8 f 000 t,t, 11nfn b1V11 0'0,14 N IV'V 11^11 0 O H F O ID 111 Tr- ,,12 1~/l 1 N.10 "';',7,1 N N N N N 111 n 1Vn In N 01 N N N N . F a2 mdo.un� a �ao.auao-au�o-o`-u�o.o.cui,ul e- Z NMI V VI m 1.m N 0..N 0 V VI m 1•m Gp �ry.I fO VVp 11 d9000000000 O.z In M,9,,9,MI M1 66 d3S LO u6p10.0£C901\Dpo.6•Dld\po3\Of f901.\:w — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — .' :OCT-Z2-99 FRI 14:55 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 41. lit A If ' - �sS 20 Mg 4- 10 (to) 4._''°°{too, a *441' n ` S o t'130(200) (1a,to—(.�>o-►� err �, '11 j r..1350(1a0o pa)40 SoS 0 rit -- •�! .111 _- OR. 1h AVE SoCRETARIAT itv -� o 0 0' Lt80(1320 � n 4.114 ,i'36 v ga (130)240--f i t r 6 (170)24 a SO d E - a 1671 0 roof 240--� '� 000111: (teo,ago-� $ la" SITE •�---• -••---- -- ._._..___._._._FUTURE 171h AVE, Ailli OEAkS LAIC AA 0- MONTE lit ooe S ~ i0(� �o, (110)220_,--t r 1a e!•-4!a( of ' (10)110 COO)110-4 =AM PEAL( ( =PMPEAK ®CONSULTING GROUP, INC. SCOTT COUNTY ' 2017 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BUILD CONDITIONS SRF N0.0993430 CSAH 83/CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT TRAFFIC STUDY FIGURE 22.3 je5e!ceLdU se ITraffic volumes for .volumes for the O the trip generation estimates Peale AM left- ffice Service land use assuming Office by less thfn l volumes for land us are similar to those of the Service land use are ill I and uses the per hour. A and traffic do not Chan Business Park use, but illustrated in FIG same methodology gain traffic vol change between the resulted in lowerURE 2vol Traffic as described arses include alternatives. However, trip generation estimates. bed previously for the a diversion,25 ,peak P Both alternatives were anal Business Park��d�e�'� between the PM left-turn volumes Icommercial land analyzed to Bete �'o site driveway drop site. uses nearest the access determine the accuracyY intersection It was determined reasonable to onto CSAN 83 of the percents access. assume that familiar'off'ce/w house t°thee diverted. The users such east and o proposed div site as office a office towersplan indicates I Traffic I employees could in the northeast co m acts and pro osed easily divert to mer of the Miti stion the alternate south location(south Valley Green Co (south of TH 'Porate Center is estimated to result in I will ay Greiteen 169),to there oral are ew is parallel to to problemsthe no approximately 3t is to with then north or from the the area. As a result,it is estimated 0 additional week the trafficwi 83/Site number of leftnorth. This results 83/ShakopeeIh''vewa ins into the site from the in peak AM hour vol day trips. Due to its Driveway intersection. that the S t southbound le bypass south rampMitigation for north. The most criticalamen of 1,300 to 1,600generated the Ces. This could easilycoon.intersection,to this area could involve queuing vehicles and I proximity to the be accomplished penn8 to aa continuous location is the south trunk hi tape second left-turn lane. us left- bound left timing. The CS highway ramp intersection.through proper stripingThis would add turn lane starting atithe at veh I scheduled to �16/Site Driveway Queuing pm and signing, but would require storagethe CSAR be installed byaY intersection should g problems could also Quiue for the]eft-turn intersection. on. year 2017 inalso be reviewed be mitigated traffic signtMn/DOT approvaltraffics to the the order to reserve a capaci periodically for tion of signal e use of s h'required for the goal w special traffic signal to the results of the Traffic operationa'Tarrts. A traffic signalg is capacity), th AM PMImpact Study, individual Driveway also According LOS E os near ca peak hours, for the designdyalla ual intersections will be at a D anddciand LOS F isyear 2017. be operating ' system however °r better for both northbo over capacit A LOS aofAla t at a Level of Se ,arterial LOS at specific and and southbound overall arterial through D is typically the Service(LOS)D a F during a LOSI and PMor ath no intersections traffic analysis indicatesr& that acceptable traffic. Thehours. loss of LOS may deteriorate to an andAM and PM ho entire co (under north and southThis specificat the northE,and in �• Because of corridor would Producing unsatisfactory Levelofcycllei deters from the 169 rip is a result of the am of the north TH time 9 coordinated I to CSAR 16. TABLE 22-1 shows amount of of green time amount of green ramp intersection Level Service and allocated for allocated for the As stated above,the the side streets,therefore locations adjacentproposed developmentQueue Length analysis for CS traffic impacts. to the site. Additional capacity will AH 83-12th Ave cedFurthermore,e,thepied generate a significant traffic impacts, additions in background alternative accpointsamount of traffic pacts v particularly on CS ground traffic points should resulting in unacceptable II AH 83, growth and site be considered toeptable LOS at certainmoreeffectively II patterns could result in more mitigate carbon monoxide levels. Provide an esti re severe (If the Discuss the effectnti traffic of e effect of the project's project Involves S00 or more IS needed) improvementsp feet s traffic . IN ill 23, lie pee-related air involves ssio parking spaces,consult "EA W or other mitigation gth generation 0p Guidelines" measuresair quality,including proposed to eliminate a � The guidance about whether on air quality impacts, should be e- consulted emissions potential guidance rovided in "EAW a detailed air I BarrisGuidelines:should quality analysis assume res regarding ISPs may be presented under Item 22 and also be Possibility for applyls requirements followed for an AUA analyses closely. 8sib an ISP for certain merely re for proposed bevdes referenced here. The R Mitigation peck developments it may developments;althoughSCA staff' Pollutant will be desirable to coordinate the RGU m passing throughbe associated withsate the AUA�not want to Project. critical intersections con motor vehicles Rand ISP emissionssiill be tribute to the traveling to and from the aira passing standards have been established overall pollutant concentration project. These Agency(The most• The pollutant s associated with vehicular traffic is C near the and other and8- ovehicles already thisairMPCAe 1-hour y the US Environmental Carbon Monoxide(CO)critical intersections serving Quality assessment for the AU�raid is slightly Protection Agency )for whichur 8 the The standards more stringent than the EPA (EPA)and the d will o 8-hour ambient andards are presented in TABLE 23 1,how afro will therefore lord and Control Before be used in IS 1 •;'iCT..22-99 FRI 14:56 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 06 4 111,0 1 /e. 4th AVE -r-- eco krk 1 -.Ili 11416, � 20 ra co t-200(130)Is Ues 4 -2f(� Se p 4J 11. j r (,2so (Io)30 I I T I (22o)Io--1 S V S s ge M.0 0 l p I T -OE 1 I ks itt 0 12th AVE 1 - 64.4 1 Lit A, 2 � � u � Ni � t N � < , JJ°'L . ° 1 M✓ OA Alli:ER.. /-'-'- ...li1r= ti) (1.2410_ (60)240 41r : 18 ro) o-->, T-. Neio ' (10),20-► w (150)280 o c1 -4oo—i too `. Se I A SITE ._ ------ 17th AVE -- a �_, 1. DEANS LAKE ito 1 4 MCN7ECIMC IV M Y • e"'v g �: 320(1!0) a « t_310(„o) I E o e 70(210) a Imo_ .--370 poo) �J 1 r 30(1,0) 41 (310)500j* 41 tr (1c0 S40 (too)140-10 440)170—9' I (00)„0--3, o00 +ws eo- I I XX =AM PEAK 1(XX)=PM PEAK g SCOTT COUNTY F CONSULTING Gaovr, INC. 2017 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BUILD I CONDITIONS WITH OFFICE/WAREHOUSE USE FIGURE 22-4 •SRF NO.0993430 CSAH 83/CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT TRAFFIC STUDY I , . H I0 a h \ • t r 1 0 v O - g = .1h I k 'o j ,0 • 1 Ci � j WW y elUwoawc:a ,A r,� ,a Ur.� UU � A a a ch '11 � �. C w .. = N l al ;� d AwatA A A °g i dAUw ¢ wwA °" O o °' o z ° z ' IoTal rilo 1 p U U coA U• .z ca 0 U A CA A A Z I1.4 "▪ '� " 1 ~ 1 H 0 i MI SU A I Q 0j o D k iof � o � � U w 1:1:1w aajw k U w U 0a40 v a Oi v O ' s c ...I O WI •..I b O >.. C o � �' o ! I I 0. . lA w a1 w A A 'xi C UIw1Qjw ,w A • ‘4:' tI • t of o I 4.▪ 004 Z o zi Q z � o O TJ (A z a � I !zav U1AW w UO i Iii o 41 > N ' a! Sag a1 CU 0 l _ 4 = o i � N Cn M c IL0 05;Ziril'%Cst''. Cli • 1O I aa ¢ � a+> 4 i a -0 • aci ~3~ O � Q .o .~ x a .�!= awc,ilj � (hI 1 I TABLE 23-1 MPCA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CARBON MONOXIDE I Period Standard 1-hour 30(parts per million)ppm 8-hour 9 (parts per million)ppm IA CO dispersion analysis was performed for four of the six intersections analyzed for traffic in Item 22. Two of the intersections,CSAH 83 at 12th Avenue and CSAH 16 at the site access along the south side of the project,are estimated to have less I than 2,400 PM Peak Hour approach movements and are not likely to have the potential for high CO concentrations based upon air quality screening guidelines developed in the early 1990s by regional air quality task force. The intersections analyzed for vehicle emissions and air quality are listed in TABLE 23-2. I TABLE 23-2 INTERSECTIONS EXAMINED FOR CO CONCENTRATIONS PM Peak Hour Approach Volumes(2017) I (North/South Roadway I East/West Roadway I Volume I LOS CSAH 83 12th Avenue 1,972 C CSAH 83 TH 169 WB Ramp 3,860 D I CSAH 83 TH 169 EB Ramp 5,150 6.040 B CSAH 83 CSAH 16 E CSAH 83 17th Avenue(future) 4,130 C ISouth Site Access CSAH 16 1,570 not available The MOBILE 5A emissions program was used to estimate vehicle emissions in the year 2017 for which the traffic analysis has I been completed. An air quality analysis one year after completion of major phases will be prepared for inclusion in the Indirect Source Permit Application to be filed for this project. The CAL3QHC dispersion model was used to estimate CO concentrations at receptor sites near each of the intersections listed in TABLE 23-2. Receptor sites 100 feet from the intersection in each of four compass quadrants were assumed since land use immediately adjacent to these intersection are currently undeveloped but could Ipotentially be developed in the future. Carbon Monoxide Background Concentration I CO monitoring was performed in May of 1996 just north of Lake Susan in Chanhassen and approximately 5.5 miles northwest of the critical intersections analyzed in this AUAR.The observed 1996 background concentrations have been adjusted to worst case annual(winter)concentrations using seasonal adjustment factors and to the 2017 projection year using the ratio of 2017 to 1996 I emission rates from the MOBILE 5A emissions model and assuming an overall regional Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMT)growth of 2%per year. A vehicle Inspection/Maintenance program was assumed in 1996 but not in 2017. The results of this adjustment are shown in TABLE 23-3. I TABLE 23-3 ADJUSTED CO BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS FOR 2017 I Factor 1996 2017 Emission rate at 25 mph 23.1 20.0 Emission rate ratio from 1996 0.87 I Traffic growth at 2%per year 1.52 Seasonal correction factor 1.43 Combined correction 1.88 1-HOUR(ppm) 1.8 3.4 I 8-HOUR(ppm) 1.6 3.0 Assumptions Used in CO Emission and Dispersion Modeling IThe air quality analysis is based upon PM peak hour traffic projections for the year 2017 developed in Question 22.The U.S. EPA MOBILE 5A emissions model for 2017 was run with the vehicle mix for the Twin Cities Seven-County Metropolitan Area I- (without the vehicle inspection and maintenance program that was terminated in 1999). The CAL3QHC model has been used to estimate downwind concentrations of carbon monoxide at receptor sites adjacent to critical intersections. Eight hour concentrations associated with each roadway are estimated using a persistence factor of 0.70 applied to the PM peak hour emissions.The assumptions used for the dispersion model are summarized in TABLE 23-4. I 16 I TABLE 23-4 ASSUMPTIONS USED IN CO MODELING I Traffic Approach Speed: Signal Cycle Time: 25 mph on all roadways 150 seconds at all intersections Green Time: Based upon SYNCHRO model results I Percent Cold Starts: 20% Vehicle Mix: Metropolitan Area mix with no UM program Wind Speed: 1 meter per second Wind Direction: Direction yielding highest concentration IProjected CO Concentrations I Based upon the approach traffic volumes and the emission assumptions noted above,carbon monoxide concentrations have been projected for each of the four quadrant receptor sites at each of the intersections for the Build 2017 traffic scenario. PM Peak Hour (1-hour)concentrations are presented in TABLE 23-5. Projected 8-Hour concentrations for No-Build and Build scenario traffic are presented in TABLE 23-6. ITABLE 23-5 PROJECTED CO 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS I (Build 2017-ppm) Roadway Background TOTAL CSAH 83/WB ramp I Receptor 1 NE 2.9 3.4 6.3 Receptor 2 SE 2.8 3.4 6.2 Receptor 3 SW 2.5 3.4 5.9 I Receptor 4 NW 2.9 3.4 6.3 CSAH 83/EB ramp Receptor 1 NE 3.5 3.4 6.9 111 Receptor 2 SE 3.6 3.4 7.0 Receptor 3 SW 4.2 3.4 7.6 Receptor 4 NW 4.6 3.4 8.0 I CSAR 83/CSAR 16 Receptor 1 NE 5.8 3.4 9.2 Receptor 2 SE 4.8 3.4 8.2 Receptor 3 SW 4.6 3.4 8.0 I Receptor 4 NW 5.8 3.4 9.2 CSAR 83/17Tth Ave Receptor 1 NE 2.5 3.4 5.9 I Receptor 2 SE 2.0 3.4 5.4 Receptor 3 SW 2.2 3.4 5.6 Receptor 4 NW 3.6 3.4 7.0 MPCA STANDARD 30.0 IFrom TABLE 23-5 it can be seen that the highest 1-hour CO concentration of 9.2 ppm occurs near the CSAH 83 and CSAH 16 intersection. However,all of the CO concentrations at this intersection and others are well below the 1-hour 30 ppm ambient air Iquality standard for Carbon Monoxide. I I I I 17 • ITABLE 23-6 PROJECTED CO 8-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS (Build 2017-ppm) IRoadway Background TOTAL CSAH 83/WB ramp Receptor 1 NE 2.0 3.0 5.0 I Receptor 2 SE 2.0 3.0 5.0 Receptor 3 SW 1.8 3.0 4.8 Receptor 4 NW 2.0 3.0 5.0 I CSAH 83/EB ramp Receptor 1 NE 2.5 3.0 5.5 Receptor 2 SE 2.5 3.0 5.5 I Receptor 3 SW 2.9 3.0 5.9 Receptor 4 NW 3.2 3.0 6.2 CSAH 83/CSAH 16 Receptor 1 NE 4.1 3.0 7.1 111 Receptor 2 SE 3.4 3.0 6.4 Receptor 3 SW 3.2 3.0 6.2 Receptor 4 NW 4.1 3.0 7.1 I CSAR 83/17Tth Ave Receptor 1 NE 1.8 3.0 4.8 Receptor 2 SE 1.4 3.0 4.4 I Receptor 3 SW 1.5 3.0 4.5 Receptor 4 NW 2.5 3.0 5.5 MPCA STANDARD 9.0 From TABLE 23-6, the 8-hour concentration is 7.1 ppm at the CSAH 83 and CSAH 16 intersection. This level as well as others projected at critical intersections are below the 9 ppm 8-hour standard for Carbon Monoxide. R+ Based upon the CO emission and dispersion analysis at these four intersections,it can be seen that the 1-hour and 8-hour , concentrations all fall below the established standards so that no significant adverse air quality impacts are expected in 2017 because of the project. Concentrations one year after the opening of each major phase will be addressed in the Indirect Source Permit Application to be submitted for this project.') u 24. Stationary source air emissions Will the project involve any stationary sources of air emissions(such as boilers or exhaust stacks)? 0 Yes®No If yes,describe the sources,quantities,and composition of the emissions;the proposed air pollution control devices;the quantities and composition of the emissions after treatment;and the effects on air quality. 24. Stationary source air emissions This item is not applicable to an AUAR.Any stationary air emissions source large enough to Imerit environmental review requires individual review. Information regarding stationary source air emissions was not needed for the AUAR. Any stationary source air emissions li sources large enough to merit an environmental review would require an individual review. I I 1 I I18 I25. Dust,odors,noise. Will the project generate dust,odors,or noise during construction and/or operation?® Yes 0 No 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 Ireceptors. 25. Dust,odors,noise.Dust, odors,and construction noise need not be addressed in an A UAR, unless there is some unusual reason to do so. The RGU might want to discuss as part of the mitigation plan, however, any dust control or construction noise ordinances in effect. I If the area will include or adjoin major noise sources a noise analysis is needed to determine if any noise levels in excess of standards would occur, and if so, to idents appropriate mitigation measures. With respect to traffic-generated noise, the noise analysis should be based on the traffic analysis of item 22. IConstruction Impacts Dust,noise and vibration will be associated with the normal grading and construction activities.The following measures to minimize noise and dust emissions will be incorporated into the construction procedures for the project: I • All internal combustion motors will be fitted with mufflers and other noise control equipment as specified by the manufacturer. • Construction procedures will comply with Minnesota Rules 7005.0050 on the control of fugitive particulate matter from I construction and hauling activities so as to minimize adverse air quality impacts. • Minnesota Rules 7030.0040 on noise limits during daytime and nighttime hours will be complied with to minimize any adverse impacts on the noise environment. Once the project is completed and operational,no unusual dust,odors or noise will be generated except that associated with mechanical equipment located on or adjacent to some of the buildings within the project. ITraffic Noise Impacts-Daytime(PM Peak Hour) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA)noise standards for residential and commercial land uses are listed in TABLE 25-1. The residential area most likely impacted by noise from immediately adjacent roadways carrying project traffic are those north Iof CSAH 16 and south of Dean Lake. Areas adjacent to the critical intersections serving the project are most likely to be developed as commercial land uses if such development occurs. It should be noted that under an amendment to Minn. Stat. §116.07,subd.2a, these standards no longer apply to roadways except in the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. A traffic noise impact analysis is still I included in this AUAR using the MPCA standards as planning guidelines although they will be referred to as"standards". Since the project is expected to generate only minimal traffic during the nighttime hours,this evaluation addresses maximum expected daytime noise levels. TABLE 25-1 1 MPCA DAYTIME NOISE STANDARDS (dBA) Land Use/ Daytime Noise Metric Standard NAC-1 Residential I L10 65 L50 60 NAC-2 Commercial I L10 70 L50 65 NAC-3 Industrial 1 L10 80 L50 75 This noise assessment also addresses the potential impact on noise levels caused by the removal of trees south of TH 169 at the homes south of Deans Lake. That assessment follows the analysis of noise impacts from immediately adjacent roadways that is I presented below. Traffic noise levels have been analyzed for the PM Peak Hour which represents the worst case daytime noise levels for comparison with the MPCA daytime noise standards. Noise levels were analyzed at the receptor sites in the vicinity of the four critical intersections listed in TABLE 23-3 and at the residential area north of CSAH 16 and south of Deans Lake. The STAMINA 2.0 highway noise model was used with the estimated Build traffic developed in Question 21 for the year 2017. An average speed of I40 mph along roadways was assumed near intersections and 45 mph along CSAH 16. A vehicle mix of 3%medium trucks and 1% heavy trucks was assumed on all of the roadways near critical intersections. Medium trucks were estimated at 5%and no heavy trucks were assumed on CSAH 16 south of Deans Lake. I 19 I The projected L 10 and L50 noise levels at receptor sites adjacent to the critical intersections for the PM Peak Hour are presented in Table 24.2 along with the increase in noise level over the No-Build scenario. TABLE 25-2 I PROJECTED PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS at Critical Intersections (dBA) ICSAH 83 at WB Ramp Receptor Site(100 feet) L 10 L50 NE 72.1 67.9 I SE 72.2 68.2 SW 72.2 68.0 I NW 71.5 67.2 CSAH 83 at EB Ramp Receptor Site(100 feet) L 10 L50 I NE 72.7 69.1 SE 73.9 70.3 SW 73.0 69.3 NW 72.5 68.6 I CSAH 83 at CSAH 16 Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 NE 74.4 71.0 I SE 73.5 70.1 SW 73.0 69.4 NW 73.5 70.0 I CSAH 83 at 17th Ave. Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 NE 72.4 68.4 I SE 71.7 67.6 SW 72.1 68.0 NW 72.9 68.9 generally consistent alongCSAH 83 from TH 169 south to the From TABLE 25-2,it can be seen that the projected noise levels are g y future 17th Avenue. L10 levels are generally above 70 dBA and L50 levels are generally above 65 dBA. A comparison of the Iprojected levels with the NAC-2(commercial)noise standards is presented in TABLE 25-3. I I I I I I I 20 TABLE 25-3 LEVEL RELATIVE TO COMMERCIAL STANDARDS at Critical Intersections I (dBA) CSAH 83 at WB Ram P I Receptor Site(100 feet) L 10 L50 NE 2.1 2.9 SE 2.2 3.2 SW 2.2 3.0 I NW 1.5 2.2 CSAH 83 at EB Ramp Receptor Site(100 feet) L 10 L50 I NE 2.7 4.1 SE 3.9 5.3 SW 3.0 4.3 I NW 2.5 3.6 CSAH 83 at CSAH 16 Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 I NE 4.4 6.0 SE 3.5 5.1 SW 3.0 4.4 I NW 3.5 5.0 CSAH 83 at 17th Ave. Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 NE 2.4 3.4 II SE 1.7 2.6 SW 2.1 3.0 NW 2.9 3.9 IFrom TABLE 25-3 it can be seen that all of the receptor sites are predicted to be over the commercial noise standards at all receptor sites. However,as noted below,the higher NAC-3(industrial)standards can be applied where certain conditions are met. IBuilding construction and use and exceptions to the MPCA noise standards Exceptions to the MPCA noise standard allow for a higher standard to be applied under specified conditions. Under Subpart 3 EXCEPTIONS(D)of Minnesota Rules 7030.0050 NOISE AREA CLASSIFICATION, the NAC 3(industrial)standards can be I applied to a land use in NAC 2(commercial)if the following conditions are met: I (1) the building is constructed in such a way that the exterior to interior sound level attenuation is at least 30 dBA (2) the building has year-round climate control,and I (3) the building has no areas or accommodations that are intended for outdoor activities Typical commercial construction will meet these requirements. However,no continuous outdoor uses should be permitted in areas for which the L10 is 70 dBA or greater or the L50 is 65 dBA or greater. Assuming that the conditions noted above are met for land uses for which there are no intended outdoor uses,differences between projected levels and the NAC-3 standards are shown in TABLE 25-4. I I I 1 21 I TABLE 25-4 PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS RELATIVE TO NAC-3 STANDARDS at Critical Intersections I (dBA) CSAH 83 at WB Ramp I Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 NE -7.9 -7.1 SE -7.8 -6.8 SW -7.8 -7.0 I NW -8.5 -7.8 CSAH 83 at EB Ramp Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 I NE -7.3 -5.9 SE -6.1 -4.7 SW -7.0 -5.7 I NW -7.5 -6.4 CSAH 83 at CSAH 16 Receptor Site(100 feet) L 10 L50 I NE -5.6 -4.0 SE -6.5 -4.9 SW -7.0 -5.6 I NW -6.5 -5.0 CSAH 83 at 17th Ave. Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 NE -7.6 -6.6 I SE -8.3 -7.4 SW -7.9 -7.0 NW -7.1 -6.1 IFrom TABLE 25-4 it can be seen that well-constructed commercial buildings(without continuous outside land uses)are likely to comply with the MPCA noise standards. 1 Projected noise levels at the residential area north of CSAH 16 and south of Dean Lake are presented in TABLE 25-5 and compared with the NAC-1 (residential)noise standards in TABLE 25-6. It can be seen that for homes within 100 feet of the roadway centerline,the daytime standards are exceeded by approximately 2 dBA. However,for most homes which are 150 to 200 feet from Ithe roadway centerline,the predicted traffic noise levels are at or below the daytime noise standards for residential land uses. TABLE 25-5 PROJECTED NOISE PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS I at Residential Area North of CSAH 16 (dBA) I Receptor distance from roadway centerline L10 L50 100 feet 66.9 61.2 200 feet 62.0 57.3 ITABLE 25-6 PROJECTED NOISE PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS RELATIVE TO NAC-1 STANDARDS at Residential Area North of CSAH 16 I (dBA) Receptor distance from roadway centerline L10 L50 I 100 feet 1.9 1.2 200 feet -3.0 -2.7 I 1 22 IImpact on residential noise levels from the removal of trees on the project site Two groups of trees,one immediately south of TH 169 and the other just north of Deans Lake,have been removed for project I grading and construction. Each of these tree areas are approximately 2000 feet wide(east to west)and approximately 500 feet deep (north to south). While no specific studies on the shielding effects of these trees have been made,it can be assumed that each of these tree barriers will provide no more shielding than a solid barrier 20 feet in height. This is consistent with empirical data that a 100 foot band of dense tree cover can provide up to 3 dBA attenuation of traffic noise,so that a 500 foot band could provide up to 15 I dBA attenuation,which is the maximum provided by a 20 foot barrier(in close proximity to the barrier). However,since traffic along TH 169 constitutes a line source,i.e.noise emanates from along the entire highway,these tree barriers only provide partial shielding of the highway. Because of the nature of noise propagation,extensive noise will reach the homes south of Deans Lake from portions of the highway that are not shielded by the trees. IThe potential impact of removing these trees was simulated assuming that each tree band was equivalent to a solid 20 foot high noise barrier along the east/west extent of the trees. Residential receptor sites along the south edge of Dean Lake were evaluated. IThe assumed tree barriers and residential receptor sites are shown in FIGURE 25-1. The results of this simulation with and without the simulated trees and therefore the difference in noise attributed to the trees are presented in TABLE 25-7. ITABLE 25-7 SIMULATED IMPACT OF TREE REMOVAL ON NOISE LEVEL FROM TH 169 at Residential Area North of CSAH 16 I (dBA) Trees No Trees Impact I 1 45.0 45.8 0.8 2 44.3 45.4 1.1 3 43.6 44.5 0.9 I 4 44.0 44.8 0.8 5 42.9 43.5 0.6 I It can be seen that the maximum impact of just over 1 dBA is expected to occur at Receptor Site#4 which is closest to Deans Lake. However,the predicted noise levels at the sites from TH 169,which is approximately 3000 feet to the north,is close to a typical urban ambient noise level that is caused by noise sources within a several mile radius of any given location. Therefore,while some impact may be noted with the removal of trees,the level of impact is expected to be generally less than 1 dBA. It should also I be noted that the placement of buildings on the project site could provide some shielding of noise from TH 169 in lieu of the trees that were removed,and could be more effective because of their solid construction. However,without a specific building plan,no estimate of potential shielding from future buildings can be made at this time. IIIBased upon the analysis of traffic noise levels and the impact of removing trees from the project site, the project is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on noise levels at future commercial areas adjacent to critical intersections or at the residential area north of CSAH 16 and south of Dean Lake.(9) I I I I 1 I 1 23 I I I I I EFFECTIVE TREE BARRIERS AND RESIDENTIAL RECEPTOR SITES '4 s ' � g� � r ��. a {,. r _ - T. 74e}.-' •-•t . « T .... . Wit .". _ ". + ., mor !� , ,Ag • f*:::222 zt .I - l�\W'ei R- :....,.. t, i{ •� R,x IS { a iiii lit siTE ,_ , .. i. ik:. B _ _ t. • ,` ter" `- ' ,. F. '.„ _ i ,--.:** -- - 1 .--46z,-* y„ .f I / k ,„1.11v4;IF.4,4452..-C-L.-. - -,„r .,i t_-..-",-f---,:-7::„: '".-1_ - ' A L'i .....,".4._, ,.-, a ":SINA..,. ,, ir------ ,,_ _ , _-_-_,_z,4,-„,__ _ _,.._t= • . = _ .,_ . ,.-_;,, , - .--;,:: ,_ ----, - "u".i) _1 - 's• I 4- - • f -K . —' - 3[-Fat. .4-.--;-:I -,_; - --`'-'4, ---.,---1---';-; T .r-tee€ - .'t{ -r . • : - 'P am? -, s • - _• • _ — -....._,.ten xr _ EIEURE 25 - 1 I DAVID BRASLAU AND ASSOCIATES I I 1 I 26. Sensitive Resources Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site: 26. Sensitive Resources: a. Archeological, historic, and architectural resources.For an AUAR, contact with the State Historic Preservation Office is required to determine whether there are areas of potential impacts to these resources.If any exist, an appropriate site survey of I high probability areas is needed to address the issue in more detail. The mitigation plan must include mitigation for any impacts identified. b. Prime or unique farmlands. The extent of conversion of existing farmlands anticipated in the AUAR should be described.If I any farmland will be preserved by special protection programs, this should be discussed. c. Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails. If development of the AUAR will interfere or change the use of any existing such resource, this should be described in the AUAR. The RGU may also want to discuss under this item any proposed parks, recreation areas, or trails to be developed in conjunction with development of the AUAR area. I d. Scenic views and vistas.Any impacts on such resources present in the AUAR should be addressed. This would include both direct physical impacts and impacts on visual quality or integrity. "EAW Guidelines:contains a list of possible scenic resources (page 20). Ia. archeological,historical,or architectural resources?0 Yes 0 No A request has been made to the State Historical Preservation Office for a site review of the Deans Lake area to see if a Phase I I survey is warranted. A Phase I archaeological survey was performed for the Eastern portion of Dean Lake in December of 1997. This survey included archival-documentary records research,a visual inspection reconnaissance of the project area,and subsurface shovel testing. The results of this survey indicated that the eastern portion of Deans Lake is considered to be moderate to good for Ithe probability of unreported archaeological properties. Trig maps of the area indicate the presence of pre-european travel to and from the lake. However no significant archaeological/heritage sites or properties within the Southbridge project area of potential effect,and warranted no further archaeological reconnaissance. A copy of the Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey can be found in APPENDIX D. Ib. prime or unique farmlands?0 Yes u No The project site does not contain any prime or unique farmlands. Past land uses have included some agricultural use,mainly in I the north and west of the project site. Those areas are considered fair for agricultural uses consisting of Dakota Loam and Copas silt loam.Both soil types have good drainage,although drainage can be restricted by bedrock in areas of the Copas silt loam. The majority of the project site is comprised of sandy droughty soils of the Dune land,Hubbard,Isanti and Zimmerman series with marshy soils located along the west edge of Deans Lake. The southeast portion of the study are is comprised of stoney land and I terrace escarpments.° c. designated parks,recreation areas,or trails?0 Yes u No IProposed development of the project site would not affect any existing public parks,recreation areas or trails. Deans Lake is classified as a shallow natural environment lake. Much of the land directly around Deans Lake consists of marsh and peat muck soils°. d. scenic views and vistas?0 Yes u No i I The proposed development would not affect any designated scenic views or vistas. e. other unique resources?0 Yes u No If any items are answered Yes,describe the resource and identify any impacts on the resource due to the project. I 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 I areas;and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.) u Yes 0 No If yes,explain. 27. Adverse visual impacts.If any non-routine visual impacts would occur from the anticipated development covered by the MUSA review, this should be discussed here along with appropriate mitigation. I Proposed development will alter its appearance from an agriculture/wooded open lot to that of a business park setting. As mentioned earlier development would also include 0.52 acres of wetland will be filled,with 2.15 acres of replacement wetland and buffer area being constructed. Final staging for the proposed development should include the planting of trees,shrubs and other I landscaping.The replacement wetland and buffer areas should be seeded with a mix of native flora to enhance the natural beauty of the area. Some local residents have voiced protest over the removal of several trees from the project area. Their concerns involve the fact that MTH 169 is now visible from their homes. Several trees were removed from the north border of the area. A portion of these I were removed in compliance with the City of Shakopee's Oak Wilt Suppression Program. The perceived adverse visual impacts will be mitigated somewhat with the location of buildings and required landscaping for this development. 1 24 I 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 0 No If yes,identify the applicable plan(s),discuss the compatibility of the project with the provisions of the plan(s),and Iexplain how any conflicts between the project and the plan(s)will be resolved. If no,explain. 28. Compatibility with Plans. The AUAR must include a statement of certification from the RGU that its comprehensive plan. complies with the requirements set out at 4410.3610, subpart 1. The A UAR document should discuss the proposed A UAR area development in the context of the comprehensive plan. If this has not been done as part of the responses to items 6,9,19,22, and I others, it must be addressed here;a brief synopsis should be presented here if the material has been presented in detail under other items.Necessary amendments to comprehensive plan elements to allow for any of the development scenarios should be noted. If there are any management plans of any other local, state, or federal agencies applicable to the A UAR area, the document must discuss the compatibility of the plan with the various development scenarios studied, with emphasis on any 1 incompatible elements. As stated in earlier sections of this report,the plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center should comply with all aspects of the I City of Shakopee's current and adopted draft Comprehensive Plan,Storm Water Management and Transportation Plan elements. 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 0 No I 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 EAW;see "EAW Guidelines"for details) 29. Impact on infrastructure and public services. This item should first of all summarize information on physical infrastructure I presented under items(such as 6, 18, 19 and 22). Other major infrastructure or public services not covered under other items should be discussed as well--this includes major social services such as schools,police,fire, etc. As noted above and in the "EAW Guidelines,"the RGU must be careful to include project-associated infrastructure as an explicit 1 part of the A UAR review if it is to exempt from project-specific review in the future. Construction of the Valley Green Corporate Center would require the extension of sanitary sewer lines and water mains from the I City of Shakopee. Negative impacts on the city's infrastructure are not anticipated. The project site was included in the recent MUSA expansion granted to the City of Shakopee by the Met Council. Approval of this expansion required a comprehensive study and proof of the city's ability to serve this area with adequate water and sanitary sewer service. Other public services such as fire and police would be provided by the City of Shakopee. CSAH 83 offers a direct link between the city and the Valley Green Corporate ICenter. The proposed development is a business park,therefore no direct impacts to local school districts are anticipated. Some indirect impacts in surrounding residential areas may occur because of the employment opportunities that would be created by the proposed development. 30. Related Developments;Cumulative Impacts 30. Related Developments;Cumulative impacts. This item does not require a response for an AUAR since the entire AUAR process deals with cumulative impacts from related developments within the AUAR area. a. Are future stages of this development planned or likely? ®Yes 0 No If yes,briefly describe future stages,their timing,and plans for environmental review. The proposed project will be developed in three stages at the rate of one stage a year,see FIGURE 6-2. I b. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project?0 Yes 8 No If yes,briefly describe the past development,its timing and any past environmental review. c. Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or outlets?0 Yes®No 1 If yes,briefly describe the development and its relationship to the present project. d. If a,b,or c were marked Yes,discuss any cumulative environmental impacts resulting from this project and the other development. I Members of the Shakopee Environmental Protection Association(SEPA)have voiced concerns about increasing noise levels due to this development and future plans of the Flying Cloud Airport. The Flying Cloud Airport is located north of the City of Shakopee in Eden Prairie. They are currently in the planning stages of a new runway that would direct air traffic near the project site. The SEPA concerns involve the cumulative noise levels that may occur if both projects are completed. Because development of this new I runway has not yet occurred and the scoping guildlines of this AUAR,it is not plausible to present detailed information at this time regarding this issue. 1 I 1 25 I31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts which were not addressed by items 1 to 28,identify and discuss them here,along with any proposed mitigation. 31. Other potential environmental impacts.If applicable, this item should be answered as requested by the EAW form. I The Shakopee Environmental Protection Association has been an integral part of the AUAR process. Many public concerns were voiced prior to the preparation of this report. Therefore,at this time it is felt that all known environmental impacts have been addressed by the AUAR. Input and concerns of the Shakopee Environmental Protection Association are appreciated and helpful in assuring that every effort is made to protect the environmental quality of the Deans Lake area. I 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 EA W.) 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 may be considered for these impacts and issues,including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. I 32. Summary of Issues. The RGU may answer this question as asked by the form, or instead,may choose to provide an Executive Summary to the document that basically covers the same information.Either way, the major emphasis should be on:potentially significant impacts, the differences in impacts between major development scenarios, and the proposed mitigation. IRefer to Executive Summary 33. Certification by the RGU.In an AUAR document, no certifications as listed at the end of the EAW form are necessary. (The I RGU is legally responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the document and for properly distributing it nonetheless.) CERTIFICATIONS BY THE RGU(all 3 certifications must be signed for EQB acceptance of the EAW for publication of notice in the EOB Monitor). ' A. I hereby certify that the information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. Signature ' 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. I Signature C. I hereby certify that copies of the completed EAW are being sent to all points on the official EQB EAW distribution list. Signature ITitle of signer Date Minnesota Environmental Quality Board. Revised June 1990. 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 26 REFERENCES I (1) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 2000. Property Audit of proposed Valley Green Corporate Center project site. Prepared for Bolton and Menk,Inc. (2) Daryll Ellison MN DNR West Metro Area Fisheries (Phone Conversation/E-mail 2/14/00) ' (3) Diana Regenscheid MN DNR- Wildlife Division ' (Phone Conversation/E-mail 2/14/00) (4) STS Consultants Ltd. 1999. Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Documents. Prepared for Valley Green ' Corporate Center (5) John Erdmann Wenck Associates 1800 Pioneer Creek Ctr. II P.O. Box 428 Maple Plain,MN 55359-0428 Barr Engineering. 1982. Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant Dewatering Evaluation. Prepared for Metropolitan Council Environmental Services. 111 Drivas E. 1997. "Appropriation Permit 67-172, Shirley Quarry Dewatering, Scott County."MNDNR Office Memorandum(May 19, 1997). IMinnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1989. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas; Best Management Practices for Minnesota. 111 Frost,J. and S. Schwanke. 1992. Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution to All Metropolitan Water Bodies. Metropolitan Council, St. Paul. I Biessel,D.R., and D.R. Ford. 1981 "Hydrogeologic Effects of Quarry Dewatering on Dean Lake, Scott County, Minnesota-A Case Study." Proceedings of the 1981 International Symposium on Urban Hydrology, Hydraulics,and Sediment Control University of Kentucky, Lexington-July 27-30, 1981). Samstad, L.E., 1975. A Report on the Source of Water for Dean Lake and Analysis of Potential Development of Dean Lake and Potential Hazards in Other Developments Which May Concern the Future of Dean Lake. Prepared for Lower Minnesota River Watershed District and City of Shakopee. (6) Schoell&Madson, Inc. July 1999. "Comprehensive Water Plan, 1999 Supplement."Prepared for the City of Shakopee. I (7) United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station. October 1959. "Soil Survey of Scott County Minnesota, Series 1955,No. 4." I (8) SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment of CSAH 83/CSAH 16. Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center. (9) David Brasalu I David Brasalu and Associates 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 322 Minneapolis,MN 55414 • 1 27 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET CONTACT CHECKLIST VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER March 17,2000 Sent Reply PY (2000) (2000) ' Rare Plant or Animal Species 1-26-00 2-25-00 Karen Cieminski ' Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator Natural Heritage&Non-game Research Program Minnesota Department of Natural Resources ' 500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25 St. Paul, MN 55155 (651)296-8319 ' Fish and Wildlife 2-2-00 2-14-00 Daryll Ellison Minnesota Department of Natural Resources West Metro Area Fisheries 9925 Valley View Rd. Eden Prairie,MN 55344 (612)826-6756 2-2-00 2-24-00 Diana Regenscheid MDNR-Division of Wildlife 100 S. Fuller Street Shakopee, MN 55379 (612)496-7686 Hazardous Waste Sites ' 2-15-00 2-25-00 Carole J.Nelson Groundwater Program Development Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Rd. St. Paul,MN 55155-4194 (651)297-1796 Potable Water 2-15-00 Davis Wulff, Supervisor MN Department of Health- Drinking Water 121 E. 7th Place ' PO Box 64975 St.Paul, MN 51164 (651)623-5522 1 1 Sent Reply (2000) (2000) Historical/Architectural 2-15-00 3-15-00 Dennis A. Gimmestad Governmen &Compliance Officer ' Minnesota HistoricaltalPrograms Society 345 Kellogg Blvd. W. St. Paul, MN 55102 ' Metro Area Trails&Waterways 2-15-00 Dennis Assmussen MDNR 1200 Warner Rd. St. Paul,MN 55106 ' (651)297-1151 Water Supply 1 2-2-00 2-14-00 Lou Van Hout Utilities Manager Shakopee Public Utility Commission 1030 E. 4th Ave. Shakopee,MN 55379 1 1 1 1 i i 1 VALLEY GREEN AUAR CONTACT LIST i Daryll Ellison Al Frechette I MDNR Scott County West Metro Area Fisheries Environmental Health 9925 Valley View Road 200 4th Ave. W. I Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Shakopee, MN 55379 (612)826-6756 Bruce Loney Carole J. Nelson City of Shakopee ' Groundwater Program Development 129 Holmes Street S. MPCA Shakopee, MN 55379 520 Lafayette Road ISt. Paul, MN 55155 Pat Lynch (651)297-1796 DNR,Area Hydrologist 1200 Warner Road ' Davis Wulff, Supervisor St. Paul,MN 55105 MN DOH-Drinking Water (651)772-7917 121 E. 7th Place PO Box 64975 Larry Samstad St. Paul,MN 51164 Lower MN Watershed District (651)623-5522 327 Marshall Rd.,#200 II Shakopee,MN 55379 Dennis A. Gimmestad (612)445-7993 Governmental Programs&Compliance Officer I MN Historical Society Doug Snyder 345 Kellogg Boulevard West BWSR-Metro Region St. Paul,MN 55102 1 West Water Street,#200 ' (651)296-6126 St. Paul,MN 55107 (651)215-1520 Dennis Assmussen I MDNR Jay Michels 1200 Warner Road MPCA-Water Quality Division St. Paul,MN 55106 520 Lafayette Rd.N. I (651)297-1151 St. Paul,MN 55155-4194 Lou Van Hout Diana Regenscheid Utilities Manager DNR-Division of Wildlife Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 100 S. Fuller St. 1030 E. 4th Ave. Shakopee,MN 55379 111 Shakopee, MN 55379 612-496-7686 (612)445-1988 Steve Robertson I Peter Beckius MDH-Environmental Division Scott County Soil & Water Conservation PO Box 64975 107 Water Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Jordan, MN 55352 1 I I Mark Zabel Dave Czaja MDA-Agronomy Service Div. 612-445-8071 90 W. Plato Blvd. czajadj@aol.com I St. Paul, MN 55107-2094 John W. Collins John Larson MDNR Park& Rec. U MN Planning-Envir. Quality Bd. 612-445-6736 658 Cedar St. St. Paul, MN 55155 Julie Klime I Greg Downing City of Shakopee 129 S. Holme St. MN Planning-Envir. Quality Bd. Shakopee, MN 55379 658 Cedar St. 612-445-3650 I St. Paul, MN 55155 Jon R. Albinson Stan Ellison Valley Green ISioux Community 612-445-9286 2330 Sioux Trail jalbinson@valleygreen.com Prior Lake, MN 55372 I (612)496-6158 David Braslau David Braslau Assoc. Karen Cieminski 612-331-4571 I DNR Ecological Services Fax: 612-331-4572 500 Lafayette Rd. david@braslau.com Box 25 111 St. Paul,MN 55155-4025 John Erdmann (651)296-8319 Wenck Associates 612-479-4203 I Allan Olson ierdmannawenck.com DNR Forester-SW Metro Area 9925 Valley View Rd. Ron Roetzel Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Bolton&Menk, Inc. I (612)826-6760 612-890-0509 ronro@bolton-menk.com I Welby Smith DNR Botanist Ross Knapper 500 Lafayette Rd. Bolton&Menk, Inc. I Box 25 612-890-0509 St. Paul,MN 55155-4025 rosskn@bolton-menk.com Michael Leek Mark McNeill I City of Shakopee Shakopee City Administrator 612-496-9677 I 612-445-3650 Scott Wazz mleek@ci.shakopee.mn.us SMSC 612-496-6123 I Kathy Gerlach land@ccsmdc.org 612-445-7179 k-gerl@hotmail.com I I 1 1 ' APPENDIX A ' MDNR NATURAL HERITAGE AND NON-GAME RESEARCH PROGRAM INDEX I I0 ro Co o N o U) N O IV E HW a y IX m >• i a m a w o w '0• N F O s, Q 0 £ bi 0 W Z m H H 4, o .H U I it b O r� In ro _2CN l O o 3 >, I CO 0 oa ti) C z• o .- .c a z" - z4tom y H V GA z o IN• CD `� a m > a n C W -0 EL) >, ~ N m " WawH £ on co a z C U) z° H H v wu0u) 0 — w a m a C 14 �° c C d O a) PI Q a w p-q z Z 4 g w 0) W RC F a £ H • Fro -0 J - F x U 0 co 0O al W(� W H x xa w a V) E. rO CO hV N o mz a W • Hww O a x m i a ),1U w• 2 {O. U x ." (4 011 WHU)0 0 Q Z E. a a y C4 01 Ol.n a w m ~ azbR Y x a IxE. u) O AE. H H Z O' c ZWui W 0 W x. xZ Q H 4L F. 04O CP aa▪ 00 WO 71w x 0 I u) d C Lei .0 cu aswa• E. a • U] U1 V) V) W CO b O O 4 O C N0 R wO E ' bl rts• v cE. a o w co04 ,I U yO• C4 y CU Qy ur .i iO n O. 0 n:1C3-1 v I LH 1-4 U oF a W N 44-, .-I H .1 ri 457 Wq oo Z zu H aNO .,� NN++ § 3 3 3 3 3 a a0Zr ,5 Q 0 N N N N N 3 Q. aa00 • O L z [ 0 u) NNc• va .I zZzZzz 0) 0 HFEHF O7ah E C FH a 6C I I I I I I 1 I 111APPENDIX B I MIXED EMERGENT FACT SHEET I I Mixed Emergent Marsh Fact Sheet I I I I ^ . r ,� r•• ?t,.11 hs ' 1 E ' — t.' ; , ti a,. - ii :7' ; m Ill . , ' ' -- -,:ill -'*- ' '' ,1-„,r4.-4.,-.::,,,f-.'i-fi-',,,',#,4,..., - c, - .1 :- $ ; i ,L 2f; ' z Fig.15.2 Mixed emergent marsh in McLeod's Slough, a backwater of the St.Croix River in northern Washington County(see site I 32). The marsh is dominated by river bulrush and prairie cordgrass. Broad-leaved arrowhead is in the foreground. The largest remaining mixed emergent marshes in the Region are in river backwaters. I Status: 4 Soils and substrate and displacement by cattail Structure Occurs on alluvial and lacustrine silt or marsh; many marshes remain along the St. An open wetland community dominated by sand;standing water during much of the Croix and Rum rivers and portions of the I graminoid and forb species that grow above growing season. Mississippi River. the water level;cattails account for less Historic distribution Existing acreage: 2,100 or more than half of the vegetation cover;frequent Along the margins of major rivers,espe- Number of known locations: 95 I open-water pools and channels containing cially in backwater channels or in shallow floating or submerged aquatic plants. sloughs, along the margins of lakes and Common plant species Other characteristics ponds, and in small closed basins; most —Ground layer Common at lake and stream margins; extensive across south-central and eastern FORBS occurs in basins where the water is too Anoka County and adjacent Washington St.John's-wort(Hypericum majus) deep for wet meadow or where a peat mat and Chisago counties;occurred on all of Boneset(Eupatorium perfoliatum) I supporting rich fen or poor fen has not the landforms in the Region. Cut-leaved bugleweed (Lycopus developed; may be dominated by only one Present distribution americanus) Common bladderwort(Utricularia vulgaris) or two species during high-water years; Differs significantly from historic distri Broad leaved arrowhead (Sagittaria diverse native graminoids and forbs typi- bution; losses throughout Anoka County I cally colonize mudflats or exposed mucky because of county ditch systems developed latifolia) channels during drought years. in the early 1900s; other losses caused by Blue vervain(Verbena hastata) 1 [126] Chapter 15 I I Mixed Emergent Marsh Fact Sheet ' I (cont.) GRAMINOIDS 'i�'� '� /1,1, IVill , tai Blue-joint(Calamagrostis canadensis) .�y` •�I( ti e.r .1 I pi-- Softstem bulrush (Scirpus validus 4 � 1��46 � 11 41 1�4hI,/��'r, +1 : 1►�1;�'���� ' var. creber) � j � '1f il'. ,' illf 'f ,�.� ' A species of sedge(Carex scoparia) ��<<�4JTJNS Three-way sedge(Dulichium Spring peeper(Pseudacris crucifer) , ' , I arundinaceum) - Chorus frog(P. triseriata) } Small's spike-rush (Eleocharis smallii) Green frog(Rana clamitans) Snapping turtle(Chelydra serpentina) Woolgrass(Scirpus cyperinus) Northern leopard frog(R. pipiens) Blanding's turtle(Emydoidea blandingii) I Reed canary-grass(Phalaris arundinacea) Painted turtle(Chrysemys picta) Y g Disturbance indicators and threats Characteristic plant species Characteristic animal species Lack of native plants on mudflats during River bulrush (Scirpus fluviatilis) Least bittern(lxobrychus exilis) drought years; abundant reed canary-grass. I Giant bur-reed (Sparganium eurycarpum) Virginia rail (Rallus limicola) Threats include hydrologic alterations Small's spike-rush(Eleocharis smallii) Black tern(Chlidonias niger) caused by ditches, draining,dikes, and Marsh wren(Cistothorus palustris) dams; invasion by purple loosestrife; nutri- I Rare plant species Yellow-headed blackbird (Xanthocephalus ent-rich runoff and excess sedimentation Waterwillow(Decodon verticillatus) xanthocephalus) from surrounding farms, roads, lawns, and Walter's barnyard grass(Echinochloa Blanding's turtle(Emydoidea blandingii) developed land; storm water runoff; unsea- I walteri) sonable water level fluctuations in managed Animals of mixed emergent marshes /� impoundments; incremental damage by Q` �N' �r\ f!,,,; ,j?" small areas of dredging or filling. Aquatic animals predominate in this corn- ,; , _„_-- ' 'el,..i, munity, although terrestrial species forage2. I%�,' ',ACP;,:' Associated natural communities I along the marsh perimeter. The height and ` '" ' �) 1 , a 1T' River beach,floodplain forest, lake beach, structure of emergent vegetation are impor- �r•r ► ' �� •j\,`v_ ., • cattail marsh,alder swamp,willow swamp, tant to nesting birds and breeding frogs and 4 , '. 1 , , ,' wet meadow, and rich fen. toads. The amount of open water associ- m F �1' aj ' I ated with the community and any con- m /f, JI�1� ► j. 4 �i•.` nection with a lake or river can influence z if, i.i the species of waterbirds and turtles 5'''*�` W* � I found here. _ \ % , ,',;--AVN-- st�i. Examples • 1. Boot Lake Scientific and Natural Area Common animal species _ ,% 1 � 02 ., '�;�` 7. Martin-Island-Linwood Lakes I —Breeding birds ks.�~.- �a ..IF '4 y Regional Park: Linwood Lake Canada goose(Brants canadensis) --. - >.- .,. .••, �- r 17. Rum River(west of Walbo Landing) Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) a _.. - r4 y:., -,_ 32. McLeod's Slough Sora(Porzana Carolina) .. '`,., I American coot(Fulica americana) .— .•rd� ori �; r Marsh wren(Cistothorus palustris) �` , ; Common yellowthroat(Geothlypis trichas) t7 �-- � Swamp sparrow(Melospiza georgiana) . I, Red-winged blackbird (Agelaius American bittern •syi.•'i ✓ phoeniceus) . i. 41Rare animal species • . 3'2 —Mammals American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) Common muskrat(Ondatra zibethicus) Common moorhen(Gallinula chloropus) I Common raccoon (Procyon lotor) Sandhill crane(Grus canadensis) 1 —Amphibians and reptiles Wilson's phalarope(Phalaropus tricolor) l.."'�' tj I American toad (Bufo americanus) Forster's tern(Sterna forsteri) Emergent Marshes (127] I I Coffin,B. and L,Pfannmuller,(cds), 1988. Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna, University of I Minnesota Press,Minneapolis for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. APPENDIX C TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 i 1 1 1 { 1 1 i 1 1 1 I ' _ ® BA Mictelsteadc,P.E. Bret A.Weiss,P.E. I WicS 350 Westwood Lake Office 8441 Wayzata Boulevard Peter R.Willenbring,P.E. Minneapolis, MN 55426 Donald W.Sterna,P.E. Ronald B.Bray,P.E. I ® 612-541-4800 Associates,Inc. FAX 541-1700 1 December 2, 1999 IMr. Brad Larson,P.E. County Engineer Scott County Highway Department j I 600 Country Trail East Jordan, MN 55352 IRe: CSAH 83 /CSAH 16 Improvements Shakopee, MN IWSB Project No. 1063.21 Dear Mr. Larson: ' IAs you are aware,WSB&Associates has been working with the City of Shakopee and Valley Green Business Park on the proposed CSAH 83/CSAH 16 improvements for the past two years. We have I recently completed an analysis of revised traffic numbers based on information provided by your transportation consultant(SRF Consulting Group). You provided direction at our August 23, 1999, meeting to meet with SRF and review the trip generation and distribution assumptions for the project I and to come to agreement on the traffic numbers.This has been completed,and the memo from SRF dated October 22, 1999, is the result of that meeting and agreement(attached). Based on the revised traffic numbers, as outlined in the October 22, 1999, SRF memorandum,we have analyzed the proposed corridor and intersections using the SYNCHRO software. A table outlining the analysis results, as well as the analysis worksheets, is attached to this letter. the analysis indicate that the individual intersections in the year 2017 will all be The results of y I operating at level of service (LOS) D or better during the AM and PM peak hour. The overall arterial analysis also indicates that the entire corridor would also be operating at an LOS D or better for both northbound and southbound traffic during the AM and PM peak hours. However,with the I coordinated system, the arterial LOS at specific intersections in some cases is at an E, and in one case at the north TH 169 ramp intersection an F during both the AM and PM peak hours. It appears that this is primarily a result of the amount of green time allocated for each phase. To accommodate Ithe coordination of CSAH 83,the amount of green time allocated for the northbound and southbound movements for specific cycle lengths deters from the amount of green time allocated for the side streets,therefore producing unsatisfactory levels of service for those movements. IIThe length of queue was also reviewed as part of this analysis. It was found that the westbound right turn lane and the southbound left turn lane at the Valley Green Corporate Center site entrance/CSAH 16 (west) has the potential for backing up into their respective through lanes. I I Infrastructure Engineers Planners EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER F:\WPWIM106).2I 11999•bl.wpd I' . IMr. Brad Larson Scott County Highway Department I Jordan,MN December 2, 1999 Page 2 I It should be noted that the traffic volume information provided and the analysis that was conducted I is for a 20-year traffic forecast. These traffic volumes are based on significantly conservative assumptions with respect to the development of the Valley Green Corporate Center site, as well as the adjacent development in the area and background traffic growth along the corridor. Considering I this and the results of the analysis, it is our conclusion that the concept plan with the proposed geometrics would provide the necessary capacity to accommodate these developments now and in the future. The traffic signal systems along the corridor can be adjusted with timing modifications I as the traffic along the corridor increases. In addition,it is our experience that as congestion occurs along a corridor, vehicles will tend to use alternate, less congested routes to and from a site. 0 Therefore,the proposed geometrics of these roadways and the realignment of CSAH 16 will provide the required capacity now and in the future. It is our understanding from our conversations with you and Brian Sorenson,and your conversations Iwith the City of Shakopee,that the County is in favor of the proposed realignment of CSAH 16 as an overall transportation improvement for this area. The alignment of CSAH 16 (east) with the proposed 17th Avenue to parallel TH 169 on the south side makes sense as a transportation improvement for the entire region. We do understand that there are additional issues related to this with respect to the jurisdiction of 17th Avenue to the west of CSAH 83. However, at this time,we are not looking for your concurrence on that aspect of the plan. That is an issue that can be addressed once it is concurred that the realignment of these roadways makes sense and the geometries as proposed would adequately handle the anticipated traffic volumes on CSAH 83. IAs you are aware, the improvements of CSAH 83 / CSAH 16 has been a proposal seen by the County over the past two years. The following are key milestones which have occurred in that time frame. I October, 1997 Feasibility report completed by Valley Green and submitted to the City and County for review. January 6, 1998 Comments were received on the feasibility report from Scott County I (Scott Merkley). February 2, 1998 Comments on the feasibility report were addressed and submitted to the County. April 21, 199tY 8 The Ci of Shakopee City Council received the draft city-wide transportation plan and submitted it to the surrounding agencies for comments. The transportation plan included the proposed CSAH 83/CSAH 16 improvements. I IF:\WPW 1M1063.21%1 11999-1,1%7x it; IMr.Brad Larson Scott County Highway Department IJordan,MN December 2, 1999 Page 3 I August 5, 1998 A meeting was held with Scott County to review the proposed improvements. Scott County required that ME/DOT review the proposal. IAugust 11, 1998 A meeting was held with Mn/DOT to review the proposed improvements. IOctober, 1998 Mn/DOT provided comments on the proposed concept plan. December 18, 1998 A meeting was held with Scott County to review the changes in the Iproposal based on their comments and Mn/DOT comments. December 30, 1998 Additional comments were received from Scott County on the revised proposal. January 8, 1999 The comments from Scott County were addressed and submitted to Bruce Loney at the City of Shakopee. March 18, 1999 A letter was sent to Scott County addressing the "A" minor arterial status of CSAH 83. IMarch 31, 1999 The "A" minor arterial request was submitted by Scott County to the Met Council. 1 June 8, 1999 Scott County provided WSB with an analysis of the traffic generation and distribution performed by SRF Consultants. 1 August 23, 1999 A meeting was held with Scott County to discuss the SRF analysis results and revisions to the proposed improvements. WSB was directed to meet with SRF to come to an agreement on the traffic 11 numbers. September 20, 1999 A TEA 21 application was submitted for federal funding of the CSAH 83 improvements. Scott County provided a letter of support/ for the improvements. I October 14, 1999 A meeting was held with SRF Consultants to review the results of their analysis and discuss additional parameters. October 22, 1999 A memo was received from SRF with revised traffic numbers. I As is apparent from this time line, this issue has received significant attention over the past two I years, as should be the case with such an important issue. We understand that this will be an important link in your transportation system, and we feel that the analysis justifies the proposed IF:\WPW[N\106311U 11999-bI.wpd Mr. Brad Larson Scott County Highway Department Jordan,MN December 2, 1999 Page 4 I improvements. However, if the County still has unaddressed concerns with regard to the future traffic along CSAH 83 and CSAH 16,please provide us with direction with respect to what the next steps you would like us to take to bring this issue to conclusion. We are hopeful that based on the information we have provided to you, the County can make a decision with respect to the realignment alternative. Once that step is completed,we would like to move forward to address the jurisdictional issues. Should you have any questions or require any additional information on this submittal,please do not hesitate to give me a call at(612) 277-5783. Thank you and the Countyfor allyour efforts over thepast twoyears. We hope to hear from you soon. Sincerely, 1 WSB &Associates,Inc. Charles T. Rickart, P.E. Project Manager c: Bruce Loney, City of Shakopee Bret Weiss, WSB &Associates,Inc. Ron Bray, WSB & Associates, Inc. Project File No. 1063.21 nm/kd I t i I F:\W PW IN\1063.21\I 11999-bl.wpd OCT-22-99 FRI 14: 53 SRF FAX H. 4752429 f. Ui 1 Bradley J. Larson -2' October 22, 1999 I by calculating the reserve capacity at the CSAH 83/County Road 16 and County Road 16/Site Driveway intersections and rerouting the traffic from the over-capacity site driveway on CSAH 83 to the under-capacity driveway on County Road 16. The reserve capacity was Icalculated at each intersection using critical lane volumes. The diversion was only applied to the southbound left turning traffic during the a.m.peak hour. IThe volumes displayed in Figure 2 include a diversion of approximately 25 percent between the two site driveway intersections using the same methodology. Both diversions were compared to I the proposed site plan in order to determine if the percentages were reasonable. The proposed site plan displays commercial land uses nearest the access onto CSAH 83, office/warehouse to the east,and office towers in the northeast corner of the site. Therefore, diversion to the alternate I south access is reasonable for familiar users (such as office employees). The method used to determine the amount of diversion is based on a simple analysis based on intersection capacity. If a more detailed analysis results in available capacity at the CSAH 83/Site Driveway Iintersection,fewer trips would divert. I The recent roadway layout was also reviewed during the meeting with WSB Associates. The most critical queuing location is the southbound left-turns at the CSAH 83/Site Driveway intersection. Additional storage for the left-turn vehicles could be obtained by providing a I continuous left-turn lane starting from the CSAH 83/Shakopee bypass south ramp intersection, tapering to a second left-turn lane. This could be accomplished through proper striping and signing, but would require acceptance by Mn/DOT due to the proximity to the trunk highway I ramp intersection. Special traffic signal timing operation may also be used to reduce left-turn queues. The intersection of County Road 16 and the Site Driveway should be periodically reviewed for traffic signal warrants. The traffic diversion percentages assume a traffic signal installed by I 2017 in order to provide the reserve capacity required for operation of the CSAH 83/Site Driveway intersection. ICONCLUSIONS • The proposed Valley Green Corporate Center is a substantial amount of development and will result in approximately 32,000 to 40,000 additional weekday trips. I • The background growth rate of 1.5 percent per year used by WSB is reasonable for the area surrounding the proposed development. I • The proposed project location south of TH 169 in an area without many parallel routes causes 55 percent of the site-generated traffic to travel to/from the north. This creates left-turn Ivolumes into the site from the north during the a.m. peak hour of 1,300— 1,600 vehicles. '4I 14:54 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 04 1 .y J. Larson -3 - October 22, 1999 I • A percentage of the left-turn traffic into the site was diverted from the CSAH 83/Site Driveway intersection to the County Road 16/Site Driveway intersection based on capacity constraints at the CSAH 83/Site Driveway intersection. • The left-turns at the Site Driveway intersection on CSAH 83 are still approximately PP Y 1,000 vehicles even with the diversion of traffic to the Site Driveway on County Road 16. • From planning level analysis,this volume of left-turns, combined with the dote intersection Ispacing, has the potential for operations and queuing problems. Possible mitigation for this • problem includes adding a continuous left-turn lane, tapering to a second left-turn lane, and creating a special signal timing plan to improve operations and reduce queuing. • The intersection of County Road 16 should be periodically monitored for traffic signal warrants due to the increase in volumes on County Road 16 with the construction of 17th Street and the diversion of traffic assumed from the Site Driveway on CSAH 83. A traffic signal was assumed by 2017 in order to accommodate the diverted traffic. Without this signal, a much lower percentage of left-turns would divert to this driveway. I I I I I I t I • QCT-22-99 FRI 14: 55 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 05 At <L1 AVE. V ru{ I -I V o L —• -- 000 4- 10 (0) r '" oo 130(200) I .� 1 L. x-100(260) 0. % , c—1350 0360 m� (/0)30—± 4-Itrlt (220)40— 000-• in Z o0 / I q. us wuu • I 11 1 e N. iltiz 1201 AVE. % •-- Rit - I -�a , NoMs s!CREL j -- — – --_.oh, ._.4:. t.. /, �'� '`3O, r •N (,SIO (110) 14.. 63 I 0 ',. G (,50)210 t tr (50)15010 1 (eo)ZIo—� 1 (170) 90 a 0 1,11 kJ 11,11111111111".... �E7 (0) 0—* ori 0 0 0 O (160)330 0 0 — `� ��ilei a ��� Qt. o0 SITE I . 11 FiTURE 17111 AVE. 0 _ eS_—__- - 1 DEANS LAKE RD I ® ItONTEC$T iOR. OV+ V 0":7) 334(210) o • 350(130) 0 0 0 4-- I0(230) 0 4-410(270) I .J l 4 r— 30(,tltr 30) - (350)620 (60)ISO—J („o)220-0 (470)1I0-0 I IXX =AM PEAK (XX)= PM PEAK 6 I SCOTT COUNTY FIGURE �s��t�CONSULTING GROUP, INC. 2017 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BUILD CONDITIONS 1 ISRP NO.0993430 CSAH 83/CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT TRAFFIC STUDY ;'OCT-22-99 FRI 14:56 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 06 . /o\ 4th AVE _ ._.T_____. v _ � y I 1 � w 0 ISA V L za E ' '/Not,. •.°'i a 43 o is t 200(130) — o, (''O' l—10 (1°) V � 4 1180(1290) C .� �► r S'(280) ( 0)30 1 f �-. ; I t I (10)10-0' am a 0 3 .. (220)40--i 0 42 0 In la 0 a 0 0 / us 0a+ o2 II 'CE 1 _ _____ ________ ---- 12th° gifi ii 421 o to .N ot290 0 0 0 0 tatio S y�� ii R I40-- 30(120) Q 4] 1 Y j-110(428) ,► r (1 so)240 ,44, (80)240 ;E�► -t l t r ! 0,a ,e, (0) 0—1• t.. �- (4o),2a--� N. .` t8 (,so)2ao a-. I 4��— (170) 90 o 0 0 7... 000 c0 -� SITE • ------ FUTURE 17th AVE 0 e ® I .-__- DEANS LAKE Ft0 I4ir MCNTECITC 1 oto 0 0 320(190) 310 110 0 0 I0 4— 70(210) Io Io_ 4-370(260) I 0 Y + 30(110) Y `*_ 41(390)500 ♦ r (80)s40-± (,0)190—. t I (440)170-0" i (90)110—..1 r.ms IXX =AM PEAK I(XX)=PM PEAKI o I SCOTT COUNTY FIGURE CONSULTING C sour, 1NC. 2017 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BUILD 1 CONDITIONS WITH OFFICEIWAREHOUSE USE 2 SRF NO.0993430 CSAH 83/CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT TRAFFIC STUDY I,, rn S. 03 vim m o p ti a 1 1 1 1 z Q a 3 Pa b UwmWm A UwUUa1 A Icl) ' . z O '� •..1 r V v Ts w p p N p .07 0 Q -0 AWGQAA A g Q .0 UW ¢ wW A 0 o p o z z I a a o rp VUCAAV z ,g• o UAmAA z kla • •� a 15 - -— _ al al 0 ICD CI) a a ¢ a z 3 coI z a �Q [� a � 3 3 o Uwmwal w gi m e UwUAm A ii gi ' e ril O p O p I •C a Cd a p p a 1 ... �; O it p ; i c m Q = A w m w A A G Q s U c�.!¢ W W A et V O u t I .0 poi C cpz _ Cpz i i,i ( _ C/2 u f .-4 V rn v1 i c.) c p U AIm W U zL I • G UA:mAIA z 44 .a I IO' H I _ • mg a • •.-. .c a a, ,/ I •§ ! >;a mi, tu ' •( p wl 4• CO a A W NIzIC% �O R 2 (t :ziCn V, 'I� C try C 4: �.y _ c"I C"1 x 'a G. C Q` 1 Ts ¢;,p ;.0 p , i.y ¢;�D I,p I p .C .7 Cl) Cl) F: —if--tEx-� U w Q Fx- 'F=-�Ulw 1 I" T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Y Baseline 11/18/99 I Arterial Level of Service: NB CSAH 83 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial ICross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time(s) (mi) Speed LOS FUTURE 17TH AVE II 38 13 39 52 0.1 10 E PROP CSAH 16 II 40 20 45 65 0.2 13 E I TH 169 EB OFF RAMRI 38 14 2 16 0.2 34 A TH 169 WB ON RAMPII 40 11 38 49 0.1 9 F SECRETARIAT DRIVHI 39 7 5 12 0.1 23 C I 12TH AVENUE it 37 6 6 12 0.1 19 C Total Ii 39 71 135 206 0.8 14 D 1 Arterial Level of Service:SB CSAH 83 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial I Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time(s) (mi) Speed LOS 12TH AVENUE II 38 13 16 29 0.1 18 C SECRETARIAT DRIVER 37 6 5 11 0.1 21 C I TH 169 WB OFF RAMR 39 7 34 41 0.1 7 F TH169EBONRAMPII 40 11 13 24 0.1 18 C PROP CSAH 16 II 38 14 20 34 0.2 16 D I EXIST CSAH 16 II 40 20 12 32 0.2 26 B Total II 39 71 100 171 0.8 17 D I I I 1 1 I 1 I I Synchro Report Page I WSBASS-L300 • 111 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO1CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 . I Lanes,Volumes,Timings © © LI a © MEND a © D L7 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4+ r 4, 1 +T 1 ++ r Satd. Flow(prot) 0 3591 1583 0 3505 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583 I Flt Perm. 0.950 0.728 0.950 0.814 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 2712 1583 0 2963 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 30 10 40 100 10 20 380 580 140 80 540 20 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 46 42 0 144 0 400 796 0 84 596 21 Perm or Prot? Perm Pm+Ov Perm Prot Prot Perm Phase Number 8 4 1 6 5 2 Maximum Split(s) 22 22 53 108 20 75 I Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.13 0.46 0.13 0.33 0.70 0.11 0.48 0.48 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 344 728 375 590 2532 201 1788 760 I V/C Ratio 0.13 0.06 0.38 0.68 0.31 0.42 0.33 0.03 V/S Ratio Prot 0.02 0.23 0.05 V/S Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.22 0.16 0.01 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 44.2 15.9 45.7 32.7 6.6 47.0 18.3 15.6 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.09 0.35 0.09 0.26 0.76 0.09 0.59 0.59 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.19 0.08 0.54 0.87 0.29 0.55 0.27 0.02 I Percentile St Delay 47.4 21.4 49.3 39.8 4.4 49.6 12.4 10.4 Percentile LOS E C E D A E B B Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 27 68 376 105 80 137 8 I Queue Length 95th(ft) 41 46 103 463 159 136 214 26 Link Length (ft) 220 220 255 665 50th Up Block Time% 26% 95th Up Block Time% 32% I Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 270 310 330 50th Bay Block Time% 24% 95th Bay Block Time% 30% I Queuing Penalty(veh) 282 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.43 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.46 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 19.5 Intersection Percentile LOS: C I Splits and Phases: 12TH AVENUE&CSAH 83 Q 1 Q 2 Q 4 r} 11 , 16= 111 6'4 -y.111 6 , � 5 11516 E8 I I Synchro Report Page 1 WSBASS-L300 I 1 TH 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 ILanes,Volumes,Timings © © Daaa © aCa © Da ILane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prot) 0 0 0 3539 0 j1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583 I Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 0 0 0 1350 0 130 110 900 0 0 620 90 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 0 0 1464 0 137 119 994 0 0 686 95 Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Phase Number 4 4 1 6 5 2 Maximum Split(s) 81 81 15 58 11 54 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.52 0.57 0.08 0.37 0.34 0.34 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 1840 908 283 1366 1266 538 I V/C Ratio 0.80 0.15 0.42 0.73 0.54 0.18 V/S Ratio Prot 0.41 0.01 0.03 V/S Ratio Perm 0.08 0.27 0.18 0.06 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 22.4 10.3 49.9 31.2 30.4 26.4 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.47 0.52 0.07 0.42 0.40 0.40 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.89 0.17 0.47 0.63 0.46 0.15 Percentile St Delay 27.4 13.1 53.2 28.9 26.2 22.5 I Percentile LOS D B E D D C Queue Length 50th (ft) 636 65 59 385 248 60 I Queue Length 95th (ft) Link Length (ft) 665 92 87 448 333 113 570 330 50th Up Block Time% 12% 95th Up Block Time% 12% 5% Il Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 300 200 290 50th Bay Block Time% 30% 36% 95th Bay Block Time % 28% 43% 12% IQueuing Penalty(veh) 232 47 26 Cycle Length: 150 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated I Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.69 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.73 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 27.8 Intersection Percentile LOS: D I Splits and Phases: TH 169 WB ON RAMP &CSAH 83 Q 1 © 2 a4 I Mil I I Synchro Report Page 2 WSBASS-L300 I ' TH169EBOFF RAMP & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 ILanes,Volumes,Timings o © ooaoaoa LEI a © ILane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0 I Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0 Volume(vph) 240 0 330 0 0 0 0 770 1150 100 1880 0 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 253 0 347 0 0 0 0 852 1368 108 2078 0 Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Prot Phase Number 8 8 1 6 5 2 Maximum Split(s) 33 33 19 105 12 98 I Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.20 0.31 0.68 0.68 0.06 0.63 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 354 485 2533 2154 212 2359 I V/C Ratio 0.71 0.71 0.34 0.64 0.51 0.88 V/S Ratio Prot 0.14 0.08 0.03 V/S Ratio Perm 0.14 0.23 0.43 0.56 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 42.6 33.1 7.6 10.3 51.9 17.3 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.20 0.31 0.68 0.68 0.06 0.63 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.34 0.63 0.52 0.88 I Percentile St Delay 42.9 33.7 1.4 2.0 50.7 9.6 Percentile LOS E D A A E B Queue Length 50th (ft) 234 293 27 46 49 390 I Queue Length 95th(ft) 337 411 35 86 85 548 Link Length (ft) 720 570 50th Up Block Time% 95th Up Block Time% 2% 111rnTuBay Length (ft) 275 275 285 220 50th Bay Block Time% 8% 19% 95th Bay Block Time% 18% 25% 18% IQueuing Penalty(veh) 31 41 44 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.78 I Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.83 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 10.4 Intersection Percentile LOS: B ISplits and Phases: TH 169 EB OFF RAMP&CSAH 83 Q1 -=---, _ I I Synchro Report Page 3 WSBASS-L300 rPROP CSAH 16 &CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO1CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings © © 0 0E1 ® © 0 0 © 0 LE ILane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations VI 44r vil 14 re '' ++ r iii) 44 r I Satd.Flow(prat) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 539 3f25 1583 3539 3725 1583 Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 • 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 240 150 90 130 40 390 140 1290 520 1000 1120 90 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 261 166 95 141 44 464 151 1426 547 1085 1238 95 Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot 2Pm+Ov Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 Maximum Split(s) 16 20 16 20 14 63 51 100 I Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.09 0.11 0.19 0.09 0.11 0.43 0.07 0.40 0.49 0.32 0.65 0.73 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 307 422 295 307 422 1372 260 1490 770 1132 2409 1161 I V/C Ratio 0.85 0.39 0.32 0.46 0.10 0.34 0.58 0.96 0.71 0.96 0.51 0.08 V/S Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 0.04 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.31 0.01 V/S Ratio Perm 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.38 0.28 0.33 0.05 I Critical LG? Uniform Delay,dl Yes Yes Yes Yes51.3 46.9 29.5 49.5 45.3 20.0 51.1 33.2 13.3 38.0 10.6 3.7 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.43 0.07 0.40 0.51 0.32 0.65 0.74 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.85 0.50 0.38 0.36 0.10 0.34 0.60 0.95 0.67 0.96 0.51 0.08 I Percentile St Delay 62.2 49.3 30.1 47.2 45.3 20.2 64.6 34.2 12.8 46.7 14.9 5.5 Percentile LOS F ED EECF D B EBB Queue Length 50th(ft) 128 79 68 65 19 143 77 641 329 540 411 32 I Queue Length 95th(ft) #201 114 118 103 39 185 116 #813 411 #625 481 52 Link Length (ft) 420 420 1120 0 50th Up Block lime% 13% I 95th Up Block Time Turn Bay Length(ft) % 300 300 230 230 260 24% 14% 2250 465 270 50th Bay Block Time 95th Bay Block Time% 27% 14% 20% 7% Queuing Penalty(veh) 140 108 188 38 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 12 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.80 I Intersection V/C Ratio:0.87 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 31.6 Intersection Percentile LOS: D # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. IQueue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: PROP CSAH 16&CSAH 83 I Im© 2U3 = 4 IIl5 116 Mg r; 7 Synchro Report I Page 4 WSBASS-L300 1 FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 83 T:11063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 ILanes,Volumes,Timings El © ED a El a © L] LI © LI EJ I . Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Iii) ftr 11,1 ++ r 1,1 4T r 11 ft r Satd. Flow(prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 I Fit Perm. 0.631 0.539 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 2351 3725 1583 2008 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 520 220 110 30 80 350 70 1100 130 770 300 270 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 563 244 116 33 88 368 76 1216 137 835 332 284 Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 Maximum Split(s) 21 33 9 21 10 62 46 98 I Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.26 0.20 0.25 0.16 0.12 0.41 0.05 0.39 0.43 0.29 0.63 0.75 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 754 745 390 383 447 644 165 1465 686 1015 2359 1193 ' V/C Ratio V/S Ratio Prot 0.75 0.33 0.30 0.09 0.20 0.57 0.46 0.83 0.20 0.82 0.14 0.24 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.16 0.02 0.01 0.24 0.03 V/S Ratio Perri 0.10 0.07 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.33 0.08 0.09 0.15 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 37.2 39.0 33.1 32.1 45.2 25.0 52.9 31.1 18.7 37.9 8.4 3.6 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.26 0.21 0.26 0.15 0.12 0.38 0.05 0.42 0.45 0.26 0.63 0.75 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.75 0.31 0.28 0.09 0.20 0.61 0.46 0.78 0.19 0.89 0.14 0.24 I Percentile St Delay 37.5 38.2 32.3 32.1 45.2 26.9 52.9 29.5 17.4 42.0 9.0 1.0 Percentile LOS D D D _ D ED EDCEB A Queue Length 50th(ft) 244 103 90 12 39 271 37 524 78 408 46 12 I Queue Length 95th (ft) 306 144 149 26 67 373 64 623 126 475 78 24 Link Length (ft) 420 420 665 1120 50th Up Block Time% 95th Up Block Time% 4% Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 300 260 300 260 240 235 235 50th Bay Block Time% 32% 41% 95th Bay Block Time% 5% 14% 37% 42% Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 4 73 128 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.76 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.80 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 30.2 Intersection Percentile LOS: D I Splits and Phases: FUTURE 17TH AVE&CSAH 83 MOB 03 = 4 ile5 © 6 111E8 I I Synchro Report Page 5 WSBASS-L300 I SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 ' Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings © 0 © 0 0 Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prot) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fit Perm, 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop rControl Type: Unsignalized r r i r r r • r r r r r ' Synchro Report Page 6 WSBASS-L300 r 1 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 IArterial Level of Service:NB CSAH 83 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time(s) (mi) Speed LOS FUTURE 17TH AVE II 38 13 24 37 0.1 14 D PROP CSAH 16 II 40 20 47 67 0.2 12 E I TH 169 EB OFF RAMRI 38 14 7 21 0.2 26 B TH 169 WB ON RAMPII 40 11 28 39 0.1 11 E SECRETARIAT DRIVER 39 7 5 12 0.1 23 C I 12TH AVENUE II 37 6 9 15 0.1 15 D Total II 39 71 120 191 0.8 15 D 1 Arterial Level of Service:SB CSAH 83 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time(s) (mi) Speed LOS 12TH AVENUE II 38 13 13 26 0.1 20 C SECRETARIAT DRNHI 37 6 5 11 0.1 21 C I TH 169 WB OFF RAMR 39 7 46 53 0.1 5 F TH 169 EB ON RAMP II 40 11 5 16 0.1 28 B PROP CSAH 16 II 38 14 137 151 0.2 4 F EXIST CSAH 16 II 40 20 11 31 0.2 26 B 1 Total Il 39 71 217 288 0.8 10 E I I I I I I I I I Synchro Report Page 1 WSBASS-L300 I 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.211SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Y Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings © © 0 0 © 0 © 0 0 © 0 0 • ILane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prot) 0 3584 11583 0 3487 0 1770 3614 0 1770 3725 1583 I Fit Perm. 0.950 0.592 0.950 0.788 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 2205 1583 0 2856 0 1770 3614 0 1770 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 40 10 220 260 10 60 160 530 130 60 620 20 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 56 232 0 366 0 168 730 0 63 686 21 Perm or Prot? Perm Pm+Ov Perm Prot Prot Perm Phase Number 8 4 1 6 5 2 Maximum Split(s) 33 33 29 100 17 88 I Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.20 0.37 0.20 0.17 0.65 0.09 0.57 0.57 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 441 591 571 307 2337 165 2111 897 I V/C Ratio V/S Ratio Prot 0.13 0.39 0.95dl 0.55 0.31 0.09 0.38 0.32 0.02 0.07 0.04 V/S Ratio Perm 0.03 0.08 0.13 0.20 0.18 0.01 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 37.4 24.6 41.8 43.0 8.9 48.6 13.1 10.8 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.17 0.30 0.17 0.13 0.71 0.06 0.64 0.64 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.15 0.48 0.75 0.71 0.29 0.55 0.29 0.02 I Percentile St Delay 39.5 29.6 44.5 47.0 6.9 50.4 10.1 8.2 Percentile LOS D D E E B E B B Queue Length 50th(ft) 23 178 171 160 131 60 145 7 I Queue Length 95th(ft) Link Length (ft) 43 237 221 233 182 110 211 22 220 220 255 665 50th Up Block Time% 95th Up Block Time% 8% 5% I Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 270 310 330 50th Bay Block Time% 95th Bay Block Time% IQueuing Penalty(veh) 9 8 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.41 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.43 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay:20.9 Intersection Percentile LOS: C dl Defacto Left Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a left lane. ISplits and Phases: 12TH AVENUE&CSAH 83 a1 II2 M4 fit__.___ .r>_______- � , _._ I 5 Q6 '` - =8 111 I Synchro Report Page 1 WSBASS-L300 I . TH 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 ILanes,Volumes,Timings • © © aoeo © oo © o © IIILane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurationsr 14 44 r Satd. Flow(prot) 0 • 0 0 3539 0 1583 3 39 3725 0 0 3725 1583 I Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 0 0 0 1360 0 200 350 690 0 0 1040 220 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 0 0 1475 0 211 379 762 0 0 1150 232 Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Phase Number 4 4 1 6 5 2 Maximum Split(s) 71 71 23 68 11 56 I Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.45 0.51 0.13 0.43 0.35 0.35 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 1604 802 472 1614 1316 559 • I V/C Ratio 0.92 0.26 0.80 0.47 0.87 0.41 V/S Ratio Prot 0.42 0.01 0.11 V/S Ratio Perm 0.12 0.20 0.31 0.15 I Critical LG? Yes Yes 14.8 Yes Uniform Delay,dl 29.2 47.9 23.0 34.5 27.9 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.44 0.50 0.13 0.44 0.37 0.37 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.94 0.27 0.83 0.46 0.84 0.40 I Percentile St Delay Percentile LOS 33.2 15.3 47.0 21.5 C E C 34.7 27.1 D D D Queue Length 50th(ft) 667 110 182 252 526 172 I Queue Length 95th(ft) Link Length(ft) #780 164 #247 290 617 253 570 330 50th Up Block Time% 15% 27% 95th Up Block Time% 20% 33% I Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 300 200 290 50th Bay Block Time% 32% 16% 31% 95th Bay Block Time% 35% 19% 21% 36% IQueuing Penalty(veh) 365 35 71 494 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.83 Intersection V/C Ratio:0.89 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 31.5 Intersection Percentile LOS: D # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. IQueue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: TH 169 WB ON RAMP&CSAH 83 I 31 ©Z . r 04 4r f, --- -• g - 1 EMIR I Synchro Report Page 2 WSBASS-L300 ITH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings © © C1 0 © 0 © 00 © 0 © Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) r ?+ re l'i 44 Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0 I Flt Perri. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0 Volume(vph) 60 0 160 0 0 0 0 970 1570 290 2100 0 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 63 0 168 0 0 0 0 1072 1868 314 2322 0 Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Prot Phase Number 8 8 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 20 20 16 108 22 114 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.70 0.70 0.13 0.74 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 201 317 2608 2217 448 2756 I V/C Ratio 0.31 0.53 0.41 0.84 0.70 0.84 V/S Ratio Prot 0.04 0.05 0.09 V/S Ratio Perm 0.06 0.29 0.59 0.62 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 46.5 38.8 7.2 12.5 47.7 10.2 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.71 0.71 0.12 0.74 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.33 0.54 0.40 0.83 0.75 0.84 I Percentile St Delay 46.9 39.6 5.1 9.2 57.0 3.5 Percentile LOS E D B B E A Queue Length 50th(ft) 58 145 163 483 150 279 I Queue Length 95th (ft) 107 Link Length (ft) 224 223 637 198 439 720 570 50th Up Block Time% 4% 2% I 95th Up Block Time% 11% 3% Turn Bay Length (ft) 275 275 285 220 50th Bay Block Time% 13% 4% 95th Bay Block Time% 18% 6% IQueuing Penalty (veh) 233 84 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.74 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.79 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 10.0 Intersection Percentile LOS: B ISplits and Phases: TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83 © 1 Q �_. , e5 1116 08 I I Synchro Report Page 3 WSBASS-L300 ' PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings aisomEicioo ID El El El Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations VI ++ rrr ill 44 rr ' r Satd. Flow(prot) 3539 3725 1583 1139 3725 3167 39 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 I Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 150 50 170 500 140 1520 190 880 180 550 1500 210 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 163 56 179 542 154 1808 206 972 180 596 1658 221 Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 11 34 35 58 12 46 35 69 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.05 0.21 0.27 0.21 0.37 0.58 0.06 0.29 0.50 0.21 0.44 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 189 770 422 755 1366 1837 212 1068 792 755 1639 781 I V/C Ratio 0.86 0.07 0.42 0.72 0.11. 0.98 0.97' 0.91 0.24 0.79 1.01 0.28 V/S Ratio Prot 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.21 0.06 0.05 0.17 0.02 V/S Ratio Perm 0.02 0.09 0.04 0.36 0.26 0.07 0.45 0.12 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes IUniform Delay,dl 53.5 36.4 18.9 41.6 23.8 22.0 53.5 39.2 8.1 42.4 31.9 15.7 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.05 0.11 0.17 0.31 0.37 0.56 0.06 0.30 0.62 0.20 0.44 0.49 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.86 0.14 0.68 0.49 0.11 1.01 0.97 0.86 0.19 0.86 1.01 0.28 I Percentile St Delay 78.3 45.6 22.7 32.1 23.8 50.5 118.1 35.9 4.1 43.3 104.5 9.7 Percentile LOS F E C D C E F D A E F B Queue Length 50th(ft) 80 25 92 214 49 802 100 483 31 262 -801 92 I Queue Length 95th(ft) #146 45 142 289 75 #1032 #181 #559 54 338 #981 134 Link Length(ft) 420 420 1120 720 50th Up Block Time% 26% 10% 95th Up Block Time% 8% 34% 20% Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 300 230 230 260 250 465 270 50th Bay Block Time% 31% 33% 20% 95th Bay Block Time% 18% 36% 36% 26% IQueuing Penalty(veh) 141 693 71 510 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 12 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.91 Intersection V/C Ratio:0.99 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 58.2 Intersection Percentile LOS: E - Volume exceeds capacity,queue is theoretically infinite. I Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. . Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. I I I Synchro Report Page 4 WSBASS-L300 • PROP CSAH 16 &CSAH :�183 T063.21\SYNCHRO1CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 I Splits and Phases: PROP CSAH 16&CSAH 83 • awn 2 � 4 I U5 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i Synchro Report Page 5 WSBASS-L300 i FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings © © ID © ID © CI 0 © LI a I Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations II r vi ft r In ft, rr )1 ft, r I Satd. Flow(prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Flt Perm. 0.290 0.691 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1080 3725 1583 2574 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 350 110 90 130 230 210 130 660 40 410 1170 600 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 379 122 95 141 254 221 141 730 42 445 1294 632 Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 34 46 10 22 16 62 32 78 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.35 0.29 0.37 0.17 0.13 0.32 0.09 0.39 0.44 0.19 0.50 0.71 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 890 1068 591 491 472 507 307 1465 697 684 1862 1119 II V/C Ratio 0.43 0.11 0.16 0.29 0.54 0.44 0.46 0.50 0.06 0.65 0.69 0.56 V/S Ratio Prot 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.13 0.12 V/S Ratio Perm 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.20 0.02 0.35 0.28 1 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay,dl 26.7 30.0 22.3 26.8 46.6 28.9 49.5 26.1 17.1 42.4 21.8 7.1 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.28 0.21 0.29 0.17 0.13 0.29 0.08 0.50 0.55 0.16 0.59 0.72 I Actuated V/C Ratio 0.61 0.16 0.21 0.29 0.55 0.48 0.52 0.39 0.05 0.76 0.59 0.56 Percentile St Delay 33.3 36.6 28.9 31.6 46.9 31.4 50.4 18.5 11.5 55.0 8.3 5.7 Percentile LOS D D D D E D E C B E B B Queue Length 50th(ft) 151 49 68 52 118 173 67 219 18 228 184 145 I Queue Length 95th (ft) 190 75 112 77 164 246 103 298 42 278 252 220 Link Length(ft) 420 420 665 1120 50th Up Block Time% I 95th Up Block Time% Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 260 300 260 240 235 235 50th Bay Block Time% 95th Bay Block Time% 11% 22% 7% 2% I Queuing Penalty(veh) 7 104 23 9 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 12 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.57 I Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.62 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 22.9 Intersection Percentile LOS: C ISplits and Phases: FUTURE 17TH AVE&CSAH 83 211 _ ©2 Q Q IM5 © 6 ©OM8 I I Synchro Report Page 6 WSBASS-L300 I • SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings D Lane Group © El CI EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd.Flow(prot) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Control Type: Unsignalized I 1 1 I 1 1 1 . i 1 1 I Synchro Report Page 7 WSBASS-L300 1 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Arterial Level of Service:NB CSAH 83 • • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial ICross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time(s) (m1) Speed LOS FUTURE 17TH AVE II 38 13 37 50 0.1 10 E I PROP CSAH 16 II 40 20 46 66 0.2 12 E TH 169 EB OFF RAMRI 38 14 2 16 0.2 34 A TH 169 WB ON RAMPII 40 11 35 46 0.1 10 E SECRETARIAT DRIVER 39 7 5 12 0.1 23 C I 12TH AVENUE II 37 6 6 12 0.1 19 C Total II 39 71 131 202 0.8 14 D IArterial Level of Service:SB CSAH 83 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial I Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time(s) (mi) Speed LOS 12TH AVENUE II 38 13 16 29 0.1 18 C SECRETARIAT DRIVER 37 6 5 11 0.1 21 C l TH 169 WB OFF RAMR 39 7 27 34 0.1 8 F TH 169 EB ON RAMP II 40 11 14 25 0.1 18 C PROP CSAH 16 II 38 14 17 31 0.2 18 C I EXIST CSAH 16 II 40 20 13 33 0.2 25 B Total II 39 71 92 163 0.8 17 D I I I t I I I I I Synchro Report Page I WSBASS-L300 5 I 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83 T:11063.211SYNCHRO1CR83 AM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 IBaseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings . I aaa000000aoa Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 r . li +1. 11 ft r I Satd. Flow(prot) Flt Perm. 0 3591 1583 0 3502 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583 0.950 0.735 0.950 0.816 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 2738 1583 0 2964 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 30 10 40 90 10 20 380 570 140 80 490 20 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 46 42 0 134 0 400 784 0 84 542 21 Perm or Prot? Perm Pm+Ov Perm Prot Prot Perm Phase Number 8 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 22 22 53 108 20 75 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.13 0.46 0.13 0.33 0.70 0.11 0.48 0.48 I Lane Grp Cap(vph) 347 728 375 590 2532 201 1788 760 V/C Ratio 0.13 0.06 0.36 0.68 0.31 0.42 0.30 0.03 V/S Ratio Prot 0.02 0.23 0.05 V/S Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.22 0.15 0.01 1 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 44.2 15.9 45.5 32.7 6.5 47.0 18.0 15.6 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.09 0.35 0.09 0.26 0.77 0.09 0.59 0.59 I Actuated V/C Ratio 0.19 0.08 0.52 0.87 0.28 0.55 0.25 0.02 Percentile St Delay 47.8 21.7 49.5 39.8 4.3 49.6 12.0 10.3 Percentile LOS E C E D A E B B Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 27 64 376 101 80 121 8 I Queue Length 95th(ft) 41 47 97 463 154 136 191 26 Link Length (ft) 220 220 255 665 50th Up Block Time% 26% I 95th Up Block Time% 32% Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 270 310 330 50th Bay Block Time% 24% I 95th Bay Block Time% 30% Queuing Penalty(veh) 279 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.42 I Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.44 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 19.4 Intersection Percentile LOS: C Splits and Phases: 12TH AVENUE& CSAH 83 MI1 113 3:4 II _ _ ,________,„_. .!- _ , it. - r - ,.:,-77771-7-77-777,-,-. 3 e5 Os MB II I Synchro Report Page 1 WSBASS-L300 I & CSAFI 82063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 TH 169 WB ON RAMPY I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings © © 0 LI © a a Li © a E I Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prot) 0 0 0 3539 0 r583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583 4 r tFit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 0 0 0 1180 0 200 100 880 0 0 570 90 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 0 0 1279 0 211 108 972 0 0 630 95 Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Phase Number 4 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 72 72 14 63 15 64 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.46 0.54 0.07 0.40 0.41 0.41 I Lane Grp Cap(vph) 1628 855 260 1490 1515 644 V/C Ratio 0.79 0.25 0.42 0.65 0.42 0.15 V/S Ratio Prot 0.36 0.02 0.03 V/S Ratio Perm0.11 0.26 0.17 0.06 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 26.0 12.8 50.5 27.7 24.1 21.3 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.41 0.49 0.07 0.45 0.46 0.46 I Actuated V/C Ratio 0.88 0.27 0.45 0.58 0.37 0.13 Percentile St Delay 30.6 15.5 52.0 26.8 20.9 18.3 Percentile LOS D C E D C C Queue Length 50th (ft) 566 112 55 370 201 54 I Queue Length 95th(ft) 610 151 83 570 330 101 Link Length (ft) 436 270 50th Up Block Time% 8% I 95th Up Block Time% 11% Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 200 290 50th Bay Block Time% 29% 33% 95th Bay Block Time% 29% 39% Queuing Penalty (veh) 205 38 Cycle Length: 150 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.64 I Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.68 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 27.0 Intersection Percentile LOS: D Splits and Phases: TH 169 WB ON RAMP&CSAH 83 ®UIp2 n4 E5 Q - I I Synchro Report Page 2 WSBASS-L300 1 TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAfff: 63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings . © © ooao © oo © oa Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 r ++ rr to ++ Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0 Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0 Volume(vph) 240 0 280 0 0 0 0 750 1110 100 1640 0 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 253 0 295 0 0 0 0 828 1320 108 1812 0 Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Prot Phase Number 8 8 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 37 37 22 100 13 91 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.23 • 0.35 0.65 0.65 0.07 0.59 I Lane Grp Cap(vph) 401 559 2409 2048 236 2185 V/C Ratio 0.63 0.53 0.34 0.64 0.46 0.83 V/S Ratio Prot 0.14 0.07 0.03 V/S Ratio Perm 0.12 0.22 0.42 0.49 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay,dl 39.8 27.5 9.1 12.2 51.2 19.0 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.21 0.34 0.67 0.67 0.06 0.60 I Actuated V/C Ratio 0.68 0.55 0.33 0.63 0.48 0.81 Percentile St Delay 41.3 28.9 1.4 1.8 44.9 10.4 Percentile LOS E D A A EB Queue Length 50th (ft) 226 222 27 44 50 332 I Queue Length 95th (ft) 325 316 36 59 81 473 Link Length (ft) 720 570 50th Up Block Time% I 95th Up Block Time% Turn Bay Length (ft) 275 275 285 220 50th Bay Block Time% 24% 95th Bay Block Time% 15% 12% 24% Queuing Penalty (veh) 22 15 26 Cycle Length: 150 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.70 I Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.74 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 10.0 Intersection Percentile LOS: B ISplits and Phases: TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83 311 Q :tea f7-.:,-:71`..1.;.-7,17 :, . _.:, 1 art■+-:� _.-_ , - 1'` - f ■ tI I Synchro Report Page 3 WSBASS-L300 I , NEW VOLUMESs 5 PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 TA1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRFy Baseline • 11/18/99 ILanes,Volumes,Timings © © oaoo © oo © a © ILane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 44 I vil 14 r� vivi ++ r ++ r Satd. Flow(prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 539 3725 1583 I Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 240 120 90 110 30 330 140 1290 430 1000 820 90 111Lane Group Flow(vph) 261 132 95 119 34 392 151 1426 453 1085 906 95 Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 15 20 15 20 14 64 51 101 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.08 0.11 0.19 0.08 0.11 0.43 0.07 0.41 0.49 0.32 0.65 0.73 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 283 422 295 283 422 1372 260 1515 770 1132 2434 1161 I V/C Ratio 0.92 0.31 0.32 0.42 0.08 0.29 0.58 0.94 0.59 0.96 0.37 0.08 V/S Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.04 0.05 0.31 0.01 V/S Ratio Perm 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.38 0.24 0.24 0.05 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay,dl 52.1 46.4 30.0 49.9 45.2 19.4 51.1 32.5 12.2 38.0 9.1 3.7 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.08 0.09 0.16 0.10 0.11 0.43 0.07 0.41 0.52 0.32 0.66 0.74 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.92 0.41 0.38 0.33 0.08 0.29 0.60 0.93 0.56 0.97 0.37 0.08 I Percentile St Delay 82.7 48.9 30.8 47.8 45.5 19.8 45.1 34.9 13.9 45.1 12.6 6.1 Percentile LOS F E D- E E C E D BE BB Queue Length 50th(ft) 129 62 69 55 15 118 68 455 187 535 278 36 I Queue Length 95th(ft) #213 94 119 90 33 155 108 #801 264 #637 341 55 Link Length(ft) 420 420 1120 720 50th Up Block Time% I 95th Up Block Time% 15% Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 300 230 230 260 250 465 270 50th Bay Block Time% 35% 13% 95th Bay Block Time% 47% 14% 23% IQueuing Penalty(veh) 186 54 183 Cycle Length: 150 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 12 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.80 I Intersection V/C Ratio:0.86 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 33.0 Intersection Percentile LOS: D # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. IQueue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: PROP CSAH 16&CSAH 83 1 MIN©} 2 U3 Fa4 5�� - , t��� , Be , 4 -.., i 5 v 6 Mi 8 157 Synchro Report Page 4 WSBASS-L300 1 ' FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 811\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings © © ooa000aaoo Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations i� ++ r vi ++ r ill ++ r vivi ft, r Satd. Flow(prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 I Fit Perm. 0.688 0.576 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 2563 3725 1583 2146 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 500 190 110 30 70 320 70 1050 100 460 290 260 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 542 210 116 33 78 337 76 1160 105 499 320 274 Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 Maximum Split(s) 22 41 10 29 12 64 35 87 I Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.32 0.25 0.31 0.22 0.17 0.39 0.06 0.41 0.45 0.21 0.56 0.69 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 944 944 496 537 646 612 212 1515 718 755 2086 1087 1 V/C Ratio 0.57 0.22 0.23 0.06 0.12 0.55 0.36 0.77 0.15 0.66 0.15 0.25 V/S Ratio Prot 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.14 0.03 V/S Ratio Perm 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.10 0.31 0.06 0.09 0.14 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 31.1 33.6 27.4 27.2 39.8 25.5 51.4 29.1 17.0 41.0 12.1 6.0 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.32 0.26 0.32 0.21 0.17 0.37 0.06 0.43 0.46 0.20 0.57 0.69 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.58 0.22 0.23 0.07 0.12 0.58 0.38 0.73 0.14 0.71 0.15 0.25 I Percentile St Delay 31.6 33.1 27.1 27.5 40.1 27.4 51.7 27.8 15.9 25.9 9.6 4.1 Percentile LOS D D D D E D E D C D B A Queue Length 50th (ft) 213 82 82 11 32 264 36 451 52 155 56 56 I Queue Length 95th (ft) 269 117 135 24 57 348 64 569 96 173 80 114 Link Length (ft) 420 420 665 1120 50th Up Block Time% I 95th Up Block Time% Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 260 300 260 240 235 235 50th Bay Block Time% 26% 95th Bay Block Time%. 12% 34% 1% I Queuing Penalty(veh) 3 31 Cycle Length: 150 ' Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.64 I Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.68 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 25.5 Intersection Percentile LOS: D I Splits and Phases: FUTURE 17TH AVE&CSAH 83 U1 3 a: 4 E5 Qs Q©-8 I I Synchro Report Page 5 WSBASS-L300 SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSAffl:13tD63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 • Lanes,Volumes,Timings • © 0 © 0 I Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prat) 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop IControl Type: Unsignalized I I f 1 • Synchro Report Page 6 WSBASS-L300 1 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 Baseline 11/18/99 Arterial Level of Service: NB CSAH 83 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time(s) (mi) Speed LOS FUTURE 17TH AVE II 38 13 22 35 0.1 15 D PROP CSAH 16 II 40 20 32 52 0.2 16 D I TH 169 EB OFF RAMRI 38 14 8 22 0.2 25 B TH 169 WB ON RAMPII 40 11 25 36 0.1 12 E SECRETARIAT DRIVER 39 7 5 12 0.1 23 C I 12TH AVENUE II 37 6 9 15 0.1 15 D Total II 39 71 101 172 0.8 16 D IArterial Level of Service:SB CSAH 83 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial I Cross Street 12TH AVENUE Class Speed Time Delay Time(s) (mi) Speed LOS II 38 13 13 26 0.1 20 C SECRETARIAT DRIVER 37 6 5 11 0.1 21 C I TH 169 WB OFF RAMR 39 7 34 41 0.1 7 F TH 169 EB ON RAMP II 40 11 6 17 0.1 26 B PROP CSAH 16 II 38 14 43 57 0.2 10 E EXIST CSAH 16 II 40 20 13 33 0.2 25 B I Total II 39 71 114 185 0.8 15 D I I I I I I I I I Synchro Report Page 1 WSBASS-L300 I 1 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83 T:11063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings a © oa © o © oo © o © Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4T r 4t, ti 4,) 1 ++ r Satd. Flow(prot) 0 3584 1583 0 3487 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583 I Fit Perm. 0.950 0.628 0.950 0.790 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 2340 1583 0 2864 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 40 10 220 260 10 60 160 490 120 60 610 20 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 56 232 0 366 0 168 674 0 63 674 21 Perm or Prot? Perm Pm+Ov Perm Prot Prot Perm Phase Number 8 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 27 27 24 69 14 59 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.22 0.41 0.22 0.19 0.60 0.10 0.51 0.51 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 511 648 625 . 338 2170 177 1896 806 I V/C Ratio 0.11 0.36 0.87dI 0.50 0.31 0.36 0.36 0.03 V/S Ratio Prot 0.07 0.09 0.04 V/S Ratio Perm 0.02 0.08 0.13 0.19 0.18 0.01 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 26.2 15.6 29.3 30.2 8.2 35.1 12.3 10.2 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.19 0.33 0.19 0.15 0.66 0.07 0.59 0.59 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.13 0.44 0.68 0.65 0.28 0.48 0.31 0.02 I Percentile St Delay 27.8 19.3 31.4 33.3 6.7 36.0 9.6 7.9 Percentile LOS D C D D B D B B Queue Length 50th(ft) 16 120 120 113 99 43 116 6 I Queue Length 95th(ft) Link Length(ft) 33 167 164 176 141 86 177 20 220 220 255 665 50th Up Block Time% I 95th Up Block Time% Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 270 310 330 50th Bay Block Time 95th Bay Block Time% I Queuing Penalty(veh) Cycle Length: 110 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.40 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.44 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 16.2 Intersection Percentile LOS: C dl Defacto Left Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a left lane. ISplits and Phases: 12TH AVENUE&CSAH 83 Qi Q 2 Q 4 ' .... .__ %-__■ •yam 7,_---77._ _ • ..�L �,t fi . . • ft ':;:_,:i. - , _ ' l IIZI5Q6 Z8 I Synchro Report Page 1 WSBASS-L300 TH 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAFT813063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings © © o © aa © oo © co Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prot) 0 0 0 39 0 1583 119 325 0 0 3725 j1583 IFlt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 0 0 0 1290 0 130 300 640 0 0 1020 220 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 0 0 1399 0 137 325 708 0 0 1128 232 Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Phase Number 4 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 52 52 49 9 42 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.45 0.50 0.12 0.42 0.35 0.35 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 1576 792 418 1558 1321 561 I V/C Ratio 0.89 0.17 0.78 0.45 0.85 0.41 V/S Ratio Prot 0.40 0.01 0.09 V/S Ratio Perm 0.08 0.19 0.30 0.15 I Critical LG? Yes Yes 10.3 Yes Uniform Delay, dl 21.2 35.8 17.5 25.0 20.4 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.43 0.49 0.12 0.43 0.37 0.37 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.91 0.18 0.78 0.44 0.83 0.40 IPercentile St Delay 24.3 10.7 36.2 18.7 25.6 19.9 Percentile LOS C B D C D C Queue Length 50th(ft) 442 48 117 160 365 123 I Queue Length 95th(ft) Link Length(ft) 543 82 #176 216 450 194 0 50th Up Block Time% 1570 2 0 95th Up Block Time% 6% 22% Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 300 200 290 50th Bay Block Time% 21% 18% 95th Bay Block Time% 28% 15% 27% IQueuing Penalty(veh) 79 24 286 Cycle Length: 110 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios:0.79 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.86 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay:23.9 Intersection Percentile LOS:C # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. IQueue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: TH 169 WB ON RAMP&CSAH 83 I E©Q . I Synchro Report Page 2 WSBASS-L300 I IOFF RAMP & CSAfff:)63.21\SY R NEW TH 169 EB NCHRO\C 83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings ILane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0 I Flt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0 Volume(vph) 60 0 150 0 0 0 0 880 1420 290 2030 0 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 63 0 158 0 0 0 0 972 1689 314 2244 0 Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Prot Phase Number 8 8 1 6 5 2 1 Maximum Split(s) 20 20 10 73 17 80 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.15 0.22 0.64 0.64 0.13 0.70 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 274 345 2370 2015 450 2608 I V/C Ratio 0.23 0.46 0.41 0.84 0.70 0.86 V/S Ratio Prot 0.04 0.03 0.09 V/S Ratio Perm 0.07 0.26 0.53 0.60 Critical LG? Yes Yes I Uniform Delay, dl 31.0 26.5 7.5 11.8 34.9 9.5 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.14 0.20 0.66 0.66 0.12 0.72 1 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.26 0.50 0.40 0.81 0.72 0.84 Percentile St Delay 32.0 27.6 5.9 9.7 43.3 4.6 Percentile LOS D D B B E A Queue Length 50th (ft) 40 94 129 394 117 173 I Queue Length 95th (ft) 81 157 199 529 161 476 Link Length (ft) 720 570 50th Up Block Time% 95th Up Block Time % 8% 5% Turn Bay Length(ft) 275 275 285 220 50th Bay Block Time% 12% 5% 95th Bay Block Time% 21% 9% Queuing Penalty(veh) 149 81 Cycle Length: 110 1 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.70 Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.76 IIntersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 9.6 Intersection Percentile LOS: B ISplits and Phases: TH 169 EB OFF RAMP Si CSAH 83 31MQ I5 1111-6 Ei 8 I I Synchro Report Page 3 WSBASS-L300 I I PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings . © © 0 D © 0 0 0 0 © 0 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Iiii r 44 rr � cc- r NI f4, r Satd. Flow(prat) 3539 3725 1583 539 3725 3167 539 3725 1583 539 3725 1583 IFlt Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 150 40 170 420 120 1290 190 860 150 460 1490 210 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 163 44 179 455 132 1535 206 950 158 499 1646 221 Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 9 23 24 38 10 36 27 53 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.05 0.18 0.25 0.19 0.32 0.54 0.06 0.30 0.49 0.22 0.45 0.51 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 193 677 389 676 1185 1699 225 1118 777 772 1693 806 I V/C Ratio 0.84 0.06 0.46 0.67 0.11 0.90 0.91 0.85 0.20 0.65 0.97 0.27 V/S Ratio Prot 0.05 0.03 0.13 0.20 0.06 0.04 0.14 0.02 V/S Ratio Penn 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.29 0.26 0.06 0.44 0.12 I Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay,dl 39.2 28.3 15.0 31.4 20.1 15.9 38.9 27.5 6.0 29.7 22.3 10.5 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.06 0.13 0.19 0.25 0.32 0.51 0.06 0.33 0.58 0.19 0.46 0.51 I Actuated V/C Ratio 0.84 0.09 0.59 0.52 0.11 0.96 0.92 0.77 0.17 0.75 0.97 0.27 Percentile St Delay 60.4 31.7 16.4 27.6 20.1 20.3 73.9 24.2 4.2 30.9 32.5 5.8 Percentile LOS F DCDCC F C A DDB Queue Length 50th(ft) 58 14 70 139 33 464 73 214 22 150 498 58 II Queue Length 95th(ft) #116 28 116 202 55 #556 #128 324 52 204 #714 87 Link Length(ft) 420 420 1120 720 50th Up Block Time% 18% 1 95th Up Block Time% 22% 11% Turn Bay Length(ft) 300 300 230 230 260 250 465 270 50th Bay Block Time% 26% 7% 95th Bay Block Time% 29% 34% 18% Queuing Penalty(veh) 403 34 188 Cycle Length: 110 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 12 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.83 I Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.94 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay:27.4 Intersection Percentile LOS: D # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. IQueue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: PROP CSAH 16&CSAH 83 11 QimQ 2 ©M 4 II 15 11 6 Z8 Q7 I Synchro Report Page 4 WSBASS-L300 I I FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 811\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR8 3 PM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 I Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings I a © 000a000 © oa Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I) 44 r vii 4,4, r l� ++ r vivi ++ r Satd. Flow(prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 I Flt Perm. 0.375 0.710 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1397 3725 1583 2645 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 Volume(vph) 340 100 90 110 210 190 130 650 40 380 1130 580 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 369 110 95 119 232 200 141 718 42 412 1248 611 Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2 I Maximum Split(s) 26 38 8 20 12 41 23 52 Lost Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 g/c Ratio 0.39 0.32 0.40 0.20 0.15 0.34 0.08 0.35 0.39 0.18 0.45 0.65 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 994 1185 633 570 576 532 290 1287 619 643 1659 1036 I V/C Ratio V/S Ratio Prot 0.37 0.09 0.15 0.21 0.40 0.38 0.49 0.56 0.07 0.64 0.75 0.59 0.08 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.04 0.00 0.12 0.12 V/S Ratio Perm 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.19 0.02 0.34 0.26 1 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes Uniform Delay, dl 17.3 20.0 14.6 17.6 31.8 19.4 36.7 22.2 14.5 31.7 19.3 6.9 Actuated G/C Ratio 0.31 0.24 0.32 0.19 0.14 0.31 0.08 0.44 0.49 0.16 0.53 0.67 Actuated V/C Ratio 0.50 0.12 0.19 0.22 0.43 0.41 0.50 0.43 0.05 0.71 0.63 0.58 I Percentile St Delay 21.9 24.6 18.8 20.9 32.5 20.9 36.8 16.9 10.6 38.7 10.1 3.5 Percentile LOS C C C C D C D C B D B A Queue Length 50th (ft) 98 30 46 29 74 103 48 177 15 153 178 98 I Queue Length 95th(ft) 131 50 80 48 112 165 80 243 37 201 237 148 Link Length(ft) 420 420 665 1120 50th Up Block Time% I 95th Up Block Time% Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 260 300 260 240 235 235 50th Bay Block Time 95th Bay Block Time% 2% 10% 1 Queuing Penalty(veh) 30 Cycle Length: 110 I Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Lost Time: 9 Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.57 Intersection V/C Ratio:0.62 I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 17.5 Intersection Percentile LOS: C I Splits and Phases: FUTURE 17TH AVE& CSAH 83 Q1 © 2 U.3 hM4 I .ces I r; MU' 111 .:.,� . ' � L5 116 QFIEj8 I ISynchro Report WSBASS-L300 Page 5 SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSA1H: D63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5 1 Baseline 11/18/99 Lanes,Volumes,Timings 11 © LI Li 0 0 El Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Satd. Flow(prot) 0 0 0 0 0 0 FIt Perm. 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop IControl Type: Unsignalized I 1 1 I I I I I r I Synchro Report. Page 6 WSBASS-L300 LIST OF PERSONNEL Project Manager Elizabeth J. Abel Principal Investigators Elizabeth J. Abel Andrew J. Schmidt Archaeologists Randy J. Peterson Andrew J. Schmidt Graphics Adrienne B. Todd 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 -- h I I I V 1 1 p 1 1 • p 41 CC 1 I 1 MCP Ltd. Cultural Resources Management Architectural History Archaeology Preservation Planning 1 r ' APPENDIX D SOUTHBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT PHASE I ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY IIIINNallag.... I 02::: ' ,.i.,,,, ,,. FILE COPY PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY f� ..„ ' � FOR THE }' SOUTHBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT I ,,, II '� 4 �� ` A (formerly known as "EAST DEAN LAKE DEVELOPMENT") s• , ti `y „4.��``„ti i { SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA 4 , t..,.';', ...,:,y1 ? ; T i y F Y ; I 1 1 The 106 Group Ltd.= December 1997 ;The Dacotah Building I "370 Selby Avenue.' _.. St.'Paul Minnesota ,,55102 " (612)290=0977 :'. I i PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE ' SOUTHBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT (formerly known as "EAST DEAN LAKE DEVELOPMENT") SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA ' SHPO File No. 97-3177 The 106 Group Project No. 97-26 I Submitted to: Steven D. Soltau Shakopee Crossings LP 3601 Minnesota Drive, Suite 880 Edina, MN 55435 Submitted by: The 106 Group Ltd. The Dacotah Building 370 Selby Avenue St. Paul, MN 55102 ' Principal Investigators: Elizabeth J. Abel and Andrew J. Schmidt Report Authors: Randy J. Peterson and Andrew J. Schmidt 1 December 1997 1 Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey t Page I ' MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ' The 106 Group Ltd. conducted a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey within the area of the Southbridge Development fromerly known as East Dean Lake Development near Dean Lake in Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, during November ' of 1997. The investigation was carried out for a consortium of property owners, including: Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership, Shakopee Crossings LP, and The Minneapolis Foundation. The owners are proposing an 850-unit housing ' development on the property. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was being prepared for the project under state laws. Pursuant to the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act (Minn. Stat. 138.31 - 138.42), the Minnesota Historic Sites Act (Minn. 1 Stat. 138.51 - 138.66), and the Minnesota Private Cemeteries Act (Minn. Stat. 307.08), the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) found that "there is a good probability that unreported archaeological properties may be present in this project area" 1 (SHPO letter of 7/28/97; File No. 97-3177) and recommended an archaeological survey for the property. The development and archaeological survey area for the project covers 550 acres and is located in the SE1/4 of Sec.10, SW1/4 and W1/2-SE1/4 of Sec.11, N1/2-NE1/4 of Sec.15, and N1/2-NW1/4 and NW-NE1/4 of Sec.14, T115N, R22W. The area of 1 potential effect of the project is defined as being coterminous with the defined survey area. 1 The investigation consisted of a review of previously recorded sites and previous surveys within one mile of the Southbridge Development area, and a Phase I survey for the identification of archaeological/heritage sites. The archival-documentary research and archaeological field survey, which included a visual inspection reconnaissance of the project area and shovel testing of the survey area judged to have a higher potential for the ' presence of archaeological sites, did not identify archaeological/heritage sites within the project area. This report recommends that no additional archaeological investigations are necessary within the limits of the proposed project area. 1 1 I 1 Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey ' Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ' Management Summary Table of Contents ii List of Figures iii 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Environmental Setting 3 ' 3.0 Cultural-Historical Context and Previous Investigations 4 3.1 Cultural-Historical Context 4 ' 3.2 Previous Investigations ' 4.0 Research Design and Procedures 10 5.0 Results and Recommendations 14 16 References ' Appendix A Correspondence B List of Personnel I I 1 1 11 1 1 1 Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page iii 1 LIST OF FIGURES ' Figure 1. Project Location 2 Figure 2. Location and Number of Shovel Tests 13 •r I I 1 . i I Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION The 106 Group Ltd. conducted a Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey ' within the area of the proposed Southbridge Development, in Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, on November 13 and 14, 1997 (Figure 1). The investigation was carried out for a consortium of property owners, including: Valley Green Business Park Limited Partnership, Shakopee Crossings LP, and The Minneapolis Foundation. The owners are proposing an 850-unit housing development on the property. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is being prepared for the project under state laws. Pursuant to the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act (Minn. Stat. ' 138.31 - 138.42), the Minnesota Historic Sites Act (Minn. Stat. 138.51 - 138.66), and the Minnesota Private Cemeteries Act (Minn. Stat. 307.08). the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) found that "there is a good probability that unreported archaeological properties may be present in this project area" (SHPO letter of 7/28/97; File No. 97-3177) and recommended an archaeological survey for the property. Because the study area is located on private property, a state archaeological license was not required for the archaeological investigation. The objective of the investigation was to identify archaeological sites which are potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, within the defined area of potential effect of the Southbridge Development project. The project area was surveyed for potentially significant archaeological sites. The development and archaeological survey area for the project is located in the SE1/4 of Sec.10, SW1/4 and W1/2-SE1/4 of Sec.11, N1/2-NEI/4 of Sec.15, and N1/2- NW1/4 and NW-NE1/4 of Sec.14, T115N, R22, and covers approximately 550 acres. The area of potential effect of the project is defined as being coterminous with the defined survey area. The archival-documentary research and archaeological field survey, which ' included a visual inspection reconnaissance of the project area and shovel testing of the survey area judged to have a higher potential for the presence of archaeological sites, did not identify archaeological/heritage sites within the project area. This report recommends that no additional archaeological investigations are necessary within the limits of the proposed project area. 1 • 1 • -- {I{_..._./SJ _- --- /— i' i o I :a �JJ 764 . 7fi9 .. L;,+.a\v Ii• 1' -� j/, (�-"_' k � ` ti I N ' II I �� �o P LS r 17 ,......_ (:, r� ,,,,,_,..„ ,.:, , , ..,,. \‘,._,., ,..,-, C(7\:' \ °•• . 50- lam- V s.,\.\ �(N.., 1 • ° • 3 I/� / ,sem ) (�' 749' � • '`� 7 I .f- ° _ , 1. ? / .0<.„‘ .• .,. ".i"1 _.__---• --- --<- ---------"t i•-,'-`,''•-)-•`':•"----''---—- ,. _ 0 :lit ,-,,_ c--_,,, L ,._...,,,H,, t.,, , r 1 .,,..., n , it• ,.......-, m ', . . -• n 4 I F III '- oy_. • S.��g III ='��'•-� ( l I �` c, `L \ 2n:1 I ...... �; 755 -. --''''I':;...:=..1":1'. o @Q4 [�'-` � '761: .,\� II �_ JL LQ* i '.._. .. ._ • :: •st • :E A G L E .� C R E K 1 16 i ..`_ .5 O _ �,. d j6e ° I. \ ,.., : , . . .--....--72.:,' . - . ‘11' ' I.• II • 11L l 1 f833 � y \ -.f C \ \ •..--..._ _ O 1827 `, _.T_ .. • B2 i 9 ' f1 31 o •I ___------ . hs-'----.'-. s'''11- r / II II 1 �i91Tl�-• �A I { p �'Y5 5,1' i 4) I q a- =_�_�,F 827IJ \ �._/ / y ,,,,,,,,...)).•,,,,•:.'4,1;:‘,;.,"•',c'',7•••. \\v,.. b \\ _ ' .•-:;7 v Q}Z 9 ".I� 1 \ / / `�.�/\lJ • S �.. 1 1111 I �� � \ • s I _ r•rs /l Thp / p \ ; Akw, i `.. , ,-,,.,-/,/<:,,,,..t2:,\., ` y.; yI 00. ,:� i ` � , . ` //' �, j . � • .f \ {Z,J t • ° i ` 7./\J ''Pt 1E,/..,..-:,,,.• 9� � b , Jti .< o �,� _/I , Source: USGS Quadrangle, 7.5 minute series, Eden Prairie, Minnesota, 1967 (1972, 1980). I SOUTHBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT LOCATION I PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA r M�ry 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET MINN. Ise MIs FH H •� 6%)15Y ti { 7 { 1 I �� 1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER • ��( , —i v--{ �— —t The 106 Group Ltd. Figure 1 i Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 3 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Southbridge Development is located in the northeastern part of Scott County, and is characterized by nearly level to rolling landscapes. The geology of Scott County was influenced by the Mankato stage of the Late Wisconsin glaciation, which deposited a ' light yellowish-brown or light olive-brown, calcareous, moderately fine textured material. The survey area is on an outwash terrace formed by the glacial river Warren. Currently the area is mostly level and is partly wooded and partly meadow land, although the ' southern portion around Dean Lake is primarily wetlands. Some of the project area has been previously cultivated and much of the area is utilized as horse pasture. At least the western portion of the project area is also used for horse-riding trails. There are four different types of soils in the surveyed area: two from the Zimmerman series; Isanti fine sandy loam; and marsh (Cummins et al. 1959). iThe majority of the project area is composed of two types of Zimmerman soils: fine sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes (ZaB); and fine sand, 6 to 12 percent slopes, slightly to ' moderately eroded (ZaC2). These soils were formed from glacial outwash sand, are light colored, and are well drained and subject to severe drought. The ZaB type made up the soils in the shovel test area. A portion in the center of the project area consists of Isanti ' fine sandy loam. This soil type was formed by glacial outwash, is level to depressional, and is slow to very slow in drainage. The soils have a solum (A and B horizons) with a thickness range of 40 to 65 cm overlying the till material. The area around Dean Lake is ' composed of Marsh land(Ma), characterized by shallow lakes and ponds which generally remain wet throughout the year, although they may dry up in drought years. The more prominent feature on the landscape is Dean Lake. The lake is bordered on the south by a broad, glacial river terrace, and on the north by level to very gently rolling terrain in which there are small and slight rises of land dispersed within generally low and frequently wet ground. 1 1 1 I Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 4 3.0 CULTURAL-HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS 3.1 Cultural-Historical Context Anfinson (1989, 1990) has ro osed nine archaeological regions for the state, p P g basing his classification largely on regional hydrologic characteristics. The Southbridge ' project lies within an area Anfinson has characterized as the Central Deciduous Lakes - East Region. The following cultural history synthesis for the area is derived from a variety of sources, including Johnson (1988), Anfinson and Wright (1990), and particularly Anfinson's (1989, 1990) description of archaeological regions in Minnesota; the files and records of the State Historic Preservation Office and the Office of the State Archaeologist; the statewide comprehensive plan; reports of investigations in the region and the archaeological record of adjacent regions; and local histories. The Pre-contact period cultural sequence in the region begins with the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods (ca. 12,000 to 5,000 years ago). The earliest human presence in the Upper Midwest dates to the Paleoindian Tradition (ca. 12,000 to 8,000 years ago). As glaciers receded from the Upper Midwest, migratory groups of people settled throughout the area's open woodlands and succeeding grasslands, hunting native herding animals such as bison and extinct megafauna such as the mastodon, and likely exploiting available small- game, fish, and plant resources as well. Throughout much of this period, the climate was becoming successively warmer and drier. A distinction within the Paleoindian Tradition is often made between Early and Late Stages, based on the morphology of lanceolate spear points (e.g., Mason 1986; Johnson 1988). In addition to distinctive projectile points, the tool kits included large, bifacially flaked knives, simple choppers and large scrappers. Paleoindian sites are rare in Minnesota, especially those dating to the early stage. Evidence for the presence of human groups during the period is limited mainly to surface finds and the settlement pattern for these peoples is poorly understood. The Archaic Tradition (ca. 8,000 to 2,800 years ago) represents a continuation of seminomadic hunting and gathering, probably in a seasonal round of resource procurement. A wider range of resources is believed to have been utilized during the period, generally reflecting the increasingly rich environment of the early to middle Holocene, although bison may have been locally important. ' The Eastern, or Lake-Forest, Archaic Tradition has been divided into Early, Middle, and Late Stages. Characteristic of the Middle-Late Archaic periods (ca. 5,000 to 2,800 years ago) was a continued reliance on large game hunting(bison to the west, and deer, elk, and moose to the east) and increasingly diversified technologies associated with hunting, trapping, fishing, foraging, woodworking and plant processing. This diversification of culture and associated technologies reflects more highly regionalized adaptation to specific t Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey I Page 5 or local environmental conditions as climatic trends shifted to a cooler, wetter Iconfiguration, a pattern which continues to this day. Lithe technology shows a parallel shift toward greater utilization of local, often more marginal resources. Chipped stone tools I such as stemmed and notched projectile points dominate the tool kit, but the use of pecked and ground stone implements also became widespread. In the Upper Midwest, the intensive use of native copper for making implements, manifested in the so-called "Old Copper I Culture" (e.g., Stoltman 1986; Bleed 1969; Mason 1981) is apparent late in the Late Archaic period. Evidence of the exploitation of diverse floral and faunal resources suggests a seasonal round type of subsistence-settlement system, with habitation areas often located Ialong the margins of lakes and major rivers. The Woodland Tradition (ca. 2,800 years ago to historic contact) is distinguished I from the Archaic primarily by the manufacture of ceramic vessels and the construction of earthen burial mounds. The subsistence base established during the Archaic Tradition is thought to have continued largely unchanged until into the later Woodland period, when Inew subsistence practices, such as horticulture in southern Minnesota and intensive wild rice exploitation in the north, developed. The Woodland Tradition in the area may have been associated with incipient plant domestication, but hunting coupled with the likelihood of some wild rice gathering provided the bulk of subsistence needs. Settlement patterns resembled those appearing previously, with particularly intense occupation of stream/lake junctions late in the period. The Woodland Tradition is divided into Early, Middle, and Late Stages in much of 1 the Upper Midwest, although southeastern Minnesota is the only area of the state where the Early Woodland Stage has been securely documented (Johnson 1988; Gibbon 1986). An especially significant technological innovation of the Woodland peoples is the development I of ceramics (e.g., Malmo, Howard Lake, Brainerd, St. Croix, Onamia, Blackduck, Clam River, and Sandy Lake ceramics). Mound construction associated with mortuary activity also developed at this time. The region evidences the state's highest concentration of I mounds. The introduction of bow and arrow technology was another significant technological development. Populations of people appear to have significantly increased in the area during the Middle and Late Woodland time period. I Cultural influences from central North America resulted in local expressions of the I Mississippian Tradition (ca. 950-1,050 years ago to historic contact) in the Upper Midwest. An intensification of the agricultural subsistence base, along with a change in pottery form and design, projectile point types, and house and mound construction, all signal a I fundamental shift in economic strategies and social structure (Johnson 1988). Evidence of Oneota (Ogechie) / Plains Village occupation (ca. 950 years ago to historic contact) is reported in the broader region, with the larger sites located along the margins of major river I valleys or bordering lakes. Sites have been identified in the nearby counties of Washington, Hennepin, and Dakota. These peoples appear to have developed a blended subsistence strategy based on simple agriculture and/or wild rice exploitation, gathering, and bison Ihunting. I I Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey I Page 6 IDuring the Contact period in the Upper Midwest, about 150 to 300 years ago, a period characterized by the initial contacts and early relationships between American Indian I and Euro-American peoples, western portions of the region were occupied by Yankton Dakota, while Santee Dakota occupied the east. Divisions of the eastern Dakota were the occupants of the study area. French fur traders had moved into the region by the late 1600s, I to be succeeded, in turn, by English and American traders. The eastern Dakota lived in semi-permanent and permanently settled villages, with an economy based on game animals, fish, and probably wild rice, as well as bison obtained from hunting parties on the western I prairies. After being pushed southward by the Ojibwe in the late seventeenth century, the Dakota adapted to a seasonal round of hunting and gathering, and came to settle along the Mississippi and Minnesota rivers. Ojibwe peoples had displaced the northern Dakota by the Iearly 1800s; much of the south was effectively unoccupied at the time as competing Ojibwe and Dakota vied for control of the region. Several Dakota village and cemetery sites, documented in the historical record, were later located along the Minnesota River, 1 Mississippi River, and the area of their confluence. During the Post Contact period, Euro-American settlement of the region began in I the early 1800s with the establishment of Fort Snelling at the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers. Urban commercial centers formed around the water-powered mills I of St. Anthony Falls and the northernmost navigable areas of the Mississippi. Settlement of the study area began in the mid-1800s and the region saw the development of agricultural communities during the mid- and late 1800s. IHistoric and thematic contexts are developed by each state's State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), as required by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Ias amended. Thus, each state has instituted a program of preservation planning based on the continual development of these historic contexts. SHPO contexts provide a framework for evaluating the significance of cultural resources in Minnesota. These frameworks, Iorganized into three tiers (broad statewide contexts, thematic contexts, and local contexts) according to the temporal, geographical, and thematic scope of the context, establish Iconnections between patterns of state history and the archaeological/historical resources that have the potential to be encountered and sometimes are encountered in the landscape. The broader of the SHPO context tiers is composed of statewide classifications 1) defined by varying cultural expressions of American Indian populations of the Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, Plains Village, Mississippian, and Oneota traditions of the Pre-contact I period (ca. 12,000 to 350 years ago); 2) defined by historically identifiable American Indian groups as well as the early Euro-American exploration and economic/political pursuits of the Contact period in Minnesota (ca. 350 to 150 years ago); and 3) defined by American Indian communities-reservations and by patterns of subsistence and of resource I extraction practiced by dominant Euro-American inhabitants in the Post Contact period of the past 150 years. I I r Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 7 The Minnesota SHPO Pre-contact statewide historic contexts considered more relevant to the project area are: the Paleoindian tradition including the Fluted point and Plano/Lanceolate point stages; Eastern Archaic Tradition; Woodland Tradition; and Mississippian Tradition. Contact period contexts that may be applicable to the present project include the Eastern Dakota and the French, British, and Initial United States Presence in the area. Post Contact period historic contexts may include Indian Communities and Reservations (1837-1934), Early Agriculture and River Settlement(1840- 1870), and Railroads and Agricultural Development(1870-1940). The other two tiers of thematic and local contexts established by the SHPO include patterns of statewide thematically-linked properties and contexts established through research and field survey of a particular class of historic properties. With the exception of the American Indian Special Use Archaeological Sites thematic context, including lithic scatters and Native American earthworks, neither of these tiers appear to be applicable to the present project. 3.2 Previous Investigations The State Historic Preservation Office Site Files and Report Files were researched for known archaeological sites and for areas previously surveyed within one mile of the Southbridge Development project area. Research indicated that there are several recorded sites within one mile of the project area. However, there are no recorded sites within the area of potential effect. ' Early professional investigations into the prehistory of Minnesota date to the later nineteenth century. Theodore H. Lewis and Alfred J. Hill conducted an exhaustive survey of burial mounds and earthworks throughout the upper Midwest. Around the turn of the century, Jacob V. Brower investigated and described mortuary and habitation sites in Minnesota. Newton H. Winchell synthesized his own research, the work of Brower, and of Hill and Lewis, in his Aborigines of Minnesota (1911). Although much of their work entailed field identification and verification of sites, a great deal of site location information 1 was derived from informant interviews rather than actual field survey, a method which resulted in frequent ambiguities and generalizations in the physical and legal description of sites. In subsequent years, there was a period of several decades during which relatively few sites were identified and described in this area of the state. Throughout the ensuing decades, especially beginning in the 1930s, an increasing number of sites were identified and described through field survey and site testing in this archaeological region. More intensive investigation through archaeological site excavations in the region were conducted principally by State agencies such as the Division of State Parks, Minnesota Historical Society archaeologists, and University of Minnesota archaeologists, but also by Hamline University and St. Paul Science Museum (now Science Museum of Minnesota) Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 8 archaeologists (Norquist 1969; Streiff 1972). Since the 1960s, efforts to identify and manage the state's cultural resources pursuant to federal and state historic preservation legislation have necessitated investigations designed to inventory, evaluate, and recover information and data from cultural heritage sites. Some state agencies established archaeological survey programs to meet these needs for their development undertakings. During the late 1970s, the Minnesota Legislature appropriated funds to conduct a statewide survey which included site identification and testing surveys (Minnesota Historical Society 1981). Scott County, however, was not included in the statewide survey's archaeological field investigation efforts. Since the 1970s, increasing emphasis on state and federal legal compliance in regard g P g to considering the effects undertakings may have on cultural resources, has resulted in a number of compliance investigations. These, in turn, have produced studies ranging from preliminary site inventories, to projects designed to identify, evaluate, and mitigate effects to individual sites. The above-efforts Bove efforts notwithstanding, the area's archaeological and architectural history record is only moderately well-documented. Archaeological or, more generally, cultural resource research in the county has resulted in 52 Scott County archaeological sites being recorded under state site numbers in the files of the Office of the State Archaeologist and the State Historic Preservation Office. A few additional sites without state site numbers are identified in the SHPO's archaeological site inventory. The sites include habitation, mound/mortuary, special use, lithic/artifact scatter and findspot, trading post, mill, ghost town, and farm/homestead sites. Many counties have additional cultural resource sites or properties added to the inventories throughout each year. ' Since the mid-1970s, a number of investigations have been conducted in the general vicinity of the project area in Scott County, largely in response to federal- and state-mandated cultural resource inventory, evaluation, and mitigation requirements. These have resulted in the identification of several American Indian habitation and mound sites, artifact and lithic scatters, and cultural material findspots, as well as Post Contact, Euro-American sites in Scott County. With a few exceptions, relatively few of the recorded archaeological sites in the region and in the county have been either intensively tested or investigated through extensive excavation and analysis, and many have not been identified or dated to a specific cultural manifestation or more specific cultural expression than the major cultural tradition. Northeast of the property in the SW-SE1/4, Sec.1, T115N, R22W, there are two sites, 21 SC0036 and 21SC0037, that were identified by an archaeological reconnaissance survey and evaluated (Redman et al. 1991; Johnson 1992a), as well as investigated by data recovery excavations (Johnson 1992b). Both sites, located on rises of land within the Minnesota River bottomlands and adjacent to a creek channel near Fisher and Rice lakes, are composed of artifact scatters affiliated with the Woodland Tradition. Site 21SC0036 also has an historic component, a Euro-American farmstead, overlying the 1 I • Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 9 Woodland component. Another site, 21SC0025, located in the N 1/2-SE 1/4, Sec.2, T115N, R22W, is an earthwork which is possibly a burial mound, although the site has not been authenticated. Several other habitation and mound group sites have been identified in the general vicinity of the project, but they are located two or more miles from the Southbridge project area. Known sites in the vicinity tend to be located on the bluff edge overlooking the Minnesota River floodplain as well as adjacent to the riverine and lacustrine features within the Minnesota River bottomlands or floodplain. A number of other surveys have been conducted with negative results within one mile of the area of potential effect. Woolworth (1976) surveyed the W1/2, Sec.15 and E1/2, Sec.16, T115N, R22W and identified no sites. One-half mile east of the project area, the County-Municipal Highway archaeology program of the Minnesota Historical Society conducted reconnaissance surveys of the proposed 2.5-mile reconstruction and realignment of CSAH 18 [old Co. Rd. 89] from CSAH 42 north to the TH 101-169 Shakopee Bypass (Peterson et al. 1993:376-377; 1994:404-405). The survey traversed Sec. 12, 13, and 24 of T115N, R22W, and no sites or features were identified that would be affected by that undertaking. Mather (1995) conducted a reconnaissance survey covering the N1/2-NE1/4, Sec.10, T115N, R22W, reporting no sites in the area. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (Berg 1995) surveyed an area roughly covering the SW1/4 and S1/2-NW1/4 of Sec.15, SE1/4, S1/2-NE1/4 and NE-NE1/4 of Sec.16, and N1/2-NE1/4 and NE-NW1/4 of Sec.21, T115N, R22W. That survey was also negative. The 106 Group Ltd. (Hruby et al. 1997) also conducted a reconnaissance survey in the vicinity for the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community. The 77-acre survey parcel is located one mile south of the Southbridge project, in the E1/2-NE1/4 of Section 22, T115N, R22W, and no archaeological resources were identified. I r 1 I I I I Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 10 4.0 RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCEDURES The objective of the archaeological survey was to determine if there are archaeological resources within the Southbridge project's area of potential effect which are potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Before undertaking the archaeological fieldwork, staff members conducted background research in the SHPO Site Files and reviewed reports of previous investigations. The field survey was conducted by Randy J. Peterson and Andrew J. Schmidt, on November 13 and 14, 1997. Field investigations included obtaining landowner permissions to conduct the work as well as pedestrian (surface) reconnaissance and subsurface shovel testing to assess for the presence of archaeological/heritage sites within the area of potential effect. Field conditions at the time of the survey were fair with much of the ground surface obscured by woodland and meadow grass vegetation, and a 2-3 inch covering of snow. Thus, most of the soil surface was not exposed to direct observation. Field procedures used in the reconnaissance level survey were determined by the archaeological site potentials apparent from the archival-documentary records research, the physiography of the project area, and the ground conditions. A preliminary visual inspection reconnaissance was conducted of the entire project area. The procedure, coupled with information derived from the background research, permitted the identification of tracts of relatively lower archaeological site potential, such as depressional areas of current or former wetland, steep slopes, and areas in which Holocene deposits have been significantly disturbed, which were excluded from intensive field survey. Similarly, with no riverine and few high ground features within the survey area to attract habitation prior to the Post Contact period Euro-American settlement, higher potential areas were judged to be the ridge parallel to and bordering the north side of Dean Lake. Higher Hi hpotential areas were tested according to the nature of the soil deposits and surface visibility. Areas that had greater than 70 percent surface visibility, such as trails through the project area, were investigated using pedestrian survey. Selected areas which were judged to have higher site presence potential and appeared to have been undisturbed or had less than 70 percent of the ground surface visible were surveyed by shovel testing The peninsula-like land feature extending into the north side of the lake was visually inspected. It essentially is a low-lying land formation below the 770' elevation contour; the survey team encountered standing water when access to the landform was attempted. Project plans show Dean Lake with a high water level margin at the 747' elevation contour. The locations judged to exhibit a higher probability of site presence within the survey area were found to be generally above the 770-775' elevation contour. The principal ridge and the few more prominent ridge-like knolls bordering the north side of Dean Lake were judged to exhibit the higher potential for intact I F Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 11 archaeological deposits. Therefore, shovel testing survey efforts were concentrated in that area. A total of eighteen (18) shovel tests (ST) were excavated, generally at intervals of 50-foot/15-meters, along the length of these high ground areas north of Dean Lake (Figure 2; showing the location of shovel testing transects and the number of shovel tests, circled, excavated along each transect). Revealed soil profiles were typical of the predominate soils mapped for the area. Shovel tests were circular, approximately 30-40 centimeters in diameter, and generally were excavated to a depth of 50-60 cm and as deep as 65 cm below the surface. All soil removed from shovel tests was screened through 1/4 inch hardware cloth screen. All shovel tests (ST) were numbered individually, had soil strata noted and described in profile, were mapped to location, and immediately back- filled. As shown on Figure 2, ST #1 and ST #2 were excavated '35 feet/11 meters apart and on a small ridge-like feature, about 100 feet north of the wetland margin of the lake. The first test revealed that a portion of the meadow grass covered area had been disturbed; the upper level apparently had been truncated. ST #2 , further toward the west and the edge of a wooded area, appeared to have an intact profile, as follows: 0-12 cm dark brown (Munsell 10YR 3/3) loamy very fine sand; 12-26 cm brown (10YR 4/3) mottled fine sand; and 26-50 cm dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) sand. No cultural material was recovered. About 350 feet further north, ST #3 and ST #4 also were excavated 35 feet/l1 meters apart and on an elongated knoll in meadow grass vegetation. Both tests revealed a ' disturbed profile with truncated upper horizons that had apparently been graded, plowed, or eroded. ST #3 had 17 cm of yellowish brown sand fill above dark brown (10YR 3/3) very fine sand from 17 to 38 cm, overlying dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) fine sand from 38 to 55 cm below the surface. ST #4 was composed of dark yellowish brown fine sand from the surface to a depth of 35 cm. No cultural material was recovered. Still further north about 450 feet, lies the eastern end of the principal ridge which borders and parallels the north side of Dean Lake. A WNW to ESE aligned transect of fourteen (14) shovel tests were excavated, mostly at 50-foot/15-meter intervals, along the length of its wooded crest which rises above the 790' elevation contour. The thickness of soil horizons varied slightly according to the location of tests on the ridge high points, Supper slope, or swales, but a typical soils profile of ST #5 through ST #14 in the wooded area is as follows: very dark brown (10YR 2/2) very fine sandy loam from 0 to 5-8 cm; dark brown (10YR 3/3) fine to very fine sand from 5-8 to 16-23 cm and as deep as 34 cm; dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4) fine sand from 16-23 to 50-55 cm; and dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) fine sand to the base of excavation at about 60 cm below the surface. The eastern end of the ridge was an open area in meadow grass, bordered by a few small, basin-shaped hollows. Four shovel tests, ST #15 through ST #18 were excavated within an approximately 200x200 foot area of the open field. ST #15, near the edge of the woods, had a soils profile like that described above. A typical soils profile in the I Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey ' Page 12 remainder of the field was a follows: an apparent old plowzone 0 to 32-34 cm is a dark ' brown (10YR 3/3), loose, structureless, loamy very fine sand; a more firm, dark brown to dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/3 to 3/4) very fine sand from 32-34 to 50-60 cm; overlying brown (10YR 5/3) to dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/6) very fine sand below about 55-60 cm below the surface. With the exception of fragments of clay pigeons or targets that were used for trap-shooting, cellophane, and strands of baling cordage found in the 0-25 cm level of ST # 15 and ST #17, no significant cultural material was recovered from the fourteen shovel tests excavated along the transect. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .6.4 l�U0Iry— C - J 5o ` �� J O _ 01111 ^- c 1 . cp R) . =� so li __,) ,. , `. ',. 6 ' L, 1 ' iti�. D C7'1I _� •tl ___/ 0 , -Til „ . :• ._ ° -- :".m..T1.1.4-i'r(li : \.: icli---, II/ 1:7\1 ....... ......--- '. —— TH 169 _ o,v 'Q �So 7 , lir . o!.._...6 Q4 ihrlig i \ n \� \1II Z7 ,111 II II II ern. l(! IN 1 i--U J \ `'-.i II u ,i ,• f ' 4 x -11 ' , s6 Lake �i I 8/2 O O O i BOOT_------.N` �r--ti a... - i 0 .s----.,, C R E .-----.. _1 -... N Project Area Boundary -)..... I y_. ``- 1 rj co Ra X61- �\ -rel.!: �. : ... \ A.o i ,a�� -- ` \82 - i• nt' ;' �.� �, I lam _, .�\ `�_ /, �� �' i 11 • • � •fly` %%�� Source: USGS Quadrangle, 7.5 minute series, Eden Prairie, Minnesota, 1967 (1972, 1980). I SOUTHBRIDGELOCATION AND NUMBER I DEVELOPMENT PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF SHOVEL TESTS MN SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA GN A MINN. 5. 1 _O'13i�:R9 MALS 0 1009 2000 L M,Ls The 106 Group Ltd.IleC 1 Inch Figure 2 I 1 Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey IPage 14 5.0 RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 I The investigation was conducted in compliance with Minnesota state guidelines for National Register surveys as well as the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The final product of the investigation is the current report presenting the potentials, procedures, and results of the I archaeological survey. The report demonstrates the project's compliance with state and federal laws concerning cultural resources. The results generated sufficient information I regarding affected sites to form a basis for recommendations concerning potential National Register eligibility, as well as to direct subsequent levels of investigation, if warranted. IBased on the archival-documentary records research, the project area was assessed as having a moderate potential for significant archaeological sites within the proposed I limits of the development. The Phase I archaeological reconnaissance survey of the Southbridge Development area in Scott County, which included archival-documentary records research, a visual inspection reconnaissance of the project area, and subsurface Ishovel testing, did not identify any significant archaeological/heritage sites or properties within the project's area of potential effect. The area of potential effect is defined as I being coterminous with the survey area recommended by the SHPO. As a result of these investigations, The 106 Group Ltd., recommends that no further archaeological reconnaissance is warranted within the proposed limits of the Southbridge Development i project. Current methods and procedures of archaeological investigation do not preclude I the possibility of undetected archaeological or cultural resource deposits. In the event that such remains are encountered during the undertaking, the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) with offices at the Minnesota Historical Society, or the I Office of the State Archaeologist, Minnesota Department of Administration, may be consulted to provide assistance in achieving compliance with 36 CFR 800.11 (the Regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation governing the Section 106 I process) and with Chapter 138 of Minnesota Statutes, as appropriate. In the event that a human burial area or suspected human remains are encountered Iduring construction, it is recommended that activity in the area of the encounter should stop immediately. The human remains, the surrounding area, and any associated objects I should be accorded due respect and protected from further disturbance of any kind, including handling, picking up, or removing material from their location. It is recommended that immediate contact be made with the local authorities and the Office of ' the State Archaeologist, Minnesota Department of Administration, or the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council to obtain assistance in complying with Chapter 307 of Minnesota Statutes. I 1 Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 15 Copies of project documentation, correspondence. records research and field investigation notes, maps, photographs and photographic negatives, field and laboratory recording forms and analysis forms, and reports are maintained by The 106 Group Ltd. Accessioned archaeological materials, if any, and associated project documentation ' required by the repository are curated by the Collections Department of the Minnesota Historical Society, History Center, in St. Paul, Minnesota; the facility meets federal curation standards defined in 36 CFR Part 79. ISI 1 1 1 1 1 I Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey Page 16 REFERENCES Anfinson, S. F. 1989 Archaeological Regions of Minnesota. Revision in Minnesota Municipal and County Highway Archaeological Reconnaissance Study 1988 Annual Report. Appendix 3. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. 1990 Archaeological Regions in Minnesota and the Woodland Period. In The Woodland Tradition in the Western Great Lakes: Papers Presented to Elden Johnson, edited by Guy E. Gibbon, pp. 135-166. University of Minnesota Publications in Anthropology No. 4, Minneapolis. ' Anfinson, S. F., and H. E. Wright, Jr. 1990 Climatic Change and Culture in Prehistoric Minnesota. In The Woodland ' Tradition in the Western Great Lakes: Papers Presented to Elden Johnson, edited by Guy E. Gibbon, pp. 213-232. University of Minnesota Publications in ' Anthropology No. 4, Minneapolis. Berg, R. E. ' 1995 A Phase I Sample Reconnaissance of Land within the Shakopee Mdewakanton Community in Scott County, Minnesota. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Minneapolis Area Office, Minneapolis. ' Bleed, P. 1969 The Archaeology of Petaga Point: The Preceramic Component. Minnesota ' Prehistoric Archaeology Series Number 2. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. Cummins, J.F., R. Edwards, H. Francis, G. Harms, E. Meier. M. Korpi, and A. Robertson 1959 Soil Survey of Scott County, Minnesota. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. ' Gibbon, G. E. 1986 Does Minnesota Have an Early Woodland? In Early Woodland Archeology, ' edited by K. B. Farnsworth and T. E. Emerson, pp. 84-91. Kampsville Seminars in Archeology, Volume 2. Center for American Archeology Press, Kampsville. Green, W., J. B. Stoltman, and A. B. Kehoe (editors) 1986 Introduction to Wisconsin Archaeology: Background for Cultural Resource Planning, edited by W. Green, J. B. Stoltman, and A. B. Kehoe. Special Issue of The Wisconsin Archaeologist 67 (3-4) Southbridge Development � P Phase 1 Archaeological Survey Page 17 Hruby, A. R., K. A. Ketz, and A. J. Schmidt ' 1997 Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Shakopee Petsch Property, Prior Lake, Scott County, Minnesota. The 106 Group Ltd., Project No. 97-13. Prepared for the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, September 1997. On file at ' the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. ' Johnson, C. M. 1992a Phase I and II Archaeological Investigations Along the County Road 18 Project, Hennepin and Scott Counties, Minnesota. IMA Reports of Investigations ' Number 197, Minneapolis. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. 1992b Phase III Archaeological Investigations at Sites 21SC36 and 21 SC37, Scott County, Minnesota. IMA Reports of Investigations Number 219, December 1992, Minneapolis. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. Johnson, E. 1988 The Prehistoric Peoples of Minnesota. Revised third edition. Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul. ' Mason, R. 1981 Great Lakes Archaeology. Academic Press,New York. 1986 The Paleo-Indian Tradition. In Introduction to Wisconsin Archaeology: Background for Cultural Resource Planning, edited by W. Green, J. B. Stoltman, and A. B. Kehoe. Special Issue of The Wisconsin Archaeologist 67 (3-4):181-206. Mather, D. ' 1995 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Proposed Limestone Quarry Expansion in Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. Minnesota Historical Society 1981 Minnesota Statewide Archaeological Survey Summary: 1977-1980. Report ' submitted to the Minnesota Legislature. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. Norquist, C. L. (compiler) 1969 Roster of Excavated Prehistoric Sites in Minnesota. Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. i 1 Southbridge Development Phase I Archaeological Survey ' Page 18 Peterson, R. J., M. A. Magner, and B. A. Koenen 1993 Minnesota County and Municipal Highway Archaeological Reconnaissance Study 1992 Annual Report. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. ' Peterson, R. J. M. A. Magner, B. A. Koenen, and M. J. Dudzik 1994 Minnesota County and Municipal Highway Archaeological Reconnaissance Study 1993 Annual Report. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. ' Redman, J., G. Bourgerie, and C. Johnson 1991 A Preliminary Report of Archaeological Investigations Along the Stage One County Highway 18 Reconstruction Project (Hennepin and Scott Counties) Minnesota. IMA Reports of Investigations Number 170, September 1991, Minneapolis. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. Stoltman, J. B. 1986 The Archaic Tradition. In Introduction to Wisconsin Archaeology: Background for Cultural Resource Planning, edited by W. Green, J. B. Stoltman, and A. B. Kehoe. Special Issue of The Wisconsin Archaeologist 67 (3-4):207-238. Streiff, J. E. (compiler) 1972 Roster of Excavated Prehistoric Sites in Minnesota to 1972. Minnesota Prehistoric Archaeology Series, No. 7. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. Winchell,N. H. 1911 The Aborigines of Minnesota. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul. Woolworth, A. 1976 An Archaeological Survey of a Possible Sludge Deposition Site in Eagle Creek Township, Scott County, Minnesota. Prepared for the Metropolitan Waste ' Control Commission, St. Paul. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. 1 1 1 ' Appendix A. Correspondence I 1 1 i 1 i I f p 1cE .. 0 M1 \1E: ( 'i':\ 1IisTc.)IRIt: 11. St)c:iET) 0 July 28, 1997 0 The City of Shakopee Attn: Michael Leek 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379-1376 RE: East Dean Lake Residential Planned Unit Development Shakopee, Scott County SHPO Number. 97-3177 IDear Mr. Leek: Thank you for providing this office a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the above- referenced project. It has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the Minnesota Historical Il Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in Minnesota Rules 4410.1600. 111 The response to question 26a may be somewhat premature. We believe that there is a good probabil- ity that unreported archaeological properties may be present in this project area. Therefore, we recommend that a survey of the area be completed. The survey must meet the requirements of the I Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification and Evaluation, and should include an evaluation of National Register eligibility for any properties which are identified. For your information, we have enclosed a list of consultants who have expressed an interest in undertaking such surveys. I If the project area can be documented as previously disturbed or previously surveyed, we will re- evaluate the need for survey. Previously disturbed areas are those where the naturally occurring post- glacial soils and sediments have been recently removed. Any previous survey work must meet contemporary standards. letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the Nationai Please note that this comment q I Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal license or permit, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the appropriate federal agency. IIf you have any questions on our review of this project, please contact me at 612-295-5462. ISincerely, bV-GCL:..___/l\-\ --yam 1 Dennis A. Gimmestad Government Programs and Compliance Officer IEnclosure. List of Consultants I Appendix B. List of Personnel I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I /57 4. • CITY OF SHAKOPEE ^ Memorandum CON 37: TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Execution of Contract with Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc. for Dial a Ride Services MEETING DATE: March 21, 2000 Introduction: After Southwest Metropolitan Transit Commission's reorganization of services in 1999, it became clear that a separate services contract between the City and Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc. would be necessary. Several months ago, staff and the City Attorney reviewed the draft contract. Several minor changes were requested by staff based on that review, and Laidlaw has responded with those changes. A copy of the proposed contract is attached for the Council's information. The contract would expire on May 1, 2000,but could be extended on a year-by-year basis by mutual agreement. Because the contract incorporates the current hourly rate for dial a ride services, staff expects that Laidlaw may wish to re-open the contract. Should that be the case, the contract would be placed before the transit commission first for their review and recommendation to the City Council. Alternatives: 1. Approve the Transit Services Contract between the City of Shakopee and Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc., and authorize the appropriate City officials to execute said contract, as well as extend the term of the contract for one year under the rates, terms and conditions set forth therein. 2. Approve the Transit Services Contract between the City of Shakopee and Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc., and authorize the appropriate City officials to execute said contract without authorizing extension of the contract for an additional one-year term at this time. 3. Table the matter for additional information. Laidlaw.DOC/ML 1 Action Requested: Offer and pass a motion consistent with Alternative 1, approving the Transit Services Contract between the City of Shakopee and Laidlaw Transit Services. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director Laidlaw.DOC/ML 2 TRANSIT SERVICES CONTRACT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES, INC. THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Shakopee (Hereinafter referred to as "The City") and Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc. (Hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR"). The parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions For the purposes of this contract, the following definitions shall apply: 1.1. Transit System: The dial-a-ride public bus service is a community-centered transit service that is custom-designed for the residents of Shakopee. Dial-A-Ride provides rides under the "shared ride" concept. All trips are coordinated to carry in a safe manner as many passengers as possible and as cost effectively as possible. The transit system may also include route deviation bus service if this is added in the future. The City shall have the right to change the service area at any time during the term of this Agreement. 1.2. Operating Revenue: Operating Revenue includes all revenues derived from the provision of transit services under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, passenger fares, passenger donations, and advertising revenue. 1.3. Service Hour: A Service Hour shall be defined as each hour a vehicle is available for pick up, carrying or discharging of persons commencing from the time the vehicle proceeds from the garage until the time the vehicle returns to the garage. At no time shall billing commence more than 15 minutes prior to the first scheduled stop or terminate more than 15 minutes following the last scheduled stop. 1.4. Hourly Rate Subsidy: The Hourly Rate Subsidy is the fixed hourly rate service charge per vehicle Service Hour less any Operating Revenue received by the CONTRACTOR in association with this Service. 2. Employment and Acceptance: THE CITY does hereby engage the CONTRACTOR as an independent contractor to advise THE CITY, and to operate and manage the transit system on a day to day basis, including additions to and extensions thereof, as described in this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to supply such services in an efficient and economical manner. 3. Independent Contractor: In the performance of the CONTRACTOR's obligations under this Agreement, it is understood, acknowledged, and agreed between the parties that CONTRACTOR is at all times acting and performing as an independent contractor, and THE CITY shall neither have nor exercise any control or direction over the manner and means by which CONTRACTOR performs CONTRACTOR's obligations under this Agreement, except as stated herein. CONTRACTOR understands and agrees that CONTRACTOR's employees, agents, servants and other personnel are not employees of THE CITY. CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for 1 payment of salaries, wages, payroll taxes, unemployment benefits or any other form of compensation or benefit to any of the CONTRACTOR's employees, agents, servants or other personnel performing services or work under this Agreement. 4. Scope of Services: 4.1. Under the general policy direction and oversight of THE CITY, CONTRACTOR, through its Project Manager, will plan, operate, organize and direct the activities of THE CITY's transit system, operate the service at the level of service and for the budget adopted by THE CITY, provide and oversee all CONTRACTOR employees including bus drivers and contract employees, and be responsible for THE CITY's transit fleet. CONTRACTOR shall provide safe, timely, professional and reliable transit services. The CONTRACTOR shall operate the transit system under the name "Shakopee Dial-A-Ride"; all rights to which are owned by THE CITY. The work to be performed by the CONTRACTOR shall include without limitation, providing for: operating, dispatching, and scheduling of vehicles and personnel; maintaining equipment; developing administrative procedures; compiling performance statistics and financial reports; and developing methods to maximize service effectiveness and efficiency. The CONTRACTOR shall provide for full and competent technical services to handle and correct any and all service problems that arise associated with the operation of the transit services. 4.2. The advisory, management and supervisory services to be furnished by CONTRACTOR, in coordination with the City, will include, but not be limited to, transportation operations, vehicle maintenance, schedule operations, labor relations and labor contract negotiations as may be necessary for CONTRACTOR's employees, equipment purchasing, accounting, income and expense projections, safety, employee selection and training and all other managerial functions normally required in the daily operation of a transit system. 5. Personnel: 5.1. CONTRACTOR agrees to furnish a highly qualified professional person to serve as Project Manager. To assist THE CITY and the Project Manager, CONTRACTOR will further furnish, at CONTRACTOR'S expense, executive consulting personnel and technical assistance personnel as needed by THE CITY in the operation of the transit system. 5.2. The responsibilities of the CONTRACTOR, through the Project Manager, shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 5.2.1. Daily operation and service activities of the transit system in accordance with THE CITY, FTA/DOT policies and regulations and maintain records to document compliance. 5.2.2. Management of CONTRACTOR'S transit system employees. 5.2.3. Implementation of adopted transit system plans and policies. 5.2.4. Daily dispatch, evaluation, and preparation of routes and schedules subject to THE CITY direction. 5.2.5. Assist in preparing specifications for capital equipment and supplies. 5.2.6. CONTRACTOR'S personnel and labor relations. 2 5.2.7. Other CONTRACTOR employee personnel matters including training and development. 5.2.8. Inventory control and purchasing. 5.2.9. Hire, assign, supervise, and dismiss all CONTRACTOR employees. 5.2.10. Project and monitor monthly cash flow. ' 5.2.11. Handling of CONTRACTOR'S accidents, claims and safety and security. 5.2.12. CONTRACTOR'S administrative policies and procedures and record keeping. 5.2.13. Fare strategy recommendations. 5.2.14. Project Manager shall advise THE CITY on matters of importance to the transit system and make recommendations to THE CITY. 5.2.15. Review time sheets, approve bills, and initiate purchase order requisitions. 5.2.16. Review system operations manual, procurement code, personnel manual, and work rules, and modify as appropriate. 5.2.17. Oversee fleet maintenance(including preventative maintenance); and maintain, in good efficient and serviceable condition, all vehicles owned by or placed in the possession of THE CITY and report annually to THE CITY that such assets (except obsolete equipment recommended for disposal) have been so maintained. 5.2.18. Monitor efficiency and cost effectiveness of transit services and provide routine reports and recommendations relating to service modifications, route planning and service design. 6. Vehicle Requirements 6.1. Vehicle Compliance and Operation: All vehicles, whether provided by Contractor or THE CITY, shall comply with applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, and regulations when initially provided for the service by the party providing the vehicle. Thereafter, the Contractor shall be solely responsible for maintaining and operating all vehicles in conformance with any lawful orders, rules or regulations of any federal, state or local agency having jurisdiction over the Contractor and THE CITY, and with due regard for the safety, comfort and convenience of passengers and the public. The Contractor shall not use THE CITY owned vehicles for any other purpose other than supplying service under the terms of this Contract unless prior written approval is given by THE CITY. 6.2. Pre-Trip Inspection Required: All vehicles used to provide service hereunder shall receive pre-trip inspection by the driver each day prior to being placed into service. The Contractor shall keep a written record of all such inspections. 6.3. Vehicle Appearance: Contractor is responsible for ensuring high quality appearance of all vehicles. Vehicles shall be kept in clean and sanitary and fully operational condition, 3 including but not limited to: washing exterior (daily if needed), cleaning of interiors to remove all dirt and debris; and repairing and/or replacing any worn, broken, cut, torn or vandalized components. Water and dirt shall not be retained in or on any body feature to freeze or bleed out onto the bus after leaving the washer. Body and windows shall be sealed to prevent leaking of air,dust or water under normal operating conditions. 6.4. Maintenance Requirements: Contractor must maintain all vehicles and on board equipment in accordance with manufacturer's warranty requirements and ongoing preventive maintenance schedules. 6.5. .Parts and Equipment Replacements: All parts, equipment, and tires must be replaced with Original Equipment Manufacture (hereinafter "OEM") parts or parts that meet or exceed the OEM specifications. 6.6. Vehicle Data Sheets: Contractor must provide to THE CITY a vehicle data sheet for each Contractor vehicle used in the operation of the transit service. 7. Routing and Service: CONTRACTOR, through the Project Manager, shall make to THE CITY periodic recommendations as requested by THE CITY concerning any deletions, additions, or changes in the service and routing of the Transit System. The Project Manager will prepare all necessary documentary evidence and provide testimony to be presented to THE CITY in the event that it is needed to accomplish any change in the service and routing. The changes in the service and routing shall be subject to the approval of THE CITY. THE CITY shall have final determination authority over all Routes, Fares, and Schedules. 8. Budgets and Recommendations: CONTRACTOR, through the Project Manager, agrees to assist in the preparation of projections as are or may be required by THE CITY for budget purposes and to assist THE CITY in the preparation of an annual report of operations. CONTRACTOR, through the Project Manager, will also furnish periodic reports and recommendations to THE CITY relating to service extensions, route planning and service policies. 9. Revenues: All operating revenues are, shall be, and remain the absolute properties of THE CITY. The handling of these revenues, including the banking thereof and the accounting therefor, shall be as directed by THE CITY. CONTRACTOR shall receive, collect and deposit all operating revenues of the transit system to the account of THE CITY in the manner directed by the CITY. 10. Compensation: Service provided by CONTRACTOR for Dial A Ride service shall be compensated for at the Hourly Rate Subsidy of$34.90 per Service Hour. 11. Invoicing Procedures and Records: 11.1. CONTRACTOR shall submit to THE CITY, on a monthly basis, an invoice for reimbursement for operating expenses incurred in the performance of this Agreement. 11.2. THE CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR for its operating expenses within 30 days of receipt of CONTRACTOR's invoice. Should THE CITY dispute any item on CONTRACTOR's invoice, THE CITY may withhold payment on the disputed amount but shall pay all undisputed portions. Disputes shall be resolved pursuant to Section 22 herein. 4 12. Audit and Inspection of Records: 12.1. The CONTRACTOR shall permit the authorized representatives of THE CITY, the State Auditor, the State Legislative Auditor, and at THE CITY's request, representatives of THE CITY's member cities and the State or Federal government to inspect and audit all data and records of the CONTRACTOR relating to performance under the contract until the • expiration of three years, or longer if required by law, after the final payment under this • contract. 13. Materials. Equipment and Facilities to be Provided by the CONTRACTOR: 13.1. The CONTRACTOR will provide and furnish real estate, office, garage and storage facilities, shop and garage equipment, office equipment, computer equipment and software, and other assets necessary for the operation of the transit system. 14. Non - Discrimination/Ethical Standards: The CONTRACTOR's shall comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (Public Law 88 - 352); all requirements imposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation; Executive Orders 11246 and 11375; and all state, federal, and local regulations and requirements.CONTRACTOR shall have an affirmative action plan that has been approved by the Minnesota Commissioner of Human Rights. The CONTRACTOR shall submit to THE CITY a copy of the Certificate of Compliance issued by the Commissioner signifying that the CONTRACTOR has an Affirmative Action Plan approved by the State Human Rights Department. 15. Public Records: The CONTRACTOR shall at all times abide by Minn. Stat. 13.01 et seq., the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, to the extent the same is applicable to data and documents in the possession of the CONTRACTOR. 16. Continuing Effect: This agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and assigns. 17. Commencement and Term: 17.1. This agreement shall become effective on 0001 hours, May 1, 1999 and end 2400 hours, April 30, 2000, subject to the termination provisions of the Agreement. 17.2. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, this Agreement may be extended on a year to year basis. 18. Insurance: 18.1. The CONTRACTOR agrees to secure and maintain during the term of this Agreement the coverage described below relating to the work. Such insurance shall be carried with companies satisfactory to THE CITY. A certificate evidencing such coverage shall be furnished to THE CITY within five working days of signing of this Agreement. The certificate shall contain a provision that coverage afforded under policies will not be canceled or permitted to lapse unless at least (30) days prior written notice has been given to THE CITY. The CONTRACTOR's insurance shall name THE CITY, its officers and employees and member jurisdictions as additional insured. 18.2. The minimum insurance coverage which the CONTRACTOR shall obtain and keep in force is as follows: 5 18.2.1. Worker's Compensation Insurance at statutory minimums and $100,000 in Employers Liability Insurance. 18.2.2. Public Liability and Property Damage in the amount of $5,000,000 with a combined single limit. This insurance coverage shall be a comprehensive and general liability form and shall include the following endorsements: • Premises/Operations, Contractual, Independent Contractors, Broad Form and Personal Injury 18.2.3. Automobile Liability Insurance in the amount of$5,000,000, combined single limit. 19. Law:. This Contract is subject to and shall be interpreted under the law of the State of Minnesota. Contractor shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations. 20. Termination: 20.1. For Lack of Funding: This Agreement may be terminated at any time by THE CITY in the event that THE CITY fails to obtain funding, or in the event funding is reduced, to operate the services provided under the terms of this Agreement. In this event, THE CITY shall notify CONTRACTOR in writing, specifying a date of termination. THE CITY shall be responsible for payment of services provided prior to termination. 20.2. For Cause: Either party may, upon the giving of 90 days advance written notice, terminate this Agreement if the other party fails to cure a default within 30 days of receipt of written notice being given to the other party. If more than 30 days is required to cure such default, a reasonable time in excess of 30 days may be permitted, provided both parties agree in writing as to the time period to be substituted. Default as used herein means failure to comply and fulfill any terms, obligations or conditions of this Agreement. 20.3. Contractor's Failure to Perform: Should CONTRACTOR materially abandon, delay unnecessarily in the performance or in any manner refuse or fail to comply with this Agreement, THE CITY shall provide written notice to the CONTRACTOR specifying the portion of this Agreement that the CONTRACTOR is not in compliance with. After receipt of this notice the CONTRACTOR shall respond within seven (7)calendar days with one of the following actions: (1) Denying the allegations; (2) curing such non-compliance; or (3) setting forth a plan to cure such non-compliance. In the event of a denial of the allegations, the CONTRACTOR shall appeal the notice to THE CITY within the seven (7) day period referred to above pursuant to the dispute procedure set forth in section 22 of this Contract. In the event the non-compliance is cured, there shall be no termination of this Agreement on account of such notice of non-compliance. In the event a plan to cure non-compliance is submitted, the Executive Director shall either accept or reject the plan. If the plan is rejected, the CONTRACTOR shall have three (3) calendar days to submit another plan. In the event the CONTRACTOR fails to respond as required by this section or in the event it fails to perform as agreed to in the plan to cure the non- compliance, then THE CITY may terminate this Agreement at its sole discretion by giving written notice to the CONTRACTOR. 21. Force Majeure: Either party shall be excused from performing its obligations under this Agreement during the time and to the extent that it is prevented from performing by a cause beyond its control, including, but not limited to: any incident of fire, flood, Acts of God, strikes, labor disputes, Acts of the Government or shortage of commodity. In this event, the party claiming Force Majeure shall notify the other party in writing of the Force Majeure situation, the extent the party will be prevented from performing and an estimated timetable for resumption of that party's full duties. 6 22. Disputes: In the event either party claims a dispute over the performance of the other party or over the intent of this Agreement, the party claiming dispute shall first notify the other party in writing and shall afford the other party a minimum of fourteen days to respond to the dispute in writing. If the dispute cannot be settled through negotiation, the parties shall, if the amount of the • dispute is less than $25, 000, submit any claim to arbitration pursuant to the Uniform Arbitration Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 572 and the American Arbitration Association (AAA) rules for commercial arbitration. If the dispute is greater than $25, 000, the parties may jointly agree to submit the dispute to arbitration, otherwise, suit may be filed District Court, Scott County, State of Minnesota. Punitive damages will not be awarded to either party. 23. Equal Employment Opportunity: CONTRACTOR will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, sex, religion, sexual orientation, age, national origin, disability, marital status or status with regard to public assistance. CONTRACTOR will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during their employment without regard to their race, creed,color, sex, religion, sexual orientation, age, disability, marital status, status with regard to public assistance or national origin. Such action shall include but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. CONTRACTOR agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this discrimination clause. The applicable provisions of Presidential Executive Order 11246, as amended, relating to Equal Employment Opportunity, is incorporated by reference herein. 24. Prohibited Interests: No member, officer, or employee of THE CITY, during his or her tenure or one year thereafter, may have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract or the proceeds thereof. 25. Waiver and Precedent: The failure to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this agreement or to require at any time performance by any party of any of the provisions hereof shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of such provisions or to affect either the validity of this agreement, or any part hereof, or the right of each party thereafter to enforce each and every provision in accordance with the terms of this agreement. 26. Prior Agreements: This Agreement replaces a certain other Agreement between THE CITY and CONTRACTOR. 27. Amendments: All changes to this Agreement shall be evidenced by a written agreement duly executed by authorized officials of CONTRACTOR and THE CITY. In the event a change in this agreement causes an increase or decrease in the operating expenses hereunder, the CONTRACTOR and THE CITY agree to negotiate an increase or decrease in the amount contained in Section 10 herein. Administrative Change Orders issued by THE CITY shall be considered amendments to this Agreement when agreed to by CONTRACTOR. 7 28. Notices: All notices hereunder and all communications made with respect to this Agreement shall be deemed to be made when deposited with the United States Postal Service, first class postage prepaid, or transmitted by facsimile with the original delivered by any of the other means set forth in this Section, or delivered by a recognized overnight courier or personally, and addressed as follows; To CONTRACTOR: Vice President Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc, 1501 Wilson Blvd., Suite 1001 Arlington,VA 22209 To THE CITY: Michael Leek Shakopee Dial A Ride 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement in duplicate originals on the dates shown below. THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE By: This day of ,1999 LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES, INC. By: Timothy B. Collins,Vice President This day of ,1999 8 CITY OF SHAKOPEE 4.5:6, Memorandum CONSENT TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Request for Extension of Preliminary Plat Approval for Westridge Lake Estates MEETING DATE: March 21, 2000 Discussion: Darrel E. Gonyea has requested extension of preliminary plat approval for Westridge Lake Estates. Mr. Gonyea's letter stating the reasons for this request is attached for the Council's information. The Final Development Plan for this PUD, as well as the preliminary plat, were originally approved by the Shakopee City Council in August of 1993. Two of the anticipated five phases of development have taken place, with the last(Westridge Lake Estates Second Addition)having received approval about two years ago. Since approval of the new subdivision ordinance, extension of preliminary plat approval is governed by City Code Sec. 12.34. Subd. 2. Since approval of the preliminary plat, the applicant has consistently filed timely requests for extension of the preliminary plat approval. Last year the Council granted an extension of the preliminary plat approval to April 1, 2000. Alternatives: 1. Approve extension of the preliminary plat approval of Westridge Lake Estates 1'Addition to April 1, 2001. 2. Approve extension of the preliminary plat approval of Westridge Lake Estates 1d Addition to another date. 3. Do not approve the requested extension. Action Requested: Offer and approve a motion granting extension of the preliminary plat approval for Westridge Lake Estates to April 1, 2001. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director i:\commdev\cc\2000\cc0321\wstlkext.doc (-7 , ; : - January 21, 2000 ' l' Michael Leek City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Leek, As you are aware, at the March 2,1999 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. Two years ago I developed Westridge Lake Estates Second Addition. There was extensive tree damage on the peninsula. Under the present ordinance, it is my understanding that I will have to continue to request extensions for these future additions, as they are all part of the Westridge Lake Estates First Addition. Sincerely, WESTRIDGE BAY COMPANY • .moiI By: .Darrel E. Gonyea Its: President 16—deity CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeil, City Administrator FROM: Jared Andrews, Planner I SUBJECT: Initiating the Vacation of Portion of Scott Street and unnamed alley for Stemmer Farm and Garden Supply, Inc. DATE: March 21, 2000 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Legal Description of land to be vacated Exhibit B March 13,2000 Letter from Bruce Loney,Public Works Dir. Exhibit C Location/Zoning Map Exhibit D Survey Introduction The attached Resolution No. 5335 sets a public hearing date to consider the vacation of a portion of the unnamed alley and Scott Street adjacent to Block 19, Original Shakopee Plat. The request stems from an encroachment issue where the Stemmer Farm and Garden Supply Building encroaches 7.92 feet into the Scott Street right-of-way and over the entire width of the alley for length of approximately 125 feet according to the survey submitted. Discussion The attached resolution sets a public hearing for April 18th, 2000 to consider the vacation of these public rights-of-way. 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 consideration. Staff has already received letter from Bruce Loney, Public Works Director concerning this request and has attached it for Council consideration(see Exhibit B). Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 5335, A Resolution Setting the Public Hearing Date to Consider the Vacation of drainage and utility easements on parcels as described in Exhibit A, and move its adoption. Jared Andrews Planner I i:kommdev\cc\2000\0229\vacevrgm.doc 1 EXHIBIT B CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum ) TO: v 07,44)1 O� FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director jUo0 %% U/ SUBJECT: Vacation of Right-of-Way for Scott Street And Unnamed Alley Between Scott Street and Apgar Street DATE: March 13, 2000 This memo is in regard to a vacation request from Stemmer Farm and Garden for right- of-way vacation on Scott Street and an unnamed alley between Scott Street and Apgar Street. In review of this request, it was noted that the existing building in which the vacation request is being requested for is currently extended into Scott Street right-of- way and is built over the existing alley. It appears to have been so for many years. In review of this vacation request, the Engineering Department's only comment is that vacation of existing right-of-way, due to existing buildings being located in the public right-of-way, is not a reason for vacation of those right-of-ways. There are examples of this in the City of Shakopee, namely the Laurent Building on Fuller Street and 1st Avenue and the Bob Sweeney residence on 5th Avenue and Holmes Street. To my knowledge, I do not believe the City has vacated any right-of-way to accommodate those buildings which were built in the right-of-way. It is my opinion that the vacation request should be denied to maintain the City's right-of-way in this area, to maintain continuity of the Scott Street right-of-way and also to have the potential alley right-of-way inplace if a redevelopment should occur in this area. With the location of 1St Avenue being a County road and the railroad tracks located mainly on 2"d Avenue, an alley may be necessary for future development in this area and would not be known until the area does redevelop. This concludes my comments for the staff review on the requested vacation of right-of- way. �1�ei j)/ Loney Public Works Dirrector BL/pmp VACATION Li EXHIBIT C Alt 011 tt. MID Olin En] ‘66D VD EMT COT S VT 00. p:m 6001011 Ott tot otolpsgt cEn um vilD Mi101116... ,,I,"! OW II0 IOW OOP%.0 tlea tli 14°0 1102 1it* 0 giM 101110110 saM,, OS OA US 0* 1111 TO 11100110110 G-\-\ 00 wivi 11111 SO WrititS110 SO TOCED101.00 10 OS SO 11110111100 VEM COVII. 110011 WI SO IS Illt la RIC VSED!!!0 •O'VE1 Pn 0] MO OD Via VA 00 01 OS I gD VDID SO OD Oa N i"i LL" I la V1EM tag W IT T \-\ V2113 Oa E S W -'� E �maemvx�maam 5 Proposed Vacation of Right-of-Way Parcel Boundaries 0 Zoning Boundaries 5 03/15/00 RESOLUTION NO.5335 A RESOLUTION SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF UNNAMED ALLEY AND SCOTT STREET ADJACENT TO BLOCK 19,ORIGINAL SHAKOPEE PLAT WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has received a vacation request from Stemmer Farm and Garden Supply, Inc. indicating that the rights-of-way as described in Exhibit A serve 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 21st day of March, 2000, at 7:00 P.M. or thereafter, on the matter of vacating the drainage and utility easements on the parcels as described in Exhibit A,. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota,held the day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk PREPARED BY: City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 2 • EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LAND TO BE VACATED That part of the 16.00 foot alley as shown in Blockom.Cthlty of e southwesterly corner of Lot opee, Scott County, Minnesota, lying easterly of a line drawn 8, Block 19, of said plat to the northwesterly corner of Lot 3, Block 19, of said plat. That part of Scott Street adjacent to Block 19, City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the northeasterly corner of-said Block 19; thence South 12 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds East assumed bearing along the easterly line of said Block 19, a distance of 88.95 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence North 77 degrees 15 minutes 17 seconds East a distance of 9.00 feet; thence South 12 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds East a distance of 112.72 feet; thence South 77 degrees 00 minutes 11 seconds West a distance of 9.00 feet to the easterly line of said Block 19; thence North 12 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds West along said easterly line a distance of 112.76 feet to the point of beginning. 3 ! - xor-- c 0 o , 13_ � AI Fo o *. z x zz pi A a N SD o (') iTt u <Q cl a {/i - CEJ;co -u r7 - > vC 133 mo 0 tri] X)f— m e c �. b p O CO 0 0 p n �. - NN 0 _a a o_ 7 —\ \ rn t o r- TI rn -n -o X1 y D 15 Z hel X • .-.fir 1 J JZ� Z 1 i , cri (31 C71 ` , vVW 0 --.1oNCO o • b J \ \r C,K S3 crn — ! os� c • o 5tl3 a m n a a m ° �� ° 3r�1 In a ,c -< SD - — G a _ o om � c, n tJ 7 N , CD a a m � tnr5.e r. a m — a 7 �� Ort 7 g a F Q 7 0 3 N 0 0 S �� a m• p 3"c5 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 rn N W c —C 0 0 77 -t o a a a � m co Q .LIHIHXE CO BOUNDARY SURVEY PREPARED FOR: VALLEY SURVEYING ' . }„, P.A. BILL STEMMER 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL SE. SUITE 230 2080 SHORELINE BOULEVARD PRIOR LAKE MN. 55372 SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 PH. (612) 447-2570 FAX (612) 447-2571 • 1 ! —' � � , }} • 1 1 , , c.:., • P T • a } `x y .. ES STING • • \ BUILDING • 7.9 _-\1941 cailb `� 1 �2.oi G.I '> ,r,. `� 1 EXISTING $1, , ` BUILDING �•�, EXISTING G N.61 BUILDING 1 1 - ^�j CPP' I ' -- ; i nr y�� 17883„ • • t„ 1 ��'1319 E r1cjS • z.l ''1319 ,' _ , � a�238.17_ �t, <n,, -- '�; f • .7)8979-- •\ l.-- — ,�a8653'5 W II �� }� 'L=1 52.53 A b2�27�02„ R=358-8 _NOTE: ENCRdACNMENT 25' \2'27302 ND _ c.MAIN 7R GAK A.--- - - .-- -' `-- 4 __� i �,_ v. ', 1 --�- t , -'' EXISTINGBUILDING \ 1 i 2Ri1PEP,TY DES'CPIPTliN Ac E'ROdlDL:`. { All that port of lots 6,7 and Sof Blocl. P. Civ hrjk:oL>ee c•tt arum t t' i ...----- Minnesota, lying southerly of the following described line. Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Block 19, thence southerly along the • East dine +:therof a distance of 88.95 feet to the beginning ;of the line to be described; thence westerly at an angle of 89'44'54” as measured from the North to the West a distance of 180.00 feet to the end of said described line. Also. All that port of Lots 1 through 5, inclusive, of said Block 19 lying northerly of a line 5 feet northerly of as measured perpendicular to, the centerline of the Soo'Line Railroad- Company 's main track. • GRAPHIC SCALE 1 Jn 0 15 30 s —�I I hereby certify-that this boundary IN FEET survey was prepared by me or under inch = 30 e. my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota • Denotes Iron Monument Found �uZ17 O Denotes Iron Monument set and Minnesota License number 10183 marked by License No. 10183 Dated this 22nd day of December. 1998 a,-1 I-1 W H i.,r-a-----------. . 'EXHIBIT C At 0 ts- 10°1 01 000 I* 0 100 01 - SID II ,, ,, , \ 0401 11 , ravel .4 fir i Will „_ 1°I° 1611 ,, 606 sea ilie -------si ' Iii • II a 11111 Ga tiOs BE \Li,,i.i3 ii-ii-iii- aus moo WI; awrit in-14, 00 blig 1111_.....mi 0 ISAllt IlØØi Voli 10011 ...wom'n.,••=2 1,---ji 0111 110" V til ... ...... ...110 WI teS tr001 Os° - - 00,----- ia 11111 \ egie __,_, lest \ 77;71 WPM . , \ , \ , ‘ -\ \ i1 \ \ \ L_:___=!-- , _.,.. _77, \ \ 1 \ ; ,. _ .-\ , ( __--\ . , - ‘J,-, -7\ ---- 77 --:, 0\ \-;- ------ \ \ \ \ \ 17\\._ -___;_------,--, \_:._. -----= i \ : ',,,,y, : , , -.-- 0,._:- , , ,• ,,__:------• ,__, , _ _.-, , \ ,, ,\, 2 ,, .. , \ • , '• _.-1-2-- \ ', \ \ i ,_.._.,___:----,-- , , \ \ \ .. • • ' ' ' ____.- r7--r"7-7,-, ', \ \ ',1,_\,it-; \ _",- - 1, ., ; \ ' \ ' ' ' ' ' r---- \ \22,.. .-1 .--,-=-----,',‘ ,, \ \ \ \ • '.._:---'--- ,______--7-,, \' ______ __---- _____7„-,,\ \ , \,_ •._ __-.= , , , ., \ \ \ \ , , , ,_,--.7-- , \ ., , ,, • , ,r_...r_r_7-7-, \,_j__ 7-'7-7777 , ', , , ' _.. .,_____2,---- -• ; , , ,, ; , _____--' , r-'77-'--, I \ \\ ,,----=------- --,-1 , ____ ----- . 7---7-, -.-,----7" , , . ,, , \___I- N WI*All ,i, - E SHAKOPEE w r a,4 PUDE SINCE toP S S;C2-fr na.A.,‘.40.d(fr) 4- 60_,L62_,t,C Proposed Vacation of Right-of-Way 1 1 Parcel Boundaries 1 1 Zoning Boundaries 5 03/15/00 /5'. 6. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Investigation of Property Acquisition and/or Landscaping for CSAH 17 Project No. 1999-7 DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: At the February 29, 2000 City Council meeting, City Council directed staff to investigate the possibility of property acquisition and/or landscaping for CSAH 17 residential properties south of 17th Avenue. This agenda report will outline staff's investigation. BACKGROUND: City Council previously approved Project No. 1999-7 which is CSAH 17 improvements, from T.H. 169 to St. Francis Avenue in September of 1999 and ordered plans and specifications. Those plans and specifications were presented to City Council on February 29, 2000, were approved and an advertisement for bids was ordered. Also at this meeting, City Council directed staff to investigate the possibility of property acquisition and/or landscaping along C.R. 17 south of 17th Avenue for five residential properties located west of C.R. 17. In order to complete this directive, staff needed to have two consultants prepare conceptual plans and/or cost estimates in order to analyze the property acquisition for improvements that can mitigate the impact of the four laning of C.R. 17. City staff has utilized WSB & Associates, Inc. for the design of C.R. 17 improvements. Their recommendation was to use Evergreen Land Services, Inc. for property acquisition proposed costs and Brauer & Associates for developing concept plans for landscaping/fencing alternatives to lessen the impact to these properties. Attached to this memo are the reports from the consultants for land acquisition and concept landscape plans, with preliminary costs in regard to the land acquisition. The costs for property acquisition for the five residential properties is $535,000.00 and the relocation assistance costs for those five parcels is $243,000.00. These costs are based on whether the City condemns the property and obtains those parcels and must pay relocation assistance costs. The City would not have to pay relocations assistance costs if the property owners waived their rights voluntarily. The total costs of property acquisition and relocation costs is $778,000.00. If the City were to sell those parcels to a developer for high density residential development, the maximum the City could obtain is approximately $50,000.00 per acre or $150,000.00 for three acres. Thus, the net loss to the City for property acquisition is approximately $628,000.00. This cost has not been identified in the feasibility report nor the Capital Improvement Program and the City would have to fund this from other sources. For concept landscaping plans and preliminary cost estimates, the first concept plan is to incorporate a berm with landscaping. The approximate total cost for this alternative is $37,200.00. Concept 2 is the incorporation of fencing between the properties and C.R. 17 with landscaping. This approximate cost is $48,900.00. The third concept plan is for a vegetative screen in order to have an ornamental landscaping screen along C.R. 17. The total cost is approximately $43,200.00. These concept plans are the maximum amount of landscaping and it is possible to achieve a satisfactory buffer with less up-front costs according to the consultant. In review of the property acquisition costs and landscaping costs, staff believes it is not cost effective to acquire these parcels and resell to a developer for high residential development. The property owners would still be able to use their property as they currently do, since the City is not taking any additional right-of-way from the property owners to reconstruct C.R. 17. Staff believes that the property owners would still be able to use their property for their intended use. If their access to C.R. 17 becomes a traffic safety issue, Scott County should be involved in the acquisition of the properties in order to buy the access and improve the roadway safety. If Council wishes to mitigate the highway impacts to these properties it is possible to add screening, landscaping and berming to lessen the impact of the two lane roadway going to four lane. Staff has contacted Scott County and they are not interested in participating in any costs associated with property acquisition or landscaping. Thus, any costs determined by the City for the five property owners along C.R. 17 would be a City cost. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Direct staff to begin the property acquisition of the five residential properties along the west side of C.R. 17 and south of 17th Avenue. 2. Do not direct staff to proceed with property acquisition for the five residential properties along the west side of C.R. 17 and south of 17th Avenue. 3. Direct staff to proceed with a landscaping alternative, as determined by Council. This landscaping plan would need cooperation of all five residents in order to be implemented. 4. Do not provide any landscaping along C.R. 17. 5. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has provided alternatives for property acquisition and landscape alternatives. This is a policy decision that Council needs to make as to how to treat property owners along major roadway improvements in the City of Shakopee. If the Council desires to provide landscaping and/or fencing to mitigate the roadway impacts, Council should provide direction as to the amount of landscaping to provide. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Direct staff to begin or not to begin property acquisition for the five residential properties along C.R. 17. 2. Direct staff to begin or not to begin landscape plan alternatives, as directed by Council. / 111.4 rice Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp C.R. 17 Mar, 16. 2000 8: 50AM BRAUER & ASSOC. No, 5654 P, 2/3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE - CSAH 17 /Marschall Road Project Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate Date: March 16, 2000 Overview: This statement considers the potential overall costs for landscape improvements along the residential lots adjacent to the CSAH 17 road improvement project.The cost analysis has been broken down into key components for each concept. Each of the concepts indicated has been designed to maximize a visual screen and buffer the noise,however,it is also possible to achieve a satisfactory buffer with less up-front costs by incorporating different types and sizes materials. Note that this estimate was completed to provide preliminary cost information associated with this project and assumes that grading and removals would be done as part of the CSAH 17/Marschall Road Reconstruction Project, separately. s....._....... <:..:. s.H. .i ,�.y.... ' ....... , *odii,{ x- 43=2.::,;..%; :_:eA.'.r . ' ]Qt. : ., VnE# 6f0t_A a,tuTot :T Enhanced landscaping along berms(budget-includes plant materials,landscape 25,000.00 fabric,edging and mulch material) Sod 6,000.00 Concept One-Subtotal 31,000.00 Design Fees,Surveying-10% 3,100.00 Contingency-109E 3.100.00 Concept One Total 37,200.00 ................... ......u._ :... .:i,>n. .... . .. ...:,.>.,. ...s ss3 t. :i:? .:�":tT�i•,• ::•k;'.. ................ .. 's„x..a. Oq i �t T 1t orp ra kin of i to ,:r., :s. ..; ..>... ... ,c,;>.....-__ f..< ,+�• --'�f�f:.31 '��li3iih r:Y...:•`.,�Lih3A33w>n,Y>< RIM%A Fencing 33,500.00 Enhanced landscaping(budget-includes plant materials,landscape fabric,edging 4,250.00 and mulch material) Sod 3,000.00 Concept Two-SubTotal 40.750.00 Design Fees,Surveying-10% 4,075.00 Contingency-10% 4,075.00 Concept Two Total 48,900.00 Shakopee CSAH 17 Landscape Concepts Brauer&Associates, Ltd.#00-09 Schematic Design Cost Estimate Page 1 of 2 shakopee-est.wpd Mar, 16. 2000 8: 50AM BRAUER & ASSOC, No, 5654 P. 3/3 i... .................ysk�sr.a,%,:a%,,;;5:>...,.... . .� »z>i?ii>••�>,tx kx"'...:,.....� .3�*��" � .... 4046V. ....::�� �.;.._.. ..,..., n?�3`°::»»:ti 1`iii33�}�::<,..;. � ,;,:,,:,:, 3fu••';:..�` onccept Th'�T<`• �.' ` `11P1 t1 s}}s,sf}Ss" �... R , �;3y�e�i �� ......,. � 335y}� • �.�..'�. ......_ > e � ,.s.....# �•''C� 9 �•,iJ�i4p��};}??::s.,... .. ... r.;a�ORtii+,tl'.3!�3 �s Ornamental landscaping for screening(budget-includes plant materials,landscape 33,000.00 fabric,edging and mulch material) Sod 3,000.00 Concept Three-SubTotal 36,000.00 Design Fees,Surveying-10% 3,600.00 Contingency-10% 3,600.00 Concept Three Total 43,200.00 Shakopee CSAR 17 Landscape Concepts Brauer 8 Associates,Ltd.#00-09 Schematic Design Cost Estimate Page 2 of 2 shakopee-est,wpd • Z['gilt r0 0 ZOY4910\F 9ZYb9lq Z6Y4'\ ICI /I /, LZ'L4910 /bL'94' 9Z'L4910L�— I.S'L691q F (914! I l LIE\ a p ++ "w 9Z'9s u 04 41 L4'91,910 BL'9491) .69'94910 /SL'9b910—►`BZ'94 a U cu j >1101301S-313210N00 - ft 0 Oq b j g I ,Asok :2 0 � C a,�j m W 10 I r It v u+ x 0 P4 It* m w g E u 7-4 co . --4.6,... I Q �� ., U g w m8 I µ � r v;', - I`-‘'1_9 ' 'I .-. -'7-7:-. flli, .T 1.fASr� 1 a ll'. . 5'Y ' •tea fff 200 .eI ., :I I I 0111 41 kw f .. 01110 I • En ' ' pax o q. or ibi, 0 1 061 wa Z ',, I 1 1,i14 ro w s ° W 0 4a i IX i4 Z ° I z o i a Imo-' ; ,�`, E.X �8a '' it-,7 rw <'` 1 4 '• .11 x az .%. ;I^. J o 4 .-'t e I P.P. m �. II U W ^ U) • U w _U ° O0 � °z ZL MID _.._-...._.. 3y ZO'L4810\F 917_4910 F LI,'Lb' w td r] 1 /, 1ZY4810 /4L'94' 'V a a 9Z'L4910LF- IS'L9810'�- L9'0: I I L{ a t N. a SZ'9f u 04 o C9'9P810\ 8L 9481D\613.91•810 SL'99910->/8Z'9t a U 'I 1 m A NltlM301S-313NON00 1\ l'!"..-.- a O -e C "P z a g a g m m Z N L13 o I 9. � u a i x flA0 I 1:: UU ril rd In "' . _ _ I m 41$ ! I h t?: , , [] 6 jJ I , 1 �Y ,� epyy b }, I AYIA Ra.,i, 1 .11 L' 1 LL [ „ a ry VI o � 4', r v 1.11 4 ; I I fli a 100, Thy gel `fir;= I m Ifit t gyp'i j lCn U y Ilk ul q ♦g\ a, Y z fnf % " �A• Qziii 'oil w a,o .,,- .:$'t � tea . r.)PQ W •Pc' V W '3 �.� , z4�jLI zoo h f g:'F y'i .sS<ii1 W1 . w I °z Oa � wI c ` I I T.L. , a __ 0 �` ♦ ati N w e o i� 1 a. m w II U W - `n z ti V I_ 4 O u zz 4111. ZOL 910\F 9Z'L491d ..- Z4'L1,0at 9Z•L4910/--- I.SY4912'Y1 L911,3 El I /lZ'(b919jI bL gp Q 0 ani e L4'94910\ 9L'94910_29'94919 /SL'94910-s 9Z'9S NltlM015-3130N00 I O Oa _ .•y�a CL 2U � e �b t.... fa u w x - ° U 7 h 1 ro z 2 _ , 1 vcd . , ,,,vA a . `. . :I Aix --' < .tf t. - `die e opt. r m It. 1,,'•. X16' Vi ri • f',4241 14 7 7;N,.:. ii',D.,0 ,1„..,-, . -\‘'....--. ','- !,';'---: •- ' w br b 1, V O I .. >! x.� 1 �'IU r' 1 w a I, E 4g 1 1 ,' I1 _I • _. . i s ,♦ *r'' f' I .k4s i j, Et! J1 LCCA 82 -tD w z 41i�. k4^ , i p g.. ��'f;:' Ww ir, I 1 �11 z01 ( z o • II w • 4" kke •' TI ; r..) A 414, -;7* ° � II j .' & cr, m , <IN.koi,,, l ap • n • I Lit Ooh rF pz March 16, 2000 Mr. Chuck Rickart WSB 350 Westwood Lake Office 8441 Wayzata Blvd. Minneapolis, MN 55426 RE: County Road 17 Dear Chuck: Attached please find the information on the five properties the City of Shakopee is considering relocating. I have summarized the findings below: Property Address Acquisition Cost Relocation Cost Total 1772 Marschall Road $109,000.00 $47,200.00 $156,200.00 1766 Marschall Road $105,000.00 $53,200.00 $158,200.00 1752 Marschall Road $122,000.00 $35,200.00 $157,200.00 1732 Marschall Road $102,000.00 $51,200.00 $153,200.00 1712 Marschall Road $97,000.00 $56,200.00 $153,200.00 Grand Total $535,000.00 $243,000.00 $778,000.00 The high differential between the acquisition and relocation cost is due to using the assessed value instead of an appraisal. If independent appraisals were secured for each property I believe the acquisition costs would increase. The relocation costs will remain as they are so the grand total of$778,000.00 is a good estimate. Should you wish to proceed with purchasing of these properties we would be happy to assist. Thank you for the opportunity to present this estimate. Sincerely, Matthew S. Storm Vice President ESTIMATE OF ACQUISITION AND REL OCA TION BENEFITS Property Address: 1712 Marschall Rd. Landowner: Nemanic, Lance and Janet P. I. D. #: 279180040 Purchase Price of subject home- $ 97,000.00 Replacement housing differential payment- (Comparable-5811 Cedarwood St, Prior Lake, $147,000.00) $50,000.00 Closing expenses- (Using the selling price of$130,000.00 with NO current mortgage) $ 1,200.00 Moving expenses- $ 5,000.00 TOTAL $153,200.00 S/Shakopee-Co.Rd. 17/1712 Marschall Rd. This estimate is provided by Evergreen Land Services Co.and is based on preliminary information and may be affected by many factors including but not limited to:surveys,appraisals,source of project funding,timing of project,Uniform Relocation Act, mortgage interests,business interests,tenants,environmental concerns,condemnation proceedings and other factors.This estimate does not include administrative costs that may be associated with the acquisition and relocation services provided. ESTIMATE OF ACQUISITION AND REL OCA TION BENEFITS Property Address: 1732 Marschall Rd. Landowner: Hall, Donald and Gale P. I. D. #: 279180050 Purchase Price of subject home- $ 102,000.00 Replacement housing differential payment- (Comparable-5811 Cedarwood St, Prior Lake, $147,000.00) $ 45,000.00 Closing expenses- (Using the selling price of$130,000.00 with NO current mortgage) $ 1,200.00 Moving expenses- $ 5,000.00 TOTAL $153,200.00 S/Shakopee-Co.Rd. 17/1732 Marschall Rd. This estimate is provided by Evergreen Land Services Co.and is based on preliminary information and may be affected by many factors including but not limited to:surveys,appraisals,source of project funding,timing of project,Uniform Relocation Act, mortgage interests,business interests,tenants,environmental concerns,condemnation proceedings and other factors.This estimate does not include administrative costs that may be associated with the acquisition and relocation services provided. • ESTIMATE OF ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION BENEFITS Property Address: 1752 Marschall Rd. Landowner: Kervina, Anthony and Shuantane P. I. D. #: 279180030 Purchase Price of subject home- $ 122,000.00 Replacement housing differential payment- (Comparable-5811 Cedarwood St, Prior Lake, $147,000.00. $ 25,000.00 Adding an additional allowance for 3 stall detached garage. $ 4,000.00 Closing expenses-(Using the selling price of$130,000.00 with NO Current mortgage) $ 1,200.00 Moving expenses- $ 5,000.00 TOTAL $157,200.00 S/Shakopee-Co.Rd. 17/1752 Marschall Rd. This estimate is provided by Evergreen Land Services Co.and is based on preliminary information and may be affected by many factors including but not limited to:surveys,appraisals,source of project funding,timing of project,Uniform Relocation Act, mortgage interests,business interests,tenant,environmental concerns,condemnation proceedings and other factors.This estimate does not include administrative costs that may be associated with the acquisition and relocation services provided. ESTIMATE OF ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION BENEFITS Property Address: 1766 Marschall Rd. Landowner: Marshall, Robert and Loyola P. I. D. #: 279180120 Purchase Price of subject home- $ 105,000.00 Replacement housing differential payment- (Comparable-5811 Cedarwood St, Prior Lake, $147,000.00 $ 42,000.00 An additional allowance is given for the larger lot. $ 5,000.00 Closing expenses-(Using the selling price of$130,000.00 with NO Current mortgage) $ 1,200.00 Moving expenses- $ 5,000.00 TOTAL $158,200.00 S/Shakopee-Co.Rd. 17/1766 Marschall Rd. This estimate is provided by Evergreen Land Services Co.and is based on preliminary information and may be affected by many factors including but not limited to:surveys,appraisals,source of project funding,timing of project,Uniform Relocation Act, mortgage interests,business interests,tenants,environmental concerns,condemnation proceedings and other factors.This estimate does not include administrative costs that may be associated with the acquisition and relocation services provided. ESTIMATE OF ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION BENEFITS Property Address: 1772 Marschall Rd. Landowner: Cook, Jeffrey and Karen P. I. D. #: 279180020 Purchase Price of subject home- $ 109,000.00 Replacement housing differential payment- (Comparable-1017 Miller, Shakopee, $150,000.00 $ 41,000.00 Closing expenses- (Using the selling price of$130,000.00 with NO Current mortgage) $ 1,200.00 Moving expenses- $ 5,000.00 TOTAL $156,200.00 S/Shakopee-Co.Rd. 17/1772 Marschall Rd. This estimate is provided by Evergreen Land Services Co.and is based on preliminary information and may be affected by many factors including but not limited to:surveys,appraisals,source of project funding,timing of project,Uniform Relocation Act, mortgage interests,business interests,tenants,environmental concerns,condemnation proceedings and other factors.This estimate does not include administrative costs that may be associated with the acquisition and relocation services provided. Is: 6. 20 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Gorman Street, from 4th Avenue to County Road 17, Project No. 2000-1 DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 5331, which approves the plans and specifications and authorizes staff to advertise for bids for Project No. 2000-1 for the improvement of Gorman Street, from 4th Avenue to County Road (C.R.) 17. BACKGROUND: On January 18, 2000,Resolution No. 5303 was adopted and ordered the preparation of plans and specifications for Gorman Street improvements, from 4th Avenue to C.R. 17. The plans have been prepared by City Engineering staff to reconstruct Gorman Street to an urban roadway with the installation of watermain and reconstruction of sanitary sewer and storm sewer utilities. Also, with the roadway is the installation of sidewalk, trail, boulevard trees and street lighting. The design has been completed and is ready for approval and the advertising for bids. Staff has worked with Shakopee Public Utilities commission's staff to determine the watermain location and Scott County's staff for Gorman Street improvements near C.R. 17 and the relocation of handholes, loop detectors and wiring for the traffic control signal. With this design, additional easements are necessary to accommodate the bituminous trail and utilities such as sanitary sewer, water, gas, electric, telephone where no easements were existing. Staff is working with the property owners to obtain these easements. The property owners have all signed a waiver of assessment and are supportive of this project. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 5331. 2. Deny Resolution No. 5331. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to approve plans and specifications in order to proceed with this project so as to construct the improvements this year. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 5331, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications for Gorman Street, from 4th Avenue to County Road 17, Project No. 2000-1 and move its adoption. nice Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp MEM5331 RESOLUTION NO. 5331 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For Gorman Street, From 4th Avenue To County Road 17 Project No. 2000-1 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 5303 adopted by City Council on January 18, 2000, Bruce Loney, Public Works Director has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street reconstruction, sidewalk, bituminous trail, street lighting and any appurtenant work as described in the feasibility report and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file and of record in the Office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The Advertisement for Bids shall be published as required by law. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, held this day of , 2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk 1S�3-a. C S CITIZENS STATE BANK OF SHAKOPEE 1100 EAST 4TH AVENUE P.O.BOX 339 SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379-0339 PHONE(612)445-8200 FAX(612)445-3226 March 21, 2000 To Mayor Jon Brekke and City Council Members Shakopee, Minnesota This letter is a request for you to consider, in your final discussions on the Gorman Street improvements, that the 8 foot wide trail be placed directly next to the curb in the area along our drive-up. By eliminating the 6 foot grass boulevard, we would gain enough space to retain our bushes, reduce the possible damage to existing trees, and eliminate or reduce the need for a retaining wall. It has taken us at least 10 years to obtain seven mature flowering trees and a large screen of bushes. These trees and bushes provide a drive-up wind and snow screen from westerly weather. In the spring our trees blossom to provide a spectacular view for all to enjoy. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, CITIZENS STATE BANK OF SHAKOPEE /'314,44i /h.Aga, Brian M. Norris President The Community's Choice AS: 6, 3 , CITY OF SHAKOPEE p �� + Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Engineering Consultant Contract Extensions DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: This agenda item is to consider extending the engineering consultants contract for a period of one year. BACKGROUND: On March 12, 1996, the City Council moved to pre-qualify the consulting firms of WSB & Associates, Inc., MSA Consulting Engineers, Inc., and Bolten & Menk, Inc. as needed for a three year term. MSA Consulting Engineers, Inc. has merged with another firm and is now Howard R. Green, Inc. The contracts were entered into between the City and the consultants and the contract period was established to end on January 1, 1999. These contracts were extended to January 1, 2000 on February 2, 1999 by Council motion. Staff has conducted yearly evaluations of the consultant's performance for each year. At this time staff would recommend that the contracts be extended for a one year period versus going through an extensive engineering consultant selection process. If Council agrees with staff, the recommendation would be to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the extension agreements as drafted by the City Attorney. If Council does not agree with staff, Council should direct staff to begin an engineering consultant selection process to determine a consultant to be retained for engineering services and for what contract term length. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the consultants contract extension agreement as prepared by the City Attorney. 2. Direct staff to solicit statements of qualification from engineering firms for the purpose of retaining general municipal engineering consultants. 3. Tale for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the consultants contract extension agreement as prepared by the City Attorney. The performance of the consultant over a three year period has been satisfactory and acceptable, and the time and cost to solicit statement of qualifications from other engineering firms is not worth the effort in staffs opinion. At this time, staff has been utilizing WSB & Associates, Inc. and Bolton & Menk, Inc. Howard R. Green Company has changed significantly and staff has not utilized this company for over two years. Recommendation is to extend WSB & Associates, Inc. and Bolton & Menk, Inc. at this time. ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the consultants contract extension agreements for WSB & Associates, Inc. and Bolton & Menk, Inc., as prepared by the City Attorney. Aruce Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp AGREEMENT • CONSULTANT CONTRACT EXTENSION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT,made and entered into this day of 2000,by and between the CITY OF SHAKOPEE, a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "City"with offices at 129 South Holmes Street, Shakopee, Minnesota, and WSB & ASSOCIATES, INC. with offices at 350 Westwood Lake Office, 8441 Wayzata Boulevard, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426, hereinafter referred to s the "Consultant". RECITALS: A. The City and Consultant have entered into an agreement dated March 19, 1996 ("Consultant Contract") by which Consultant provides certain professional services to the City. B. The City and Consultant desire to extend the Consultant contract. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this Agreement, the City and Consultant agree as follows: 1. Section III. Paragraph C of the Consultant Contract is amended to read as follows: "This Agreement is effective until January 1, 2001 unless otherwise terminated as provided for in the Agreement." 2. Except as otherwise provided in this Extension Agreement, all the terms in the Consultant Contract are unchanged. WSB & ASSOCIATES, INC. CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA BY: Jon Brekke, Mayor Its: Mark McNeill, City Administrator Judith S. Cox, City Clerk CONSULTANT CONTRACT EXTENSION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT,made and entered into this day of 2000, by and between the CITY OF SHAKOPEE, a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "City"with offices at 129 South Holmes Street, Shakopee, Minnesota, and/BOLTON &MENK, INC. with offices at 1515 East Highway 13, Burnsville, MN 55337, hereinafter referred to s the "Consultant". RECITALS: A. The City and Consultant have entered into an agreement dated March 19, 1996 ("Consultant Contract")by which Consultant provides certain professional services to the City. B. The City and Consultant desire to extend the Consultant contract. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this Agreement, the City and Consultant agree as follows: 1. Section III. Paragraph C of the Consultant Contract is amended to read as follows: "This Agreement is effective until January 1, 2001 unless otherwise terminated as provided for in the Agreement." 2. Except as otherwise provided in this Extension Agreement, all the terms in the Consultant Contract are unchanged. BOLTON &MENK, INC. CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA BY: Jon Brekke, Mayor Its: Mark McNeill, City Administrator Judith S. Cox, City Clerk Is y, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum h TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Request of Centex Homes Regarding Hourly Restrictions on Construction Activities For Southbridge Addition DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: By letter dated March 7, 2000, Centex Homes, developer in Southbridge Addition has requested that City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, D,be suspended for Saturday work hours. DISCUSSION: The above named section of the City Code restricts the hours of operation from 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. on weekdays, and from 9:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. on weekends and holidays. Centex Homes is requesting a suspension on the hours as follows: Saturday 7:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. The earlier starting time is to expedite work in order to work longer hours to allow contractors to work earlier on Saturday and to meet the schedule for this project. Staff would recommend that if the suspension of hours is granted, that the approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval is contingent upon minimizing noise exposure near residential areas. 2. If excessive residential complaints are received by the City, the variance can be revoked at the discretion of the City Council. 3. Blasting activities must be done from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. If Council approves the suspension, a public notice is needed to meet the City Code requirement and a notice such as a news release would be placed in the Shakopee Valley News. A noise variance was granted previously in the area to Centex Homes in September, 1998. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, D, as requested by Centex Homes, as per their letter dated March 7, 2000 and direct staff to publish notice of the suspension terms with the conditions as recommended by staff 2. Approve the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, D, for some other period of time as determined appropriate by the City Council, and direct staff to publish notice of the suspension terms. 3. Do not approve the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations,D. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer a motion approving the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, D, as requested by Centex Homes, as per their letter dated March 7, 2000 and direct staff to publish notice of the suspension terms with the conditions as recommended by staff 41,(//, :nice Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp RESTRICT CENTEX HOMES Minnesota Division 12400 Whitewater Drive Suite 120 Minnetonka,MN 55343 Phone:612-936-7833 Fax:612-936-7839 March 7,2000 Joel Rutherford City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,MN 55379 Dear Joel, We have recently begun grading the last two phases at Southbridge and would request to have the contractors working hours extended. A similar request was made for the first two phases and the City accommodated us by approving the request. Both the grading and utility contractor would like the option to work Saturdays 7:00 A.M.to 5:00 PM. Currently,the City requires a starting time of 9:00 A.M. If this request requires council action please place on the earliest meeting. If there is additional information you need please let me know. Sincerely, e Ach Land Development Manager Centex Homes oat. ill alljil\o„.„,, ,,,. 1 Ca. RD, lg 3 (,..r ..7111...----7,.Tir" ) 7 7 7 Ifroor W z T� � o z ]GLS H F—I F S 1 L I--- i F f IyR �' C a Eu (i ,,gs �090 1 `' f'-', �J z ISS Li C V y x (..r..; U Lt-I N r - 1: W z , � a 0 0) tW7 `` ISI o \ o A; Q -X ZN ..-A`� _ Vii. To L 1 1 ry i r 7....? •,J i... X al il [ , , H- cp....." «, ''' 4 if. L \ , M . . A l _ W z et A ;:Yi':: U F , C• Yci .7 �, q 4i' o • 14/ x a I yC) 3NI21Q W W AV/131V9 a I- 3v Q Z I S LAW 411111 , o A is-:. r �+ • CITY OF SHAKOPEE CONS y�.. Memorandum TO: Mayor&City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Ray Ruuska, Project Coordinator SUBJECT: Downtown Alleys, Project No. 1993-9 DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Council action is required for a resolution accepting work and making final payment on the Downtown Alley Project No. 1993-9. BACKGROUND: All of the work for this project has been completed in accordance with the contract documents. Attached is a Certificate of Completion showing the original contract amount of$502,971.85 and the actual final costs of$632,343.63 for this project. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 5334, A Resolution Accepting Work on the Downtown Alleys Project No. 1993-9 and move its adoption. 1 -� Ray Ruuska Project Coordinator RR/pmp MEM5334 RESOLUTION NO. 5334 A Resolution Accepting Work On The Downtown Alleys Project No. 1993-9 WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Shakopee on April 7, 1995, Killmer Electric Co., Inc. has satisfactorily completed the Downtown Alley Project, in accordance with such contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the work completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, held this day of , 2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk f CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION CONTRACT NO. : 1993-9 DATE: January 31, 2000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION : Downtown Alleys CONTRACTOR: Killmer Electric Co. , Inc. P.O. Box 246 Osseo, MN 55369 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $ 502,971.85 QUANTITY CHANGE AMOUNT $ 17,115.12 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 THRU NO. 7 AMOUNT . , $ 112,256.66 FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $ 632,343.63 LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS $ 632,343.63 FINAL PAYMENT $ -°- I, hereby certify that the above described work was inspected under my direct supervision and that, to the best of my belief and knowledge, I find that the same has been fully completed in all respects according to the contract, together with any modifications approved by City Council . I, therefore, recommend above specified final payment be made to the above named Contractor, ,44/4.14'gjf/ Professional Engi /S. 6.6 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Michael Hullander, Public Works Supervisor SUBJECT: Purchase of Portable Sewer Pipe Inspection/Location Camera DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Due to the high costs associated with emergency and spot inspections of the sanitary sewer system, the Public Works Department is requesting to purchase a portable inspection/location video camera from MacQueen Equipment, Inc. for the purchase price of$6,595.00. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has recently discontinued its in-house video inspection program for main line sanitary sewers, due to the high costs associated with purchasing new video equipment. The Metropolitan area has numerous private sewer televising companies that compete for municipal contracts. This competition makes it far more cost effective for the Public Works Department to contract out this service. Although televising main line sanitary sewers in an inspection program is cost effective, emergency and spot televising of our system is expensive. Mobilization for emergencies and spot checking cost is $800.00 and up per set-up. Because of the high costs, the Public Works Department is requesting to purchase a portable video camera to use for emergency and spot inspections of the main line sanitary sewer system. The Public Works Department has looked at portable cameras from various vendors with prices ranging from $6,000.00 to $16,000.00. Staff considered all the options available and believes a simple black and white monitor with a manual push style camera will meet our needs for emergency situations. Staff is requesting Council to consider the purchase of a MicroView-400 Pipe Inspection/Location Video Camera System from MacQueen Equipment, Inc. for the purchase price of$6,595.00. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the purchase of a MicroView-400 Pipe Inspection/Location Video Camera System from MacQueen Equipment, Inc. for the purchase price of $6,595.00 to be funded by the Sanitary Sewer Fund. 2. Deny the above request. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to authorize the purchase of a MicroView-400 Pipe Inspection/Location Video System from MacQueen Equipment, Inc. for the purchase price of $6,595.00 with payment to be funded by the Sanitary Sewer Fund. 11/14il14-4— Michael Hullander Public Works Supervisor /s.8. '7 . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Michael Hullander, Public Works Supervisor SUBJECT: Purchase of a Toro 580D 16-Foot Mower. DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The Public Works Department has identified in the 2000 Capital Equipment Fund Budget a need to replace the existing Toro 455D 10.5-foot mower with a Toro 580D 16-foot mower. Utilizing State of Minnesota bids, the purchase price for a Toro 580D with attachments and trade-in from MTI Distributing Co. is $69,132.35 including sales tax. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department recently submitted a cost analysis report to the City Council on public vs. private contracting of park mowing. As the report indicated, it is more cost effective to continue mowing the parks using City owned equipment with full and part-time labor. In order to increase mowing efficiency and also to replace a mower that has been expensive to maintain, our department would like to replace the existing Toro 455D 10.5-foot mower with a new 580D 16-foot mower. The Toro 580D is capable of mowing approximately 50% more with the same labor costs. The existing Toro 455D with high maintenance costs, unreliability and constant down time needs to be replaced in order to meet the service demands with the goal of efficiency and economy. With the purchase of a 580D, the manufacturer now has a two year warranty versus the previous standard of a one year warranty. Staff feels a two year warranty is sufficient to determine the quality of the equipment. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the purchase of a new Toro Groundmaster 580D 16-foot rotary mower, utilizing State bid pricing, from MTI Distributing Co. for the purchase price of $69,132.35 with payment to be expended from the Capital Equipment Fund. 2. Deny the above request. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to authorize the purchase of one new Toro Groundmaster 580D 16-foot rotary mower, utilizing State bid pricing, from MTI Distributing Co. for the purchase price of $69,132.35 with payment to be expended from the Capital Equipment Fund. Michael ' llander Public Works Supervisor I Park Maintenance 2000: Small Mower/Equipment ($25,000) . This would replace the existing 1990 Toro 220D mower, which will be 10 years old at this time. Attachments besides mower, include snow blower and cab for snow removal. Mechanics Comments: Engine is in fair to poor condition and will need work. Drive train and body are in fair to good condition. Vehicle does meet replacement guidelines. Skid Steer Loader ($35,000) . This will replace the existing 1990 Melroe Bobcat 743, which will be 10 years old at this time. Mechanics Comments: This vehicle does meet replacement guidelines but body engine and drive train are in good condition. Large Mower/Equipment ($70,000) . The Park division would like to trade-in the 1993 GM455D Toro with a 10.5 foot cutting width for a Toro 580D which has a 16 foot cutting width, in order to provide a reasonable service level in mowing the growing park system. Mechanics Comments: This vehicle does not meet the replacement guidelines. Engine and drive train are questionable, have had to do a lot of repairs. 2001: 1 Ton Pick-up ($25,000) . Due to the increase in seasonal employees, the Park division is requesting an additional pick-up. 2002: Small Tractor ($25,000) . Due to the increase in athletic fields, the Park division is requesting an additional tractor. 2003 : Large Mower ($85,000) . Due to continued growth, the Parks division may need an additional mower at this time. 2004: Small Tractor ($30,000) . Replace tractor #134 (1994 JD 1 Tractor 1070) , this tractor will meet the replacement guidelines at this time. Sewer Fund 2000: 1-Ton Truck Box/Hoist 4x4 14,000 Lbs. ($45,000) . This will replace Truck #125 (1990 Chev 3500 Dump Truck) , which will meet the Guideline Replacement Standard. Mechanics Comments: This vehicle does meet the replacement guidelines. Body, engine, and drive train are in good to fair condition and vehicle has only 50,000 miles. 2001: Enductor ($45,000) . This will replace the 1984 IME Enductor cleaner. 1 1 5-25 •Sas- - - - . . ._._.. c`s :' I S(I) • Department of Administration `'4";;s¢ ' Materials Management Division 112 Administration Building 50 Sherburne Avenue St.Paul,MN 55155 Voice:651.282.5578 • September 24, 1999 • Fax:651.297.3996 t TTY:651.282.5799 • NOTIFICATION OF CONTRACT AWARD CONTRACT NO: 424514 TO: RELEASE NO: M-448(5) Randy Ruski MTI Distributing Inc. ' 14900-21st Avenue North Plymouth,MN 55447 CONTRACT PERIOD: from September 1, 1999,through ( - July 31,2000 . • EXTENSION OPTION: up to- You are hereby notified that your bid in response to our solicitation, which opened August 9, 1999, is accepted. This contract award includes all or part of the following products or services,as further specified in Exhibit A:Commercial Front Mounted Riding Mowers(Non-Articulating). Bond required in the amount of$ _ X Bond not required for this contract. The following documents, in order of precedence,are incorporated herein by reference and constitute the entire Contract between you and the State: (1)this Notification of Contract Award,together with Exhibit A and any attachments or subsequent purchase orders,amendments or similar documents;(2)the solicitation; and(3)your response. In the event of a conflict in language among any of these documents,the terms and conditions set forth and/or referenced in this Notification and any later executed documents shall prevail over conflicting terms and conditioris contained in the earlier documents, in their original form or as amended. CONTRACTOR: The CONTRACTOR certifies STATE OF MINNESOTA 1 that the appropriate person(s)have executed - the Contract on behalf of the CONTRACTOR as required by vendor's applicable articles, bylaws,resolutions,or ordinances. • DATE: z4 f elq DATE:digi 0—9-`�Gf is I (Name of Company;individual or partners) BY. h /� S/ , �r//(Acq i o an •, ,it/ MTI Distributing Inc. . BY: - 4AeJJh,,A)1 4.4.4 ". Approved as to form and execution TITLE: ' /. tom%)1— this day of Original signed OCT 0 5 1999 BY: ATTORNEY GENERAL,STATE OF MINNESOTA ' TITLE: by Patricia S. Nolte BY: (To be signed by executive officer(s) (Legal Assistant) parner(s)or by individual.if sole owner.) " 08/03/99 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DIVISION ACQUISITION SERVICES ROOM 112 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 50 SHERBURNE AVE, ST.PAUL,MN 55155 QTY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE TOTAL TORO GROUNDSMASTER 400 SERIES - Toro GM455-D,Diesel,2WD, 10-1/2 ft Deck,2 Post ROPS, 1 Service Manual,Filter Kit $ 29,557.00 - S 29,557.00 Toro GM455-D,Diesel,4WD, 10-1/2 ft Deck,2 Post ROPS, , 1 Service Manual,Filter Kit t $ 32,919.00 : $ - 32,919.00 { TORO GROUNDSMASTER 400 SERIES OPTIONS I .Leaf Mulcher(30475) 1 $ 756.00 ' S 756.00 Cruise Control(30485) 1 ! $ 307.00 ! S 307.00 Road Light Kit(30471) • 1 - , $ 475.00 S 475.00 Canopy for 2 Post Roll Bar(4 Post Conversion) 1 i$ 675 00 • S 675.00 .All Steel Cab with,Wiper,Heater,Defroster Fan,Headlight Kit, 1 Roof Flasher i $ 5,297.00 ! S 5,297.00 MB-7 ft Hydraulic Rotary Broom 1 1 $ 6,360.00 S 6,360.00 - Hanson General 6ft 2-Stage Snowblower $ 4,595.00 S 4,595.00 1 Option-Electric Deflector Kit(chute) 1 $ 395.00 S 395.00 1 TORO GROUNDSMASTER 580-D t I - - Toro GM580-D,Diesel,2WD, 16 ft Rotary Mower,2 Post 1 1 ROPS.Canopy,Road Light Kit,Service Manual,Filter Kit $ . 63,895.00 S 63,895.00 I TORO GROUNDSMASTER 580-D OPTIONS t' I Leaf Mulcher Kit(30588) i 1 $ 1,295.00 S 1,295.00 • All Steel Cab with Wiper,Heater,Defroster Fan,Roof Mount 1 Flasher,Headlight Kit `$ 5,595.00 S 5,595.00 Air Conditioning Kit(complete) 1 $ 5,695.00 S 5,695.00 _MB-8 ft Rotary Broom (complete) $ 6.395.00 S 6,395.00 1 Loftness 7 ft Snowblower(complete) � 1 - $ 8.995.00 S 8,995.00 14900•21st Avenue North — Plymouth.MN 55447-4655- 612-475-2200 fax 475-0351 1.800.362.3665 , Randy Ryski , 05/01/1996 17:43 7152487326 BOB FRANK PAGE 01 TOY() ■wa ■ I DISTRIBUTING CO. Date 12/2/99 TO: n City of Shakopee - I Attn:Gene-City Shop Terms Net 30 Shakopee, MN Prices quoted are I Phone: (612)496-3179 Fax: 445-2313) F.O.B. Shakopee We are pleased to quote as follows: Delivery 6 weeks Quantity Description List Price Sell Price State Contract 2000 pricing 1 Toro 580D 16'Rotary mower $63,895.00 1 All steel cab with Wiper, Heater, defrost fan, roof mount flasher, A/C and headlight kit $11,290.00 Deduct for 2 post ROPS -$803.00 Deduct for GM 455D,cab, mower,blower -$13,000.00 Sub-total $62,002.00 1 Used 7'snowblower with hydraulic drive $2,911.00 $64,913.00 Sales tax $4,219.35 Total $69,132.35 Sales Tax Customer Signature Salesman: Bob Frank Phone: 800-362-3665 Ext. 8295 "Quotation Good For 30 Days" 14900 Twenty-first Avenue North • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-4655 • Phone (612)475-2200 • Fax(612)473-4397 A$ c . I CITY OF SBAKOPEE f Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Tom Pitschneider, Fire Inspector SUBJECT: Adoption Fire Safety Codes and Policies DATE: March 15, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached is an Ordinance adopting the 1998 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and Standards of the National Fire Prevention Association and a Resolution adopting the Policies of the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. BACKGROUND: In previous years the City of Shakopee has adopted the most recent versions of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and National Fire Prevention Code. These were last adopted by Ordinance 408 on March 16, 1995. The State of Minnesota adopted the 1997 Uniform Fire Code during 1998 and in speaking to City Attorney James Thomson he felt it appropriate to draft a new ordinance adopting the 1998 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. In the past the City has adopted only the National Fire Prevention Code as published by the National Fire Protection Association. This Association publishes over 100 standard for fire protection, several of which would be valuable to the City. The attached Ordinance#566 adopts the 1998 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code as amended by the City of Shakopee and the Standards of the National Fire Protection Association. The Shakopee Fire Department has maintained written policies regarding fire protection for several years; however, these policies were never approved by City Council Resolution. With the addition of the full-time Fire Inspector it would be appropriate to approve these policies for enforcement. The attached Resolution#5332 adopts those policies and the order of precedence for enforcement of those policies in conjunction with the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and the Standards of the National Fire Protection Association. These codes, standards and policies are vital to the life safety and property preservation of the City and its residents. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Ordinance#566—an Ordinance adopting the 1998 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and the Standard of the National Fire Protection Association. 2. Adopt Resolution#5332—a Resolution adopting the Policies of the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. 3. Adopt only Ordinance#566 or Resolution#5332. 4. Table the Ordinance or the Resolution for more information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative#1 and Alternative#2. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adopt Ordinance#566—an Ordinance adopting the 1998 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and the Standard of the National Fire Protection Association. 2. Adopt Resolution#5332—a Resolution adopting the Policies of the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. ORDINANCE NO. 566, FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 1998 MINNESOTA UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND STANDARDS OF THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION BY AMENDING SECTION 10.35 OF THE CITY CODE AND ADDING SECTION 10.351 TO THE CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1 —The City Code is amended by adding a new subdivision 10.35 to read: SEC. 10.35. ADOPTION OF THE MINNESOTA UNIFORM FIRE CODE. The Minnesota Uniform Fire Code (1998 Edition) is hereby adopted with the amendments set forth in Subdivision 1. One copy of this Code shall be kept on file in the office of the Fire Prevention Bureau. Subd. 1. Amendments to Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. A. Section 103.2.2.1 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code is hereby amended to read: 103.2.2.1 General. A fire prevention bureau is hereby established within the City of Shakopee under the direction of the Community Development Director. The Bureau shall consist of such personnel as may be assigned thereto by the City of Shakopee and/or the Fire Chief The function of this bureau shall be to administer and enforce the provisions of this code. B. Section 105.3 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code is hereby amended to read: 105.3 Application for Permit. Applications for permits required by this code shall be made to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and/or Shakopee Fire Department in such form and detail as prescribed by said authority. Applications for permits shall be accompanied by such plans as required by the Fire Prevention Bureau and/or Fire Department. C. Section 105.8 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code is hereby deleted and replaced with the following: 105.8 Permit Required. No person shall engage in any activity, operation, practice or function listed below without first having obtained a permit from the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and/or Shakopee Fire Department. 1. Fireworks and pyrotechnical special effects material. 2. Installation or alteration of fire extinguishing systems. 3. Installation or alteration of fire alarm systems. 4. Installation and removal of aboveground and underground flammable or combustible liquid storage tanks. 5. Installation or alteration of fuel dispensing systems. 6. Open burning other than recreational fires. (See Section 10.29) 7. Temporary membrane structures, tents and canopies. A permit is required for temporary membrane structures and tents over 200 square feet or when heat sources or cooking equipment are contained within or near the structure. A permit is required for canopies in excess of 400 square feet. No permit is required if the structure is used exclusively for camping. D. Section 105 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code is amended by adding a section to read: 105.9 Permit Fee. Fees for such permits as required by Section 105.8 shall be in an amount as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. E. Section 204C of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code is amended by amending the following definition: CHIEF is the chief officer of the fire department serving the jurisdiction or the chief's authorized representatives. For the purposes of enforcing this code, the term chief also includes the members of the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and the Minnesota State Fire Marshal's Office. Section 2-The City Code is amended by adding a new subdivision 10.351 to read: SEC. 10.351. ADOPTION OF THE STANDARDS OF THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION. The Standards of the National Fire Protection Association are hereby adopted as applicable, with the exception of those codes listed in Subd.1 which are adopted for reference only. One copy of each of the said Standards shall be kept on file in the office of the Fire Prevention Bureau. Subd. 1. The following Standards are generally operational in nature, but may be used as a reference to provide guidance in responding to fires or other emergencies. They may also be used to describe various employee classifications, to specify firefighting equipment and to provide guidance for general safety procedures and guidelines. A. The following Standards of the National Fire Prevention Association shall be adopted for reference only: 13E, 301, 402, 403, 405, 412, 414, 415, 422, 424, 471, 472, 473, 901, 902, 903, 904, 906, 921, 1000, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1006, 1021, 1031, 1033, 1035, 1041, 1051, 1061, 1201, 1221, 1250, 1401, 1402, 1403, 1404, 1405, 1410, 1451, 1452, 1500, 1521, 1561, 1581, 1582, 1600, 1620, 1670, 1901, 1906, 1911, 1914, 1925, 1931, 1932, 1936, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1971, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1991, 1992, and 1999. Section 3 — Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO.5332 A RESOULUTION ADOPTING THE POLICIES OF THE SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU WHEREAS, the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau is responsible for implementation and enforcement of local, state and national fire codes and, WHEREAS, the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau has developed policies to assisted in the clarification and enforcement of said codes and, WHEREAS, in the interest of public safety it is prudent to adopt such policies to enhance public well being, and eliminate fire hazards. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,that the following policies shall be adopted: 1. Policies to be adopted by reference as though set forth verbatim: a. Policy: #01-2000(03/01/2000)—Premises Identification b. Policy: #02-2000(03/01/2000)—Keyboxes c. Policy: #03-2000(03/01/2000)—Fire Department Access Roads d. Policy: #04-2000(03/01/2000)—Sprinkler Systems e. Policy: #06-2000(03/01/2000)—Fire Lane Signage f. Policy: #08-2000(03/01/2000)—Pre-Fire Plans g. Policy: #09-2000 (03/01/2000)—Fire Alarm Systems h. Policy: #10-2000 (03/01/2000)—Labeling of Fire Rated Walls 03 01/2000 —Tanks and Dispensing i. Policy: #11-2000( / ) p g j. Policy: #12-2000 (03/01/2000)—Temporary Membrane Structures, Tents and Canopies 2. A copy of said policies shall be kept on file in the office of the Fire Prevention Bureau. 3. If there is a conflict between or among any of these policies and the fire codes and standards as adopted by the City of Shakopee, the following order of precedence shall apply: a. Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau Policies b. Minnesota Uniform Fire Code as adopted by the City of Shakopee. c. Standards of the National Fire Protection Association as adopted by the City of Shakopee. d. Other nationally recognized fire safety standards as are approved by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and/or Shakopee Fire Department. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Mumesota, held this day of , 2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PREMISES IDENTIFICATION General Requirements 1. Address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. 2. Address numbers shall be a contrasting color from their background. 3. Address number shall not be of script or italic style typefaces. 4. If the structure and/or address is not visible from the fronting street, additional address numbers shall be required at the driveway entrance or entrance to the private street on which the structure is located. 5. Location of address numbers shall be approved by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. 6. If deemed necessary, additional address numbers shall placed in locations as required by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. Specific Requirements Commercial 1. Minimum height requirements shall be 12'for main entrances and 6"for all secondary and/or back entrances. exception: In strip malls and multi-tenant buildings where there will be separate addresses for each tenant the minimum height requirement shall be 6". 2. Address numbers shall be placed at the main entrance and at doors accessing the rear of the building. 3. If address numbers are located on a directory sign, additional address numbers shall be required at the main entrance. Residential 1. For 1 or 2 family dwellings the minimum height requirement shall be 6". 2. For multi-family dwellings the minimum height requirements shall be 6"for main entrances and 4"for all secondary and/or back entrances. Policy:#01-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page 1/1 h:/policies/premid.doc • SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU KEYBOXES General Requirements 1. A keybox of a type approved by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau/Shakopee Fire Department shall be placed on all buildings regardless of occupancy. Exception:Group R-3 as defined by the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 2. Each keybox shall include the following applicable keys: a. Minimum of 1 exterior entrance master key b. Minimum of 1 interior entrance master key, up to 3 keys may be required c. Minimum of 1 alarm panel key d. Minimum of 1 key for any other areas not accessible with a master key, and as required by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau/Shakopee Fire Department 3. Each key shall be on a separate ring and marked with a tag stating its use. 4. The keybox shall be located above the fire department connection on sprinklered buildings and next to the front or rear door of non-sprinklered buildings as directed by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. 5. The keybox shall be mounted at a height not to exceed 6 feet above grade. The keybox shall be mounted high enough above finished grade to prevent water/snow from entering or blocking the box. Policy:#02-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page 1/1 h:/policies/keybox.doc SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROADS Definition 1. Driveway is any property access point serving as the main access to the property for any residential or commercial property owner and/or occupant(s). 2. Fire Department Access Road is any road or driveway greater than 150 feet in length as required by Article 9, Section 902 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. General Requirements 1. Access roads shall be established and maintained in accordance with the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. Access roads shall be provided during construction, alteration or demolition of any building. Exception:When approved,temporary access roads of a width,vertical clearance and surface,which provide access for fire department apparatus,are allowed to be used until permanent roads are installed. 3. Access roads shall have a minimum design capacity of 15-tons. 4. Driveways and access roads shall be provided with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. 5. Driveways and access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet. 6. Driveways and access roads shall have a driving surface width of not less than 10 feet. 7. Driveways and access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. 8. Access roads shall not be obstructed in any manner and shall be accessible in all weather conditions. Exception:When required by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and/or Shakopee Fire Department approved gates or barriers may be installed and secured in an approved manner. When installed said gates or barriers shall be maintained. Closed or secured access roads shall not be trespassed upon or used unless authorized by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and or Shakopee Fire Department. 9. Access roads shall be visually inspected and maintained to provide an acceptable driving surface. 10. Dead-end access roads greater than 150 feet in length shall be provided with provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus. Policy:#03-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page 1/1 h:/policies/accessroad.doc SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Underaround General Requirements 1. Permits are required for all underground sprinkler work. 2. All work shall be designed and constructed in accordance with NFPA 13 requirements. 3. Contact Shakopee Public Utilities(952-445-1988)for additional Water Department requirements. 4. An indicator valve shall be placed within twenty(20)feet of the building. The indicator valve shall be a minimum of 10 feet from any electric or gas meters and any electric transformers. 5. A minimum of one(1)hydrant must be within the 50 feet of the Fire Department Connection(FDC),but not less than 20 feet from the building.The hydrant shall be accessible via an asphalt access road. 6. The number of hydrants and placement shall be per the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 7. All underground piping shall be visual inspection by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and Shakopee Public Utilities before back filling. 8. The Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and Shakopee Public Utilities shall witness flushing of underground lines. 9. Appointments for inspections can be made by calling both the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau and Shakopee Public Utilities. The Fire Prevention Bureau can be reached at 952-445-3650, extension 145 between the hours of 8:00 a.m.and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Shakopee Public Utilities can be reached at 952-445-1988 between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Please arrange tests at least 24 hours in advance. Signed copies of the 'Contractor's Material and Test Certificates'for underground piping shall be provided to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau within 30 days of job completion. Abovearound General Requirements 1. Permits are required for all aboveground sprinkler work. 2. A minimum of three (3)sets of plans are required. Up to 2 sets will be reviewed and returned. Additional sets to be reviewed and returned will require and additional payment as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. Send, or drop off plans, specifications and calculations to: City of Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,MN 55379 3. All systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 13, requirements. Policy:#04-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page 1/3 hJpolicies/sprinksys.doc 4. All plans shall include specification sheets for fire sprinkler heads and dry-pipe/pre-action valves. All plans shall include the elements contained in NFPA 13 for submittal of working plans. 5. All equipment installed in a fire protection system shall be UL Listed, Factory Mutual Approved or listed by a nationally recognized organization acceptable to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. 6. Contact Shakopee Public Utilities(952-445-1988)for requirements regarding backflow prevention. 7. All control valves, including post indicator valves,shall be monitored and provided with tamper protection. 8. All sprinkler systems shall be monitored, no matter what size. 9. All buildings 3 stories or more in height shall be provided with standpipes. 10. A keybox of a type approved by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau/Shakopee Fire Department shall be placed on all buildings regardless of occupancy. Exception:Group R-3 as defined by the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 11. A light and buzzer shall be placed above the Fire Department Connection (FDC). 12. The Fire Department Connection (FDC)shall be located on the street (i.e. address)side of the building, other locations may be approved by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. The FDC shall be installed at a height of 42 inches above finished grade,the connection shall be labeled as to the system it supplies. 13. Sprinkler riser rooms shall have a door to the exterior of the building. This door shall be labeled "Sprinkler Riser Room' in a legible size and of contrasting color to the door. 14. In'low"to"mid-rise"buildings, fire sprinkler systems shall be provided with shut-off valves on each floor. In"high-rise" buildings, systems shall be provided with shut-off valves and water flow devices for each floor. 'Bird-cage'systems are not allowed in any building 15. Sprinklers shall be installed in elevator equipment rooms and shafts in accordance with the joint letter of the State Fire Marshal and the State Building Official. Contact the State Fire Marshal's office and request a copy of policy#FP 1999-07. 16. The Shakopee Fire Inspector shall witness all system tests required by NFPA 13, Chapter 8. Appointments can be made by calling the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau at 612-445-3650, extension 106 between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Please arrange tests at least 24 hours in advance. Signed copies of the"Contractor's Material and Test Certificates"for aboveground piping shall be provided to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau within 30 days of job completion. 17. Fire protection systems that are hydraulically calculated shall have a 5-psi safety factor at maximum system flow. 18. Main drains and inspector test connections shall be piped to exterior atmosphere. 19. Water flow data used for hydraulically designed fire protection systems shall be less than 3 years old. Additional water flow tests may be required in areas where substantial development has occurred since the most recent flow data was collected. Policy:#04-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page 2/3 h:/policies/sprinksys.doc 20. Acceptable water supplies for sprinkler systems are listed in NFPA 13. Swimming pools, ponds and fire department connections and/or fire department apparatus are not acceptable as a reliable automatic water supply. 21. Pressure, suction and gravity tanks shall be sized per the requirements contained in NFPA 13 and NFPA 22. The duration of the water supply shall match the hazard classification of the occupancy. Tanks shall be listed by an approprate organization and acceptable to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. 22. An approved audible sprinkler flow alarm shall be provided on the exterior of the building. An approved audible sprinkler flow alarm to alert occupants shall be provided in the interior of the building in a normally occupied location. 23. In buildings where high water usage is likely, or when the maximum size of the domestic water supply(including lawn sprinkler systems) on combination fire sprinkler/domestic water supply lines exceed 1/4 size of the main water supply, an electric solenoid valve shall be installed on the domestic side of the service (including lawn sprinkler systems). This valve shall be normally powered open and shall dose on loss of electric power or signal from the automatic fire sprinkler system flow indicator. a. The domestic water usage may also be designed into the hydraulic calculations of the fire sprinkler system in lieu of a solenoid valve. 24. Sprinkler systems designed for multiple use areas including, but not limited to;gymnasiums,wrestling rooms and ice rinks shall be designed for Ordinary Hazard Group II due type of use or to the use of these facilities for other purposes including craft shows,flea markers or community sales. 25. Sprinkler plans which must be resubmitted for a second time,and each time thereafter,because of failure to meet the minimum requirements of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and/or NFPA 13 shall be resubmitted with a resubmission fee as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. 26. Zone maps shall be posted next to the sprinkler riser for all systems. A copy of said maps shall be submitted to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. A permanent sign shall identify each system riser and shall correlate with the zone map. An acceptable zone map shall include the following information: a. Minimum size of 8-1/2"x 11"and shall be clear and legible b. Framed and mounted or protected by other acceptable means c. Simplified floor plan map showing location of FDC, PIV, riser controls, inspectors test, other system control valves, auxiliary drains and location of special heads. Policy:#04-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page 3/3 h:/policies/sprinksys.doc SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU FIRE LANE SIGNAGE General Requirements 1. An'as built"site plan on an 8-1/2'x 11"sheet shall be provided to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau at the time curbing is installed. This site plan will be used in designating fire lanes. 2. Signs shall be a minimum of 12'x 18'. 3. Signs shall have red letters on a white background. 3. Engineer's grade reflective sheeting material on aluminum base is preferred. 4. Wording shall state: NO PARKING FIRE LANE 5. Signs shall be posted at each end of the designated fire lane and at 75-foot intervals along the fire lane. 6. Islands under 75 feet in length shall have one sign centered over the length of the island. Islands greater than 75 feet in length shall have signs at each end of the island and at 75-foot intervals along the island. Odd shaped islands and/or parking areas may require additional signage. 7. All signs shall face in the direction of travel. If a fire lane has 2 directions of travel, signs shall be posted in both directions. 8. Mounting post shall be set back a minimum of 12" but not more than 36"from the curb. 8. Signs shall be mounted with not more than 7 feet between the grade and the bottom edge of the sign. 9. A fire lane shall be maintained for the Fire Department Connection (FDC). The fire lane shall extend a minimum of 5 feet in each direction from the FDC. 10. Additional fire lanes may be required as designated by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. 11. Any deviations from this policy shall be submitted in writing,with a site plan, for approval by the Fire Prevention Bureau. Policy:#06-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page 1/1 h:/policies/firelane.doc SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PRE-FIRE PLANS General Requirements 1. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy(C.O.) a pre-fire plan(site plan)shall be submitted to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. The maximum size of this preplan shall be 11"x 17" with the following items shown on the plan: a. Building footprint and building dimensions. b. Exterior doors. c. Interior walls. d. Fire walls(area separation wall), if applicable. Include fire rating. e. Fire hydrant locations. f. Gas meter(shut off). g. Electric meter(shut-off). h. Water meter(shut-off). i. Keybox location. j. Fire Department Connection (FDC). k. Location of standpipes, if applicable. I. Location of fire alarm panel and annunciators. m. Sprinkler riser location. n. Roof vents, if applicable. o. Type of construction for exterior walls and roof. p. Exterior LP storage, if applicable. q. Hazardous material storage, if applicable. r. Underground storage tank(s) locations, if applicable. s. Aboveground storage tank(s) locations, if applicable. t. Other special areas as required by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau. 2. Plans with topographical information, contour lines, easement lines, property lines, setbacks, right of way lines, headings and other related lines or markings are NOT ACCEPTABLE as pre-fire plans and WILL BE REJECTED. Policy:#08-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page: 1/1 h:/policies/preplan.doc SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS General Requirements 1. Permits are required for all fire alarm systems. 2. A minimum of three(3)sets of plans are required. Up to 2 sets will be reviewed and returned. Additional sets to be reviewed and returned will require and additional payment as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. Send, or drop off plans and specifications to: City of Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 3. Fire alarm systems shall meet the requirements of NFPA 72. 4. All plans shall include specification sheets for all system components. 5. All components of the system must be UL Listed for the application and installed per the appropriate codes and manufacturer's specifications. 6. Fire alarm systems shall have pull stations zoned separate from smoke, heat or other detectors. 7. The alarm system shall be audible above the ambient noise level in all area of the building 8. A keybox of a type approved by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau/Shakopee Fire Department shall be placed on all buildings regardless of occupancy. Exception:Group R-3 as defined by the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 9. A full function enunciator shall be provided if the control panel is remotely located. 10. Duct smoke detectors located in normally non-visible locations shall be provided with remote indicators and reset controls. 11. Heat detectors installed in areas with an automatic sprinkler system shall have a lower temperature rating than the sprinkler heads in the same area. 12. Tamper devices(lock-on)shall be installed on all circuit breakers used for life safety systems. 13. Manual pull station shall be of the key resettable type, utilizing the same key as the fire alarm panel. 14. When Central Station notification is required or otherwise provided it must be through a UL Listed communicator or NFPA Listed control panel. All Central Stations shall be UL Listed. 15. A UL Certificate is required for all systems. The UL Certificate shall be current and is required for the life of the alarm system. All systems shall be inspected and tested annually. Policy:#09-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page: 1/2 h:/policies/firealarm.doc 16. Alarm verification is required for all systems using smoke detectors. The maximum verification time shall not exceed 30 seconds. 17. Written operating instructions shall be provided to the property owner(or his/her authorized agent)and shall be placed with the fire alarm control panel. A detailed zone map shall be posted next to the fire alarm panel and annunciator panel Of applicable). A copy of said maps shall be submitted to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. An acceptable zone map shall include the following information: a. Minimum size of 8-1/2'x 11'and shall be clear and legible b. Framed and mounted or protected by other acceptable means c. Simplified floor plan map showing zone locations. d. Map shall indicate location of alarm panel and annunciators and all devices and related controls. If symbols are used to indicate devices a symbol map shall be provided. 18. The Shakopee Fire Inspector shall be contacted for final system inspection. Appointments can be made by calling the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau at 612-445-3650, extension 145 between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:30 pm, Monday through Friday. Please arrange tests at least 24 hours in advance. 19. Fire alarm system plans which must be resubmitted for a second time,and each time thereafter,because of failure to meet the minimum requirements of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and/or NFPA 72 shall be resubmitted with a resubmission fee as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. 20. The minimum inspection will include: a. Test for proper operation of each device. a. Random testing for system trouble. b. Random testing for ground fault trouble. c. Correct operation on battery or standby power. Policy:#09-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page:2/2 h:/policies/firealarm.doc SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU LABEUNG FIRE RATED WALLS General Requirements 1. All rated firewalls(area separation walls)shall be labeled with their fire rating. 2. Labeling shall be marked 10 feet from every corner or change of direction, and every 30 feet thereafter. Identification shall be on both sides of interior walls. 3. Labeling may be hidden above ceiling tiles or in other areas as approved by the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau, Building Official or Building Inspector. 4. Firewalls shall be labeled with a combination of numbers and letters. Numbers and letters shall not be less than 5 inches high by 3 inches wide and have a minimum stroke of 1/4 inch. Labeling shall contract with the background. 5. The requirements set forth in this policy shall be in effect for new and existing construction. 6. All penetrations through fire rated walls shall by fire stopped with an approved material. Specific Requirements 1. The requirements set forth in this policy shall be in effect for all occupancies. a. EXCEPTION: Group R,Division 3 occupancies shall not be subject to this policy. Example 1. Firewalls shall be labeled in the following manner. 1 hrFRW(1 hour fire rated wall) Policy:#10-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page: 1/1 h:/policiesffirewall.doc SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU TANKS AND DISPENSING General Reauirements 1. Permits are required for all flammable/combustible liquid storage tanks and dispensing. 2. A minimum of three (3)sets of plans are required. Up to 2 sets will be reviewed and returned. Additional sets to be reviewed and returned will require and additional payment as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. Send, or drop off plans and specifications to: City of Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 3. All systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with current code requirements. 4. All plans shall include specification sheets for tanks, piping, containment, overfill, leak detection and dispensers. 5. Above ground storage tanks must be reviewed by the Minnesota State Fire Marshal's Office. 6. Tank and dispensing plans which must be resubmitted for a second time,and each time thereafter, because of failure to meet the minimum requirements of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code shall be resubmitted with a resubmission fee as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. 7. All plans submitted must show the following information when applicable. a. Plan scale. b. Real property lines. c. Structures within property lines. d. Tank construction (provide specification sheets) e. Tank location and clearance. f. Tank size in gallons. g. Tank size in dimensions. h. Tank testing requirements(provide specification sheets). i. Type of product in tank(provide MSDS sheets). j. Buried depth of tank. k. Tank anchors, if required. I. Tank fill openings m. Corrosion protection (indicate type). n. Secondary containment for tank and piping(provide specification sheets). o. Driveways and roadways. p. Vent pipe termination height. q. Vent pipe size. r. Piping layout. s. Type of dispensing(full service or self-service). t. Type of dispenser(provide specification sheets) u. Location of dispensers. Policy:#11-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page: 1/2 h:/policies/tanks.doc v. Dispenser protection. w. Type of overfill protection (provide specification sheets). x. Type of leak detection (provide specification sheets). y. Required signage(No Smoking, Shut-off Engine, Minimum 16 Years Old, etc.) z. Two-way intercom system. aa. Fire extinguisher locations and types(ie:2A20BC) bb. Self-service attendant location. cc. Sources to waterway(storm/sanitary sewer intakes). dd. Type of back-fill. 8. NOTE: It is the policy of the City of Shakopee not to allow the use of an adjoining property's setback to determine tank placement, except in special circumstances. Policy:#11-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page:2/2 h:/policies/tanks.doc SHAKOPEE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU TEMPORARY MEMBRANE STRUCTURES TENTS AND CANOPIES General Requirements 1. Permits are required for all temporary membrane structures and tents over 200 square feet or when heat sources or cooking equipment are contained within or near the structure or tent. Permits are also required for canopies over 400 square feet. 2. A minimum of three (3)sets of plans are required. Up to 2 sets will be reviewed and returned. Additional sets to be reviewed and returned will require and additional payment as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. Send, or drop off plans, and specifications to: City of Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 3. All plans submitted shall include the following information if applicable: a. Date(s) and time(s) of event. b. Date and time of installation and removal. c. Site address d. Emergency contact person and phone number. e. Number of people attending. (approximate) f. Location of each temporary membrane structure,tent or canopy on site. g. Size of each temporary membrane structure,tent or canopy. h. Distance from nearest structure(not including other temporary membrane structures,tents or canopies). i. Distance to property lines. j. Distance to automobile parking. k. Distance to combustibles and internal combustion engines(other than automobiles). I. Location and width of exits. m. Emergency and exit lighting and exit signs. n. Electrical wiring. o. Seating arrangement. p. Stage size and electrical requirements. q. Heating/cooling units(size and location). r. Floor covering(type). s. Trash collection locations. t. Parking and emergency access routes. u. Location, size and type of fire extinguishers. v. Location of NO SMOKING signs. Cookingand/or servingareas(including placement of stoves/warming devises; fuels used; fuel w. n9 ( storage; distance from emergency exits and fire extinguisher locations,types and sizes). Policy:#12-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page: 1/2 h:/policies/tents.doc 4. The sidewalls,drops and roofs(tops)of all temporary membrane structures,tents and canopies shall be constructed of flame-retardant material or shall be made flame retardant in an approved manner. Coverings used on floors, including hay bales,sawdust and wood chips along with any bunting or flammable decorations shall be made flame retardant in an approved manner. 5. Approved certification shall be submitted with the application and maintained on the premises. The certification shall indicate the following: a. Identification of temporary membrane structure,tent or canopy including size and fabric type. b. Date that fabric and other flammable materials were last treated with flame retardant solution. c. Trade name and type of solution utilized during treatment. (Provide manufacture's specification sheet) d. Name of firm and persons providing flame retardant treatment. e. Name and address of temporary membrane,tent or canopy owner. 6. Temporary membrane structures,tents and canopies and appurtenances shall be adequately roped, braced and anchored to withstand the elements or weather against collapse. Evidence of such stability shall be provided to the Shakopee Fire Prevention Bureau upon request. Air-supported and air-inflated structures shall have design, construction, anchoring and inflating in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Appendix Chapter 31. 7. Plans which must be resubmitted for a second time,and each time thereafter, because of failure to meet the minimum requirements of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code shall be resubmitted with a resubmission fee as set forth in the City of Shakopee Fee Schedule. Policy:#12-2000 Date: 03/01/2000 Revised: Page:2/2 h:/policies/tents.doc /5".. Cr 5 / CITY OF SHAKOPEE r , Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Surplus Property Declaration DATE: March 16, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The City Council is asked to declare an impounded vehicle as surplus property. BACKGROUND: The attached memo from Chief Dan Hughes indicates that the Police Department is in need of disposing of a 1984 Buick Skylark, which was impounded as a result of a DWI arrest. He indicates that the vehicle is very poor condition, and it is unlikely that it would be bought at auction. He would like to dispose of it as junk. According to State law, any proceeds from the sale of impounded vehicles goes into a special fund, administered by the City,to be used towards the enforcement of DWI- related laws. It is possible that no income will come about as a result of this disposal. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Council declare the 1984 Buick Skylark(MN license plate 160MJN) surplus property as a result of a DWI arrest. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should,by motion,declare the 1984 Buick Skylark as surplus property in accordance with City Code 2.70s3A, and further direct that the Police Chief dispose of the vehicle as expeditiously as possible. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw n) City of Shakopee Memorandum To: Mark McNeil, City Administrator From: Dan Hughes, Chief of Police Date: February 24, 2000 Subject: Surplus Property Disposal On 061999 the Shakopee Police Department impounded a 1984 Buick Skylark(MN license plate 160MJN), as a result of a DWI arrest. The registered owner was a repeat DWI offender, and qualified under state law for vehicle forfeiture. Forfeiture proceedings have been completed and the City of Shakopee is eligible to title the vehicle. The vehicle is inoperable and in poor condition. It is highly unlikely that this vehicle would be sold at auction. I am requesting that the vehicle be declared surplus property, under City Code 2.70 s3A, and disposed of/sold as junk. iso. l , CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan, Natural Resource Director Subject: Tree Trust Project for O'Dowd Lake Park Date: March 7, 2000 INTRODUCTION Council is asked to approve funding for improvements in O'Dowd Lake Park. BACKGROUND The Inland Container Corporation Foundation recently awarded the Minnesota Tree Trust Program a three-year grant. A provision of the grant encourages Tree Trust to pursue projects in the City of Shakopee and/or Scott County. The Tree Trust was established as a non-profit organization in 1976 to re-plant the urban forest being decimated by Dutch elm disease. Since its founding, the Tree Trust expanded its focus to include employment opportunities for disadvantage youth and adults in public service programs and projects. Besides the re-planting of trees, Minnesota Tree Trust has completed hundreds of landscaping and construction projects in the Metro area. In most cases, the Tree Trust program partners with local communities to provide the labor and expertise to see a project through. The City provides the materials and Tree Trust constructs the project. o'Aowol La lee Pa rie Project In 1997, the City extended the bituminous trail through-out the park by partnering with Shakopee Rotary Club and the Preserve Golf Course. In 1998, the City received an 85- foot fishing pier from the Minnesota Fishing Pier Grant program. This year, the City has an opportunity make additional improvements by partnering with Minnesota Tree Trust. This proposal involves the construction of retaining walls along the paths for erosion control, construction of a six-foot wide stairway at the point of the peninsula, benches, tables and a metal gazebo. BUDGET IMPACT The Five Year Capital Improvement Program identifies $25,000 for improvements at O'Dowd Lake Park. These funds will be used primarily to purchase materials. The labor costs are funded through the Minnesota Tree Trust Program. Project Estimates Landscape timbers and materials for stairway $ 8,000.00 Gazebo (16')w/shipping $12,000.00 Rental of equipment $ 500.00 ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve funding for improvements at O'Dowd Lake Park. 2. Do not approve funding. 3. Table for additional information from staff. RECOMMENDATION The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has discussed the project and fully supports partnering with Minnesota Tree Trust Program to make improvements in O'Dowd Lake Park. ACTION REQUESTED If Council concurs with Parks and Recreation Advisory Board's recommendation, it should, by motion, approve the O'Dowd Lake Park Project, whereby, the Minnesota Tree Trust Program provides labor and supervision and the City of Shakopee provides funding up to $25,000 for materials from the Park Reserve Fund. Mark / cQuillan Natural Resource Director L' c c o43 Iii- if)In o 0 o mill � N O O O c Ci '6 O Nal .= C 1 C 0 7 ,= N dlt y K a C O E p p N c 1 aUco 0 � c `�° ° 0 2h U , Y 0 ° 0 c a o R v � � aya. Ec o � CD 3coT� " .,x 't-5 ` = et p Vl j R C N 7 O V O G C O) CL N Q '� w H 0 lII O C V. .... y ..- in w U W p C O C F- «' C O 0 R o 4- c> • O O a. CX 2 = N a V 0)f- N N O O O O Y ` Y 0 w. o s N y H a C c C a c C aw 0 N 0 CO CI, C .0 1- lO . C yy0 13 Cl. I O R N pl O C 00 N (3 O . N c N c0 3 a .. 3 c) o E x �i c 05 al c Ny 00 O O c t w ` y O _o p m to • N O. > O c 0 .c .0 y 0 + co a ° 0 cp, `mU o E cn al 0, C aID Z' +� ~ E ili 111 I O y Y N O "- '0 N .N w p O N N O NECLoccc Fes- pJ N 0 g C O w CO E V C O U 7. i".; -0 0 , W e y O O `1 `7 C O y o N 0 o > V t a u W 7 — II O Q N C N > 3 0` w Y To D E d i W0000 7 C2 F " N L y w 0 0 a OWF- � O I 'o I I 1 ir O I1 CV ��daye '.,,,a&icaripo „ti o 00 0 0 II tet.+• �+e 0 0 0 0 ._- d N N CD o N W 15 Cti 0 Mr"11 Y \\ 4h" a as o lit v w c H ti N C.46 E u' mQ idi! hl -11 cOac °� oc w co u'f c = = 0 N C c vo82 > N cco E00 0 > 0 m Roa.c _ V . XYmcX - W _1UEw aC.9U12aCDO .- 'o CL Q o0 7-39 Edina U. S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray . • - •." --4# • ••,` L'd"e's '•-• e • .6. 4.. - 4.1. • .... --1,.^ :1. . ' - - i. • - . " ...;.iL; ..nar.", - -•-!:.. : * • • illIC 4" , •4. *4 - •. V. .; '- .- • .,•••• - - 'r • • . K% • IP‘ i."‘ W,'k•3111P . • 16g. '• •-• • . •'''' ! a.A•-VI Ili • t22..... T).4:I ':•.• . •../s 4 '•;:'. i '''. - t 4'n.i : . •**'•e-.. -' - -v.':.:• ...7.'14 . .1,...,8.. •-.4r-': ' ••- ' - ••••`,.r.1 -;; 7• f - •.' "t • - Nig: illir*. is .. -- . . '-‘7. ' - ' •:,''' ,,.. 1 ., ,.,,,. .t .., .. Aor ,••. 4 •... . • - '•44- 4*...• -- • . • • it,- 4 7,*; •'--• •. • • • • ...... 4,. • . 44 7--4 --;••• I , • ..- . . • •• •7 -•f ' • 4 - I• . 't• ii ..••:.• .0 . ', .;,77%. 4 1 L--z•- ..- ,A-1•,-., • / . .•li.t. -r.. .-,474117- ...42 ' . --,.- • ... Ns, '71' ...A. . ./F. ./ 1.1*. • • `./..1... '' 311'1t ' * " ' .- :'t•i-414.**.• ' -; .t .' . . ' .' : . ' '.; - '.. •••....- -‘4.,„ •-• - " 4 .....7'. .'• L.' N 4,,•PIS 7 , .44.d Aii,.7$ Nir• • "..; .,.. 4. * . Al i • , - ,, .. 1, . .' : ...„, - • ,- .• ,-„....i. , I • - •- , 4 •4 'A;I, , ' • a.' V .. .d a. V .. r ( .... 4 . .....,... • . .-- . . , i .,-• 4% . , ,, .. _ .. . _ — - ...- - e "41:. ..,......, .., _ -i-' _ - e Air '. - r. .:-4i•.4s 0,.tst .414014,, *..i -. 4 t -• ..4 ... . - . i . ' .4 .•.,Vor. • ,s.- ror - • . , I • . -; lob IL. • 4 , or- _.. ... , .. . . ..... was ...." '1* -,-• E. ... ....•••• ' . _ . , . . ......./INN-----• .......- - - 'L 7.., ---- _ ; 1 .,. .1.2 I.-...7' lir. --- • t; * . r, ., • ''-'`.....'4% 444"4,:•‘:7-• ,.v-3,••' ..•:.•• •• •-...,--- ---.10 ... ...I- K---,g4,---:-. • • . 4-- -44-1 ..v .v,"-1-•-•,..w,N.,,- . • '. - .-,- . • L.T.:&t.,-...14-, :#44,-,,7 - - ,-... . ....- . - - ifif vele4,-.•- : --• - '-' •- , 1,431•-•• . .. .. -: r i .• .' •, -4 -,4,4 ..., •• •'; .-7 • - .4.. - -. • - •' Wi, ••• -• • •- --- '•-•-• 4. , ;-, ••4','.- ,.0 4..-- • .•.-1,?./.,il••*:. .• - ' '':p . -f• 0- -_. . ... -,- -- : '7,'Ll.V ' .",-.L'i'4''' ...!. -:• .,.1111r..p.::. ....,..„,i_...:f''''''-w_:;•....1".7:-',~1,'-'•.:`.•:. .--" " . , "-,....-.. . ..-.. 144 ..'•-...•• 0 . • --4,--.•C."-.'• ,.1.'4."",'',44.1114'••• 17'1'..4154.1: •••-• ' •f'Alli .. •.-'''.. '.7,/ifre:44.:• ••ir .4 4.'. --•- ;::•"•-,' .•. :7 1• r.;•_, „. • ." ...t 4..• 44,,r.' r"ti"•‘rosi,.. -"17'.r..,:.,•:.:',. ::.•• . ':" ' ,.:'..• . 1411?",*'''.- ' ' ' .• `. '''''' • .. . ........, , ._. f 4 .s s•---, --,,vm s4-•--., .,,f.f" . . "••••••,-'•-•-.-.•40•,. , ' 4 - 0 ' ..• , ..", .... 1 - ...." • • . •-' ' . ft" .ftt 57 , - !OF " ,4)14 . ';' ' _. -ff .',-,.`, ft,-,•'! ..',...•".'":. .,.''' • , .• „. . - 1 ' r- •'"'11- . 1 • , - ." • • ' ••O'n - . . .,•,. . . . -f ,•, , , _'f-n„ - W.- . $11' - - •, .,,_ '''-'`.,'"-....."'ile'''r-'-'-7:', _, . - r, '. _........,.4.`";L, '•:t''':- ;..... • .4 jt,tirj,,. _ ..,i.---.i. _ .,.... - . ' - -'`',.-y4i-..:-'77,4,,A1..e-,- '741. .1 •'; ''. '-. , - '. -.• • •?--- • •- -:,,- -"-•,..A.O. .„,,, ' •".,' ".-i•....??..• .-:,..-(. . - ..... ,,,,,,...6'.------ . :- - ' 11 ‘. ..'7,-...- -:,•:-,.;,..1...-.--s-----. .-----,.,:••,,"-.::-L----- - -• ' - • •..1,,,v,-..1...:•-•71-' -c:_:.-....----...,.-..--.---- - _ ., , •. ,. , . .... ' ----1'-''..- •_- ---- - k • • • . .. . .- -rt... „..;.'-- 4 • • ' ;- , P....,."e--.-}.4a.4.4- t.•-,-'.„'.`-.' ,_.: .F1"r"--.0.1.4 :: • ... , , '':'•' *-"--'.,, ‘ * - :.0"., _ ''.'' • "C`''.''''' 7-"--• - - ..,•4' ...t!-' '''''•4.. ..„. . ..2.'' - • 4,.._........--- -- - • . •....:?,-.t-- -t„,'44,, - --4` --'''•-•._ --- -- '' -:: •••• - -7:-'..--- . __••. .„:4- .. --------- i' :7',•2.:. 7, , ---- ' --' -ift,•;44„. ---,,;, 1,--, - ----. - . - - -s,-,-..4•-.` - • - .' ''. ...e.' ' ...''.'''''''' .. ..'....'4,1:8 f.'-. .. , '-''''..., ..:r... •, 4 '. - ,2 i ,I,#,P, -.:";/"_. ' ---': - .---:',- •,....:- - ' ,. - _. .• ._._ .r. . - --.-, .'••4,0-„,,:-• u - - - '. - ., --- • '... ..- 4-"=-':.:'----1.?t, ...-'::.--:-.1..-i'444-104 -- ---,:.s--- •---........ -•,:-.- . 1 _ * _1 _.„, -'"• .... -- .---.. 4:- `'' -- ..., - , _a :-.1.44,..', ).'.. ,' ",„4. . St. Croix Bluffs - Washington County U. S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray a , lal f ` a "� •':. r, �. s {.-_ . c ? y r+ 2sr 4,..-- ,---, - �.' 4.0 +s. Vii.it1 L_ a ..21.t o a' i. y • 4Cy . ' -r {,."sac-V SV —•.�.V..- ar ' � � .,--.- t • 1 . -.. MPJ r �- 1r.r i';-i( .- 'til . ray 4�i F. ( ,1 r411V • /a 4 ; ; , ��. Rum River ,`..` I ' •'. F 4 - infir•, 'C • f L6�1 y.. North Anoka County {4 ;, . .: Parks r r.r r J�+ Y • :. X71 T _.R iT,: --Atku.,.' .., .... .,,, . .... ^ Air^�., ' 'f � fCYC"' } r a` s .Y "":'1.r +- t -t 3 r .. k' 1 j ♦ or 0 - fi ti ,. -lab.-: ' - : - sl,i,„,.FP.,.--z...-..7---f--.-47,Y-A ,----"4,-;,r - JO s,• •aw..,y °-s •, .awe _ . ' _ IIL , gill ' 4,-.. . J. 'ice, { '. . •* ta." -. - , .4.t f f 5 .'sem ) aqs ' .y • yr 1^ r ac +.—aF, } .: • ti+rs,. Vit- -,-• .^qrk „- �w F Sy + • ;� fl , 11 f h:K13S y s. ii: kill% � ryf� .4- / g,r, •'' y_ "R` f 4 l y. r- K 0, ti Avg V L K. :" • e tea. ,. ;'., ` '": ' "' ,7 '- -•- ,'-'••••) - • ..,..,.. ..-„,.:',;:,''-? v-77 ..--.;-.. '...-7-- -1T.=-• At.,ey- - ' -, ...,.;-:,..1.‘ ..•i.---',tit ' - .'..%,.... „.. . ;'...-.''' 1:4'-' • .4;4'ifr, 4'7.';',...V•ri**:$ 44/01416• 4:'•. ',,.•,- ."-e ''''":1itikk. :-"' '': '.-__ I"-::7,."47, ;/1";9•1-:::::::-. "...,,,,- •• ,-.4''',-, :. . 2•A'':':-10-9%.L.'..:'-:::::::- 4. .,•,' . . ':':71--.s*,,I,2.,. ...e.1- .Z+119i:11.' •R,-.,''.-Ti..:Cri?' .7,,,:' ''''''' ' .. •:-"It.:::::':::', - .:44iit''''' ' Eagan _4414 .;,. , - - ;,,,., „,,,,../„...., ,...1r4v1....„ rrit,,_ , 4.,_,..f•;.. i'' .,.,....:4„,......... , -.44. • .,,,,,,,1„ . . •4;• *; ,:,- .•r,,,,.,,,,.. -'' -r : •',,•1E-• •ritt:-',-S,i- *- - ,- - -11.4**`*r‘'.f4, .44: . . 11k* ...-- . te,,,.: . - 5.`,„ ---,,,. . -- -1V"..,,,,,:!---4:- .. ', ,,,---..--,.. -,-....'7,,itit,„:,..,- , •7,.-1.,• ..:;,, ...7.', ., ,77-.. ,-.41,;I:, s'', • •.., •-• - ''''. ... ''-'"". ..' " '**'-'1•7?'-',. '-.,,'4',/, 4,..;". :'-.''',;.' V,'-.:,':,i'.'"4:t-"''.. ;.,.V. . -:4'''';'.1.-. :.' ,-7- . -'-.-:-.-' A. liffortra, •..• tr--",.-- ' .." " *-. - - $."'",-""*,,. •.; lk, ... •'•?',.... - s'• .-* _ • ' U S Bancorp . -1--•' 011*- i - ' Piper Jaffray _ -,,, ---4- ' ...' 1 %.,...-... !,'..:.,'ti''''.:7.:`-,-,,4t•it'0.471r0::, ',,,- ' „',...!.: N' -'-' ('' ' -.'' :. 1' ' ', ..; ,k 4. -.i..ti-.7-,,, ..L.,7:7•ks'A "t•-;:-. '' '''''.74- .'i..'',': :727',-.r.: .,.. , -to:' 41 -.:3,-1,A r:‘,4it,' j,,,,.7.... '...„...,. 7 'L i --• ;..•' '' ' 4' /7 ..;.7-: . 7 .••.' • ." -7 ' '1",• .•.•:-...'.... ". .4-1,r .....,.., ,- . • .. .' A/ r'd-':.,"&/.•47.1k,;.. .401111),..)°' . 1.7..i.:-';'-.7 . ;:: -- ,-- ipp-r•' 4.;•••• :';'7 .41-::• ;-''''74r--s''-''- . ' '.••--•:- .'-...-.-....' '''' - '. ' .<-7-•"-. ,...t ,: . • ....?.7-7'• - ,..... -:-.../;-:--...i.,.,:::. , .1........... . . .,.. , ._, . _ ,,,,te*;-...4.`el-.4.....,-;!,;•4-J". ...:-..:2:-.:-tf,:i ,'--;.,'.-..7.,.... .-:-...,.. .-...2..-,.:„.,,...,-... ...-,..........4.44.. ._, -- - ..:-;, -.-....•?e,:-.-.1. „;,;,-,......-..,,,,,,,,,;,,.--4 - ..„. ".* --4'-,,•-••!;*r-r-..,-•44,-*N7 - ---- - ' ,_. ,,r.'';',,,„ --.....1.„..4-.•t- "-••.44.•', 1-*•.7-."-- - . r' .: ---- --- - , --._ .....",*-,"-*'-''''''''-?7.-.Z.1,,la''-:*",..- •.,-.c 1:7, --- - ---*•4','-. •—• .',•'•'7'''r?`-',-----.1,:-1-5-'''-Y•l'''•-' _ ,__ — .. - - - - '-'••ti,ls, . . . , 411110t. r, * . - . ... \ . . , „.. 't-ii e. Ag • ' , - - ' - :... _,x..,,.., - ..*. .e• '', •, lir . ,,, - .-4..-.L., :14 - • o, -•• 1, / ----- ___....„......„., -.2- ",_ ... •. .. , , _______ ... ,, ... ‘..,.' ANNOP ...,1161: - ''- ' :,1. , WAllaw...54.- 1W-t--- -.' ,t, . x , "..' *4.....r: , ' le: . - - , .-,. ..,, . .., - .r.• . ; . . ... . . ,.• • , .d.i. - - . . , .. „... i•'.4..wer•7. 4,-, ..„1.-- ,, . . ,, , Al, 7. 40k ' ".*.eili, -ii- -,C.--p•.„4,-..-.•,-.,4 ,,. ,... ***4 .•••-• : . 'VV.* •j- ... _ . .i , - r••• ' -.-- '....' •'!"...t11N-'• - - ' viti ., . •".4.. "Z• , . . • .., • .... . . , --- Ilik . . * .. . r 4 .)....-V-.. . '' -•••••:* ,.?.. •. ., . . ' ','-' Y.,,:'.1-4.,t, . .1; -'! •1•.• r '.4** • ... „ . ' •-', W' . ,- . , ... ., • .,..... ,...- .."— - : -,. ;:lok..0.- --".. • - . ,. .0 .. - ..; • .:..--.......L...„---- ... .: 4..: .,.... .....--- .... . - . r i ; ... . _ _ -_ .,,tr . ef....- . ._ . ..,, • 7 , . . ''.7.. ,..'6.•' '..'-t 1•11,17.4`, " •..,....viimaillirtti ` _7.TT'..i....-7-.7.7• - •. --:7 ,... .._ - - 7 - _,..-...... .P. .--.* ..-- i- ''t : :I'.7,1;.*7.-77------------'----- -7 ' ---5------ : '• •' •- -----, - ------ --rfa1t1E4C;lak._ ., , . -- , -. '' '- -1***.• •r. - ..„. ,:• - ---,---,."••••,.**,t. -,*.e ,_r..zt.,..;,..._,,,.,,;:,--., ,c. .,,,,..„.,..k-.,.-.i4„,3,.x,,',:,.,..,-4,4,.4.-.,.ei-".:•...10-4-:•.i:,-.„-0--:,,.'*..;`-1;,---..1i•-i'..i'7.....-.,:.,-A- 4.xrt.141-1- 4 4•t':-.r.X•,-:' • .--,_'i : a .. ; :;.-:-...;:•.',4 ,1..,;--2,;;;-,.t,..".`.',.:*7-1',.:' . '„-;,,,,7.,i.t.''..,f"i'.4/,!”.4',.-.'1':'..'..'„:-'.-,(.A.Rr1 X;-,.,.,i..:..-*..s-.''1.'.,-.,.v,r,.e.r'-,.-,..-"t'!-*0.'*.•,'Y..-.r;1:,,....,1.-.;,,.'4,.''..*-,:.=,4r,\'0•41A4-.e1_4r.'--1.-..','.-.,';4.=r.','...'r-.1-;.,'.,..,........•.,„',”'.rA'.,.•..„.r.. '.'•r.,i,;,t,"-::-'--.'--'.':-.4r-.-e t -- k 7 r - ' „ k --,-rt..i'l',,.-..1.,3.-,.1I1tY,0r*4:.*.-'•-'..,.t.V.••,,4,e.-.-.,..',-...:..--..,,.,'..-'1/4.V{0...- -7*. 144-.7",.k.",• -' .,...--,.$ .,•.-.1'-t444,..•-•.P4'1,- ' .• ' . --* , `-- . ' ''.•..':414fia414.C.7" . .. re,44_--i, ''''--' -...7-'• /6t*C. , . 4 ''' ;''''...747k,4440*.-7'.*•- ''''''-: .U.,Vtirt4. -•*. l' -.., , 1-1- . ',,,„. - cf 4. 1,,,ciiitt- •,. A 4 li,.:1 .k: ~ 11�, .fit St. Paul ' • r Phalen • Golf Course U. S. Bancorp � 'Ai Piper Jaffray _.. k ... .. „. . .. ., , r-- . , 14, , , .,,,_ , ,_ p4 iiito,„ : ..f-- .�...,.�•.. 1. ,* v. } � + , i, ".-..*k, �jj` '+F� i Lr +�� v ,tom; ', r h. ;^. • Yj 1 . 4.. -.t. •,,,,o` .2 't ! w au r . op ii` ry ''. '''' . 41111°:35 '47., "..' .• s� 44 b Z w . - - fi ,1st!:.._. a' • Minnetonka U. S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray -..-' '4., - a *.4 r "` 3r • �•, .,.,. 04_ ,-, r y....ter T i .!,'.::"'L r ' . ,• . V . ' 4 : . „_ - ,..-.. — i .mss • -.. •ry tirq -'.: •-,.;-".":0'0.i:",'","••••,4',44-ij .,;r; ' t .1',--,-,:- 2�r(FC 3Fes .gst. , •1,...-- _, ,. ¢ Z ,! Y,," _ NS Wl �Ar7�. S .., '" . • JF �� ,Pty ,,y •�,'. a F CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMORANDUM C> NI S e 1\1 To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan,Natural Resource Director Subject: Lease Agreement for Photo Copier Date: March 3, 2000 INTRODUCTION Council is asked to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a 48-month lease agreement with Coordinated Business Systems, Ltd. for a photocopier. BACKGROUND In the 2000 Recreation Operating budget,there is$15,000 for the purchase of a ne'w photocopy machine. Staff researched various makes and models of copy machines on the market. In addition, staff examined the pros and cons of purchase versus lease. Like personal computers,the technology of copiers is constantly changing making them more powerful, faster and efficient. After much discussion, staff determined it was more advantageous to lease a copier for four years rather than own it. Copiers tend to breakdown more often after a few years of usage and,by then, the technology will have drastically changed. The cost to purchase a large new photocopier will range from$8,000 to$10,000. Leases will also vary depending on the features you select and how long you wish to lease it. The recreation staff prefers a 4-year lease with a service agreement. Staff contacted three companies that sold and leased copiers. They were Won Office Solutions,Marco and Coordinated Business Systems, Ltd. Based on price, service and ease of using the machine, staff recommends leasing a Mita photocopier from Coordinated Business Systems, Ltd. The monthly lease is $248.00 per month plus $95.20 for maintenance service. A comparison sheet is attached to this memorandum. ALTERNATIVES 1. Won Office Solutions 2. Marco 3. Coordinated Business Solutions RECOMMENDATION Alternative# 3 ACTION REQUESTED If Council concurs with staff's recommendation,it should,by motion,move to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a 48-month lease agreement with Coordinated Business Solutions,Ltd. for a Mita Point Source Ai4040 copier at$3,A .20 per mo . � Al/ Mark Mark.. McQuillan' Director of Natural Resources COMMUNITY CENTER COPIER ESTIMATES 2rz000 1 Make j Ikon j Ikon 2nd choice I 'Savin 9935 DP Digital 'Canon Image Runner 3305 j Lease • 48 months. $221.00 . $207.00 (Network $ 71.00 'Network $ 89.00 I 'Total per month $292.00 'Total per month $296.00 j 'Purchase $8,340.00(trade included) 'Purchase $7,515.00 !Network $2,655.00 !Network $3,664.00 I No extra charge if purchased with copier. To' No extra charge if purchased with copier. I • add on later would be an additional charge. Network ' To add on later would be an additional charge. Network would • would need to be added to our server. need to be added to our server. Service I I 1 Agreement j7000 copies @ .016= 112.00 '7000 copies© .016= 112.00 j j4 hour on site service response time j4 hour on site service response time I Features .35 copies per minute .33 copies per minute 'Reversing Auto Document Feeder 'Reveersing Auto Document Feeder I 11000 Sheet finisher/Stapler 'Finisher/Stapler/Stacker I ;Trayless Auto Duplexing Unit ;Trayless Auto Duplexing Unit j 'Two 500 Sheet paper drawers 'Two 500 Sheet paper drawer • .50 Sheet Bypass Tray .50 sheet By-pass Tray 125%-400%Reduction/Enlargement !25%-800% Reduction/Enlargement I 112 MB Memory Capacity 132 MB Copier Memory Upgrade for total of 64 MB Make j Marco 3rd choice 1 Mita 1st choice j 'Sharp AR-405 'Point Source Ai4040 j Lease • 48 months!7000 copies©.43=$301.00 I $248.00 INetwork $ 53.80 INetwork $ 52.00 •No extra charge if purchased with copier. To: ■ I add on later would be an additional charge. Network u Network can be purchase anytime within one year of purchase. I • I would need to be added to our server. I Network would be separate from our server. 'Scanner $36.58 'Total per month $300.00 ' 'Total per month $391.38 . ' 60 months. $209.00 • !Network $ 43.00 !Total per month $252.00 1 I I 1 'Purchase $7617.00 'Purchase $9,615.00 I ▪Network $2,016.00 'Network $2,075.00 'Scan Server $1,370.00 ' � Service Agreement .0131 per copy Based on average volume !7000 copies @ .0136=95.20 11st 15,000 copies free I I I I I Features 140 copies per minute '40 copies per minute . 'Reversing Auto Document Feeder 'Scan through Document Feeder • !Auto Duplexing !Stackless duplexing !2 Tray Stapler/Stacker/Finisher 125%-400% Reduction/Enlargement 14050 Sheet Paper Supply 'Continuous Copying to to 999 I 1▪16 MB Memory Capacity 'Three paper sources= 1,200 sheets of paper j • •100 Sheet bypassII ■ !Auto paper selection/paper switching IText/Photo/Combination I ' jXY Zoom, Page numbering, electronic sorting ' Auto stapler&Hole Punch unit ' :48 MB Memory Capacity All service agreements cover parts and labor, drums, roller, toner and developer. Paper and staples are not included. Price does not include tax. ISEt CITY OF SHAKOPEE C 0 ti S Ci Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Authorization of Engineering Personnel DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached to this memo is a letter of resignation from Tom Voll, Engineering Technician II, notifying the City that he would like to terminate his employment with the City of Shakopee on March 29, 2000 as he has accepted a position with James R. Hill, Inc. With this resignation, staff would like to request authorization from Council to begin advertisement and hiring for an Engineering Technician II. BACKGROUND: In the 2000 City Budget, Council approved an Engineering Technician II position which was held by Tom Voll. The Engineering Technician II position consists of CADD design of City projects, inspection of public infrastructure and review of developer or consultant plans. If Council does not desire to fill a full time position at this time, staff would ask that Council authorize the Engineering Department to utilize consultants to provide inspection and other services as needed until a decision is made. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize staff to advertise and hire an Engineering Technician II to fill the vacancy left by Tom Voll's resignation. 2. Do not authorize staff to advertise and hire an Engineering Technician II at this time and utilize a consultant to provide engineering technician services. 3. Table for additional information. 4. Accept the resignation of Tom Voll. 5. Do not accept the resignation of Tom Voll. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 and No. 4, as this position was budgeted in 2000 and the project workload justifies the filling of this position. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Move to accept the resignation of employment from Tom Voll effective March 29, 2000. 2. Move to authorize the appropriate City staff to utilize Scott County in advertising and hiring an Engineering Technician II. 19. • ruce Loney Public Works erector BL/pmp HIRES CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator Bruce Loney, Public Works Director FROM: Tom Voll, Engineering Tech. II DATE: March 15, 2000 Effective today with this memo, I am giving my two weeks notice per the personnel policy for termination of my employment with the City of Shakopee. I have decided to take a job with James. R. Hill, Inc. I would like to thank all of the people I have worked with. It truly has been a pleasure working for the City of Shakopee. Sincerely, --1-73-w. V- Tom Voll CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Hiring of Maintenance Workers DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Interviews have been held with candidates for the Public Works Maintenance Worker positions which were authorized at the January 18, 2000 Council meeting. At this time, I am recommending that the City Council authorize the hiring of Jess Haeg and Jess Friendshuh to fill these positions. BACKGROUND: In the 2000 Budget, there are eleven Public Works Maintenance Worker positions authorized by City Council. Two additional positions were created with the growth of the City the past few years. Staff utilized the Scott County Personnel Department for the selection process and in determining an interview list. The interview panel consisted of the Public Works Director, Public Works Supervisor, Street Lead Person, Park Lead Person and the City Administrator. After reviewing the result of the interviews, applications and reference checks, the recommendation is to hire Jess Haeg and Jesse Friendshuh. Their anticipated starting date is March, 22, 2000 for Mr. Friendshuh and April 3, 2000 for Mr. Haeg and would be contingent upon their successful pre- employment physical and background check. One issue with the hiring of Jess Haeg is on the Personnel Handbook Policy on Section VIII, Appointments, Paragraph J — Family Conflicts. Mr. Haeg is a brother-in-law to a current employee in the Public Works Department. According to the City Attorney he could work as a maintenance worker. However, in the future, a promotion to a supervisory position for either of the employees would probably not meet the policy. Both employees have been informed of this policy and both the applicant and current employee are willing to accept the position of maintenance worker. Budget Impact: The advertised salary range for the Public Works Maintenance Worker position was listed at $14.26 per hour. This position is a non exempt position which allows the employee over time pay and the prospective candidates have agreed to Step 1 of the 2000 Pay Schedule for Public Works employees, as included in the labor agreement which is $14.26 per hour. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the hiring of Jess Haeg and Jesse Friendshuh for the Public Works Maintenance Worker positions. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to authorize the hiring of Jess Haeg and Jesse Friendshuh as Public Works Maintenance Workers and to be hired at Step 1 ($14.26/Hr.) of the 2000 Public Works Union Pay Schedule, effective March 22, 2000 for Jesse Friendshuh and April 3, 2000 for Jess Haeg, and subject to a successful pre-employment physical and background check. (ruceLo " ney Public Works Director BL/pmp HIRED Cc: Marilyn Remer, Payroll/Benefits Coordinator The employment process for seasonal and temporary employees follows the same procedures as for regular employees except as follows : Previous temporary employees, upon recommendation by the department head, may be rehired within two years without use of an open application process. The City Administrator or the City Administrator' s designee may notify those individuals by letter, informing them of current seasonal positions available and offering them first chance for filling those positions. If they do not respond by the designated deadline, the remaining vacancies shall be filled by new applicants. City Council action is not required for temporary positions. J. Family Conflicts. No person shall be appointed, promoted, or transferred to a position where that person would be working on a daily basis with, supervising, or receiving supervision from that person's spouse, any person permanently residing with the employee, a child, parent, sibling, grandparent, or grandchild of either the employee or of the employee ' s spouse. This paragraph does not apply to part-time or temporary employees. VIII-5 gr: a. 3 . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: New Finance Position DATE: March 14, 2000 Introduction The 2000 Budget contains an appropriation for a new position in the Finance Department . Background Due to the growth in activity for the Finance Department, additional staffing is needed. This is particularly true for 2000 because of the substantial additional staff time needed for the software conversion. There were some tentative plans earlier for LOGIS to arrange for staffing help to rotate around the cities to assist in conversion. This is not happening. Finance is requesting authorization to begin the process for filling the new position. It is proposed for this to be an Accounting Clerk position. Original intent was for this to be a part time position. However, based on work load as we get farther along in the year and learn more about the conversion process, it may need to be a full time position. Some special assessment tasks would be reassigned to this position from the Payroll/Benefits Coordinator. Other tasks would be reassigned between department personnel . The new position would be assigned lower level, simpler tasks that currently are primarily the existing Accounting Clerk' s. The position is on the Pay Plan at Grade "C" which is $13 .34 to $16 . 67 . There are adequate funds available in the existing budget for wages to cover the new position whether it is part time or full time. The approach will be to try to hire someone on a part time basis but with enough flexibility to work more hours as needed. As a result of the shifting of tasks, at a later time we would be reviewing the situation of the current Accounting Clerk to see if a reclassification to Accounting Clerk III is warranted. Requested Action Move to authorize the appropriate persons to proceed with the recruitment process to fill the new Accounting Clerk position. vr, Gregg oxland Finan e Director C:\gregg\memo\newclk 15. E . 4 . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Authorization of Engineering Personnel DATE: March 21, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached to this memo is a letter of resignation from Mike Huber, Engineering Technician III, notifying the City that he would like to terminate his employment with the City of Shakopee on March 31, 2000 as he has accepted a position with the City of Lakeville. With this resignation, staff would like to request authorization from Council to begin advertisement and hiring for an Engineering Technician III. BACKGROUND: In the 2000 City Budget, Council approved an Engineering Technician III position which was held by Mike Huber. The Engineering Technician III position consists of CADD design of City projects, inspection of public infrastructure and review of developer or consultant plans. Staff would ask that Council authorize the Engineering Department to utilize consultants to provide inspection and other services until the Engineering Department is properly staffed. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize staff to advertise and hire an Engineering Technician III to fill the vacancy left by Mike Huber's resignation, contingent upon his passing of a pre- employment physical for the City of Lakeville. 2. Do not authorize staff to advertise and hire an Engineering Technician III at this time and utilize a consultant to provide engineering technician services. 3. Table for additional information. 4. Accept the resignation of Mike Huber. 5. Do not accept the resignation of Mike Huber. 6. Authorize staff to utilize engineering consultants, as necessary, to assist the department until vacancies are filled. 7. Do not authorize staff to utilize engineering consultants. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 and No. 6, as this position was budgeted in 2000 and the project workload justifies the filling of this position, and authorizing staff to use consultants, as necessary, to assist in completing the engineering work at this time. Staff did check with the City Attorney and it is acceptable to add a contingency of employment termination. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Move to accept the resignation of employment from Mike Huber effective March 31, 2000, contingent on his passing the pre-employment physical by the City of Lakeville. 2. Move to authorize the appropriate City staff to utilize Scott County in advertising and hiring an Engineering Technician III. 3. Move to authorize staff to utilize consultants to assist staff as necessary. J71/ nice Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp HIRE CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Bruce Loney,Public Works Director Mark McNeill, City Administrator Mayor and City Council FROM: Michael Huber,Engineering Technician III SUBJECT: Employment Termination Notice DATE: March 20, 2000 With this memo I am giving my two weeks notice per the personnel policy for termination of my employment with the City of Shakopee. I would like to make this contingent on passing the pre-employment physical required by the City of Lakeville. It has been a pleasure working for the City of Shakopee, and I would like to thank all of you for the time I was employed here. Sincerely, 7 A-1/67' Michael A. Huber 157 F I. CITY OF SHAKOPEE rCiNSENT, Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox,City Clerk SUBJECT: Apportionment of Special Assessments for Condominiums of Shenandoah Place 2 DATE: March 15,2000 INTRODUCTION: City Council is asked to consider adopting the attached Resolution No. 5333,which apportions existing special assessments against newly created lots located within the plat of Condominiums of Shenandoah Place 2. BACKGROUND: Prior to the platting of Condominiums of Shenandoah Place 2,there were existing special assessments against it for the improvements to County Road 16 between CR-17 and CR-83,Project No. 1994-11. Now that the parcel has been subdivided into smaller lots as a result of platting,it is necessary to apportion these assessments against each of the new lots. Resolution No. 5333 apportions the existing special assessments against the newly created lots within the plat. The developer has received a copy of this memo advising him of the proposed apportionment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 5333, A Resolution Apportioning Assessments Among New Parcels Created As A Result Of The Platting of Condominiums of Shenandoah Place 2, and move its adoption. 41J:tic J . 36 lerk r:c , app-spachnesno RESOLUTION NO. 5333 A RESOLUTION APPORTIONING ASSESSMENTS AMONG NEW PARCELS CREATED AS A RESULT OF THE PLATTING OF CONDOMINIUMS OF SHENANDOAH PLACE 2 WHEREAS, on December 3, 1996, Resolution No. 4567 adopted by the City Council levied assessments against properties benefited by improvements to County Road 16 between CR-17 and CR-83,Project No. 1994-11; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 1997,Resolution No. 4794 adopted by the City Council apportioned the installments remaining unpaid against the parcels created because of the platting of Shenandoah Place; and WHEREAS, on April 6, 1999, Resolution No. 5107 adopted by the City Council apportioned the installments remaining unpaid against the parcels created because of the platting of Condominiums of Shenandoah Place; and WHEREAS, Outlot C of Shenandoah Place has been subdivided into the plat of Condominiums of Shenandoah Place 2; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to apportion the installments remaining unpaid against Outlot C, Shenandoah Place because of the platting of Condominiums of Shenandoah Place 2. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the 2000 payable remaining balance of assessments (to parcel 27-231057-0 for the 1994-11 County Road 16 sanitary sewer and water services improvements) is hereby apportioned as outlined in Exhibit"A"attached hereto and made a part hereof. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that all other parts of Resolution Numbers 4567, 4794 and 5107 shall continue in effect. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee City Clerk I:clerk/jeanette/app-spec/condoshenplace2 Exhibit A Levied Amount s/a 27095 City Project 1994-11 Parent Parcel=27-231057-0(Outlot C,Shenandoah Place) $ 20,849.78 Number of Lots(Not Including Road) 10 Lots Assessment per Lot $ 2,084.978 27-299001-0 Heritage Development Lot 1,Block 1 $ 2,084.97 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299002-0 Heritage Development Lot 2,Block 1 $ 2,084.97 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299003-0 Heritage Development Lot 3,Block 1 $ 2,084.98 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299004-0 Heritage Development Lot 1,Block 2 $ 2,084.98 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299005-0 Heritage Development Lot 2,Block 2 $ 2,084.98 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299006-0 Heritage Development Lot 1,Block 3 $ 2,084.98 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299007-0 Heritage Development Lot 2,Block 3 $ 2,084.98 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299008-0 Heritage Development Lot 1,Block 4 $ 2,084.98 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299009-0 Heritage Development Lot 1,Block 5 $ 2,084.98 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299010-0 Heritage Development Lot 1,Block 6 $ 2,084.98 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 27-299011-0 Heritage Development Outlot A(Road) $ - 450 E.County Road D Condominiums of Little Canada,Minnesota 55110 Shenandoah#2 TOTAL $ 20,849.78 Page 1 City of Shakopee r -7\°- Memorandum _ J TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Pawnshop License—TBOF,LLC dba/Shakopee Pawn DATE: March 14, 2000 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: On April 19, 1994,the City Council adopted an ordinance requiring the licensing of pawnbrokers, precious metal dealers, secondhand dealers, pawnshops, and their employees. The City has received an application from Frank Marzario for TBOF, LLC dba Shakopee Pawn, 1147 Canterbury Road. Mr. Marzario has previously been licensed as Madison Financial Company dba Moneyxchange. He has formed a new corporation,thus requiring a new license and background investigation. The Police Department has conducted the background investigation. Nothing was revealed that would prohibit the issuance of the license. Mr. Marzario will continue to employ some of the same employees under his now corporation. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the license. 2. Deny the license. 3. Table application for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative#1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Approve the application and grant a Pawnshop License to TBOF,LLC dba Shakopee Pawn, 1147 Canterbury Road. 2. Approve the application and grant a Pawnbroker, Precious Metal Dealer and Secondhand Dealer's license to Frank John Marzario, TBOF, LLC dba Shakopee Pawn, 1147 Canterbury Road. 3. Approve employee licenses for the following employees of TBOF, LLC dba Shakopee Pawn: Jim Rocheford,Kraig Ellingson and Joe Arthur. / . 117, Clerk Ijeanetteni /mazzario /5 CH Y OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum l- 'ten "�T �. TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator... FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Intoxicating Liquor Licenses - TL Foods, LLC DATE: March 16, 2000 INTRODUCTION: City Council is asked to consider applications from TL Foods, LLC for on-sale and Sunday on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses. BACKGROUND: The Brew Station Brewery, 1128 Vierling Drive East, is changing hands. TL Foods, LLC is acquiring the business from The Brew Station Brewery, Inc. Some of the original stockholders will remain and some stockholders will be new. The applications were tabled at the February 29, 2000, meeting because the background investigation was not completed. The applications from TL Foods, LLC are in order. The police department has conducted the background investigation on the stockholders. The investigation has produced nothing that would prohibit the issuance of the licenses. The applicant is working on obtaining evidence of the required insurance. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the licenses 2. Deny the licenses 3. Table for additional information RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative 11, approval of the licenses with the condition that they not be delivered until the required insurance is in order. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Remove from the table the applications from TL Foods, LLC for on-sale and Sunday on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses. 2. Move to approve the applications and grant on-sale and Sunday on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses to TL Foods, LLC dba/The Brew Station Brewery, 1128 Vierling Drive East, conditioned upon providing evidence of the required insurance. I:\clerk\jeanette\liquor\TL Foods, LLC >s, F, y, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Paul Snook,Economic Development Coordinator SUBJECT: Approval of Small Cities Development Program Policies and Procedures MEETING DATE: March 21, 1999 Introduction&Background: The City Council is asked to approve the enclosed Policies and Procedures for the Single-Family Residential (Exhibit A) and Rental Residential(Exhibit B)portions of the Shakopee Small Cities Development Program. As of the writing of this memo (March 15) the Policies and Procedures for the Commercial portion (Exhibit C) of the SCDP were still under review by DTED, and may or may not be available for approval at the council meeting on the 21St. Amanda Lundberg of the Carver County HRA will be at the meeting to answer questions. Options 1. Approve the Policies and Procedures for the Single-Family Residential, Rental Residential (and Commercial, if available) portions of the Shakopee Small Cities Development Program. 2. Table the matter and request additional information Recommendation Option 1. Action Required Offer and pass a motion to approve the Policies and Procedures for the Single-Family Residential, Rental Residential (and Commercial) portions of the Shakopee Small Cities Development Program. SCDPmmo9.doc Small Cities Development Program Policies and Procedures For the City of Shakopee Commercial Rehabilitation Program TABLE OF CONTENTS A. PURPOSE 2 B. DATA PRIVACY 2 C. FAIR HOUSING/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY 2 D. CONFLICT OF INTEREST 3 E. DEFINITIONS 4 F. ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES 4 G. ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENT 5 H. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS 6 I. COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION LOANS (GENERAL PROPERTY REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENTS) 6 J. MARKETING 7 K. APPLICATION INTAKE 7 L. PROPERTY INSPECTIONS 8 M. CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS 9 N. PARTICIPATION BY LENDING INSTITUTIONS 9 O. COMPLAINT AND APPEAL PROCEDURES 10 P. ASBESTOS 11 Q. OTHER PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS 11 R. AMENDMENT PROCESS FOR POLICIES 11 SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES A. PURPOSE The purpose of the City of Shakopee Commercial Rehabilitation Program is to provide the financial incentive for property owners and tenants to bring their properties up to desirable community standards thereby eliminating slum and blight conditions, preserving the tax base of the community and enhancing the overall economic viability of the City's primary commercial district. Participants in the Commercial Rehabilitation Program may use program funds to make energy and any code-related improvements to their buildings, to make handicapped accessibility improvements, and to make improvements to the exterior of the building. To the greatest extent feasible, economic opportunities will be given to residents and businesses located in the specified target area. B. DATA PRIVACY Information on program applicants shall be gathered and released in accordance with the Minnesota Data Practices Act. All information including names, addresses, income and income sources,assets and asset sources, and financial reports will not be released without prior,written consent of the applicant as specified by the ACT. The Data Release Form will inform the applicant of what information will be released and to whom. Information will only be gathered and released for solely administrative purposes such as eligibility determination, administrative review, coordination and securing of leverage funds. Private information may be released to the following agencies or organizations: City Council, Carver County HRA, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency,FmHA, Lending Institutions, MN DTED and HUD. C. FAIR HOUSING/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY It is the policy of the City of Shakopee to work to further fair housing opportunities in our programs and to administer our housing programs in a way that all residents of similar incomes have equal access to programs regardless of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation, or familial status. No person or business will be denied services, contracts for project services, or access to SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 2 program information and materials due to race, color, creed,religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation, or familial status. There will be no discrimination of persons in the administration of the Owner Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program. It is the policy of the City of Shakopee that marketing efforts will be such that no potentially eligible applicants or providers of services are excluded from participating. Affirmative marketing will included efforts to reach people have traditionally not participated in similar programs or have not been aware of available assistance. This includes,but is not limited to single heads of households, people of color or people with disabilities. D. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: • General Conditions: No member of the governing body of the locality and no official, employee, or agent of the local government, Carver County HIRA or the City of Shakopee who exercises policy, decision-making function or responsibilities in connection with the planning and implementation of the Owner-Occupied Housing Rehab Program shall directly or indirectly benefit from this program. This prohibition shall continue for one year after an individual's relationship with the City of Shakopee or Carver County HRA ends. • Program participation: No member of the governing body of the locality of the City, no official, employee, or agent of the local unit of government, Carver County HRA or the City of Shakopee, as defined above, shall accrue direct or indirect program benefits. • Contractual Relationships: No member of the governing body of the City, no official, employee, or agent of the City of Shakopee, or Carver County HRA, as defined above, shall obtain direct or indirect interest in any contract, subcontract, or agreement in any activity in this program that provides financial compensation for services. • Prohibition Extensions: This prohibition extends to contracts or direct benefits in which a spouse, minor child or business partner may have personal or financial interest. • Determination of Conflict of Interest: When questions arise or a situation is unclear an initial Opinion of Conflict of Interest shall be sought from the City Attorney. That Attorney's Opinion will outline areas that the situation is within or outside applicable Federal Regulations 24 CFR 570, Uniform Administration Requirements and State Statues 412.311 or 471-87 through 471.89. Upon determination that a conflict exists, a disclosure and description of the nature of the conflict must be made public and together with the Attorney's Opinion shall be forwarded to DTED Staff. At DTED's discretion,this may be forwarded to the Minnesota Attorney General for the State's Legal Opinion. SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 3 E. DEFINITIONS • Standard. A standard property is one that has slight or no defects and meets applicable adopted codes and standards. Minor repairs may be corrected through regular, normal and routine maintenance. • Substandard. More than routine maintenance is needed to bring the property into standard condition. Defects are generally associated with the structural integrity or mechanical systems and generally a combination of deficiencies exist that require replacement of extensive repair. Substandard is defined as not meeting the Uniform Building Code adopted by the City of Shakopee and unable to be modified at 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new building of the same square footage and type. • Suitable for Rehabilitation. Generally, this means that the financial assistance provided by the Commercial Loan Program to the project will not be in excess of 75 percent of market value of the property after rehabilitation as determined by the County Assessor. However, suitability will be determined on a case by case basis in consultation with the Carver County HRA (CCHRA) Rehabilitation Inspector, and the City of Shakopee. • Dilapidated. Exterior conditions of dilapidated buildings suggest situations that may pose health and safety problems for occupants and customers. Dilapidated buildings will have several major defects that require replacement. Typically the cost of improving a dilapidated building to local standards will be comparatively higher than the cost of new construction of similar material and scale. Such decisions will be resolved based upon established codes, rehabilitation standards, and current staff expertise. F. ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES Shakopee Commercial Rehabilitation Program funds may be used to improve properties that meet the following criteria: 1. The Property to be improved must be located within the Target Area as presented on the map included with these policy statements. 2. The property must be a commercial structure or a mixed-use structure that is used primarily for commercial purposes. 3. The property must be determined to be feasible for rehabilitation as defined in the program statement. Generally, this means that the financial assistance provided by the Commercial Loan Program generally should not exceed 50% of the local assessor's estimated valuation of the property upon completion of the rehabilitation. SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 4 4. Improvements made to the property with Shakopee Small Cities Commercial Funds must be consistent with program guidelines, the characteristics of the area and preservation or historically sensitive enhancement of the original building character. 5. The building must be determined to be substandard in order to receive Shakopee Commercial Rehabilitation proceeds. 6. Priority will be given to owner-occupied structures or those where leases are in place and the owner agrees to the improvements. Vacant buildings may be considered for rehabilitation where other criteria are satisfied and where the need for priority rehabilitation has been met. 7. The property owner/manager shall complete the Tenant Assistance Record for each commercial unit to be rehabbed. The form contains general information about the number of occupants, their incomes, pre and post-rehab rents, etc. This form will be furnished to the property owner/manager by the HRA. 8. If tenants are not to be displaced,the property owner/manager must notify each tenant that they will not be displaced. A copy of what needs to be mentioned in the letter will be furnished by the HRA. This general information notice shall be personally served or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. If any new tenants move into a unit to be rehabilitated before the completion of construction, the property owner/manager must notify them as well with the general information notice. 9. If tenants are to be displaced,they need to be notified by the property owner/manager that they are eligible for relocation payments and assistance. A copy of what needs to be mentioned in the letter will be furnished by the HRA. This general information notice shall be personally served or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. If any new tenants move into a unit to be rehabilitated before the completion of construction, the property owner/manager must notify them as well with the general information notice. The property owner/manager will then follow through with relocation assistance and help the tenants complete there move and receive proper relocation payments. The property owner/manager needs to keep the tenant assistance record up to date. G. ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS Improvements made with project funds shall comply with the following guidelines: 1. SCDP loan funds will be limited to rehabilitation necessary to prevent or eliminate blighting influences in the area as determined by the Rehabilitation Inspector based on the noted definition of substandard conditions. Building improvements and repairs must be to correct defects and deficiencies in the property affecting the aesthetics of the property or the safety, energy consumption, structural/mechanical systems, habitability or handicapped accessibility of the property. SCDP funded SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 5 improvement are limited to code compliance and must meet the BOCA, MEES and Facade Design guidelines upon completion of the rehabilitation. 2. All improvements made to buildings should be in compliance with all applicable health, fire prevention, building, housing and energy codes. 3. Health and safety needs and concerns will always be considered the top priority for using SCDP funds, including providing handicapped access with a sloped walk to the entrance rather than steps and a door. 4. SCDP proceeds may not be used for the purpose of refinancing or paying off existing debts; assessments for public improvements, working capital needs or inventory enhancement. Funds may be used only for building improvements that will prevent or alleviate blight. 5. Where the Minnesota Historical society determines that a structure is historically significant, plans for exterior improvements must be approved by that agency and/or the Scott County Historical Society, as well as meeting the Facade Design Guidelines. 6. As a condition of obtaining SCDP funds, the City of Shakopee and the Scott County Historical Society may recommend specific improvements that are consistent with the overall design for downtown. H. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS Any building owner or tenant (with owner's consent) in the target area may apply for SCDP assistance. All individuals with an ownership interest in the structure being considered for rehabilitation must be party to the application and loan documents, upon approval. I. COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION LOANS (GENERAL PROPERTY REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT) The Commercial Rehabilitation Program will be available to eligible applicants on a first- come, first-served basis. Determination of project appropriateness and conformance with r standards and requirements will be determined by CCHRA. SCDP funds will be o am q program used according to the following priorities, if necessary: 1) To stabilize the building 2) Code compliance related improvements, 3) To enhance energy efficiency, and 4) To address requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 5) Exterior improvements determined necessary to correct defects. Proceeds from loan repayments will be used to further the revolving loan fund and provide for rehabilitation assistance on an on-going basis. All projects with total costs in excess of$2000 must comply with Davis Bacon and other labor standards provisions. Prevailing wages must be paid to all construction employees. The following types of assistance will be available: SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 6 1. Under the Commercial Rehabilitation Program,the Maximum City loan amounts will not exceed $25,000, or 50 percent of total project cost, whichever is less. If 50% of the project cost exceed $25,000, the property owner must finance the additional costs, thus financing over 50% of the SCDP. Funds may be matched by owner equity, commercial fmancing,Main Street Loan Pool or EDA Revolving Loan funds. 2. Any construction funds used to add to the area of the building will be considered toward the private financing match. 3. Each applicant will be required to show evidence of matching financing or equity prior to closing on the loan. Expenditure of private leveraged funds will be required prior to paying out of a 5 percent retainage account. Equity may be determined in most cases by deducting what is owed against the property (mortgages, liens, etc.) from 125 percent of the estimated tax capacity (market value) of the building as established by the County Assessor and set forth in public record. 4. All SCDP loans shall be secured with a Repayment Agreement that stipulates the deferred loan will be forgiven on a sliding scale over a seven-year period if the property owner does not sell the property. 5. These policies permit modification and amendment. If the policies are amended, existing agreements will be examined and modified to reflect program changes. J. MARKETING Outreach will include the following: • Press releases to both local print and broadcast media advertising the availability of Commercial Rehabilitation dollars. • Make direct mailings of program information to the property owners in the Commercial Target area. • Develop brochures and posters to display in prominent locations in the target areas. • One on one personal meetings with the city and property owners. • Assurance of affirmative marketing by compliance with Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Laws when soliciting applicants. K. APPLICATION INTAKE Applications will be received on a first-come, first-served basis. The CCHRA will review the application documents for program eligibility. Careful consideration will be given to the degree of rehabilitation necessary to bring the building in compliance with the Rehabilitation Standards. Total rehabilitation costs generally should not exceed 50% of the local assessor's estimated valuation of the property upon completion of the rehabilitation. The exception to this rule is as follows: SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 7 • When it is determined that a building involves improvements over and above normal improvements that are necessary to correct a serious existing health and/or safety condition(s). Applicants are advised that they must notify tenants in writing of their intention to make improvements to the building, that improvements will not cause displacement and that efforts will be made to minimize disruption wherever possible. L. PROPERTY INSPECTIONS The primary focus of this rehabilitation program is to eliminate health, safety, energy, and structural deficiencies in the dwelling units within the target area. In all cases those types of deficiencies will be addressed before any other improvement can be considered. There will be no work funded through the SCDP for strictly cosmetic purposes. Once the applicant has been accepted for assistance, the building will be inspected to determine whether additional code work is required and to assure that specifications for work proposed will conform to standards and building codes. Upon completion of the inspection,the applicant will be given a write-up of work necessary to bring the building into compliance. The owner will be required to secure at least two bids for the project and submit them to the CCHRA for review. The CCHRA will make the final determination as to which improvements qualify for SCDP monies. Properties located within the 100-year floodplain are not eligible for the Small Cities Development Program. Each applicant file will contain a form from the City's Planning Department stating that the property is not located in the 100-year floodplain. Accepted properties must comply with environmental requirements, especially those applicable to State Historic Preservation Office review. The following procedures will apply: • All properties erected before 1945 will be reviewed by the Minnesota Historical Society to determine if the structure is historically significant before any rehabilitation may occur. ♦ After the initial property inspection has been completed by the CCHRA or Building Inspector the following information will be submitted to the State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO): - A summary of the work to be undertaken at the property; - Photographs of the structure; - Property description; - Any other information requested by the SHPO. Any changes in the scope of the project requested by the SHPO will be made to the maximum extent feasible. SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 8 M. CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS CCHRA staff will prepare a list of all contractors expressing an interest in participating in the program. Participants may select contractors from this list or may request bids from a contractor of their choice. Contractors must be licensed and show evidence of appropriate insurance. Contractors will be expected to participate in a pre-construction conference prior to receiving their notice to proceed. • The contract for rehabilitation work will be between the property owner/manager and the contractor. The property owner/manage is responsible for selecting the contractor. The program will provide a standard contract. • The property owner, taking into consideration the comparison to the cost estimating done by the CCHRA Rehab Advisor will select the contractor. The Rehab Advisor after initial inspection of the property will draw up a cost estimate on the approved repairs. This cost estimating will assist the property owner/manager in comparison shopping when contractor bids start to come in and/or if only one bid is submitted on the property. A sole bid may be approved if it meets the cost reasonableness test based on the cost estimate. • All Federal labor standards provisions, including HUD 4010 and wage decisions are to be included in all bid specifications. Program staff will assist in preparing specifications/work write-ups and bid documents and will review the submissions to assure that they are responsible and responsive. Contractors will also have to address equal employment opportunity and Section 3 requirements governing the expenditure of SCDP funds. • Change orders must be in writing and require review by the building owner, contractor and CCHRA Rehab Advisor, prior to proceeding. • Interim inspections will be scheduled by the CCHRA Rehab Advisor to monitor work progress, and labor interviews will be made at appropriate times in the process. Final and interim payments will be made upon satisfactory completion of work. Final inspections must be made to certify satisfactory completion and all labor requirements satisfied prior to payout of retainage. Lien waivers are a condition of payment and IC 134s must be completed prior to final payment. • The City and CCHRA will act only as mediators in finding satisfactory solutions to any disputes between owners and contractors. Neither the CCHRA nor the City will be party to construction contracts. N. PARTICIPATION BY LENDING INSTITUTIONS Individual case files will be maintained for each loan applicant. Within each file will be documentation recorded with the County Recorder, required information and any accessory information. Each file shall minimally include the following: • Application for rehabilitation loan assistance including a copy of the most recent property tax statement. SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 9 • Property inspection report prepared by the CCHRA, the City's building official and/or architects/contractors responsible for preparing bid specifications. • Copies of Requests for Bids • Copies of work write-ups and specifications done by the Rehab Advisor included as part of the request for bids, • Copies of all bids received and statements of consideration of prevailing wages in preparation of bids. • Property owner/contractor contract and subsequently, any change orders. • Notice to Proceed • Completion Certificate • Loan closing documents and repayment agreement. • Lien waivers • IC 134s -Withholding Compliance • Labor Standards documentation including the request for wage determination, the wage determination, notice of contract award, weekly payrolls, record of interviews, final compliance report and other information covered in the mandatory pre- construction conference. In addition to required information, project files will include correspondence and communication between financial institutions, contractors,the city and other parties. O. COMPLAINT AND APPEAL PROCEDURES Complaints and/or appeals concerning administration of the Shakopee Commercial Rehabilitation Program shall be presented in writing and addressed to the Carver County HRA 500 Pine St Suite 204 Chaska MN 55318. A written response will be given to the complainant within 15 working days. If the complainant is not satisfied with the CCHRA response, a written appeal may be made to the City of Shakopee's EDA Director Paul Snook, who also will respond within 15 working days. If the applicant is not satisfied with the response, The Shakopee City Council will hear discussion concerning the complaint at its next regularly scheduled meeting, or the next meeting thereafter if there is insufficient time to include the item on the Council's agenda. A response in writing will be made within 10 working days of the Council hearing on the matter. """"SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 10 P. ASBESTOS Inspections for asbestos must be completed by a licensed asbestos inspector prior to rehabilitation. Contractors conducting asbestos related work must be licensed and follow safe work practices associated with this type of work. Removal or disturbance of asbestos-containing material from commercial or residential buildings is regulated by the Minnesota Department of Health. Q. OTHER PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS Participants in the Old Town Commercial Rehabilitation Program agree to comply with other program considerations including provision against the use of lead based paint, equal employment opportunity, fair housing, the Americans with Disabilities Act and data privacy to the extent feasible. R. AMENDMENT PROCESS FOR POLICIES Program policies presented in these guidelines have been approved by the Economic Development Authority, Shakopee City Council and the Department of Trade and Economic Development Small Cities Development Program. Substantive changes to these policies and procedures will be approved by the City and DTED and will be effective following the date of approval. Adopted by the City of Shakopee this day of , 2000. BY: ATTEST: SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL(11/99) 11 Small Cities Development Program Policies and Procedures For the City of Shakopee Single-Family Residential Rehabilitation Program TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages 1 and 2 I. PROGRAM OBJECTIVE 3 II. FAIR HOUSING/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY 3 III. DATA PRIVACY 3 IV. CONFLICT OF INTEREST 3 V. DEFINITIONS 4 VI. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 5 VII. HOUSEHOLD ELIGIBILITY 6 VIII. LOAN STRUCTURE 7 IX. LOAN AMOUNTS 8 X. PROJECT FUNDING 9 XI. ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES 10 XII. ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS 10 XIII. INELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS 11 XIV. FLOOD PLAIN REVIEW PROCESS 11 XV. HISTORICAL SOCIETY REVIEW 12 XVI. LEAD BASED PAINT 12 XVII. MARKETING 12 XVIII. APPLICATION& APPLICANT SELECTION PROCEDURES 12 XIX. CONTRACTING PROCEDURES 13 XX. CLIENT FILES 16 XXL. CITY APPROVAL PROCESS 16 XXII. CLIENT COMPLAINT PROCESS 17 XXIII. PROJECT APPEAL PROCESS 17 1 XXIV.LOAN REPAYMENT 18 XXV. PROGRAM INCOME 18 XXVI. PROGRAM FRAUD 19 XXVII.AMENDMENT S/DIRECTIVES 19 2 POLICIES AND PROCEDURES,CITY OF SHAKOPEE THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE SMALL CITIES DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES I. PROGRAM OBJECTIVE: To assist eligible households in rehabilitating their owner occupied homes utilizing Small Cities Development funds. II. FAIR HOUSING/EOUAL OPPORTUNITY: It is the policyof the City of Shakopee to work to further fair housing opportunities in our programs and to administer our housing programs in a way that all residents of similar incomes have equal access to programs regardless of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation, or familial status. No person or business will be denied services, contracts for project services, or access to program information and materials due to race, color, creed,religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation, or familial status. There will be no discrimination of persons in the administration of the Owner Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program. It is the policy of the City of Shakopee that marketing efforts will be such that no potentially eligible applicants or providers of services are excluded from participating. Affirmative marketing will included efforts to reach people have traditionally not participated in similar programs or have not been aware of available assistance. This includes,but is not limited to single heads of households, people of color or people with disabilities. III. DATA PRIVACY: Information on program applicants shall be gathered and released in accordance with the Minnesota Data Practices Act. All information including names, addresses, income and income sources, assets and asset sources, and financial reports will not be released without prior, written consent of the applicant as specified by the ACT. The Data Release Form will inform the applicant of what information will be released and to whom. Information will only be gathered and released for solely administrative purposes such as eligibility determination, administrative review, coordination and securing of leverage funds.Private information may be released to the following agencies or organizations: City Council, Carver County HRA, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency,FmHA,Lending Institutions,MN DTED and HUD. IV. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS: No member of the governing body of the locality and no official, employee, or agent of the local government, Carver County NIRA or the City of Shakopee who exercises policy, decision-making function or responsibilities in 3 connection with the planning and implementation of the Owner-Occupied Housing Rehab Program shall directly or indirectly benefit from this program. This prohibition shall continue for one year after an individual's relationship with the City of Shakopee or Carver County BRA ends. Specific prohibitions are as follows: a. Program participation: No member of the governing body of the locality of the City, no official, employee, or agent of the local unit of government, Carver County BRA or the City of Shakopee, as defined above, shall accrue direct or indirect program benefits. b. Contractual Relationships: No member of the governing body of the City, no official, employee, or agent of the City of Shakopee, or Carver County HRA, as defined above, shall obtain direct or indirect interest in any contract, subcontract, or agreement in any activity in this program that provides financial compensation for services. c. Prohibition Extensions: This prohibition extends to contracts or direct benefits in which a spouse, minor child or business partner may have personal or financial interest. 2. DETERNHNATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST: When questions arise or a situation is unclear an initial Opinion of Conflict of Interest shall be sought from the City Attorney. That Attorney's Opinion will outline areas that the situation is within or outside applicable Federal Regulations 24 CFR 570, Uniform Administration Requirements and State Statues 412.311 or 471-87 through 471.89. Upon determination that a conflict exists, a disclosure and description of the nature of the conflict must be made public and together with the Attorney's Opinion shall be forwarded to DTED Staff. At DTED's discretion, this may be forwarded to the Minnesota Attorney General for the State's Legal Opinion. V. DEFINITIONS: Carver County HRA Carver County Housing and Redevelopment Authority City City of Shakopee Deferred Loan .A loan that requires no monthly payments but is paid back in a prorated manner(see forgiveness period below) at the time the property is sold,title is transferred, or people are no longer living there, if within 10 years of the repayment agreement date. Dilapidated Buildings-A property that is determined not suitable for rehab because of the condition of the home and other factors considered when determining if a property is suitable for rehab. Forgiveness Period -A period after ten years when the loan will be fully forgiven, starting on the date that the repayment agreement is signed. (20%per year is forgiven for every year in the home). All SCDP loans will be secured with a repayment agreement against the property. 4 Home Equity .Equity that is calculated by deducting the existing housing debt from the estimated market value. A modified estimated market value will be used to evaluate the equity for the program in the City of Shakopee. Rehabilitation Advisor Carver County HRA Staff who are construction managers on each individual project. Leverage Funds-Non-SCDP resources used to finance a portion of the repairs of the rehab project. Project Manager-City Administrator Rehabilitation Standards -Carver County HRA's Rehab Standards, which include; Section 8 Housing Quality Standards(HQS), and Carver County HRA Energy Efficiency Standards. Standard -Is a housing unit that is generally in good condition, and may have no or slight defects, which can normally be corrected during the course of regular maintenance. Examples of slight defects include: • Slight chipping, peeling or unfinished exterior painting • Slight damage to porch and steps • Broken rain gutters or downspouts Substandard -Are those housing units that are in need of minor or moderate rehabilitation. Minor or moderate rehabilitation involves one or a number of repairs needed to make the dwelling unit standard. Examples of defects include: • Holes, open cracks, rotted, loose or missing materials over a small area of foundation, walls and roof • Shaky and unsafe porch, steps or railings. • Several broken or missing windowpanes. • Rotted or loose window frames or sashes that are no longer rain or wind proof • Lack of rain gutters and erosion of landscaping. Suitable for Rehabilitation -There are several factors considered when a determination is made as to whether or not a property is considered suitable for rehab. The primary factors are structural stability and the economic feasibility of the improvements to be made to the dwelling. For a more detailed description of Suitable for Rehabilitation see Section IX. Target Area-Is a designated area within the City of Shakopee identified in Attachment A. VI. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION: 1. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION: The City of Shakopee will be contracting with the Carver County HRA for the general administration and the Housing/Commercial/Rental Rehab component of the City's Comprehensive program. 2. FIELD ADMINISTRATION: Carver County HRA is responsible for all administrative services related to the housing rehab component, including: marketing, taking rehab 5 applications, determining eligibility, conducting housing inspections, develop scope of work,bids and specifications, obtaining city and financial approval, perform loan closing, issue proceed to work notices, construction management, and inspect completed work. Carver County HRA will submit signed completion certificates for each project contractor payments for City approval and payment,the Carver County HRA will also bill the City for actual administrative costs incurred by the Carver County HRA. The City will review and approve the payment request and draw the funds from DTED. Upon receipt of the funds from DTED,the City will cut a check to Carver County HRA for reimbursement of expenses incurred by Carver County HRA on behalf of the City of Shakopee. 3. FEDERAL COMPLIANCE: The City and Carver County HRA will share in the responsibility to comply with Federal regulations regarding the administration and implementation of this Small Cities Development project. VII. HOUSEHOLD ELIGIBILITY: 1. The housing rehabilitation program is designed to be of 100 percent benefit to households of low to moderate incomes. Income Limits set by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Section 8 Existing Housing Program will be followed. Income limits are adjusted for family size as listed below. These limits shall be adjusted periodically upon HUD notification of income revisions. 2. Income for the purposes of this rehabilitation program shall be defined as gross annual income including salary, interest income, commissions, bonuses, interest dividends,tips, capital gains or sales of securities, annuities, pensions, rental property income (adjusted as allowed by the IRS), partnerships, estates or trust income, child support, alimony, social security,MN Family Investment Program(MFIP), and miscellaneous income. Gross annual income from self-employment shall be deemed to be the net profit from said self- employment, as declared by the applicant in Schedule C. F. or E. Part III, as appropriate, of the United States Internal Revenue Service Form 1040, or any other such schedule as may hereafter promulgate, but including all depreciation as income. 3. All income shall be verified in writing and projected forward for 12 months. The following examples listed below are considered acceptable: a. An income verification sheet which is assigned by a third party at the source of income; b. The previous two years tax returns shall be used for those applicants who are self employed or having variable incomes; c. Signed third party verifications from banks, savings and loans, insurance companies, etc. d. Such other written/printed verifications as deemed appropriate by CARVER COUNTY HRA. 4. Assets shall be defined as being in the following two separate categories for the purposes of this program; a. Liquid assets are those defined as cash on hand or deposits in savings or checking 6 accounts. b. Non-liquid assets are those that are real property, vehicles, or any other material possession. 5. There will be no asset limitation associated with the SCDP loans. 6. No member of the governing body of the City, and no official, employee, or agent of the local government or Carver County HRA, who exercises policy, decision making function or responsibilities in connection with the planning and implementation of the Housing Rehabilitation Program shall directly or indirectly benefit from this program. This prohibition shall continue for one year after an individual's relationship with the City of Carver County HRA. VIII. LOAN STRUCTURE The Housing Rehabilitation Program will provide rehabilitation funds to low/moderate income homeowners as follows: • Very low income households (owner occupied): Owner occupied households meeting very low income Section 8 income guidelines (50%or less of Section 8 income limits for their household size for Scott County)will receive 100% deferred loans for the rehabilitation of their dwellings. The maximum deferred loan amount will be $19,000. The deferred loan will include a repayment agreement that stipulates a percentage payback of the deferred loan(20%per year in the home forgiven) if the property owner sells the dwelling within a ten year period of time after rehabilitation is completed. • Moderate income households(owner occupied): Owner occupied households that are below Section 8 income limits(80%median income for Scott County),but above very low Section 8 income limits (50% of 80% of median income), will receive a partial deferred loan, or tier II funding. Following is the schedule for deferred loans/homeowner share. Gross Income% Home Owner Share Deferred Loan Share Deferred Loan Max. Section 8 Amount Maximum Income Limits 50%&under 0% 100% $19,000 50%-60% 10% 90% $17,100 61%-70% 20% 80% $15,200 71%-80% 30% 70% $13,300 81%-90% 40% 60% $11,400 91%400% 50% 50% $9,500 7 If the applicant is also eligible for any other low-income housing rehabilitation programs, such as the MHFA Rehab programs or the Weatherization program administered by the CAP Agency, every attempt will be made to leverage these programs in conjunction with the Small Cities program. • Where there are no other sources of funding that may be included in the financing package and where there is determined to be no repayment ability, based on affordability calculations and program eligibility review,the applicant may qualify for tier 1 status. This will be determined by using the Underwriting Worksheet. Household Income Limits by Household Size SCOTT COUNTY MEDIAN INCOMES ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SEVEN EIGHT 50% $22,250.00 $25,450.00 $28,600.00 $31,800.00 $34,350.00 $36,900.00 $39,450.00 $42,000.00 80% $33,450.00 $38,250.00 $43,000.00 $47,800.00 $51,600.00 $55,450.00 $59,250.00 $63,100.00 IX. LOAN AMOUNTS LIMITS AND MAXIMUM 1. LOAN LIMITS: The maximum SCDP project size will be $19,000.00. 2. SUITABLE FOR REHAB CONSIDERATIONS The following factors will be considered in determining the project size and whether it is suitable for rehab: a. Rehabilitation Feasibility: Properties to be rehabbed through this program must be feasible for rehabilitation,both economically and from a planning perspective. Property may be deemed ineligible for rehabilitation if it is located in an area where residential property is an inappropriate usage or the value of property for residential usage is generally declining. The Rehab Advisor will generally determine if the property is suitable for repair. However, if the property is determined to be more than moderately substandard by the Rehab Advisor,the HRA will take that application to the City of Shakopee City Council to determine if the property is feasible for rehabilitation. b. Housing Replacement Costs: Housing Replacement costs can be used to justify housing rehabilitation in cases where substantial rehabilitation is necessary and there are no other housing alternatives for the applicant. In general, if rehabilitation of a house is less than 75%of the cost of new construction of a home of similar size, style, and amenities,then it may make economic sense to allow rehabilitation. Usually rehabilitation activities that exceed economic housing values are done because of other socio-economic considerations. c. Socio-Economic Considerations: When a housing unit has been determined to be 8 unsuitable for housing rehabilitation due to economic considerations, other factors should also be evaluated. Those factors range from the economic cost of relocation,to the physical condition or age of the occupant,to the physical condition or characteristics of a neighborhood. These factors,which will be called socio-economic factors, are tangible or intangible factors that have some social or economic value to the community over and above the strict monetary considerations of a housing rehabilitation project. In fact, many socio-economic considerations can incur costs to the community that far exceed the cost of a housing rehabilitation project. Socio- economic factors need to be evaluated before a decision is reached not to rehabilitate. Some of these factors can be: I. Handicap Accessibility Modifications 2. Lack of Housing Alternatives 3. Cost of Relocation 4. Expensive Housing Alternatives a. Nursing Home S. Historic Renovations 6. Neighborhoods or Areas with Depressed Market Values X. PROJECT FUNDING 1. FUNDING TYPE: The SCDP funds will be in the form of a loan without interest or periodic payments which must be repaid on a pro-rated basis in the even the improved property is sold, transferred, conveyed or ceases to be the borrower's principal place of resident within 10 years. All SCDP loans shall be secured with a repayment agreement. 2. LEVERAGE REQUIREMENT: Leverage funds shall be any funds used to provide for rehabilitation activities performed at an eligible applicant's dwelling unit other than the funds provided by the Small Cities Development Program. It will be determined if the homeowner need s to provide leverage by using the Underwriting Worksheet. There are two basic types of leverage, Deferred Loans and Grants and Subsidized and Unsubsidized Loans. The homeowner's eligibility for leverage sources will be determined by their income, homeowner debt and debt carrying capacity, homeowner credit worthiness and property eligibility. The HRA staff can determine if the homeowner will be eligible for the Deferred loans and grants by the information listed on the Small Cities Application. Also,the HRA staff can determine if the homeowner will be eligible for Subsidized and Unsubsidized loans by looking at the Small Cities Application and pulling a credit report. If the homeowner is unable to obtain leverage based on household income, debt carrying capacity and funding source limitations, the leverage requirement may be waived. Very Low Income: a. Deferred loans and grants: These will be provided by the following programs and sources: Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's Deferred Loan Program(DLP) and Revolving Loan Program(RLP),D.O.E. Weatherization, Energy Assistance Repair Program Grant/Loan, and where applicable, client contributions. 9 Low to Moderate Income: b. Subsidized and Unsubsidized Loans: These loans will be provided by the following programs and sources;Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's Home Improvement Loan Program(HLP),Local Bank Loans, and where applicable, client contributions. 3. For most rehabilitation projects, where the household has affordability and credit worthiness, Carver County HRA will be the primary lender through Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's Home Improvement Loan Program. 4. Cases where the applicant can go to another agency for rehab loans or grant funds, Carver County HRA will supply specifications and bidding documents or any other documentation required by the funding source. Carver County HRA will also coordinate contractor activities and payments with other agencies. 5. In some cases, applicants will be able to secure loan funds from local lending institutions when Carver County HRA is unable to underwrite a loan. When an applicant does secure funds from a lending institution Carver County HRA will provide specifications,bidding documents, warranties or any other documentation required by the lending institution before loan closing. However,before any proceed to work is sent to a contractor,the loan proceeds must be in the homeowner's escrow account and require the lending institution's authorization before any funds can be dispersed. This will be triggered by a completion certificate signed by the homeowner, contractor, and Carver County HRA's representative. 6. In some cases homeowners may wish to use liquid assets for leverage funds. When this occurs, homeowners will be required to turn the funds over to Carver County HRA before any proceed to work is sent to a contractor. These funds will be deposited in an escrow account and will be released only after the homeowner has signed a completion certificate. 7. Homeowners may also wish to contribute labor towards the completion of the project. To do this must exhibit adequate skill and the physical ability to perform the work required. Their ability will be determined by the Rehab Advisor. Work agreements will be signed by the homeowner with strict completion dates to insure timely project completion. 8. Loan proceeds will be held in escrow accounts from all sources, except where prohibited by other lending sources, until the improvement has been completed to the satisfaction of the applicant and the Project Manager(REHAB ADVISOR). The escrow will be held in a special account labeled as "leverage funds" and cannot be released until the applicant has signed a completion certificate, indicating that they are releasing the funds to the contractor. XI. ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES SCDP funds will be used to improve properties,which meet the following criteria: a. The property must be located within the boundaries of the designated target area. b. The property must be substandard but suitable for rehab. c. The property must be a permanent structure. 10 d The homeowner must individually or in aggregate have a qualifying interest in the property consisting of at least. ' 1. A 1/3 interest in the fee title. Such interests must be subject to a mortgage, and must demonstrate the ability to secure the signatures of all remaindermen and spouses with interest in the property, as loan guarantors; 2. A 1/3 interest as purchaser in a contract for deed. Such interests must secure the signatures of all parties and spouses that have interest in the property both as a contractor vendor and contract vendee; 3. A valid life state. Such life estates must be recorded and must appear in the records of the county. All remaindermen must be listed and must also sign the mortgage as loan guarantors; e. The property must be occupied by low/moderate income households, and the applicant must occupy the property as a principal place of residence. f. The property taxes on the applicant's property must be current at the time of application; rehabilitation money will not be reserved for the homeowner if there is a delinquency. Proof of payment will be required prior to proceeding with the processing of the application. The home must also be current on homeowners insurance. Proof of insurance must be provided at the time of application. XII. ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS It is the goal of this housing rehabilitation program to rehabilitate substandard housing to the Carver County BRA Housing Rehabilitation standards as set forth by the Shakopee City Council. These standards include HUD's Housing Quality Standards and Carver County Energy Efficiency Standards. If the property would not meet the Small Cities program and any other rehab programs(MHFA Rehab, Weatherization),the property would not be eligible for the Small Cities program. 2. The primary focus of this rehabilitation program is to eliminate health, safety, energy, and structural deficiencies in the dwelling units within the target area. In all cases those types of housing deficiencies will be addressed before any other improvement can be considered. There will be no work funded through the SCDP for strictly cosmetic purposes. 3. Only permanent improvements can be funded through the SCDP. Permanent improvements shall be those that include conversions, alterations, renovations, or repairs upon and in connection with existing dwelling units,which correct defects and deficiencies in those units. A permanent improvement shall be defined as an improvement that meets the following criteria: a. The Structure shall have a projected useful life of a minimum of 10 years. b. The structure shall be livable, safe, structurally sound and habitable. c. All improvements shall meet all governing applicable codes,however, existing situations may be"grandfathered in" if the code violation is not one that is associated with any health, safety, energy or structural violations. d. Those structures where overcrowding exists shall be prioritized. Overcrowding 11 shall be determined by the building design and the number and sex of the occupants. e. If the structure has been determined historically significant by the Minnesota Historical Society,plans for exterior improvements to the structure must be reviewed by the Minnesota Historical Society. XIII. INELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS-Swimming Pools, all air conditioning(unless per Doctor's order for medical reasons), patios, decks(unless existingand determined hazardous), fireplaces, window/door coverings (curtains,blinds, etc.),landscaping (unless needed for drainage purposes and then improvements should be limited to resolving problem), outbuildings (unless clearly hazardous or peeling lead paint), recreational improvements, woodstoves, 200 AMP service unless needed(than justify), payment of any improvements made before application approval, improvements not consistent with established standards, driveways, sidewalks (unless health, safety problems), water softener, garage door opener(unless handicap accessible improvement), wallpapering. Flooring and fixtures shall only be replaced to comply with the HQS Standards (see attached). In addition, SCDP funds shall not be used in whole or in part to finance or to satisfy an existing debt. XIV. FLOOD PLAIN REVIEW PROCESS Properties located within the 100-year floodplain are not eligible for the Small Cities Development Program. Each applicant file will contain a form from the City's Planning Department stating that the property is not located in the 100-year floodplain. XV. HISTORICAL SOCIETY REVIEW 1. All properties which are over 50 years of age will be reviewed by the Minnesota Historical Society to determine if the structure is historically significant before any rehabilitation occurs. 2. After the initial property inspection has been completed by the Rehab Advisor,the following will be submitted to the Minnesota Historical Society Officer (SHPO). a. A photograph of the property(original, no photocopies) b. Year that the property was built c. Address or location of property d. Any known historical information about the property(original owner, architect, associated events or persons.) 3. Any changes in the scope of the project requested by the SHPO will be initiated. XVI. LEAD BASED PAINT 12 At the time of the application, each applicant will receive Lead Based Paint Warning Information and sign off that they have read and understand that literature. At the time of the inspection, evidence of chipping and peeling paint will be noted and addressed in the bidding process so that Lead Based Paint concerns are met. The specifications and scope of work related to painting include provisions that do not allow the use of lead base paint on any rehabilitation project. DTED's policy on lead based paint will be adhered to. XVII. MARKETING 1. Carver County HRA, on behalf of the City will conduct outreach in the target areas and will solicit applications for the program in the following ways: a. Notifying all applicants on the Target Area waiting list. b. Issue press releases advertising community meetings on SCDP grant both to local newspapers and to the local radio stations. c. Make a direct mailing of program information to the homeowners in the target areas if necessary to generate additional applicants. d. Develop brochures and send them out with the Municipal Utilities billing statements. e. Develop posters and post them in prominent areas in the City, and at the local food shelf. XVIII. APPLICATION AND APPLICANT SELECTION PROCEDURES 1. Applications will be received on a first come, first served basis, starting from the waiting list, which will be prioritized from the date at which the interested party first contacted Carver County HRA. Project approval for funding will be based upon first come first serve which will require the homeowner to provide all necessary documentation to proceed with loan closing. Applicants will be selected for participation in the SCDP based upon applicability to the program guidelines. CARVER COUNTY HRA will use the following guide to access the preliminary eligibility of the applicant. a. Whether or not the applicant is income eligible for a SCDP loan and what leverage package the applicants are eligible for. b. Credit history and debt-to-income ratio-as needed for leverage sources. c. Location of the applicant's property. d. Property ownership. 2 Once an applicant has been determined eligible for a SCDP loan then an inspection of the property will be conducted by the Rehab Advisor, the Rehab Advisor will determine what work is necessary to bring the property into compliance with the Housing Standards. The Rehab Advisor will then prepare a Scope of Work(work write-up)which will identify any violations to the Rehabilitation Standards and will also include any eligible improvements requested by the applicant that fall outside of the mandatory improvements. The Scope of Work shall be considered a binding contract between the applicant and the contractor performing work at the applicant's property. The Scope of Work will contain written cost estimates and will be used as part of the decision regarding reasonable cost bids and/or used as the basis for establishing a reasonable cost if only one bid is received. 13 3. The Scope of Work shall contain the following project and contractual documents: a.Instructions to the bidder. e.Special Conditions; b.Bid Proposal f. Specifications categorized by trade c.Diagrams and Lay-outs; d.General Conditions; THE CARVER COUNTY ARA WILL REQUIRE THE HOMEOWNERS TO GET 2 BIDS UNLESS THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES. XIX CONTRACTING PROCEDURES 1. The Contract is between the applicant and the contractor. The applicant will be provided a list, maintained by Carver County HRA, of contractors to choose from, however, an applicant is free to choose any contractor, as long as they meet license and insurance requirements. 2. The contractor bids off of computer generated bid specifications and a scope of work prepared by the Rehab Advisor following their inspection of the property and discussions with the homeowner. The Rehab Advisor after initial inspection of the property will draw up a cost estimate on the approved repairs. This cost estimating will assist the homeowner in comparison shopping when contractor bids start to come in and/or if only one bid is submitted on the property. A sole bid may be approved if it meets the cost reasonableness test based on the cost estimate. 3. Contractors will be allowed to bid on any and all rehabilitation projects, however, due to our adherence to our 90-day construction period. 4. The Contract shall be awarded to the lowest base bid, unless one of the following circumstances occurs: a. The Contractor has failed to follow the procedures as outlined in the Instructions to Bidders. b. The Contractor fails to bid according to the specifications and it proves impossible to compare that contractor's bid with the other contractors; c. The bid is determined to be unrealistically low by the Rehab Advisor and the Contractor agrees to withdraw the bid; d. The homeowner does not want the low contractor to perform the work and agrees to pay the difference between the lowest bid and the preferred contractor's bid. e. All bids in a trade category are determined to be unrealistically high or non- competitive in which case all bids in the questionable trade category will be thrown out and different contractors solicited for bids. 5. Upon acceptance of the bid by the homeowner,the REHAB ADVISOR will package the project according to the eligibility of the homeowner to the various leverage sources and the Small Cities Development Program. The package is then reviewed by the Rehab Advisor. Once the package has been approved,the Repayment Agreement is drawn up and a loan closing is conducted by the Community Development Specialist. 14 6. . Upon closing the REHAB ADVISOR issues a Notice to Proceed to the accepted contractors. That notice will allow the contractor 90 days in which to complete the awarded contract. Ninety days will be the allotted amount of time except under the following conditions: a. The work is weather dependent and weather conditions have not allowed the completion of the work; b. The Notice to Proceed is issued too late in the building season to allow weather dependent work to be completed on time; c. The homeowner preferred contractor is too heavily committed and a work schedule is established and is acceptable to the homeowner,the REHAB ADVISOR, and the contractor; d. Unforeseen difficulties develop with the approved work and force a delay. 7. After work begins, interim inspections will be scheduled by the REHAB ADVISOR to monitor work progress and work quality. If a dispute arises between a homeowner and a contractor the REHAB ADVISOR will attempt to find a means of resolving the conflict. If a solution cannot found then the Appeals process will be initiated. 8. All contractors will agree to the payment schedule contained within the Contractor's Application that is as follows: a. Payment shall not be required until the work has been inspected and approved by the homeowner and the Rehab Advisor and a completion certificate has been executed by both in connection with such inspection. b. Partial payments may be made by the HRA with sufficient withholding to protect the homeowner and/or the HRA from loss on account of incomplete or defective work and/or contractual obligations. c. Payments will be made only upon presentation of the following documents; 1. Billing Statement 2. Lien Waiver 3. Completion Certificate 9. Change Orders to the contract require the signature of the homeowner,the contractor,the REHAB ADVISOR, and the Housing Coordinator. Change Orders will specify who is responsible for the increased cost. These costs may be the responsibility of the homeowner and, if so,these funds must be placed in the appropriate escrow account. Change Orders will be allowed only for the following reasons: a. To rectify hidden deficiencies that are discovered once the work has begun; b. To change a specification due to unforeseen difficulties arising after work has begun; c. To address a deficiency that was inadvertently dropped from the project during project packaging. 10. A contractor's contract can be terminated under the following procedures: a. Poor work performance on the job site and the demonstrated inability to rectify the poor workmanship. The cost of repairing poor workmanship and the higher costs of awarding the bid to the next lowest bidder shall be deducted from any amount owed to the initial contractor for work completed. In all cases the contractor shall be given 15 the opportunity to rectify the problem before removal procedures are instituted. The REHAB ADVISOR shall institute the following procedures when negotiating a workmanship problem: 1. Shall set up a meeting at the job site with the contractor and homeowner to attempt to come to a consensus; 2. Shall contact the contractor the second time by certified mail notifying the contractor that the workmanship is still poor and specifying the areas that need to be addressed to satisfy the contract, giving the contractor a fifteen (15) day time limit in which to make the required repairs. b. Causing undue damages to a homeowner's property and the inability or unwillingness to correct the damages. The cost of repairing damages will be deducted from any money owed the contractor for work already completed. If the amount owed is insufficient to cover the costs of the damages then Carver County HRA will assist the homeowner, if necessary,to reclaim damages by legal means. c. The inability of the contractor to perform the work within the allotted time; d. Unreconcilable and unresolvable differences between the contractor and the homeowner; e. Contractors who are removed from a contract shall be removed from the Contractors List and shall be prohibited from being awarded any contract with CARVER COUNTY HRA. XX. CLIENT FILES 1. The Housing Department of Carver County HRA, on behalf of the City of Shakopee, shall maintain files on each applicant throughout the duration of the program. Each applicant's file shall include the following: a. Work Progression Chart: This form allows easy monitoring of the file and enables those working with it to see at a glance,just what stage the project is at. This form will be attached to the inside cover of the file; b. SCDP Loan Application: This form will provide information relative to family size and composition, employment information, household income, applicant affordability, and monthly expenses. The form will also provide data on the property to be improved. Verification of all income, as well as a copy of the applicant's most recent property tax statement shall be attached to the application. Proof of property ownership(Warranty Deed, Torrens Certificate,Recorded Contract for Deed, Recorded Life Estate, etc.)must also accompany the application. The lead paint warning will be included at the bottom of this form&will be signed by the applicant attesting that they have read&understand the dangers associated with lead based paint. c. Third Party Income Verification: This form provides third party verification of an applicant's income. These forms shall be signed by a representative from the source of 16 income; d. Property Inspection Form: The Inspection Report shall be prepared by the REHAB ADVISOR. The Inspection Report is designed to include a specific account of the condition of the property& all corrective actions necessary; e. Scope of Work: The Scope of Work is the contract between the applicant& contractor& specifies the exact work, which will be performed at the eligible household's property. f. Bids and Warranty's: These forms shall be signed& dated by the homeowner&the contractor&will be used as legal binding contracts; g. Repayment Agreement: This form is the legal mechanism by which a Lien is placed against the improved property until the loan is repaid, with no interest, at the time of property ownership transfer within 10 years; h. Close-Out Packet: A letter is sent to the homeowner informing them of completion& contains copies of the Repayment Agreement, &Completion Certificates. XXI. CITY APPROVAL PROCESS 1. All housing rehabilitation projects shall be reviewed by the City Council and the Carver County HRA Board. All applicants as part of the application process sign a data privacy release form allowing Carver County HRA to disclose information. The project information shall consist of the applicant's household composition, estimated market value, list of rehabilitation activities, estimated SCDP loan amount, leverage sources. If the City denies a project, reasons for denial must be stated in writing, within 15 days,& in the Council Minutes, & forwarded to the applicant& Carver County HRA. Carver County HRA will provide information on the appeal process to the applicant, Section XXIII. Any applicant whose application is denied shall have the right of appeal before the City Council. XXII. CLIENT COMPLAINT PROCESS Initial client complaints about any aspect of: 1. Carver County HRA's service delivery 2. Carver County HRA's staff; and or City Staff 3. Program restrictions; or 4. Contractor relations/workmanship may be pursued verbally or in writing to the Carver County HRA Assistant Director and shall be responded to by either the Housing Services Coordinator or the Housing Rehabilitation Specialist who shall work with staff,the contractor, and the client to resolve the problem within two weeks. If the applicant is still dissatisfied,the client may further pursue the complaint as follows: a. File a written complaint within two weeks of the original complaint. This complaint shall be responded to by the Executive Director within two weeks. b. If still unsatisfied, a complaint may be filed with the overall Project Coordinator for the City's SCDP project (in this case, the Shakopee Economic Development Coordinator) which will be taken to the City Council for action at their next regularly scheduled 17 meeting. c. If still unsatisfied,the complaint will be forwarded to the MN Dept. of Trade and Economic Development along with the following information: 1. A copy of the written complaint and request for satisfaction under the appeals process. 2. A copy of all correspondence between Carver County HRA and the appealing client concerning the appeal dispositions. 3. The final appeal disposition. XXIII. PROJECT APPEAL PROCESS If a household's application for any reason is denied or a household is dissatisfied with the level of assistance they have received, the following procedure is to allow for a standardized appeal/complaint process to all applicants. Upon complaint an applicant will be informed of the following procedure: a. That a written procedure for appeal is available. b. In the case of denial of assistance or service, a written notice shall be sent to the applicant clearly stating under what condition that application was denied and also a copy of this appeal process; c. Initial client appeals about any aspect of Carver County HRA's service delivery expressed verbally or in writing shall be forwarded to the appropriate department and shall be responded to by the Department Head within two weeks. If the applicant is dissatisfied with the response then the client shall be informed of the following procedure; d. The applicant who wishes to appeal the initial response, must submit a request for appeal in writing within thirty days of the initial response. This request must state the reason(s) for the appeal and should include any information that the applicant feels is pertinent to the appeal; e. All appeals should be addressed to: Carver County HRA Executive Director 500 PINE STREET N. SUITE 204 CHASKA, MN 55318 f. The Assistant Director shall be designated by the Carver County HRA Executive Director to review all written appeals with the Executive Director. g. If the Executive Director and the Assistant Director do not concur on the findings,the Executive Director shall respond to the applicant, in writing, including the results of the review, an explanation of the findings and the next step the applicant can take if he/she is still not satisfied with the response; h. Or if the Executive Director and the Assistant Director do not concur on the findings, the appeal will be presented to the City of Shakopee City Administrator whose written decision shall be final and presented to the applicant within fifteen(15)working days. i. If the applicant wishes to appeal the decision of the Executive Director and the Economic Development Coordinator, the applicant may appeal to the City Council within fifteen(15)working days. At that time the applicant will be notified that they have the right to appear before the City Council. The City of Shakopee City Council 18 will respond with a written decision, which shall be final,within fifteen(15)working days. j. Any further appeal actions will be forwarded to the MN Dept. of Trade and Economic Development along with the following information: 1. A copy of the written complaint and request for satisfaction under the appeals process. 2. A copy of all correspondence between Carver County HRA and the appealing client concerning the appeal disposition 3. The final appeal disposition. XXIV. LOAN REPAYMENT 1. Within ten(10)years from the date of loan closing,when a property ceases to be the applicant's principal place of residence or when the property is sold or transferred,the loan principal is due in full. The loan funds will be repaid to the City, in full, from the proceeds from the sale when an improved property is sold. 2. The City will use the repaid funds to help address the future housing needs within the City in the exact manner as outlined in the proceeding procedures. XXV. PROGRAM INCOME Income from the repayment of loans will be held by the City and tracked separately from other City funds. Repayments will be used by the City to assist LMI households in the repair of their homes. XXVI. PROGRAM FRAUD EVIDENCE OF FRAUD: The Administrator shall refer to any participating households,where evidence of fraud or misrepresentation is present,to the Minnesota Attorney General for appropriate investigation and legal action. 19 XXVII.AMENDMENTS/DIRECTIVES These procedural guidelines may be amended or supplemented from time to time by the City of Shakopee/Carver County HRA by issuance of revised pages to be effective on the date of issue. Adopted by the Shakopee City Council this day of 2000. By: Attest: 20 Small Cities Development Program Policies and Procedures For the City of Shakopee Residential Rental Rehabilitation Program CITY OF SHAKOPEE SMALL CiTI S DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM RESIDENTIAL RENTAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES ADMINISTERED BY CARVER COUNTY HRA PROGRAM OBJECTIVES 1. FEDERAL OBJECTIVE: The Federal objective addressed by the Shakopee Downtown Revitalization Program's rental rehabilitation activity will be of benefit to "Low/Moderate Income Persons." All of the rental structures must have at least 51% of their rental units occupied by low/moderate income households at an affordable rent in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Section 8 Income Limits for Scott County. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 1. GENERAL ADMINISTRATOR: The Carver County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (CCHRA) will be responsible for all phases of the administration of this Small Cities Development Comprehensive Program. CCHRA will be the Fiscal Agent and will be responsible for all financial and progress reports. CCHRA will have principle responsibility for completion of the Environmental Assessment and development/submission of all required policies and procedures prior to commencement of program delivery. Floodplain maps will be provided to the Field Administrator. 2. RENTAL REHABILITATION ADMINISTRATOR: City of Shakopee will contract with CCHRA for rental rehabilitation field administration services. CCHRA will be responsible for program marketing, determination of property owner, tenant eligibility and requirements, assistance with financial packaging, property inspections and suitability of property rehabilitation, work write-ups, contract awards, interim inspections, change orders, final inspections,contractor payments and project close-outs. 3. FEDERAL COMPLIANCES: The City of Shakopee and CCHRA will share responsibility to comply with Federal Regulations regarding the implementation and administration of this Small Cities Development Project. 1. FAIR HOUSING/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: It is the policy of the City of Shakopee to work affirmatively to ensure that all persons regardless of race, creed, national origin, sex, martial status, age, handicap or reliance on public assistance shall be treated equally and fairly for purposes of this SCDP Rental Rehabilitation Program. a. Program promotion conducted by CCHRA and the City of Shakopee shall be inclusive and will exercise care to avoid promotion methods that exclude eligible applicants. b. CCHRA will provide all applicants with printed information on Fair Housing at the time of application. c. Affirmative promotion shall actively pursue methods of reaching potential applicants that are difficult to reach. 1 GENERAL ELIGIBILITY 1. IMPROVEMENT OF SUBSTANDARD RENTAL UNITS: This rental rehabilitation program is designed to improve substandard rental units, address health and safety considerations and to preserve existing community rental stock. 2. INCOME: Property owner income shall have no direct bearing on the lending of SCDP funds except where inadequate cash flow or income exists to matching fund requirement. 3. DATA PRIVACY: Information on program applicants shall be gathered and released in accordance with the Minnesota Data Practices Act. All information including names, addresses, income and income sources, assets and assets sources, credit reports and financial reports will not be released without prior, written consent of the applicant as specified by the ACT. The Data Release Form will inform the applicant of what information will be released and to whom. Information will only be gathered and released for solely administrative purposes such as eligibility determination, administrative review, coordination and securing of leverage funds. All necessary tenant information will also fall within this protected area. Private information may be released to the following agencies or organizations: CCHRA, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, Lending Institutions, DTED,and HUD. 4. EVIDENCE OF FRAUD: The administrator shall refer any participating tenants, property owners,or contractors,where evidence of fraud, collusion, or misrepresentation is present,to the Minnesota Attorney General for appropriate investigation and legal action. CONFLICT OF INTEREST 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS: No member of the governing body of the locality and no official, employee, or agent of the local government, City of Shakopee or CCHRA, who exercises policy, decision-making function or responsibilities in connection with the planning and implementation of the Rental Rehabilitation Program shall directly or indirectly benefit from this program. This prohibition shall continue for one year after an individual's relationship with the Local Government, City of Shakopee or CCHRA ends. 2. DETERMINATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST:When questions arise or a situation is unclear an initial Opinion of Conflict of Interest shall be sought from the City Attorney. The Attorney's Opinion will outline areas that the situation is within or outside applicable Federal Regulations 24 CDFR 570, Union Administration Requirements and State Statutes 412.311 or 471-87 through 471.89. The Attorney's Opinion shall be forwarded to DTED Staff,and at DTED's discretion, shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Attorney General for the State's Legal Opinion. RENTAL PROPERTY OWNER'S AGREEMENT 1. TERM OF RENTAL CONDITION: Property owner's participation in the Rental Rehabilitation program is conditional upon the Owner's consent to enter into an Agreement with the City. That agreement shall stipulate the following conditions: a. All rehabilitated rental units shall, at a minimum, meet the Rehabilitation Standards as provided in the Small Cities Development Program procedures. 2 b. A minimum of 51% of the units to be rehabilitated shall be rented by low to moderate income households. Low to moderate income shall be defined as household income of less than 80%of the annually published area HUD median income. c. The owner agrees to enter into an annual lease with existing tenants if the affected units are not currently under lease. d. The owner further certifies that the rental rates effective at the time of this agreement shall be maintained for the term of the existing lease period. e. The Owner must limit rental increases to no more than 5%per lease year for the effective term of this contract, provided those rental increases do not exceed the HUD published 50%rent allowance for the area. f. The Owner agrees to maintain rents for a period of five consecutive years from the date of this agreement at a rate that is LESS than the rent level, including utility allowance, based on 30%of the 50%of the Area Median Income: Efficiency $416.00 One Bedroom $535.00 Two Bedroom $684.00 Three Bedroom $925.00 Four Bedroom $1048.00 Where the lease rents exceed these limits, rents must be lowered to meet them. g. The Owner agrees to minimize any activities that may result in displacement of a tenant. The Owner agrees to provide alternative housing for an affected tenant if the tenant is forced to relocate due to construction activities, he must agree to reimburse the displaced tenant for allowable expenses under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, (URA). 2. ASSETS: There will be no asset limitation associated with SCDP loans. Liquid assets shall be viewed as a potential loan leverage source. 3. EVIDENCE OF FRAUD: Any administrating party participating in the Program shall refer evidence of fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct in connection with the operation of the Program to the State of Minnesota Attorney General for investigation and possible legal action. 4. FAIR HOUSING/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: The rental property owner and/or management staff will work affirmatively to ensure that all persons regardless of race, creed, national origin, sex, martial status, age, handicap or reliance on public assistance shall be treated equally and fairly for purposes of this SCDP Rental Rehabilitation Program. TENANT ELIGIBILTY 1. INCOME ELIGIBILITY:This rental rehabilitation program is intended to primarily benefit tenants of low to moderate incomes. This will be achieved by requiring that at least 51%of 3 the assisted rental units house low to moderate income tenants. Tenant income will be verified and shall follow the gross income limits as set by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Section 8 Existing Housing Program. These limits shall be adjusted periodically upon HUD notification of income revisions. The income limits as adjusted for family size are as follows: Household Size Household Income 1 $33,450 2 $38,250 3 $43,000 4 $47,800 5 $51,600 6 $55,450 7 $59,250 8 $63,100 2. INCOME VERIFICATION: All income shall be verified in writing by a third party. Tenant income shall be assembled and verified by CCHRA. The following examples listed below are considered acceptable. a. An income verification sheet which is signed by a third party at the source of income; b. The previous two years tax returns shall be used for those applicants who are self- employed or have variable incomes. All schedules and attachments are necessary; c. Signed third party verifications from banks, savings and loans, insurance companies, etc.; d. Such other written/printed verifications as deemed appropriate by CCHRA. Income information that is no more than one-year-old will not be considered current for verification purposes and must be re-verified. 1. PRIORITY FOR REHABILITATION: All SCDP applications are taken on a first-come first-served basis. When an application is completed and approved by the Housing Coordinator, the applicant home is scheduled for an inspection by the Rehabilitation Inspector. Inspection schedules are made based on the order an application is received after it has been approved. The inspector will work with the homeowner and prospective contractors to schedule rehabilitation completion. Health and Safety: When the Field Inspector determines that there is a deficiency in the home that is a health and safety risk to the family,that home will receive priority. 2. SUITABILITY FOR REHABILITATION: Residential rental units must be determined as suitable candidates for rehabilitation in order to receive SCDP funds. That determination shall be based on a number of factors including structural viability/housing deficiencies, 4 market-housing design viability, historic significance, zoning, location, cost of rehabilitation and post market value,housing replacement costs and other socio-economic factors. a. Structural Viability: Will be determined by the number and severity of structural and house system deficiencies existing in the rehabilitation candidate. Funding from SCDP and leverage sources must be available to address all existing structural deficiencies. b. Residential Design/Local Market Value: The residential rental unit design must allow for residential reuse of the unit after the current owner has moved on. The residential design must be such that the unit will have an after rehabilitation market value or a layout that allows for modifications to the unit within its after rehabilitation market value that exceeds the cost of rehabilitation. c. Historic Significance: Residential units that possess historic significance will be reviewed outside of normal market value economic considerations. d. Zoning/Property Location: Residential units located within industrial or commercial zones may be declared as not suitable for rehabilitation. e. After Rehabilitation Market Value: If the type and number of housing repairs needed to bring the rental unit into compliance with the adopted housing standards exceeds the after rehabilitation market value of the unit, the unit may be declared as not suitable for rehabilitation. Denial of assistance shall be based on after rehabilitation market value established through an appraisal. After Rehabilitation Market Value defined as: Current EMV+50%of the Cost of Rehabilitation Repairs f. Housing Replacement Costs/Socio-economic Factors:When a residential unit has been determined to be unsuitable for rehabilitation due to economic or market factors, other factors must be considered. These factors include. 1) Lack of Housing Alternatives 2) Cost of Relocation 3) Expensive Housing Alternatives 4) Abnormal Low Market Values due to depressed market 5) Physical condition and age of resident 3. DECLARATION OF UNSUITABLE FOR REHABILITION: When a residential rental unit has been determined as "Not Suitable for Rehabilitation"the governing body,the City of Shakopee, shall review information provided by the Field Administrator that shall consist of the following: 1) Inspection Report 2) Estimated Cost of Repairs 3) Zoning/Location 4) After Rehabilitation Appraisal 5) Historic Review(SHPO) 6) Socioeconomic Factors The Field Administrator will also provide the City of Shakopee with the analysis made based on Section 4f Lack of Housing Alternatives; Cost of Relocation; Expense of Housing 5 Alternatives, Abnormal Low Market Value in a Depressed Market; and Physical Condition/Age of Resident. The Governing Body shall then make a determination to declare the residential unit as unsuitable for rehabilitation or decide that other factors warrant the rehabilitation of the unit,in which case the project proceeds. 4. TARGET AREA: The property to be rehabilitated must be located within the target area which, for the purposes of this rental rehabilitation program, will be the "Residential Redevelopment Area"as designated in the City of Shakopee. See Attached Map. 5. ELIGIBLE STRUCTURES:The property must be a residential rental structure meeting the following classification: a. Single Family and Duplex Rentals. b. Residential Commercial Buildings containing 2 or more units. c. Mixed-use Commercial units containing residential units. d. The property to be rehabilitated shall be an active residential rental enterprise. Exceptions can be made for repairs to allow the rehabilitation of vacant residential rental properties that are bona fide developments and receive a waiver of the occupancy standard by the City of Shakopee. 6. OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS: The property owner must individually or in aggregate have a qualifying interest in the property consisting of at least: a. A 1/3 interest in the fee title. Such interests must be subject to a mortgage, and must demonstrate the ability to secure the signatures of all remaindermen and spouses with interest in the property, as loan guarantors; b. A 1/3 interest as purchaser in a contract for deed. Such interests must secure the signatures of all parties and spouses that have interest in the property both as contractor vendor and contract vendee 7. TAX DELINQUENCY: Property Owner receiving rehabilitation assistance must be current with property tax payments. 8. PROPERTY INSURANCE: The Property Owner must carry current property insurance both at the time of the application and through the completion of rehabilitation. 9. DEFAULT AND BANKRUPTCY: The Property Owner shall not be eligible to receive SCDP funding if the property to be rehabilitated is in default of its mortgage, contract for deed or comparable obligation. An applicant will be ineligible to receive assistance through this rehabilitation program if the applicant is currently involved in bankruptcy proceedings. FLOOD PLAIN: All Rental Housing units will be individually assessed to determine if the housing property is located in a 100-year flood plain area. Location within a flood plain will be determined by reviewing the applicant home location on a flood plain map. If the housing is located outside of the 100-year floodplain it will be documented in the file and no further action will be necessary. Properties located within the 100-year floodplain are not eligible for the Small Cities Development Program. Each applicant file will contain a form from the City's Planning Department stating that the property is not located in the 100-year floodplain. 6 PROJECT FUNDING 1. TENANT OCCUPIED PROGRAM DESIGN: The SCDP project shall have a funding threshold based on income. 51%of the tenant households must meet the current incomes in order for the project to be eligible to receive SCDP funding. The following table details funding level and loan type: Household 80%Area Median Income Size 50%Deferred Loan 50%Other Funds 1 $33,450 2 $38,250 3 $43,000 4 $47,800 5 $51,600 6 $55,450 7 $59,250 8 $63,100 2. MAXIMUM FINANCING: The maximum SCDP loan amount extended to any applicant shall not exceed $10,000 for single family or duplex residential rental dwelling units. If the total cost of repairs exceeds the SCDP funding limit, the applicant will be responsible to secure additional financing. CCI RA will assist the applicant to secure leverage funding, but if the applicant is unable to secure the necessary funding,then the scope of the project will be reduced in a manner that is consistent with the funding priorities and adopted Housing Standards. 3. FINANCING DEFINITIONS: The City of Shakopee Small Cities Development Program (SCDP) Rental Rehabilitation Program will have a blended financing made up of two separate sources of funds. That financing will consist of: a. Deferred Loans: A 0% deferred loan will be defined as a loan without interest or periodic payments, which must be repaid in the event the improved property is sold, transferred, or conveyed or ceases to be used for residential housing within 7 years. Forgiven 1/7%per year for seven years. b. Leverage funds: Shall be any funds used to provide for rehabilitation activities performed at an eligible applicant's dwelling unit other than the funds provided by the Small Cities Development Program. Leverage sources will be determined by income, existing debt and cash flow and the debt carrying capacity of the property, property owner credit worthiness and property eligibility. Primary rental rehabilitation leverage funds are composed of the following: 7 c. Subsidized and unsubsidized loans: These loans will be provided by the following programs and sources: Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's Rental Rehabilitation Loan Program(RRLP),Local Bank Loans,and where applicable, client contributions. 4. OTHER LEVERAGE SOURCES: SCDP funds shall also be leveraged with dollars provided from sources other than private,public or non-profit Lenders. a. Liquid Assets:In some cases Property Owners may wish to use liquid assets for leverage funds. When this occurs, Property Owners will be required to turn the funds over to CCHRA, these funds will be deposited in an escrow account before any "proceed to work"is sent to a contractor. b. Leverage Fund Policy: Proceeds will be held in escrow accounts from all sources, except where prohibited by other lending sources, until the improvement has been completed to the satisfaction of the applicant and the project manager. The escrow will be held in a special account labeled as "leverage funds" and cannot be released until the applicant has signed a completion certificate, indicating that they are releasing the funds to the contractor. ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS:It is the goal of this rental rehabilitation program to rehabilitate substandard rental housing to the standards as set forth in the Carver County HRA Housing Rehabilitation Standards as adopted by City of Shakopee (See Attachment 1 to these policies). These standards exceed HUD's Housing Quality Standards and are, in part, based on the Minnesota Energy Efficiency Standards. It will be the primary focus of this rehabilitation program to eliminate health, safety, energy and structural deficiencies in the dwelling units within the residential area of City of Shakopee. There will be no work funded through the Small Cities Development Program for strictly cosmetic purpose. 2. ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS: Only permanent improvement can be funded through the Small Cities Development Program. Permanent improvements shall be those that include conversions, alterations, renovations, or repairs upon and in connection with existing habitability, structural integrity or energy efficiency of the property. Upon completion the property must meet or exceed HUD's Housing Quality Standards and must meet the following general requirements: 3. PRIORITY IMPROVEMENTS: Shall be defined as improvements that are mandatory and must be completed before other types of repairs are considered. Those repairs include, but are not limited to the following: a. Fire Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code and Mechanical Code violations affecting health and safety. b. Elimination of Lead Based Paint and Asbestos. c. Repairs affecting the structural integrity of the building. d. Modifications to make the rental units accessible to handicapped persons(Section 504). e. Violations of HUD's Housing Quality Standards. 8 f. Violations of the Minnesota Energy and Efficiency Standards. g. If the structure has been determined historically significant by the Minnesota Historical Society, plans for exterior improvements to the structure must be reviewed by the Minnesota Historical Society. SHPO mandated repairs are priority. 4. FUNDING PROHIBITIONS: Improvements that are largely cosmetic or do not improve housing systems are generally ineligible. Specifically,the following activities are ineligible: a. Household appliances, saunas, whirlpool baths, decorative cabinetry, detached garages, decks, patios, landscaping (unless it's undertaken due to repairs resulting from eligible activities), wood burning heating systems, fireplaces, financing, water softener or window air conditioners (central air conditioning may be allowable with documented medical justification). b. Small Cities Development funds shall not be used in whole or in part to finance or to satisfy an existing debt. c. Small Cities Development Program funds shall not be used for the payment, in whole or partly for the satisfaction of assessments for public improvements. d. Additions are generally ineligible unless the work is being undertaken to address accessibility issues. LEAD BASED PAINT 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS: The elimination of lead based paint is a priority of this Small Cities Development Program. The following procedures shall apply to the housing rehabilitation activities: a. All Tenants shall receive, review and sign "Lead Based Paint...A Threat To Your Children" (US GPO#1933-351-568). This document shall be part of the applicant file. b. The Scope of Work contract, (the contract between the applicant and the contractor), shall expressly prohibit the use of lead based paints in all rehabilitation activities. c. All defective paint surfaces including peeling, cracking, scaling, chipping or loose paint surfaces shall be identified and corrected in accordance with methods that ensure the safety of residents and contractors. d. Lead-safe work practices will be followed in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health. HISTORICAL SOCIETY REVIEW 1. SHPO REVIEW: All properties erected before 1945 will be reviewed by the Minnesota Historical Society to determine if the structure is historically significant before any rehabilitation occurs. 9 2. HISTORIC PROCEDURE: After the initial property inspection has been completed by the Field Inspector, the following will be submitted to the Minnesota Historical Society Officer (SHPO). a. A summary of the work to be done at the property; b. Photographs of the structure; c. Property description; d. Any other information request by the SHPO. Prior to the issuance of the Proceed to Work.a response form the SHPO must be in the file indicating approval of proposed work and/or required amendments to the proposed work. Any changes in the scope of the project required by the SHPO must be initiated. MARKETING 1. GENERAL MARKETING: CCHRA, along with of the City of Shakopee will conduct outreach in the City and will solicit applications for the program in the following ways: a. Notifying all applicants on the Shakopee Waiting List for compilation of an Applicant List. b. Issue press releases advertising community meetings and/or information on SCDP grant application both to local newspapers and to local radio stations. c. Make direct mailing of program information to the property owners in the community if necessary to generate additional applicants. d. Develop brochures and send them out in the billing statements of local utility vendors. e. Develop posters and post them in prominent areas in the communities as well as distributing brochures at commodity distribution sites,where applicable. APPLICATION AND APPLICANT SELECTION PROCEDURES 1. APPLICATION PROCEDURES: Applicants will be selected for participation of the Small Cities Development Program based upon completion and acceptance of their application in accordance with program guidelines. Applications will be received on a first come, first served basis, starting from the waiting list,which will be prioritized from the date at which a completed application is returned to the CCHRA. CCHRA will use the following guide to access the preliminary eligibility of the applicant. a. Property owners are eligible for a 50%deferred loan with a maximum deferred loan of $10,000 per unit. The property owner must be able to secure leverage to be eligible for the program. b. The property owner/manager chall complete the Tenant Assistance Record for each housing unit to be rehabbed. The form contains general information about the number of occupants,their incomes,pre and post-rehab rents,etc. This form will be furnished to the property owner/manager by the HRA. 10 c. If tenants are not to be displaced, the property owner/manager must notify each tenant that they will not be displaced. A copy of what needs to be mentioned in the letter will be furnished by the HRA. This general information notice shall be personally served or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. If any new tenants move into a unit to be rehabilitated before the completion of construction, the property owner/manager must notify them as well with the general information notice. d. If tenants are to be displaced,they need to be notified by the property owner/manager that they are eligible for relocation payments and assistance. A copy of what needs to be mentioned in the letter will be furnished by the HRA. This general information notice shall be personally served or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. If any new tenants move into a unit to be rehabilitated before the completion of construction, the property owner/manager must notify them as well with the general information notice. The property owner/manager will then follow through with relocation assistance and help the tenants complete their move and receive proper relocation payments. The property owner/manager needs to keep the tenant assistance record up to date. Once an application has been completed and preliminary approval by the Housing Coordinator, the application will be given to the Field Inspector for the scheduling of an inspection. 2. HOUSING INSPECTION: Once a property owner and the residential rental structure has been determined eligible for a SCDP loan then an inspection of the property will be conducted by a Field Inspector. The Inspector will determine what work is necessary to bring the property into compliance with the Housing Standards. The REHAB ADVISOR after initial inspection of the property will draw up a cost estimate on the approved repairs. This cost estimating will assist the property owner in comparison shopping when contractor bids start to come in and/or if only one bid is submitted on the property. If one bid is submitted and the costs are high in comparison,a pre-construction conference with the property owners, bidding contractor and the Carver County HRA's REHAB ADVISOR will take place. Discussions as to where the differences are and the cost reasonableness of the bid will occur. The final decision will be based on the Rehab Advisor input and the desire of the homeowner to pay the difference between the bid and cost estimate. 3. SCOPE OF WORK:The Scope of Work shall be considered a binding contract between the applicant and the contractor performing work at the applicant's property. It shall contain the following project and contractual documents: a. Instructions to the bidder; b. Bid Proposal; c. Program Warranties; d. General Conditions; e. Special Conditions; f. Specifications categorized by trade; g. Diagrams and Lay-outs. 11 DAVIS BACON LABOR STANDARDS 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS: All rental rehabilitation projects containing eight (8) or more units with rehabilitation costs exceeding $2,000 shall incorporate the Davis Bacon and Related Acts provisions. 2. SPECIFICATIONS: Projects governed by Davis Bacon shall contain the prevailing wage rate within the work-write-up/specification. The CCHRA Labor Standards Officer will request a wage determination for the prevailing wage rate from the Labor Standards Officer at DTED prior to bidding. Prevailing wages are computed by the Department of Labor and are issued in the form of federal wage decisions for each classification of work. DTED will issue two copies of the most recent wage decision, including the HUD form 4010, Federal Labor Standards provisions. 3. COPELAND "ANTI-KICKBACK" ACT: The Act requires that workers be paid at least once a week without any deductions or rebates except permissible deductions which include taxes, deductions the worker authorizes and those required by court processes. The Act also requires that contractors maintain payroll records and submit weekly payrolls and statement of compliance to the contracting agency. 4. CONTRACT WORK HOURS/SAFETY STANDARDS ACT: The Act requires that workers receive overtime compensation at a rate of 1 '/Z times their regular wage after they have worked 40 hours in one week. 5. DEBARMENT: Before contract issuance, the Field Inspector shall verify that the selected contractor is not debarred or otherwise excluded from working of federally funded projects. Contractor clearance will be obtained from DTED. Documentation of Contractor Clearance will be kept in each individual project file. 6. PRE-CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE: A pre-construction conference shall be held with the General Contractor and all sub-contractors prior to the issuance of a Proceed To Work to discuss Labor Standards compliance and reporting procedures with the awarded bidder(s). 7. REPORTING:The Field Administrator shall be responsible to gather, maintain and provide weekly payroll reports and employee interviews. The Field Administrator will also ensure that the General Contractor completes HUD's Contractor/Subcontractor Certification. 8. COMPLIANCE MONITORING: CCHRA is responsible for monitoring compliance with Labor Standards requirements. Monitoring will include weekly review of payroll reports, comparisons with wage decisions and employee interview. Interviews will be conducted with at least 10% of the contractor employees, with a representative sample of Trades and Classifications. Compliance reviews will be dated and initialed by the individual conducting the review and copies will be maintained in each project file. 12 9. LABOR STANDARDS VIOLATIONS: If labor standards violations are discovered, the contractor must be notified and corrective action taken immediately. All violations will be immediately reported to the DTED Labor Standards Officer. 10. POSTINGS: Applicable wage decisions and rates must be posted at the work site for the duration of the contract work. Contractors must post the "Notice To All Employees" and EEO posters at each job site for the duration of the job. 11. FINAL LABOR STANDARDS COMPLIANCE REPORT: When the construction contract is complete,the Final Labor Standards Compliance Report must be completed by the Labor Standards Officer and sent to DTED. CONTRACTING PROCEDURES 1. PARTICIPATING CONTRACTORS: All contractors participating in the Small Cities Development Program must have on file at CCHRA office, a Contractor's Application. The contractors will be responsible for securing insurance in the amounts specified on the application form. The application must contain proof of insurance coverage via a Certification of Insurance Coverage, and the contractor's registration number. 2. BID SOLICITATION:The Contract is between the property owner and the contractor. The property owner will be provided a list of contractors,to choose contractors from, however, a property owner is free to choose any contractor to solicit bids from who the property owner may want. In order for a contractor who is not approved by CCHRA to be awarded a bid,the contractor must furnish CCHRA with a Certificate of Insurance, and must complete a Contractor Application. Upon doing so the contractor shall be awarded the bid. 3. DAVIS BACON: Davis Bacon Labor Standards requirements and documentation must be included in the contractor bid packets. 4. BIDDING: Contractors will be allowed to bid on any and all rehabilitation projects, however, no single contractor will be allowed to work on more than three rehabilitation projects at one time. The contractor bids off of computer generated bid specifications and a scope of work prepared by the Rehab Advisor following their inspection of the property and discussions with the homeowner. The Rehab Advisor after initial inspection of the property will draw up a cost estimate on the approved repairs. This cost estimating will assist the homeowner in comparison shopping when contractor bids start to come in and/or if only one bid is submitted on the property. A sole bid may be approved if it meets the cost reasonableness test based on the cost estimate. 5. BID AWARDS: The Contract shall be awarded to the lowest base bid, unless one of the following circumstances occurs: a. The contractor has failed to follow the procedures as outlined in the Instructions to the Bidders,page 2, Scope of work; b. The contractor fails to bid according to the specifications and it proves impossible to compare that contractor's bid with the other contractors; c. The bid is determined to be unrealistically low by the Inspector and the contractor agrees to withdraw the bid; 13 d. The property owner does not want the low contractor to perform the work and agrees to pay the difference between the lowest bid and the preferred contractor's bid. e. All bids in a trade category are determined to be unrealistically high or non-competitive, in which case all bids in the questionable trade category will be thrown out and different contractors solicited for bids. 6. PROJECT PACKAGING AND LOCAL REVIEW APPROVAL: Upon acceptance of the bid by the homeowner and the Inspector, the Inspector will package the project according to the eligibility of the homeowner to the various leverage sources and the Small Cities Development Program. The package is then reviewed by the Housing Coordinator to ensure completeness and accuracy. a. Location of Home to be rehabilitated; b. Income/ownership eligibility status of applicant; c. Proposed rehabilitation to be completed; d. Submitted Bid amounts and selection of approved bid; e. Proposed Financing Package. 7. CONTRACTOR NOTIFICATION:Upon closing the Inspector issues a Notice to Proceed to the accepted contractors. That notice will allow the contractor 90 days in which to complete the awarded contract. Ninety days will be the allotted amount of time except under the following conditions: a. The work is weather dependent and weather conditions have not allowed the completion of the work; b. The Notice to Proceed is issued too late in the building season to allow weather dependent work to be completed in time; c. The property owner preferred contractor is too heavily committed to perform the work within the allotted time and informs the property owner and Inspector that he is too heavily committed and a work schedule is established and is acceptable to the property owner,the Inspector and the contractor; d. Unforeseen difficulties develop with the approved work and force a delay. 8. CONTRACTOR CONTRACT:Each selected contractor will enter into a contract with the Property owner. The contract will outline the terms for completion of the rehabilitation on the home and will include the following: • Project Start Date • Project Completion Date • General Conditions • Special Conditions • Project Warranties • Change Order Procedures • Payment Terms • Termination Procedures 14 9. FAILURE TO START/COMPLETE PROJECT: Upon receipt of the Proceed to Work a contractor will have 90 calendar days in which to complete the contracted work. Failure to begin work within the first 90 days will be grounds to terminate the contract. 10. INTERIM INSPECTIONS:After work begins, interim inspections will be scheduled by the Inspector to monitor work progress and work quality. If a dispute arises between a property owner and a contractor the Inspector will attempt to find a means of resolving the conflict. 11. PAYMENT PROCEDURES: All contractors will agree to the payment schedule contained within the Contractor's Application which is as follows: a. No pre-payments are allowable for any reason; b. Lien Waivers are required for all sub-contractors before payment will be made; c. Partial payments are not allowable for any work that is not completed. Payments are limited to a maximum of 85%of the total due on the completed portions of the project; d. Any and all payments will be made only after the work is completed according to the specifications contained within the Scope of Work and when the work meets with the approval of both the Applicant and the Inspector. In order for the contractor to be paid, a signed Completion Certificate must be presented at the time of payment. Both the Applicant(s)and the Inspector must sign the Completion Certificate; e. Fifteen percent(15%) shall be retained from each partial payment. Final payment for all work completed, including any withheld amounts, may be made after all work by a contractor is completed, the final inspection has been conducted and the inspector, homeowner and contractor have signed off on the work. f. Payments will be made only upon presentation of the following documents; 1) Billing Statement 2) Lien Waiver 3) Sworn Contractors Statement 4) Completion Certificate 5) W-9 Form 12. CHANGE ORDERS: To the contract require the signature of the property owner, the contractor,the Inspector, and the Housing Coordinator. Change orders will be allowed only for the following reasons; a. To rectify hidden deficiencies that are discovered once the work has begun; b. To change a specification due to unforeseen difficulties arising after work has begun; c. To address a deficiency that was inadvertently dropped from the project during project packaging; d. To approve changes in the contract time period. 15 13. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT: A contractor's contract can be terminated under the following procedures. a. Poor work performance on the job site and the demonstrated inability to rectify the poor workmanship. The cost of repairing poor workmanship and the higher costs of awarding the bid to the next lowest bidder shall be deducted from any amount owed to the initial contractor for work completed. In all cases the contractor shall be given the opportunity to rectify the problem before removal procedures are instituted. The Rehab Advisor shall institute the following procedures when negotiating a workmanship problem: 1. Shall set up a meeting at the job site with the contractor and homeowner to attempt to come to a consensus. 2. Shall contact the contractor the second time by certified mail notifying the contractor that the workmanship is still poor and specifying the areas that need to be addressed to satisfy the contract, giving the contractor a fifteen (15) day time limit in which to make the required repairs. b. Causing undue damages to a homeowner's property and the inability or unwillingness to correct the damages. The cost of repairing damages will be deducted from any money owed the contractor for work already completed. c. The inability of the contractor to perform the work within the allotted time; d. Unreconcilable and unresolvable differences between the contractor and the homeowner; e. Contractors who are removed from a contract shall be removed from the Contractors List and shall be prohibited from being awarded any contract with CARVER COUNTY HRA. LOAN PACKAGES 1. LOAN FILES: CCHRA, as the Field Administrator, shall maintain files on each property owner throughout the duration of the program. Each property owner's file shall include the following: a. Work Progression Chart: This form allows easy monitoring of the file and enables those working with it to see at a glance,just what stage the project is at. This form will be attached to the inside cover of the file; b. SCDP Loan Application: This form will provide information relating to property income and cash flow, property owner affordability, and monthly expenses. The form will also provide data on the property to be improved as well as other pertinent lending data as required by the MHFA Home Loan Program and CCHRA. Verification of all income/assets, as well as a copy of the property owners most recent property tax statement shall be attached to the application. Proof of property ownership (Warranty Deed, Torrens, Recorded Contract for Deed, recorded Life Estate, etc.) and current property owner's insurance must also accompany the application. The lead paint warning will be included at the bottom of this form and will be signed by the property owner attesting that they have read and understand the dangers associated with lead based paint. All tenant information shall also be collected including tenant income, tenant rent, and 16 lease terms. The lead paint warning shall also be included, reviewed and signed by the tenant. c. Third Party Income Verification: This form provides third party verification of an applicants income. These forms shall be signed by a representative from the source of income; d. Property Inspection Form: The Inspection Report shall be prepared by the Field Inspector. The Inspector Report is designed to include a specific account of the condition of the property and all corrective actions necessary; e. SHPO Response: A letter from SHPO indicates their approval or requirements for the project; 1. Scope of Work: The Scope of Work is the contract between the property owner and contractor and specifies the exact work which will be performed at the eligible property; g. Mortgage and Repayment Agreement: This form is the legal mechanism by which a Lien is placed against the improved property until the loan is repaid or forgiven and establishes and records the City's loan to the property owner in conjunction with the reduced loan portion of the SCDP project. h. Close-Out Packet: A letter is sent to the property owner informing them of completion and contains copies of the Repayment Agreement,and Completion Certificates. i. Tenant Profile and Income; A form documenting tenant family profile, income and pre- existing rents will be in each file. The tenant profile will document name, age, and gender of each resident and include the source(s)of income for each resident. j. Rental Property Agreement: A copy of the lease agreement between the tenant and landlord, outlining terms of lease. Must include rent paid, including utilities, and length of lease. k. Davis Bacon Documentation: Copies of all Davis Bacon Labor Standards documentation, monitoring reports,and correspondence must be in each project file. 1. Other Pertinent Information: Other information important to the approval and completion of the project. LOAN REPAYMENT&PROGRAM INCOME 1. REPAYMENT PROCEDURES: a. Deferred Loans; The deferred loans shall be forgiven 1/7% per year. When a property is sold or ceases to be utilized as residential units then the remaining loan principal is due. The repayment will be repaid directly to City of Shakopee, which will place the funds in a special account. The loan funds will be repaid from the purchase funds when an improved property is sold. 2. PROGRAM INCOME: City of Shakopee will use the repaid funds during the active phase of the project to rehabilitate eligible rental units in the same manner as detailed above. After 17 project close-out the City will use repaid funds to help address the future housing needs within City of Shakopee in the exact same manner as outlined in the preceding procedures. DENIAL/COMPLIANT/APPEALS PROCEDURES 1. APPLICANT DENIAL PROCEDURE: If a household's application is denied for any reason, a letter of denial will be sent to the household within 10 working days. The denial letter will clearly outline the reason for denial and provide a copy of the appeals procedure. 2. APPLICANT COMPLAINT PROCEDURE: When an applicant has a concern about the management of his/her file or the level of assistance awarded, said concern should be relayed to CCHRA's field administrator. The concern and response/solution to the concern should be documented in the applicant's file. 3. APPLICANT APPEAL PROCEDURE: If a household is dissatisfied with the level of assistance they have received, and where an applicant complaint cannot be resolved by CCHRA, CCHRA will notify the applicant in writing that a written procedure for appeal is available. The appeals procedure is as follows: a. The applicant who wishes to make an appeal must submit such an appeal in writing to the Carver County HRA. The appeal must specifically state the complaint and how the applicant wishes the complaint to be resolved. b. The complaint will be presented to the City of Shakopee at the next scheduled meeting. The CCHRA will notify the applicant of this date. If the applicant wishes to be present at the meeting,the applicant must notify the CCHRA in writing prior to the meeting. c. The Shakopee City Council will notify the applicant of its decision regarding the appeal. Notification will be in writing and must be made within 1 week of the decision. d. All appeals should be addressed to: Appeals Carver County Housing&Redevelopment Authority Attn: Julie Frick 500 N. Pine St, Suite#204 Chaska, MN 55318 e. After an appeal action has been initiated CCHRA will send the following information to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development(DTED): 1) A copy of the written complaint and request for satisfaction under the appeals process. 2) A copy of all correspondence between CCHRA and the appealing client concerning the appeal disposition. 3) The final appeal disposition. 18 AMENDMENTS/DIRECTIVES 1. These procedural guidelines may be amended or supplemented from time to time by City of Shakopee by issuance of revised pages to be effective on the date of issue. All amendments to the guidelines must be approved by DTED. Adopted by the Shakopee City Council this day of 2000. By: Attest: 19 15 . . � D "Telecommunications ADC Telecommunications,Inc. ieiepnone(biz)9,36-susu P.O.Box 1101 FAX(612)946-3292 Minneapolis,Minnesota 55440-1101 March 16, 2000 Mark McNeill, Administrator City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Request for Business Subsidies Dear Mr. McNeill: ADC Telecommunications, Inc. (ADC), a leading global supplier of network equipment, software and integration services, requests $720,000 from the City of Shakopee in the form of tax abatement over six years to develop a 490,000 sf manufacturing, office and engineering facility. We believe this project meets the criteria necessary for consideration and that it will help Scott County and the City of Shakopee meet their economic development goals and objectives by: • increasing the tax base; • creating/retaining high quality jobs that exceed the average livable wage; • providing significant economic impact within the county and community (multiplier effect); • contributing to the establishment of a critical mass of commercial development; • helping to enhance the competitive position of Scott County and the City of Shakopee. The facility will be built on a 106 acre site located at the southeast corner of Valley Park Drive and Highway 101 at a total project cost of $78 million. ADC anticipates that within two years the facility will house approximately 1,025 employees; creating 450 new jobs and relocating 575 existing ADC employees. The hourly wage for these jobs ranges from $12.64 to $25.00 plus benefits. •• • As you are aware, ADC has been experiencing rapid and successful growth. To continue to meet our customers' demands, ADC will need to begin construction of this proposed facility by July 1, 2000 and be operational by July 1, 2001. All of us here at ADC look forward to moving ahead with this project in the City of Shakopee. We hope the City will share our excitement and respond favorably to our request. Enclosed for your consideration is a completed Business Subsidies Application that further describes our proposed project, the application fee, a preliminary site plan and ADC financial information and bank references.. Please direct any questions you may have about the attached information to Clint Baer, our Real Estate Transactions Manager, at 952-914-6443. Sincerely, 41) J. Wayne Stewart Vice President, Operations Enclosures CITY OF SHAKOPEE Application for Business Subsidies SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 Phone (952) 445-3650 Fax (952) 445-6718 1 Section I: General Information ** With this application,please submit a formal letter requesting the assistance. 1. Business Name: ADC Telecommunications, Inc. 2. Address: 12501 Whitewater Drive,MS54 Minnetonka,MN 55343 3. Contact Person: Clint Baer,Real Estate Transaction Manager 4. Telephone: 952-914-6443 5. Fax: 952-946-3989 6. E-Mail: clint_baer@adc.com 7. Brief Description of the Business/Company: Established in 1953,ADC is a leading global supplier of voice,video and data systems and solutions for telephone, cable television, internet,broadcast,wireless and private communications networks. 8. Parent Corporation, if any: None 9. Consultant information, if applicable: Name: CRESA Partners—Roger Christensen Address: 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 3200 Minneapolis,MN 55402 Telephone: 612-373-0291 Fax: 612-337-8459 E-Mail: rchristensen@cresapartners.com 10. Type of Subsidy Requested: ❑ Tax Increment Financing ® Tax Abatement 11. Amount of Subsidy Requested: $720,000 12. Public Purposes of the Subsidy: To assist with the attraction of a large manufacturing, office and engineering development. Subsidy to be used for land acquisition, site preparation, infrastructure development, administrative and other costs related to the development. City of Shakopee Application for Business Subsidies 2 13. Location of Proposed Project: Former CAMAS Site—approximately the southeast corner of Valley Park Drive and Highway 101; adjoining the Valley Green Industrial Park 14. Legal Description of Project Location: (See attached legal description) 15. Property Identification Number(s): 27-903-0040; 27-910-0020; 16. Present Ownership of the Site: ADC Telecommunications, Inc. 17. Name/Description of the proposed project(Attach site plan, if available): ADC Manufacturing and Engineering Facility (preliminary site plan attached) 18. Size of the Property 106 acres/4,617,360 sq. ft. 19. Estimated Total Building Square Footage 490,000 sq. ft. 20. Estimated size of the Proposed Facility: Manufacturing/Assembly/Processing 264,500 sq. ft. Office 147,500 sq. ft. Research Laboratory 55,500 sq. ft. Warehousing sq. ft. Other(Please Specify Amenities ) 22,500 sq. ft. TOTAL 490,000 sq. ft. City of Shakopee Application for Business Subsidies 3 21. Estimated Project Costs: Land Acquisition $8.0 million Site Development(grading, landscaping, etc.) $2.5 million Building Cost $58.1 million Street/Road Improvements(include your costs only) $1.03 million Utility Improvements (include your costs only) $470,000 Capital(machinery and equipment) $1.5 million (Does NOT include production equipment, furniture, etc.) Professional Services(archit., engin.,legal, fiscal) $5.2 million Fees and Permits (same as total from below) $1.2 million Other(Please specify ) $ N/A TOTAL $78.0 million 22. Estimated Fee and Permit Costs: City Permits and Fees $900,000 (Grading and Building Permits,Park Dedication Fees, etc.) Metropolitan Council Fees $300,000 (SAC and WAC Charges) Other fee or permit costs $ N/A (Please Specify ) TOTAL $1.2 million City of Shakopee Application for Business Subsidies 4 23. Indicate the proposed start date for construction and estimated date of completion: Construction—July 1, 2000 / Occupancy July 1, 2001 24. Proposed Financing Source(s): Equity $75.99 million Bank Loan $ 0 (Check one): ❑ Tax Increment Financing, OR X Tax Abatement $2,01 million City—$720,000 County- $1,290,000 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds $ 0 Other Local Government Assistance $ 0 (Please specify ) State of Minnesota Assistance $ 0 (Please specify: ) TOTAL $78 million 25. If tax increment financing is requested, please submit a list of eligible project costs (Refer to Section V of the Business Subsidy Policy): N/A 26. The City reserves the right to request tax returns and/or other financial statements from the applicant for the years of operation. See attached annual report. 27. The City reserves the right to request three bank references from the applicant. See attached references. City of Shakopee Application for Business Subsidies 5 Section II: Employment, Wage and Benefit Information A. EMPLOYMENT 1. Does this project involve the relocation of jobs within the State of Minnesota? X Yes ❑ No a. If so, provide a statement of why the project cannot be completed at its current location/facility: Other ADC facilities are at full capacity. To effectively open a new facility and to train new employees, some existing employees will be moved to the proposed facility. ADC estimates continued employment growth in other Shakopee and Twin Cities facilities. b. Number of full time equivalent (FTE) permanent employee positions at current Minnesota location/facility to be relocated to Shakopee: 575 2. If the project is an expansion of an existing Shakopee facility, what is the current number of FTE permanent employee positions? N/A 3. Estimated Number of FTE permanent employee positions to be created (within 2 years of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy) as a result of the project 450 4. TOTAL number of current and estimated new FTE permanent employee positions (No. lb+ No. 3 from above) 1025 City of Shakopee Application for Business Subsidies 6 B. WAGES 1. What will be the minimum hourly wage (exclusive of benefits) of the FTE permanent employee positions created by the project? $12.64 Estimated average hourly wage is $18.50 2. The hourly wage of each new permanent FTE employee position, with separate bands of wages,is as follows: Total Number of Wage Levels Per Hour FTE Permanent Employee Positions Less Than $12.00 $12.00— 16.99 180 $17.00—21.99 180 $22.00—26.99 90 $27.00—31.99 $32.00 and Over C. HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS The value of health insurance benefits provided by the employer for the above referenced jobs, separated by bands of wages, is as follows: Wage Levels Per Hour Value of Health Insurance Benefits Less Than$12.00 $12.00— 16.99 38% $17.00-21.99 38% $22.00—26.99 38% $27.00—31.99 $32.00 and Over City of Shakopee Application for Business Subsidies LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 3, Township 115, Range 22 lying Southerly of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis and Omaha Right of Way, EXCEPTING THEREFROM that part of the West 200.00 feet, as measured at right angles to the West line thereof of the Southeast V4 of Section 3, Township 115, Range 22, lying Southerly of the Southeasterly extension of the Northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 5, Valley Park First Addition, and lying Northerly of the Easterly extension of the Southerly line of Lot 3, Block 5, Valley Park First Addition, according to the recorded Plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Scott County, Minnesota. (Abstract) Together with an easement for roadway purposes over and across Outlot E, Valley Park First Addition, according plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Scott County, Minnesota as evidenced in Easement Agreement filed of record as Document No. 37539. (Torrens) That part of the North 824.00 feet(as measured at right angle to the North line) of the Northeast V4 of the Section 10, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota lying North and East of the South 488.00 feet of the West 179.95 feet of said North 824.00 feet, EXCEPT the plat of Valley Park Thirteenth Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. (Torrens, Certificate No. 29990) City of Shakopee Application for Business Subsidies r -1 o bo = Ca- .2 • "="=-' e" i .0 -= ...0 1.-. c. = = es S NI ---. c's '....- I = 0.1 i 11 F, 11 .3 = if E a = •Er.0 = 4.1 LLJ « e 1 ld 1 r?, V I U u --) L1 _. < _____ < _ ._ ___ _<,,.-'/_._._._ 1 / / ._ 1 ---------,,-- - - L_____ Ii --& [ 1 El es*- - •1 ) ' — • — • — • 1 i 1 ,4-- 1 I i \. 1 1---' ,.,, _ _ __,, (,' • 1 / oRH-Riffiffilmilin offilimilillimilo , offiimmiffillido oniiiiiinonio 1 , I ROIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHO 011111111111111111111111110 Er,' -011111111111111111111111110 011111111111111111111111110 i I011111111111111H-H-H-1-1+0 011111111111111111111111110 11 tg i 2011111111111ffilliiiiiiiii0011111I11111111111111111110 Di; 1 \ I a011iiininli11111110 0111111111111111111111111 ll I 1 I / iri : I I OffiiiIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii0 b, 011111111111111111111111110 OffiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiIii0 E / ti 1 - 1 _—____ „.. :. -1-. •%;x,* \ R - R A 11 01111111111111111111111110 011111111111111111111111110 / */ F /:;:: /' 1§ 7 4 g I I ti i_ i, ...tm,„,rniumiii_ (. . N)121.64MA E_- I / i e 111111111111111H r ..wnasiTiR_Tot_uabga ! Ii °'474'atvAidd - 118 1 / // ......./ i / ' 11 // p v', m vz v- --.......4. ! 1 i II 1 1 .1 il Fl, 0 Pi ! l' / 1! am v ! 1 R 1 ! ! Z • i I i : / / 1 I! I ' , // I Li' / I - / / 0 I 1/ II I t • • , I• A 1 . • ; ,p2 / ii*E0 §tigg Row m • r I e 1 II g0 1 i iff . ( _ _._._._______. --- dig it: 1W mIA i a 444 161 dy P - E IS I 1 L .—. J MAR-15-2000 16 59 612 445 6719 P.02/04 Assumptions Report l City of Shakopee,Minnesota Tax Abatement Projection Cl!Project Scenario A Type of Project Tax Abatement Maximum Duration of Tax Abatment 10 Years Current Year 05/01/00 First Abetment Year 12/01/03 Final Abatement Year 12/01/08 (6 Years of Abatement) 1999/2000 Land Value $637,200 Times: First $150,000 2.40% 3,600 Excess 3.40% 23,365 Net Tax Capacity(Land) $26,965 Non-Abated NTC(Land) $26,965 Assessment/Collection Year } 2000/2001 2001/2002 2002/2003 2003/2004 Land Estimated Market Value $837,200 $837,200 $637,200 $837,200 Increase in Estimated Market Value 0 0 24,870.800 24.870.500 Total Estimated Market Value $837200 $837,200 $25,708,000 $25.705,000 Times: First $150,000 2.40% 3,600 3,600 3.600 3.600 Excess 3.40% 23.365 23.365 868,972 663,972 Total Net Tax Capacity $26,965 $26.965 $872,572 8872.572 Local Tax Capacity Rate 114.765% 1999/00 Fiscal Disparities Deduction 29.4527% Abate City Tax Rate? Yes 20.587% Abate County Tax Rate? Yes 36.182% Abate School District Tax Rate? no 53.546% Other Tax Rate 4.450% Current City Levy 5,000,000 @ 5% 250.000 Max.Abate- 250,000 Current County Levy 40,000.000 @ 5% 2.000.000 Max.Abate- 2,000,000 Present Value Date&Rate 05/01/00 5.00% Rands fir'fP -As-You-Got Bonds Dated 05/01/00 Note Dated 05/01/00 First Interest Date 02J01/01 Note Rate 9.00% Underwriters Discount 1.50% Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated(printed on 3/15/00 at 1:27 PM) Tax Abatement3.xlsAssumptions MAR-15-2000 17 00 612 445 6718 P.03/04 0 0 0 M e7 c-> ) M M 0 0 0 0 0 m N. N 127 tC) to O t1) 4 X M-6 > cd ep Qj co' cc cc .�% M E ^ co C7 C) C) c7 c) N p - - v c� c7 M M M cn 0 {-- 1' m E Q `9 a) to 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 x (f> m 0 H F- E O o a o Q U 0) 0 0 0 M M C!) M M c) 0 0 0 0 0 N- E C 41 O O u) Lel O CD• X E c to Ki to tri is 111 v r- {- m o N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E0 CD • N t-, N. t•-..‘ 1,- N r- It) C m 5 >. ---.. N N N N N 0 CO N N N N N N M i 'x U ' . ." r- r .- - t- r- O 2 CI- CI)O Q' 0 0 0 c') r) M N) M eh O 0 0 0 0 CO chi c�i OrC-•alr). o o 75c v c- v' v. v' 0 y Q 3 @ X , co co co CO CO 173 0 C N h m cD Co O co co v .►+ C .-os Q bf $ o o d : a o N C 0 i e 0 e o of o 0..e e 0 e e o ►- 19 O O c1) 11) IA O an IA If) O u) .C) .f) .fl as p °) d s v c0 0 co 0 (0 m CD 0 CD 000 c0 (0 = R U W E Al a CU co C"V [r er `C v? v xr v er vi `i K o `p Q CD x _ I- 0 0 0 0) 0 C) a) a) Cl) 0 0 0 0 0 D. O N- '- U v X w O) to CO o rn CL q) d N N N N N N N = F- IC) cr ID ttricco" c0 010030 •� d `� IIA to to IC) U) U) Cci va M U Z U 00 Ii;0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v o 0 0 0 0 0 i c) C) v) C) c) C) G o In 2 fl. "' N N N N N N W • CIN a to In O O O to to to coIAN N N N N tU 'O X a 0))CD O) C)) o W CD W o) 0)) t� I? 10 IC) IIt) tl) �. y C cu 12 ro --. c0 c0 cti cc; to a5 co co <D N N N N N 8 J a 2. N N N N N N N N N W N N N c 2. Q Z 0 a 'o 0 11') IC) O N N N N N N N N N N N ti Se .T CO O CD h r` r` N- N r` r` N- n r• r` CT CO CA CO Co .C) N to IC) 1C) 10 Lo t1) 11) 00 ICJ C W h e6c-P N N N N N. r- r` N n r- N N N N N. a ice- w m ' co 00 corn 0) 10 co coco0 M C/) U *,:, 0 . ) O •-- N c7 'It O (Dr-. CO O) O r- N M 00000000000 —r- CO. ti TS lT V. r r . . . . C2. O t"' M M M M t.) e7 co M C) M M M M Ma C 0) c h N N N N N N N N N N N N N a- 40- W MAR-15-2000 17:00 612 445 6718 P.04/04 Projected Pay-As-You-Go Note Report ,J City of Shakopee,Minnesota Tax Abatement Projection C/I Project • Scenario A Note Date: 05/01/00 Noto Rate: 9.00% Amount: 61.212.300 Semi-Annual Loan Net Capitalized Batance Date Principes Interest P&I Revenue Interest Outstanding (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 1,212.300.00 02/01/01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 81,030.25 1,294,130,25 08/01/01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58,235.86 1,352,366,11 02/01/02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60,856.47 1,413,222.58 08/01/02 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 63.595.02 1,476.617.60 02/01/03 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 66,456.79 1,543,274.39 08/01/03 99,809.14 69,447.35 169,256,49 169.256,49 0.00 1,443.485.25 02/01/04 104,300.55 64,955.94 169258.49 169,256.49 0.00 1,339,164.70 08/01/04 108,994.03 60,262.41 169,256.49 169,256.49 0.00 1.230.170.62 02/01/05 113,898.81 55,357.68 169.256.49 169.256.49 0.00 1,116.271.81 03/01/05 119,024.26 50.232.23 169.256.49 169,256.49 0.00 997,247.55 02/01/06 124.380.35 44,376.14 169.256.49 169.256.49 0.00 872,67.20 08/01/06 129,977.47 39,279.02 169.256.49 169.256.49 0.00 742,889.73 02/01/07 135,326.45 33 430,04. 169,256.49 169,256,49 0.00 607,083.28 08/01/07 141.933.64 27,31735 ' 169,256.49 169,255.49 0.00 455,124.64 02/01/08 146,325.83 20,930.61 169,256.49 169,256,49 0,00 316,793.76 08/01/08 155,000.55 14.255.94 169,256 49 169,256.49 0.00 161,798.21 02/01/09 161,798.21 7280.92 169,079.13 169.079.13 0.00 0.00 03/01/09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/10 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 03/01/10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/11 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 06/01/11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 08/01/12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/13 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0,00 08/01/13 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02/01/14 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $1,543,274 S487.626.13 82,030.90032 52.030.900.52 5330,974,39 Excess Tax Abatement 177,308 Total Net Revenue S2,031,077.63 Prepared by:Sorinosted lncoroorated frwintael nn:MCrnn at 1•77 MA' _ TOTAL R.04 ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. P.O. BOX 1101 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440-1101 BANK First Chicago NBD Attn: J. Garland Smith (312) 732-2735 Account # 5219841 TRADE Adams Nut and Bolt Central Container 8575 Monticello Lane P.O. Box 43310 Maple Grove, MN 55369 Minneapolis, MN 55443 612-424-3374 612-425-7444 612-493-0800 fax 612-425-8008 fax Sheri Settembrino Betty Obraske Fullerton Metals Superior Plating 3000 Shermer Road University at 1st Ave NE Northbrook, IL 60062 Minneapolis, MN 55440 847-291-2400 612-379-2121 847-291-8107 fax 612-379-8933 fax Jerry Knoll Geri Clapp Written references only Menasha Attn: Doug Lakeville,MN 612-469-7824 Fax: 612-469-1068 D & B RATING:5A1 Federal ID #41-0743912 1 0/1 3/97 • 21 00 7// J•o l I 1 i •IC 5e A.. _ ._.___,. mi. 41. • — :A 010 .. :::• i •: , ,,t‘ 4 "1 --i- s' ...:-.... :•::::::- Ili \.1i 1 -"T • • 0 L..1 ce i'i 0 a . .........::-:x :::: /1/ 1 :.:::::::::: :•:• i .-.% -.....4 .c.....- E 8 . ,..., :,:•.0 00 .. ..........:*:::....2.2, :: / fs},03••11 A c, ow 00 ::. • .. • , , ill ...z..J -amommimeimorrioso""""orr cn .,,c „...4,.) 6 // . .•.- :: ::. - gil m m- x El 0 Ow 6-- . :::::::: ::: :: . 1 .•:::::: -:: :: : : , 0 0 . •::.•::.•: :::::: •••••.:. :.: : • .•... I • •:•:•:...•: :•: ... ::: ::: • • • • • • • • • • • • ...: H....CH: ::: .... H:. .-........... • .. . )4 112 .52E) g -. <,. z • 4.1 vi CC VI I • PT-1 3P 18 § /' ......: ::::::: ...c:c :: ::. ::-.H:: Z al < • :•: ::::::": *: ':: ::: .7:::.:••:: FA elf 8 cc • / : :•: :•:•:•:•:• •.• •: :-::: ;-:•:•: C • 8; 88 .9 I i : ::::::: ::: :• ::: ::::::::: •• •: :•: :-:•:•:::: ::: :: -....*-::.,.:::. / .::: !::::....:... :.::. ...: :::::-_:::: . . CC fil U 0 — oti i ' .:H...; .... .:.. .....! - • . Ito •:::: :.:.: •.- L—n--/ .,__ • . —+ ———— ---t!-I'- lb.-.....- 111- 111z•----7-•-- -' ---I -- -7- 1 4. • ID i.j./t, —7-- 1 . . / •1:. ... ;:j„• i• , " . rn . r...) •.•:.•.:: • I I 0 • g/ , , Z / at L / , C4 Ia. • . ... I s , •/ ... 1 •/5:• I _ • // -----.71 .""i/ 1 • :11.: , Ili ill :I i! ... . .......i4 Iti _ —.2•• .., / / ... .... _,-.4 ._ .... /71-4=70 11. ' , • mytymaiiim 1 . : f )/k.' ,ik • I z 1 h i , ' • W' . x ,..,........ . 1 , c:4 E. • .,. . ... 40 hI' '.................. .,.../ . ....../1 '1 . . PC/A •••• 8 CO ri :•171:.1: iii...:•ii-c.:,14: : 4 , , - - •• .... (•-, --.....,........ i . ---...„...... >.. 4, , I .., .._ ..• < , --r — ..... ..-............ li- 1 1.5, P. 6 . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: City Participation—Water Treatment Plant Feasibility Study DATE: March 15, 2000 INTRODUCTION: At the March 20 meeting,the Council will be asked to participate in a proposed water treatment plant feasibility study,that may be done in conjunction with SPUC. BACKGROUND: Councilor Sweeney reports that Shakopee Public Utilities is continuing to experience a delay in water planning as a result of the Department of Natural Resources continuing to push for Shakopee to utilize"non-traditional"water sources. These would be such things as utilization of water from the Shiely pit, or the Minnesota River. For the DNR,there is a focus on eliminating as much as possible further wells being drilled into the Jordan aquafer. The DNR is pushing for increased use instead of the Franconia-Ironton- Galesburg aquafer,which is deeper and not as productive, and therefore,more costly to pump. SPUC and City staff do not feel that the restrictions on the Jordan aquafir are warranted at this time. However, it appears that before the DNR will even consider a revision in their position,that a study will need to be done to show the costs of some of the alternatives that they have identified. The SPUC Commission has directed Lou VanHout to request proposals for a feasibility study for a water treatment plant,to address treatment for water that would be taken from the Minnesota River and the Shiely pit. (It is anticipated that a water treatment plant for either of those could run in the vicinity of$20 million.) CouncikiSweeney suggests that the City participate in this feasibility study, as the City has a significant stake in the outcome. Obviously,without water, Shakopee will not be able to grow. BUDGET IMPACT: The amount of the feasibility study is not currently known. What the Council is asked to consider is the concept of sharing that cost with SPUC. Once a proposal is in hand,the Council would be approached again for formal authorization. RECOMMENDATION: So as to facilitate a resolution of the delay by the DNR,I recommend participation in the anticipated water treatment plant feasibility analysis between the City and SPUC. ACTION REQUIRED: The Council should give an indication as to whether it is interested in participating jointly with SPUC for a water treatment plant feasibility study. J4` Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CC: Lou VanHout Bruce Loney Michael Leek J / 7, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum r13717 4,11 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Lions Park Youth Building Repair DATE: March 16,2000 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to authorize work to be done by GME Consultants,Inc.,to determine remedial work to address a continuing moisture problem in the basement of the Youth Building in Lions Park. BACKGROUND: There is a need to have professional assistancein investigating the moisture problems in the basement of the Youth Building at Lyons Park. Since it was constructed in 1989, a continuing high humidity has lead to mold and air quality problems. GME Consultants was recommended by JEA Architects as being knowledgeable in this type of work. I toured the building with one of their engineers, and received the attached proposal from them. Following the receipt of this document, I conferred with Ed Dressen, and with Councilor Link. Both were involved with the original construction of the building; Mr. Dressen was more so with the backfilling around the basement foundation. It appears that some of the things which might be found to be remedied won't be issues— Mr. Dressen informs me that drain tile was installed;however, it was on the inside of the foundation wall,below the basement slab. In addition,what should have been adequate waterproofing was installed on the exterior of the foundation wall. Of the items proposed by GME,it appears that a couple of things specifically should be done: the backfill should be analyzed by means of soil borings, and a water vapor transmission test should be performed to determine if any moisture is coming through the basement floor slab. Overall,the investigation may confirm that exterior walls would need to be excavated, and a second drain pipe installed around the outside of the foundation. Then, if confirmed by the soil borings, acceptable backfill should be utilized. It is probable that the original backfill material was that material which was excavated from the site. A more granular sandy soil would facilitate drainage to the new drain tile(which would then empty into a sump pump in the basement of the structure). BUDGET IMPACT: Overall, GME has quoted an amount of$4,290. We believe that amount can be reduced, as it is based on an hourly estimate, as we now know more about the construction of the building then we did at the time that the quote was submitted. I did discuss with Public Works Director Loney whether the prices quoted by GME are fair. He said that it is possible that another company could do it for less,but, all in all, given GME's analytical expertise,the prices seem fair. There is money in the Government Buildings budget for consultants,but that may all be going towards the architectural analysis of City buildings currently underway. A budget amendment from other sources would be required for this work. However, in order for the basement problem to be addressed this year(there is a window of time of about six week's duration between mid-July and the first of September when the building is not normally used, and when remedial work might take place),the City should therefore proceed now. Wherever possible,the use of Public Works employees to assist in any remedial work will be utilized, so as to reduce the overall costs. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the proposal of GME be accepted,and that Council direct that a budget amendment be prepared to pay for the analysis. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should,by motion, accept the proposal of GME Consulting, Inc.,to determine remedial work to address the moisture problem at the Youth Building at Lions Park,not to exceed$4,290; and, direct that a budget amendment be prepared to pay for the cost of the investigation. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CC: Mark McQuillan Bruce Loney Mike Hullander GME CONSULTANTS, INC. 11 CONSULTING ENGINEERS 14000 21st Ave. No. / Minneapolis, MN 55447 Phone (612) 559-1859 / Fax (612) 559-0720 February 29, 2000 Mr. Mark McNeill City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Proposal for geotechnical exploration, and evaluation of foundation performance and basement moisture problems at the Community Youth Building in Lyons Park in Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Mr. McNeill : We are pleased to submit a proposal for this project . In this proposal, we present a description of our understanding of the project, an outline of the scope of work we are to provide, and a fee schedule and estimate of charges for this work. Project Description The existing Youth Building was constructed in 1987 . As you explained to us, it was built by volunteer labor, so that there was no specific building design or architectural/engineering planning. The building is 40 feet by 60 feet in plan dimensions. There is a full-depth (13-course) basement with masonry bearing walls . The above-grade construction is log frame. You explained that due to persistent humidity problems in the basement, the furring and basement sheet rock walls have been removed, and the building has not been used in some time. Apparently, the interior humidity has been so high that it has caused curling and disadherence of the floor tile on the first floor of the building. The tile was laid on a plywood substrate bearing on trusses . On Thursday, February 24, 2000, Mr. Steven J. Ruesink, P.E. , of GME, visited with you at the site. Mr. Ruesink observed that the masonry basement walls have stair-step cracking in the corners, as well as some vertical cracks extending completely through the block. You explained that the foundation design of the building is not known with respect to bearing pressure, footing widths, and reinforcing. You also explained that there is probably not a perimeter drain system on WILLIAM C. KWASNY, P.E. THOMAS P. VENEMA, P.E. WILLIAM E. BLOEMENDAL, P.E. GREGORY R. REUTER, P.E. CHARLES M. ALLGOOD, P.E. TAMMY A. LANDERS, P.E. MARK D. MILLSOP, P.G. TIMOTHY F. McGLENNEN STEVEN J. RUESINK, P.E. BRYAN J. RIPP, P.E., P.G. An Equal Opportunity Employer ERIN J. O'BRIEN. P.E. Mr. Mark McNeill 2 February 29, 2000 the outside of the basement, although there is a sump basket in the basement from which accumulated water is periodically pumped out. The pumped water is discharged near the building, and you believe that it may infiltrate the ground and pond against the basement walls. Originally, the basement walls projected a few courses above grade, but in the recent past, soil was slope bermed against the building in an attempt to improve runoff and reduce infiltration. We observed that the building does have gutters and downspouts, although the downspout runoffs were not in place on the day of our visit . Definition of the Problem Based on our observations and your description of what has occurred, we believe that three elements of this building should be examined. 1 . The possibility of poor soil conditions at and below foundation bearing level, resulting in excessive settlement and cracking of the masonry block basement walls. 2 . The absence of a perimeter drain outside, the building, and lack of high-quality dampproofing and waterproofing on the outside of the basement walls, resulting in ponding of groundwater and/or surface infiltration against the basement walls causing migration of water and water vapor into the basement . 3 . Absence of a vapor barrier under the basement floor slab, causing excessive water vapor migration into and through the slab into the basement area. We recommend investigating these elements to permit development of feasible remedial corrective actions. Work Plan We recommend drilling two borings at diagonally opposite corners of the basement . We recommend drilling both borings to a depth of 30 feet, or to refusal on bedrock or boulders, with semi-continuous sampling by the split-barrel method (ASTM: D 1586) . This would permit us to look for weak, compressible soil layers left in place under the building. We would locate the borings as close as possible to the building, and prepare a site plan showing the as-drilled locations. We will also shoot surface elevations at the borings referenced to a convenient benchmark on or near the site. Before we drill, we will contact Gopher State One Call to locate public underground utilities; Gopher State does not currently charge for this service . If there are private utilities on this site, it may be necessary to contact a private locating company. We have not Mr. Mark McNeill 3 February 29, 2000 included a fee in this proposal for retaining a private locator. If this is found to be necessary, we will pass this fee along to you at cost, in addition to our fee for the geotechnical exploration. We will drill the borings with hollow stem augers and sample by the split-barrel method (ASTM: D 1586) . Our crew will keep field logs noting the methods of drilling and sampling, along with Standard Penetration values, preliminary soil classifications, and observed groundwater levels . Representative portions of the recovered samples will be sealed in jars to reduce moisture loss, and returned to our laboratory for examination, testing, and classification by a Geotechnical Engineer. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) has promulgated regulations regarding special methods of backfilling geotechnical boreholes, for environmental considerations . It is our interpretation of the regulations that our planned exploration program would not require the special borehole backfill . We also recommend hand excavating at least two test pits on the outside of the building to a depth of about 2 to 3 feet to allow us to observe the outside of the block wall . We would observe for the presence of a dampproofing or waterproofing material . We recommend performing water vapor transmission tests in the basement on the basement slab. These tests permit us to assess the amount of water which enters the basement in a 24-hour period. We recommend performing two of these tests . Laboratory Testing Our laboratory program will be initiated by a Geotechnical Engineer examining the recovered samples to determine the major and minor soil components . We anticipate performing routine testing, to determine the moisture content and unconfined compressive strength (by hand penetrometer) of selected samples, if cohesive soils are encountered. If special testing is required, such as Atterberg Limits, organic content, gradation, or consolidation tests, we would contact you to discuss a modification in the scope of work before proceeding. After completion of the laboratory testing, the Engineer will visually/manually classify each sample on the basis of texture and plasticity in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, and prepare the boring logs and the geotechnical report . Report In our report, we will describe the soil and groundwater conditions that we encounter. If we find conditions that we believe would have contributed to settlement resulting in cracking of the basement walls and the foundations, we would give recommendations for remedial corrective action, such as pressure grouting under the foundations. Mr. Mark McNeill 4 February 29, 2000 We will describe our observations of the outside of the basement walls, and discuss recommendations for placement of a perimeter drain outside the building, with a free-draining granular backfill . We would also discuss the applicability of placing a high-quality dampproofing or waterproofing on the basement walls . We will present the results of the water vapor transmission tests of the basement slab, and our assessment of the contribution of such transmission to the humidity problem in the basement . Our report will conclude with a discussion of construction considerations related to our remedial corrective action. Fees Based on the scope of work outlined above, we estimate the following fees for our defined scope of work. ➢ Mobilization/demobilization, drilling and sampling for two borings, with 60 lineal feet of soil drilling $1, 390 ➢ Engineering reconnaissance of building $ 600 ➢ Excavation of test pits outside building $ 800 ➢ Water vapor transmission tests in basement, two tests $ 600 ➢ Report preparation $ 900 If additional borings or deeper borings are needed, or if engineering and testing are requested beyond that required for preparation of the report (i .e. , post-report consultation, report revision due to changes in building design or location, specification review, pre-bid or pre-construction meetings) , the increase of our fees will be in accordance with the unit prices shown on the enclosed fee schedule. Environmental Concerns This proposal is presented for engineering services to determine the structural properties of the soil at the specified site. This proposal does not cover an environmental assessment of the site, environmental testing of the soil or groundwater, or a wetlands assessment . If you wish to have us provide these additional services, please contact us . Mr. Mark McNeill 5 February 29, 2000 Acceptance We are submitting this proposal in two copies for your acceptance. When it is accepted, we ask that one copy be signed by an authorized representative of the party responsible for payment for these services, and that this copy be returned to us as our authorization to proceed. We have enclosed with this proposal a copy of our General Conditions . The terms contained in the General Conditions are incorporated herein and are an integral part of this proposal for professional engineering services. - : ► • :• -• t - a11 .•: SIGNATURE, VERBAL AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED, OR BY TSSUANCF OF A PURCHASE ORDER, INDICATES THAT YOU UNDERSTAND AND ACCEPT THE TFRMR AND CONDITIONS__._CONTAINED IN THIS PROPOSAL, TNCLUDTNG THE GENERAL CONDITIONS . If you have questions regarding this proposal, please contact us. Since el , GME t)," TANTS, INC. C. . - = .E. P incipal Engi. -er/President Erin 'O'Brien, P.E. Materials Engineer Enclosures: ASFE Notes Regarding Geotechnical Engineering Proposals MDH Borehole Backfill Regulations Fee Schedule General Conditions ACCEPTED: DATE FIRM AUTHORIZED NAME (please print) AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE TITLE WCK:ms I w:\wck\McNeill.pro.ms GME CONSULTANTS, INC. IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING PROPOSAL As the client of a consulting geotechnical engineer,you should know that site subsurface conditions cause more construction problems than any other factor. ASFE/The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Geosciences offers the following suggestions and observations to help you manage your risks. Have Realistic Expectations If you have not dealt with geotechnical issues before, recognize that site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken, at the time they are taken. The data derived are extrapolated by consulting geotechnical engineers who then apply their judgment to render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions,how they will react to construction activity,and appropriate design of foundations, slopes, impoundments, and other construction elements. Even under optimal circumstances,actual subsurface conditions may differ from those inferred to exist, because no geotechnical engineer, no matter how qualified, and no subsurface exploration program,no matter how comprehensive,can reveal what is hidden by earth,rock, and time. Develop The Subsurface Exploration Plan With Care The nature of a subsurface exploration program — the types, quantities, and locations of procedures used — plays a large role in determining the effectiveness of a geotechnical engineering report and the design based upon it. The more comprehensive a subsurface exploration plan, the more information it provides to the geo- technical engineer, helping the engineer reduce the risk of unanticipated conditions and the attendant risk of costly delays and disputes. Even the cost of subsurface construction may be lowered. Geotechnical design begins with development of the subsurface exploration plan, a task that should be accom- plished jointly by you and/or your professional representatives and the geotechnical engineer. Mutual develop- ment helps assure that all parties involved recognize one another's concerns and the available technical options. Clients who develop a subsurface exploration plan without the involvement of their geotechnical engineers may be required to assume responsibility—and liability—for the plan's adequacy. Read General Conditions Carefully Most consulting geotechnical engineers include their standard general contract conditions in their proposals, and it is common for one of these conditions to limit the engineer's liability. Known as risk allocation or limitation of liability,this approach helps prevent problems to begin with,and establishes a fair and reasonable framework for handling them should they arise. Various other elements of the general conditions explain the geotechnical engineer's responsibilities, in order to help prevent confusion and misunderstandings, and assist all parties in recognizing who is responsible for different tasks. In all cases,read the geotechnical engineer's general conditions carefully.Speak with the geotechnical engineer about any questions you may have. Have The Geotechnical Engineer Work With Other Design Professionals Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretations of a geotechnical engineering report. To help avoid misinterpretations, retain your geotechnical engineer to work with other project design professionals who are affected by the geotechnical report. Ask the geotechnical engineer to explain report implications to those design professionals affected by them, and to review other design professionals'plans and specifications to consider the manner in which they have incorporated geotech- nical issues. Although other design professionals may be familiar with geotechnical concerns, none knows as much about them as a competent geotechnical engineer. Realize That Environmental Issues Have Not Been Addressed If you have requested a geotechnical engineering proposal, it will not include services needed to evaluate the likelihood of the site being contaminated by hazardous materials or other pollutants. Given the liabilities involved, it is prudent practice always to have a site reviewed from an environmental viewpoint.A geotechnical engineer cannot be responsible for failing to detect contaminants when the services needed to perform that . function are not being provided. GME CONSULTANTS,INC. Obtain Construction Observation Services Most experienced clients retain their geotechnical engineers to serve throughout the project's development. Involvement during the construction phase is particularly important, because it permits the geotechnical engi- neer to be on hand promptly to evaluate unanticipated conditions,to conduct additional tests if required and— when necessary—to recommend solutions to problems. In addition,the geotechnical engineer can monitor the geotechnical-related work performed by contractors. It is essential to recognize that the construction recom- mendations included in a geotechnical engineer's report are preliminary, because they must be based on the assumption that conditions revealed through selective exploratory sampling are indicative of actual conditions throughout a site. Because actual subsurface conditions can be discerned only during earthwork, geotechnical engineers need to observe those conditions in order to finalize their recommendations. Only the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report is fully familiar with the background information needed to determine whether or not the report's recommendations are valid. The geotechnical engineer submitting the report cannot assume responsi- bility or liability for the adequacy of preliminary recommendations if another party is retained to observe construction. Rely On Your Geotechnical Engineer For Additional Assistance Most geotechnical engineers who are members of ASFE are familiar with a variety of techniques and approaches that can be used to help reduce risks for all parties to a construction project,from design through construction. Speak with your geotechnical engineer not only about geotechnical issues, but others as well, to learn about approaches that may be of genuine benefit. You may also wish to obtain certain ASFE publications. Contact an ASFE member or ASFE itself for a complimentary directory of ASFE publications. X15 F E RAC ICING NG FIRMS THE GEOSCIENCES 8811 COLESVILLE ROAD/SUITE G106/SILVER SPRING,MD 20910 TELEPHONE: (301)565-2733 FACSIMILE: (301)589-2017 GME CONSULTANTS,INC. 4725 . 7450 ENVIRONMENTAL BORE HOLE. ENVIRONMENTAL BORE HOLE DEFINITION In order for an excavation or drill hole to be an environmental bore hole, it must meet ALL three conditions : 1) THE DRILL HOLE MUST INTERCEPT A WATER- BEARING LAYER. For the purposes of the rules, a water- bearing layer is interpreted to mean an aquifer. An aquifer is a saturated geologic material that can transmit sufficient quantity of water to supply a well . An aquifer will have a hydraulic conductivity of 10-5 cm/sec or greater. Typically, an aquifer will have a sustained yield of .25 gallons per minute or greater. For the purposes of the rule, an artificially created basin, not hydraulically connected (less than 10-5 cm/sec hydraulic conductivity) to the earth outside the artificial basin, is not considered a water-bearing layer. Such basins may include a landfill liner or an excavated basin in clay for petroleum tanks. 2) TICE DRILL HOLE MUST BE EITHER DEEPER THAN 25 FEET OR PENETRATE A CONFINING LAYER. The depth is measured to the deepest penetration of the drill hole. A confining layer in unconsolidated materials or rock other than the Paleozoic confining layers as specified in part 4725.2020, must be a minimum of 10 feet thick. If 10 feet of a confining layer is penetrated, the drill hole is an environmental bore hole. Peat and muck-swamp deposits are not considered confining layers. 3) THE DRILL HOLE MUST BE USED FOR TESTING WITHOUT EXTRACTING WATER OR BE USED FOR VENTING, VAPOR RECOVERY, OR SPARGING TO REMOVE SOIL OR GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION. Testing includes measuring a water level, testing earth properties or obtaining geologic samples for identification or other testing. Examples of environmental bore holes include piezometers, soil borings, geologic test holes, inclinometers, pressure transducers, and vents or air sparging points that meet the requirements of the definition and paragraph above. An excavation from which a water sample is removed is a monitoring 417 GME CONSULTANTS, INC. 14000 - 21ST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55447 (612) 559-1859 FAX (612) 559-0720 FEE SCHEDULE GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, EVALUATION OF FOUNDATION PERFORMANCE AND BASEMENT MOISTURE PROBLEMS COMMUNITY YOUTH BUILDING IN LYONS PARK SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA CITY OF SHAKOPEE PERSONNEL P-i Services of Principal Engineer $130 . 00/hour P-2 Services of Senior Project Engineer $100 . 00/hour P-3 Services of Project Engineer $ 85 . 00/hour P-4 Services of Soil Engineer or Environmental Scientist $ 75 .00/hour P-5 Services of CAD Operator $ 45 . 00/hour P-6 Services of Secretary $ 39. 00/hour P-7 Personnel Transportation (vehicle) $ 0 .41/mile FIELD EXPLORATION FE-i Mobilization/demobilization of drill crew and rig, layout and survey of boring locations, client- directed standby time, drilling and sampling for basic scope of work $175 . 00/hour FE-2 Additional soil drilling Drilling and sampling 0 ' to 25 ' $ 13 . 50/foot Drilling and sampling 25 ' to 50 ' $ 14 . 00/foot Drilling and sampling 50 ' to 75 ' $ 15 . 00/foot Drilling and sampling 75 ' to 100 ' $ 18 . 00/foot LARORA_T_ORY TESTING T-1 Moisture Content Test $ 10 . 00/test T-2 Unit Dry Density Test $ 15 . 00/test T-3 Hand Penetrometer Test or Torvane Test $ 10 . 00/test T-4 Organic Content Test $ 49. 00/test T-5 Atterberg Limits Test (liquid and plastic) $ 59. 00/test T-6 Unconfined Compressive Strength Test $ 22 . 00/test SPECIAL TESTING SP-1 Water Vapor Transmission Kits $ 35 . 00/kit SP-2 Two-man crew for test pit exploration $ 98 . 00/hour SP-3 Fiberoptic viewer use fee $100 . 00/day NOTES 1 . The unit prices and estimates of charges in this proposal will be effective through April 28, 2000 . Beyond this date they will be subject to review and revision. 2 . The unit prices for additional work not listed above will be supplied upon request . 3 . Services requested in excess of 8 hours per day or 40 hours per week, or on Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays will be billed at 1.5 times the unit rates given above. 4 . In the event of injuries to GME personnel because of hazardous or environmental conditions on the site, the applicable unit rates will be charged during all first aid and evacuation. 5 . Subcontract services authorized by client will be charged at cost plus 15%. GME CONSULTANTS, INC. GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING I. Scope of Work GME,Consultants, Inc. (hereinafter called GME) shall perform the services defined in this contract, and shall invoice the client for those services at the rates shown on the attached FEE SCHEDULE.Any estimate of cost to the Client as stated in this contract shall not be considered as a firm figure, but only as an estimate, unless otherwise specifically stated in the contract. GME will provide additional services under this contract,as required to complete the engineer- ing assignment, and/or as authorized by the Client and requested by the Client with charges for those additional services at the stated rates. II. Soil Boring Locations and Elevations It is desirablefor GME to use its expertise in determining the number, depth, and locations of borings. However, it is understood that the Client may specify the number, location, or depth of borings. GME agrees to follow the Client's specifications to the extent practical. If the Client specifies the number,depth or locations of borings,Client agrees to accept the risk associated therewith,and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless GME from the claims of others arising therefrom. To the extent that the Client does not specify the number, locations or depth of borings, such will be selected by GME personnel. GME will determine the ground surface elevations at the boring locations. If a bench mark is not available on the site, the elevations may be estimated from the topographic map (if one is provided). In using survey data provided by the Owner (for horizontal and vertical control), GME assumes no liability or responsibility to verify the accuracy of the survey data;we assume the survey data and/or bench mark elevations are correct as given.When GME uses a bench mark provided by the local municipality, county, or the state, we likewise assume no liability or responsibility in verifying the,correctness of the elevation. Since GME Consultants does not practice in the profession of land surveying, boring locations will be located in the field within the accuracy feasible. When the property lines are not surveyed and staked it may be necessary to approximately locate the borings by reference to available landmarks and landforms. In some cases,GME will request the Owner to either survey the boring locations before drilling starts,or after the completion of drilling.Such surveying will be carried out at no cost to GME. The boring locations shown on the Soil Boring Location Diagram are to be construed as approximate locations only. III. Access to Site Unless otherwise agreed, the Client will furnish GME with right-of-access to the site in order to conduct the planned exploration or field service.GME will take reasonable precautions to minimize damage due to its operations.GME has not included in the estimated charges the cost of restoration of any damage resulting from the operations,and will not be liable for such damage. If the Client directs,GME will restore the site and add the cost of restoration to the charges in accordance with personnel and equipment rates indicated on the FEE SCHEDULE. IV. Utilities In the prosecution of thework,we will take reasonable precautions to avoid damage or injury to subterranean structures or utilities.The client agrees to hold us harmless for any damages to subterranean structures which are not called to our attention and correctly shown or described on the documents furnished. V. Discovery of Unconfirmed Pollution,Notification to the State If we observe a substance at the ground surface, in a boring or an excavation,or if we observe a substance in contact with or within the groundwater,which in our professional opinion could potentially pollute surface waters or the ground- water, there is a legal obligation to notify the State of Minnesota Pollution Control-Agency, in accordance with the provisions of Statute 115.061, "DUTY TO NOTIFY AND AVOID WATER POLLUTION." It is our understanding that this notification must be"immediate,"usually interpreted by the Agency to be within 24 hours.We will attempt to notify you, our Client,first to have you do the notification, but if you do not assure us that you will do so,or if we are unable to communicate with you,we will then be obligated to notify the State directly.The requirements of this statute supersede the usual practice of client confidentiality,and Client agrees to hold GME harmless from any consequences arising from such notification. VI. Invokes a. Invoices will be submitted once a month for services performed during the prior month. Payment is due upon presentation and is past due after thirty(30)days of receipt of the invoice, unless specifically arranged otherwise in writing.The Client shall provide GME with a clear written statement within fifteen(15) days after the invoice date of any questions with respect to the invoice. Failure to provide GME with a clear written statement within fifteen(15) days shall constitute acceptance of an invoice as submitted.The Client agrees to pay a finance charge of one and one-half percent (11/2%) per month eighteen percent (18%) annually on past due accounts but not to exceed the maximum rate by law.The billing rates as described in the Agreement will be increased on the anniversary of the effective date of this agreement. b. The Client's obligation to pay for the work contracted is in no way dependent upon the Client's ability to obtain financing,zoning,approval of govemmental or regulatory agencies,final adjudication of a lawsuit in which GME is not involved,or upon the Clients successful completion of the project.It is agreed that all expenses incurred by GME in liening or collecting a delinquent amount, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys' fees, financial charges; witness personnel, document duplication, organization and storage costs, court costs, travel and sub- sistence,shall be paid to GME by the Client in addition to the delinquent amount. VII. Ownership of Documents GME will furnish three(3)copies of each report to the Client.The Client will be billed for additional copies at the rate of $25.00 per copy. All reports, boring logs, field data, field notes, laboratory test data, calculations, estimates, and other documents prepared by GME,as instruments of service,shall remain the property of GME. Client agrees that all reports and other work furnished to the Client or his agents which are not paid for,will be returned upon demand and will not be used by the Client for any purpose whatsoever. GME will retain all pertinent records relating to the services performed for a period of five years following submission of the report,during which period the records will be made available to the Client at reasonable times. GME CONSULTANTS,INC. VIII. Resolution of Disputes All claims, disputes and other matters in controversy arising out of or in any way related to this agreement will be submitted to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) before and as a condition precedent to other remedies provided by law. If and to the extent we have agreed on methods for resolving such disputes,then such methods will be set forth in the"Alternative Dispute Resolution Agreement"which, if attached, is incorporated into and made a part of this agree- ment. If no specific ADR procedures are set forth in the agreement, then it shall be understood that the parties shall submit disputes to mediation as a condition precedent to litigation. If a dispute at law arises from matters related to the services provided under this agreement and that dispute requires litigation instead of ADR as provided above,then: 1) the claim will be brought and tried in the judicial jurisdiction of the court where our principal place of business is located and the client waives the right to remove the action to any other judicial jurisdiction,and 2) the prevailing party will be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred, including staff time, court costs,attorney's fees,and other claim-related expenses. IX. Termination This agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven(7)days written notice in the event of substantial failure by the other party to perform in accordance with the terms hereof. Such termination shall not be effective if that substantial failure has been remedied before expiration of the period specified in the written notice. In the event of termination, we shall be paid for services performed to the termination notice date plus reasonable termination expenses. In the event of termination, or suspension for more than three (3) months, prior to completion of all reports contem- plated by this agreement,we may complete such analyses and records as are necessary to complete our files and may also complete a report on the services performed to the date of notice of termination or suspension.The expenses of termination or suspension shall include all our direct costs in completing such analyses, records and reports. X. Assigns Neither the client nor our firm may delegate,assign,sublet or transfer its duties or interest in this agreement without the written consent of the other party.If the client requests GME to readdress the report to another party or parties,there will be a charge of$2,000.00 plus copying costs for each party to whom the report is readdressed. GME is protected by Workers' Compensation Insurance (and/or employer's liability insurance) and by public liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage,and will furnish certificates of insurance upon request. If the Client requests increased insurance coverage,GME will take out additional insurance, if obtainable,at the Client's expense, but shall have no liability beyond the limits and conditions of the insurance coverage. XI. Limitation of Liability The Client recognizes the inherent risks connected with construction and the potential for variations in subsurface conditions. In performing its professional services, GME will use not less than that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances,by members of its profession practicing in the same or similar locality.No other warranty, express or implied,is made or intended by the proposal for consulting services or by furnishing oral or written reports of the finding made,and this statement may not be modified except in writing by authorized signature. In the event that GME would be held liable for damage due to professional negligence,such liability will be limited to an amount not to exceed $20,000 or the fee, whichever is greater. In the event that Client does not wish to limit GME's professional liability, GME agrees to waive this limitation upon written notice from the-Client received within five (5) days after the date this agreement is fully executed,and the Client agrees to pay an additional consideration equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the total fee, said consideration to be called "Waiver of Limitation of Professional Liability Charge."This charge will in no way be construed as being a charge for insurance of any type but will be increased consideration for greater risk involved in performing work for which there is no limitation of liability. Further, Client agrees to notify any contractor or subcontractor who may perform work in connection with any design, report or study prepared by GME of such limitation of professional liability, and to require as a condition to their performing their work,a like indemnity or limitation on their part as against GME. In the event the Client fails to obtain a like limitation of liability,client agrees to indemnify GME for any excess liability to any third person. Under no circumstances shall GME be liable for extra costs or other consequences due to"changed conditions"or for costs related to the failure of others to install materials or perform work in accordance with the plans and specifications. XII. Hazardous Waste Indemnification For services involving or relating to hazardous waste elements of this Agreement, it is agreed that the Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless GME Consultants, Inc. and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, direct and indirect, or consequential damages, including but not limited to fees and charges of attorneys and court and arbitration costs, arising out of or resulting from the performance of the work by GME,or claims against GME arising from the work of others,related to hazardous waste. The above indemnification provision extends to claims against GME consultants,Inc.which arise out of,are related to, or are based upon,the dispersal,discharge,escape, release or saturation of smoke,vapors,soot,fumes,acids,alkalis, toxic chemicals,liquids,gases or any other material,irritant,contaminant or pollutant in or into the atmosphere,or on, onto, upon, in or into the surface or surfaces (a) soil, (b) water or watercourses, (c) objects, or (d) any tangible or intangible matter,whether sudden or not. XIII. Lien Rights GME hereby gives notice that it retains the right to submit a lien against the subject property in the event of non- payment of invoices.The lien will be prepared and filed in accordance with pertinent laws of the state. XIV GME Consultants,Inc.Is an equal opportunity employer. XV. Tax on Services The amount of any excise,VAT,or gross receipts tax(local,state or federal)that may be imposed,shall be additional com- pensation to the actual billings for service,and the client agrees that he shall pay the full amount of billings plus the tax. OME CONSULTANTS.INC. I S. F_ CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Elementary School Site/MUSA DATE: March 17, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The Council will be asked to discuss in more detail a request by I.S.D. 720 to pursue a MUSA expansion for a portion of a proposed elementary school site in the Southbridge development. BACKGROUND: At the City Council's workshop of March 16th, School Superintendent Bob Ostland appeared before the Council asking that the City request MUSA designation for approximately 8 to 10 acres of land in the Shakopee Crossings area,east of the Southbridge Development. Of most concern is land adjacent to a 8.8 acre parcel of land which has been agreed to be sold by the City to I.S.D. 720, for use as an elementary school site. Approximately five additional Shakopee Crossing's acres are needed to have MUSA designation in order for the school to be built. Superintendent Ostland reported that negotiations had proceeded with the owners of the 18 acre parcel, so that those five acres would be sold to the School District at a price significantly below market, in the $35,000 per acre range. However,the Shakopee Crossings sale was contingent upon an IRS ruling which allowed the difference between the anticipated sales price, and market value,to be written off as a charitable contribution. Unfortunately,IRS regulations prohibit that. As such, Shakopee Crossings has indicated that it will need to have an increase in density for the remaining portion of that site, so that apartments could be constructed, and therefore the financial "write down"of school site could be justified. In order for development of that 18 acres, including this school site, MUSA expansion to include those 8 to 10 acres will be needed. In addition, while not being proposed tonight, the developer(represented by Steve Stoltau)will make application for the balance of the land not currently zoned commercial, or to be used for a school site,to be zoned for mid- density(up to 8 units per acre). The property is currently guided in the Comprehensive Plan as mid-density. Note that this application will not come in until after the AUAR currently underway for Shakopee Crossings is complete, and all environmental issues can be addressed. More information will be provided to the Council at the Tuesday meeting. ACTION REQUIRED: Council should give direction on whether the area will be approved for application to expand MUSA. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw Mar-17-00 01 :45P P.02 u� 4u,pp, "... )' LJ.I. .:--- 3 i - \:,`it. SI I)��I i -'i ( / \t I, .i \,, =rte \ \ \ \ • .. ';;j7:4 "4.11.7.i..=.,'7_1 -`, •° .,..' ,t9 f." - i „1,!,) i.,/ • ' ..• �� fit._ _ / �/ / / / '0 \ I .9 t •3 l ``"' ::: ,/1,,,, ,r`. , _rl , zee.. -...,`-` 1 .2",• ,/ Alekir -4-„,..---, -;.-.5. •.•._ .„ i I /4 fif , , ,/,',4-'"''• , ...,,-.,.-i•/ .., _ �`�= �T``° J, %•,i+0, ,/ f ;,�.�, n ,� r� T - =_' ....,vm•,,•_,!_,,,,.. \\t\\\ 1% il� 7/ •.. - I....,,(17".4 .•: 1a /_ 1 - fi r i e "_L,_"4=r-t!�' r r•.G� -�- .'. II: t `, I. , _ I I \` \.\ C. :.k' , t 1 I l t I `\ ` '. /gt q:::: L~ �> '�,e� /``, ,�v\ 1 `�' •w . 1 �:::.....,.:::::::.i-l'7.•tiz;.•-: . j \ `.\i.:..�: - '• a �..... •i '',.. -� � ' '� ?�. , \I 2 r . 3 ` ' ` \��`\\\ :::..."....:::::,....;:.......4....1::: .. .�`� \ ,�. Cy l i .' i fit. .\ 3 - mlt i1!"'� :`� \'a" ,•.•; rs. '/�`Pr;� � ` 1' ? i .7'1 't ,'{ "r-r::::.}.--J ~/ l. /r ipJiNl .ti,•' ` • : �. �e:` 'fit/ 1/.a r � \r ; \Ili; I\ It\ll\'\\\ °( fuel -_._,JJ ?.�, !l`.J9 rr.-_ \n;. iii I. 1:i \\ • \ ,'^ •;\\\\\\`� �._:_^ •.� \ •�� '�ter, _ ,^ 1 r_ ..\'`\`s 'I/ ;.- `(( ,4,••.\�4�:.- --•_- '-•//•1, ... .. ..' ` moo. �. ". / t 1 �\ \ `� , \ ._ _ t j /1 '70 _L 410%„ ••••":mal :P e. '' Ili i !, \ • 1 ti) 1------__ .i \I ` • \l\ 1 - '�' A, de:. \r \\ \ + � - i !' _ `'_i ,iii 11 ter' 7..:,. .1-,;/ '�",' �� "C , , 4 iiIP • ~— , '` `\ �'\ � \ 1- _.._/ . / ^II - .-, +, / ••••,4 . . ••'‘. Ar's,..4) . \ -,ff&-.... ..:1 \ om'< Y-. / i• s4 /'` ``:..'::'•.�' I J+� i II \ \' )711/ J 3 , 1 / / /_ A/ ..1 t, � d/f It liJ • ' ROPOSED i Gti .� ; .'- ` ` ''s-`a - - MUSA EXPANSI N 09 , ' ,' �l _- r.' ., �^ �? ._ \ - ---. -----r-.)j1- I:, II '\', --,...p:„*". 1 .1 E`- I ,'r,� a 1 ' +'� •!• -- /' /' /i i ""``'`.. \\\ \ r /Y � \ ti , of i ,\\ i ) .i \ \\ Z 1 \ ';..,•!- -i ,� ryt. ice \ . ( ' ! \ \ \, ;• `\ \ / i / - -- \ * . .r , -il • P. -.-"••....' ,— • I i e. , , .\ , i \ \ !�- : ..... ( I :a r ,, , , , ,.d ..„ PROPOSED MUSA EXPANSION SOUI'HRRIDGE AREA