Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/05/2000 TENTATIVE AGENDA CITY OF SHAKOPEE REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 5, 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 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 Nfinutes: May 15 and May 16, 2000 *8] Approval of Bills in the Amount of$319,692.96 9] Public Hearing on the proposed vacation of a portion of 5th Avenue west of Adams Street, Res. No. 5382 10] Proposed Right-of-way Management Ordinance—Ord. No. 570 11] Liaison Reports from Council Members 12] Recess for Economic Development Authority meeting 13] Re-convene 14] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions A] Rezoning of property located south of 4th Avenue and west of Adams Street from RIC to R-2 - Ord. No. 569 TENTATIVE AGENDA July 5, 2000 Page 2 15] General Business A] Parks and Recreation 1. Awarding Contract for Stans Park Tennis Court Reconstruction, 2000-7, Res. No. 5380—memo on table *2. Replacement of Ice Arena Compressor B] Community Development 1. ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)—Res. No. 5384 2. Valley Green Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR) *3. Amending Fees for Electrical Permits—Res. No. 5383 4. Final Plat for Prairie Village 5th Addition, located S of STH 169, E of CSAH 17 and N of Valley View Road—Res. No. 5381 *5. Extension of Final Plat Approval for Bergs Hilltop Addition C] Public Works and Engineering 1. Noise Study and Landscaping Plan Along CSAH 17, 2000-9 -Res. No. 5379 2. Future Collector Road between 17th Avenue and Valley View Road 3. Extension of Storm Drainage Outlet D] Police and Fire 1. Thermal Imaging System E] Personnel *1. Completion of Probationary Period—Beth Thorp *2. Completion of Probationary Period—Tom Pitschneider 3. Approval of Ice Arena Maintenance Worker Job Description & Funding F] General Administration: *1. Temporary 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License— Shakopee Jaycees *2. Apportionment of Special Assessments for Southbridge 5th—Res. No. 5385 3. Derby Days Street/Parking Lot Closings 4. Amending Vehicle Policy—Res. No. 5386 5. Appointment of Committee for Annual City Administrator Performance Evaluation 16] Council Concerns 17] Other Business 18] Adjourn to Tuesday, July 18, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. TENTATIVE AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting July 5, 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.) 4 Approval of Minutes: 1 1(fl, o1QOc._ 4. Financial A.) 4 Approval of Bills - e- 5. Other Business: 6. Adjourn cdagcnda.doc OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA ADJOURNED REGULAR SESSION MAY 16,2000 Members Present: President Amundson, Brekke, Morke, Sweeney, Link 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; and Jim Thomson, City Attorney. I. Roll Call: President Amundson called the meeting to order at 7:45. Roll call was taken as noted above. H. Approval of Agenda Sweeney/Link moved to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously. III. Consent Agenda Sweeney/Link moved to approve the consent agenda. Motion carried unanimously. IV. Approval of Minutes: April 4, 2000 Sweeney/Link moved to approve the April 4, 2000 meeting minutes. (Motion carried unanimously under the Consent Agenda.) V. Financial A.) Approval of Bills Sweeney/Link moved to approve the bills in the amount of$2,215.98589.39 for the EDA General Fund and $0.00 for Seagate. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) VI. Other Business There was no other business. VII Adjournment Sweeney/Link moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday June 6, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously The meeting adjourned at 7:47 p.m. Lo.)^;tAA. • "(i( udi h S. Cox, EDA Secretary role Hedlund, Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA MAY 15,2000 Mayor Brekke called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Morke, Link, Amundson and Sweeney present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Present from Murphy's Landing were: Dennis Kelly, Executive Director and Steve Griffith, Chair of Murphy's Landing Board of Directors. Present from Shakopee Public Utilities were: Commissioners Dave Thomson and Mark Miller, Lou VanHout,Manager, and Joe Adams, Administrative Assistant. Commissioner Lynch was absent. Sweeney/Link moved to approve the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. This was a joint work session with Murphy's Landing Board of Directors and with the Shakopee Public Utilities Commissioners. This part of the meeting centered around the discussion of the proposed lease permitting an Outdoor Heritage Education Center Building on Murphy's Landing/City property. Mr. Mark McNeill reported on the possibility of an Outdoor Heritage Center to be located on land leased to Murphy's Landing by the City. Mr. Mark LaBarbera, a Shakopee resident has been working with the City and Murphy's Landing to secure a lease for an Outdoor Heritage Education Center. OHEC would sublease the property from Murphy's Landing and the City. Previously Murphy's Landing Board of Directors gave tentative approval of this OHEC but attached several conditions Mr. LaBarbera had an attorney draw up a lease. The City Attorney has just received this and has not had time to look at the lease carefully as of yet. Mr. McNeill did say the lease should be between Murphy's Landing and OHEC. The City would then have a sublease and would need to approve it. There were some areas and issues in the lease that needed to be addressed. There was concern that this was not an appropriate use of taxpayers property because this was not a City based organization. There were some groups within the City of Shakopee previously that the City felt were not compatible for City use -and perhaps this was the case now. Dennis Kelly and Steve Griffith from Murphy's Landing gave a little background as to how they had got to this point. Mr. Mark LaBarbera approached Mr. Kelly and inquired about leasing a portion of Murphy's Landing for an outdoor museum. He was informed that this was decision to be made by the Board of Directors of Murphy's Landing. Murphy's Board of Directors had some concerns regarding this endeavor. There were two main issues. 1)Is this compatible with the history of the use of Murphy's Landing and 2) is it a viable project. Can this project really be done. It would mean a huge boost to the admissions for Murphy's Landing, there would be a shared use of buildings, this would be a modern facility until Murphy's Landing was able to get to their interpretive center, the OHEC would bring in programs that are not in the budget for Murphy's Landing to do, and there would be shared publicity. Many of the issues involved in this Official Proceedings of the May 15,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—2- project are not completely resolved yet. The issue like the physical location of this OHEC has not been identified yet. There are native burial grounds to take into consideration, also the flood plain area, and this area was the early location of the City dump. Mr. Sweeney was concerned if this would be an appropriate use of the taxpayers money. What is in this for the City and the taxpayers. Mr. Morke thought that perhaps this would be an opportunity for Murphy's Landing to continue. However, he was uncomfortable with the lease but he was in favor of the idea. Cncl. Amundson felt this was of a speculative nature and there was no history to track. Mayor Brekke wanted Mr. LaBarbera to address who the backers are in this project. Mark LaBarbera approached the podium and addressed the Board members of Murphy's Landing and the City Council members. He reported that the OHEC has extreme support. There would be benefits to the taxpayers and the community. This new OHEC would bring tourism to the City of Shakopee,jobs would be provided, there would be community aspects, and cultural programs. He has had positive conversations with senators regarding this endeavor. Being on the Minnesota River is a powerful tool, when asking for funding. He has pledges of donations of memorabilia to the OHEC by several organizations. He has launched several other start up projects. There are several entities involved in the OHEC. The Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Alliance (which is made up of conservation and sporting groups), the National Wildlife Federation, there is an advisory Board with much expertise. There is much going on behind the scenes. OHEC has received IRS approval as a non-profit charitable organization. LMC funding has been applied for. The first cut in getting this funding will be soon -the final decision will be months away. The management of OHEC would be by OHEC, Inc. and a Board of Directors. There are protections in the lease for the City and Murphy's Landing if OHEC failed. The physical building that was being considered was a two-story building. There would also be a 32 foot pull behind trailer that the DNR officers would transport. The trailer would not be at the site very much. The OHEC people would need to work with Murphy's Landing on the design of the building so all buildings on site would be compatible. First the lease needed to be determined and then the site plan could be worked on. There needs to be a commitment from the City, OHEC and Murphy's Board of Directors for this project to continue. There are cash commitments over a number of years from various River Companies. Most of the support comes from River Companies at this time. There was a problem with the lease. There was concern about the openendedness of the whole document along with the language. The lease with Murphy's Landing is for 10 years; how could Murphy's Landing and OHEC come to an agreement on a lease for 100 years? Official Proceedings of the May 15,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—3- The Mayor was concerned about this being a valuable piece of property and using it for an entity that was just surviving, thereby the City not realizing great returns on their valuable piece of property. The next few steps are: Answering the question-is the City and Murphy's landing still comfortable pursuing this matter. If so, then have the City Attorney look at the lease in more detail. Also, if Murphy's Landing does go away what then will happen to OHEC and the City. Mr. Morke and Ms. Amundson would like the dump on this site identified. Mr. Link was in favor of pursuing and Mr. Sweeney was against the OHEC project. Mr. Sweeney was against pursuing because of the Native American burial grounds on the site and the pollution. There was enough interest still in this project, that it should continue to be looked at. Mr. Morke was in favor of continuing to look at this project; he could see questions and he could see positives. Staff was directed to come back with recommendations as to what would be involved in determining the landfill site on this property that is now leased to Murphy's Landing. Dennis Kelly from Murphy's Landing said this was an interesting use of the land. This was an exciting hands on activity. It was important to have partnerships for the Minnesota River. Murphy's Landing is on a positive track now and it is hoped that the positive tract will remain. Murphy's Landing can move forward with or without the OHEC project. Its success is not dependent on OHEC. A recess was taken at 5:59 p.m. to allow Murphy's Landing Board of Directors to leave and the Shakopee Public Utilities to take their places at the table. Mayor Brekke reconvened the joint work session of Shakopee Public Utilities and the City Council at 6:04 p.m. Mayor Brekke abstained from discussion on the franchise fee and left the Council table. Mark McNeill reported on the Franchise Fee Update. He said the decision was made last fall to have a franchise fee. It was recommended by a rate consultant to have the fee in lieu of the $875,000 contribution SPUC makes to the City annually. This fee is needed for the maintenance of streetlights, etc. There will be some changes,Mmnegaso has the potential to become a generator for the franchise fee along with Minnesota Valley Electric. These companies also serve some Shakopee residents. Roger Berens, attorney representing five large users of electricity, (including Rahr and Certain Teed)was present at the meeting and stated that they were opposed to the fee. The City wants to see the total impact before pursuing this franchise fee. With the franchise fee all customers would be treated equally. Mr. Sweeney objected to an attorney's presentation at a work session. Oficial Proceedings of the May 15,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—4- According to Dave Thompson,President of Shakopee Public Utilities, Shakopee Public Utilities is not a power producer. The Citizens of Shakopee are paying more than their fair share. The underlying issue of the franchise fee is that the cost of City services should be the same to all producers of electricity. The utilities franchise fee ordinance will be presented a future public hearing. There was discussion on water issues and the planning coordination of these water issues between SPUC staff, the City Council, and City staff. The City Council provided direction to Staff that they wanted a comment from Shakopee Public Utilities indicating if there would be enough water supply without further restrictions to the residents of Shakopee for the new developments proposed in the year 2000. SPUC said there would be an adequate water supply for the year 2000 but an additional well in each of the years of 2001 and 2002 would need to be added. There was a letter from Joe Adams, Administrative Assistant for SPUC, in which he stated that SPUC does not have sufficient capacity to serve proposed developments for applications dated after 5/1/00, which will be coming on line in 2001. Wells 11 &12 will be needed. Applications dated before 5/1/00 there will be sufficient water supply. Mr. Leek said he was now looking for direction from the Council on how to handle new plats. The coordination of the water issues can be seen in the Comp Plan of 1996. That Comp Plan has a 20 year time frame. Past practice has been when a well was needed, it was approved. Shakopee is not finding this to be the case any longer. It is hoped that well# 10 is going to be approved now. If not Mr. Thompson talked with a senator who is willing to come to a future meeting if that becomes necessary. Shakopee Public Utilities needs to continue to move forward on the water supply issue. The City is looking into the appeal process from within the DNR. However, the City Attorney is quite nervous as to the approvals of future Shakopee wells if the City does appeal well# 10. The City Attorney is also concerned about the status of the original request. This original request was approved for well# 10 to be blended only with wells#'s 6 & 7, according to Pat Lynch, area hydrologist. It appears that wells 11 and 12 should be approved. According to the DNR their initial distance from each other is acceptable and the wells are proposed to be in the Jordan aquifer. Things look acceptable but the wells are not approved yet. Mr. Thomson said the City can't approve a proposed plat if the water is not there. Mr. Leek said the DNR and Met Council believe there are long range significant water issues in this area. They would like to see long range plans for alternative water supplies identified to accommodate the growth until the year 2020. There are some larger policy issues involved also. They are: 1)the actual supply of water in an aquifer, 2) the impact of using an aquifer and what Oficial Proceedings of the May 15, 2000 Shakopee City Council Page—5— that impact will be for the potential growth in 2020, 3) inter relationships of aquifers and the impacts in Northern Scott County on significant surfacial features like the Savage Fen, Boiling Springs, and Eagle Creek. Mr. Loney said the DNR will not approve a well until they know how much water and what the well produces. Then they will give their approval. It was agreed that the City and Shakopee Public Utilities needed to get this issue resolved. The City would not allow further development at the expense of the current residents. The RFP for the Shiely quarry, for a water treatment distribution facility as an alternative water supply for Shakopee, Prior Lake and Savage was slightly discussed. The strategy this evening is to get well No. 10 fully on line in the year 2000 and to bring well# 11 & 12 on line by the end of summer 2001. Perhaps there should be a merging of the City Comp Plan and the Water Comp Plan. There were plans in place but the growth of Shakopee far exceeded the expectations of the City. Shakopee Public Utilities has every intention to drill wells and pump and distribute water for the needs of the citizens of Shakopee. They need to know the City's plan for the population. Mr. Leek will be talking with the City Attorney before the meeting on May 16, when decisions need to be made regarding two final plats. Perhaps he would agree that the plats could be approved with a caveat contingent upon availability of water supply and the developer develops at this own risk. Mayor Brekke would like to have the City Attorney review the whole record before Tuesday evening, May 16, 2000. He would like him to recommend what courses of action and the possible consequences of these actions. This would go the entire spectrum from approval to denial. There was slight discussion on the meeting with the county and all the surrounding towns. Mr. Loney addressed the proposed Right-of-Way Ordinance for the City of Shakopee. He felt perhaps this ordinance was needed in light of the recent developments of the State Right-Of-Way Legislation and Public Utilities Commission rules. He recommended a more comprehensive management ordinance. Many cities are adopting the model ordinance of the League of Minnesota Cities and then changing it to fit the City's need. Some of the issues involved now would impact existing policies. It is important to know what policies conflict or need to be changed. The utility industry is rapidly changing and this requires more record keeping in the area Official Proceedings of the May 15,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—6— of rights-of-way. There will be some big changes. Right now all we have is a right-of-way permit. It was asked if the City was held harmless if an accident occurred involving fiber optics installed by someone else in the City's right-of-way. The City does have some insurance but not for this type mistake. He was just introducing this item this evening. Cncl. Sweeney wanted the franchise fee and Comp Plan issues looked at along with budget implications. Mayor Brekke adjourned the meeting to Tuesday May 16, 2000 at 7:00. The meeting was adjourned at 7:08 p.m. • taxt 4fth S. Cox ty Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA MAY 16,2000 Mayor Brekke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Councilmembers Morke, Link, Amundson and Sweeney present. Also present: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director;Bruce Loney,Public Works Director, Gregg Voxland, Finance Director;Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk;Mark McNeill, City Administrator;Mark McQuillan, Natural Resources Director. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following items were added to the agenda. 15.8.2. Authorizing payment of Mn/DOT linear pond right-of-way for southwest quadrant of T.H. 169 and CSAH 17, 15.E.2. Accepting the resignation of the City Hall receptionist and authorizing her position be to be filled and 15.F.4. Execute the Scott County recycling reimbursement agreement. Link/Amundson moved to approve the agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Brekke announced that a three judge panel on the Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld the decision that the train speed going through the town of Shakopee was to remain at 10 miles per hour. MnDOT had originally appealed this decision. He thanked staff and the legal staff for their work on this appeal. As far as the City was concerned this was done. Mayor Brekke gave a short report on the housing task force. He was a member of this committee, which had four work groups. These work groups consisted of 1) design and management of developments, 2) public awareness that there is affordable housing available, 3) funding for affordable housing, 4)committee on the cost of land and regional development controls and local controls. Mayor Brekke also announced that the City had hired a management assistant and introduced, Tracy Coenen. The following items were added to the Consent Agenda. 14.A. Text Amendment to City Code regarding floodplain overlay zone-Ordinance No. 568; 15.B.2. Authorizing payment of Mn/DOT linear pond right-of-way for southwest quadrant of T.H. 169 and CSAH 17, 15.E.2. Accepting the resignation of Terry McDonald, City Hall receptionist and authorize her position to be filled, and 15.F.4. Execute the Scott County recycling reimbursement agreement. Morke/Amundson moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the May 16,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—2- Mayor Brekke asked if there were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item not on the agenda. Val Nonyak, a resident of the City approached the podium and addressed the Council on garbage hauling. He wanted to know why he did not have the opportunity to choose his own garbage hauler. He was very unhappy with the refuse hauler that the City had chosen for all residents to use. Mr. Mark McNeill, City Administrator will check on Mr. Nowyak's complaint with the waste management company and will get back to him. Morke/Amundson moved to approve the minutes of April 4, 2000. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Morke/Amundson moved to approve the bills in the amount of$717,792.85. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Mayor Brekke opened the public hearing on the currency exchange license for Chex Services, Inc. dba/Fastfunds-Resolution No. 5360. Ms. Judith Cox, city clerk, gave a report on the application that Chex Services made for a currency exchange license at Canterbury Park. The applicants, James Wellbourn and Lewis Nfirviss, have provided the State with the required $10,000 Currency Exchange Surety Bond and did undergo the required background investigation checks by the Department of Commerce through the State of Minnesota. All checks appear to be in order. It was recommended that Resolution No. 5360 approving the currency exchange license be approved. Mayor Brekke wanted to know if the Racing Commission had approved this item before he made a decision to approve this resolution. Eric Halstrom, of Canterbury Park, approached the podium to let the Council know that the Racing Commission knows of this issue and gave their approval of this Currency Exchange License at their April 19th meeting. This Chex Services would not be an additional check cashing provider because Canterbury Park has not renewed the license of their current currency exchange provider and Canterbury has requested Chex Services to be their currency exchange provider. Canterbury is providing this service in an effort to make their business work. Vincent Ella, representative of Fastfunds, approached the podium to answer questions if necessary. Mayor Brekke declared the public hearing closed. Official Proceedings of the May 16,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—3- Link/Morke offered Resolution No. 5360, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Approving the Application of Chex Services, Inc. dba/Fastfunds For A Currency Exchange License At 1100 Canterbury Road, and moved it adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Sweeney felt a mechanism was needed to limit the number of pawn shops and currency exchange licenses to meet the needs. Sweeney/Brekke moved to direct staff to investigate an ordinance that would limit the number of pawn shops and currency exchange licenses in the City of Shakopee. Motion passed 4-1 with Cncl. Morke dissenting. Mayor Brekke opened the public hearing on the transfer of the cable franchise to merged AOL/Time Warner-Resolution No. 5361. Mark Mc Neill reported on the transfer of ownership of the cable franchise (AMZAK Cable) from Time Warner to the new company formed by the merger of America Online and Time Warner. The City is asked to hold a public hearing on this matter and then consider a resolution allowing the transfer of the City's cable television system from Time Warner to AOL/Time Warner. On February 9, 2000, the City received notice of this proposed transfer of ownership. The Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory Commission retained Adrian Herbst, of Ballard and Herbst Law Firm, an attorney highly skilled in the cable communications area, to look into this transfer of ownership for the City. Mr. Herbst has given his opinion to the City. He is recommending approval of the transfer of ownership with certain caveats. There may still be some unresolved questions. Kim Roden, Vice President of Public Affairs and Marketing for Time Warner approached the podium and addressed the Council. She preferred to call this a change of control rather than a change of ownership. She did not feel that there were changes that would affect the day-to- day workings of the cable company. There was dialogue on the independent service providers with AOL/Time Warner. AOL/Time Warner was offering RoadRunner over the cable line. Time Warner would soon be doing an upgrade in the City of Shakopee. First Time Warner did the residential customers and then the commercial customers would be done. There is much demand for the internet but the upgrade needs to be done first. There is a fee schedule for the RoadRunner and the digital packages. The government Channel will not be affected by the upgrade. The analog will still be available. With this new upgrade the service in the homes will have much more clarity. With the cable service from AOL/Time Warner a second phone line for the Internet will not be needed. Mayor Brekke asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment and there was no response. Official Proceedings of the May 16,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—4- Link/Sweeney moved to continue the public hearing on the cable franchise transfer to merged AOL/Time Warner to June 6, 2000. Motion carried unanimously. Kim Roden said she would look into the matter of the Senior Citizens High Rise on Levee Drive getting cable, but without the buildings permission there really wasn't anything the cable company could do. The council members wanted to know if there was something the City could do to offer this cable service to the residents in the High Rise. Cncl. Morke asked Mr. McNeill when the bid opening was for the new audio equipment for the City Council Chambers. Several residents were inquiring into the new audio equipment through Cncl. Morke, that they felt was needed badly. Mr. McNeil advised that the bid opening was to be May 23, 2000, at 10:00 a.m. A recess was taken at 7:45 p.m. for the purpose of conducting the Economic Development Authority meeting. The meeting was reconvened at 7:47 p.m. Morke/Amundson offered Ordinance No. 568, Fourth Series,An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee Amending Chapter 11, Zoning, Section 11.56, Floodplain Overlay Zone, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director, approached the podium and reported on the final plat of Savanna Oaks at Southbridge 3'd, located north of Dean Lake, south of US 169 and west of Southbridge Parkway-Resolution No. 5363. This final plat is consistent with the overall PUD. The reason that this final plat is not on the consent agenda is that Shakopee Public Utilities had not commented on the water supply issue. If the Council did decide to approve this Final Plat of Savanna Oaks at Southbridge 3'd Addition, staff did provide a draft resolution-Resolution No. 5363 with conditions for this final plat. Joe Adams from Shakopee Public Utilities said he looked over the application which was received April 12, 2000 and that the water supply would be sufficient to approve this final plat with conditions as outlined in the resolution. Sweeney/Amundson offered Resolution No. 5363, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Approving The Final Plat of Savanna Oaks at Southbridge 3'd Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. R. Michael Leek approached the podium and reported on the Final Plat of Southbridge 51 Addition, located north of Dean Lake, south of US 169 and south of Southbridge Parkway— Official Proceedings of the May 16,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—5- Resolution No. 5364. He said this final plat is in substantial agreement with the PUD and the Preliminary Plat. This final plat was not on the consent agenda because he wanted to point out one condition. That condition was that this property is located next to County Road 21 and any future noise mitigation is the responsibility of the Homeowners Association(s). Amundson/Link offered Resolution No. 5364, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Approving the Final Plat of Southbridge 5th Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Bruce Loney,Public Works Director, approached the podium and reported on the award of the contract for Gorman Street Improvement, 2000-1 -Resolution No. 5362. The plans approving the project and the advertisement for bids were adopted in Resolution No. 5331 at the March 21, 2000 City Council meeting. Four bids were received. The low bid came from S.M. Hentges& Sons, Inc. of Jordan, Minnesota in the amount of$584,800.44 and appeared to be in line with the feasibility report. The engineer's estimate of this project was approximately $600,000. Staff has received waivers of assessment appeal from all property owners and approval for this project has come from Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. The recommendation from staff is to proceed with the project, authorize consultant engineering services for construction surveying and administration services necessary for this project and to authorize a contingency amount equal to 5% of the contract to cover change orders that may be needed for this project. Link/Amundson offered Resolution No. 5362, A Resolution Accepting Bids for Gorman Street, From 4th Avenue to County Road 17 Project No. 2000-1, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Amundson moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute an extension agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. to provide consultant services for the City of Shakopee in the form of construction surveying and administration services necessary for the Gorman Street project. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Amundson moved to authorize a contingency amount of 5% of the contract for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on the Gorman Street project. Motion carried unanimously. Morke/Amundson moved to authorize payment of $160,777.05 out of the Storm Drainage Fund for MN/DOT for the conveyance of Parcel 55 and 57B right-of-way to the City of Shakopee for the linear pond right-of-way for the southwest quadrant of T.H. 169 and CSAH 17. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Mark McQuillan,Natural Resources Director, reported to the Council on the Eugene Hauer Official Proceedings of the May 16,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—6- Property adjacent to Sun Path School. The Council is being asked to start condemnation proceedings for 10 acres of Mr. Eugene Hauers'land. This item was tabled at the February 291 City Council meeting to allow time for staff to obtain an appraisal and then offer the results to Mr. Hauer and for the City to take inventory of proposed land acquisitions that are underway and how these proposed land acquisitions are to be funded. This has been done, but the appraisal came in lower than a previous offer to Mr. Hauer and he has refused the appraisal amount. This ten acres from Eugene Hauer which the City is trying to buy will eventually be combined with other property and used for park purposes next to Sunpath School. If the City wishes to purchase this land from Mr. Hauer then the process of eminent domain needs to begin quickly because Mr. Hauer is also looking at other options. Mr. McQuillan is here this evening to see if the City wants to pursue this land any further and if so to let the City know that this needs to be done quickly. It is the Parks and Recreation Department's hope that this land is purchased so in the future they can build an athletic complex in this area to serve the soccer needs of the residents and to provide a neighborhood park. When all the land is combined it is hoped to have 30 acres for this athletic complex. Mayor Brekke said the City needed to be aggressive in purchasing this land. There was discussion that if the City bought this land there were no funds budgeted to improve the land and put in an athletic complex for soccer. It was also stated that an athletic complex for soccer is much less costlier than a softball complex. It was pointed out that two years ago the City agreed in concept to buy this land in stages for park purposes. Sweeney/Morke offered Resolution No. 5355, A Resolution Authorizing Acquisition of Property By Eminent Domain for Park Purposes, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Morke/Amundson moved to authorize the hiring of John DeLacey for the position of Engineering Technician III, starting at Step 7 of the Non-Union Pay Plan($43,811.00/Yr.) effective June 5, 2000, with the vacation accrual based on the prior years of service with the City of Shakopee subject to the successful completion of a pre-employment physical and background check. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Morke/Amundson moved to accept the resignation from Ms. Terry McDonald as receptionist at City Hall and to authorize the appropriate persons to proceed with the recruitment process to fill the receptionists position. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mark Mc Neill approached the podium and reported on the major expenditures/funding regarding the land acquisitions for the year 2000. This type of report was requested at the February 29th City Council meeting. Some of these expenditures are in the five year CIP. There have been some emergencies and some opportunities. Right now the City has a couple of opportunities Official Proceedings of the May 16,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—7- available to them. They have the opportunity to purchase some land by ODowd lake, and there is the Hauer land by Sun Path school. It was agreed that there have been enough referendums. It was felt perhaps that part of the MN DOT parcel 75 (located in Southbridge) should be sold so more funds would be available for the City to use. The City does not have all the funds in hand that are needed now. It was also discussed about selling the MnDOT parcels 43/39 (located in the SW part of the City adjacent to Scott County Highway 69) for a profit for the City. Mayor Brekke stated that the Boldt property adjacent to O'Dowd Lake is the last opportunity to acquire property next to the lake. Cncl. Link abstained from discussion on acquiring the Boldt property adjacent to ODowd Lake because of personal interest in the property and left the council table. Cncl Link approached the podium and gave a presentation on the piece of property adjacent to O'Dowd Lake that the City now owns for park property. This presentation showed that before the City buys more park property the park property that is now owned by the City needs to be kept up better. The city has owned this park land for 20 years and it still is not improved. Mr. McNeill said he would have staff look into the cleanup of the ODowd park parcel that the City currently owns. Jon Albinson, Valley Green Business Park approached the podium. He questioned the budget figures and the proposed selling of MnDOT parcel 75. He wanted the MnDOT parcel used as park land for the Southbridge area and he felt perhaps the budget figures were to conservative. He didn't want deficient spending but he was fighting for the people out in the Southbridge area. He stated that he believed that the revenue projections for park fees are extremely low and that the city may not need to sell MnDOT parcel 75. Cncl. Morke would like to know what the Park Dedication fees were in 1999. This information will be forth coming. Mayor Brekke suggested a need for a work session on this topic at a future date. Cncl. Morke stated that the report from Mr. McNeill was useful for him to understand and a helpful tool. Mark McNeill approached the podium and reported on the opportunity afforded to the City of leasing available space across the street from the current City Hall. There were a couple of ways this space could be leased out. The City could rent just a few offices for their current needs now or they could purchase 4,700 square feet. Jeff Monnens, the contractor, has been offered Official Proceedings of the May 16,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—8- $425,000 but is willing to sell to the City for$410,000. If the City bought this building they could possibly put off expanding City Hall and enclosing the parking lot; allowing them to do other expenditures in a more timely fashion. If the Council decides to lease or to buy there will be some startup costs involved. This is an unbudgeted item. Mr. McNeill was looking for direction from the Council as to whether this space should be leased, bought or left alone. At some point the current City hall will need to be added onto but this will significantly delay the remodeling of the current City Hall. There could be some space available in the basement of the current City Hall, when the lease runs out in June of the area leased to the Scott Joint Prosecution Association. If this lease agreement was terminated, then the City would have a yearly revenue of$10,200 less than what they have now. A lease for a three or five year period was being proposed by Mr. Monnens for the property across the street. The rent for the 2,500 square feet available for lease would be approximately$25,000 annually plus utilities. It was decided to get an appraisal on the building and to lease with the possibility of a purchase. Sweeney/Morke moved to direct staff to order an appraisal of the building now owned by Jeff Monnens(west of City Hall and north of 2nd Avenue) and to begin negotiating a lease with an option to buy that building for use by City staff. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Sweeney went back to the tennis court issue at Stans Park. It was at the direction of the Council that Mr. Link asked to meet with the School District and tennis group. He felt this issue had been looked into and he proposed the funding come %z from the general fund and 1/2 from the park reserve funds. His reasoning on this was that '/2 was new and '/2 was replacement Sweeney/Link moved to fund the tennis courts and Stans Park remodeling with $100,000 from the general fund and $100,000 from the park reserve fund. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McNeill reported that the City Attorney was now able to give direction to the City regarding the sale of MnDOT parcel 39 (old truck stop). He said the City would need to disclose in the sale of the property that the purchaser may need to remediate any contamination that is discovered on the property. The City would not be responsible for this remediation. Because there is new language added to the Request for Proposals, Council is asked to re-approve the RFP. It was suggested that the city close on parcels 43/39 as soon as possible with MnDOT. Sweeney/Link moved to direct staff to close on parcels 43/39 with MN DOT as soon as possible with the funding not to come from the general fund. Motion carried unanimously. This is located south of the former K Mart site on the southwest side of town along Scott County Official Proceedings of the May 16,2000 Shakopee City Council Page—9- Highway 69. I Sweeney/Link moved to approve the acceptance of MN DOT's offer for sale-parcels 43 and 39 located on the west end of town. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Morke moved to approve the revised Request for Proposals document for development of parcels 43 and 39, and direct staff to post in appropriate publications. Motion carried unanimously. According to Cncl. Link an interested party has given earnest money on parcel 43 and 39. There now is language to protect the City Morke/Amundson moved to approve the execution of the Scott County recycling reimbursement. (Motion carried under the consent agenda.) Dick Wiggin, 2151 133' St. West, Shakopee, expressed interest in the survey of the MN DOT property. Link/Sweeney moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. • Azak. • 072 6 •ith S. Cox 'ity Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance director RE: City Bill List DATE : June 29, 2000 Introduction and Background Attached is a print out showing the division budget status for 2000 based on data entered as of 6/29/00 . 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 $0 . 00 . Not included in the attached bill list but included in the total amount of bills shown on the agenda is the below listed subsistence/travel reimbursement for an employee. The employee (s) were away from their normal work site for a business purpose but the meal itself was not a "business purpose meal " or there was no receipt/odometer readings and therefore needs to be paid through payroll as taxable income. Craig Robson $16 . 53 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 $17, 479 . 77 . Action Requested Move to approve the bills in the amount of $319, 692 . 96 . ) CITY OF SHAKOPEE EXPENSES BY DEPARTMENT 06/29/00 CURRENT YEAR ANNUAL MONTH TO PERCENT DEPT DEPT NAME BUDGET ACTUAL DATE EXPENDED 11 MAYOR & COUNCIL 80,130 3,054 31,775 40 12 CITY ADMINISTRATOR 249,600 26,620 125,882 50 13 CITY CLERK 219,290 12,663 81,426 37 15 FINANCE 429,990 89,433 219,926 51 16 LEGAL COUNSEL 298,500 9,607 146,560 49 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 574,780 41,023 235,642 41 18 GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 253,840 11,766 69,705 27 31 POLICE 2,173,740 147,915 967,209 44 32 FIRE 705,840 17,920 244,292 35 33 INSPECTION-BLDG-PLMBG-HTG 428,070 36,118 226,371 53 41 ENGINEERING 541,650 40,005 225,062 42 42 STREET MAINTENANCE 904,850 71,935 322,059 36 44 SHOP 156,240 15,039 70,178 45 46 PARK MAINTENANCE 535,430 36,702 216,150 40 91 UNALLOCATED 557,010 1,180 38,395 7 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 8,106,960 560,980 3,220,632 40 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 509,990 1,515 149,400 29 TOTAL TRANSIT 509,990 1,515 149,400 29 19 EDA 247,380 6,478 35,965 15 TOTAL EDA 247,380 6,478 35,965 15 H L a) rn as a I-1 4 - o (214 a (214 a a a a as a a a a Cr 000 0 0 H 0 H H H H H H H H H H H H H Ln z M 0 - fx Cr) o O fl 0 Clx o A (N Z 0 I-) Z I a1 w z N U H H W a) N 0 H N M d' to to to I rn 0 al a1 a0 H 0 0 0 0 0 N L r' N (N N N Lf) M M M M Cl) N to to to On al Z l0 ko II) d al l0 N l0 W W to N N Cl) a)W co d' a0 a\ H O 0 CO I QI 0 tO 0 0 0 0 U) lf) 0 0 0 0 N 0 a) 0 0 as In CI) 0 d' 0 O O O d' c}' M O O O a1 0 N 0 H N 0 0 0 CO H H M H a) 0 O H H H 0 0 0 H!-� M N N H 0 H N. W CO Co N dN N N ' N N H H H Z fx 0 CO H N In CO H H H H M H H N MMM M N N Jul H d' N •cr M d' N N N N d' N N d' d'c}'d' d' d' d' O GQ I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U Z 0 in N in N H N N N N In N N H HHH M N H U0�j Ln N H N N in HH H H N H H N N N M N in (N FC Z N co al co ao H al 01 al a) a) a) a) Cl H Cl Cl d' N Cl al al 0 a) ao o O O O o al 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W U co Cr) f' U 0Z W Cl) H H m Cl) H (Cr H m fx Cr) (x H H F' a F W a, i-1 H m Z M a Cu H x Cr) a Cr) C Cr) al m o z 0n Lf ) Z `� m Q 4 Cr) 4 Z 0 co Z Z www 0 (Cr Z 0 0 Cu H (.8 In d'ao 0 0 W 000 In H H Z F In a0 N 0 Cr) 7'' Cu U FC Ul Cr) Na) i a al a W W Px. W H g F W r•C fx Cr) Cr to O H CO Cr) 0 w H WWW f=. fx Ix H a a Cr) z 0 l0 H H N a H d' 'a aaa 0 W Cr) Cr) Cr) IL. a H fx Cl 0 0 in Cr) Cl Cl 0 www fx Cu a a F r-C 0 G.' a cr o o N H N N Cr) FFF a 0 0 0 z ' Z Cil Z Cr-. c4 H W W HHH H W H > In >i>t fx fx rx 0 m 3 W a as U WWW U Z m F H mmm 0 H O \ KC 0 fx H r4 124 U mmm W Z A A H Ix) Z Oa PO. Cr) www m H U Z H A a s F F W WWW (Cr F ZH Cr) 0 Cu Cr) In Cl) afxfx Z ID a al H mm Cr) 3 0F 333 a Z X 0 F Z 0 F AA 0 0 0 H In 0 (Cr z! U CD H >4 124HH H Z £ FFF H U 4 4 UU rx H £ X w x x x m 4 Q W H a .a7 a 0 X G] a U U '.t! FFF OU IX Cr ID 4 Cr-. 0 ZZ Cu In Cl) (Cr g < U (Cr (Cr H X Z a Cl) 0 0 .0 0 4 FC 4 FC * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 0 H H N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V)lO Ln Ln Cl Cl l0 to 01 al U)\p 10 OD 0 0 a1 al O O Fp' 00 a)a) 00 N N 00 00 d'd' 0i Ln MM a)a) a)a) at a\ a1 01 M0f1)N in Ln MM 00 0 00 MM 0O d' d' Ln to in Ln Ln LO N a\H W d' NN MM 00 CO NN H l0 H a) NN N N a)a0 LI)LI) Ln Ln NN H H LAN HH HH tO Na1 Mal MM HH Ln Lf) in Ln HM HN MM 00 d. d' H H V}i/} l0 la VT t/} M CO d'W la l0 H N Cl 01 al d'd' M M N N t/}L)- V}VT t/T VT H H H H V}(O- M-t? VT VT VT L? t/)-3/T V} V}L)- V}{/} . V}4.1)- H H N N in in t0 to as a) U t/}V} t?V} H H t?4/T t/}1/1- V)- 41 /TW x fx U Cr) F co Cl la N N N N N N N N N N N N H H H H H H H H H H N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 Cr) A to l0 to \o l0 la l0 to to CO CO CO CO N N N N▪ L.▪ N• N fx 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . • x U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0▪ 0▪ 0• 0 0 Cr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o00 0 0 0 W x o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 UU N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 a 3 al O H N M d' In CO N co 01 0 H N Cl d' In H CO N N N N N N N N r h o0 00 a0 ao co co 0 .Y, N A N A N A NA N A NA NA N A NA NA NA NA NA N A N A N A N A Zi U in* in * In * In * in* in * In* In * Ln * Cl)* LI) * In* In* In * In* In* In * Ox COV WV COV CO V WV WV WV CO V WV WV WV WV WV to V to V to V to V U U • N a) t)1 Itt 04 a 4 H Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0000 0000 0 .. X m 0 ., Ga w o ow o wI 0 N 0 h z 01 W N d' m N U N LI) 4I - H O\ Tr oa cr m OM l0 O1 m 0 M LEC 01 d' O ao N l0 OW U) cr W OOm mmU)ap 0) r ri O to co l0 141 co O In V'1n Hr-) U)r M H CI)U1 ao N Ln W M O co O co co l0 N a0 H aD 0 0 U)111 COO ap O H Ln 0) H cr co x o H 0 o H N O loo x U' W d'd'U V'Ln w 0 0 H LO N 0 N 0 0 N LI) 0 00 Ua Cl) H H H U) N N N V 0 0 O N O O O O O O O O to 0 0 0000 0000 UC E-1 H m V' M M M ri V H H HH H H HHHH d'W H V H G4 N N N M N M cr N M M N N N N NNNN NNNN N W N V. d' d' W cr V d' V' cr cr d' N N NNNN W d'W d' V' OM I I 1 I I I I 11 1 I I I I I I I I U o d' ao H m H �r r1 0) rI HH 0 0 0000 H 'Hra r U d' 14l N N 111N N M r N CO LOV. Tr �r d'd'd' NNNN N 4 aD N d' m N m Lo Le. LI) LI) H N co op ap ap ap ap M M m m d' 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1p 0 00 01 01 01 01 01 0) 0000 0 Z 0 0 W W z� AWW WW zW Z W W a H 0 Hl ,i Z a > RC U)FC Z > > w A 01-11-11:4 ZZWZ H > Z. Z W G4 G4 H GC X z H H'.7 W W H W El c4 IX W W H W W a O H 4 4 U El E E-I OZW Z Z U O Lx U] U] ,� a 4 0 043H0HIGH U) Ui X a U) X GO w aaH m A z 0 H 0M z 0 0 0M H w )rma PH t7HCa H H Zia H a NO1Ln(� OH a H Z. Z . Z \ Cl) W ca m Hg x Cla co co co 4 W W H W FC H W a H a a Z U] U1 HH $ G4 HHHO ZXHZ H AX W A W FC G4 W W 4 G4 N a W > a > H H 4444 C441 O N Ol N H H H G4 H W Z M 0 0 WH to 0) oWI)MN pp W] El to H 4 a A c w Of cx G4 art; w r ao ao 0 Lft 010112401 4 H U GL, H GO H G4 W 04 G4 O X N H HHHLO w w O w Z 0 0000 00 zzzz 0 0 H H H H R H X Z H H W MGA HHHH 00 x G4' 0 ZZ U N ca MMMM 0CA as W W W W W a 0 a Z Z a a H 0 4141 A HHCc-1H a 41 H Ci 0 aaX w HA Zw 0H �� XX uavavaua 41 41 44 44444 M , KC 0 X 0000 CO 000 1-1 Cx� X H H W 0 al 0 z 4 x Z W O Ubu) 0 41 UUxx U])U]) H (I) U U S z U En W W 0 SC>C>C DC41 41 41 43 >+>+>+ Ua' w U)0 H U) 0 a w U a '+ mm . LL' zzzz 41414141 41 i I is xX • U, H w w H o 0 0 P M U 41 41 41 41 aaaa o • R1 G4 GO Ga GO GO CO P11W U U UUUU UUUU U * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 00 NN 00 0101 14)Lf) 0101 WW 00 00 00 NMN 00 MM 00000 aMOON0 CC EA00 00 00 COLI) 00 MM MM MM 00 00 CANN 00 MW 00000 01NOHM VV 00 NN 00 UCUI LOLL) MM NN MM 00 00 OLI)N LfILL) op oa 000ill UC ap00110 V' 1011) O U1U7 rr CA CA CA01 NN MM NN MM 00 00 NU)N NN CA CA U)LOLnNN NL)rd+U1 V V. V'd' U)ill a)0 d'd' Lnm d'd' 0101 NN r-N. LOU) v)-03 CA UD LO d.dr d'IdrdrCD0 in-d'LOU)LI) ci V. M.M. 4A.M. . . M-41)- CA-M- 4.4-4.0- i?i? i?i? . . . . 44-M 44-4.0- M-41)- L)•i?M-i? 5 L)•i/}i/} - MM. x M0)H HH HH N H t?i? 4.0-03 i/} i/} 0 M.M. W M M U M H U) W H H H H H H H H H H HH H H HHHH HHHH H H H 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0000 0000 0 W 0 N N r N N r r• N r N NN N N NNNN NNNN N G4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0000 0000 •o 4 U o 0 0 o• O o 0• 0 0 0 0o 0 0 0000 0000 0 U W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0000 0000 0 W x 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o 00 0 0 0000 0000 0 UU N N N N N N N N N N NN N N NNNN NNNN N 0 a z LO N ap an O H N m V' Ul LO N a) 01 0 H H co a0 co co 01 01 01 01 01 an 01 01 0) 01 U x N A r A r A r A N A N A N A N A r A N A N A N A N A N A at A co A Z 0 U)* U)* U)* Ln* LIC* UC* Ln* N* U1* M* U1 * LIC* LIC* L/) * L41 * 1l* O x WV WV lO V lO V lO V non/ toy toy l0 V WV to V 1p V LW V LO V no V no V U U M 0 to n5 f]. a 4 H Z 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 N X 0) O — a W o O(Y1 o a o N z h• Oz 0) W N a) ill N U M O W W O Ol O O so VD Tr O O U) H N CO U) 0) U) OH N U) )0 N U) 0 Ti, H NM VO U) Tr a) l0 0 0) N N l0 H N N 0 N a)0 d'N H U) N U) H 00 N W ON H N N Z H 0) co 0) CO O 0 0 N l0 O 00 0)TI 00 00 00 M H cr H (Y) W. NN d.,0 m x m w O <r 0)0) O I MM C) 0 0 U H HH HH 0 m H O1 0 N h h O H MM l:., 0\ N O O O O O O O 0 0 m U) O O O O 0 O O O O O H U) H HH HH H H 0) H H H HH H in MM H H H Z a M N NN NN m N M N N N NN m N NN M M N '.7 W Tr Tr NN NN Tr N Tr Tr Tr Cr Tr Tr Tr d' d'Tr d' yr v O W 1 i i i i I I i i i i I i i I i i I I O X W H 00 00 al O H N H M a)00 H H HH CO H H U N H d'd' W d' N Tr N N U) N NN (- Tr Tr Tr N H N 4 z \0 Tr coop coop W 0 M W N W HH H W V.4. H r) M W 0 0)01 01 0) W 0) 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 X H z H g M En En X 111 W W Z U7-. U] W \ U] m m H H H U] 0 H W W W a W W W > ',> ',> W H x H >> 0 H H H a a a H H m a 44 mm H 0 0 as 111 W W a 04 00 cn x 04 aa m m a cn H H a xx IX 124 U 04 as 0. a m M HH >4 m M MM a a a M O J m ww AA o 0 m mm r•C W WW 4 4 cn En a as m h W Z m mm Z z W \ C7 OW 0 0 co W U U] `UU) 0 00 0 H H HH COzH H 0 0 0 Al H H H HH 00 0 0) a H H H HH U] t m U] H HrC i i 0 W a a < xi FC W x x x W W4 Z NO coin -r. H Gy. W W a a s N 0 00 [L. N a H W OH Vr03 0 W Z H H WW W 0 a as 0 0 W a a MMN N -.1 o o a a s a W W W a a a a 0 HH 1010 04 N U X X 0 00 Cu X XX a a 0 H H U z U mm H U H Z H 0000 U? Z zz a 0 H U 0 H 0 as U] U)HH >4H H z al W Z H a 0 W W H 0 0 H a mm H H U] H H a a 0 U w a • as U z 4 Z W i U] M A U 00 a M H U H H 0 at U U W U] 0 0) Z HH a a z Z >1z HH U A O H mm W H H H a mm W a as H a z Z W W Z a m a Z mm m 0 HH > a W 0 >> 00 a Z W 0 W 0 WW m H 0U a H at Z HH 4 0 J Z x m Z W 0 WW W W H H HH as A 0 U H CO a H H X X as m W Z U x 00 m H W mm WW ,.a H a W W ac x U x W0 0 0 Cr) >. X >4 .a M W 00 U a 0 x W m a as 0 . H H 4� A m 0 W 0 WW A m H m >4 HH as H H W H g a H as W W z Z Cu H H D A D m 0 N a 0 3 3 W W 0 0 0 004 W H A > 00 >C 4 00 a a a U U U U 00 0 0 0 0 0 W WW W [t. NN N N N K * K K # K * K K K # K K •k * * # 00 NN o00 000 00 OO oo coc0 W W 0)01 NH0) 0000 00 W H0) crir 00 00 Zmm x000 000 000 00 OO 00 H H mm CA CA U)U)0 0)0) mm N0N w cr Tr U)U) .D LO mm 000 000 OO U)U) OO HH NN cr cr HOAH NN NN m1-0 NN c0 c0 HH 0 NNN N N U) 01 N NN U)U)O U)U) O OO NN Ol Ol NN HH LO (-(�U) NN NN m'ro r-r- W W HH Tr Tr 0 Tr Tr 0) U)U) VD NN m•m- 00 wmO L)-w• 44-in- t?)- 0- HH HH N(- L)-L} {0-L} t?L}v). in-in-o- in L} i?(0- 4n-in- i/}(0- . (0-4? (0-w- t?i? Utmi)- 4J-1--m- W M M U W H En W H H HH HH H H H H H H HH H H HH H H H H H O O 00 00 0 O O O 0 O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 FC - \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ W 0 N N Ns ss N N (- N N (- N(- (- N Ns r` N r- 1:4 o O 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 o0 0 0 00 0 O o U O o 00 00 0 0 0 0 o 0 00 0 0 00 0 o O U W 0 0 00 00 0 o 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0o O o O W x 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 o O o 00 0 0 00 0 o 0 U U N N NN NN N N N N N N NN N N NN N N N 0 a Z N m d' U) W N 0 O) 0 H N m w U) W N c0 H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H H H H H H H H U CO A OD A a) A a0 A 00 A a) A co A CO A a0 A 0) A a0 A a0 A 00 A a0 A OD A 00 A a) A Z U in K U) .. in K in 4, LO4, U)* U)* U)K U)i. U) * U) K U)* U)# U) K U)* U)K U)KK 0 x WV WV W V LO v %0 V WV W v U) v toto )/ W v to v WV WV \0 v WV U) v WV U U . w v M a a 4 M xxxxx x x x xx x x x x x MM MM x x MM rZ 0 00000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 00 Ln n 0 — W o OW 0 ai 0 N Z h ZZ a W CO to 00 N U r1 . rn r� H H NNNNN V' H Ln t0 M N MN N N N XX 0 01 00000 t0 H in t0 to 0 0 MN '.0 0 a0 NN O W t0 D t0 WLn N d' ri N 00 to In l0 LO l0 In LII 0 In MM a0 ao op ao a0 a) 0 to Ln N CO W 0 CO l0 ri ao V' A a0 to to H 0 000°0 0 N N V' in O O O O mm 00 a 0 00 01 00000 O a0 H M M co 0 0 0 0 NN ON Cl) 0 0101 0 00000 0 0 0 00 0 O O O O 00 00 O 0 O O H H VVV't H H 01 V' mm in 01 01 Ol 01 Ln'V' in 01 M M HH rx N NNNNN N CO t0 MM to M M Cr) M MN (fir') N m NN W V V VVVV d' W H V'V' H ' V' Tv d' .4..4. V'.4. d' cr .41.4. OM i i i i i i I t L I i I I I I I i i I i . I I i i UZN t0 Ln HHH N H O 0101 H H H HJ H HH HH N H NN U N N N N V'V' Ln L- CO tO l0 0 H H H N HH HN Ln in Ln Ln 4H V't0 M V'V' L- rH N. 4.0 W 0 M M M H mm mm N H NN 0 00000 0 0 01 10 W 01 0 0 O 0 00 00 O O O O Z Z Z Z Z Z H H H H H HZ Z Z H Z Z ZH UZUZU a' a a EA U g Z m FCrC cn Cl) \ EN \ \ Z Z\ W a)CO 0 w 242424 w w a a a a a HZ Ha U 41 41 H H W W W H H 0 W 0 0 0 0 xW x0 Z HH H a HHH a a 0 U w 0 0 0 0 WEA CA0 w 00 a s ZZZ a a x H w x x x x HZ HM H H as H a H H H a a U 9 0 U U U U OH �-1U Z U, as L>: a l E b Cl) E U]U] W U2 U1 U2 PO, M U1 H H 7.7 U U] wW U] \ w EA EA . \ \ \ p ]\ 4 U] U]a) U) W w CO ZZ x w w w w a n,w Z m W 0 HHHggHqqO 0 U WW U U U U U \H \U .7 00 A Z Z H WWW H Z W WW 0 W W W W Z W Z W Z \ HH H XXX HHg Cu cu a j H a ff >> H a 41 (x 41 fl'41 a GI H EA C4 H aEA al H EEll -'/H� HHHU01 Er. W P:PG a 4., rr. W ELI ZH ZiCL A 'J gL� W r7�7�7r1�W W 24 H as W 24Z 24 Z HJ HZ H i WW Cu 010101wa Cu 0 Z XZ W 0 0 0 0 WO WO x a as 0 wwwZO 0 U H HH a U U U U aw aU a) H 00 a a 4 ZZ 0 rx HH M a H M El Z HZ 00 00 Cli ZZ 0 0 00 NN ZZ H 00000 >Z HH PO'. PH WM W 0U0000 W H HH a W as HH ZZ 0 w w w Ul a U 00 CA CA 00 0 Z CWu]aw WZZ 0 W Z U]U) HH Q,' HH ZW (4 H PPEAlEl�wPP H 0 a 00 W cu FS H W 00 Q,t, HH 00 '-`+'-`+C4 C4 cu x H a) w w 0 W 41 41 H H o o a o 0 El U H CO ZZ Z ww 00 rxrx H W W W W W 00 a a 0 rx,rx, x x U a s O 2424242424 k HH C!] U 00 00 z Z 4 HHHHH ERR`�`� Z H H CAU] a W U U U)'MM H W ',�xs]i:>ii 0X 00 W00000WWWa) W0 0 � W00W �. H H H HH CO H x�4 W wwwww w 0 axWW 0 U �� z a * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1 NN NMH V'MM 0101 00 00 Ot Ln NN 00 00 00 00 MOM 000 00 00 H Ln .7 0101 KWON o01O 0101 00 00 MLAO mm 00 00 00 00 Olt V' OtLf 00 (0(0 V'S MM W.VMHHa0 )a0 WW tt a0Nt0 )a0 00 00 00 MM t0 V NN V' 00 tlf MO 0 ri HL-L-N NII V 41)-44-L ' 41)-44- O O V'V' 01 CO 03 W W t0 t0 V'V' a0 CO H H N N t? V' un M Ln Ln ,-4H V'01 i/}l> MMin-N H H N N 0101 CD t0 V'V N N N N LO LO to to W M-01 H H N N t/f LT M-CO A N M rH V' N N O O U 4N/r4/1/1•v) H i 41F-TO- lrt0 W M a U w H U] W H HHHHH H rH rH HH H H H H H HH HH H H HH H El 0 00000 0 0 0 00 0 0 o 0 o 00 00 0 0 00 0 4 \ \\\\\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \\ w A N NNNNN N N N Ns N N N N N NN NN N NNN W o 00000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 00 d U o 00000 0 o O o0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 00 U W o 00000 0 0 0 00 0 0 o O O 00 00 0 0 00 W x o 00000 0 o 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 00 U U N NNNNN N N N NN N N N N N NN NN N N NN 0 a Z 01 0 H N co V• in t0 N 0) 01 O H N M V' H H N N N N N N N N N N M co M M M U .''t. a0 A a) A co A a0 A a0 A a) A a0 A a0 A 00 A 0 A 0 A a) A a) A a0 A a0 A a) Z U m* to * m* m* m* to * m* m* m * m* m* Ln * to * m* w* to Ox W V t0 V W V W V W V t0 V W V W V W V W V t0 V W. V t0 V 0 V t0 V W. C) U Ln w to I15 a a H 0000000 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0000 0 0 0 Ln 01 0 Ix w o O of o au o N O h z I 01 w LO 01 r CO CO t`t` N U M CO Ln LO H In N mMNa' rn H II)Lf) o CO O 01 C...LO Ln Lo Ln Ln LO Hr NN o o r o0 LO wrn co r- o Lo LO Ln 01MI- HHri d' CO OO l0 dl l0 MM OOLDN CO LI) H In In O O O O al CO 0 [M d' In o to d' d'd' a0 M M Ln CO CO ri H Wd'T'x xxx 01 d'd' Tr CP M O O N r-r- M Nt.d'd'w to O w HH H Cfl V)Cf)CO N HH LO LO N o H H NN H HHRH O O NI 0000000 O H M CO N o O O O O O 0000 O r o F H H H H H H H Ln d'a0 N H H d' HH H HHRH M r ryZIrx NNNNNNN M NO N M N m d'V N NNNN N V N`aM NNNNNNN d' MN cr a1 Tr d' d'cr' N NNNN d' M cNO M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1U X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H M H H H N H V O 0 0 0 0 H Ln VU.7 d'W V d'd'd'd' CO M H N m N d' in Ln d' W V d'W o O N4 z 00 00 CO a0 00 oO OO H M 01 M H H r�r� O 00 CO a0 ao H CO LOO O O o 0 0 O O o 01 O1 01 01 01 O r` O co zH U w co U w F FH Z FC z [L H cO U CO V)C!1 co O W H >i 41 PI M > w zz w H W Lx H x >4 '17 Q; H >I i-� '7'7 Ul H F xHra U cO al al 41 a w a u rxHalx w a a co U >i>+>i H 3 x P CO a 0 dl H H a H >4 zz 1cC fcC 4 zz I-7 .-r4 FC st x a •rI zz Hz zF z H a U PCWH333H M roa xx ro g4 m 0 01 �w1�FC Ft > m cn HAcnUlal0 a a HH a z z UIHUIUI X H w Ln m H O C]A H \ t` LO LO w O 0 H LO r.0 Cn 4 4 F C7 A r H cx z z z rx 0 M r- p H z cO t` w w w wC7 U z Mx4100041 z Me-I Ln Ln G4 CA H H al U) N xxxx z 4 H N U x a a a X H H N CO M Ul H H � H a0 a Cu H El Ir4 41 Ln d' Tr H Ln N d' Z1 m Ln 1 o 4. w H F N LO N LD H A 1-1 H LOr-lLnOONNV H 010 e-Ir-I H O w 'J Z r 010 HH H 'a w NNNN NNN a NN In Ln X a 0 a (x ix H H N N N al >i 0 U 17 H H H H H HHHH W EA 4 44 EA a u) z 00 0 a r4 ix 00 O HH c:4r41=4e4 Z a Z HH ZZ 0 H r4 IX HHHF H p H co co H H P: H w w co co co co CU q0 a q(� zz0 Ci z0 >1 0000 Z 0 U E cO wWwwco ol Www FG 00 rxrx FC W w qH Us 0000 rH 11 HH 41 0000000 co HF C.)C.) cO H Z r.0 HH H 0000 0 EA El r4 zzzz o H a xxxxxxx M E Irl w H r.' X w CAC CUC!) rx x as ww co a C v '000 rx zH 4 co Ill[11 w Z w c4 c4 0000 w ala a la la 00 a°4 ZZ up ! Z w 00 X �'�'�'�' CU 0 a >+>I>+>+>4>4>i Z H H 0 0 111 0 J IE 0 0 z 3 3 3 3 H rx H 4x XXXXXx Qa ZZXX Cr) Z Ill K K K K K # K # ie K # to K is LO 0000 OO f`N OD CO 000 000 00 00 Ln Ln 00 cI d'OO o0 00000 00 00 CO HH 00 O0 Ln O co Cl 0101 000 O Ln Lf) MM NN MM 0o LO L0 N 00 00000 00 00 Lf) W C)C) OLn HLf)ON Ln Ln 000 000 Lo Lf) MM Ln Ln CD C) 010101 00 00000 00 NN L0 0 Cl Ln Ln Lf)N d'L`LO O H H Ln Ln O M i/r M H ri LO LO M M H H M M r- Ln N Ln in In Ln O O O ri H i/? d' d'W W VD Ln Lc)d'N s/)i/)- cr'd'(In Ai} i/? in-in- OO MM NN HriN d'd' d'd'd'V'a0 MM i/)-if! L} if}i?if}if?if?if?if? . 4/f i/)-co- i/?if? if}if} if?i?i/)- i?in- i/)-in-ifr in. . i/-in- fn 0 IT) x ix U w H co w HH r-IH HHH H HH H H H H H H H HHHH H H H H F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O O 0 O O o O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O o O C7 a' \\\\\\\ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \\\\ \ \ \ w 0 N N r-N N r-r- r- N r� r-N r- N r- r- N N r- N r-N L- r- N r- r4 0000000 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0000 0 0 0 A4 U 0000000 0 00 o0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0000 0 0 0 0 w 0000000 0 Oo 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0000 o 0 o 1 w x 0000000 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0000 0 0 O U 0 NNNNNNN N N N N N N N N N N N N NNNN N N N li a Z Lf) LO N a0 Ch 0 H N Cl V' Lf) LO N CO H M Cl Cl M Cl W W cM V' d' W a' d' cN 0 "NG A CO A 00 A a0 A 0) A a0 A aO A a0 A a0 A a) A aO A CO A a0 A co A a0 Z 0 K LU Ln to Ln K Ln * Lf)* Ln to Lf)* in# Ln is Lf)* Ln K Ln to Ln# Ln Ox V Lo V LO V LO V LO V LO V LO V LO V LO V L0 V L0 V L0 V LO V LO V LO 0 0 (1) to RS a M xxx xxxxxxxxxxx x x x X x x x xxxxxxxx x r-i i 0 000 00000000000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00000000 0 . in T O a4 w 0 Dao o a 0 N 0 N 0 I'D z 1 in o1 w N U ,--1 ko H ri ri ri ri ri ri r♦ri ri ri ri 0 O O1 c0 CO OD O0 OD O CO N 0 l0 O1 01 O1 O1 OA O1 O1 01 O1 O1 01 l0 N 0 co CO lfl O1 O CO OD OD CO OD CO OD O1 ri CO O OD U)in Ln in in U)Lfl Ul Lfl Ul U) 0 HO C's t` U) CO N U)U)U)Ln lfl Lfl up In in ri U)OD OD a0 co O CO 00 00 CO a0 00 CO a0 01 0 r-4C's t` CO M CO O O OD CO O OD CO OD O H 'V' HNN 00000000000 Lfl 1p l0 NCO 0 d' a0 000 00000 0 d' MMM 00000000000 H l0 0 HH 0 H co 00000000 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O M M M 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O H H H H H O OD CD OD OD 03 CO CO CO OD OD m 0] M M M 01 0) H N N N N N N N N co ZC4 N MMM MMMMMMM MMMM N M d' .0'c}' M m N ko kn ko IO IO IO'O lO M W w sr wyr wTr V+Tr wV wd,dM w Tr ,r d' v1 Tr,r w sr d. ww d,w w Tr Tr d. w 0 ao I I I ) i I I I I I I i I I I i i i i i i I I i I s I I i OZ d' 01d'� riaONriHNriO�M� H H N rlri H H H U)l0d M0)NU)H N U N IONN NNU)riNU)aDMIfl 41 CV 0 H c' NN N Lt) H NN H CV 01 Nriln N a l0 l0\O l0 MU)N Mc'HH lONNM H N H 'L0 l0 L— c' M MM ML�MMH V' O kg)0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 O 0 O 0]01 01 Ol 0 O1 O1 0 O H H H u1 U)Cn a' g g Z r HHH co 0 w aaa a a a w mu]cnu]cococmm H H e4 P4 a' O 0 O H W W W W W W W W H .-a www wwwwwwwwwww O 0 0 a wwwwwwww w a s U)u]C] 00000000000 H x x x a w 04 04 44 04 44 44 W U H a H H H H H H H H H H H Z U U U a W aaaaaaa'aaa H >aa0) zzzzzzzz CO ZZZ wwwwwwwwwww Z w w w wwwwwwww w W C) 000 cocncncococn01cnv]mCO U U U C7 CD CD CD CD CD CD C9 C9 u] AZ Z Z gggg444< Z 0 u]U)coU] >+>+>4>+>+>>4>+74>4 5+ Z CO W W H [�H W W W 44 01 44 HHHHHHHHHHH 0 [j W W H ������'�' H W 000 HHHHHHHHHHH H Z co (s]co 'W7_, Z 44 41 00000000 H a a4a4a4 HHHHHHHHHHH � 0 .70 00 a HHHHHHHH H C3 aaa xx0Ax0xxAxx CO U A AA U U 0 wwwwwr.,u.w UUU H Z H Z H zzzzzzzz a) g 4 HHHHHHHH a waw A 00000000 www a. FC u] 0 u]cncococococou] a H as 0 a zwzzwzww 04 ZZZ R�z`i U Z Cn 0 0 H 0 HHHHHHHH OA U aGxa4 aaaaaaaaaaa Z U ZZ > c>~ ZXXXZEX z H a a a ����������� J'a a� Cu F' ��� ����������FC HZ 04 O0 w w XXXXXxxx 01 x Z 00000000000 0 OH H UU x zz zz z H g44 ccou)ccoCCOcUi]cnmccoccoEEncn H HH Op Wa0Wa0�WtQaO FC aaa g4 gC KC g4 KC g4 xC g g4gg4 9 ,.7 ,.a WW a4 H HHHHHHHH C7 C7 C7 C9 C7 C7 C9 C7 C7 C9 C7 W a CZ 44 C14 a4 Cl) CO CO CO u]mcncn00 0 000 wwwwwwwwwwwa 0 co g44 g x wwwwwwwwH HHzC� cel, 04 H 3HZZzzZZZzzz c4 c4 C4 04 a 00000000 a W W W W H H H H H H H H H H H Z Z Z Z a4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl] X X Z X xxxxxxzxxxx E x x zx E x z zzzzzzzz z K K K K K K K K K K K OM ri O OD N N 1.0 ri O1 O1 O1 ri U)N N IO N 00 00 00 000 00 00 00 000000000 O1 H O1 cr r-up LSO cr 0 CO CA Ol ri N cr Ol d'NO NN OO OO CO un C) OO OO Hri 000000000 N U1 N Ln al H N 10 10 N C1 01rs N'd'UI N O M d'd' V'd' 0 0 N N UI U)UI W U1 0 0 U1 0 Ul Ul U)O U)U)0 N 0 01v0 NNNN ri MH L")Ls rHN ri ri Ls-fr)O1 0a0 00 00 000 NN NN 00 L-OL-L-L-CL-L-U) N V?V)• O1 M in-el ri t?V?V?i?i/T 4/}4/)-ri O ri l0 4/).41/- WO MM H rV Vf i/} 41-1-ii). rlH MNMMMNMMIo rl 4.03-4.? . Vf .V} . t?VT 4.11-ill. i/}t?t? V)-V} 4/)-V}V}V?V}VT V}V? s VT H H 01 01 N U if} W M % U - w H C/) W H ri H H ri ri ri ri rt ri H H ri ri ri H H H H H H H H ri H ri ri ri ri ri ri H H E-i O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 O co O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C7 a - \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \- \ \ \ \\\\\\\\ \ W A N L-L-L- N L-N N L-L-L-L`N Ls r N L- N NN N N L- L-N N N L-L-L-N . N 14 o 000 00000000000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00000000 0 .4 U 0 000 00000000000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00000000 0 0 G7 0 000 00000000000 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00000000 0 W x 0 000 00000000000 0 0 0 00 o 0 0 00000000 0 U 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 N N N N . 0 L-7 Z 00 O1 0 H N M d' Lc) l0 N op rn H sr d' U) in in in in in in in in LI) .'><i 0 A co A co A co A 00 A CD A N A co A co A co A co A O U U)K lfl K Lf) K U)K LI]K up upK Lfl K U)K U)K upK LO 0 41 LD V lD V 1p V lO V l0 V lO V U) V l0 V l0 V l0 V lO V kA) U U N al 04a 4 x x x xx U) x x x MX x ]C x xxxxx XM x N 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00000 00 0 an 0 w o OM o a o ] N z O Z CA W H H M O N U O m N Trr{ H r- d' m N U) O M d' Ul o m LD OD H 0 H U) U) 001 a0 N 0) m NL` Ul m N ON MU)Ln co U) N a0 H H H d' U) U) U) U)Ln H U1 U) H H H H H O U1 M l0 0 a0 m co a0 co m a0 a0 0 CO Wcr M U)O O O co H W Tr x 00 0 0 0 co 0 o x 0 0 crd'TrU)x Nko 0 N H m TPTP 0 0 0 H 00 U] o O H H H m m HH o O O O 00 0 0 0 0 HH 0 N 0 00000 0 0 0 H H H H m m H H M H NN H N M H H H H H HH a+ P: N N N NN M N Cl Cl M M N to Cl N N N N N m m N W W N N d d V d d d d TrN M W N N N N N d d� sr OM i i I I i I I I i I I I i I i i i i I I U1 H 0 0 HH N H H H HH 0 m Cl 00000 HH H U H Tr cis ao a0 N N N 1/4.0 M M d' Ul U) d'd'd'd'd' MN H ai Cl c0 co HH a' M M H M M a0 N H CO CO a0 00 a0 H H Cl O m m O O O O O O O O m O O 0)0)0)0)0) O O 0 H 0 Z Ln m a m m w Z Ul I> H U] CO H Z W (x HH U 0 W FC I> W U > H 0 H >> Z H H R,' H Z C4 P: Z x P:P: C11 H a m w a w w a w U>4>4P:P: 41 41 H a a w H HH m a H m co H XaCUAA mm Z H a U ZZ a m m P;RS A+ H U U) Z HH a A H a 0 H 0WWfxa' as FC 44 4 m m FC Z m >+0000 44 X m 41 r=4 XX Z co Z H W mm ZZ W 0 a 0 0 A 0 WW a p mHMAA 00 H 0 Z CC 00 H Z m H Z Z H m UMUZ ZH H Z H H H ZZ m H \ M 00 0 \ MULOHH mm w H w m HH m H .a m UU) U) ,-1 HNr33 mm X FC A A W 1 w W a s co W I I I w w a P; 0 w as w (34 > w w Cl H > HMLnaocr ww H W ao .7, HH 0 W 4 0 as Lo Z 4 mOmmLn 00 M a co 0 IDI a' a M M W41 m W C M U)U)M m P41:4 Ot 0 m N 0)0) a 0 H a HH H P: H HSNNN as W U 41 P: H 41 M 41 41 FA C.) X m XX H ww w P; w a x as w C)C) M IDID ID 0 ,-a H Z P:P: M H H Z co m m A 4 m 0 00 H mm P: >+ 44 4 Z m w m Li L.) X H w xx Z P: a aaaaa WW w W W 3 aH Z H WW 0 W H pp]IA Ccx a' a a x X >> 4a h Z0 AA U H P: 00000 HH H 0 H 0 P:P: y� W U HH P:P:P:a'P; X a' U) W W Z A W W C1, X C7 C7 CD0CD 00 0 O H mm p Z m Z Z 1.4 0 z U U U M 01 iiII 4 4 W H H W W >4>+>i>i>u m H ZZ ] a0 a mm N ,7 w rC HH H ar41 Z m CO m >+ H 0 0 ,-] H C H H H El H El FA X Cu a' 3 3 FC ,1 O O 0 0 O O O 0 a a a a a s P+ P; Pr P;P:c cI P: caU m ui * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * M WOO 00 00 000 MM WW a0 ao 00 MUm 00 00 LUU) 000WMN 000 00 H LN Low 00 00 OU)Ln N N a)co U)U) 00 Cl LO m 00 00 HH 000N0ao 000 Ln U) N HH 00 U)) 000 NN HH NN 00 N WU U)) 00 NS 0000TVcr 0a0 a0 MM 00 N HH HH Sly oaoa0 r-r- mM W U)U) Nsr UO NN HH HH U)UILICANLD OToTr t?t/)- H 0-0- O 0 LD LO LO Cl m M M t/}L)- Ln U) N N V}in t/? LO LO 0-0 t/1-t!• Tr Tr W Ty LU M in d4 m a HH -0-0- N UNH W co- t/> M PS U W H M W H H H HH H H H H HH H H H H H H H H HH H H H 0 0 o 00 0 0 0 0 00 O O O 00000 0 0 0 0 R.' \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\\\\ \\ \ W A N N N sr- N N N L- SN N N N (`N N N N L-L- N c>~ 0 0 O 00 0 0 o 0 00 0 0 0 00000 00 o ' D4 \ \ \ \\ \ S. \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\\\\ \\ \ D4 U o 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 O o 00000 00 0 O 14 o o O 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00000 00 0 W x o 0 0 00 0 o O o 00 0 0 0 00000 00 o UU N N N NN N N N N NN N N N NNNNN NN N 0 f] Z 0 H N Cl W Lf) l0 N CO m O H N Cl cr H U) l0 LO LO LO U) LO U) LO LO N N N N s O A oo n con ao n o A a) n ao n m n ao n a0 A ao n ao n oo n ao A ao A a) A Z U * U)* Ln * U)* U) * U) * Lf)* Ln * Ln* U) * U1* U)* U)* Ul * U) * Ln * 0 w v U) v Lo v LO v LO v LO v LO v LO v Lo v LO v LO v L9 v LO v l0 v to v l0 v U 0 as v 01 MI a Fl 4 M x xxxx x x x x x x x x xxxx MM x x MM H 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 00 0 0 00 Ln x 71 J - C4 W o 001 0 a 0 N 11 H O o O O O F] Z 0 00 I I 00 61 W M l0 dl oo N U H En O M H M 0 N N a0 m l0 01 01 N O H a0 01 O H M ON 0 01 H NNNN O N N cr l0 in a) a0 01 01 O O ON l0 In in l0 In In n In 01 N in 0 N H II) to to In lD l0 N l� d' In HH co 0 0 a0 aD W M a) a0 N N 0 a0 a) co co a0 a0 O O Tr • O O H 0 O 0000 cr O o dI l0 x O O 0000 ILn 0 l HH 0 0 0000 H O 0 l0 H U) 0 0 0000 N N H H 00 0 0 0000 O O O O o O O O HHHH 0 0 0 0 00 H M M HHHH H H H 01 Ln H H M NNNN H H cr H HH Z x M M NNNN N N M M N N M M M M M M N N N N MM W cr dl cr W ctl zr N dI dl cr dI N Tr cr dl dl cr cr Tr cr cr N Tr cr O W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 11 I I I I 0Z H H crHHH 0 H H H H 0 H H N Mcr0 HH l0 o HH 0 '.7 N N t0 H M N dl N H H TV dl In H Ln M M M HH N cr. mm 4 Z M M 10 w M H c0 M M M w a0 N M N N N l0 mm w a) NN O 0 10000 a1 0 0 O O a1 O o 0000 O O O a) o 0 Z H Z H U) g W 01 00 41 U WW Z W W mmmm Cl) Cl) H \ W CO CO HH 0 0 0 WWWW 0 W > 4 0 4141 Z H Z Z HHHH > H 0 Z HH W o4 o4 H W w .1.144 a a w 0 W .10 H WW a H H aaaa W a Ul x y-I H as Z mm H Cl) Cl) aaaa a U 4 O Cil as H P: H H 0.)a 0 y+ .7 4 CO 3 0 H U) U) U) mmmm a Cl) Z W Cl) N CQ mm X .1 W D ) 007C7L9 H C7 O U 0D W W W W 00 H 00 0 m Cl) ZZZZ P: Z H Z Z - m ZZZZ Z Z Z HH \ \ HHHH F(; H co W 0 N \ 0000 HH W mm 1-1 .1 HHHH x El Cl) P: W a H .1 xxxx HH Z 01 Cil W W ���� 4w w U w aaaa 44 a N WW > > P; P; N Cl: W W H o1 W 1J WWWW a'P; H M Ga 111 g4 4 WWWW to w 0 Z .1 co Z FZ .1444 41 al 0 N 00 P: 124 aaaa In a W 0 0 N (x wwww as O( M a1X El H 0000 H 0 a 0 a N h H HHHH 00 w Ln as zzzz w HHHH H Z 0000 W 01010101 U U 1t1*k1 1=4 Z Z W 0 H 0 0 0 0 aaaa H X w Z Z HH FI P: 0000 iz4 0 0 0 1:C HH 0 00 0 HHHH 0 0 H m 4 X X CO D Z Z Z ulcnmcn [I+ a H 0 X 0 XXXX as El HH WZ Z W 0000 0 H p 0 0000 Z Z H CO 00 : 0 U fl a UI 0 CO P: 0 I1 UUUU 0 0 Z Z 00 0000 0 U W CH1I z HHHH mm a OU Cmrlm 0 cn I-1 x Z H p Cl)Cl)m Ul 1�4 z - a'IxP;P P; A U 0 x 4 wwww A Z W 0 WWWWW W H 4 H 0 Z 3333 00 W H I.ax H Z zzzz 0 a El El H U U a mmmm HH H Cl) C� CO Cl) mmmm Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) MH H H ��D� nn n 3 33 K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K NN N N H 01 a0 In M 00 U1 In 00 00 00 00 00 00 N M 0)0)M cr in 0) L-C` 00 00 EA wdI NN in Mn0 MN 010 U1 L00 M rN0 NN t0 00 Na) N Tr NNa000 r- lo MM 00 00 ma) 00 a0M N01c}1 00 NN 00 00 MM 00 00 WW ION Hcrcr Ha00 NN 00 0)0 0MM0101 0)-Hcri?N MM00 HH HH MM00 00 NN MNdINN [r aoM NN 00 WN MM U1U) 41)-.1.0- i? cr cr NN 0)-0)- MM 41)-1/1- MM NN MM H i?L?41F N N 0 i?i/)W 00 .0!H .0-0)- .0).0)- 0)-0)- .0)-4./F 01-.0)- 0)-4.4. 0)-0). L}i? 41) i/} i/} L} 4/) c0 a) x HH U W M a U W H Cl) W H H HHHH H H H H H H H H HHHH HH H ri HH H H 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 O O 00 0 g4 \ \ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \'S S \\ \ \ \\ W 0 N N NNNN N N N N N N N N NNNN NN N r . N(` x 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 00 0 0 00 4 U o 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 00 0 0 00 C) W 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 00 0 0 00 W x o 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 00 0 0 00 0 0 N N NNNN N N N N N N N N NNNN N N N N NN 0 .1 Z in 10 N c0 0) o H N M dl Ln l0 N co 01 0 H N N N N N co co 00 0o 0 00 0 00 0 co 01 x co n co n co A ao n ao n ODA ao n ao n 0) A ao n 0o n CO A CO A CO A co n a) U In* 111 K L1) K In K to K Ln K Ln K N K 111 K U)K U)K 111 K U) K In K In K in O O V l0 V l0 V l0 V 10 V VI V l0 V l0 V t.0 V l0 V VD V to v l0 v to v t0 v 0 0 U 0 w tilro RI a xxxx x a a a a a aaaaaaa a a a a H 0000 0 H H H H H HHHHHHH H H H H U) al O — x Iii o OW o a o x N z 1 Z 0000 0 0000 Z 0000 1 0000 0 CA W HHHH 0 N 0 Hr-((NN 0 H O a0 a0 W N in (N IO N CO 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 H O N 0 W W W Tr a0 0 O O 0 0000000 H H H H HHHH In M W M M M C (') .' M M m IO 0000 CO l0 Z IO LO l0 IO l0 ID IO l0 l0'.0 l0 '.0 '.D M H HHHH O O O O O 0000000 0 0 0 LO 0000 O 0 O O O 0000000 O O O H 00,00 0 0 H 0 0 H HHHHHHH M H l0 H P HHHH N H 0 H a0 0 N N N N N N N a0 N H O zrx Mmmm IO M ,-1 w M H MMMMMmM H M M H W cr d1 d'cr M d' W d1 cr d1 d1 d'd1 d'd'Tr d1 N dr d1 Tr 0 a) I 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 III I 1 I I I I I I 0X HHHH H IO 111 In N In ID U)cr H H H CO N U) H In 00m M m m O N N N N N l0 N IO IU H N N H N M N ry'Z SINN O H co co cr 0 W)'O U)cr<r H 01 CO H co 0000 01 0 0l 01 0 01 '.0'4)LO I0 0 0 0 0 al 0 01 CI) W 0000 0 H ai a4p4 a >(Yi _• 0 co u)Cwn rq W 0 H CO H x aaaa x a 0 > 0 0 0 44ix 4 0 gW a' w Cl) W m ZZZZ W z gW g x W 0000 0 m WWWF�WWWW W w 0 HHHH H l H ZZZZZZz z C=. Ei mmmm a m Ct. m >1 w 0000000 H 0 G4 mmmm a m EA xxxxxxX m x 0 W W W W w w m (C H m aaaaaaa I a z m G4 G4 G4 Du 0 Cx. W Ei .1 W W W W W W W W oo W H W 0000 m 0 0 z H 0 as a a a as N a a 0 aaaa E a 3 a El 3 EElEw-IEW-IEWHEW+H N H w 3 Cx x a a) 0 0 I a " 0 zzzzzzz 0 o 0 u 0000000 HHHHHHH I:4 H H H H Ei H Ei Ei Ei Ei EI fx W En >4 m P a 444441,44 w rx 1.x 0000 H H 14 H W 0000000 0 "0 0 ZZZZ l H W 0 Q HHHHHHH� Ix a) 0 HHHH Z 0 a fw-1 W z'.z7�.'"')z- Z 00 FC W 0000 Lx z W 0 Z x l 0000 x z z 0 H ZX ZX l H mmmm x o o m >4 a 0000000 mmmm Cl) H m a w O 0000000 o 0 4F4r•CFC EA Z IX a a g El0 0 Z H 44444444 w ,il.il ,-t ..)1 0 W x U W W W W W W W fx z EA N Z 0 HEiEiEiEiEEi W EA EA 0.1 CQ Cq al H X D4>C>C>C DC>C SC W 0 0 0 mmmm 0 0 0 3333 >4 0 l h a m m * * * * * * * * * * * * i 00 .w. O O lO IO mm 0. w w N b 0 0 0 0,Ol aO, 0. d' In In In In m P OU) o Ty OA 0O ['NC- MM O0 NC` HH 0000IO cr IOao HH NN d1 d1 0I0I cr '.7 ID OlO0l0 NN Tr W Nb OO IOl0 1010 In In In U)LOl0a0H CO co HH NN 03 GO W AC I-I-aONI- Ty Tr HH NN 00 en 01 NN IO LOIOwHW MIO MM crcr U)U) OO 1- In co N ao N i? O 0 O O aO CO i/}i? N N i/}i/}i/}y}N H i/}l0 N N irrl)• U)U) O O l0 H m M M d' d4 HH V'd. c 0) 4 L? L? HH 4.0-V1- 4O-1.0- .V1-411- (0-4O- H 0 CO-V)- m W r))- x a 0 W H U) W HHHH H O1 Ol 0l 01 01 0.'0.'0)010)0101 al 01 0\ 0) H H 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 g \\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\ \ \ \ \ W Q N C`N C` t` l0 ID V0 \D l0 \D l0 ID l0\0 ID I0 IO IO l0 IO IX 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 0 ' ���� ,, \\\\\\\ 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 O 0 0 0 0 W 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 o O W x 0000 0 0 o O o O 0000000 0 o O O U0 N N N N N N N N N NNNNNNNN N N N N 0 4 z o H N m cr In l0 N co al o H H al 01 01 al 01 01 al al O1 al O O 0 ",4 CO A a0 A o0 A con con con con ao A a0 A co A O1 A a\ A Z 0 U) * In* In* In* In* In* In* Il) * In* U)* In* In* 0 x l0 V ID V l0 V t0 V IO V l0 V l0 V IO V LO V l0 V 10 V I0 V 0 0 � - (1) rn ro C14 N LU O O O O N z N N 00 0 000 O W O f-i O 1O W O t` M CO O O O O O O O N O in O Ol a) O N w U) CD LO L) U) LU O 0 \O LU CO a' In M LO Ol H l0 H N 0 0 N CD M 0 d' d' V' N LU N ML!) M M M M N N a0 VI- H a0 H a0 Ol V' tD .0 i? i/} 11 t/} J) L? V)- N d' 1O N N O1 H H Ln H t/]- [? t? t? M (I)- W 0 U H H Z c. a a D H H H H H 0 v] v1 H H vj Z Z Z Z Z Z H H 0 0 w 64 W W W W W D Z Z C1 U H X X X X Cl Z w w w rx w Z H w w w w Z w X x w (.9 D a 0 0 > > a 0 > W W W 3 4 Ci. a' D z 0 0 0 0 m 0 1> 1> a w z w• rx (x (-4 fx a (x 0 0 U? H Z V] Q Ct a a a Cu w a w r4 x FC 0 X X X X rx X l) a a 5+ rx H a 0 0 H H H H H H H W X X (4 Cl E--H 4 (x 1=+ (4 H H Z PC ° m LOW m a) a x ao m H 0 Cr) W 0 14 m a pC 0 U H U 0 H a) H 1H'r H H H w H H (1) a] (4 H vii W U W H .4. V. CO Cl) L() l0 N O O1 N CD CD O 0 L() O U O H H H N N N N N d' In H Cl) to CO N O H M Cl) M M Cl) M W d. cr S N N N co co a H it irk irk 3k 4 I 3 4 it *k 4t 4t U Z C1 C1 C1 C1 Q C1 C1 C. C1 C1 Ca C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 0 D D D D D D D D ID D D Z D D D U Cr, (c. Cr w w r w w w (L. rx r- rx w w ( w Ci CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Vacation of a portion of 5th Avenue Right-of-Way APPLICANT: EverGreen Real Estate MEETING DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: At its June 6,2000 meeting the City Council set a public hearing to initiate the vacation of a portion of 5th Avenue Right-of-Way. This portion of right-of-way is between Adams Street and the vacated right- of-way for Jefferson Street. This portion of 5th Avenue has not been improved. PLANNING COMIVIISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed vacation at its meeting of June 8,2000,and recommended vacation of the right-of-way with a 4—3 vote. Also, at the Planning Commission meeting, some of the neighbors to the south presented the Planning Commission with a petition to have the improvement of 5th Avenue included in the City's 5 year Capital Improvements Program. The petition has been passed onto the City Engineer/Public Works Director for his review. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve Resolution No. 5382 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 a motion consistent with the wishes of the Council and move its adoption. li ulie Klima Planner II g:\cc\2000\cc0705\vac5thave.doc RESOLUTION NO. 5382 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE VACATING A PORTION OF 5'H AVENUE IN KOEPERS ADDITION, CITY OF SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY,MINNESOTA WHEREAS,it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council that the portion of 5TH Avenue which is west of Adams Street and east of the vacated right-of-way for Jefferson Street in Koepers Addition, 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 Hall in the City of Shakopee at 7:00 P.M. on the 5th day of July, 2000; and WHEREAS, two weeks published notice was given in the SHAKOPEE VAI.LEYNEWS; 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 Mumesota, serves no further public purpose: That part ofF fth Street(now known as F0h Avenue), as platted and recorded in the plat of KOEPERS ADDITION, Scott County,Minnesota, lying between the southerly extensions of the east and west lines of Block 8,KOEPERS ADDITION. 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 franchise 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 and franchise 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. 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. 5382 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. 5382, presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the 5th day of July, 2000, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. Dated this day of , 2000 Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SEAL CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Vacation of Portion of 5th Avenue Right-of-Way MEETING DATE: June 8, 2000 Site Information Applicant EverGreen Real Estate Site Location: 5th Avenue between Adams Street and Jefferson Street Right- of-Way Adjacent Zoning North: Rezoning Application Pending South: Old Shakopee Residential(R-1C)Zone West: Multiple Family Residential(R3)Zone East: Multiple Family Residential(R3)Zone Attachment: Exhibit A: Location Map Introduction The City Council has received a request from EverGreen Real Estate to consider the vacation of a portion of 5th Avenue between Adams Street and the right-of-way for Jefferson Street extended. The right-of-way for 5th Avenue has not been improved(see Exhibit A). Discussion The City Council will hold a public hearing on July 5, 2000, to consider this vacation request. A recommendation from the Planning Commission is needed for the vacation process. EverGreen Real Estate is planning to proceed with a residential development should the vacation and the proposed rezoning for this area be acted upon favorably by the City of Shakopee. Other agencies, city departments and utilities have been notified of the proposed vacation. Time Warner has commented that a new easement should be given for the new project. The Engineering Department has commented that an easement should be retained over the entire area for drainage and utility purposes. Shakopee Public Utilities has not provided comment to staff as of June 1. Alternatives 1. Recommend to the City Council the approval of the vacation subject to an easement being retained over the entire area for drainage and utility purposes. 2. Recommend to the City Council denial of the request. 3. Table the decision to allow staff or the applicant time to provide additional information. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, the City Council approval of the vacation of the right-of-way subject to an easement being retained over the entire area for drainage and utility purposes- Action Rearrested Offer and pass a motion recommending approval of the vacation of the right-of-way subject to an easement being retained over the entire area for drainage and utility purposes. , , :,t&-/L) K/.,(J"2(A----, lie Klima Tanner II g:lboaa-pc\2000\june08\Vac5th.doc rillie0 A tat II i - - 0 WS \ / / 0111 Ili ..._VP*Q AI4th Ave. / ' \ 1 R3 1 I %,/' „/\ \ R3 \ \ 1I1SthAve• �� i 1 / '''' // \ \ i' ` \ ' }' \ \ /IPPI/H / ` \ ,' 1 , i ' lI ,` V i j R !, \ \ /cxaaaMmmirreLAl SHAKOPEE *cm, N Proposed Vacation W of Ri ay FJ Zoning i 7 Parcels / 0e CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of Right-of-Way Management Ordinance DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached to this memorandum are comments received from various utility companies utilizing the City of Shakopee's right-of-way on the proposed Right-of-Way Management Ordinance, No. 570. BACKGROUND: Previously, staff had sent a draft copy of the Right-of-Way Ordinance for comments by the various utility companies utilizing the right-of-way in the City of Shakopee. Comments have been received and were not able to be included in the agenda packet for the July 5, 2000 Council meeting. A number of comments have been received from the utility companies and staff will need time to review these comments and determine if the Right-of-Way Management Ordinance should be revised, based on the comments received. It is proposed on the July 5, 2000 meeting, to discuss the Right-of-Way Management Ordinance and receive comments from the utility companies. Staff and the City Attorney will review these comments and provide a revised Right-of-Way Management Ordinance No. 570 to consider for adoption at a future meeting. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Ordinance No. 570, as submitted or modified by Council. 2. Deny Ordinance No. 570. 3. Table for additional information and allow staff time to review the comments and perhaps revise Ordinance No. 570 for future Council consideration. Y Y RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 3, to table this item after hearing comments from the various utility companies utilizing the City's right-of-way and determine if any comments would require a modification of the proposed Right-of-Way Ordinance. ACTION REQUESTED: Table for additional information and consideration of comments made by the utility companies. J /�, it Bruce Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp NO.570 � Y ORDINANCE NO. , FOURTH SERIES, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE AND REGULATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMITS; ADDING SECTION 7.17 TO THE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Section 1. The Shakopee City Code is amended to add a new Section 7.17 to read as follows: Sec. 7.17. RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT Subd. 1. Findings, Purpose, and Intent. To provide for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and to ensure the integrity of its streets and the appropriate use of the rights-of-way, the city strives to keep its rights-of-way in a state of good repair and free from unnecessary encumbrances. Accordingly, the city enacts this new Section of this code relating to right-of-way permits and administration. This Section imposes reasonable regulation on the placement and maintenance of facilities and equipment currently within the City's rights-of-way or to be placed therein at some future time. It is intended to complement the regulatory roles of state and federal agencies. Under this Section, persons excavating and obstructing the rights-of-way will bear financial responsibility for their work through the recovery of out-of-pocket and projected costs from persons using the public rights-of-way. This Section shall be interpreted consistently with 1997 Session Laws, Chapter 123, substantially codified in Minnesota Statutes Sections 237.16, 237.162, 237.163, 237.79, 237.81, and 238.086 (the "Act") and the other laws governing applicable rights of the city and users of the right-of- way. This Section shall also be interpreted consistent with Minnesota Rules 7819.0050 — 7819.9950 where possible. To the extent that any provision of this Section cannot be interpreted consistently with the Minnesota Rules, the interpretation most consistent with the Act and other applicable statutory and case law is intended. Subd. 2. Election to Manage the Public Rights-of-Way Pursuant to the authority granted to the city under state and federal statutory, administrative and common law, the city elects pursuant Minnesota Statutes, section 237.163 subdivision 2(b), to manage rights-of-way within its jurisdiction. Subd.3. Definitions. The following definitions apply in this Section of this code. References to "subdivisions" are unless otherwise specified references to subdivisions in this Section. � r "Abandoned Facility" means a facility no longer in service or physically disconnected from a portion of the operating facility, or from any other facility, that is in use or still carries service. A facility is not abandoned unless declared so by the right-of-way user. "Applicant means any person requesting permission to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way. "City" means the city of Shakopee, Minnesota. For purposes of Subdivision 27, city means its elected officials, officers, employees and agents. "Commission"means the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. "Congested Right-of-Way" means a crowded condition in the subsurface of the public right-of- way that occurs when the maximum lateral spacing between existing underground facilities does not allow for construction of new underground facilities without using hand digging to expose the existing lateral facilities in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, section 216D.04. subdivision 3, over a continuous length in excess of 500 feet. "Construction Performance Bond" means any of the following forms of security provided at permittee's option: 1. Individual project bond; 2. Cash deposit; 3. Security of a form listed or approved under Minnesota Statutes, section. 15.73, subdivision 4. Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the city 5. Self-insurance, in a form acceptable to the city 6. A blanket bond for projects within the city, or other form of construction bond, for a time specified and in a form acceptable to the city. "Degradation" means a decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by excavation in or disturbance of the right-of-way, resulting in the need to reconstruct such right-of-way earlier than would be required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur. "Degradation Cost" subject to Minnesota Rules 7819.1100 means the cost to achieve a level of restoration as determined by the city at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the maximum restoration shown in plates 1 to 13, set forth in Minnesota Rules parts 7819.9900 to 7819.9950. "Degradation Fee" means the estimated fee established at the time of permitting by the city to recover costs associated with the decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by the excavation, and which equals the degradation cost. "Department"means the department of public works of the city. "Department Inspector" means any person authorized by the city to carry out inspections related to the provisions of this Section. 2 t r I "Director" means the director of the department of public works of the city, or her or his designee. "Delay Penalty" is the penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation, obstruction,patching, or restoration as established by permit. "Emergency" means a condition that (1) poses a danger to life or health, or of a significant loss of property; or (2) requires immediate repair or replacement of facilities in order to restore service to a customer. "Equipment" means any tangible asset used to install, repair, or maintain facilities in any right- of-way. "Excavate"means to dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate any part of a right-of-way. "Excavation permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this Section, must be obtained before a person may excavate in a right-of-way. An Excavation permit allows the holder to excavate that part of the right-of-way described in such permit. "Excavation Subdivision permit fee" means money paid to the city by an applicant to cover the costs as provided in Subdivision 12. "Facility or Facilities" means tangible asset in the public right-of-way required to provide utility service. The term does not include Facilities to the extent the location and relocation of such Facilities are preempted by Minnesota Statutes, section 161.45, governing utility facility placement in state trunk highways. Facility does not mean electric transmission lines, as distinguished from electric distribution lines. "Five-year project plan" shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the next five years. "High Density Corridor" means a designated portion of the public right-of-way within which telecommunications right-of-way users having multiple and competing facilities may be required to build and install facilities in a common conduit system or other common structure. "Hole" means an excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length less than the width of the pavement. "Local Representative" means a local person or persons, or designee of such person or persons, authorized by a registrant to accept service and to make decisions for that registrant regarding all matters within the scope of this Section. "Management Costs" means the actual costs the city incurs in managing its rights-of-Way, including such costs, if incurred, as those associated with registering applicants; issuing, 3 1 t i processing, and verifying right-of-way permit applications; inspecting job sites and restoration projects; maintaining, supporting, protecting, or moving user facilities during right-of-way work; determining the adequacy of right-of-way restoration; restoring work inadequately performed after providing notice and the opportunity to correct the work; and revoking right-of-way permits. Management costs do not include payment by a telecommunications right-of-way User for the use of the right-of-way, the fees and cost of litigation relating to the interpretation of Minnesota Session Laws 1997, chapter 123; Minnesota Statutes, sections 237.162 or 237.163 or any ordinance enacted under those sections, or the city fees and costs related to appeals taken pursuant to Subdivision 29 of this Section. "Obstruct" means to place any tangible object in a right-of-way so as to hinder free and open passage over that or any part of the right-of-way. "Obstruction Permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this Section, must be obtained before a person may obstruct a right-of-way, allowing the holder to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of that right-of-way, for the duration specified therein. "Obstruction Permit Fee" means money paid to the city by a permittee to cover the costs as provided in Subdivision 12. "Patch or Patching" means a method of pavement replacement that is temporary in nature. A patch consists of(1) the compaction of the subbase and aggregate base, and (2) the replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement for a minimum of two feet beyond the edges of the excavation in all directions. A patch is considered full restoration only when the pavement is included in the city's five year project plan. "Pavement"means any type of improved surface that is within the public right-of-way and that is paved or otherwise constructed with bituminous, concrete, aggregate, or gravel. "Permit"has the meaning given"right-of-way permit"in Minnesota Statutes, section 237.162. "Permittee" means any person to whom a permit to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way has been granted by the city under this Section. "Person" means an individual or entity subject to the laws and rules of this state, however organized, whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or nonprofit, and whether natural, corporate, or political. Probation"means the status of a person that has not complied with the conditions of this Section. "Probationary Period" means one year from the date that a ._ :t_•• . ' _: that they have been put on probation Comment: The concept of probation is not found in PUC Rules or in the statute and is unnecessary to achieve effective right-of-way management. The City has authority to impose 4 reasonable permit conditions, issue orders, deny and revoke permits and impose certain fines. This should be sufficient to deal with Rule or ordinance violations. "Public right-of-way" has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, section 237.162, subdivision 3. "Registrant" means any person who (1) has or seeks to have its equipment or facilities located in any right-of-way, or (2) in any way occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of- way or place its facilities or equipment in the right-of-way "Restore or Restoration"means the process by which an excavated right-of-way and surrounding area, including pavement and foundation, is returned to the same condition and life expectancy that existed before excavation. "Restoration Cost" means the amount of money paid to the city by a permittee to achieve the level of restoration according to plates 1 to 13 of Minnesota Rule 7819.1100 Subpart 1, on file with the Director . "Right-of-Way Permit"means either the excavation permit or the obstruction permit, or both, depending on the context, required by this Section. "Right-of-Way User" means (1) a telecommunications right-of-way user as defined by Minnesota Statutes, section 237.162, subdivision 4; or (2) a person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way that is used or intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under law, franchise, or ordinance to use the public right-of-way. "Service or Utility Service" means and includes (1) services provided by a public utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes 216B.02, subdivisions 4 and 6; (2) services of a telecommunications right-of-way user, including transporting of voice or data information; (3) services of a cable communications system as defined in Minnesota Statutes, chapter. 238.02, subdivision 3; (4) natural gas or electric energy or telecommunications services provided by a local government unit; (5) services provided by a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 308A; and (6) water, sewer, steam, cooling or heating services. "Supplementary Application" means an application made to excavate or obstruct more of the right-of-way than allowed in, or to extend, a permit that had already been issued. "Temporary Surface" means the compaction of subbase and aggregate base and replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement only to the edges of the excavation. It is temporary in nature except when the replacement is of pavement included in the city's two-year plan, in which case it is considered full restoration. "Trench" means an excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length equal to or greater than the width of the pavement. 5 � L "Telecommunication right-of-way User" means a person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way, or seeking to own or control a Facility in the right-of-way, that is used or is intended to be used for transporting telecommunication or other voice or data information. For purposes of this Section, a cable communication system defined and regulated under Minn. Stat. Chap. 238, and telecommunication activities related to providing natural gas or electric energy services whether provided by a public utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section. 216B.02, a municipality, a municipal gas or power agency organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapters. 453 and 453A, or a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 308A, are not telecommunications right-of-way users for purposes of this Section. "Two Year project Plan" shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the next two years. Subd. 4. Administration. The director is the principal city official responsible for the administration of the rights-of-way, right-of-way permits, and the ordinances related thereto. The director may delegate any or all of the duties hereunder. Subd. 5. Utility Coordination Committee. The city may create an advisory utility coordination committee. Participation on the committee is voluntary. It will be composed of any registrants that wish to assist the city in obtaining information and by making recommendations regarding use of the right-of-way, and to improve the process of performing construction work therein. The city may determine the size of such committee and shall appoint members from a list of registrants that have expressed a desire to assist the city Subd. 6. Registration and Right-of-Way Occupancy. A. Registration. Each person who occupies, uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of-way or place any equipment or facilities in or on the right-of-way, including persons with installation and maintenance responsibilities by lease, sublease or assignment, must register with the city. Registration will consist of providing application information and paying a registration fee. B. Registration Prior to Work. No person may construct, install, repair, remove, relocate, or perform any other work on, or use any facilities or any part thereof in any right-of- way without first being registered with the city. C. Exceptions. Nothing in this Section shall be construed to repeal or amend the provisions of a city ordinance permitting persons to plant or maintain boulevard plantings or gardens in the area of the right-of-way between their property and the street curb. Persons maintaining boulevard plantings or gardens shall not be deemed to use or occupy the right-of- way, and shall not be required to obtain any permits or satisfy any other requirements for planting or maintaining such boulevard plantings or gardens under this Section. However, 6 nothing herein relieves a person from complying with the provisions of the Minnesota Statutes, chapter 216D, Gopher One Call Law. D. Exemptions. Any service or utility service provided by a person under franchise with the city shall register pursuant to this section, but need not provide the registration information required by section 19B-7 if such information has been received by the city in the administration of the franchise agreement. Persons acting as agents, contractors, or subcontractors for a person who has properly registered , or is exempt from registering, shall be exempt from registering under section 19B-7 and are exempt from posting any construction performance bond otherwise required by this Chapter. C'omment: The requested modifications are self-explanatory, but we will be glad to discuss if any further explanation is needed. Subd. 7. Registration Information. A. Information Required. The information provided to the city at the time of registration shall include,but not be limited to: (1) Each registrant's name, Gopher One-Call registration certificate number, address and e-mail address if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers. (2) The name, address and e-mail address, if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers of a local representative. The local representative or designee shall be availableaccessible for consultation at all times. Current information regarding how to contact the local representative in an emergency shall be provided at the time of registration. Comment: The change is self-explanatory and is made to clarify the intent and more naturally leads to the following sentence. (3) A certificate of insurance or self-insurance: (a) Verifying that an insurance policy has been issued to the registrant by an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota, or a form of self insurance acceptable to the city; (b) Verifying that the registrant is insured against claims for personal injury, including death, as well as claims for property damage arising out of the (i) use and occupancy of the right-of-way by the registrant, its officers, agents, employees and permittees, and (ii) placement and use of facilities and equipment in the right-of-way by the registrant, its officers, agents, employees and permittees, including, but not limited to, protection against liability arising 7 � t i from completed operations, damage of underground facilities and collapse of property; (c) Either naming the city as an additional insured as to whom the coverages required herein are in force and applicable and for whom defense will be provided as to all such coverages or otherwise providing evidence satisfactory to the director that the City is fully covered and will be defended through registrant's insurance for all actions included in Minnesota Rule part 7819.1250; (d) Requiring that the city be notified thirty (30) days in advance of cancellation of the policy or material modification of a coverage term; (e) Indicating comprehensive liability coverage, automobile liability coverage, workers compensation and umbrella coverage established by the city in amounts sufficient to protect the city and the public and to carry out the purposes and policies of this Section. (4) The city may require a copy of the actual insurance policies if necessary to ensure the director that the policy provides adequate third party claim coverage and city indemnity and defense coverage for all actions included in the indemnity required by Minnesota Rule part 7819.1250. (5) Such evidence as the director may require that the person is authorized to do business in Minnesota. B. Notice of Changes. The registrant shall keep all of the information listed above current at all times by providing to the city information as to changes within fifteen (15) days following the date on which the registrant has knowledge of any change. Subd. 8. Reporting Obligations. A. Operations. Each registrant shall, at the time of registration and by December 1 of each year, file a construction and major maintenance plan for underground facilities with the city. Such plan shall be submitted using a format designated by the city and shall contain the information determined by the city to be necessary to facilitate the coordination and reduction in the frequency of excavations and obstructions of rights-of-way. The plan shall include,but not be limited to, the following information: (1) The locations and the estimated beginning and ending dates of all projects to be commenced during the next calendar year (in this section, a "next- year project"); and 8 (2) To the extent known, the tentative locations and estimated beginning and ending dates for all projects contemplated for the five years following the next calendar year(in this section, a"five-year project"). The term"project" in this section shall include both next-year projects and five-year projects. By January 1 of each year the city will have available for inspection in the city's office a composite list of all projects of which the city has been informed of the annual plans. All registrants are responsible for keeping themselves informed of the current status of this list. Thereafter, by February 1, each registrant may change any project in its list of next-year projects, and must notify the city and all other registrants of all such changes in said list. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a registrant may at any time join in a Next-year project of another registrant listed by the other registrant. B. Additional Next-Year Projects. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city will not deny an application for a right-of-way permit for failure to include a project in a plan submitted to the city if the registrant has used commercially reasonable efforts to anticipate and plan for the project. Subd. 9. Permit Requirement. A. Permit Required. Except as otherwise provided in this code, no person may obstruct or excavate any right-of-way without first having obtained the appropriate right-of-way permit from the city to do so. (1) Excavation Permit. An excavation permit is required by a registrant to excavate that part of the right-of-way described in such permit and to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of the right-of-way by placing facilities described therein, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. (2) Obstruction Permit. An obstruction permit is required by a registrant to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of the traveled surface within the right-of-way by placing equipment described therein on the right-of-way, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. An obstruction permit is not required if a person already possesses a valid excavation permit for the same project. An obstruction permit is not required for obstructions of two hours or less for the purpose of repairing or maintaining previously installed facilities. Comment: This section seems to require a specific permit to be granted for every right-of-way obstruction and it requires identification of the "specified portion of the right-of-way" which will be occupied by the equipment. This requirement does not appear to allow a "blanket" permit, which would allow NSP trucks or personnel to temporarily 9 obstruct rights-of-way for purposes of opening a manhole, checking a pole-mounted transformer, or other routine matters that are part of normal maintenance, inspection and operation of NSP's system within any city. The suggested changes will help reach the city's objective of reasonable management of the right-of-way while allowing for routine maintenance procedures. B. Permit Extensions. No person may excavate obstruct the right-of-way beyond the date or dates specified in the permit unless (i) such person makes a supplementary application for another right-of-way permit before the expiration of the initial permit, and (ii) a new permit or permit extension is granted. C. Delay Penalty. In accordance with Minnesota Rule 7819.1000 subp. 3 and notwithstanding subdivision 2 of this section, the city shall establish and impose a delay penalty for unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration. The delay penalty shall be established from time to time by city council resolution. A delay penalty will not be imposed for delays due to force majeure, including inclement weather, labor disputes, acts of God, or other circumstances beyond the control of the applicant. Before imposing a delay penalty, the city will recognize and take into consideration the applicant's need to respond to emergencies in other communities or areas. Comment: The proposed additions are consistent with MPUC Rule 7819.1000, subpart 3, which indicates conditions under which a delay penalty should not imposed. The proposed additions also recognize situations in which the utility may be called away from a project to respond to emergencies in other areas. D. Permit Display. permits issued under this Section shall be conspicuously displayed or otherwise available at all times at the indicated work site and shall be available for inspection by the city. Subd. 10. Permit Applications. Application for a permit is made to the city. Right-of-way permit applications shall contain, and will be considered complete only upon compliance with the requirements of the following provisions: (1) Registration with the city pursuant to this Section; (2) Submission of a completed permit application form, including all required attachments, and scaled drawings showing the location and area of the proposed project and the location of all known existing and proposed facilities. (3) Payment of money due the city for: 10 (a) permit fees, estimated restoration costs and other management costs; (b) prior obstructions or excavations; (c) any undisputed loss, damage, or expense suffered by the city because of applicant's prior excavations or obstructions of the rights-of-way or any emergency actions taken by the city; (d) franchise fees or other charges, if applicable. Comment: There should be no "other management costs" to collect. These are to be covered in the permit fee. Only costs attributable to an individual right-of-way user could be collected here, and no authority exists for the permit process to be an "all purpose"collection function. CI) Payment of disputed amounts due the city by posting security or amount-ewing. Comment: Franchises have their own dispute resolution procedure and it is not lawful for the City to use a permit application to resolve a franchise dispute. The denial of a permit should not be based on a dispute over a previous permit, which could be in a dispute resolution forum. (5) Posting an additional or larger construction performance bond for additional facilities and the city deems the existing construction Comment: This paragraph seems somewhat redundant and exceeds the city's authority. Phrase "applicable standards" is not well defined. Franchises have their own dispute resolution procedure and it is not lawful for the city to use a permit application to resolve a franchise dispute. The denial of a permit should not be based on its dispute over a previous permit, which could be in a dispute resolution forum. Subd. 11. Issuance of Permit; Conditions. A. Permit Issuance. If the Applicant has satisfied the requirements of this Section, the city shall issue a permit within three (3) business days of receiving a completed application, or shall provide written reasons for denial of the application if the city believes the requirements have not been satisfied.. 11 Comment: Applicants have a reasonable expectation of knowing how soon they will receive their permit. They also have a reasonable expectation of receiving written reasons for the denial of an application. B. Conditions. The city may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of the permit and the performance of the applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use. Subd. 12. Permit Fees. A. Fee Schedule and Fee Allocation. The city's permit fee schedule shall be available to the public and established in advance where reasonably possible. The permit fees shall be designed to recover the City's actual costs incurred in managing the right-of-way and shall be based on an allocation among all users of the right-of-way, including the city. B. Excavation Permit Fee. The city shall establish an Excavation permit fee in an amount sufficient to recover the following costs: (1) the city management costs; (2) degradation costs, if applicable. B. Obstruction Permit Fee. The city shall establish the obstruction permit fee and shall be in an amount sufficient to recover the city management costs. C. Payment of Permit Fees. No excavation permit or obstruction permit shall be issued without payment of excavation or obstruction permit fees. The city may allow Applicant to pay such fees within thirty (30) days of billing. D. Non Refundable. permit fees that were paid for a permit that the city has revoked for a breach as stated in Subdivision 22 are not refundable. E. Application to Franchises. Unless otherwise agreed to in a franchise, management costs may be charged separately from and in addition to the franchise fees imposed on a right-of- way user in the franchise. Subd. 13. Right-of-Way Patching and Restoration. A. Timing. The work to be done under the excavation permit, and the patching and restoration of the right-of-way as required herein, must be completed within the dates specified in the permit, increased by as many days as work could not be done because of circumstances beyond the control of the permittee or when work was prohibited as unseasonal or unreasonable under Subdivision 16. 12 � Y B. Patch and Restoration. Permittee must patch its own work. The city may choose either to have the permittee restore the surface and subgrading portions of right-of-way or to restore the surface portion of right-of-way itself. (1) City Restoration. If the city restores the surface portion of right-of-way, permittee shall pay the costs thereof within thirty (30) days of billing. If, following such Restoration, the pavement settles due to permittee's improper backfilling, the permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30) days of billing, all costs associated with correcting the defective work. (2) Permittee Restoration. If the permittee restores the right-of-way itself, it shall at the time of application for an Excavation permit post a construction performance bond in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule 7819.3000. (3) Degradation Fee in Lieu of Restoration. In lieu of right-of-way restoration, a right-of-way user may elect to pay a degradation fee. However, the right-of-way user shall remain responsible for patching replacing and compacting the subgrade and aggregate based material in the exacavation and the degradation fee shall not include the cost to accomplish these responsibilities. Comment: The suggested change brings this paragraph into compliance with Rule 7819.1100, Subpart 3. C. Standards. The permittee shall perform patching and restoration according to the standards and with the materials specified by the city and shall comply with Minnesota Rule 7819.1100. D. Duty to Correct Defects. The permittee shall correct defects in patching, or restoration performed by permittee or its agents. permittee upon notification from the city, shall correct all restoration work to the extent necessary, using the method required by the city. Said work shall be completed within five (5) calendar dayspromptly upon receipt of the receipt of the of notice from the city, not including days during which work cannot be done because of circumstances constituting force majeure or days when work is prohibited as unseasonal or unreasonable under Subdivision 16. E. Failure to Restore. If the permittee fails to restore the right-of-way in the manner and to the condition required by the city, or fails to satisfactorily and timely complete all restoration required by the city, the city shall notify the permittee in writing of the specific alleged failure or failures and shall allow the permittee ten (10) days from receipt of said written notice to cure said failure or failures, or to respond with a plan to cure. In the event the permittee fails to cure or fails to respond hereunder, the city may at its option perform the necessary work and permittee the city at its option may do such work. In that event the permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30) days of billing, the cost of restoring the right-of-way. If permittee fails to pay as required, the city may exercise its rights under the construction performance bond. 13 l 1 Comment: The permittee has the choice of whether to restore the right-of-way or pay a degradation fee. In most instances, it will be unreasonable to require patching if the permittee is going to restore the right-of-way. Subd. 14. Joint Applications. A. Joint Application. registrants may jointly apply for permits to excavate or obstruct the right-of-way at the same place and time. B. Shared Fees. registrants who apply for permits for the same obstruction or excavation, which the city does not perform, may share in the payment of the obstruction or excavation permit fee. In order to obtain a joint permit, registrants must agree among themselves as to the portion each will pay and indicate the same on their applications. C. With City Projects. registrants who join in a scheduled Obstruction or excavation performed by the city, whether or not it is a joint application by two or more registrants or a single application, are not required to pay the excavation or obstruction and degradation portions of the permit fee, but a permit would still be required. Subd. 15. Supplementary Applications. A. Limitation on Area. A right-of-way permit is valid only for the area of the right-of- way specified in the permit. No permittee may do any work outside the area specified in the permit, except as provided herein. Any permittee which determines that an area greater than that specified in the permit must be obstructed or excavated must before working in that greater area (i) make application for a permit extension and pay any additional fees required thereby, and (ii) be granted a new permit or permit extension. B. Limitation on Dates. A right-of-way permit is valid only for the dates specified in the permit. No permittee may begin its work before the permit start date or, except as provided herein, continue working after the end date. If a permittee does not finish the work by the permit end date, it must apply for a new permit for the additional time it needs, and receive the new permit or an extension of the old permit before working after the end date of the previous permit. This supplementary application must be submitted before the permit end date. Subd. 16. Other Obligations. A. Compliance with Other Laws. Obtaining a right-of-way permit does not relieve permittee of its duty to obtain all other necessary permits, licenses, and authority and to pay all fees required by the city or other applicable rule, law or regulation. A permittee shall comply with all requirements of local, state and federal laws, including Minn. Stat. 216D.01-.09 (Gopher One Call Excavation Notice System). A permittee shall perform all work in conformance with all applicable codes and established rules and regulations, and is responsible for all work done in the right-of-way pursuant to its permit, regardless of who does the work. 14 B. Prohibited Work. Except in an emergency, and with the approval of the city, no right-of-way Obstruction or excavation may be done when seasonally prohibited or when conditions are unreasonable for such work. C. Interference with Right-of-Way. A permittee shall not so obstruct a right-of-way that the natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways shall be interfered with, unless conditions otherwise dictate. Private vehicles of those doing work in the right-of-way may not be parked within or next to a permit area, unless parked in conformance with city parking regulations. The loading or unloading of trucks must be done solely within the defined permit area unless specifically authorized by the permit. Comment: The suggested language is self-explanatory. Subd. 17. Denial of Permit. The city may deny a permit for failure to meet the requirements and conditions of this Section or if the city determines that the denial is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use. Subd. 18. Installation Requirements. The excavation, backfilling, patching and restoration, and all other work performed in the right- of-way shall be done in conformance with Minnesota Rule 7819.1100 and other applicable local requirements, in so far as they are not inconsistent with the Minnesota Statutes sections 237.162 and 237.163. Subd. 19. Inspection. A. Notice of Completion. When the work under any permit hereunder is completed, the permittee shall furnish a Completion Certificate in accordance Minnesota Rule 7819.1300. B. Site Inspection. permittee shall make the work-site available to the city and to all others as authorized by law for inspection at all reasonable times during the execution of and upon completion of the work. C. Authority of Director. (1) At the time of inspection the director may order the immediate cessation of any work which poses a serious threat to the life, health, safety or well- being of the public. (2) The director may issue an order to the permittee for any work which does not conform to the terms of the permit or other applicable standards, conditions, or codes, so long as the nonconformance constitutes a "substantial breach" as set forth in Minn. Stat. §237.163, subd. 4(c)(1)-(5). The order shall state that failure to correct the violation will be cause for 15 revocation of the permit. Within ten (10) days a reasonable time after issuance of the order, the permittee shall present proof to the director that the violation has been corrected, within a time period set forth by the director in the order. If such proof has not been presented within the required time, the director may revoke the permit pursuant to Subdivision 22. Comment: Any alleged nonconformance must be a "substantial- breach substantial''breach in conformance with Minn. Stat. _ 237.163, subd. 4(c)(1) (5). It would be more reasonable for the compliance period to be established on a case by case basis. Subd. 20. Work Done Without a Permit. A. Emergency Situations. Each registrant shall immediately notify the director of any event regarding its facilities which it considers to be an emergency. The registrant may proceed to take whatever actions are necessary to respond to the emergency. Within two (2) business days after the occurrence of the emergency the registrant shall apply for the necessary permits, pay the fees associated therewith and fulfill the rest of the requirements necessary to bring itself into compliance with this Section for the actions it took in response to the Emergency. If the city becomes aware of an emergency regarding a registrant's facilities, the city will attempt to contact the local representative of each registrant affected, or potentially affected, by the emergency. In any event, the city may take whatever action it deems necessary to respond to the emergency, the cost of which shall be borne by the registrant whose facilities occasioned the emergency. B. Non-Emergency Situations. Except in an emergency, any person who, without first having obtained the necessary permit, obstructs or excavates a right-of-way must subsequently obtain a permit, -: . . ::.: - •e - -- = .. e e. : _ . - other fees required by the city code, deposit with the city the fees necessary to correct any damage to the right-of-way and comply with all of the requirements of this Section. Comment: The City has not been given authority to double fees as a penalty. Subd. 21. Supplementary Notification. If the obstruction or excavation of the right-of-way begins later or ends sooner than the date given on the permit, permittee shall notify the city of the accurate information as soon as this information is known. Subd. 22. Revocation of Permits. A. Substantial Breach. The city reserves its right to revoke any right-of-way permit, without a fee refund, if there is a substantial breach of the terms and conditions of any statute, 16 t ) ordinance, rule or regulation, or any material condition of the permit. A substantial breach by permittee shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following: (1) The violation of any material provision of the right-of-way permit; (2) An evasion or attempt to evade any material provision of the right-of-way permit, or the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any fraud or deceit upon the city or its citizens; (3) Any material misrepresentation of fact in the application for a right-of- way permit; (4) The failure to complete the work in a timely manner; unless a permit extension is obtained or unless the failure to complete work is due to reasons beyond the permittee's control; or (5) The failure to correct, in a timely manner, work that does not conform to a condition indicated on an order issued pursuant to section 19B-19. B. Written Notice of Breach. If the city determines that the permittee has committed a substantial breach of a term or condition of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation or any condition of the permit the city shall make a written demand upon the permittee to remedy such violation. The demand shall state that continued violations may be cause for revocation of the permit. A substantial breach, as stated above, will allow the city to place additional or revised conditions on the permit to mitigate and remedy the breach. C. Response to Notice of Breach. Within twenty four (21) hours of receiving will cure the breach. a time period established established within a written notification of breach received from the city, permittee shall provide the city with a plan acceptable to the director, that will cure the breach. Permittee's failure to so contact the city, or permittee's failure to timely submit an acceptable plan, or permittee's failure to reasonably implement the approved plan, shall be cause for immediate revocation of the permit, provided that no plan will be unreasonably rejected.. Further, permittee's failure to so contact the city, or permittee's failure to submit an acceptable plan, or permittee's failure to reasonably implement the approved plan, shall Comment: The twenty-fur (24) hour response time for responding to a notice of breach appears arbitrary and unreasonable. A time established by the city based on the circumstances would be much more reasonable. On its face, this provision also requires that the final plan meet the subjective standard of being "acceptable" to the director can not he known until after the filing of the plan. Thus, this provision could easily involve a proper, timely response by the utility with the city nonetheless citing a violation due to the city's insistence that the submitted plan was not "acceptable. '' This would violate Minn. Stat. ,¢237.163, subpart 4(e) which requires that local government units may not unreasonably withhold approval of a right-of-way permit or "unreasonably"revoke a permit. 17 . x D. Cause for probation. From time to time, the city may establish a list of conditions of .•' • • _. -e • . - e --, ically place the pern}ittee on probation for one full year,...such a-s -but not • ' - - - - t :: . • way grossly outside of the permit authorization. E. Automatic Revocation. If a permittee, while on probation, commits a breach as outlined above, permittee's permit will automatically be revoked and permittee will not be • Comment: There is no authority for the city to impose probation under the statute. Application of automatic revocation also appears unreasonable and arbitrary, hence, by its terms, it would not allow permits for new service, new construction, etc., for a year. Concept of probation is not found in the MPUC Rules or in the statute and is unnecessary to achieve effective right-of-way management. The city has the authority to impose reasonable permit conditions, issue orders, deny and revoke permits and impose certain fines. This should be sufficient to deal with rule or ordinance violations. Unless past experience has proven that the above remedies are inadequate, probation should be avoided. If the city insists on probation as a potential remedy, it should only be imposed by city council resolution at a meeting to which the permittee is invited and allowed to comment after notice of the proposed action. This would seem to be required by concepts of notice and opportunity to be heard. F. Reimbursement of City Costs. If a permit is revoked, the permittee shall also reimburse the city for the city's reasonable costs, including Restoration costs and the costs of collection and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in connection with such revocation. Subd. 23. Mapping Data. Each registrant and permittee shall provide mapping information required by the city in accordance with Minnesota Rules 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. A. Purpose. The purpose of Subdivision 21 is to promote the health, safety and general development in the city. Location and relocation, installation and reinstallation of Facilities in B. Undergrounding of Facilities. Facilities placed in the public right of way must be section and in accordance with applicable construction standards. This section is intended to be including but not limited to Minnesota Statutes, sections 161.15, 237.162, 237.163, 300.03, 222.37, 238.081 and 216B.36 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, • - ' , -.-.-• --- •• 253. 18 1 Co Undergrounding of Permanent Replacement, Relocated or Reconstructed Facilities. If the City finds that one or more of the purposes set forth in Subd. 21.A. would be promoted, the city may require a permanent replacement, relocation or reconstruction of a Facility of more than 300 feet to be located, and maintained underground, with due regard for seasonal working conditions. For purposes of this section, reconstruction means any substantial replacement, relocation or reconstruction is initiated by the right of way user owning or operating the Facilities, or by the city in connection with (1) the present or future use by the city or other local government unit of the right of way for a public project, (2) the public health or safety, or(3)the safety and convenience of travel over the right of way. D. Retirement of Overhead Facilities. The city council may determine whether it is in the public interest that all Facilities within the city, or Facilities within certain districts designated by the city, be permanently placed and maintained underground by a date certain or target date, independently of undergrounding required pursuant to Section 1.35 of this Code (new Facilities) and subdivision 21.C. (replacement Facilities). The decision to underground affected. (Two weeks published: 30 days written.) At the hearing the council must consider • i i .. . .. .. ... •,..• (6) of subdivision 21.G. of this Section. E. Public Hearings. A hearing must be open to the public and may be continued from time to time. At each hearing any person interested must be given an opportunity to be heard. The subject of the public hearings shall be the issue of whether Facilities in the right of way in . .. - . . . -. ..— . .. . -M ' Hearings are not necessary for the undergrounding required under Subdivision 21.C. of this Section. F. Public Hearing Issues. The issues to be addressed at the public hearings include but are not limited to: (1) The costs and benefits to the public of requiring the undergrounding of all Facilities in the right of way. (2) The feasibility and cost of undergrounding all Facilities by a date certain as determined by the city and the affected utilities. (3) The tariff requirements, procedure and rate design for recovery or intended recovery of incremental costs for undergrounding by the utilities from ratepayers within the city. (1) Alternative financing options available if the city deems it in the public interest to require undergrounding by a date certain and deems it appropriate to participate in the cost otherwise borne by the ratepayers. 19 4 t hether it is in the public interest to establish a plan under which all Facilities will be underground all or substantially all Facilities in the public right of way, the council must following elements: (1) Timetable for the undergrounding. (2) Designation of districts for the undergrounding unless the undergrounding plan is citywide. (3) Exceptions to the undergrounding requirement and procedure for establishing such exceptions. -• a •e••• • e••••• •e • e non-discrimination requirements under the law. (5) A financing plan for funding of the incremental costs if the city determines the utility. Comment: If the city desires to adopt an undergrounding requirement for all new lines and a plan for undergrounding existing lines, it should do so in a separate ordinance. Placing it in a right-of-way ordinance is missing the bulk of underground facilities, which are not in the public right-of-way, but on private right-o[way immediately adjacent to the customer's premises. For this reason, the city should start with an undergrounding requirement for new subdivisions and put the cost on the developer. The developer passes the cost on to the buyers of the new homes or commercial buildings. In regard to right-of-way, there is unlikely to be a desire on the city's part to pay, or to have NSP surcharge its customers, the incremental cost of undergrounding for new, say nothing about existing, electrical lines in a street. NSP already has a policy to go underground if the city so requests, and the incremental cost is paid. It would seem more appropriate for the city to consider this one project at a time and decide which ones, if any, justify imposing the added costs on its residents. 20 • Finally, the city should recognize that by its very terms this ordinance can apply only to public rights-of-way and even if the city wished to retain this section, the first sentences in paragraphs C and D would have to be amended to specifically refer to facilities "in a public right-of-way. '' H. Facilities Location. In addition to complying with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, section 216D.01 .09 ("One Call Excavation Notice System")before the start date of any right of way excavation, each registrant who has facilities or equipment in the area to be excavated shall mark the horizontal and vertical placement of all said facilities. Any registrant whose facilities are less than twenty (20) inches below a concrete or asphalt surface shall notify and work closely with the excavation contractor to establish the exact location of its facilities and the best procedure for excavation. Comment: There is no way to know the exact depth of facilities and the city can not require more than the State of Minnesota requires in Chapter 216D. The requirement pertaining to facilities less than twenty inches (20") below a concrete or asphalt surface is unenforceable due to the inexact nature, and the inability of the facility owner to know the exact depth. NSP generally has no control over or knowledge of street or sidewalk construction over its facilities. This authority is not vested in the city, but rests with Gopher State One Call pursuant to Minn. Stat. ,'216D.04 and 216D.07. When the city does work in the right of way and finds it necessary to maintain, support, or move a registrant's facilities to protect it, the city shall notify the local representative as early as is reasonably possible. The costs associated therewith will be billed to that registrant and must be facilities. Comment: The law requires all users of the right-of-way to be treated the same. The law gives no authority to the city to impose the above requirements, even on a telecommunications company. The section of the ordinance is unclear as to what type of"work in the right-of-way" is being contemplated. The city is merely "managing" the right-of-way (as opposed to accessing the right-of-way as a right-of-way user for water, sewer, etc.), the costs to maintain, support or move the registrant's facilities may be recoverable. However, if these costs are attributable to work on the city's own utilities, these costs are not recoverable. An attempt by the city to transfer liability incurred in damaging facilities caused in response to an emergency appears to violate MPUC Rule 7819.1250 on indemnification. 21 Subd. 26. Right-of-Way Vacation. Reservation of right. If the city vacates a right-of-way which contains the facilities of a registrant, the registrant's rights in the vacated right-of-way are governed by Minnesota Rules 7819.3200. Subd. 27. Indemnification and Liability By registering with the city, or by accepting a permit under this Section, a registrant or permittee agrees to defend and indemnify the city in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule 7819.1250. Subd. 28. Abandoned and Unusable Facilities. A. Discontinued Operations. A registrant who has determined to discontinue all or a portion of its operations in the city must provide information satisfactory to the city that the registrant's obligations for its facilities in the right-of-way under this Section have been lawfully assumed by another registrant. B. Removal. Any registrant who has abandoned facilities in any right-of-way shall remove it from that right-of-way if required in conjunction with other right-of-way repair, excavation, or construction, unless this requirement is waived by the city. Subd. 29. Appeal. A right-of-way user that: (1) has been denied registration; (2) has been denied a permit; (3) has had permit revoked; or (4) believes that the fees imposed are invalid,not in conformity with Minn. Stat. §237.163, Subd. 5, may have the denial, revocation, or fee imposition reviewed, upon written request, by the city council. The city council shall act on a timely written request at its next regularly scheduled meeting. A decision by the city Council affirming the denial, revocation, or fee imposition will be in writing and supported by written findings establishing the reasonableness of the decision. Continent: The proposed language brings the ordinance section into compliance with statute. Subd. 30. Reservation of Regulatory and Police Powers. A permittee's or registrant's rights are subject to the regulatory and police powers of the city to adopt and enforce general ordinances necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. Subd. 31. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Section is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court or administrative agency of competent jurisdiction, 22 l a such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. If a regulatory body or a court of competent jurisdiction should determine by a final, non-appealable order that any permit, right or registration issued under this Section or any portions of this Section is illegal or unenforceable, then any such permit, right or registration granted or deemed to exist hereunder shall be considered as a revocable permit with a mutual right in either party to terminate without cause upon giving sixty (60) days written notice to the other. The requirements and conditions of such a revocable permit shall be the same requirements and conditions as set forth in the permit, right or registration, respectively, except for conditions relating to the term of the permit and the right of termination. Nothing in this Section precludes the city from requiring a franchise agreement with the applicant, as allowed by law, in addition to requirements set forth herein. Sec. 2. This ordinance is 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 23 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA MODEL RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE COMMENTS Sec. 1 . 01 . Findings and Purpose It has not been proven that an excavation in the street, if done properly, has any detrimental effect on the street . In fact, once the street has been seal coated it is difficult to find the patch. Minnesota Statute 237 . 163 . Subd. 6. indicates that fees be based on actual costs and be based on an allocation to all users of the right-of-way, including the Local Government Unit. Sec. 1 . 03 . Definitions Bond. Minnegasco suggests that the city consider a multi-year continuing bond if it is found that a bond is necessary. Degradation cost. i . Costs will be different if utility rather than city completes the restoration. ii. Plates as developed are maximums . Minnesota Statute 237 . 163 . indicates that the right-of-way be returned to the condition that existed before the excavation. Patch or Patching. See comment above. A patch, if done correctly, will, in most cases, return the street to the condition that existed prior to the excavation. Probation or Probationary Period. These are not part of the PUC State-Wide Rules. Sec. 1 . 07 . Registration Information (b) Local Representative. Minnegasco has local representatives for several different functions . While some of these functions overlap, it is unreasonable to expect them all to be available at all times . Minnegasco has an emergency phone number for those occurrences. Sec. 1. 08 . Reporting Obligations Minnegasco' s distribution systems within many of the Cities are in place and well established. Any projects on our system will be in conjunction with a city project. System expansion projects, if and when they occur, are customer driven. In most cases the city will know about the need before we do. Gas utilities usually use the winter months to collect and evaluate system pressure and flow data. We would not know of a need to reinforce our system, if required, until at least March. Sec. 1 . 09. Permit Requirements Subd. 2 . Permit Extension. This requirement is overly burdensome on both the director and the utility. The director should be able to waive the requirements for cause. Subd. 3 . Delay Penalty. The director should be able to waive the requirements for cause. Minnegasco would like to continue the current procedure of informing most Cities monthly about work completed within the City on service lines and other existing facilities. If required, fees can be paid with the notification or when invoiced. We currently do this in most Cities. Sec. 1 . 13. Right-of-Way Patching and Restoration Subd. 2 . Patch and Restoration. Minnegasco prefers to restore its excavations . We question whether the city even wants to be involved in restoring our work. Sec. 1. 15. Supplementary Applications This section again is overly burdensome on both the director and the utility. See comments under Sec. 1 . 08 . Sec. 1 . 16. Other Obligations Subd. 2 . Prohibited work. Except in an Emergency, or with the approval of the Director, no Right-of-Way obstruction or excavation may be done when seasonally prohibited or when conditions are unreasonable for such work. A new home or business may require service. Subd. 3 . Interference with Right-of-Way. A Permittee shall not interfere with the natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways. Personal vehicles of those doing work in the Right-of-Way may not be parked within or next to a permit area, unless parked in conformance with City parking regulations . The loading or unloading of trucks must be done solely within the defined permit area unless specifically authorized by the permit. ` t, Sec. 1 . 17 . Denial of Permit The Director must be extremely careful in denying permits . The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that private utilities such as gas, electric, and telephone have as much right to use the Right- of-Way as sewer or water utilities . If a permit is denied, the director must inform the applicant of the reasons for the denial. Sec. 1 . 19. Inspection Subd. 1. Notice of Completion. If the city needs and/or wants a completion certificate we will be happy to comply. In most cases the city will know when we are completed before Minnegasco' s office staff. Sec. 1 . 22 . Revocation of Permits Subd. 1 . Substantial Breach. 3rd line: . . . applicable statute, ordinance, rule or regulation, . . . Subd. 2 . Written Notice of Breach. The last sentence is not needed. The director cannot add additional installation conditions on a gas utility other than restoration. If we are already restoring to the previous condition, by law, what more can be done. Subd. 3. Response to notice of breach. It may be impossible to develop a plan to cure a breach within twenty-four (24) hours. A Permittee should be able to contact the director within twenty- four (24) hours to start the plan process with the Director. Subds . 4 and 5. Probation and Revocation. While Minnegasco does not intend to ever have a revocation or require probation, these actions are not part of PUC rules . Sec. 1. 24 . Location and Relocation of Facilities Placement of facilities in a particular location within the Right- of-Way must take into account the current and anticipated uses of the Right-of-Way and the distinct engineering, construction, operation, and maintenance characteristics of each type of use. We would object to relocating facilities not in direct conflict with grade changes or other infrastructure conflicts that could be avoided. The facilities we have in the right-of-way have a right to be there. In addition property taxes are paid on these facilities. Concern for continued cost effective service is required. Sec. 1. 25 . Pre-excavation Facility and Facilities Location Minn. Stat . §216D provides adequate regulation for pre-excavation facility locations . Regardless of depth hand digging by an excavator to expose the facility is still required by Minnesota Statutes §216D. 01-. 09. Current buried facility locating technology does not allow for accurate depth locations . The excavator must plan on hand digging to expose any indicated buried facility. The City of Minneapolis is using the following based on comments from not only Minnegasco but also the other utilities : Pre-excavation facility location. In addition to complying with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D. 01-. 09 ("One call excavation notice system") before the start date of any right-of-way excavation, each registrant who has facilities located in the area to be excavated shall be responsible to mark the horizontal placement of all said facilities. To the extent its records contain such information, each registrant shall provide information regarding the approximate vertical location of facilities to excavators upon request. Nothing in this subsection is meant to limit the rights, duties and obligations of the facility owners or excavators as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, section 216D. 01-. 09. Any right-of-way user whose facilities are less than twenty (20) inches below a concrete or asphalt surface shall notify and work closely with the excavation contractor in an effort to establish and mark the exact horizontal and vertical location of its facility and the and the best procedure for excavation. Sec. 1 . 26. Damage to Other Facilities Minnegasco has always assisted cities in locating, supporting, and or moving or looping our facilities and will continue to do so. We object to charges for work on sewer or water as they are also users of the Right-of-Way. If the city is excavating in the Right-of-Way as a management function we will assist and depending on the circumstances may accept costs. Secs . 1. 27 and 1 .28 Please refer to franchise agreements. Sec. 1 . 29. Abandoned and Unusable Facilities Minnegasco has been installing and abandoning facilities in its distribution system for over 100 years . Some of these facilities have been abandoned in place with no adverse effects . Removing buried facilities that have been abandoned along most streets will delay both the city' s project and Minnegasco' s . This portion of the LMC Model Ordinance was written in response to the Telephone Industry Deregulation. Removing abandoned natural gas facilities may be appropriate for heavily traveled or high density Rights-of-Way. It is not necessary for residential streets nor is it a fire or safety hazard. 96-29-2000 02:52PM FROM MUEC TO 94456718 P.01 31, From: .., Ron Jabs Community Relations Specialist dir. 952-492-8244 pager 612-621-8751 fax 952-492-8296 rjabsOmnvalley.org 125 Minnesota Valley Electric Dr. Jordan,MN 55352 800-282-6832 To: tit IC. fife jai. Of: Fax#: 13/415' Phone#: 44715--34'CV Date: e,/PVA Message: z' ' • • # of pages: 3 If you do not receive all pages, please notify me immediately. P6-29-2000 02:52PM FROM MVEC TO 94456718 P.02 4 ,I , • Proposed Right-of-Way Ordinance City of Shakopee Comments by Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative Many of our concerns revolve around un-addressed questions or issues that arise in reading the proposed Ordinance. Specifically, what will the schedule of charges be and what will they be based on? • Are the charges flat rate or actual? • Will there be registration fee for existing plant and if so how much? Note that that existing plant was generally already installed with a permit fee already. Will installations into new developments require a permit and also permit fee? • Be aware that permit fees will become a pass through to the developer. Are installations in an easement, within private property, under the same requirements as facilities within the boulevard right of way? Subd.6 C. suggests property owners have the unrestricted right to plant or construct gardens or other obstructions that could seriously interfere with installation or maintenance of utilities. This is counter to the best interest of the general public. Many jobs are subcontracted out to subcontractors. How do the certificate of insurance or self-insurance provisions pertain to this situation? SPUC incur all the same kind of fees, requirements and permits required of all other utilities? • We would insist on no unfair advantage or treatment to any utility. MVEC would hereby request membership on the Utility Coordination Committee if established. What are the cities specific mapping requirements and will information in addition to our standard processes be required? The Undergrounding requirements in many cases are not practical. Reimbursement by the City, if expecting existing facilities be replaced, would be expected. We do not have a problem with the requirement wen applied within the body of a new development. Facility Location must conform to state law and the GSOC requirements. Subd.25 provisions allow the City to relocate or handle our electrical facilities incurs significant City liability and safety issues. We do not allow unsupervised handling of our 06-29-2000 02:53PM FROM MVEC TO 94456718 P.03 • facilities and object to this provision and the provision that if the City damages someone else's facilities when you move ours, we are liable. We object to the probationary Period provisions of the ordinance. Reasonable delays as noted in NSP's comments should be required. Prompt turn around of permits from the City should be expected with a commitment as to the maximum time to get confirmation or reason for denial. What will be the maximum permit duration? Extensions sound like they will be costly and time consuming and yet unavoidable if reasonable windows of time are not accommodated. If applied to all "Energy Providers" MVEC would prefer to incorporate management cost into a franchise agreement as referenced in Subd.12 E. A provision for shared fees as noted in Subd.14 B. is a good idea especially since nearly all of our work is coordinated as a joint installation with other utilities. With the original draft ordinance first arriving by mail at our office on the 26th and a subsequent revision coming on the 27th from the City and a deadline of written comments by June 29, adequate time was not afforded to do a fully referenced response to all the issues MVEC has concerns about. In addition to the general statements and concerns expressed in the above summary, I would note that we concur with nearly all of the concerns expressed in NSP's response to this proposed ordinance. We would encourage further careful study of this topic with appropriate time allocation to make informed decisions on an ordinance that will affect your City; its residents and the utilities that try to provide your City service. Ronald Jabs Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative Community Relations Specialist. 6/29/2000 TOTAL P.03 I SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Bruce Loney,Public Works Director FROM: Joseph D. Adams,Administrative Assistant , A RE: RIGHT OF WAY ORDINANCE DATE: 6/28/00 I have been asked to review the proposed ordinance and offer you Shakopee Public Utilities perspective and comments. Attached to this memo is another from Lou VanHout,Utilities Manager,that expresses his thoughts and concerns. Since the proposed ordinance does in fact contain language requiring undergrounding of existing overhead lines,I draw your attention to Lou's comments about the effect on Shakopee Public Utilities. I would only add that I question why the undergrounding section is included in Shakopee's proposed ordinance when it is not,as I understand it,in the League of Cities model ordinance. The reasons listed seem to indicate that overhead facilities are inherently less safe than underground facilities. Electric utility companies must design,install and maintain their overhead facilities in conformance with the National Electric Safety Code. For some time now there has been a growing concern both here,and expressed by the representatives of the other utility companies,that utilities are being squeezed into a smaller and smaller area in which to place our facilities. This has lead to expanded efforts to coordinate joint trenching operations amongst all the utility companies. Historically, Shakopee Public Utilities has been a pioneer in the joint trenching of wire,i.e. SPU electric,US West telephone and Amzak/Paragon/Time Warner cable television, utility lines. These joint trenching activities have been practiced in Shakopee since the 1970's. In the past few years with the advent of private streets that are narrower than public street right of ways,and in and around commercial areas,we have expanded our joint trenching activities to include Minnegasco's natural gas lines. Last year there was an effort to develop standard locations within the right of way and utilities easements for the utility companies to place our facilities. On the surface,this sounds like a good idea. To have a reserved location would be a plus. Representatives from the other utility companies have advised us that similar efforts have been have been started in other cities from time to time,but it always falls apart before coming to ti 4 'f -' conclusion. Will this right of way ordinance lead to renewed efforts to develop standard locations for utility facilities? My only additional comment concerns the language exempting the property owner from the ordinance requirements in regards to planting of trees and other landscape materials. The ordinance seems to encourage plantings over the area the utility lines would be buried. We believe this to be a bad idea. The restoration costs for repairs will increase as a result, as will the frequency of need to do repairs. Tree roots are no better for underground lines than tree branches are for overhead lines. If utilities are to be given a designated location in which to install our underground facilities,it would be appreciated if that area was free and clear of obstructions and potential interference as much as possible. Trees,berms and elaborate landscaping should be kept outside the utility corridors. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on this issue. I will plan to attend the Council meeting on 7/5/00 to answer any questions regarding our comments. V J♦ ~ , • `TO: Joe Adams FROM: Lou Van Hout RE: Proposed City ROW (Right Of Way) Ordinance DATE: 6/23/2000 Enclosed is the latest communication on this . As I believe you already know, you are asked to convey SPDC ' s perspective to City staff and City Council on the matter. In view of your other pressing responsibilities, I would expect you can give this only so much attention. But please apply your best efforts , as usual, to the matter. I have not had time to review whether the undergrounding of existing overhead lines is still in this draft of the ROW ordinance. There seemed to be conflicting indications on this from the City at the last SPUC meeting. But if it is , then it would be worth noting as a general comment that although all utilities are nominally treated equally, I feel it is clear that the impact on electric utilities will be much more than the impact will be on cable TV wires (for example) . And further, of all electric utilities, the impact on SPUC will be much greater than on any other, for at least 3 reasons: 1 . Shakopee is growing at an extremely fast rate, so replacing existing streets having existing electric facilities will probably occur much more often here than in the average community, 2 . while other utilities with larger service areas will be able to spread their costs across a larger customer base outside the immediate area, SPUC will have to spread it across our customer base here, 3 . Other electric utilities are either in newly established (underground) areas only, or are in an industrial area where they are less likely to face roads being rebuilt . SPUC has a lot of plant along roads that might be rebuild as development nears , and some of that plant was put in ( in compliance with existing requirements ) before the rebuilding of those roads could be engineered - meaning those lines could not be economically buried to start with. Please convey the fact that these comments are not opposition to a ROW ordinance, only to convey to City staff and or City Council why SPUC has to take a cautious course on the matter. CC C.:-dl/SC n, J � arae I Ja CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of Right-of-Way Management Ordinance DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Ordinance No. 570, an ordinance of the City of Shakopee amending Chapter 7, by adding a new section, Section 7.17, relating to right-of-way management for Council consideration. Also attached is a right-of-way executive summary from Jim Strommen of Kennedy& Graven on this particular ordinance. BACKGROUND: The attached ordinance and summary has been drafted by Kennedy & Graven after Council direction to proceed on adopting a Right-of-Way Management Ordinance. This ordiance is similar to other cities, based upon the League of Minnesota Cities model ordinance, that has been developed following 1997 right-of-way legislation and 1998/1999 right-of-way rule making before the Public Utilities Commission. The proposed Right-of-Way Management Ordinance will be a more comprehensive ordinance than exists currently with the City of Shakopee Code. This ordinance has been adopted by several cities in the Metropolitan area and is being provided for Council consideration and discussion on right-of-way users in the City of Shakopee. Staff has sent a letter to the following right-of-way users: • Shakopee Public Utilities • Northern State Power Co. • Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative • Reliant Energy-Minnegasco • U.S. West • Time Warner Cable TV Staff has provided these right-of-way users with a copy of the proposed ordinance and restoration plates, as well as a notice of public meeting for the proposed right-of-way ordinance. With this ordinance, the City can recoup its costs in managing the right-of- way. If this ordinance is adopted by City Council, staff intends to bring back a resolution with right-of-way management fees at a future meeting. The alternatives are as follows and are dependent upon discussion of the issues. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Ordinance No. 570, as submitted or as modified by Council. 2. Deny Ordinance No. 570. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No. 570, which establishes a new Section 7.17 for Right-of Way Management in the City of Shakopee. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Ordinance No. 570, An Ordinance Amending Chapter 7 By Adding Section 7.17 Relating to Right-of-Way Management and move its adoption. (AW Bruce Lone Public Workirector BL/pmp ORD570 MEMORANDUM TO: Bruce Loney FROM: Jim. Strommen DATE: June 22,2000 RE: ROW Ordinance Executive Summary This is a comprehensive right-of-way (ROW) management ordinance based on the League of Minnesota Cities model ordinance developed following the 1997 ROW state legislation(Minn. Stat. §§ 237.162, 237.163) and 1998-1999 ROW rulemaking before the Public Utilities Commission, codified in Minnesota Rules Parts 7819.0050 et seq. It reflects federal and state law requirements that telecommunications ROW users be given equal access and non-discriminatory treatment by local bodies controlling the ROW. Minnesota law arguably places a broader requirement than federal law for equal access and non-discriminatory treatment to include gas and electric utilities as well as telecommunications providers. Finally, local government units must treat themselves in the same manner as other ROW users through the allocation of costs and other management considerations. Accordingly, the purpose of this ROW ordinance is to establish uniform ROW procedures for all ROW users to install, maintain, operate and remove facilities and to pay the City's cost of ROW management. This ordinance is distinguishable from a franchise that would be separately negotiated between the City and a gas and electric utility or a cable company. A franchise could either incorporate these ordinances or modify them, to the extent such provisions do not delegate away a city's police power to manage the ROW. Subds. 4-11----Management Procedure These provisions establish the process of ROW management and supervision through registration, reporting and permit requirements for excavation or obstruction in the ROW. Subd. 12—Fees By law, the fees are limited to recovery of the cost incurred by the City in ROW management, including administrative costs. Other cities have established schedules and the City is free to adopt schedules annually by resolution. Note, however, that the municipal utility must be charged its share of the fees in the same manner as the other ROW users. Theoretically, if the City were responsible for 90% of the ROW management and repair costs, that 90% could not be charged to the non-City ROW users but rather must be allocated to the City. If SPUC were responsible for the 90% in the example it would be required to pay that amount to the City because of SPUC's separate accounting for its operations. The City need not pay itself,however, for ROW work that is done in imc_1 R77mv1 the normal course of its operations. If the City incurs costs because of the use of the ROW by non- City ROW users, that is to be recovered in permit fees. Note the excavation permit fee takes into consideration the cost of management and degradation of the ROW. The obstruction permit fee involves only management costs when an obstruction, e.g., a road detour, occurs. Subd. 13—Patching and Restoration This provision, together with the engineering plates adopted as part of the Rules, establishes the requirement that the ROW user must restore the ROW to the previous condition. This requirement is based on specific requirements set forth in the Plates. If the ROW user chooses not to restore the ROW itself, it must provide a degradation fee to the City in lieu of the self-restoration. Subds. 17 and 22------Denial or Revocation of Permits This establishes the right of the City to deny or revoke permits under circumstances affecting health, safety and welfare or other failure of the permittee to perform. Subd. 24 Undergrounding This incorporates and complements existing undergrounding provisions previously enacted by the City. The City already has a requirement that all new facilities be placed underground. Therefore, Subd. 24 does not address that. Subd. 24.0 provides that if certain criteria are met, previously installed overhead lines would be placed underground when a public improvement project is undertaken. Under 24.D., the City Council could commence a public hearing process that would result in a series of findings on the issue of retirement of overhead facilities over time. This is discretionary and would only be commenced if the Council thought it was appropriate. If the hearing were undertaken and it were determined that overhead should be converted to underground over time, the Council would establish a comprehensive plan as noted in 24.G. In sum, existing City ordinance and Subd. 24 cover three situations regarding undergrounding of utility facilities: 1) new facilities are required to be placed underground; 2) if appropriate, overhead facilities will be placed underground in conjunction with a public improvement project; and 3)if the City Council becomes interested in a program whereby overhead facilities would be undergrounded over time,it may commence the process described in 24.D. and following. Subd. 29—Appeal from Director Decision When the Director has denied or revoked a registration or a permit,the ROW user may appeal to the City Council. Upon a final decision by the Council, an ROW permit user would have the right to appeal to a court or the Public Utilities Commission. Whether the PUC or a court would hear such an appeal has not been resolved yet and cannot be controlled by these ordinances. Miscellaneous Provisions The ROW ordinance also incorporates requirements under Minnesota Rules regarding mapping of all underground facilities , indemnification,right-of-way vacation and abandoned facilities. JMS-180147v1 2 Latest 6-22-00 ORDINANCE NO. 570 , FOURTH SERIES, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND REGULATION OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE AND REGULATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMITS; ADDING SECTION 7.17 TO THE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Section 1. The Shakopee City Code is amended to add a new Section 7.17 to read as follows: Sec. 7.17. RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT Subd. 1. Findings, Purpose, and Intent. To provide for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and to ensure the integrity of its streets and the appropriate use of the rights-of-way, the city strives to keep its rights-of-way in a state of good repair and free from unnecessary encumbrances. Accordingly, the city enacts this new Section of this code relating to right-of-way permits and administration. This Section imposes reasonable regulation on the placement and maintenance of facilities and equipment currently within the City's rights-of-way or to be placed therein at some future time. It is intended to complement the regulatory roles of state and federal agencies. Under this Section, persons excavating and obstructing the rights-of-way will bear financial responsibility for their work through the recovery of out-of-pocket and projected costs from persons using the public rights-of-way. This Section shall be interpreted consistently with 1997 Session Laws, Chapter 123, substantially codified in Minnesota Statutes Sections 237.16, 237.162, 237.163, 237.79, 237.81, and 238.086 (the "Act") and the other laws governing applicable rights of the city and users of the right-of- way. This Section shall also be interpreted consistent with Minnesota Rules 7819.0050 — 7819.9950 where possible. To the extent that any provision of this Section cannot be interpreted consistently with the Minnesota Rules, the interpretation most consistent with the Act and other applicable statutory and case law is intended. Subd. 2. Election to Manage the Public Rights-of-Way Pursuant to the authority granted to the city under state and federal statutory, administrative and common law, the city elects pursuant Minnesota Statutes, section 237.163 subdivision 2(b), to manage rights-of-way within its jurisdiction. Subd.3. Definitions. The following definitions apply in this Section of this code. References to "subdivisions" are unless otherwise specified references to subdivisions in this Section. JJT-182079v2 1 SH 155-23 "Abandoned Facility" means a facility no longer in service or physically disconnected from a portion of the operating facility, or from any other facility, that is in use or still carries service. A facility is not abandoned unless declared so by the right-of-way user. "Applicant means any person requesting permission to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way. "City" means the city of Shakopee, Minnesota. For purposes of Subdivision 27, city means its elected officials, officers, employees and agents. "Commission"means the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. "Congested Right-of-Way" means a crowded condition in the subsurface of the public right-of- way that occurs when the maximum lateral spacing between existing underground facilities does not allow for construction of new underground facilities without using hand digging to expose the existing lateral facilities in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, section 216D.04. subdivision 3, over a continuous length in excess of 500 feet. "Construction Performance Bond" means any of the following forms of security provided at permittee's option: 1. Individual project bond; 2. Cash deposit; 3. Security of a form listed or approved under Minnesota Statutes, section. 15.73, subdivision 4. Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the city 5. Self-insurance, in a form acceptable to the city 6. A blanket bond for projects within the city, or other form of construction bond, for a time specified and in a form acceptable to the city. "Degradation" means a decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by excavation in or disturbance of the right-of-way, resulting in the need to reconstruct such right-of-way earlier than would be required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur. "Degradation Cost" subject to Minnesota Rules 7819.1100 means the cost to achieve a level of restoration as determined by the city at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the maximum restoration shown in plates 1 to 13, set forth in Minnesota Rules parts 7819.9900 to 7819.9950. "Degradation Fee" means the estimated fee established at the time of permitting by the city to recover costs associated with the decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by the excavation, and which equals the degradation cost. "Department"means the department of public works of the city. "Department Inspector" means any person authorized by the city to carry out inspections related to the provisions of this Section. JJT-182079v2 2 SH155-23 "Director" means the director of the department of public works of the city, or her or his designee. "Delay Penalty" is the penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation, obstruction,patching, or restoration as established by permit. "Emergency" means a condition that (1) poses a danger to life or health, or of a significant loss of property; or (2) requires immediate repair or replacement of facilities in order to restore service to a customer. "Equipment" means any tangible asset used to install, repair, or maintain facilities in any right- of-way. "Excavate"means to dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate any part of a right-of-way. "Excavation permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this Section, must be obtained before a person may excavate in a right-of-way. An Excavation permit allows the holder to excavate that part of the right-of-way described in such permit. "Excavation Subdivision permit fee" means money paid to the city by an applicant to cover the costs as provided in Subdivision 12. "Facility or Facilities" means tangible asset in the public right-of-way required to provide utility service. The term does not include Facilities to the extent the location and relocation of such Facilities are preempted by Minnesota Statutes, section 161.45, governing utility facility placement in state trunk highways. Facility does not mean electric transmission lines, as distinguished from electric distribution lines. "Five-year project plan" shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the next five years. "High Density Corridor" means a designated portion of the public right-of-way within which telecommunications right-of-way users having multiple and competing facilities may be required to build and install facilities in a common conduit system or other common structure. "Hole" means an excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length less than the width of the pavement. "Local Representative" means a local person or persons, or designee of such person or persons, authorized by a registrant to accept service and to make decisions for that registrant regarding all matters within the scope of this Section. "Management Costs" means the actual costs the city incurs in managing its rights-of-Way, including such costs, if incurred, as those associated with registering applicants; issuing, processing, and verifying right-of-way permit applications; inspecting job sites and restoration HT-182079v2 3 SH155-23 projects; maintaining, supporting, protecting, or moving user facilities during right-of-way work; determining the adequacy of right-of-way restoration; restoring work inadequately performed after providing notice and the opportunity to correct the work; and revoking right-of-way permits. Management costs do not include payment by a telecommunications right-of-way User for the use of the right-of-way, the fees and cost of litigation relating to the interpretation of Minnesota Session Laws 1997, chapter 123; Minnesota Statutes, sections 237.162 or 237.163 or any ordinance enacted under those sections, or the city fees and costs related to appeals taken pursuant to Subdivision 29 of this Section. "Obstruct" means to place any tangible object in a right-of-way so as to hinder free and open passage over that or any part of the right-of-way. "Obstruction Permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this Section, must be obtained before a person may obstruct a right-of-way, allowing the holder to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of that right-of-way, for the duration specified therein. "Obstruction Permit Fee" means money paid to the city by a permittee to cover the costs as provided in Subdivision 12. "Patch or Patching" means a method of pavement replacement that is temporary in nature. A patch consists of(1) the compaction of the subbase and aggregate base, and (2) the replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement for a minimum of two feet beyond the edges of the excavation in all directions. A patch is considered full restoration only when the pavement is included in the city's five year project plan. "Pavement"means any type of improved surface that is within the public right-of-way and that is paved or otherwise constructed with bituminous, concrete, aggregate, or gravel. "Permit"has the meaning given"right-of-way permit"in Minnesota Statutes, section 237.162. "Permittee" means any person to whom a permit to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way has been granted by the city under this Section. "Person" means an individual or entity subject to the laws and rules of this state, however organized, whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or nonprofit, and whether natural, corporate, or political. Probation"means the status of a person that has not complied with the conditions of this Section. "Probationary Period" means one year from the date that a person has been notified in writing that they have been put on probation "Public right-of-way" has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, section 237.162, subdivision 3. JJT-182079v2 4 SH155-23 "Registrant" means any person who (1) has or seeks to have its equipment or facilities located in any right-of-way, or (2) in any way occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of- way or place its facilities or equipment in the right-of-way "Restore or Restoration" means the process by which an excavated right-of-way and surrounding area, including pavement and foundation, is returned to the same condition and life expectancy that existed before excavation. "Restoration Cost" means the amount of money paid to the city by a permittee to achieve the level of restoration according to plates 1 to 13 of Minnesota Rule 7819.1100 Subpart 1, on file with the Director . "Right-of-Way Permit"means either the excavation permit or the obstruction permit, or both, depending on the context, required by this Section. "Right-of-Way User" means (1) a telecommunications right-of-way user as defined by Minnesota Statutes, section 237.162, subdivision 4; or (2) a person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way that is used or intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under law, franchise, or ordinance to use the public right-of-way. "Service or Utility Service" means and includes (1) services provided by a public utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes 216B.02, subdivisions 4 and 6; (2) services of a telecommunications right-of-way user, including transporting of voice or data information; (3) services of a cable communications system as defined in Minnesota Statutes, chapter. 238.02, subdivision 3; (4) natural gas or electric energy or telecommunications services provided by a local government unit; (5) services provided by a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 308A; and (6) water, sewer, steam, cooling or heating services. "Supplementary Application" means an application made to excavate or obstruct more of the right-of-way than allowed in, or to extend, a permit that had already been issued. "Temporary Surface" means the compaction of subbase and aggregate base and replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement only to the edges of the excavation. It is temporary in nature except when the replacement is of pavement included in the city's two-year plan, in which case it is considered full restoration. "Trench" means an excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length equal to or greater than the width of the pavement. "Telecommunication right-of-way User" means a person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way, or seeking to own or control a Facility in the right-of-way, that is used or is intended to be used for transporting telecommunication or other voice or data information. For purposes of this Section, a cable communication system defined and regulated under Minn. Stat. Chap. 238, and telecommunication activities related to providing natural gas or electric energy services whether provided by a public utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section. 216B.02, JJT-182079v2 5 SH 155-23 a municipality, a municipal gas or power agency organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapters. 453 and 453A, or a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 308A, are not telecommunications right-of-way users for purposes of this Section. "Two Year project Plan" shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the next two years. Subd. 4. Administration. The director is the principal city official responsible for the administration of the rights-of-way, right-of-way permits, and the ordinances related thereto. The director may delegate any or all of the duties hereunder. Subd. 5. Utility Coordination Committee. The city may create an advisory utility coordination committee. Participation on the committee is voluntary. It will be composed of any registrants that wish to assist the city in obtaining information and by making recommendations regarding use of the right-of-way, and to improve the process of performing construction work therein. The city may determine the size of such committee and shall appoint members from a list of registrants that have expressed a desire to assist the city Subd. 6. Registration and Right-of-Way Occupancy. A. Registration. Each person who occupies, uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right- of-way or place any equipment or facilities in or on the right-of-way, including persons with installation and maintenance responsibilities by lease, sublease or assignment, must register with the city. Registration will consist of providing application information and paying a registration fee. B. Registration Prior to Work. No person may construct, install, repair, remove, relocate, or perform any other work on, or use any facilities or any part thereof in any right-of- way without first being registered with the city. C. Exceptions. Nothing in this Section shall be construed to repeal or amend the provisions of a city ordinance permitting persons to plant or maintain boulevard plantings or gardens in the area of the right-of-way between their property and the street curb. Persons planting or maintaining boulevard plantings or gardens shall not be deemed to use or occupy the right-of-way, and shall not be required to obtain any permits or satisfy any other requirements for planting or maintaining such boulevard plantings or gardens under this Section. However, nothing herein relieves a person from complying with the provisions of the Minnesota Statutes, chapter 216D, Gopher One Call Law. JJT-182079v2 6 SH155-23 Subd. 7. Registration Information. A. Information Required. The information provided to the city at the time of registration shall include,but not be limited to: (1) Each registrant's name, Gopher One-Call registration certificate number, address and e-mail address if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers. (2) The name, address and e-mail address, if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers of a local representative. The local representative or designee shall be available at all times. Current information regarding how to contact the local representative in an emergency shall be provided at the time of registration. (3) A certificate of insurance or self-insurance: (a) Verifying that an insurance policy has been issued to the registrant by an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota, or a form of self insurance acceptable to the city; (b) Verifying that the registrant is insured against claims for personal injury, including death, as well as claims for property damage arising out of the (i) use and occupancy of the right-of-way by the registrant, its officers, agents, employees and permittees, and (ii) placement and use of facilities and equipment in the right-of-way by the registrant, its officers, agents, employees and permittees, including, but not limited to, protection against liability arising from completed operations, damage of underground facilities and collapse of property; (c) Either naming the city as an additional insured as to whom the coverages required herein are in force and applicable and for whom defense will be provided as to all such coverages or otherwise providing evidence satisfactory to the director that the City is fully covered and will be defended through registrant's insurance for all actions included in Minnesota Rule part 7819.1250; (d) Requiring that the city be notified thirty (30) days in advance of cancellation of the policy or material modification of a coverage term; (e) Indicating comprehensive liability coverage, automobile liability coverage, workers compensation and umbrella coverage established by the city in amounts sufficient to protect the city and JJT-182079v2 7 SI-1155-23 the public and to carry out the purposes and policies of this Section. (4) The city may require a copy of the actual insurance policies if necessary to ensure the director that the policy provides adequate third party claim coverage and city indemnity and defense coverage for all actions included in the indemnity required by Minnesota Rule part 7819.1250. (5) Such evidence as the director may require that the person is authorized to do business in Minnesota. B. Notice of Changes. The registrant shall keep all of the information listed above current at all times by providing to the city information as to changes within fifteen (15) days following the date on which the registrant has knowledge of any change. Subd. 8. Reporting Obligations. A. Operations. Each registrant shall, at the time of registration and by December 1 of each year, file a construction and major maintenance plan for underground facilities with the city. Such plan shall be submitted using a format designated by the city and shall contain the information determined by the city to be necessary to facilitate the coordination and reduction in the frequency of excavations and obstructions of rights-of-way. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: (1) The locations and the estimated beginning and ending dates of all projects to be commenced during the next calendar year (in this section, a "next- year project"); and (2) To the extent known, the tentative locations and estimated beginning and ending dates for all projects contemplated for the five years following the next calendar year(in this section, a"five-year project"). The term"project"in this section shall include both next-year projects and five-year projects. By January 1 of each year the city will have available for inspection in the city's office a composite list of all projects of which the city has been informed of the annual plans. All registrants are responsible for keeping themselves informed of the current status of this list. Thereafter, by February 1, each registrant may change any project in its list of next-year projects, and must notify the city and all other registrants of all such changes in said list. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a registrant may at any time join in a Next-year project of another registrant listed by the other registrant. B. Additional Next-Year Projects. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city will not deny an application for a right-of-way permit for failure to include a project in a plan submitted to the JJT-182079v2 8 SH155-23 city if the registrant has used commercially reasonable efforts to anticipate and plan for the project. Subd. 9. Permit Requirement. A. Permit Required. Except as otherwise provided in this code, no person may obstruct or excavate any right-of-way without first having obtained the appropriate right-of-way permit from the city to do so. (1) Excavation Permit. An excavation permit is required by a registrant to excavate that part of the right-of-way described in such permit and to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of the right-of-way by placing facilities described therein, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. (2) Obstruction Permit. An obstruction permit is required by a registrant to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of right-of-way by placing equipment described therein on the right-of-way, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. An obstruction permit is not required if a person already possesses a valid excavation permit for the same project. B. Permit Extensions. No person may excavate obstruct the right-of-way beyond the date or dates specified in the permit unless (i) such person makes a supplementary application for another right-of-way permit before the expiration of the initial permit, and (ii) a new permit or permit extension is granted. C. Delay Penalty. In accordance with Minnesota Rule 7819.1000 subp. 3 and notwithstanding subdivision 2 of this section, the city shall establish and impose a delay penalty for unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration. The delay penalty shall be established from time to time by city council resolution. D. Permit Display. permits issued under this Section shall be conspicuously displayed or otherwise available at all times at the indicated work site and shall be available for inspection by the city. Subd. 10. Permit Applications. Application for a permit is made to the city. Right-of-way permit applications shall contain, and will be considered complete only upon compliance with the requirements of the following provisions: (1) Registration with the city pursuant to this Section; (2) Submission of a completed permit application form, including all required attachments, and scaled drawings showing the location and area of the JJT-182079v2 9 SH155-23 proposed project and the location of all known existing and proposed facilities. (3) Payment of money due the city for: (a) permit fees, estimated restoration costs and other management costs; (b) prior obstructions or excavations; (c) any undisputed loss, damage, or expense suffered by the city because of applicant's prior excavations or obstructions of the rights-of-way or any emergency actions taken by the city; (d) franchise fees or other charges, if applicable. (4) Payment of disputed amounts due the city by posting security or depositing in an escrow account an amount equal to at least 110% of the amount owing. (5) Posting an additional or larger construction performance bond for additional facilities when applicant requests an excavation permit to install additional facilities and the city deems the existing construction performance bond inadequate under applicable standards. Subd. 11. Issuance of Permit; Conditions. A. Permit Issuance. If the Applicant has satisfied the requirements of this Section, the city shall issue a permit. B. Conditions. The city may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of the permit and the performance of the applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use. Subd. 12. Permit Fees. A. Fee Schedule and Fee Allocation. The city's permit fee schedule shall be available to the public and established in advance where reasonably possible. The permit fees shall be designed to recover the City's actual costs incurred in managing the right-of-way and shall be based on an allocation among all users of the right-of-way, including the city. B. Excavation Permit Fee. The city shall establish an Excavation permit fee in an amount sufficient to recover the following costs: (1) the city management costs; HT-182079v2 10 SH155-23 (2) degradation costs, if applicable. B. Obstruction Permit Fee. The city shall establish the obstruction permit fee and shall be in an amount sufficient to recover the city management costs. C. Payment of Permit Fees. No excavation permit or obstruction permit shall be issued without payment of excavation or obstruction permit fees. The city may allow Applicant to pay such fees within thirty (30) days of billing. D. Non Refundable. permit fees that were paid for a permit that the city has revoked for a breach as stated in Subdivision 22 are not refundable. E. Application to Franchises. Unless otherwise agreed to in a franchise, management costs may be charged separately from and in addition to the franchise fees imposed on a right-of- way user in the franchise. Subd. 13. Right-of-Way Patching and Restoration. A. Timing. The work to be done under the excavation permit, and the patching and restoration of the right-of-way as required herein, must be completed within the dates specified in the permit, increased by as many days as work could not be done because of circumstances beyond the control of the permittee or when work was prohibited as unseasonal or unreasonable under Subdivision 16. B. Patch and Restoration. Permittee must patch its own work. The city may choose either to have the permittee restore the surface and subgrading portions of right-of-way or to restore the surface portion of right-of-way itself. (1) City Restoration. If the city restores the surface portion of right-of-way, permittee shall pay the costs thereof within thirty (30) days of billing. If, following such Restoration, the pavement settles due to permittee's improper backfilling, the permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30) days of billing, all costs associated with correcting the defective work. (2) Permittee Restoration. If the permittee restores the right-of-way itself, it shall at the time of application for an Excavation permit post a construction performance bond in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule 7819.3000. (3) Degradation fee in Lieu of Restoration. In lieu of right-of-way restoration, a right-of-way user may elect to pay a degradation fee. However, the right-of-way user shall remain responsible for patching and the degradation fee shall not include the cost to accomplish these responsibilities. JJT-182079v2 11 SH 155-23 C. Standards. The permittee shall perform patching and restoration according to the standards and with the materials specified by the city and shall comply with Minnesota Rule 7819.1100. D. Duty to Correct Defects. The permittee shall correct defects in patching, or restoration performed by permittee or its agents. permittee upon notification from the city, shall correct all restoration work to the extent necessary, using the method required by the city. Said work shall be completed within five (5) calendar days of the receipt of the notice from the city, not including days during which work cannot be done because of circumstances constituting force majeure or days when work is prohibited as unseasonal or unreasonable under Subdivision 16. E. Failure to Restore. If the permittee fails to restore the right-of-way in the manner and to the condition required by the city, or fails to satisfactorily and timely complete all restoration required by the city, the city at its option may do such work. In that event the permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30) days of billing, the cost of restoring the right-of- way. If permittee fails to pay as required, the city may exercise its rights under the construction performance bond. Subd. 14. Joint Applications. A. Joint application. registrants may jointly apply for permits to excavate or obstruct the right-of-way at the same place and time. B. Shared fees. registrants who apply for permits for the same obstruction or excavation, which the city does not perform, may share in the payment of the obstruction or excavation permit fee. In order to obtain a joint permit, registrants must agree among themselves as to the portion each will pay and indicate the same on their applications. C. With city projects. registrants who join in a scheduled Obstruction or excavation performed by the city, whether or not it is a joint application by two or more registrants or a single application, are not required to pay the excavation or obstruction and degradation portions of the permit fee,but a permit would still be required. Subd. 15. Supplementary Applications. A. Limitation on Area. A right-of-way permit is valid only for the area of the right-of- way specified in the permit. No permittee may do any work outside the area specified in the permit, except as provided herein. Any permittee which determines that an area greater than that specified in the permit must be obstructed or excavated must before working in that greater area (i) make application for a permit extension and pay any additional fees required thereby, and (ii) be granted a new permit or permit extension. B. Limitation on Dates. A right-of-way permit is valid only for the dates specified in the permit. No permittee may begin its work before the permit start date or, except as provided herein, continue working after the end date. If a permittee does not finish the work by the permit JJT-182079v2 12 SH155-23 end date, it must apply for a new permit for the additional time it needs, and receive the new permit or an extension of the old permit before working after the end date of the previous permit. This supplementary application must be submitted before the permit end date. Subd. 16. Other Obligations. A. Compliance With Other Laws. Obtaining a right-of-way permit does not relieve permittee of its duty to obtain all other necessary permits, licenses, and authority and to pay all fees required by the city or other applicable rule, law or regulation. A permittee shall comply with all requirements of local, state and federal laws, including Minn. Stat. 216D.01-.09 (Gopher One Call Excavation Notice System). A permittee shall perform all work in conformance with all applicable codes and established rules and regulations, and is responsible for all work done in the right-of-way pursuant to its permit,regardless of who does the work. B. Prohibited Work. Except in an emergency, and with the approval of the city, no right-of-way Obstruction or excavation may be done when seasonally prohibited or when conditions are unreasonable for such work. C. Interference with Right-of-Way. A permittee shall not so obstruct a right-of-way that the natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways shall be interfered with. Private vehicles of those doing work in the right-of-way may not be parked within or next to a permit area, unless parked in conformance with city parking regulations. The loading or unloading of trucks must be done solely within the defined permit area unless specifically authorized by the permit. Subd. 17. Denial of Permit. The city may deny a permit for failure to meet the requirements and conditions of this Section or if the city determines that the denial is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use. Subd. 18. Installation Requirements. The excavation, backfilling, patching and restoration, and all other work performed in the right- of-way shall be done in conformance with Minnesota Rule 7819.1100 and other applicable local requirements, in so far as they are not inconsistent with the Minnesota Statutes sections 237.162 and 237.163. Subd. 19. Inspection. A. Notice of Completion. When the work under any permit hereunder is completed, the permittee shall furnish a Completion Certificate in accordance Minnesota Rule 7819.1300. B. Site Inspection. permittee shall make the work-site available to the city and to all others as authorized by law for inspection at all reasonable times during the execution of and upon completion of the work. HT-182079v2 13 SH155-23 C. Authority of Director. (1) At the time of inspection the director may order the immediate cessation of any work which poses a serious threat to the life, health, safety or well- being of the public. (2) The director may issue an order to the permittee for any work which does not conform to the terms of the permit or other applicable standards, conditions, or codes. The order shall state that failure to correct the violation will be cause for revocation of the permit. Within ten (10) days after issuance of the order, the permittee shall present proof to the director that the violation has been corrected. If such proof has not been presented within the required time, the director may revoke the permit pursuant to Subdivision 22. Subd. 20. Work Done Without a Permit. A. Emergency Situations. Each registrant shall immediately notify the director of any event regarding its facilities which it considers to be an emergency. The registrant may proceed to take whatever actions are necessary to respond to the emergency. Within two (2) business days after the occurrence of the emergency the registrant shall apply for the necessary permits, pay the fees associated therewith and fulfill the rest of the requirements necessary to bring itself into compliance with this Section for the actions it took in response to the Emergency. If the city becomes aware of an emergency regarding a registrant's facilities, the city will attempt to contact the local representative of each registrant affected, or potentially affected, by the emergency. In any event, the city may take whatever action it deems necessary to respond to the emergency, the cost of which shall be borne by the registrant whose facilities occasioned the emergency. B. Non-Emergency Situations. Except in an emergency, any person who, without first having obtained the necessary permit, obstructs or excavates a right-of-way must subsequently obtain a permit, and as a penalty pay double the normal fee for said permit, pay double all the other fees required by the city code, deposit with the city the fees necessary to correct any damage to the right-of-way and comply with all of the requirements of this Section. Subd. 21. Supplementary Notification. If the obstruction or excavation of the right-of-way begins later or ends sooner than the date given on the permit, permittee shall notify the city of the accurate information as soon as this information is known. JJT-182079v2 14 SH155-23 Subd. 22. Revocation of Permits. A. Substantial Breach. The city reserves its right to revoke any right-of-way permit, without a fee refund, if there is a substantial breach of the terms and conditions of any statute, ordinance, rule or regulation, or any material condition of the permit. A substantial breach by permittee shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following: (1) The violation of any material provision of the right-of-way permit; (2) An evasion or attempt to evade any material provision of the right-of-way permit, or the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any fraud or deceit upon the city or its citizens; (3) Any material misrepresentation of fact in the application for a right-of- way permit; (4) The failure to complete the work in a timely manner; unless a permit extension is obtained or unless the failure to complete work is due to reasons beyond the permittee's control; or (5) The failure to correct, in a timely manner, work that does not conform to a condition indicated on an order issued pursuant to section 19B-19. B. Written Notice of Breach. If the city determines that the permittee has committed a substantial breach of a term or condition of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation or any condition of the permit the city shall make a written demand upon the permittee to remedy such violation. The demand shall state that continued violations may be cause for revocation of the permit. A substantial breach, as stated above, will allow the city to place additional or revised conditions on the permit to mitigate and remedy the breach. C. Response to Notice of Breach. Within twenty-four (24) hours of receiving notification of the breach, permittee shall provide the city with a plan, acceptable to the city, that will cure the breach. permittee's failure to so contact the city, or permittee's failure to timely submit an acceptable plan, or permittee's failure to reasonably implement the approved plan, shall be cause for immediate revocation of the permit. Further, permittee's failure to so contact the city, or permittee's failure to submit an acceptable plan, or permittee's failure to reasonably implement the approved plan, shall automatically place the permittee on probation for one (1) full year. D. Cause for probation. From time to time, the city may establish a list of conditions of the permit, which if breached will automatically place the permittee on probation for one full year, such as, but not limited to, working out of the allotted time period or working on right-of- way grossly outside of the permit authorization. HT-182079v2 15 SH155-23 E. Automatic Revocation. If a permittee, while on probation, commits a breach as outlined above, permittee's permit will automatically be revoked and permittee will not be allowed further permits for one full year, except for Emergency repairs. F. Reimbursement of city costs. If a permit is revoked, the permittee shall also reimburse the city for the city's reasonable costs, including Restoration costs and the costs of collection and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in connection with such revocation. Subd. 23. Mapping Data. Each registrant and permittee shall provide mapping information required by the city in accordance with Minnesota Rules 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. Subd. 24. Undergrounding. A. Purpose. The purpose of Subdivision 24 is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public and is intended to foster (i) safe travel over the right-of-way, (ii) non-travel related safety around homes and buildings where overhead feeds are connected and (iii) orderly development in the city. Location and relocation, installation and reinstallation of Facilities in the right-of-way must be made in accordance with this section. B. Undergrounding of Facilities. Facilities placed in the public right-of-way must be located, relocated and maintained underground pursuant to the terms and conditions of this section and in accordance with applicable construction standards. This section is intended to be enforced consistently with state and federal law regulating right-of-way users, specifically including but not limited to Minnesota Statutes, sections 161.45, 237.162, 237.163, 300.03, 222.37, 238.084 and 216B.36 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Title 47, U.S.C. section 253. C. Undergrounding of Permanent Replacement, Relocated or Reconstructed Facilities. If the City finds that one or more of the purposes set forth in Subd. 24.A. would be promoted, the city may require a permanent replacement, relocation or reconstruction of a Facility of more than 300 feet to be located, and maintained underground, with due regard for seasonal working conditions. For purposes of this section, reconstruction means any substantial repair of or any improvement to existing Facilities. Undergrounding may be required whether a replacement, relocation or reconstruction is initiated by the right-of-way user owning or operating the Facilities, or by the city in connection with (1) the present or future use by the city or other local government unit of the right-of-way for a public project, (2) the public health or safety, or(3) the safety and convenience of travel over the right-of-way. D. Retirement of Overhead Facilities. The city council may determine whether it is in the public interest that all Facilities within the city, or Facilities within certain districts designated by the city, be permanently placed and maintained underground by a date certain or target date, independently of undergrounding required pursuant to Section 4.35 of this Code (new Facilities) and subdivision 24.C. (replacement Facilities). The decision to underground must be preceded by a public hearing, after published notice and written notice to the utilities affected. (Two weeks published: 30 days written.) At the hearing the council must consider items (1) — (4) in subdivision 24.F. of this Section and make findings. Undergrounding may not JJT-182079v2 16 SH155-23 take place until city council has, after hearing and notice, adopted a plan containing items (1) — (6) of subdivision 24.G. of this Section. E. Public Hearings. A hearing must be open to the public and may be continued from time to time. At each hearing any person interested must be given an opportunity to be heard. The subject of the public hearings shall be the issue of whether Facilities in the right-of-way in the city, or located within a certain district, shall all be located underground by a date certain. Hearings are not necessary for the undergrounding required under Subdivision 24.C. of this Section. F. Public Hearing Issues. The issues to be addressed at the public hearings include but are not limited to: (1) The costs and benefits to the public of requiring the undergrounding of all Facilities in the right-of-way. (2) The feasibility and cost of undergrounding all Facilities by a date certain as determined by the city and the affected utilities. (3) The tariff requirements, procedure and rate design for recovery or intended recovery of incremental costs for undergrounding by the utilities from ratepayers within the city. (4) Alternative financing options available if the city deems it in the public interest to require undergrounding by a date certain and deems it appropriate to participate in the cost otherwise borne by the ratepayers. Upon completion of the hearing or hearings, the city council must make written findings on whether it is in the public interest to establish a plan under which all Facilities will be underground, either citywide or within districts designated by the city. G. Undergrounding Plan. If the council finds that it is in the public interest to underground all or substantially all Facilities in the public right of way, the council must establish a plan for such undergrounding. The plan for undergrounding must include at least the following elements: (1) Timetable for the undergrounding. (2) Designation of districts for the undergrounding unless the undergrounding plan is citywide. (3) Exceptions to the undergrounding requirement and procedure for establishing such exceptions. JJT-182079v2 17 SH155-23 (4) Procedures for the undergrounding process, including but not limited to coordination with city projects and provisions to ensure compliance with non-discrimination requirements under the law. (5) A financing plan for funding of the incremental costs if the city determines that it will finance some of the undergrounding costs, and a determination and verification of the claimed additional costs to underground incurred by the utility. (6) Penalties or other remedies for failure to comply with the undergrounding. H. Facilities Location. In addition to complying with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, section 216D.01-.09 ("One Call Excavation Notice System")before the start date of any right-of-way excavation, each registrant who has facilities or equipment in the area to be excavated shall mark the horizontal and vertical placement of all said facilities. Any registrant whose facilities are less than twenty (20) inches below a concrete or asphalt surface shall notify and work closely with the excavation contractor to establish the exact location of its facilities and the best procedure for excavation. Subd. 25. Damage to Other facilities. When the city does work in the right-of-way and finds it necessary to maintain, support, or move a registrant's facilities to protect it, the city shall notify the local representative as early as is reasonably possible. The costs associated therewith will be billed to that registrant and must be paid within thirty (30) days from the date of billing. Each registrant shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any facilities in the right-of-way which it or its facilities damages. Each registrant shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any damage to the facilities of another registrant caused during the city's response to an Emergency occasioned by that registrant's facilities. Subd. 26. Right-of-Way Vacation. Reservation of right. If the city vacates a right-of-way which contains the facilities of a registrant, the registrant's rights in the vacated right-of-way are governed by Minnesota Rules 7819.3200. Subd. 27. Indemnification and Liability By registering with the city, or by accepting a permit under this Section, a registrant or permittee agrees to defend and indemnify the city in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule 7819.1250. Subd. 28. Abandoned and Unusable Facilities. A. Discontinued Operations. A registrant who has determined to discontinue all or a portion of its operations in the city must provide information satisfactory to the city that the .1.1T-182079v2 18 SH 155-23 registrant's obligations for its facilities in the right-of-way under this Section have been lawfully assumed by another registrant. B. Removal. Any registrant who has abandoned facilities in any right-of-way shall remove it from that right-of-way if required in conjunction with other right-of-way repair, excavation, or construction, unless this requirement is waived by the city. Subd. 29. Appeal. A right-of-way user that: (1) has been denied registration; (2) has been denied a permit; (3) has had permit revoked; or (4) believes that the fees imposed are invalid, may have the denial, revocation, or fee imposition reviewed, upon written request, by the city council. The city council shall act on a timely written request at its next regularly scheduled meeting. A decision by the city Council affirming the denial, revocation, or fee imposition will be in writing and supported by written findings establishing the reasonableness of the decision. Subd. 30. Reservation of Regulatory and Police Powers. A permittee's or registrant's rights are subject to the regulatory and police powers of the city to adopt and enforce general ordinances necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. Subd. 31. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Section is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court or administrative agency of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. If a regulatory body or a court of competent jurisdiction should determine by a final, non-appealable order that any permit, right or registration issued under this Section or any portions of this Section is illegal or unenforceable, then any such permit, right or registration granted or deemed to exist hereunder shall be considered as a revocable permit with a mutual right in either party to terminate without cause upon giving sixty (60) days written notice to the other. The requirements and conditions of such a revocable permit shall be the same requirements and conditions as set forth in the permit, right or registration, respectively, except for conditions relating to the term of the permit and the right of termination. Nothing in this Section precludes the city from requiring a franchise agreement with the applicant, as allowed by law, in addition to requirements set forth herein. Sec. 2. This ordinance is effective from and after its passage and publication. JJT-182079v2 19 SH155-23 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 HT-182079v2 20 SH155-23 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9900 UTILITY TRENCH RESTORATION; PLATES 1 AND 2. 2 Subpart 1. Plate 1. l •J O Q 0 O 0 x JI N P Ill j I J• b CCy C 1 1 1. I irs III W � � OS • o �— ID IS QQ -.A J E o ... i 1 us 1 II i — 4:1-- i___ it PII? e 11 is o aat I - "sv Sg vi s• __ IMO; z ns e • ii T. z �i .:i I i I HWY TRENCH RESTORATION PUTS 1 TWA TPAYEII0(T 010 S YEARS OLD Ma Sca 7819.9900 18 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 Subp. 2. Plate 2. a p Y it ✓r a) c 1 I I ; c P rn 0 4 J _ N _ I. al 1 C C u r J I J Ti W = . 1 i cc I •• • W — — .* £ JS `c s I f a € i i f r • a se ..) C fr HJIGI I 11 I I I• s• o S o • I ? • s 41 al. z at i N I .1: • . ,..., • ...4 • iJ . I i cn Z 1 I MY TRENCH RESTOQATIONPLATE 2 TYPICAL PAVETIENT 0 b 5 TEARS OU) We 3-5-11 Ib Sea 7819.9900 19 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9905 UTILITY TRENCH RESTORATION; PLATES 3 AND 4. 2 Subpart 1. Plate 3. 1 J t O — � o I C Y i . J V 0 O J L I 1 — i 1 z N + ` c C i z.z T el 2 : u I C J■ ! & o a' W � I Q Z 2 — I — .3"1. E J 'a � c 1 > d u a c J p 1 G 9 • O. .S -+ E .2 I ' o w If.E S A E3 L- . i j . ii11111! c o I II d 1 0 1 4 �. i o s J ^y•. a: C• C cn' 9 I $ LI n'TRENCH RESTORATION TYPICAL PAVEMENT 5 YEARS OLD TO 5 YEAR PROST PUN Oak 3-5-!! i.S*3 7819.9905 20 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 Subp. 2. Plate 4. J I I II / i 1 2 I J J 1 3 I s al I 0 L, J 1 2 L, I g N • r e iLi _ ,f,, E s ) 4 g ` E > v 8 P T. 1 I h iii -§ o $ - 1e `o o t c 2g E r ► 11 ii • g cC ._ V 1 v illit 11 rn s _ . lj %- s 0 ii iti ma1 1 ! UTILE TRW H RESTORATION PLATE 4 I TYPICAL PREVENT 5 YEARS OLD TO S YEAR PROJECT PIAN Odc S-S-Ig No Soh 7819.9905 21 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9910 UTILITY TRENCH RESTORATION; PLATE 5. u 1 Cl e • Ia IIIu = it I I e = o 1 s • r s I B I 1 1 s I • I , I J 4 — N N N a I =i E� e s •}• « ii i - )1 N N 1 N 'a I = Z ii � I Os 1 1 • s L g 1 0- I II ,.i. I I fl o i $Ii " I `s f s It �� • U) 9 .. a A LTo a z s MUTT TROD 1E510QATIX IN MR PROJECT PUN big 344 PLATE 5 OR unm TRE101 PATCH lb Seal 7819.9910 22 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9915 UTILITY TRENCH RESTORATION; PLATE 6. 1 1 1 • u I i( v v 0 • I i Cl' 3 r1 1 0 4 g" r I Lkg 1 1 EF r i.t`i — 1 t 1 co 0 1 zi cc ' _ 1- o .f.: g il J i s E 1 1 1y 3 • o 1 Ibi f 1 tatf' S C l It CCayN1ii ✓ 0• %4 Pri • I unm TRENCH RESTCRADON } PLATE 6 'MAL PAYOUT N 2 YEAR PROJECT PUN OR TEMPORARY SURFACE w Ws 7819.9915 23 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9920 UTILITY HOLE RESTORATION; PLATE 7. 1YPKAi HOLE EXCAVATION , ----- tteN.Z: n r LV T G il 1 • . TYPICAL RESTORATION I T-- Shat Width(M >s (Mos) --t 2 i s*d Cii6ii'•_____ las u■ • kit 1 u� fY.e6r- -- ----_______-- tat j Coutral s Ike tile ' Jai -_-_k � rhr�Irl --\ Cards t•lir i; Note 1:Ominous nous Pavement Alf lane replacement of base and binder to the nearest canshudion joint or transverse crack .Ful street width mil k overlay of rearing carne Note Z Concrete Pavement Fun panel replacement for concrete pavement Note 3:Al Other Types of Surfaces and Pavements *placement on in—idnd materials UTILITY HOLE RESTORATIONOak74-38PLATE 7 TYPICAL PAVEMENT 0 TO S YEARS OLD No Scale 74 7819.9920 24 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9925 UTILITY HOLE RESTORATION; PLATE 8. TYPICAL HOLE EIGYATION • TYPICAL IIESTORATON 1~ Simi WM Naim) -7 Sir ait re Wel Ur tee lie i •►�_ r e s t 01.1 _Lt II I 33 Note 1: Illumines Pavement AR lane replacement of base,binder,and rearing course to the nearest znstnudion;mint x transverse crock Note L•Concrete Pavement -Full pond replacement for concrete pavement Note 3:MI Other Types of Surfaces and Pavements •Replacerneid irRh in—kind Maids UTU1I NOTE RESTORATION PLATE 8 TYPICAL PAVEMENT 5'f EARS 0LD TOS YEAR PROJECT PUN :74-96 No Scale 7819.9925 25 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9930 UTILITY HOLE RESTORATION; PLATE 9. TYPICAL HOLE (OVATION s14. i � e >s s TYPICAL RESTORATION Street Width (Nax.) \� .��` »--Law lint s4 4 f ire Ug . • -lar line e g E • tae lir Lae tin 82 Note 1: Numinous Pavement •Repioce base, binder and wearing course for width of hole plus 2 ft. on either side of cut Note 2:Concrete Pavement •Aeplat width of hale plus 2 ft. on either side of cut Note 3:Al Other Types of Surfaces and Pavements .Replace width of hole plus 2 ft. on either side of cut UDLJTT Half RESTORATION INS YEAR74-91 9 Date:PROJECT PIAN OR UTWIY HOLE PATCH No kale 7819.9930 26 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9935 UTILITY HOLE RESTORATION; PLATE 10 TYPICAL HOLE EXCAVATION 1 s 1 s L ..,} == ....:______÷._ s.-- - _ _ +. i L. L — t 1 1 11 1 1— TYPICAL RESTORATIONI I-- Street Width (Mal.)—1 — f ' // erga _ r - r— _beth 11 t Ad kne tie .. IC x ! r.r, ._ .I— F tar tin drkeis_kid .� tar tie Nate 1:&hunirces Pavement -Replace base, bider and rearing course for width of halt only Nail 2:Concrete Pavement -Replace width of hole only Mote 3: All Other Types of Surfaces and Pavements -Replacement rah in—kind materials for width of hole only UTILITY HOLE RESTORATION Data]_6-9b PLATE 10 TYPICAL PAM IN 2 YEAR PROJECT PLAN OR TEMPORARY SURFACE No Scot 7819.9935 27 . 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9940 TYPICAL ROAD PLAN; PLATE 11. OI , , 1, I I ,c, I i I- I i 1 W � G I is gI C:71 55 ; I I I , It tuns , Iib oar I, I ROW.----L----J I 1 1 j� o t�,e .0(-- 3 r Grovel Rood m I ! O(çUne �' I I I Utility— — I i�p71 OK.... I , I CONCRETE I z A ', , DRIVEWAY I I , \ L L Iut t/ I I 1 I I ' r1I-�I i I1 GRAVEL o d' 13' C ME1WlY � � AiI I , 1 , Note: All utility lines must be pushed under roads, shoulders and driveways unless other construction methods ore approved by the Local Governmental Unifi TYP►CAL ROAD PLAN Da 1-H* PLATE 11 No sale 7819.9940 28 04/19/99 [REVISOR] RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9945 TYPICAL ROAD RESTORATION; PLATE 12. Section A—A Section A—A Restore Gravel Surface Restore Gravel Surface Trench Plow Goal Wool Groot Sitoee -r-J r „ b to densitl Section 8-8 Restore Gravel Surface . (Plow or Trench) t-- 1 m greeter Compact subgrode to ongnol demil Section C—C Full Panel Restoration: Concrete or Bituminous 0' ay Si-- or Path 1' Note 1: Restore oa surfaces to original condition with in—kind materials (imported or found on site) TYPICAL ROAD, DRIVEWAY, OR PATH RESTORATION Data 9-25-98 PLATE 12 No Scale 7819.9945 29 04/19/99 [REVISOR) RR/KS AR2986ST 1 7819.9950 TYPICAL ROAD SHOULDER RESTORATION; PLATE 13. Trench Installation Restore shoulder to itaid materterielis with I Top sod seed and/or sod 1 t Replace subgrade w�lh 1 a greater approved compacted til Trench — Compact subgrode to original densly Plow Installation Restore shoulder to original condition with in—kind materiels Too soil seed'and/or sod Plow 1 or greater ( 1 Compact subgrode to U original density Note 1: Restore all surfaces to orittjnal condition with in—kind materials (imported or found on site) TYPICAL ROAD SHOWER RESTORATI011 p 9-25-98 PLATE 13 Sedan 0-0 No Scale 30 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA MODEL RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE COMMENTS Sec . 1 . 01 . .. ' .• . •s .• - It has not been proven that an excavation in the street, if done properly, has any detrimental effect on the street . In fact, once the street has been seal coated it is difficult to find the patch. Minnesota Statute 237 . 163 . Subd. 6 . indicates that fees be based on actual costs and be based on an allocation to all users of the right-of-way, including the Local Government Unit . Sec . 1 . 03 . Definitions_ Bond. Minnegasco suggests that the city consider a multi-year continuing bond if it is found that a bond is necessary. Degradation cost . i . Costs will be different if utility rather than city completes the restoration. ii . Plates as developed are maximums . Minnesota Statute 237 . 163 . indicates that the right-of-way be returned to the condition that existed before the excavation. Patch or Patching. See comment above. A patch, if done correctly, will, in most cases, return the street to the condition that existed prior to the excavation. Probation or Probationary Period. These are not part of the PUC State-Wide Rules . Sec. 1 . 07 . Registration Information (b) Local Representative. Minnegasco has local representatives for several different functions. While some of these functions overlap, it is unreasonable to expect them all to be available at all times . Minnegasco has an emergency phone number for those occurrences . Sec. 1 . 08 . Reporting Obligations Minnegasco' s distribution systems within many of the Cities are in place and well established. Any projects on our system will be in conjunction with a city project . System expansion projects, if and when they occur, are customer driven. In most cases the city will know about the need before we do. Gas utilities usually use the winter months to collect and evaluate system pressure and flow data. We would not know of a need to reinforce our system, if required, until at least March. Sec . 1 . 09. Permit Requirements Subd. 2 . Permit Extension. This requirement is overly burdensome on both the director and the utility. The director should be able to waive the requirements for cause . Subd. 3 . Delay Penalty. The director should be able to waive the requirements for cause. Minnegasco would like to continue the current procedure of informing most Cities monthly about work completed within the City on service lines and other existing facilities . If required, fees can be paid with the notification or when invoiced. We currently do this in most Cities . Sec. 1 . 13 . : ' • s -• - . . a s• . s•. :- • •. Subd. 2 . Patch and Restoration. Minnegasco prefers to restore its excavations. We question whether the city even wants to be involved in restoring our work. Sec. 1 . 15 . .. -u- s . t.. ' •• This section again is overly burdensome on both the director and the utility. See comments under Sec. 1 . 08 . Sec. 1 . 16 . Other Obligations Subd. 2 . Prohibited work. Except in an Emergency, QM with the approval of the Director, no Right-of-Way obstruction or excavation may be done when seasonally prohibited or when conditions are unreasonable for such work. A new home or business may require service . Subd. 3 . Interference with Right-of-Way. A Permittee shall not interfere with the natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways . Personal vehicles of those doing work in the Right-of-Way may not be parked within or next to a permit area, unless parked in conformance with City parking regulations. The loading or unloading of trucks must be done solely within the defined permit area unless specifically authorized by the permit . Sec . 1 . 17 . Denial of Permit The Director must be extremely careful in denying permits. The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that private utilities such as gas, electric, and telephone have as much right to use the Right- of-Way as sewer or water utilities. If a permit is denied, the director must inform the applicant of the reasons for the denial . Sec . 1 . 19. Tnap-ction Subd. 1 . Notice of Completion. If the city needs and/or wants a completion certificate we will be happy to comply. In most cases the city will know when we are completed before Minnegasco ' s office staff . Sec. 1 .22 . Revocation of P rmi Subd. 1 . Substantial Breach. 3rd line : . . . applicable statute, ordinance, rule or regulation, . . . Subd. 2 . Written Notice of Breach. The last sentence is not needed. The director cannot add additional installation conditions on a gas utility other than restoration. If we are already restoring to the previous condition, by law, what more can be done. Subd. 3 . Response to notice of breach. It may be impossible to develop a plan to cure a breach within twenty-four (24) hours . A Permittee should be able to contact the director within twenty- four (24) hours to start the plan process with the Director. Subds . 4 and 5 . Probation and Revocation. While Minnegasco does not intend to ever have a revocation or require probation, these actions are not part of PUC rules . Sec . 1 .24 . Location and R to ion of a ili i Placement of facilities in a particular location within the Right- of-Way must take into account the current and anticipated uses of the Right-of-Way and the distinct engineering, construction, operation, and maintenance characteristics of each type of use. We would object to relocating facilities not in direct conflict with grade changes or other infrastructure conflicts that could be avoided. The facilities we have in the right-of-way have a right to be there. In addition property taxes are paid on these facilities . Concern for continued cost effective service is required. Sec . 1 .25 . Pre-excavation Facility and Fac l i t;i es T,ocati os Minn. Stat . §216D provides adequate regulation for pre-excavation facility locations . Regardless of depth hand digging by an excavator to expose the facility is still required by Minnesota Statutes §216D. 01- . 09 . Current buried facility locating technology does not allow for accurate depth locations . The excavator must plan on hand digging to expose any indicated buried facility. The City of Minneapolis is using the following based on comments from not only Minnegasco but also the other utilities : Pre-excavation facility location. In addition to complying with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D. 01- . 09 ("One call excavation notice system") before the start date of any right-of-way excavation, each registrant who has facilities located in the area to be excavated shall be responsible to mark the horizontal placement of all said facilities. To the extent its records contain such information, each registrant shall provide information regarding the approximate vertical location of facilities to excavators upon request. Nothing in this subsection is meant to limit the rights, duties and obligations of the facility owners or excavators as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, section 216D. 01- . 09. Any right-of-way user whose facilities are less than twenty (20) inches below a concrete or asphalt surface shall notify and work closely with the excavation contractor in an effort to establish and mark the exact horizontal and vertical location of its facility and the and the best procedure for excavation. Sec. 1 .26 . I. ii.. - . • .- - Minnegasco has always assisted cities in locating, supporting, and or moving or looping our facilities and will continue to do so. We object to charges for work on sewer or water as they are also users of the Right-of-Way. If the city is excavating in the Right-of-Way as a management function we will assist and depending on the circumstances may accept costs . Secs. 1 . 27 and 1 .28 Please refer to franchise agreements . Sec. 1 .29 . Abandoned and Unusable FacilitieR Minnegasco has been installing and abandoning facilities in its distribution system for over 100 years. Some of these facilities have been abandoned in place with no adverse effects . Removing buried facilities that have been abandoned along most streets will delay both the city' s project and Minnegasco ' s . This portion of the LMC Model Ordinance was written in response to the Telephone Industry Deregulation. Removing abandoned natural gas facilities may be appropriate for heavily traveled or high density Rights-of-Way. It is not necessary for residential streets nor is it a fire or safety hazard. CITY OF SHAKOPEE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE RELIANT ENERGY MINNEGASCO COMMENTS Subd. 1. Findings,Purpose,and Intent. Reliant Energy Minnegasco and other private utilities pay property taxes on the facilities that they have in the public rights-of-way as well as on private property and in easements. During 2000 Reliant Energy Minnegasco will pay$168,730.00 in personal property taxes and an additional$3,416 in real estate taxes for its facilities in Shakopee. Subd. 3.Definitions. "Construction Performance Bond" Reliant Energy Minnegasco suggests that the city consider a multi-year continuing bond if it is found that a bond is necessary. "Excavate". Excavate means to dig any place. This could be titled Right-of-Way Excavation. "Hole"Confusing definition. See Trench. "Management Costs" Management costs do not include the costs of supporting other utilities while working on city utilities such as water and sewer as these are other utilities governed by the Act and Rules. "Patch or Patching" In most cities; in many, if not most, cases a good patch restores the right-of-way to the condition that existed prior to the excavation. "Restore or Restoration" See comment for"Patch". . "Temporary Surface" See comment for patch. Would rather see a patch used unless the city is actually in contract for street to be replaced. This definition would not work very well in a Mill and Overlay project. "Trench" Confusing definition. See Hole. A trench is a excavation that is much longer than it is wide and can go in any direction. Subd. 6.Registration and Right-of-Way Occupancy. A. Registration. How does registration work for a utility that already has a Franchise Agreement with the city? Subd. 7.Registration Information. Local Representative. Reliant Energy Minnegasco has local representatives for several different functions. While some of these functions overlap, it is unreasonable to expect them all to be available at all times. Minnegasco has an emergency phone number for those occurrences. Subd. 8. Reporting Obligations. Minnegasco's distribution systems within the city of Shakopee are in place and well established. Any projects on our system will be in conjunction with a city project. System expansion projects, if and when they occur,are customer driven. In most cases the city will know about the need before we do. Gas utilities usually use the winter months to collect and evaluate system pressure and flow data. We would not know of a need to reinforce our system,if required,until at least March. Subd. 9. Permit Requirement. Reliant Energy Minnegasco agrees with the need for permits. We would like to meet with City Staff to develop permit procedures and fees that are fair to the city and the utilities and that are cost effective and easy to manage. Subd. 17. Denial of Permit. Utilities such as natural gas, electric, and telephone are essential services. These utilities as well as cable have the right to use the public right-of-way. The city must be extremely careful when refusing a permit. Subd. 22. Revocation of Permits. See comments for Subd. 17. C.Response to Notice of Breach If a condition is so bad that it may require revocation of the permit, the utility may not be able to put a plan together in twenty-four hours. They should,however,respond to the notice and start the planning or design process within twenty-four hours. Subd. 24. Under Grounding. H.Facility Locations Minn. Stat. §216D provides adequate regulation for pre-excavation facility locations. Regardless of depth hand digging by an excavator to expose the facility is still required by Minnesota Statutes §216D.01-.09. Current buried facility locating technology does not allow for accurate depth locations. The excavator must plan on hand digging to expose any indicated buried facility. We suggest the following wording: In addition to complying with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D.01-.09 ("One call excavation notice system') before the start date of any right-of-way excavation, each registrant who has facilities located in the area to be excavated shall be responsible to mark the horizontal placement of all said facilities. To the extent its records contain such information, each registrant shall provide information regarding the approximate vertical location of facilities to excavators upon request. Nothing in this subsection is meant to limit the rights, duties and obligations of the facility owners or excavators as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, section 216D.01-.09. Any right-of-way user whose facilities are less than twenty (20) inches below a concrete or asphalt surface shall notes and work closely with the excavation contractor in an effort to establish and mark the exact horizontal and vertical location of its facility and the and the best procedure for excavation. Subd.25.Damage to Other Facilities Reliant Energy Minnegasco has always assisted cities in locating, supporting, and or moving or looping our facilities and will continue to do so. We object to charges for work on sewer or water as they are also users of the Right-of-Way. If the city is excavating in the Right-of-Way as a management function we will assist and depending on the circumstances may accept costs. Subds.26 and 27 Right-of-Way Vacation and Indemnification and Liability. Please refer to franchise agreement. Subd.28.Abandoned and Unusable Facilities. Reliant Energy Minnegasco has been installing and abandoning facilities in its distribution system for over 100 years. Some of these facilities have been abandoned in place with no adverse effects. Removing buried facilities that have been abandoned along most streets will delay both the city's project and Reliant Energy Minnegasco's. Removing abandoned natural gas facilities may be appropriate for heavily traveled or high density Rights-of-Way. It is not necessary for residential streets nor is it a fire or safety hazard. v JUN-2y-2000 1 :44 f-NUM bHHKUHLL NUBL 1 L U I 1 L 1 I 1 t5 IU 44bb'(11:1 H.02 A SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILInc8 COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Bruce Loney,Public Woks Director FROM: Joseph D.Adams,Administrative Assistant RE: RIGHT OF WAY ORDINANCE DATE: 6/28/00 I have been asked to review the proposed ordinance and oft you Shakopee Public Utilities perspective and comments. Attached to this memo is another from Lou VanHaut,Utilities Manager,that expesses his thoughts and concerns. Since the proposed ordinance does in fact contain language requiring uncle rounding of existing overhead d lines,I draw your attention to Lou's comments about the effect on Shakopee Public Utilities. I would only acid that I question why the undacgnding section is included in Shaklopee's proposed ordinance when it is not,as I understand it,in the League of Cities model ordinance. The reasons listed seem to indicate that overhead facilities are inherently less safe than underground facilities. Electric utility companies must design,install and maintain their overhead facilities in conformance with the National Electric Safety Code. For some time now there has been a growing concern both here,and expressed by the representatives of the other utility ovagsmies,that utilities are being squeezed into a smaller and smaller area in which to place our facilities. This has lead to expanded efforts to coordinate joint trenching operations amongst all the utility companies. Historically,Shakopee Public Utilities has been a pioneer in the joint trenching of wire,ie. SPU electric,US West telephone and Am ak/ParagoniTime Warner cable television, utility lines. These joint trenching activities have been practiced in Shakopee since the 1970's. In the past few years with the advent of private streets that are narrower than public street right of ways,and in and around commercial areas,we have expanded our joint trenching activities to include Minnegasco's natural gas lines. Last year there was an effort to develop standard locations within the right of way and utilities easements for the utility curries to place our facilities. On the surface,this sounds like a good idea. To have a reserved location would be a plus. Representatives from the other utility companies have advised us that similar efforts have been have been started in other cities from time to time,but it always falls apart before coming to + JUIV'G —GkXJkJ 1J•44 rrsuiI Jflt-INUf CC rUDLIL U11L1I1GJ IU 44.J0f1O conclusion. Will this light of way ordinance load to renewed efforts to develop standard locations for utility facilities' My only additional comment cont ns the language exp the property owner from the ordinance requirements in regards to planting of trees and other landscape materials. The ordinance seems to encourage plantings over the area the utility lines would be buried. We believe this to be a bad idea. The restoration costs for repairs will increase as a result, as will the frequency of need to do repairs. Tree roots are no better for tmderground lines than tree branches are for overhead lines. If utilities are to be given a designated location in which to install ourundecgrotaid des,it would be appreciated if that area was free and clear of obstructions and potential interference as much as possible. Trees,berms and elaborate Lmdscaping should be kept outside the utility corridors. Thank you fir the opportunity to provide input on this issue. I will plan to attend the Council meeting on 7/5/00 to answer any questions regarding our conn a nts. 1"9.J4..,I 1 V I .C.) 1 TO: Joe Adams 6(.7" �FROM: Lou Van Flout RE: Proposed City ROW (Right Of Way) Ordinance DATE: 6/23/2000 Enclosed is the latest communication on this. As I believe you already know, you are asked to convey SPUC's perspective to City staff and City Council on the matter. In view of your other pressing responsibilities, I would expect you can give this only so much attention. But please apply your best efforts, as usual, to the matter. I have not had time to review whether the undergrounding of existing overhead lines is still in this draft of the ROW ordinance. There seemed to be conflicting indications on this from the City at the last SPUC meeting. But if it is, then it would be worth noting as a general comment that although all utilities are nominally treated equally, I feel it is clear that the impact on electric utilities will be much more than the impact will be on cable TV wires (for example) . And further, of all electric utilities, the impact on SPUC will be much greater than on any other, for at least 3 reasons: 1. Shakopee is growing at an extremely fast rate, so replacing existing streets having existing electric facilities will probably occur much more often here than in the average community, 2. while other utilities with larger service areas will be able to spread their costs across a larger customer base outside the immediate area, SPUC will have to spread it across our customer base here, 3 . Other electric utilities are either in newly established (underground) areas only, or are in an industrial area where they are less likely to face roads being rebuilt . SPUC has a lot of plant along roads that might be rebuild as development nears, and some of that plant was put in (in compliance with existing requirements) before the rebuilding of those roads could be engineered - meaning those lines could not be economically buried to start with. Please convey the fact that these comments are not opposition to a ROW ordinance, only to convey to City staff and or City Council why SPUC has to take a cautious course on the matter. c:C L44/5o•u 1'wef ti e i a JVI'1 GJ LVVV 1.J'�J I IVI ....I II IIVI �� I VLl La� V 11I_A I ate.,. I V ��JV I 1 .VJ SI—JAKOPEE June 22, 2000 RECEIVED Lou VanHout Shakopee Public Utilities Commission JUN 2 3 2000 1040 E. 4th Avenue Shakopee,MN 55379 SHAK.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. Dear Lou: Please find enclosed the City of Shakopee's proposed Right-of-Way Management Ordinance which will be discussed at the July 5, 2000 Council meeting. Also enclosed is a Notice of Public Meeting on this ordinance. Please review and if you have written comments, please submit them by June 29, 2000 to Mark McNeill, City Administrator. Also, if you wish to be heard, please attend the July 5,2000 Council meeting. Sincerely, 4/1‘k) Bruce Loney, P. . Public Works Director BL/pmp ORDINANCE COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmen Street South• Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-13.51 • 612-445-3650 • FAX 612-445-6718 TOTAL P.05 Proposed Right-of-Way Ordinance City of Shakopee Comments by Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative Many of our concerns revolve around un-addressed questions or issues that arise in reading the proposed Ordinance. Specifically, what will the schedule of charges be and what will they be based on? • Are the charges flat rate or actual? • Will there be registration fee for existing plant and if so how much? Note that that existing plant was generally already installed with a permit fee already. Will installations into new developments require a permit and also permit fee? • Be aware that permit fees will become a pass through to the developer. Are installations in an easement, within private property, under the same requirements as facilities within the boulevard right of way? Subd.6 C. suggests property owners have the unrestricted right to plant or construct gardens or other obstructions that could seriously interfere with installation or maintenance of utilities. This is counter to the best interest of the general public. Many jobs are subcontracted out to subcontractors. How do the certificate of insurance or self-insurance provisions pertain to this situation? Will SPUC incur all the same kind of fees, requirements and permits required of all other utilities? • We would insist on no unfair advantage or treatment to any utility. MVEC would hereby request membership on the Utility Coordination Committee if established. What are the cities specific mapping requirements and will information in addition to our standard processes be required? The Undergrounding requirements in many cases are not practical. Reimbursement by the City, if expecting existing facilities be replaced, would be expected. We do not have a problem with the requirement wen applied within the body of a new development. Facility Location must conform to state law and the GSOC requirements. Subd.25 provisions allow the City to relocate or handle our electrical facilities incurs significant City liability and safety issues. We do not allow unsupervised handling of our facilities and object to this provision and the provision that if the City damages someone else's facilities when you move ours, we are liable. We object to the probationary Period provisions of the ordinance. Reasonable delays as noted in NSP's comments should be required. Prompt turn around of permits from the City should be expected with a commitment as to the maximum time to get confirmation or reason for denial. What will be the maximum permit duration? Extensions sound like they will be costly and time consuming and yet unavoidable if reasonable windows of time are not accommodated. If applied to all "Energy Providers" MVEC would prefer to incorporate management cost into a franchise agreement as referenced in Subd.12 E. A provision for shared fees as noted in Subd.14 B. is a good idea especially since nearly all of our work is coordinated as a joint installation with other utilities. With the original draft ordinance first arriving by mail at our office on the 26th and a subsequent revision coming on the 27th from the City and a deadline of written comments by June 29, adequate time was not afforded to do a fully referenced response to all the issues MVEC has concerns about. In addition to the general statements and concerns expressed in the above summary, I would note that we concur with nearly all of the concerns expressed in NSP's response to this proposed ordinance. We would encourage further careful study of this topic with appropriate time allocation to make informed decisions on an ordinance that will affect your City; its residents and the utilities that try to provide your City service. Ronald Jabs Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative Community Relations Specialist. 6/29/2000 TOTAL P.O3 /1/4 9. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Amendment to the Zoning Map rezoning property from Old Shakopee Residential (R-1C)to Medium Density Residential(R2) APPLICANT: EverGreen Real Estate Bert Notermann and Judy Ess—Property Owners MEETING DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: EverGreen Real Estate has requested that the City amend its zoning map to rezone property currently zoned Old Shakopee Residential(R-1C)to Medium Density Residential(R2). The property is located north of 56 Avenue and west of Adams Street. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for medium density residential development. At its June 8,2000,meeting,the Planning Commission took public testimony and reviewed this request. The Planning Commission recommended approval(4—3 vote)of this request to the City Council. Provided for your reference is a copy of the June 8,2000 memorandum to the Planning Commission. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the request to rezone property from Old Shakopee Residential(R-1C)to Medium Density Residential(R2). 2. Deny the request to rezone property from Old Shakopee Residential(R-1C)to Medium Density Residential(R2). 3. Table the decision and request additional information from the applicant and/or staff. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer a motion to approve Ord.No. 569,An Ordinance Amending the City of Shakopee's Zoning Map by Rezoning Property from Old Shakopee Residential(R-1C)to Medium Density Residential(R2). 4/(il WL----1 ulie Klima Planner II g:1cc\2000kd1620\tezevergreen.doc ORDINANCE NO. 569,FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ADOPTED IN CITY CODE SEC. 11.03 BY REZONING LAND GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF 5TH AVENUE AND WEST OF ADAMS STREET FROM OLD SHAKOPEE RESIDENTIAL(R-1C) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(R2) WHEREAS, EverGreen Real Estate, the Applicant, and Bert Notermann and Judy Ess, property owners, have requested the rezoning of land from Old Shakopee Residential (R-1C)to Medium Density Residential(R2); WHEREAS,the subject property is legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 12, Block 8, Koepers Addition, Scott County,Minnesota WHEREAS, notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on June 8, 2000, at which time all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council heard the matter at its meeting of June 20, 2000, and found that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the area of the City within which it is located. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1 - That the zoning map adopted in City Code Sec. 11.03 is hereby amended by rezoning the property referenced herein, from Old Shakopee Residential(R-1C)Zone to Medium Density Residential (R2)Zone. Section 2 -Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of , 2000. 0+:605/00 WED 15:21 FAX 6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON 0 001 { L N`l RCAL ESTATE' DcvCLOPMCNT CORPORATION 5212 Hope Street Prior Lake. MN 55372 ;� �� (61 Z)806-0406 111 JUL Fax (612) 831-1869 2000 i By Facsimile Cover Sheet TO: 51/Lc_ aiwtior FAX: 113 - 8 FROM: Greg McCtenahan DATE: 1 — --'10-0 0 PAGES: (o (including this cover sheet) ilik RE: 2 ff-Q--c"- MESSAGE: _ Ai.Nr C -- cerviul_ aLvv4t c2>y etc o _ - .r5 A . CL. c. c err C Q 1 Cil) %t , � .�-,� 013-r-LcOl•k4 � o-t. 01.5 AT CY)Cc.447-'1%-j. ti1/44.3<y . 07/05/00 WED 15:22 FAX 6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON Ia 002 MARSHVIEW TOWNHOMES - 32 Units Households with children 28/32 = 88% Female Head of Household with children - 22 = 69% Male Head of Household with children - 6 = 19% Households with No children - 4 = 12% Total Households 32 Incomes (31) '4 - 8 $41,043 $36,724 $36,057 $35,415 $33,945 $33,861 Median $27,500 $32,047 Average $26,391 $31,735 Upper '/< (8) $35,103 Middle 'h (15) $26.599 Bottom '/ (8) $17,287 1/2-15 $30,291 $29,150 $28,626 It of Children 56 _ 32 HH = 1.75/H11 $28,426 Greatest# children in HH - 4 $27,704 Largest Household - 6 $27,692 $27,545 $27,500 $26,374 $26,230 $25,893 $23,952 $23,840 $23,283 $22,476 $22,384 $21,829 $20,376 $19,858 $19,444 $16,880 $15,090 $ 2,436 155283.wpa 07705/00 WED 15:22 FAX 6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON a003 EVERGREEN POINTE TOWNHOMES -43 Units Households with children 35/43 = 81% Female Head of Household with children - 25 = 58% Male Head of Household with children - 10 = 23% Household with No Children 8 = 19% Total Households 43 Senior 1 Incomes: 10 $33,644 Median $21,840 $32,616 Project Average $21,046 $31,804 Upper '4 Average (10) $30,685 $30,800 Middle tfi (22) $23,188 $30,470 Bottom 'A Average (11) $ 9,199 $30,328 $30,205 $30,007 $28,777 # of children 73 _ 43HH= 1.7/HH $28,202 22 $27,379 $21,840 $26,798 $21,485 $26,475 $21,400 $26,016 $21,256 $26,000 $20,874 $24,444 $20,416 $24,339 $20,153 $23,880 $16,894 $2z,2rim29 $16,300, J $22,967 $16,633 $22,683 $14,799 11 $13,987 $13,646 $12,830 $11,268 $11,055 $10,212 $ 8,364 $ 8,124 $ 8,059 Full Time School $ 7,260 Refugee $ 6,384 155286.wpd 07/05/00 WED 15:22 FAX 6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON IA004 • `PERCENTAGE OF INCOME NEEDED FOR HOUSING . ;. IN THE TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA • As .` i.a. :• •� '�`tee .c`.$ 4.>c`>°`, c ,°mac • :.-- Cashier 513.1S7 53 30 57% 75% River Bend Townhomes Child Care worker 514,560 5 364 51% 68% Qualifying Income Ceiling C-attrtterand RgntalClcrk. S12.792 5320 58% 77% •. . Household Income Dinning Room/Cafeteria Attendant 513.312 S333 56% 74%- . Size 516 931 5423 44% 58% 2 $31,560 File Clerk 3 $35,460 Food Preparation Worker S 15.600 5390 48% 63% 4 $39,420 5 $42,600 Horne 1 health Aide 51 5,91 2 5395 47% 62% 6 $45,720 t-tost/lfostess 512.480 5312 60% 79% Rents Janitor,Cleaner 516.610 Ss 16 45% 59% .. 2 Bedroom $663 Maid. Housekeeping Cleaner S 15,600 5390 48% 63% 3 Bedroom $765 Medical Assistant 521,103 5535 35% 46% 4 Bedroom $844 Medical IZecord.'Technician S__.?77 55i7 33% 44% Nursing Aide.Orderly. Attendant S 19.656 5191 38% 50% Receptionist 518.720 5468 40% 53% . Restaurant Cook S 16.640 5416 45% 59% Salesperson.Retain SI 3.208 53 30 56% 75% School Bus Driver • 515.40S 3460 40% 54% Teacher Aide 515.92S 5398 47% 62% . Teller 517,09S 5427 44% 58% ' Source:Minnesota Dep?Rmenc of Economic Security. 1996 Minnesota Salary Survey. Based on 30%of income. ' Based on 1997 HUD Fair-Market Rent of 5621 fora two-bedroom apartment in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. ' Based on Regional Multiple Listing Scn•ice average cost of 593.000 (5825 per month) for a three-bedroam, 1,000-1.500 square foot cinglc-family home sold in the Twin Cities metropolitan arca is 1996. 4 OZ,/05/00 WED 15:23 FAX 6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON i!005 , r....., .. .:. . . .. . . . . ..... . _ . .. . . _ , , , itt .y y a . ' •.; C- r ' 21 q� ismit 4- 40 '-' 0 :IT 1 14 g .., .4 .,, .4_, .. . wy: i 4.• 0. u ..4s .F..• ,.... . Triti ? ON 0 ,o 1 g S C.) -L.' , , 1 al II ..+ -6 a E-, t.E..• , C: g 4 — '-'2 4, WI ,..1 vl .-. 51! --, ol N 14 ..e4 AI a pig 144 t • .� El 8 u i' •a y E a � y a, W �j 'eu ao Mme{ v uu °SjliHUIflflbiI. C' .v ..i 07/05/00 WED 15:23 FAX 8128311859 JOHNSONLCONDON i006 :.= c% ID g .• 03- gi z TN% .) . Eli z V\ . • ._t 1 _ I % I. vekriem, 'A 1 rn'ic' 0,...i 6..4.1;15 sa Oa'• I ! 1-1-pieni. ,22L17 ' --1----_ PokAtirol3 . ., A 0 5 1 it I 1 : , i 1 . 3o Z Z,51 1 a,.:j II r 1 eok 1 14 -0 " --c. -. NI 0 -0: i 1 • .1). A a 0 1 10 CA-C ; Ili D ii% r; c41 ul I . . 1 i 7 rit 1 117-q" r :le 1 r •A,.64.,„de,,,fel 3e9,41.10,1 Rov.) . , - . -- . I t I 4 • I . ?I K. ' ..J., 0 - .0 I '''..........\,. . Z‘,...,. ,.......,,..3 / (11 c -__ , i---• -1> - . • --e -,.s\ ...-- ,::- ..,.. . , 1 f.,_ ... ! 1 , -, .)-- .....- 1 ,.1 , . , , ;• — 5 OP . 4 . , . 0lf/05/00 WED 15:05 FA%_6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON a001 • DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 171) JUL 0GN ReAt. E STATti DEVELO 2000 fr 5212 1-lopc Street �� 111..ili Prior Lake.MN 55372 • � ' (612) 806-0406 • fax (612) 831-1869 Facsimile Cover Sheet FAX: �q 5 _ (07i 8 FROM: Greg McClenahan DATE: (including this cover sheet) PAGES: a . .. - ` 1-1 F A"`A ,Q —\-- MESSAGE: j PCZ vf— ji-DA./L S .-= % • .:-.. ,,- -c2---1---)\ 4 ck_ sc s.e .___.-5Gni.A.-sk,--r 2._ 07/05/00 VIED 15:05 FAX 6128311869 JORNSON&CONDON fj 002 ��� field 't, „b j Research Inc. my 3,2000 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg McClenahan Principal EverGreen Real Estate FROM: Rick Fenske Vice President Maxfield Research Inc. RE: Assessment of a Site at 4th Avenue and Adams Street in Shakopee,Minnesota for Tax- Credit Financed Rental Housing. Introduction Maxfield Research Inc. was engaged by EverGreenRthwest corner of 4 AvenueEstate Development �and Adams II oration to assess the appropriateness of a site located on Street in Shakopee, Minnesota for rental housing. It is our understanding that the development would be financed, in part,through Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's(MHFA) Section 42 Tax-Credit program and, in part,with Holmen funds. The financing method would serve house- holds with low- to moderate-incomes and would have rents slightly below current"market-rate" rents. Site Evaluation It is the opinion of Maxfield Research that the highest and best use for the subject site would indeed be moderately priced rental housing. Not only does the site lend itself well for this type of development, we believe that the site's potential for other types of development(residential or otherwise) are limited. The surrounding land uses,in particular,the concentration of other multifamily housing, institu- tional housing(Friendship Manor nursing home),industrial uses and proximity of rail lines would,without question,restrict the type of development that would likely occur at the subject 612.338.0012 (*)612.338.5288 612.338.5288 510 Marquette Avenue, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55402 07705/00 WED 15:06 FAX 6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON a003 JaIy 3, 2000 Mr.Greg McClanahan Page 0 Ever een Develo ment site. Currently,the surrounding residential properties consist of a mix of older(albeit relatively well maintained),modest-sized single-family homes, a 12-unit apartment building, several rental four-plexes, and a duplex. It total,there are roughly 36 apartment units within a one-block radius of the site versus 5 single-family homes(of which one is abandoned). The apartments in the vicinity of the site consist primarily of older(1970s) one- and one-half story four-plexes, although one,two and one-half story 12-unit building is located just northwest of the site at the corner of Harrison Street and 4th Avenue. With the exception of two of the four-plexes, none of the apartment buildings even offer garage parking. Previous work conducted by our firm re- vealed that the existing housing in the immediate area(below 66 Avenue) is among the most modestly priced in Shakopee. The area immediately north of the site along 3`d Avenue band Highway used 101autis s dominalots and the id by industrial buildings;primarily freestanding warehouse Rahr Malting Company with its 5-story elevators dominating the skyline. A rail line also runs parallel to Adams Street about two blocks north of the site as does the truck entrance to Rahr Company. Visibility of the site is limited to roughly a two-block radius, with a hillside ob- structing views from the south and the industrial buildings to the north blocking visibility from Highway 101. Assets of the site are mature stands of trees, proximity/access to Highway 101 and its location next to parkland(although, the park currently consists only of a ball field). Overall,we believe the site's lack of amenities would make it improbable that any new housing on the subject site would be able to command the price points needed by the private sector to develop"market-rate"housing (ownership or rental). We believe that any other type of residen- tial development on the site would probably need to be priced such that government assistance would be needed to subsidize the development costs. Furthermore, rental housing would likely provide the City with the maximum amount of tax revenue that could be generated from the site. Meanwhile, demand for rental housing is at an all-time high with Metro-wide vacancy rates at historic lows(1.8%), rents increases averaging 7 percent annually, and very few sites available for affordable housing development. Our comprehensive rental housing needs study conducted for the Scott County HRA revealed a rental vacancy rate of a mere 1.1 percent for Scott County (0.9%in Shakopee), as of November 1998. This same study found a need for at least 1,100 additional rental units in Scott County through 2003. Not only do we believe that"affordable"rental housing is appropriate for the site, but it would provide the market with critically needed affordable housing. Our familiarity with EverGreen Real Estate's other affordable rental housing developments in Scott County leads us to believe that the development would most likely improve the neighborhood. Research conducted by our firm has indicated that the development of affordable rental housing has not had a negative 46: 7 07/05/00 WED 15:06 FAX 6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON Q004 Mr. Greg McClanahan July 3, 2000 Evergreen Development Page 3 impact on surrounding housing values and in fact, it is some of the most attractive and desirable housing in the neighborhoods in which they're located. We believe this to be the case in this instance as well. Credentials Maxfield Research was established in 1983 and has become the premiere real estate market research firm in the Upper-Midwest. Over the last 17 years, Maxfield Research has conducted nearly 1,000 market feasibility studies and consulting assignments in 15 states, including numer- ous assignments in Scott County. Although,Maxfield Research conducts research in all sectors of real estate, our primary focus has been and continues to be housing. Recent residential consulting assignments completed by our firm in Scott County include: ► Market Positioning and Lot Pricing for Sand Creek Estates, adjacent to the Ridges of Sand Creek golf course, in Sand Creek Township (Associated Capital Inc., 1999); ► Consulting work for The Hamilton mixed-use development in Savage (Scott County HRA, 1999); ► Consulting on Boulder Ridge Townhomes in Shakopee(Sand Companies, 1998); ► Consulting on Gorman Estates Apartments in Shakopee (INH Management, 1998); ► Market Analysis and Demand Assessment for Rental Housing in Scott County(Scott County HRA, 1995& 1998); ► Determination of Exception Rents for Shakopee(Scott County HRA, 1998); ► Consulting work for River City Apartments in Shakopee (Scott County HRA, 1997); ► Demand Analysis and Market Positioning Study for the Southbridge single-family develop- ment in Shakopee(Valley Green Business Park 1997); ► Assessment of Best and Highest Land Use for a Site at the Intersections of County Roads 42 and 27 in Savage(Van Zee Homes, 1997); ► Market Feasibility Study for Senior Housing on the Lutheran Home Campus in Belle Plaine (Belle Plaine Lutheran Home, 1997); 04./05/00_WED 15:07 FAX 6128311869 JOHNSON&CONDON 21 005 July 3,2000 Mr. Greg McClanahan Page 0 Evergreen Development ► Study of the Potential for Relocating Skilled Nursing Beds from Jordan to Shakopee(Health Dimensions, 1997); ► Market Feasibility for Assisted Living Housing in Prior Lake (Community Home Health Inc., 1996); ► Market Assessment for a Single-Family Subdivision in Prior Lake(McNulty Company, 1996); ► Determination of Exception Rents for Shakopee, Savage and Prior Lake (Scott County HRA, 1995); ► Market Positioning Study for Lynn Court Senior Apartments in Savage (Metes &Bounds Management, 1994); ► Market Assessment for Country Village Apartments in Shakopee (Ackerberg&Associates, 1994). • \ % • CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney,Public Works Director SUBJECT: 2000 Tennis Courts Reconstruction At 10th Avenue &Fuller Street, Project No. 2000-7 DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 5380, which accepts the bids and awards the contract for the 2000 Tennis Courts Reconstruction at 10th Avenue &Fuller Street, Project No. 2000-7. BACKGROUND: On June 6, 2000, Resolution No. 5373 was adopted approving the plans and ordering the advertisement for bids on the 2000 Tennis Courts Reconstruction. On June 30, 2000, sealed bids were received and publicly opened for this project. A total of seven bids were received and are summarized in the attached resolution. The low bid was submitted by Midwest Asphalt, Inc. in the amount of$178,980.00. The Engineer's estimate for this project was approximately $220,000.00. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept the low bid of $178,980.00 and adopt Resolution No. 5380, awarding the contract to Midwest Asphalt, Inc. 2. Reject the low bid and award the bid to another bidder. 3. Reject all bids and rebid. 4. Authorize a 10% contingency amount for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on this project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No.'s 1 &4. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Offer Resolution No. 5380, A Resolution Accepting Bids on the 2000 Tennis Courts Reconstruction at 10th Avenue & Fuller Street, Project No. 2000-7 and move its adoption. 2. Authorize a 10% contingency amount for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on this project. Bruce Loney Public Works Dire or BL/pmp MEM5380 RESOLUTION NO. 5380 A Resolution Accepting Bids On 2000 Tennis Courts Reconstruction At 10th Avenue & Fuller Street Project No. 2000-7 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the 2000 Tennis Courts Reconstruction at 10th Avenue&Fuller Street,Project No. 2000-7, bids were received,opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Midwest Asphalt, Inc. $178,980.00 Ingram Excavating, Inc. $183,020.00 K.A. Witt,Inc. $190,740.00 Frattalone Paving,Inc. $195,473.50 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $217,295.00 Barber Construction,Inc. $224,843.00 DMJ Corporation,Inc. $230,165.00 AND WHEREAS, it appears that Midwest Asphalt, Inc., P.O. Box 5477, Hopkins, MN 55343 is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA: 1. The appropriate City officials are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Midwest Asphalt, Inc. in the name of the City of Shakopee for the 2000 Tennis Courts Reconstruction at 10th Avenue & Fuller Street, Project No. 2000-7, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held this day of ,2000. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk 15 . A. a • CITY OF SHAKOPEE C'�� E�� MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director Subject: Replacement of Ice Arena Compressor Date: June 26, 2000 INTRODUCTION Compressor B1 in the ice arena system recently failed and will require replacement. City Council is asked to approve replacement. BACKGROUND On Tuesday, June 13, compressor B1 in the four-compressor system failed. Rink-Tech International, the company that provides the majority of support for the Community Center's arena system, evaluated the compressor and determined that an internal mechanical failure had occurred. Associated Mechanical Contractors, Inc. provided a second evaluation. The failure appears to be the result of two interrelated conditions: • The four-compressor refrigeration system has run year-round over the past five years, except for brief periods when the ice was removed for maintenance. The system is designed to cycle run time evenly between the four compressors. This has resulted in over 17,000 hours of accumulated running time to be logged on each compressor, a significant number of hours for five-year-old compressors. • Calcium buildup from the City's water affected the cooling tower over the first few years of operation. The calcium reduced the cooling tower's efficiency, which caused the refrigeration system to work harder and run hotter than normal. A water conditioning system that was installed in 1997 has reduced the calcium problem. The warranty period for the compressors was one year from the date of start-up (December 1, 1995). Three quotations have been received for labor and materials associated with replacing the compressor: 1. Rink Tech International: $5,381.92 2. Arena Systems: $5,865.00 3. Associated Mechanical Contractors, Inc.: $6,350.00 BUDGET IMPACT This is an unbudgeted expenditure that will be funded from the Recreation Fund. Future operating budgets should include allowances for these types of expenditures. ALTERNATIVES 1. Direct staff to authorize Rink Tech International to replace the compressor. 2. Direct staff to authorize another contractor to replace the compressor. ACTION REQUESTED Move to direct staff to authorize Rink Tech International to replace compressor B1 at a cost of$5,381.92. 4 Mark Themig Facilities and Recreation Director Jun 23 00 10: 39a 651-481-1178 p- 1 1 Rink-Tec International Arena Specialists since 1979 June 23, 2000 Shakopee Community Center 1255 Fuller St. Shakopee, MN 55379 Attention: Mark VIA FACSIMILE: (952)445-8172 Reference: Compressor change/Possible condenser replacement Proposal#1 -Your price for a new compressor model#06EZ499370 is$5,381.92. This price includes tax,all materials and labor to install a new compressor at the Community Center. Proposal#2-For a new evaporative condenser Model VCI-80 including: copper sweat connections,oversized 10 HP fan motor,removal and disposal of existing condenser, crane to place new condenser and labor to instalL Your price is$16,950.00.This price includes state sales tax. Proposal#3-For a Baltimore Corrosion Protector add$1,265.00 to the price listed above for condenser. Please review this information and let us know if you wish to proceed. There shouldn't be a lead time on the compressor,however on the condenser we will most likely need a 10 week notice to give to the factory for production_ Regards, -. / Kyl— ` espie Rink-Tec International,Inc. 310 East County Road D,Uttle Canada,MN 55117 Tel.:(851)481-1190 (800)890-8080 Fax:(651)481-1178 E-MAIL rinktecl@mn.uswestnet http://www.rinkteo.on.ca/ Federal IDN:411099722 Sent By: ARENA SYSTEMS; 6514905357 ; Jun-21 -00 10:07AM; Page 2/2 j • NA SISTEN6 Wednesday, June 21, 2000 Mark Themig Shakopee Arena 1255 Fuller Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mark: Enclosed you will find pricing for the compressor replacement for your refrigeration System. This price includes installation. This price is based on reusing the existing tan. The new compressor has a 2 week lead time. The price listed below is good for 30 days. Compressor Replacement-$5,865.00 If you have any questions about this proposal please give me a call. Thanks again for the opportunity to provide you pricing on this compressor Sincerely, Michael Elam Arena Systems 420 E. County Rood D • St. Paul, Minnesota 55117 800.328.6808 • 651.490.3044 • Fax 651.490.5357 U6/20/2000 TUE 09:15 FAX It002/002 SSOC1ATED mechanical contractors, inc. 1257 Marschall Road,Suite 104, P.O. Box 237• Shakopee, MN 55379 Phone:6121445.5100 Fax:61 21445-51 1 9 PROPOSAL Date: 6/20/00 To: Shakopee Community Center 1255 Fuller 5t Shakopee, MN 55379 Attn: Mark RE: Same The undersigned hereby proposes to furnish for the above building all materials, labor and equipment and perform all work for the replacement of 40 HP compressor on ice rink refrigeration system. For the sum of: Slx thousand three hundred fifty dollars $6350.00 Inclusions: - Replace 40 HP Carlisle compressor. - Replace liquid and suction line driers. - Evacuate and recharge system. - 1 Year warranty on compressor. Alternates: - Extended 4 year warranty on compressor (no labor included). ADD: $1240.00 This proposal void if riot accepted within thirty days from above date. All material purchased and all labor performed during any one calendar month Is due and payable on the 10th of the succeeding month. The parties to this contract agree that if said contract is not completed by any cost increase of materials and labor, subsequent to above mentioned date, shall be adde to the original contract price. Accepted by Dated Proposal b — 24 HOUR EMERGENCY SERVICE — AT.& 1. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) MEETING DATE: July 5, 2000 Introduction: The City Council is asked to adopt findings of fact and conclusions, and to adopt the attached resolution making a negative declaration on the need for an environmental impact study(EIS)for the proposed project. Attached for the Council's consideration are the proposed findings and Resolution No. 5384 making a negative declaration. Also attached are copies of the comments received and the draft responses to those comments. Discussion: A notice of the availability of the EAW for the project was published in the EQB Monitor on May 15, 2000. The review and comment period thus officially closed on June 14, 2000. Copies of the comment letters that were received, as well as the responses from the City have been attached as Exhibit A. The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB)guidelines for EAWs state that an EIS shall be ordered for a project that has the potential for significant environmental effects. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant effects,the RGU compares the effects that are reasonably expected from the project with the following criteria: A. Type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects. B. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects. C. The extent to which environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. D. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the public proposer or of EIS's previously prepared. The RGU must apply the criteria to the factual information contained in the EAW, the comments received on the EAW and the responses to the comments. After reviewing the four criteria, staff proposes the findings contained in the attached resolution. i EAWADC.doc/ML Alternatives: 1. Offer and approve the proposed findings of fact and conclusions, and Resolution No. 5384, A Resolution Making a Negative Declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the ADC project as presented. 2. Offer and approve the proposed findings of fact and conclusions, and Resolution No. 5384, A Resolution Making a Negative Declaration on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Department 56 distribution center project with revisions. 3. Make a positive declaration on the need for an EIS, and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution. 4. Table the decision on the need for an EIS. Recommendation: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. Action Requested: Offer and approve the proposed findings of fact and conclusions, and Resolution No. 5384, A Resolution Making a Negative Declaration on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the ADC project. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director 2 EAWADC.doc/ML RESOLUTION NO. 5384 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA ISSUING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF NEED FOR AN EIS FOR A PROJECT TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS,INC. WHEREAS, the preparation of the EAW for the proposed ADC Telecommunications project, and the comments received on the EAW have generated information adequate to determine whether the proposed development has the potential for significant environmental effects; and WHEREAS, the EAW has identified areas where the potential for significant environmental effects exist, but appropriate mitigative measures have or will be incorporated into the project plan and/or permits to reasonably mitigate these impacts; and WHEREAS, the ADC Telecommunications project is expected to comply with all applicable standards of the City of Shakopee and review agencies; and WHEREAS, based on the criteria established in Minnesota R. 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects; and WHEREAS, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions,the project does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,the City of Shakopee has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required for the ADC Telecommunications project. Adopted by the Shakopee City Council this day of July, 2000. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RES5384ADC.docF:\wrwirni233-om«p-re.. • • a) (f) ADC Telecommunfr ' *ions, Inc. 0 : I c Csw P°c 6fr e P iti)6 Prepared by: SFIAKOPEE 4 0.) ,Irtdi City of Shakopee c/o Michael Leek Community Development Director y a 129 Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 > EQB Publication Date: May 15, 2000. A 350 Westwood Lake Office EAW Comment Deadline: June 14, 2000 WSB 84 i neapoata Boulevard Minneapolis,MN 55426 - 812541.4800 ci Associates.Inc. FAX 541-1700 INFRASTRUCTURE - ENGINEERS - PLANNERS WSB Project No. 1233-001 i 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Note to preparers: This form is available at www.mnplan.state.mn.us. EAW Guidelines will be available in Spring 1999 at the web site.The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects.The EAW is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit or its agents to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared.The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data for—but should not complete—the final worksheet.If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted,attach additional sheets as necessary.The complete question as well as the answer must be included if the EAW is prepared electronically. Note to reviewers:Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor.Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information,potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an.EIS. 1. Project title ADC Manufacturing and Engineering Facility 2. Proposer ADC Communications,Inc. 3. RGU City of Shakopee Contact Person Bernard J.Wenzel Contact Person Michael Leek Title Manager: Safety and Environmental Affairs Title Community Development Director Address PO Box 1101-MS-54 Address 129 Holmes Street City,State,Zip Minneapolis,MN 55440-1101 City,State,Zip Shakopee,MN 55379 Phone (952)946-3967 Phone (952)445-3650 Fax (952)946=3989 Fax (952)445-6718 E-mail bernie wenzelO)adc.com E-mail mleek(a ci.shakopee.mn.us 4. Reason for EAW preparation(check one) EIS scoping Mandatory EAW X Citizen petition RGU discretion Proposer volunteered If EAW is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number 44104300,shpt.14 and subpart name Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Facilities 5. Project location County Scott City/Township Shakopee SE1/4 Section 3 Township 115N Range 22W Attach each of the following to the EAW: • County map showing the general location of the project(Figure 1,Appendix A); • U.S.Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries(photocopy acceptable);(Figure 2, Appendix A) • Site plan showing all significant project and natural features(Figure 3,Appendix A). 6. Description a.Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. The City of Shakopee has prepared an EAW for the ADC Manufacturing and Engineering Facility. This facility proposes a 490,000 sf facility(147,500 of office space,264,500 sf of manufacturing,55,500 sf of product test facilities, F:\W P W IM 123 3-00\EA W.wpd • and 22,500 sf building amenities):located on a 106-acre site immediately south of County Road 101 and east of Valley Park Drive in the City of Shakopee. b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction.Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction,operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes.Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition,removal or remodeling of existing structures.Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ADC Telecommunications,Inc.is a large corporation made up of several divisions located throughout the world. ADC designs and manufactures voice,video,and data systems for telephone,cable television,Internet,broadcast, wireless,and private communication networks. In order to meet business growth and projections,ADC is proposing to construct a new manufacturing and office facility located on a portion of a 106-acre site located at the southeast corner-of Valley Park Drive and County Road 101 in the City of Shakopee. This project also proposes to construct roadways to connect the site to Valley Park Drive. The proposed facility will include an engineering office and support organizations such as product assurance testing facilities and manufacturing operations. The primary manufacturing technologies that will be utilized within this proposed facility include: • Injection molding of engineeringgrade plastics • Sheet metal fabrication • Continuous flow electrostatic powder painting • Punch press and precision progress die stamping • Precision tool and dies for making molds,dies and custom equipment • Diecasting operations As part of this proposed facility,significant infrastructure is needed for materials procurement,shop planning, facility and machine maintenance,manufacturing,engineering,etc. PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The construction and operation of the proposed ADC Telecommunications,Inc.manufacturing facility will have physical and environmental impacts. The physical impact to the site will be the change of land cover from rural grassland,brush,and wooded land to an industrial,highly impervious surface. This change in surface cover will increase the rate and volume of stormwater runoff that is generated from the site,as well as increase pollutant loads in stormwater runoff. Storm water will be pretreated on-site prior to discharge. The proposed manufacturing facility will discharge wastewater into the sanitary sewer system.Portions of the wastewater discharged from this site will be the result of paint facilities. Wastewater disposed of from the painting facility is high in phosphates and will be treated by elementary neutralization prior to discharge into the sanitary sewer system. ADC is anticipating using 0.1 MGD of water for the entire facility. In addition,there are impacts associated with air quality from increased traffic,as well as manufacturing processes. The manufacturing processes are anticipated to generate volatile organic compounds(VOCs),carbon dioxide(CO), sulfur dioxide(SO2),nitrogen oxide(NOX),and lead. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Construction is anticipated to begin in July 2000,and continue through July 2001. CONSTRUCTION DESCRIPTION The building will consist of a one-story(high bay)manufacturing facility with an attached two-story office and product test building. The office and product test portion is proposed to be located to the north and west sides of the manufacturing facility. The main entrance will be located at the west end of the facility. The exterior wall materials will be masonry and architectural precast panel with large areas of glazing. Parking will be located south and east of the building. F:\W P W IN\123 3-00\EA W.W pd c. Explain the project purpose;if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit,explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The purpose of this project is to increase ADC's office and manufacturing space. ADC currently has a facility within the Valley Green Business Park that will continue to operate. The project will be carried out by ADC. d.Are future stages of this development including development on any outlots planned or likely to happen? 0 Yes ■No If yes,briefly describe future stages,relationship to present project,timeline and plans for environmental review. ADC proposes to construct their facility on the east side of the 106 acre parcel and leave the west portion as an outlot. ADC may sell their adjacent outlot on the west at a future date. However,there are no current plans by ADC for this outlot. e.Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? 0 Yes ■No If yes,briefly describe the past development,timeline and any past environmental review. 7. Project magnitude data Total Project acreage 106 acres(35.5 acres will remain as outlot) Number of residential units:unattached N/A attached N/A maximum units per building N/A Commercial,industrial,or institutional building area(gross floor space);total square feet 490,000 sf Indicate areas of specific uses(in square feet): Office 147,500 sf Manufacturing 264,500 sf Retail N/A Other industrial 55,500 sf(product test facilities) Warehouse N/A Institutional N/A Light industrial N/A Agricultural N/A Other commercial(specify) 22,500 sf(building amenities-includes hallways,bathrooms,etc.) Building height 32-37 feet If over 2 stories,compare to heights of nearby buildings N/A F:\WPWIN\1233-00\EAW.wpd 8. Permits and approvals required.List all known local,state and federal permits,approvals and financial assistance for the project.Include modifications of any existing permits,governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees,Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. Unit of government. Type of application Status Federal US Environmental Protection Hazardous Waste ID# To be applied for Agency State Minnesota Pollution Control Indirect Source Permit Application being prepared Agency Minnesota Pollution Control Total Facility Permit Application being prepared Agency Minnesota Pollution Control NPDES-General Stormwater To be applied for Agency Permit Department of Natural Resources Temporary Dewatering Permit To be applied for,if needed for construction Local Scott County Environmental Hazardous Waste Generator Permit To be applied for Health Scott County SWCD Review of stormwater management To be submitted plan Metropolitan Council Industrial Waste Discharge Permit To be applied for Environmental Services City of Shakopee Building Permit To be applied for City of Shakopee Site Plan/Plat Approval To be obtained Lower Minnesota River Plan Review To be submitted Watershed District Financial Assistance ADC is pursuing business subsidy assistance from the City of Shakopee and Scott County in the form of Tax Abatement to construct improvements to the development property. 9. Land use.Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses.Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses,such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks,or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. The land was purchased by ADC from the CAMAS-Sheily Quarry. No mining operations have occurred on the site although stockpiled material has been stored on the site in the past. The current land use consists of open grassland with a few trees scattered throughout the property. The site has previously been used in the past by the Toro Company to test lawn care equipment. There is also contains an area used by a remote control airplane club. There are no known hazards due to sail contamination or abandoned tanks. In 1990,Shiely Quarry reported a leaking 10,000 gallon underground storage tank east of the proposed ADC site. The tank was removed and the site was cleaned. The MPCA declared the site to be clean in 1992. F:\WPWIN\1233-OO\EAW.wpd The adjacent developments are industrial in nature and,therefore,the ADC site is not anticipated to create any conflicts. The Prior Lake-Spring Lake outlet channel is located on the eastern border of the property. This channel is also under the jurisdiction of the DNR. The project is not anticipated to impact this stream. 10. Cover types.Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development: Before After Before After Types 1-8 wetlands 0 0 Lawn/landscaping 35 Wooded/forest 4.0 0 Impervious surfaces 31 Brush/Grassland 102 35.5 Other(describe) 4.5(ponding) Cropland TOTAL 106 106 If Before and After totals are not equal,explain why: 11. Fish,wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources a.Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts. In general,the conversion of open space to developed space has an impact on wildlife by reducing the habitat that is available. The Prior Lake-Spring Lake outlet channel is located along the eastern border of the site. However,no impacts associated with alteration of this channel are anticipated as part of this project. No impacts to fish are anticipated within the site. Additional storm water runoff will be generated by the site. To minimize impact downstream at Blue Lake and the Minnesota River,this storm water will be pretreated on-site and the discharge rate will be required to be limited to 1/3 cfs per acre as outlined in the City's Stormwater Management Plan. b.Are any state-listed(endangered,threatened or special concern)species,rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat,colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities 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 has been conducted and describe the results.If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been contacted give the correspondence reference number:ERDB#20000851 .Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The Natural Heritage Database has been reviewed by the DNR While sensitive ecological resources are located within 1 mile of the project site,it is anticipated that the project will not have an impact on any of these known occurrences of rare features. The information from the DNR is included in Appendix B. 12. Physical impacts on water resources.Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration(dredging,filling, stream diversion,outfall structure,diking,and impoundment)of any surface waters such as a lake,pond,wetland,stream or drainage ditch? ❑Yes •No If yes,identify water resource affected and give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory number(s)if the water resources affected are on the PWI: .Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. 13. Water use.Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells,connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water(including dewatering)? •Yes 0 No If yes,as applicable,give location and purpose of any new wells;public supply affected,changes to be made,and water quantities to be used; the source,duration,quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well numbers and DNR F:\wpwmi233-ookEww.wpd appropriation permit numbers,if known.Identify any existing and new wells on the site map.If there are no wells known on site,explain methodology used to determine. There are 4 monitoring wells on-site. These wells were drilled in 1999 and ADC has indicated that these wells will remain in place unless they are in the way of the proposed building. Information from the Minnesota Geologic Survey indicated that 4 other wells were present on the site but have since been sealed. City Wells#4 and#5 are located southeast of the project. There are also 2 wells immediately south of the project that were installed by the CAMAS quarry. Figure 3 in Appendix A shows the approximate location of these wells. This project will require the connection to the public water supply. It is anticipated that the facility will use 0.1 MGD of water. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission(SPUC)staff has been contacted regarding the adequacy of the water supply. The SPUC staff is awaiting an official statement by the Commission regarding water supply issues-for the area. Temporary dewatering may be necessary during construction. If this is necessary,a permit will be acquired from the DNR. 14. Water-related land use management district. Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district,a delineated 100-year flood plain,or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? ■Yes 0 No If yes,identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions. The Prior Lake-Spring Lake outlet channel flows north immediately east of the project. Land within 300 ft of the top of bank is regulated by the City's Shoreland Zoning Ordinance. This ordinance states that the setback for a sewaged facility such as ADC is 50 ft. The proposed ADC building is anticipated to be in compliance with this ordinance. Currently,a study is being completed by the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District to determine high water levels within the channel. While this study is not anticipated to be completed in time for the proposed ADC construction to begin,estimates will be made for setbacks and minimum floor elevations for the buildings within the project site. These issues will be addressed through the plan approval process by the City. 15. Water surface use.Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? :Nes ■No If yes,indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses. 16. Erosion and sedimentation.Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: acres 70 ; cubic yards 400,000 .Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map.Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. ADC has indicated that the grading plan will be developed with the intent of having no net loss or gain of soil on the site. There are no steep grades on the site: Based on the Scott County Soil Survey,the soils on the site consist of the following: HdA-Hubbard fine sand,0-2%slopes HeA-Hubbard loamy fine sand,0-2% slopes HdB-Hubbard fine sand,2-6%slopes ZaB2-Zimmerman fine sand,2-6% slopes Dg-Dune land These soils are described as well to excessively drained. These soils are described as wind erodible within the Scott County Soil Survey. Silt fencing,sod,erosion mats,mulch,and hay bales in ditches and around storm inlets will be used to control erosion and siltation during construction. Temporary detention basins will be constructed to trap silt prior to storm water leaving the site. Seeding and mulching will be completed within 14 days after grading is complete. All site grading will be in conformance with City of Shakopee requirements and Best Management Practices recommended by the MPCA and Scott County Soil and Water Conservation District. F:IWPWINS1233-00\EAW.Wpd 17. Water quality:surface water runoff a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project.Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff.Describe any stormwater pollution prevention plans. The site is currently undeveloped and consists primarily of grass with scattered trees. There is an area used by a model airplane club located on the west side:of the property. There are some wooded areas on the east portion of the site near the Prior Lake-Spring Lake drainage channel. The proposed development will increase stormwater runoff due to an increase in the amount of impervious surface. The quantity and quality of runoff from the proposed development will be managed in accordance with the City of Shakopee's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan and MPCA requirements. Information from ADC indicated that the estimated pre-development peak discharge from the 100-year design storm event is 48 cfs. The estimated post-development peak discharge from the 100-year design storm event is 213 cfs prior to ponding. The City's Stormwater Management Plan requires that peak discharge rates be limited to 1/3 cfs per acre. Therefore,ADC has indicated that they will design the stormwater basins on-site to restrict flows to 353 cfs. These basins will also be designed to provide permanent sediment control. Stormwater runoff from the proposed development is anticipated to include pollutants typically associated with commercial land use. These pollutants include suspended solids,nutrients,trace metals,petroleum-derived hydrocarbon,chloride,and litter. The impact of additional pollutants in the runoff will be mitigated by pretreating the runoff prior to discharge. The proposed project includes two permanent storm water basins that meet the design guidelines identified in the MPCA manual Protecting Water Quality in Urban Area. The proposed storm water basins will also meet the criteria of the City of Shakopee and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District(LMRWD). The total wet volume of the basin will be approximately 4 acre-feet. The basin will provide permanent control of sediment and floatable pollutants discharged from the site. A storm water management plan will be prepared and submitted to the City,LMRWD,and the Scott County SWCD for review. Storm water quality impacts will be mitigated by the following methods: • The proposed project will include wet detention ponds sized to retain the runoff from a 2.5" design storm event. Based on the proposed land use,the estimated runoff amount is 0.7". • It is anticipated that maintained turf will be limited to the areas around the building. Native prairie grass and vegetation will be used for areas away from the building. Fertilizers and lawn chemicals will be used on the maintained turf by the building areas and will be limited to the extent feasible. • Floatable pollutants will be controlled with a submerged or baffled outlet structure. b.Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters,Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters. Storm water from the site will flow into an on-site stormwater pond(see Figure 3 in Appendix A). Treated water will ultimately leave the site through the existing Prior Lake-Spring Lake drainage channel at the east edge of the property. The channel crosses under County Road 101 and discharges to Blue Lake and the Minnesota River. Since water will be pretreated and the flow rate restricted,the quality of water downstream of this development is not anticipated to be impacted. F:1 W P W IN\1233-00\EAW.wpd 18. Water quality:wastewaters a.Describe sources,composition and quantities of all sanitary,municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. The existing ADC facility in Shakopee has reported the following water use to the MCES for 1999: Cooling water:0.17 million gallons per year(approximately 0.0007MGD) Domestic water:4.6 million gallons per year(approximately 0.018 MGD) Industrial water: 15.5 million gallons per year(approximately 0.06 MGD) It is anticipated that the proposed ADC facility will generate 50%more of the cooling,industrial,and domestic water than the existing facility. The total proposed facility is anticipated to generate 0.1 MGD of wastewater. Of this total,0.066 MGD areproposed for the paint and process. The composition of these wastewaters is anticipated to be approximately the same as the existing ADC facility. The wastewater from that facility has the following composition based MCES monitoring from March 2000: Parameter Concentration/Result* Discharge Limits and Threshold pH(Paint line) 7.5-7.8 5.0-11.0 Total Suspended Solids 78 250 Chemical Oxygen Demand 130 500 Cadmium <0.001 1.0 Copper 0.089 4.0 Lead 0.02 1.0 Zinc 0.063 6.0 *Results in mg/L except for pH. Monitoring was completed over a 24-hour period. b.Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters,including major downstream water bodies,and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters.If the project involves on-site sewage systems,discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems. The only on-site waste treatment will be elementary neutralization of the phosphorous tank solutions used on the powder paint lines. These solutions will be neutralized prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. The volume of this discharge is approximately 3900 gallons per event and occurs once every four months per paint line. Therefore,with six active paint lines,it is anticipated that 5850 gallons of this type of discharge would occur within a month. The wastewater discharge from this industrial development will be discharged through a new connection to a Metropolitan Council Environmental Services interceptor sewer located at the north edge of the site. The sanitary sewer system discharges to the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment facility. c.If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility,identify the facility,describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes,identifying any improvements necessary. Wastewater will be discharged into the sanitary sewer,which discharges into the Blue Lake wastewater treatment facility(WWTF). The Blue Lake WWTF is a regional wastewater treatment facility,treating wastes from Shakopee and Prior Lake. This facility has been designed to accommodate these flows. See 18a and 18b for discussion of composition and volume. F:\W PWIN\1233-00\EAW.wpd f - d.If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure,describe disposal technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary.Describe any required setbacks for land disposal systems. Not applicable to this project. 19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions a.Approximate depth(in feet)to ground 11.8 ft minimum 16 ft average water: to bedrock: 25 ft minimum 35 ft average. Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map:sinkholes,shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. There are no known sinkholes,shallow limestone formations,or karst conditions on the site. Groundwater depth information was taken from monitoring well data from 1999. Depth to bedrock data was taken from the Scott County Geologic Atlas. b. Describe the soils on the site,giving NRCS(SCS)classifications,if known.Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils.Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination. Based on information from the Scott County Soil Survey,the soils on the site consist of the following: HdA-Hubbard fine sand,0-2%slopes HeA-Hubbard loamy fine sand,0-2% slopes HdB-Hubbard fine sand,2-6%slopes ZaB2-Zimmerman fine sand,2-6% slopes Dg-Dune land These soils are described as well to excessively drained. Due to the sandy,gravelly nature of these soils,it is anticipated that potential for groundwater contamination is high. Toxic and hazardous material will be stored in dedicated areas designed to prevent contamination of the environment. 20. Solid wastes,hazardous wastes,storage tanks a. Describe types,amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes,including solid animal manure,sludgeand ash, produced during construction and operation.Identify method and location of disposal.For projects generating municipal solid waste,indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling.If hazardous waste is generated,indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments. It is estimated that the new facility will produce 50%more solid and hazardous wastes than the existing ADC facility that is located in Shakopee.The following listing outlines the projected volumes of wastes to be generated by the proposed ADC facility. Solid Waste Amount Composition Disposal Method 125 yds/wk Kitchen,office,and non-hazardous Landfill Hazardous Waste Amount Composition Disposal* 1073 gaUyear Dichloromethane(F002) Incineration/thermal 2648 gal/year Flammable liquids(D001) Fuel blended 8748 gaUyear Oil(M100) Recycled/beneficial use 908 gal/year Water soluble mineral oil(M100) Incineration/thermal 83 gaUyear Used oil filters(M100) Recycled/beneficial use F:\WP WIIV\1233-00\EAW.wpd 1950 lbs/year Oil soaked absorbents(D007,D008) Incineration/thermal 772 lbs/year Misc.chemicals(MN02) Incineration/thermal 24 units/year Batteries-Lead acid(D002,D008) Recycled/beneficial use 330 units/year Fluorescent lamps(D009) Recycled/beneficial use 6531 lbs/year Surplus electronic scrap inventory (D006,D007,D008) Recycled/beneficial use 4125 lbs/year Used filters and metal fines Incineration/thermal 10,176 lbs/year Solvent contaminated Kim-wipes Incineration/thermal 3732 lbs/year Solvent contaminated rags Laundered and reused 3795 lbs/year Paper paint booth filters Recycled/beneficial use 1800 lbs/year Steel and yarn filters Incineration/thermal *In compliance with MPCA regulations ADC has indicated that the wastes will be routinely assessed to maximize the amount that can be recycled. The proposed facility will recycle copper alloys,aluminum,steel,plastics,cans,cardboard,and paper: As required by the hazardous waste rules,there will be a waste minimization plan and pollution prevention plan developed and implemented for the proposed facility that will constantly evaluate methods to reduce the amount of waste generated at the facility. b.Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater.If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste,discharge or emission,discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste,discharge or emission. The toxic and hazardous materialsidentified above will be stored in dedicated areas designed to prevent unauthorized releases to the environment. If less hazardous materials can be substituted for hazardous materials, ADC will incorporate these methods into operations. c.Indicate the number,location,size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials,except water.Describe any emergency response containment plans. The proposed ADC site will contain above ground storage tanks. These tanks will contain the following: • Methylene chloride-500 gallons • Liquid oxygen -800 gallons • Liquid nitrogen-1500 gallons • Liquid argon-1500 gallons All hazardous material will be stored in an above ground tank contained within a bermed area designed to contain any releases that may occur. 21. Traffic.Parking spaces added 1,550 . Existing spaces(if project involves expansion) N/A .Estimated total average daily traffic generated 3,269 .Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated(if known)and time of occurrence 509 vehicles;AM Peak . Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary.If the project is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area,discuss its impact on the regional transportation system. The ADC Telecommunications,Inc.development includes:170,000 sq ft of office space,264,500 sq ft of manufacturing,and 55,500 sq ft of industrial space. Figure C-1 in Appendix C shows the location of the proposed development. It is estimated that the proposed ADC development will generate the following traffic: F:\WPWIN\I233-00\EAW.wpd Traffic Generation ADC Telecommunications,Inc.Development Type of Space Code* Area(sq ft) ADT AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips In Out In Out Office space 710 170,000 1,872 233 32 43 -210 Manufacturing 140 264,500 1,010 149 44 70 126 Industrial 110 55,500 387 45 6 7 47. Total 490,000 3,269 427 82 120 383 *Land Use Code, 6th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual The estimated traffic generation is based on information found in the 6th Edition of The Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual. Existing 2000 AM and PM peak hour volume movements at the intersection of Trunk Highway 101 and Valley Park/Fair Drive are shown in Figure C-2 in Appendix C. Traffic movement counts were performed at the intersection of Trunk Highway 101 and Valley Park/Fair Drive on April 18,2000,by WSB&Associates,Inc. The existing AM and PM peak hour volume movements at the intersections of Valley Park/Fair Drive at Valley Industrial Boulevard North and Valley Park/Fair Drive at Park Place were estimated based on adjacent traffic volumes and are shown in Figure C-2,Appendix C. Three years were examined as part of the Traffic Analysis.. The existing(2000)traffic volumes were analyzed to determine how the intersections adjacent to the proposed development are operating under current traffic conditions. The.year 2002 represents one year after the opening of the proposed ADC development. The year 2005 was selected as a 5-year forecast to analyze future traffic conditions both with and without the proposed development traffic. The proposed ADC factory will have three shifts;however,the AM and PM peak hours were considered to represent the worst case traffic conditions on the roadways adjacent to the proposed development. The background (non-development)traffic volumes were assumed to increase at the Scott County standard projection rate of 4.5%per year for determining projected 2002 and 2005 background traffic volumes. Figures C-3 and C-4 illustrate the projected 2002 and 2005 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes without the proposed ADC development traffic. The direction of the approach and departure traffic to and from the proposed ADC development during the AM and PM peak hours was assumed to be consistent with the existing traffic patterns during those hours. Figure C-5 shows - the AM and PM peak hour directions of approach and departure. Figure C-6 illustrates the distributed AM and PM peak hour development traffic. The projected 2002 and 2005 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed ADC site traffic were determined by adding the development traffic volumes to the projected 2002 and 2005 traffic volumes. Figures C-7 and C-8 show the total 2002 and 2005 projected traffic volumes including the proposed ADC development traffic. A level of service(LOS)analysis was performed using procedures outlined in the Transportation Research Board (TRB)1995 Highway Capacity Manual. The LOS for the intersections of Trunk Highway 101 at Valley Park/Fair Drive,Valley Park/Fair Drive at Valley Industrial Boulevard North,and Valley Park/Fair Drive at Park Place were determined. The results of the LOS analysis are located in Table C-1 in Appendix C,with descriptions for the different levels of service given in Table C-2. The LOS Analysis of the existing traffic conditions indicates that the intersections of Trunk Highway 101 and Valley Park/Fair Drive is currently operating at a LOS C. The intersections of Valley Park/Fair Drive and Valley Industrial Boulevard North and Valley Park/Fair Drive and Park Place are currently operating at a LOS B during the AM and PM peak hours. All movements can be accommodated with existing geometrics and traffic controls. F:\W P W IN\1233-00\EA W.wpd I ' The years 2002 and 2005 LOS analysis indicates that the intersection of TH 101 at Valley Park/Fair Drive will operate at a LOS C with the existing lane configuration and traffic control in 2002 and 2005 with and without the proposed ADC development traffic. The intersection of Valley Park/Fair Drive at Valley Industrial Boulevard North was also analyzed and will operate at a LOS B with the existing lane configuration and one-way stop sign control in both 2002 and 2005. With the ,proposed ADC development traffic,the intersection will operate at a LOS D and C during the AM and PM peak hours,respectively,in 2002 and 2005. The intersection of Valley Park/Fair Drive at Park Place will operate during the AM and PM peak hours at a LOS C in 2002 and 2005 with the proposed development. Based on the traffic analysis that includes the traffic from the proposed ADC development,no roadway improvements are necessary. 22. Vehicle-related air emissions.Estimate the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality,including carbon monoxide levels.Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts.Note:If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces,consult EAW Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed. The proposed development includes more than 1,000 new parking spaces but less than 2,000 spaces. Therefore,an Indirect Source Permit(ISP)assessment was conducted. The busiest roadway within 1/4 mile of the proposed development is CSAR 17 with an ADT of 12,300 vehicles per day. The volume on this roadway exceeds 8,333 vehicles per day;therefore,an ISP is required and will be submitted to the MPCA for review and approval. It is anticipated that the results of the detailed air quality analysis associated with the ISP will also show that the emissions associated with this project and the surrounding area will be within the MPCA emission guidelines. The proposer will comply with any requirements from the ISP. 23. Stationary source air emissions.Describe the type,sources,quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers,exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources.Include any hazardous air pollutants(consult EAW Guidelines for a listing)and any greenhouse gases(such as carbon dioxide,methane,nitrous oxide)and ozone-depleting chemicals(chloro-fluorocarbons,hydrofluorocarbons,perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride).Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices.Describe the impacts on air quality. ADC has indicated that air permit(s)will be filed with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for this facility. Equipment that will be identified on the application are: • Solvent degreasers using methylene chloride and an associated storage tank. All appropriate controls and procedures for use of this equipment will be implemented as required by the standards regulating the use of this material. • Associated natural gas burners for the powder paint lines for up to six lines. • Touch-up paint booths and associated silk screen operations. • Facility boilers and HVAC Equipment (HVAC systems would use the refrigerant R-22) • Emergency back-up generator The following are estimated air emissions for the facility: VOCs <25 tons PM/PM-10 <1 ton CO <1 ton SO2 <1 ton NOX about 5 tons Lead 0. F:\WPWIN\1233-00\EAW.wpd 24. Odors,noise and dust.Will the project generate odors,noise or dust during construction or during operation? ®Yes ❑No If yes,describe sources,characteristics,duration,quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts.Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them.Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life.(Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.) Dust During construction,particulate emissions will temporarily increase due to the generation of fugitive dust. The following dust control measures will be undertaken as necessary: • Minimize the period and extent of areas being exposed and re-graded at any one time. • Spraying construction areas and all roads with water,especially during periods of high wind or high levels of construction activity. • Minimize the use of vehicles on unpaved surfaces. • Covering or spraying material piles and/or truck loads. Odors The proposed project is not anticipated to involve any process that would generate odors outside of the building. Noise Minnesota Statutes(§ 116.07,subd.2a)exempt from state noise standards"...an existing or newly-constructed segment of a road,street,or highway under the jurisdiction of a road authority of the town,statutory,or home rule charter city,or county,except for roadways for which full control of access has been acquired." Therefore,a detailed noise analysis is not required for the ADC EAW and Indirect Source Permit application. 25. Nearby resources.Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? Archaeological,historical or architectural resources? ❑Yes 0 No The Minnesota Historical Society has been contacted Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? 0 Yes •No Designated parks,recreation areas or trails? 0 Yes ■No Scenic views and vistas? 0 Yes ■No Other unique resources? 0 Yes ■No If yes,describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the resource.Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The Minnesota Historical Society(MHS)has been contacted for information on archeological,historical,or architectural resources on the site. If the MHS identifies any of these resources on the site,it will be addressed when responding to comments from the EAW public review process. 26. Visual impacts.Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation such as glare from intense lights,lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? ■Yes 0 No If yes,explain. Visual impacts from the project will be similar to other industrial/office developments in the area. Adjacent properties may experience visual impacts such as increased light glare and views of the building. However,the planned use is intended to be consistent with the zoning requirements and the City's Comprehensive Plan. Landscaping and screening will be provided in accordance with City requirements. Existing trees at the northeast corner of the site will be maintained to the extent possible to provide a buffer to adjacent property. New plantings will provide the required screening. The parking lot and roadway light fixtures will be shielded and directed downward to minimize glare. F:\WPWIN\1233-00\EAW.wpd 27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations.Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan,land use plan or regulation,or other applicable land use,water,or resource management plan of a local,regional,state or federal agency? II Yes 0 No. If yes,describe the plan,discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved.If no,explain. This project is subject to the City's Comprehesive Plan and the Stormwater Management Plan. The site may require a Conditional Use Permit if the percentage of office space exceeds 35%. This issue will be resolved by the City Staff, City Council,and ADC. The Stormwater Management Plan requires that stormwater runoff be restricted to 1/3 cfs per acre. The stormwater ponding on site will be required to meet this policy. These issues will be addressed through the City's approval process. This project is also subject to State air quality regulations. ADC will be required to obtain and comply with these permits. 28. Impact on infrastructure and public services.Will new or expanded utilities,roads,other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? N Yes 0 No. If yes,describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EAW; see EAW Guidelines for details.) Road The perimeter road is proposed to be a City road. This road could be built by the City or by ADC using the City's design requirements. Water There is concern about the water supply issues for this site. It is anticipated that the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will be required to review and sign-off on the project prior to the City Council approving the plan. If approved,the site will need to be connected to the watermain. 29. Cumulative impacts.Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700,subpart 7,item B requires that the RGU consider the"cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects"when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past,present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts.Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s)elsewhere on this form). The site to the east is owned by CAMAS and contains the Shiely Quarry. Industrial property borders the site to the east and south. Railroad tracks,County Road 101,Valley Fair Amusement Park,and commercial and industrial property are located north of the site. The cumulative impact of these developments has been to convert open space to developed space over time and thus reduce wildlife habitat in the area,increase impervious surface,and increase runoff volumes. The ADC site proposes a 35.5 acre outlot on the west half of their property. ADC has indicated that they have no plans for this outlot,but they may sell it in the future. If this outlot is sold,it is likely that it will be used for industrial development. This will convert the open space to developed space with impervious surface. 30. Other potential environmental impacts.If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28,identify and discuss them here,along with any proposed mitigation. No other impacts are anticipated by this project. 31. Summary of issues.Do not complete this section if the EAW is being done for EIS scoping;instead,address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document, which must accompany the EAW. List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is begun.Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that havebeen or may be considered for these impacts and issues,including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. F:\WPWIN\1233-00\EAW.wpd In summary,the following impacts and mitigative measures are associated with this project: • Increase in volume,rate,and pollutant loads of stormwater runoff. This impact will be mitigated through the use of treatment basins on site to remove pollutants and restrict the rate of runoff to 1/3 cfs per acre. • Increase in air pollutant emissions. ADC will be required to apply for and comply with all air quality permits. • Increase in water use. The proposed facility anticipates using 0.1 MGD. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission is currently addressing the water supply issue for the City of Shakopee. • Increase in waste water discharge. The Blue Lake Waste Water Treatment Facility was designed to accommodate the increased flows from development such as the ADC site. • Conversion of open space to developed space. The regional land use conversion that has taken place in the Metropolitan area is difficult to mitigate. The ADC site plan maintains some open space within their property and propose to use native plantings for some landscaped areas. RGU CERTIFICATION.The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor. I hereby certify that: D The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. ❑ The EAW describes the complete project;there are no other projects,stages or components other than those described in this document,which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions,as defined at Minnesota Rules,parts 4410.0200,subparts 9b and 60,respectively. ❑ Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Signature Date Title Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at Minnesota Planning.For additional information,worksheets or for EAW Guidelines,contact:Environmental Quality Board,658 Cedar St., St.Paul,MN 55155, 651-296-8253,or www.mnplan.state.mn.us F:\WPW IN\1233-00\EAW.wpd Appendix A Location and Site Plan Figures F'\WPW1N\12 -OO1\FAW uvni i I ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROPOSED FACILITY COUNTY MAP • H E N N E P I N C 0. h •ti t0 wr B 1A� I 2I 03 12 to 3QIr3, I3I R 22 W I ag SCALE .To Chaska ,A+'3 .I :i ii wOw?7 PRAW q F-1 ty 0 1 2 3 4 MILES WANflAl1■wN I . . MINNEsoI \-.::::;.•;•:•:::"----'• - -'•` --- TA.'. 3 9710' 1 Svwl,1IVj R24W, stio..21),EE 4,;k1-ietliosirria3101 -..:„.„:„:.:..i.,.. ,ic, ri i; I1Lak be 11.11 1 I 1 'I 113 1®il N` `®'�'.'.6 I `✓ { IIice .'~...Kw1 �, SAVAGE II -,'9�, 1 IIS .._1 _ - ............: :. -- - I_' I 1 wV1WeVILLTI o 1:: t:::1':.:% :C.J m1� 4. 3 C.; 1. I. �� 1 I': �-� C-r:.`.. PRIOR'LAKE }� Lakr+" I ,�," -PROJECT I Lake T ,; T ,21 ---- LOCATION ., I0P y'r IS .,. ; I INDIAN 4i PRIOR k{ 1 O'Doad X1( `+ j I ys ..i.:!!:' 1 1 ! rte Cake t I - 1 RESERVATION] • ...;.'...411,44.r.,.'•:::. 1 C/ ,yy/ et qv Ar," Y I - - I i it i -\i• r'1 MURPHY-HANRAHAN I de \ -- ,I, Lak 1 �� / , % ,� PARK RESERVE \ i 1 .is • I ....... !v\\1:1 im\ ,fIr 1, j :\ : j..:.... Campbe I ® ® ( - 1 _-%'%--AfurphY I-� I- - Lake• = I _�-� ::. ® _ I A_�_ I te, L9k. m 1iii:� �C ICre-•�` . ( 11 N I CLEARY.t. .G . 4_4_,,,,..4.: / 13 . RTre I \\ LAKE j�� (/, .,. �•�. ‘ 1 ® 1r L.A. I 1 PARK AL IIi-�� /k •Amp' l �i ��I raiii_ j I I (2,-,_ j / ,1 ,I r' --� IN iffair4L) i - ` LI 1°Ii I I �!' i ASIA.ikc R E #I.:i 's r .A.° S I 1 G • (`i 0Q i ! :' LAcsvn.IE 1 11 II 12 k Tfp�"1� 1, `2Y�V,LI �,-- mI _ 1� x 1® \ I4�1, 7 41' To Farml/Won \�•i ao�' ym.I��Y%- *T- I (� --1_��iI -s-- //-.11� ► \- •1...'141 I\\Lok.�1 I 1` Int: 7 A --I I li__ il�� <-; iro✓a.k-35I 1 v 1 r _-- 1 O 1 I `---- —i c. I'- V M Mme. • I _, - _- Oi y ` ' ,13 ®I LaA. ----` Q.-- ---r„:::k 3s IIS Lokei r , i bi: ® I v� - ! ------•`I S I ` 1 I I i © � i. Ii r I Sus.Wia k--®I`�- 11,41-- o II IS I . �_- 1 ! 5 Loo. i . II - lm iTa Farmington '-Jr11114,5 n. "® I �, I•m.t%�\ I -;!t I I In_I lop /i � _ I ❑ 4 I Q� i ---- ___1,_1J I � mo_/ ISI` I _i i - --I WILDLIFE/-- I I I ----I f `I O r' �\ I -.,_�_i_I , ,mofrib 1 I 4441 1 Cali iE 1__L -_l (� ___( :ii) r I All,----7-7,---- 'I' j " �j --- , .. 4411. -----I I11111- --- �, ,1-\411 I I 1 ,_ IP_ 1 ( \\ �'� p-�I 1 y, 1 \ , V NI E V 1- j ID _ --ierflph1111.,-16.0- _ �7`4//q-, I _ _1 -\ I �I-- `_� To Eulem carr I 1 '� - --j'-^_ARIA e3 ,741� ,---- 1 20 Al R 11 E T° ;Uw' \‘' It 9 4°=4475' 4Llt CO E! D 1A Q.I 230 I O Iti ,I 91 O 3s , / ,.. Ii —` ;-- -- ! I-- i — — I NSW t' :1 ' `v,4/ 1.4$4 1I 4* _I I I I I , - I MAHLETI ..., I �1�, - - 1 i __■1 1 1 i I I I I --- 1 ine , t EISO .,.....1 1 A. m.r....W.9.. I 4:.Par..El.:.. .'.'.I �:,. MI wY.�..wYme Ill • ( �1 _ IrFAWiaIi ... . \lI ,' 13 •I ,_{ I - I I wmo17��I L I ,i) ,� '\ t3 !1 `2� ® I �� j ! • 3s �I®.,i, I' ® i 19 I„ m / ® _ D _ 1` __.lo i>� i i � i�' To Castle Rock j i - I ta ' el�cil 3/ IItl 41It- o i i R22W I 3 R21w I �a N F. I 1 n. ti 93'20' L I Figure 1 8 cn ����rrrrz 4.) 8 0 P g as a t , , U , C I O • Q O + N L ' Q C 1 ,--3 U 0C + Z , C IUv °• ( --, U , % ll, , M I ' Y I /'% o IS1 e0110111..°1111411 Uil ia / Sill8 litio000000.00000) c....)1 121 o 3 o /1 /1 i' o • = C 0- • 3°:. A . _= 1 ^^ � ° i l / / 0 Y _ I,_ �u 11*:D '' IS F+�1 _ O N N ;/ 8 = I o 0 il i t i //�� •w hr�l15 ' o - 1 1 � / I / �T / I N'• I / $ ,(00 i I ` ' ' ' �\" it- J L O L M �I A—I a r'♦5. ,, d�I -o , I '-,I WU U \ u /� i •D ° ._ co • 7 Cr---------------7-1.11 ' o Xi - r Clip �/ ii ia�0 1 I ad yyyfis II 1 a. L I ' 0 I /i E I • ' / o I L O l 0l l v- • + } /I N I C / N /. / I° — c W l/ j n , 77 / } / 1, III 7tll W /I 0 1 N I • p% + N Ell I / ;, I o I hal ° /% ' I 1 L /// //I// /II // i/1 il 11 lc � � i CONT II 2 / / X++ 7 L 16 } coal} c p7o � N / Fll-1aQ� a o L Q 0 N 7 Cl- - L L'O U0�•-U d 0 -4 U00 L U N D • 0 Z N / /- U N } N N 3 t • °d x 1 CLi a+ TQ / 0 0 0 7 }tk / 2 r Y- o , I o1,2 ° _.N 3A/tl0 MHYd A311VA ' j O •• " '' n N O o N o N U a o / 3 n0 •o Y C D E O,_ L L O+ a Op 7 0 0 N D J E O L a ° N p N • o / GIC • •z. w- ..-as �.jx -- ,.., � ` • '.•- mak _ �i I. e �+•» , ^ - y," ra w .iy.` �-..� 1^- i f? t ,.� ,,, '7 prj •A.:. ,: per �, __ k„,,,, ....3,, _ , i a# 4 11 1 9O0. y '� c 1l ,:m.. ".t*, `\,:3tr,„%\•,„„._ . _-.,--,,.,-,,,,, .. .. 4::;'-'17-,;•. ',-,,,risli,„eAl''› i&4;,,,,,„,..',...,:,- .... - a .41,- --c,.•;;'.tfiswittitA, ,-, or'.-4„•.,,,',44,104..,„-4L,ip„,,,„,-2:3:•;'•:••• ••••*;3'.1i,"3„;;t1'24.k".1*,,.1.:‘, :i ..,._,..„ „..1.,,,,t.,...iz, • Waterworks 1' :,+:,,,,,,..tt.:1„,..::: - ,,.. 74/�1N..'''::::::.•::.:::::: ::: ry"- .�7r7,ud`.,5n '''04-�j. 2 _:: ,F-To 1 - -+r_+. 7 4111 :11 rte. ` r; q u f�=� ° -.-- -, S'� ` ` ..� 3 1 / \/ �Ir '. l�fl 111111 764 . `+r':^ w77; !� i4 0,,t, 6 .-„---„4.-.,-; ..,„ .....iiis•xf4 driii,:.,,,,, ikt- L„,,i_p,iiiirAfix-i*, ..,-e% Air -------:, VO ga �� l= x° �`� "„ �• ` .iii ~ 416. ".'�I J / a 14�' z _ .tet-. } - ua �'--a I •• 1p N1 ' ''*'' E':',..,.,±-'- 7<—',„,1„.„ ^ ;;;I#.— ._ -" ,41-...- g .'��° u x' o I , . 4 ki ._-fir # k _`-� _ - -.---- X40 _a ✓`��� `�' nils = max - tea', iI! Itr $so--`� `�• —--,� ,r... T. tom—,\ 2000 a 0 2000 Feet ADC TELECOMMUNICATION PROPOSED FACILITY A �W k . . USGS QUAD MAP 8441 Nayml.BaiMvrtl WSB ° 'M~ 8 411Figure 2 h.lwidmq 4c FAX 541.1100 I*RASiRNC7URE-ENGINEERS-PLANNERS Appendix B Letter from the DNR Natural Heritage Database F:\WPWIN\1233-001\EAW.wpd .cP,s0E MINA/p„ coi. nnesota p m W Naitural Heritage Deand Nongamartmente ResearchofNatural ProgrResourcesam, Box 25 , U lA . oJ500 Lafayette Road 4'd? Nan �Q`�' St. Paul,Minnesota 55155-40_ oP1RP Phone:(651)296-8279 Fax:(651)296-1811 E-mail:karen.cieminski@dnr.state.mn.us April 12, 2000 RECEIVED Andrea Moffatt APR 1 7 2000 WSB & Associates 8441 Wayzata Blvd, suite 350 WSB & Minneapolis, MN 55426 ASSOCIATES Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed ADC Telecommunications Industrial Facility, T115N R22W S.3, Scott County. NHNRP Contact#: ERDB 20000851 Dear Ms. Moffat, The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the area indicated on the map enclosed with your information request. Based on this review, there are 19 known occurrences of rare species or natural communities in the area searched (for details, see enclosed database printout and explanation of selected fields). However, based on the nature and location of the proposed project I do not believe it will affect any known occurrences of rare features. The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, a unit within the Section of Ecological Services, Department of Natural Resources. It is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, natural communities, and other natural features. Its purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features. Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database. A county-by- county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Scott County. Our information about natural communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county, However, because survey work for rare plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not been an on-site survey of all areas of the county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist on the project area. The enclosed results of the database search are provided in two formats: index and full record. To control the release of locational information which might result in the damage or destruction of a rare element, both printout formats are copyrighted. The index provides rare feature locations only to the nearest section, and may be reprinted, unaltered, in an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, municipal natural resource plan, or report compiled by your company for the project listed above. If you wish to reproduce the index for any other purpose, please contact me to request written permission. Copyright notice for the index should include the following disclaimer: "Copyright(year)State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources. This index may be reprinted,unaltered, in Environmental Assessment Worksheets,municipal natural resource plans, and internal reports. For any other use,written permission is required." The full-record printout includes more detailed locational information, and is for your personal use only. If you wish to reprint the full-record printouts for any purpose, please contact me to request DNR Information: 651-296-6157 • 1-888-646-6367 • TTY:651-296-5484 • 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Who Values Diversity 10 Minimum of 10%Post-Consumer Waste written permission. Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program focuses only on rare natural features. It does not constitute review or-approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. If you require further information on the environmental review process for other wildlife-related issues, you may contact your Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist Wayne Barstad, at(651)772-7940. An invoice for the work completed is enclosed. You are being billed for map and database search and staff scientist review. Please forward this invoice to your Accounts Payable Department. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. Sincerely, Karen L. Cieminski Data Manager / Ecologist encl: Database search results Rare Feature Database Print-Outs: An Explanation of Fields Invoice cc: Wayne Barstad, DNR Ecological Services • • y H A • y 0 ca as - o 0 o 0 o •- N £ • . 4-1 00 a °, W CLO ..1 al w ..1 ..1 .W-7 b04 Co > > > > > • 'O Co E E Co Co R a.. 0 0 0 O 0 0 • O .0 Co CO V) U1Co •H Co • b CO Co . CO W o H A. E H O • D, H E as CO la Co • N Co 0 H ' H• a Co Co a Co H .0 Co C-1 0 H 2 w CO W• a1 a it 0 H p H 0 zpCoo: H Cm a) m _ W CO XC N aha HI • m o CO Co al Co cn• H E 0UT-1 C00 X C11-110 >• It N . >+ qCo F N au m a CO m 3C o Co 10o F 2 OU 0 W x F Co 0)1 0k Hx 2 to 0 W C) O H CO O ,.) Co W F b4 Co _l N w Co .7- m co Co 0 ac —�,7D w U .�r7.� w -, pZ PI a7 VI CO CO *a Co alZz .En a a. xcaCx03a 4a .1 co.—Co O • 0 u1 4 u) U 4 O Q x c0 W > 4 F > H10 0 0 ZZHCOZOCCE. H40 CCI KG E. 3 a) W 4 a cn a X H CO E `C0 u] 0 Co 3 H 0 • U N Cn W H a a O ,o a Z a ca . Co Cd . og 2 O CO z O --. (II O O U �C-cE. F I-1 N RI XPIPOZ .ICOOCOZ00 --- co aO� H O H G7 C OO H• H x 2 vI W C7 U L7 pp al Cn E CE — x Wat - IT W H H a C7 a CO H O a u) a c.0 g a H a CD� O Co }%I U w F a w a w a a s V c~n W S w F o H H 'J HI > H o H a H H Z o H UFwmAECOOC0aOw W UO CU 7 £ oaU Z Co CCEl a 24 CU .1 .1 Co H0wO044raPVCnw2277. - . co A aAwawI xaH +Hw xCx i CooHCOOx O 4 aoa OHZZCoCOmZZ a. Co HpZaaFOHCW F aH 4 a a a. H Ha. w 1CCH10oCH agoCC. cn00SCC00 Z H N N co co co co co a) Co co Co U 2 U U V U U U 2' V U 2 Cl AZ F a 0 a 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 Co a 0 a m u) vl2a) cncnmcc/ uiZ Co cn2CO L O co D w co F Os W E H H H as• o a. CO a a 4.1 U S•I 0 a) a 2 a) a. 2 H O l-I II S4 as C1 <J• O a W m 10 ID H H H m m m d0C) d H 1 . VV V ' 11 d• 1.0 F .a 0 a cn 0 0 0 H H H H m m m m m m m m-m m m m Z Z C) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Co N 0 0 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNCNNN a L NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN O 1) a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a co ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ•as as 2 - - O E Co Co Co Co .n Co .n < Co. lD tD \D Co Co Co Co b \D <0 0 O a) a H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H U d HIH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H [0)1 $ W- 3 H H R H H EH H H H H H H H H H H H H H • Appendix C Traffic Analysis F:1WPWIN\1233-001\EAW.wpd • EDEN PRAIRIE /- ' - 4 \t / `\ I' Naw ---- 614/ *Me R Ingo TrollerCt., _ -_-- _SCOTT iF 4 Wel ...-----alk F11111 . .. 11f 4; 101ktr el 11111Em 1 9i ''''''-.-../4 rr ,: '' .r 16. - .t 1 t3 1 "` 11 � 0 atko• n r 16 Project _ ill ® ADC e is1 1 .- a. — — � J' ®I s^ol.moi! 10 i # I 1 io I ' - PRIOR g LAIR PRIOR LAIR I rrlar taxa jtr,alw.Rawwma. .., ... i 0 4)------0 0 1 1 fr?jggiC , w 1a EAW Project No. 1233-001 Date:April 2000 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Project Location Map Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Figure C-1 t:\1233-001\eaw\fig-1.dgn Valley Fair X Drive moa • 101 AllkA (3991 34.118 370 f0 245 (735) 21 f'j4. `�9,y te QaI.- Railrcad Q o Tracks 0 _ o U) M ..O Q N alley Indus al BI d vd 39 f7 f45 )..Of t ••• Ul Site `\ rel CO \ �/ \ <` Park Place 39 (45) 11 (5)0 1 Ul� M v 01 N Valley Park Drive 2000 AM Peak(ADT) = XX 2000 PM Peak(ADD=(XX) ADT=(XX1 EAW Project No. 1233-001 Date:April 2000 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. 2000 Traffic Volumes Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Figure C-2 t:\1233-001\eaw\fig-2.dgn Valley Fair X Drive t�aa ,� I0l ALTA 436 (43 01 4j0 (0),311 +268 (1471 23 (21) ir _au, •V1 Ra�lroad v O O racks CO N Ni M 0 Of Valle y/ad u IL Blvd (49) 4. s ,l1 -- - ton ---\ \ v� \ 1 /1 COt- \ Si `-_ \� M01 - 1 Park , Place 41 (481•04" 12 (5)°,441 t N Valley Park Drive 2000 AM Peak(ADT) = XX 2000 PM Peak(ADT) =(XX) EAW Project No. 1233001 Date:April 2000 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Projected 2002 Peak Hour Volumes (ADD w/o Development Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Figure C-3 t:\1233-001\eaw\fig-3.dgn Valley Fair X Drive moo Tg �oa lol 497 (4970) 0 305 O68) 470 (5.(0) 26 24))aim* VI (vac ▪ N Ram/SO) „a[ - u7 +[ aq1 T 0 n1 racks •T c0 V Q in r- • Valle,Ind us;44Blvd I q (56)„.0 —� t •-• -0 1 4110 ' \ _d I ,/ \ Site U,rn M Park _1, Place 49 (96)M'h, —, 14 (6)mill ala, l.o —Q NID M Valley Park Drive 2000 AM Peak(ADD= XX 2000 PM Peak(ADD=(XX) EAW Project No. 1233-001 Date:April 2000 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Projected 2005 PM Peak Hour Volumes (ADD w/o Development Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Figure C-4 t:\1233-001\eaw\fig-4.dgn Valley Fair X Drive ®y 101 .11( 56% (38%) rr M V Railroad Tracks M co Valle y Ddu m strr4B1Pd 38% (44%) a kki. 39% Park 23% (45X) 23X (11%) Place \c fi M AM%-(PM%) OUTBOUND 1 AM%-(PM%) INBOUND EAW Project No. 1233-001 Date:April 2000 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Trip Distribution Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Figure C-5 t:\1233-001\eaw\fig-5.dgn V A. Valley Fair X Drive 238 (46) 150 (37)� a,N Rai �N *l:11 oadT N Sr racks N Val to N eyed a113 Ivda,a, 1 v 31 (169) C) it A pi 1"1 r N N M N la k...32 (172) Park X19 (42) Place in a, M 2000 AM Peak(ADD= XX 2000 PM Peak(ADD=(XX) EAW Project No. 1233-001 Date;April 2000 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Peak Hour Site Traffic Volumes Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Figure C-6 t:\1233-001\eaw\fig-6.dgn Valley Fair X Drive moa N O O AlikA ,T 436 f 43 0 J 50 (0 505 (193) ? (4t2JJ (Sej "IIl' In (13 Iroad Trac M o ^N^ N a11CSJ e3,Indo a1 B1 0 V vd d,k, t_gt (1p) 43 0 (0) (4 (01 0 9) 12 (5)......4„ 'It?' 0 mtiN - Y 0,V ^y 2 e, R �1� `32 (172) Park �� 0 (0) ��19 (42) Place 41 (48)o, 0 (5). 1tfr 12 (5) �f- V NC M M) 2000 AM Peak(ADD= XX 2000 PM Peak(ADD =(XX) EAW Project No. 1233001 Date:April 2000 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Proposed 2002 Peak Hour Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Volumes (ADD with Site Traffic Figure C-7 t:\1233-001\eaw\fig-7.dgn Valley Fair Drive J` moo Tk eloa 10l qJ L %k 497 (490) 470 (° 543 (21g1 1760 (516)) O N t0 .T 'frO r- ad Trac ksin In Vali Indo B r-Q 41 Ivd (169) ° 0 (49) 14 (0) m co 0 4 ANO tiirvON a) v v 1A N N Ot N' �32 (172) Park 4, � 0 (01 \c19 (42) Place 49 (561 0 ( )E, Ilk 1 14 (6)EN menti .-t0 M Nal tT In in 2000 AM Peak(ADD= XX 2000 PM Peak(ADD=(XX) EAW Project No. 1233-001 Date:April 2000 ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Proposed 2005 Peak Hour Volumes (ADD with Site Traffic Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Figure C-8 t:\1233-001\eaw\fig-B.dgn .0 N e EEm.xW a 0 0 0 ; a O o w NW U f: U A x z a U U U O N a O 41 U Q U A Z 0.4 U oa as x E-4 "Pi 3a w o w - U W co cs1A O ( a 0 as CO F 0 a Nu a112:1 0 c•1 a 0 = . . z H 0 CO pa 1-1 W z c 'mml � . •� . a� i. v ^..., Et wW Ra , s. s A R A 1, .13 c cia ca a �: OCT - 'R ate 'CY O O cu •. U c C Z . - o ♦+ R O a� V '—' a •L a a F > � > a * * Al Table C-2 Level of Service Descriptions LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTION A FREE FLOW: speed controlled by driver's desires, speed limits, or physical roadway conditions. B STABLE FLOW: operating speeds beginning to be restricted, little or no restriction on maneuverability from other vehicles. C STABLE FLOW: speeds and maneuverability more restricted. D APPROACHING UNSTABLE FLOW: tolerable speeds can be maintained but temporary restrictions to flow cause substantial drops in speed, little freedom to maneuver, comfort and convenience are low. E UNSTABLE FLOW: volumes near capacity, speed typically in neighborhood of 30 MPH, stoppages of momentary duration, ability to maneuver severely limited. F FORCED FLOW: low-operating speeds,volume below capacity, queues formed. - 4 � CITY OF SHAKOPEE In the matter of the Decision on the FINDINGS OF FACT Need for an Environmental Impact AND CONCLUSIONS Statement(EIS) for the Proposed ADC Telecommunications development, Shakopee,MN. ADC Telecommunications has proposed to construct an office and manufacturing facility on 106 acres located immediately south of County Road 101 and east of Valley Park Drive. The facility proposes 147,500 sf of office space,264,500 sfofmanufacturing space,55,500 sfofindustrial space, and 22,500 sf of building amenities. Pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.4300, subp. 14, the City of Shakopee has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW)for this proposed project. As to the need for an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)on the project and based on the record in this matter, including the EAW and comments received, the City of Shakopee makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions: ' FINDINGS OF FACT I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project The project proposes the construction of an industrial/office space development on a 106-acre parcel of land. The facility proposes 147,500 sf of office space,264,500 sf of manufacturing space, 55,500 sf of industrial space, and 22,500 sf of building amenities. B. Project Site The proposed project is within an 106-acre area immediately south of County Road 101 and east of Valley Park Drive in Shakopee, MN. The project is located within the SE1/4 of Section 3,T115N,R22W. This site contains brush and grassland. The CAMAS-Sheily Quarry is located east of the site. II. PROJECT HISTORY A. The project was subject to the mandatory preparation of an EAW under Minnesota R. 4410.43 00, subp. 14. B. An EAW was prepared for the proposed project and distributed to the Environmental Quality Board(EQB)mailing list and other interested parties on May 4, 2000. C. A press release containing the notice of availability of the EAW for public review was provided to media serving the project area the week of May 15, 2000. D. The EAW was noticed in the May 15, 2000 EQB Monitor. The public comment - period ended on June 14,2000. Comment letters were received from the Minnesota F:1 WPW IM 1133-00%FOF wpd Pollution Control Agency(MPCA)and the Department ofNatural Resources(DNR). Copies of the letters are hereby incorporated by reference. Responses to the comments are also incorporated by reference. III. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Minnesota R.4410.1700, subp. 1 states that "an EIS shall be ordered for projects that have ' the potential for significant environmental effects." In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects,the City of Shakopee must consider the four factors set out in Minnesota R.4410.1700,subp. 7.With respect to each of these factors,the City finds as follows: A. TYPE, EXTENT,AND REVERSIBILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The first factor that the City must consider is "type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects,"Minnesota R.4410.1700,subp.7.A. The City's findings with respect to each of these issues are set forth below. 1. The type of environmental impacts and mitigation efforts anticipated as part of this project include: a. Increased storm water runoff rate,volume and runoff pollutants. This impact will be mitigated through the use of treatment basins on site to remove pollutants and restrict the runoff rate to 1/3 cfs per acre. ADC will be encouraged to reduce impervious surfaces, where feasible. b. Increased water use. The facility proposes to use 0.1 MGD of water. It is anticipated that 1-2 new wells will be constructed by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.(SPUC) to address water supply in the area. Further, it is anticipated that a water supply analysis will be undertaken by SPUC. c. Increased wastewater discharge. The Blue Lake Waste Water Treatment Facility was designed to accommodate the increased flows from development such as ADC. The high phosphate content in the wastewater will be treated by elementary neutralization prior to discharge into the sanitary sewer system. d. Increased air pollutant emissions. ADC has applied for and will be required to comply with all air quality permits. e. Conversion of open space to developed space. The regional land use conversion that has taken place in the Metropolitan area is difficult to mitigate. The ADC site plan maintains some open space within their property and proposes touse native plantings for some landscaped areas. 2. The extent and reversibility of environmental impacts are consistent with those of office/industrial development. F:I WPWIM 1233-001 FOF.wpd B. CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR ANTICIPATED FUTURE PROJECTS The second factor that the City must consider is "the cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects",Minnesota R.4410.1700.supb.7.B.The City's findings with respect to this factor are set forth below. 1. The construction of the ADC facility will be in one phase. The site is proposed to be constructed on the east side of the 106 acre property. There are no plans for development within the western outlot of their property; however, this outlot may be sold in the future and is likely that it would be used for industrial uses. C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ARE SUBJECT TO MITIGATION BY ONGOING PUBLIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY 1. The following permits or approvals will be required for the project: Unit of Government Permit or Approval Required Federal: US Environmental Protection Agency -, Hazardous Waste ID# State: DNR -, Temporary dewatering permit MPCA - NPDES-General Stormwater Permit MPCA - Facility Permit MPCA - Indirect Source Permit Local: City of Shakopee - Site Plan/Plat Approval City of Shakopee Building Permit Lower Minnesota River Watershed District -) Plan review Metropolitan Council -+ Industrial Waste Discharge Permit Scott County SWCD - Review of stormwater management plan Scott County Environmental Health - Hazardous Waste Generator Permit F•I WPW1M 1777.M%F/)F lure! 2. The City of Shakopee finds that the potential environmental affects of the project are subject to mitigation by ongoing regulatory authorities such that an EIS need not be prepared. D. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAN BE ANTICIPATED AND CONTROLLED AS A RESULT OF OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES UNDERTAKEN BY PUBLIC AGENCIES OR THE PROJECT PROPOSER, OR OF EISs PREVIOUSLY PREPARED ON SIMILAR PROJECTS. The fourth factor that the City must consider is "the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer,or ofEISs previously prepared on similar projects," Minnesota R.4700.1700,subp. 7.D. The City's findings with respect to this factor are set forth below: The environmental impacts of the proposed project have been addressed in the following plans prepared by the City: 1. City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan 2. City of Shakopee Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan The City finds that the environmental effects of the project can be anticipated and controlled as a result of the environmental review, planning, and permitting processes. CONCLUSIONS The preparation of the ADC Telecommunications EAW and comments received on the EAW have generated information adequate to determine whether the proposed facility has the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW has identified areas where the potential for significant environmental effects exist,but appropriate mitigative measures have or will be incorporated into the project plan and/or permits. The ADC Development is expected to comply with all the City of Shakopee standards and review agency standards. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota R.4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions,the project does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required. F:IWPWIN\1233-0O\FOF.wpd JUN-13-2000 11:01 612 445 6718 P.01/02 G °r`Pomo to Department of Natural Resources W. $ „4",€,T, y9t>nn�SO r 550X1 Lsftiyct►e Road 10 G 4 ‘ / AO lel ._ Paul.Minneww 55155-4o_—_ _ !.._ —•— !-a/'L-' Si. -.97....-- --"....;:el 7671 u o lea- 9yG • 39/0 Post��t/' Fax fV�ote� (� To i/1`�.-��7't!''�' FI�n1 i COJORDt.OZwite , 4- Phone R .6Ciff"ifiraf 2000 Fax# gr . s fol: Fee 0 car). 6-" foi June 9, • )4ibbael Leek Development Director -.' ,..:•r� _ - Community D City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,MN 79 RE: ADC Manufacturing and Engineering Facility Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) Dear Mr.Leek: Manufacturing and NB- has reviewed the EAW for the ADCMao The ne ing Fac li� e�Resources offer the following comments for your consideration. Engineering Facility p PP in meeting its water It will rely upon the public water supplyoto water useem e,WaterThproposed indicates that the project Wo rtun opportunity nOto The roposed utilization is not significant in itself,of Shakopee service oPP public utility that needs. P to increase in theCity the City and rum municipal water use continues l issues for this and future projects by 1 plan to address the careful sign. The Ci of water supe Y researched long-term water supply commission. The City should develop a well growing water supply needs of this rapidly developing area• Land Use Management District issues in Item 14 correctly notes that a The discussion of Water-related DNR protected watercourse,commonly referred to asthe Prior Lake Outlet Channel,is located on the arequired to meet a 50-foot setback from the top of the channel pro bank, site. In addition d tov structures park 0ct 50-foot setback. within the driveways,and parking areas arc also required to meet a setback. Review bank,proposed roads, of the site plan indicates that portions of the public road depicted east of the prat road should be realigned to the west such that the toe�and waoercourse be required the setback. The alsoareas disturbed between th into the setback. We recommend that any planted and maintained in native grass types. Regarding mitigation measures to address wind erosion potentials denifn in Item 16, we recommend that vegetation reestablishment occur as soon as possible Blue Lake as a downstream receiving water. Item rib,Water Quality:Surface Water Runoff,identifiesquality of runoff leaving site,runoff Although we do not anticipate an app?eC1able decrease in the q ty when l+ the with increases quantities o could cause a significant associatedies will be substantially erdeelo c teib increase of BlueLak , with other develop 6157 • 1-8n-646-A67 • �Y:651-296-5484 • 1-800�513929 DNR Information:651-296-Who •s• PPrimoot+a�O1ad Paper Containing a Ponu°itY Employer NV Minimum of to%Po*Fconswnef YAM VVealues Di�asih 1 JUN-13-2000 11 01 612 445 6718 P.02/02 Michael Leek,Community Development Director June 9, 2000 effect to the ecological functions of Blue Lake. The concern is tied mainly to the potential for longer- duration high water conditions at Blue Lake. The environmental impact statement(EIS)need decision should reflect consideration of how the City of Shakopec's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan,as well as any related requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA),address the potential for development to result in an increased frequency of high water conditions in Blue Lake. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. We look forward to receiving your record of decision and responses to comments on the project. Mintz.Rules part 4410.1700,subparts 4& 5 require you to send us your decision document within 5 days of your decision. Please contact Bill Johnson of my staff at(651)296-9229 if you have questions about this letter. Sincerely, 5;i2" J;LA-Pv---6 Thomas W.Balcom, Supervisor Environmental Planning and Review Section Office of Management and Budget Services c: Kathleen Wallace Con Christianson Joe Oschwald Russ Peterson,USFWS .Jon Larsen,EQB Bernard S. Wenzel,ADC Communications,Inc. Q0000851-0001 .4DCFACtLIr(.WPD • • • 2 • TOTAL P.02 JUN-19-2000 15: 11 612 445 6716 P.03/07 • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency •.rl■r-• June 14,2000 n a n i 45 U JUN 1 6 2000LuJ Mr. R.Michael Leek Community Development Director City of Shakopee By 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 RE; Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW)for ADC Manufacturing and Engineering Facility Dear Mr. Leek: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the EAW for the proposed ADC Manufacturing and Engineering Facility(ADC),near County 101 and Valley Park Drive. The proposed development is a 490,000-square feet facility. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA)staff has reviewed the EAW for this project. We have the following comments for your consideration and response by the city in its decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS). Storm Water Runoff Because of the soil types in this area,we strongly encourage the use of low-impact development principles like added detention through pending, depressional storage,and infiltration. We recommend that thc city and'developers develop a plan to match existing(pre-development)and post-development • discharge rates and volumes from the site. Additionally,we encourage the project proposer to minimize. the'ainount of impervious surfaces at the site, which will help minimize the potential impacts from storm water runoff. Options may include minimizing driveway widths,or providing alternative routes for infiltration,such as through using porous materials on walkways and mulch on bare ground,directing rainwater from roof-top gutters into flower beds or other planted areas,or including infiltration strips in parking areas. We are also concerned about the storm water discharge location,the Prior Lake-Spring Lake outlet channel. The channel in this area is showing significant disrepair and has bank destabilization. Does the proposer or city plan to repair and clean up the channel in the project's vicinity? If not,we recommend that be done. Questions about these comments or the MPCA's construction storm water program requirements may be directed to Jay Michels at(651)296-7036. Indirect Source Permit(ISP)Requirements As stated in the EAW document,an Indirect Source Permit(ISP)is required for the project. If a project with at least 1,000 or more parking spaces is located within one-quarter mile of a busy roadway with at least 8,334 average daily traffic(ADT),an ISP is needed under the assessment procedure of the ISP rule. The project is expected to have 1,550 parking spaces and is.located within one-quarter mile of TH 101, with existing ADT of approximately 12,040-18,000 vehicles per day(CSAR•17 is referenced in the EAW • document as within one-quarter mile of the project site)., • - 520 Lafayette Rd. N.;St. Paul,MN 55155-4194;(651)296-6300(Voice); (651)292-5332(TTY) St. Paul • Brainerd • Detroit Lakes • Duluth • Mankato • Marshall • Rochester • Willmar; www.pca.state.mn.us Equal Opportunity Employer • Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20%fibers from paper recycled by consumers. JUN-19-2000 15:11 612 445 6718 P.04/27 Mr.R.Michael Leek Page Two • to Traffic� impact study and identifies potential traffic impacts aexpected nd ctedibution prq o includes a teprofed ct traffic Theitimpact study includes ADT,trip generation result from the proposed project. ��analysis, existing and future no build and build conditions. estimates,and level of service capacity Y peak hours represent worst case traffic and evening weekend or The traffic study indicates thatc the morning analysis takes into account ValleyFair p conditions,however,it is not clear if the traffic ic. We also note that no roadway improvements or traffic mitigation measures are weekday traff recommended or needed for the project ua. Anal sis-Traffic modeling analysis for the project by modeling .. Air t fails to include a detailed air quality area. The EAW,modeling The EAW document and carbon monoxide concentrations in the projectWe wowd futureever, atraffic flow resultingapplication for the project. s shouldube states that an air quality analysis will be submitted with the� air analysis is large enough to requirepublic detaileddoair qualityent than as ISP. like to stress that when a projectew An EAW is a more included in the EAW for the public to nevi Travel Demand Mena ementNproject area is included ro ected availability m mass ssss tra itoerf ve ice to theit system,and tis incl e in estimate ofthedocumenttent and Pshould provide number and ri esharericy in the EAW programs sThe EAWreThe MICA encourages and carpool programs as possible mitigation measures to stirn�in ��' vehicle trips to and from the project site and traffic congestion oolre biking aadwalcoUrlcing,and alternatives to the single occupancy vehicle including transit,car and vane g, flextime tel commuting. quality is on the comments regarding the ISP,traffic and air q ty If you have any questions abouHtheo�n at(651)297-2331. analyses,please contact Mary Stationary Source Air Emissions potential air It a ears the air emissions listed in Item 23 are projected �'.'ons would be limitedunder proposed t PPpotential emissions. We understand from ADC that �for any pollutant. We suggest that information thou permit permit to less than l u0 tons per ypotential the estimated limits also be included in the EAW discussion,whenavailable, in addition to the estimate likelyuquality-requirements ons,this actual emissions: �S�� Late what r requirements m1?PlY' would help the Gene manufacturing materials, The EAW indicates that the proposer would implement recycling of office and manufto waste minimization and pollution prevention for hazardous wastes. We would aslts p support pppo t along with o oser to evaluate and pursue waste prevention opportunities n and encourage the pr p both the construction phase and operation of the facility. significant trees and incorporating native plantings We would support the proposer in preserving existing Sm employ energyin the landscaping to the maximum extent possible. We also suggest the proposer em P efficient building practices as much as possible. JUN-19-2000 15 11 612 445 6718 P.05/07 Mr.R.Michael Leek Page Three We look forward to receiving your written responses to these comments and the city's determination on the need for an EIS. If you have any questions about this letter,please contact me at(651)296-6703. Sincerely, Barbara Conti Planner Principal Operations and Planning Section Metro District BC/gs cc: Bernie Wenzel,ADC Gregg Downing,Environmental Quality Board Mary Hoffman Lynn,MPCA Jay Michels,MPCA B.A.Mittelsteadt,P.E. 350 Westwood Lake Office Bret A.Weiss,P.E. WSB 8441 Wayzata Boulevard._ Peter R.Willenbring,P.E. Minneapolis, MN 55426 Donald W.Sterna,P.E. Ronald B.Bray,P.E. 612-541-4800 &Associates, Inc. FAX 541-1700 Memorandum To: Bill Johnson,DNR Barbara Conti,MPCA From: Michael-Leek, City of Shakopee Pete Willenbring, P.E., WSB &Associates Andrea Moffatt, WSB&Associates Date: June 28, 2000 Re: ADC Telecommunications EAW-Response to Comments WSB Project No. 1233-00 Please find the responses to the comments from Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) that were received in response to the ADC Telecommunications EAW for Shakopee, MN. The public comment period for this EAW ended June 14,2000. Comments from the DNR 1. Comment: Item 13, Water Use, indicates that the project will rely upon the public water supply in meeting its water use needs. The proposed utilization is not significant in itself, however we take the opportunity to note the municipal water use continues to increase in the City of Shakopee service area. We recommend careful consideration of water supply issues for this and future projects by both the City and public utility commission. The City should develop a well researched long-term water supply plan to address the growing water supply needs of this rapidly developing area.: Response: As discussed in the EAW,the City is aware of the water supply issues within the area. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission(SPUC)is addressing the water supply issue. At the time of the EAW preparation, SPUC could not comment on the adequacy of the water supply. Since the EAW was submitted for review, SPUC has recently initiated a water supply.analysis for the area. Also, SPUC is in the process of requesting approval for 1-2 new City wells. 2. Comment: The discussion of Water-related Land Use Management District issues in Item 14 correctly notes that a DNR protected watercourse, commonly referred to as the Prior Lake Outlet Channel, is located on the project site. In addition to structures being required to meet a 50-foot setback from the top of the channel bank,proposed roads, driveways, and parking areas are also required to meet a 50-foot setback. Review of the site plan indicates that portions of the public road depicted east of the project encroach within the required setback. The road should be realigned to the west such that the toe Minneapolis • St . Cloud F:\WpWIN\1233-00\O62o00comments.wpd Infrastructure Engineers Planners EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER June 28, 2000 Page 2 and slope does not encroach into the setback. We also recommend that any areas disturbed between the road and watercourse be planted and maintained in native grass species. Response: The road alignment will be adjusted through the plat approval process to meet applicable setback requirements. Also, ADC intends to use native plant species in the landscaping of the development, as feasible. (See also response to MPCA Comment#2). 3. Comment: Regarding mitigation measures to address wind erosion potentials identified in item 16, we recommend that vegetation reestablishment occur as soon as possible after construction. Response: As noted in the EAW, the soils present on the site are highly erodible by wind. ADC will be responsible for assuring that the vegetation is reestablished as soon as possible after construction to reduce this type of erosion. 4. Comment: Item 17b, Water Quality : Surface Water Runoff, identifies Blue Lake as a downstream receiving water. Although we do not anticipate an appreciable decrease in the quality of runoff leaving the site,runoff quantities will be substantially increased. This increase in runoff volume,when coupled with increases associated with other development in the contributing watershed of Blue Lake, could cause significant effect to the ecological functions of Blue Lake. The concern is tied mainly to the potential for longer-duration high water conditions at Blue Lake. The environmental impact statement (EIS)need decision should reflect consideration of how the City of Shakopee's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, as well as any related requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA), address the potential for development to result in an increased frequency of high water conditions in Blue Lake. Response: The City has stipulated that development within the Blue Lake watershed will be limited to discharge rates of 1/3 cfs per acre. This corresponds to a developed discharge rate of 35.3 cfs. This is more restrictive than limiting discharge to pre- development conditions,which would be 48 cfs. Furthermore, the discharge rates for subwatersheds upstream of Deans Lake will be restricted to 1/10 cfs per acre. These rates have been required by the City in an attempt to protect resources such as Deans and Blue Lakes. These rates are outlined in the City's approved Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan. In addition, Blue Lake is a backwater of the Minnesota River and therefore is impacted annually to a greater extent by the regional flooding profile of the river than increases in stormwater volume. Comments from the MPCA 1. Comment: Storm Water Runoff. Because of the soil types in this area,we strongly encourage the use of low-impact development principles like added detention through ponding, depressional storage, and infiltration. We recommend that the city and F:\W PW IN\1233-00\062000comments.wpd June 28, 2000 Page 3 developers develop a plan to match existing (pre-development) and post-development discharge rates and volumes from the site. Additionally, we encourage the project proposer to minimize the amount of impervious surfaces at the site, which will help minimize the potential impacts from storm water runoff. Options may include minimizing driveway widths, or providing alternative routes for infiltration, such as through using porous materials on walkways and mulch on bare ground, directing rainwater from roof-top gutters into flower beds or other planted areas, or including infiltration strips in parking areas. Response: As per the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, the discharge rate will be restricted to 1/3 cfs. This corresponds to a more restrictive discharge rate of 35.3 cfs as opposed to a 48 cfs discharge rate under pre-development conditions. Water will be retained and treated on-site to NURP guidelines. The City will encourage the developer to decrease impervious surfaces. 2. Comment: We are also concerned about the storm water discharge location, the Prior Lake-Spring Lake outlet channel. The channel in this area is showing significant disrepair and has bank destabilization. Does the proposer or city plan to repair and clean up the channel in the project's vicinity? If not,we recommend that be done. Questions about these comments or the MPCA's construction storm water program requirements may be directed to Jay Michels at(651)296-7036. Response: The City intends to address the erosion and destabilization problems within the channel and is reviewing whether this could be done as part of the ADC grading plan or as a city-wide regional project. Further, the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District and the City are completing a study of the entire outlet channel. This study will identify problem areas and corrective actions to be taken to repair the entire length of the channel. 3. Comment: ISP Requirements. As stated in the EAW document, an Indirect Source Permit(ISP)is required for the project. If a project with at least 1,000 or more parking spaces is located within one-quarter mile of a busy roadway with at least 8,334 average daily traffic(ADT), an ISP is needed under the assessment procedure of the ISP rule. The project is expected to have 1,550 parking spaces and is located within one-quarter mile of TH101, with existing ADT of approximately 12,000-18,000 vehicles per day (CSAH 17 is referenced in the EAW document as within one-quarter mile of the project site). Response: As stated in the EAW, an ISP is being prepared for the ADC development. 4. Comment: Traffic Analysis. The EAW includes a detailed traffic impact study and identifies potential traffic impacts expected to result from the proposed project. The traffic impact study includes ADT,trip generation and distribution estimates, and level of service capacity analysis, for existing and future no build and build conditions. The F:\W P W IN\1233-00\062000conunents.wpd June 28, 2000 Page 4 traffic study indicates that the morning and evening peak hours represent worst case traffic conditions, however, it is not clear if the traffic analysis takes into account Valley Fair peak weekend or weekday traffic. We also note that no roadway improvements or traffic mitigation measures are recommended or needed for the project. Response: Weekday traffic represents the worst case traffic conditions at the intersections adjacent to the proposed ADC development with the morning and evening peak hours representing the worst times for traffic during these days. Due to the fact that Valley Fair opens at 10:00 am, after the am peak hour occurs, the traffic generated by the amusement park will only impact the evening peak hour. The original traffic counts were conducted April 18, 2000, prior to the spring opening of Valley Fair. To account for the traffic entering and exiting Valley Fair during the pm peak hour, additional traffic counts were conducted June 21, 2000. The level of service traffic analysis was then revised to include the new Valley Fair traffic data. The results of the revised analysis show that all of the intersections analyzed are still forecast to operate at a satisfactory level of service with the additional ADC Telecommunications, Inc., development traffic. The only level of service that actually changed as a result of the revised pm peak hour traffic volumes was the 2005 pm peak hour level of service at Valley Park Drive and Valley Industrial Boulevard North with the proposed ADC development traffic. The level of service went from C to a D. 5. Comment: Air Quality Analysis-Traffic. The EAW document fails to include a detailed air quality modeling analysis for the project by modeling future traffic flow and resulting carbon monoxide concentrations in the project area. The EAW,however, states that an air quality analysis will be submitted with the ISP application for the project. We would like to stress that when a project is large enough to require an ISP, a detailed air quality analysis should be included in the EAW for the public to review. An EAW is a more public document than an ISP. Response: An ISP applications for the ADC development is currently being prepared and is in review with the MPCA. 6. Comment: Travel Demand Management. No estimate of the current and projected availability of mass transit service to the project area is included in the EAW document. The EAW should provide some discussion of the transit system, and rideshare and carpool programs as possible mitigation measures to help in reducing the number of single occupancy vehicle trips to and from the project site and traffic congestion in the project area. The MPCA encourages alternatives to single occupancy vehicle including transit, car and vanpooling, and biking and walking, and flextime telecommunting. If you have any questions about the comments regarding the ISP,traffic and air quality analyses, please contact Mary Hoffman Lynn at(651)297-2331. Response: The City of Shakopee's current mission statement for transit is as follows: F:\wpwThm233-00\062000comments.wpd • June 28, 2000 Page 5 "To evaluate and improve the performance, efficiency, and productivity of the local transit system by identifying the transit service needs of all citizens, and - delivering the appropriate transit services while balancing available energy and financial resources." The City is not served by metropolitan Transit service. Instead,the City of Shakopee is the provider, through Shakopee Area Transit (SAT), of alternative transit services persuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.388. Services currently provided are: • Dial-a-Ride service within the Shakopee city limits • Express bus service to Eden Prairie Center during peak hours • Commuter van pools The Dial-a-Ride and Van Pool programs have been operating since the fall of 1983. Peak hour fixed-route service was begun in the fall of 1994. The City currently purchases transit services from a number of providers, including: • Laidlaw Transit Services,Inc. - Dial-a-Ride; • Southwest Metro Transit Commission-Express Bus Service; • Van Pool Services, Inc. (VPSI) -Van Pool Services Currently,there is regular route transit service to the proposed ADC development. ADC will be encouraged to instigate rideshare and carpooling programs. 7. Comment: Stationary Source Air Emissions. It appears the air emissions listed in Item 23 are projected actual emissions,rather than potential air emissions. We understand from ADC that potential air emissions would be limited under proposed permit conditions to less than 100 tons per year for any pollutant. We suggest that information about likely permit limits also be included in the EAW discussion,when available, in addition to the estimated actual emissions. As most state and federal air quality- requirements are based on potential emissions, this would help the MPCA staff evaluate what requirements may apply. Response: ADC submitted a Federal : Synthetic Minor Part 70 permit application on May 1, 2000. This application is currently under,review of the MPCA. The permit limits per year outlined in the application are as follows: Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC): _<95 tons Single Hazardous Air Pollutant(HAP): 9.8 tons Total HAP: 24 tons Particulate Matter<10 microns(PM10): 95 tons PM: 95 tons Sulfur dioxide(SO2): 0.05 tons F:\W P W IN\123 3-00\062000comments.wp d June 28, 2000 Page6 Nitrous oxide(NOX): 9.01 tons Carbon monoxide(CO): 7.6 tons Lead(Pb): 4.5 x 10-5 tons 8. Comment: General. The EAW indicates that the proposer would implement recycling of office and manufacturing materials, along with waste minimization and pollution prevention for hazardous wastes. We would like to support and encourage the proposer to evaluate and pursue waste prevention opportunities as much as possible in both the construction phase and operation of the facility. We would support the proposer in preserving existing significant trees and incorporating native plantings in the landscaping to the maximum extent possible. We also suggest the proposer employ energy efficient building practices as much as possible. Response: This information will be given to ADC for their review and consideration. This concludes the response to comments generated from the public comment period for the EAW. If you have questions,please contact Michael Leek at(952)445-3650 or Andrea Moffatt at(763)541-4800. F:\W P W IN\123 3-00\062000comments.wpd ►2). z , 1 I FINAL I I ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREA-WIDE REVIEW +� (FAUAR) VOLUME 1 OF 2 VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER I Prepared for: CITY OF SHAKOPEE SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA I I July 3, 2000 BMI Project No. T11.20132 I Prepared by: •";a�*; " .3, 1 CERTIFICATION I 1 1 I 1 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: 2ZV� Ronald .Roetzel,P.E. ' Registration No. 18986 Date: .1 U Z d l L► 1 Bolton&Menk,Inc. Consulting Engineers& Surveyors I Table of Contents Cover Sheet Table of Contents SECTION 1: Introduction& Summary A. Introduction B. History C. Summary of Major Issues Included in"Comments" SECTION 2: DAUAR Revised A. Textural Discussion B. Graphical Exhibits SECTION 3: Written Public Comments on AUAR and Detailed Responses ' A. Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban B. Lower Minnesota River Watershed District C. Metropolitan Council D. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources E. Minnesota Department of Transportation F. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency G. Scott County-Environmental Health Department H. Shakopee Environmental Protection Association I. Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community SECTION 4: Mitigation Plan A. Organized by Goal I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 SECTION 1 1 Introduction & Summary 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 1-1 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. 1 I A. Introduction I The Final Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review(FAUAR)provides responses to public comments and supportive information revising the Draft Alternative Urban Area-Wide (DAUAR)dated March 17,2000. The AUAR discusses the potential environmental impacts, ' alternatives,and mitigative measures that may be generated and implemented with the construction and development of the Valley Green Corporate Center(VGCC). The proposed project is intended to be developed into a business center to stimulate economic development community growth and the conservation of natural resources. The business park will contain a mix of office,warehouse,retail, light industrial and commercial sites within the 332 acre I site. B. History The City authorized the preparation of a a draft AUAR(DAUAR)on December 11, 1999. The DAUAR was submitted to the Responsible Governmental Unit(RGU)and distributed to all appropriate agencies and individuals as established by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB)on for review and comment. The public comment period was opened March 11,2000 and remained open for 30 days at which point this Final AUAR(FAUAR)was initiated. Its purpose is to address the comments received. C. Summary of Major Subjects Discussed in `Comments' Several reviewers made similar observations and comments. Each individual comment is responded to in Section 3,however,the following is a summary of those subjects repeatedly addressed: 1. Graphics : The DAUAR utilized existing graphical exhibits collected from numerous sources,without major editing. The result was inconsistent scales, limits of display, rlegends,etc. Revised and improved graphical exhibits have replaced many of those contained in the DAUAR- See Section 2.B. I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 1-2 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I I In particular,the actual boundary of the AUAR project site is now shown on Figure 5-2 I Project Boundary and serves to replace all previous representations of project boundaries. In summary,the legal boundary extends to the edge of water of Dean's Lake but the City's Shoreland Zoning Ordinance limits use of the property below the Iordinary high water level of the Lake,which is the 747 foot contour. 1 2. Phasing : The DAUAR originally presented the proposer's phasing plan as a physical sequence of construction. Subsequently,the Proposer has discussed phasing as I relative to"occupancy and build-out"as the individual parcels are sold. At that time, the individual owner will prepare building plans and identify tenant needs. There is no physical sequence proposed or suggested to this `phasing'. All parcels will be made Iavailable for sale and the sequence of purchases will depend upon the buyers. 1 3. Jurisdictional : The proposed project is within the seven county metropolitan area and is subject to the rules and regulations of a host of public agencies,many of which I operate on a regional basis. Therefore,many subjects that other agencies and individuals wish to have addressed are beyond the purview of this local AUAR. Examples of these regional responsibilities include utility extension,traffic, highway Irelocation,etc. These regional subjects would be more appropriately directed to the agency responsible. 1 4. Scope of the AUAR : This AUAR is designed to cover two principal areas: Ia. Issues associated with advancing the VGCC from 'site grading, as currently completed' to `individual building parcels ready for sale'. I b. Environmental impacts which may have occurred during the initial steps of Idevelopment which have already been completed(site grading). Improvements and activities that are a part of`occupancy and build-out' by individual Ilot buyers are beyond the scope of this AUAR, since the necessary details are not available until the parcels are developed and sold. I5. Transportation System : The VGCC development depends on one key improvement to I the street system. The City and County have considered improvements to the roads in the area by realigning CSAH 16 from its current diagonal route across the site to an east/west alignment along the southerly border of VGCC. CSAH 16 would then I City of Shakopee,Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 1-3 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I I connect to a proposed extension of 17t Avenue at the intersection with CR 83. See IFIGURE 5-1 Vicinity Map. I Although these improvements are an integral part of the VGCC development,they are regional in nature and beyond the scope of this AUAR. 1 6. Traffic Generation : Two areas were addressed in the comments received I a. The overall flow of traffic through the vicinity of VGCC. This is a regional topic and is more appropriately addressed at that level. 1 b. Traffic specifically generated by the VGCC development. Since the size and actual activities conducted by individual tenants of the development will Idetermine this, it is beyond the scope of this AUAR. However, in order to evaluate potential impacts, certain maximum conditions were assumed to assess IIIpotential congestion and mitigative measures. 7. Stormwater Management : The City of Shakopee has developed and adopted a Storm IWater Management Plan' which obligates anyone making changes to the stormwater system to follow prescribed standards and practices in the design/construction of the Ichanges. I These were considered and included in the DAUAR. But further amplification and clarification are contained herein. I I I I I ' Hubmer,Todd E&Willenbring,Peter R.,WSB&Associates,Inc.,City of Shakopee Comprehensive Stormwater IManagement Plan,Feb.22, 1999. I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 1-4 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. i I 1 1 1 1 1 SECTION 2 t DAUAR Revised 1 1 I 1 I 1 i 1 1 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2-1 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I A. Textural Discussion 1. This FAUAR contains modifications from the DAUAR,as distributed. The terms VGCC (Valley Green Corporate Center)and VGBP(Valley Green Business Park)are used interchangeably throughout this report and all appendices. Use of typographical term [sic] : Occasionally when direct quotes are used,the original quote may have contained mis-spellings,words which reviewers might not be familiar with and therefore believe to be mis-spellings,or references which are unclear without the entire document. The symbol [sic] acknowledges the existence of such occurrences and possibly,a clarification. a. The FAUAR has been divided into 2 volumes to facilitate distribution: 1) Volume 1 contains the FAUAR, including all graphics. 2) Volume 2 contains all appendixes referred to in the FAUAR. a) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources' (MDNR)Natural Heritage and Non-Game Research Program Index- from DAUAR. b) Mixed Emergent Fact Sheet-from DAUAR. Ic) Traffic Impact Study- from DAUAR. d) <<Phase 1 Archeological Survey For The Southbridge Development as been deleted from the FAUAR>> e) Phase 1 Archeological Survey for the Proposed VGCC. f) 1999 City of Shakopee Oak Wilt Suppression Program g) Amendment to Permit Documents [sic-Wetland Replacementl,VGCC. h) Question 23 -Vehicle Emissions i) Question 25 -Odors, Dust,Noise b. DELETIONS-If the original text had to be removed for any reason, it was simply deleted and is no longer printed or referenced. c. INSERTIONS -Text which has been added to the discussion is highlighted with double underlines. d. TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS,MIS-SPELLINGS,ETC.-Appropriate corrections have been made to these but no special attention is drawn to them unless they were i City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2-2 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I I specifically mentioned in comments received or could represent a"substantive"change. I Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW)form contained in 2. The instructions from the o I the DAUAR were deleted in deference to the AUAR instructions highlighted with italics. If portions of the EAW instructions are referred to in the AUAR instructions,they remain in the document. I 3. Some items in the DAUAR were identified with"reference"numbers to appropriately credit I the original author. These have been converted to `footnotes' for ease of use by the reviewer and in some instances more specifically the source. I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-3 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. r Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) NOTE TO PREPARERS This worksheet is to be completed by the Responsible Governmental Unit(RGU)or its agents. The project proposer must supply any I reasonably accessible date necessary for the worksheet,but is not to complete the final worksheet itself. If a complete answer does not fit in 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 I (ask operator for the EQB environmental review program)or consult"EAW Guidelines",a booklet available from the EQB. NOTE TO REVIEWERS I Comments must be submitted to the RGU(see item 3)during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. (Contact the RGU or the EQB to learn when the comment period ends.) Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information,potential impacts that may warrant further investigation,and the need for an EIS. If the EAW has been prepared for the I 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) I2. Proposer. It is not necessary for AUAR purposes to idents 3. RGU City of Shakopee property owners within the AUAR area(although it may be Contact Person Michael Leek I useful to use such names as identifiers of various land parcels). And Title Community Development Director Address 129 S.Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 Phone 952-445-3650 I4. Reason for EAW Preparation. Not applicable to AUAR. Note: AUAR is prepared under EQB rule category number 4410.3610,Subp.4 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 AUAR and any subdistricts used in the AUAR analysis; (2) land I 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. I 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 I Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW: a.a county map showing the general location of the project; NA. b.copy(ies)of USGS 7.5 minutes, 1:24,000 scale map(photocopy is OK)indicating the project boundaries; I Refer to FIGURE 5-1 VICINITY MAP (revised) c.a site plan showing all significant project and natural features. NA 1. Refer to FIGURE 5-2 PROJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARIES(revised) 2. Refer to FIGURE 5-3 CITY WIDE LAND USE PLAN(revised) 3. Refer to FIGURE 10-1 COVER TYPES(revised) I 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; I - infrastructure planned to serve development(roads,sewers, water, storm water system, etc.)Roadways intended primarily to serve as adjoining land uses within an AUAR area are normally expected to be reviewed as part of an AUAR. More "arterial"types of roadways that would cross an AUAR area are an optional inclusion in the AUAR analysis; if they are Ito be included, a more intensive level of review, generally including an analysis of alternative routes, is necessary; I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI1.20132 Page 2-4 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. - 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. 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 AUAR 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 development 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 water distribution system with approval by the Shakopee Public Utility Commission.Wastewater generated by the center will be collected and treated by the Metropolitan Council -Environmental Services Division. Refer to FIGUREs 6-4,6-5,6-6 and 6-7 for detailed routing of potable watermains and sanitary sewer lines. c. All stormwater collection and management discussion is contained in ITEMS 12,17 and 18. d. A formal grading plan for VGCC was prepared and submitted to the City on 9/21/99. Subsequently,it was approved on 9/22/99. The actual work will be accomplished in 2 steps: 1 1.The first is on the flatter portion of the site,north of existing CSAH 16. This portion of the site grading,including stormwater pond construction,wetland replacement and street was completed prior to the preparation of the DAUAR.. 1 2.The second step will be the portion of grading associated with the relocation of CSAH 16 along the southerly boundary of the VGCC site. Utility and street construction will complete the improvements associated with the VGCC development and individual parcels within this site will be made available for sale.Purchasers must then submit appropriate building and site designs,to all appropriate agencies, that demonstrate compliance with all codes and regulations. 1 Provide a 50 or fewer word abstract for use in EOB Monitor notice: ABSTRACT: Praject Title: Valley Green Corporate Center(VGCC)or Valley Green Business Park(VGBP) 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. 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 7. Project Magnitude Data. The cumulative totals of the parameters called for should be given for each major development scenario, 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; 1 ' City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 2-5 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I Indicate area of specific uses: I Office to be determined Manufacturing n/a Retail to be determined Other Industrial n/a Warehouse to be determined Institutional n/a Light Industrial to be determined Agricultural n/a I Other Commercial(specify) Building Height(s) I Detailed information regarding the densities of specific land uses within the Valley Green Corporate Center are not known at this time. It will be the responsibility of individual lot owners to propose specific building plans and activities for each developed lot. This report is based upon a high density alternative-as provided by the developer as a"worse case"scenario. All land uses will 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 Approvals Required. A listing of major approvals likely to be required by the anticipated types of development I 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 1 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 inFinal Plat Vn Site Plan La I Grading Plan Building Permits Approved&Partially Completed (**) Vacation of CSAH 16 across VGCC. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Water Appropriation Permit(construction dewatering) I (MDNR) col Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit; (MPCA) National Pollution Discharge Elimination I System Permit(NPDES); Approved Water Quality(Sect.401)Certification, Approved Indirect Source Permit(ISP) in I Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Watermain Extension Permit Minnesota Department of Transportation Right-of-way Permit for County Road(CR)83 access (Mn/DOT) I Metropolitan Council Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA)extension Approved Scott County Right-of-way Permit for work on CR 83 and CSAH 16 in Vacation of CSAH 16 across VGCC. Note: Permit requests will be submitted upon the completion of the AUAR. Iin To be applied for by the developer. (**) To be applied for by individual lot purchasers/building owners. 1 9. Land Use. The AUAR does not need to include a section corresponding to item 9. The summary of existing and past land uses and discussion of potential land use conflicts should be included as part of the response to item 28. The identification of any Iexisting areas of soil contamination or other hazards can be included under item 20. Current 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 1 1 I I City of Shakopee,Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2-6 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. conducted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency2 found no environmentally contaminated sites within the project site. Information regarding other hazards can be found in Section 20. Refer to the following figures : IFIGURE 5-3 City Wide Land Use Plan-Year 2000 FIGURE 9-1 Aerial Photo Prior to 1999(Prior to site grading and Oak Wilt supression.) IFIGURE 9-2 Aerial Photo Current(Subsequent to site grading),April,2000 I 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) I -watercourses-rivers, streams, creeks, ditches -lakes-idents protected waters status, and shoreland management classification -woodlands-breakdown by classes where possible -grassland-idents native and old field I -cropland -current development b. an "overlay"map showing anticipated development in relation to the cover types;this map should also depict any "protection I areas,"existing or proposed, that will preserve sensitive cover types. Separate maps for each major development scenario should generally be provided. IBefore After Before After Types 2 to 8 Wetlands N/A N/A Urban/Suburban Lawn N/A N/A Landscaping IWooded/Forest N/A N/A Impervious Surface N/A N/A I Brush/Grassland N/A N/A Other(describe) N/A N/A Cropland N/A N/A IRefer to the following figures : FIGURE 9-1 Aerial Photo Prior to 1999(Prior to site grading and Oak Wilt supression.) IFIGURE 9-2 Aerial Photo Current(Subsequent to site grading),April,2000 FIGURE 10-1 Current Cover Types I a. Portions of the VGCC site were covered with oak savannah. Several factors were involved in the initial grading of the Valley Green Corporate Center site and the loss of the woods,ie: I1. Tree Removal:The VGCC site was specifically identified in the Oak wilt suppression program'as a"Large Oak Wilt Infection Center within Shakopee". As such,certain mitigation measures were performed which removed a portion of the trees, Ihowever,the specific location of the trees removed was not clearly noted in the report graphics. 2. In addition,a portion of the trees were destroyed by storm damage t2 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 2000. Property YAudit of proposed Valley Green Corporate Center project site. Prepared for Bolton and Menk,Inc. I ' Kunde Co.,Inc.; 1999 City of Shakopee Oak Wilt Suppression Program; 1999. ° Carlson,Steven J.,by telephone interview with Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,May 31,2000. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 2- 7 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. b. Since,it will be the responsibility of individual lot owners to propose specific building and landscaping plans for each developed lot, it is beyond the scope of this AUAR to precisely`predict' cover types to be used. 11. Fish, Wildlife,and Ecologically Sensitive Resources. 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. As discussed previously,the project site overlaps a portion of land known as the West Dean's Lake Area. The West Dean's Lake Area consists of woodland,open space,Dean's Lake and a complex of wetlands and marshes. Fisheries There are no MDNR fishery surveys recorded within this project's boundaries. The adjacent Dean's Lake is an MDNR protected water (Identification no.70-0074),and classified as a Type 4 wetland(FIGURE 10-1)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 is the possibility of fish entering Dean's Lake from Prior Lake,Pike Lake or Spring Lake through an overflow channel. However,this would generally only occur during a high water event. If the high water event coincided with the spawning season,fish could migrate to the wetlands.' Although,individuals may have experienced satisfactory fishing in Dean's Lake,"... The low water level in Dean's Lake,coupled with the ' significant natural accumulation of organic sediment would likely cause winter kill of fish, except for the possible survival of rough fish that are tolerant to very low disolved oxygen levels."6 The introduction of higher quality fish to Dean's Lake is primarily through overflow from Spring Lake,Prior Lake and/or Pike Lake through the overflow channel'and in warmer winters,there may be some survival. Although no directpath is identified,fish migration toward Dean's Lake could occur duringperiods of high flow unless it is encumbered by the series of erosion control wiers between the Minnesota River and Dean's Lake. Winter kill during most years prevents the development of a permanent,self sustaining fishery in Dean's Lake.8 ' Wildlife The west portion of the proposed development is grassland that has been converted to agricultural land in past years.The land around Dean's 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 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 rapiers 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 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 project site following development.9 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 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 Dean's Lake,as well as maintaining proper building setbacks. 1 ' Ellison,Daryll,MDNR,West Metro Fisheries,by phone conversation and e-mail,Feb. 14,2000. 6 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,letter to the City of Shakopee,April 24,2000,page 2. ' Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,June 2,2000,page 3. 8 Daryll Ellison, MN DNR-West Metro Area Fisheries,by phone conversation/E-mail with Ross Knapper,Feb. 14, 2000,and Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,June 22,2000. 9 Regenscheid,Diana,MDNR-Wildlife Division,by phone conversation and e-mail with Ross Knapper,Feb. 14,2000. ' City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2-8 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. b. For an AUAR,p rior consultation with the DNR Natural Heritage program for information about reports ofrare 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 I appropriate portions of the AUAR area is required. Areas of on-site surveys should be depicted on a map, as should any 'protection zones"established as a result. IEcologically Sensitive Resources Extensive studies and reviews have been conducted by the DNR as part of the County Biological Survey and Woods End Landscaping,a I specialist in native plant"rescue"and transplanting.The DNR report concluded that"no rare species or Natural Plant Communities" 10 were identified on the Business Park site and "According to the review conducted by Mr. Nelson fsic-of Woods End Landscaping7, the native plants were not rare enough to warrant heroic efforts to protect.... ++n I Although,the Minnesota Rules which govern activities relating_to species of special concern states that,"Species designated as species of special concern are not_protected by Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895 or rules adopted under that section Parts 6134.0100 to 6134.0400 do not address .rotection o habitat or s secies desi fnated as endanfered threatened or s.ecies o s.ecial concern nor do theyobligate anyone to survey lands for the presence of desi f nated species."12,an information request was submitted to the Minnesota g A)to identify all known locations ofthreatened Program(VOLUME 2,APPENDIXrare, I DNR's Natural Heritage and Nongame Researchg fY and endangered species in the vicinity of the project. I The inquiry determined that the following rare,threatened and endangered species are possibly located within a one-mile radius of the project site. All records for the following identified species were located outside of the project site: I Bald Eagle(Haliaeetus leucocuphalus) 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 Ispotted within the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development. Hill'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 I Thistle has not been spotted within the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development Dry Prairie(Southeast)Barrens Subtype I 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 I the most distinctive but also the least common of the Region's dry prairies. Rare animals commonly found in barren 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 I Primrose has not been spotted within the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development. 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. IPlains Pocket Mouse(Perognathusllavescens) 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 1 I10 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 2. 11 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 2. 12 Minnesota Rules Section 6134.0150 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 2-9 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. found to the east of the project area and has not been spotted within the project boundaries. Thus it will not be directly affected was I 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. I The land to the north and west of Dean's 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 VOLUME 2, APPENDIX B. Plans for the proposed development include a"no impact zone"around Dean's Lake and minimum building setback distances set by City of Shakopee zoning ordinances to prevent any negative impacts to the shore land of Dean's Lake. Additional mitigation measures have been described in the Water Resource and Water Quality sections of this report. 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources. The information called for on the EAW form should be supplied for any of the infrastructure I associated with the AUAR 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 provisions of the mitigation plan. IThe 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 10-2 and summarized in TABLE 12-1. The following is a summary of the Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit ' Documents"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 impacted wetlands are adjacent to,or hydraulically connected with Dean's Lake,or its complex of wetland and waters. ITABLE 12-1 Impacted Wetlands IWetland ID Acres Filled Comments 26-WM 0.23 Monotypic stand of canary reed grass with relict hummocks I 29-MS 0.29 Bulrush marsh with poplar fringe.Numerous mature tree,sapling and seedlings were dying back. Total 0.52 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 10-2. The report indicates that in total a net increase in wetland acres will I 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 Dean's Lake is 747 Mean Sea Level(MSL). The replacement wetland will I 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 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 I Wetland Mitigation Plan indicates that BMP's to be used will include traffic control,erosion control,temporary construction protection, and restoration seeding. I 13 STS Consultants Ltd. 1999.Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Documents. Prepared for Valley Green I Corporate Center I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 2- 10 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. 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 I and shrubs located on TABLE 12-3 will be planted as additional buffer zones. Seed replacement wetland basin and storm water pond buffer area. Seed from elevation 750 MSL down to water(NWL=748.6 MSL)line 111 at time of seeding. TABLE 12-2 I Modified Mn/DOT 33A Apply 50 lbs.per acre(PLS) Species Common Name %of Total Pounds/Acre ' I Petalostemon purpureum Purple Prairie Clover 1 0.5 Koeleria cristata June Grass 2 1.0 Sporobolus cryptandrus Sand Dropseed 3 1.5 I Agropyron trachycaulum Slender Wheat Grass 3 1.5 Stipa viridula Green Needle Grass 5 2.5 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 Cover Crop* 40 20.0 I Forbs: 1 0.5 100% 50.0 I PLS-Pure Live Seed *Oats or winter wheat,depending on time of year. Note: Purple prairie clover should be inoculated prior to seeding. 1 Forbs are as follows,for each'A pound forbs mix: Oenethera rhombipetala (Rhombic-leaved evening primrose) 4 ounces IGeum triflorum (Prairie smoke) 2 ounces Lupinus perrene (Wild Lupine) 2 ounces ITABLE 12-3 Plantings for Additional Buffer IAdjacent to Founier Property Shrubs-Viburnum trilobum(American highbush cranberry) ITrees-Equal numbers of the following species: Ouercus macrocarpa Burr Oak IAcer saccharinum Silver Maple Celtis occidentalis Hackberry Some local residents have questioned,informally,if site grading activities could possibly disturb the"seal"of Dean's 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 Watershed District engineer Lawrence Samstad(1975)on the source of water for Dean's Lake and related issues found that Dean's Lake Iis not hydraulically isolated from the surficial sand aquifer by tight sediments forming a"seal";rather,the level of Dean's Lake directly reflects ambient groundwater levels. This finding is consistent with two MDNR studies that focused on the potential for quarry dewatering I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2- 11 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. effects on Dean's Lake(Beissel and Ford, 1981;Drivas, 1997). In any case,the site grading is well separated from Dean's 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.14 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; ifgroundwater levels would be affected,any impacts resulting on other I resources should be addressed. With respect to possible individual appropriations byfuture projects,a general assessment ofthe likely needfor such should be included,and ifthere is potential for major appropriations or environmental issues assessment ofthose should be included along with a discussion of mitigation for potential problems. a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells? O Yes ®No I 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). I 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. I b. Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water(including dewatering)? ®Yes 0N If yes,indicate the source,quantity,duration,purpose of the appropriation,and DNR water appropriation permit number of any existing appropriation. Dthe mpct of the ation ouer le . I According to site plans the proposediscuss developmentiamay,depending onon congrditionsnd exwatposed velsand time of year, require a temporary permit for construction dewatering purposes. Dewatering may be necessary to accommodate construction of the required infrastructure. Cessation of dewatering will occur once construction has been completed. Ic. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? 0 Yes 0N If yes,identify the supply,the DNR water appropriation permit number of the supply,and the quantity to be used. I 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 I guided for commercial development located south of CSAH 16 on both sides of County Road 18, and a 332 acre property guided for business park located south of US169 between Dean's 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 I require 660,000 gallons per day(gpd).15 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. I 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 I No formal "water use management district" exists in the area, however, the City's Shoreland Control Ordinance does establish restrictions on the use of prove adjacent to .ublic waters(Dean's Lake) The setback requirements establish a 75' "no im•act"zone with a 150 foot setback from the ordinary high water(OHW),as established by the MDNR. They also provide for doubling the distances for I `non-water' related uses. In addition,the provisions of the City Shoreland zoning ordinance state,"... [sic-buildings]if located on lots or parcels with public waters fronta•e, must either be set back double the normal ordinary high water level setback or be substantially screened from view from I the water b ve fetation or to.o f ra.h assumin• summer lea-on conditions."16 Therefore individual buildin:desi.ners would have the option of constructing appropriate screening rather than meeting the increased setbacks. This discussion is beyond the sco.e of this FAUAR since it applies to the individual building owners. I 14 Erdmann,John,Wenck Associates I15 Schoell&Madson,Inc.July 1999."Comprehensive Water Plan, 1999 Supplement."Prepared for the City of Shakopee. i 16 City of Shakopee,Chapter 11-Zoning Ordinance,§ 11.54,Subd.5,B, 1,d,page 1292. I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-12 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. A proposed gradin• •Ian was prepared for the developer through its engineer WSB and submitted to the City for review and ap•royal. The plan included a 75 foot"no impact"zone around the lake shoreline which appears to meet the City's Shoreland Ordinance for water erception related uses. The`nearby activities'which the plan Irovedthe gradin_inclued were e conlanStThe 75 foot stormruction of o impactntzone is shown i FIGURE 10-2 along ponds which were apparently seen as`water related'by the City,since they a. with the actual edge of water of Dean's Lake and the final position of the stormwater detention ponds/replacement wetlands. I Individual site plans are beyond the scope of this AUAR,but it is recommended that all future site activities including building permit requests be specifically reviewed for compliance with all applicable regulations,including the Shoreland Ordinance. 15. Water Surface Use. This item need only be addressed if the AUAR area would include or adjoin recreational water bodies. I The AUAR project site does not contain any recreational water bodies,however,Dean's Lake is a public body of water adjacent to the AUAR proiect. Dean's Lake is a shallow"natural environment lake",and is suitable for some,more passive,recreational purposes. denied is proposed as a part of this proiect. The public will have the same legal access No legal access to Dean's Lake has been or they have previously en.° ed. I The current•ro'ect is in corn•liance with Ci codes re•ardin l the'no im•act zone'as evidenced b the Ci 's a••royal of the•radin • plan and detailed building plans must comply with the City's setback and screening requirements. These requisites assure that the public's Iuse of Dean's Lake is not inhibited. 16. Soils. A standard soils map covering the area should be included. IGround water:minimum 5 average maximum 10.5 Bedrock:minimum 5.5 average maximum 18 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. A broader hydrologic soils map is shown in FIGURE 16-2 with descriptions of those soils'types shown in TABLE 16-2. I TABLE 16-1 Soil Descriptions '7as shown in FIGURE 16-1 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 I restricted by bedrock. 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 I gravel. De-Duelm Fine Sandy Loam, Moderately dark colored soils of the terraces derived from wind and water assorted fine sands. I 0-3%slopes Intermediate in drainage between the Isanti and the Zimmerman and Hubbard soils,with which they are associated. Dg-Dune Land Land consisting of loose sandy material blown about by the wind. Severe blowouts and fresh Idune deposits have made these areas of little or no use. 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 Sand, loamy sand to fine sand to a depth of about 36 inches. I -0-2%slopes Ia-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. 17 United States Department of Agriculture,Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Minnesota Agricultural IExperiment Station. October 1959."Soil Survey of Scott County Minnesota,Series 1955,No.4." Page 2- 13 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR ITABLE 16-1 Soil Descriptions "as shown in FIGURE 16-1 Ma-Marsh Occupies shallow lakes and ponds that may be dry during years with less than normal precipitation. Most areas,however remain wet all year. I 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. Sc-Stoney Land Located chiefly on terraces. It is non-agricultural land on slopes ranging from 1 to 36 percent. I 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. I Ta-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 gravelly and has little soil development. I 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. ZaA-Zimmerman Fine Sand, Light-colored,windblown sands on the timbered terraces between Shakopee and Savage. I0-2%slopes Slight wind erosion has occurred nearly everywhere. The soil is very droughty. ZaA2-Zimmerman Fine Sand, Light-colored,windblown sands on the timbered terraces between Shakopee and Savage.Has I 0-2%slopes,moderately wind lost 3 to 4 inches of surface soil through wind erosion.The soil is very droughty. eroded ZaB-Zimmerman Fine Sand, Light-colored,windblown sands on the timbered terraces between Shakopee and Savage.Low, 2-6%slopes dunelike topography.Wind erosion slight in most places,but soil is very droughty. ITABLE 16-2 Hydrologic Soil Descriptions1s as shown in FIGURE 16-2 A These soils have high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted. The I infiltration ratesrange from 0.3 to 0.5 inches per hour. These soils consist chiefly of deep,well drained to excessively drained sands and gravel. These soils have a high rate of water transmission,therefore resulting in a low run-off potential. I B These soils have moderate infiltration rates ranging from 0.15 to 0.30 inches per hour when thoroughly wetted. These soils consist of deep moderately well to well drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. I C These soils have slow infiltration rates ranging from 0.05 to 0.15 inches per hour when thoroughly wetted. D These soils have ve slow infiltration rates ranin from 0 to 0.05 inches •er hour when thoroughly wetted. These soils are typically clay soils with high swelling. •otential soils with hi.h •ermanent water table soils with a cla la er at or near the I surface,or shallow soils over nearly impervious material. 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; I instead, a general discussion of the likely earth moving needs for development of the area should be given, with an emphasis on unusual 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. I 18 Hubmer,Todd E.&Willenbring,Peter R.,WSB&Associates,Inc.,City of Shakopee Comprehensive Stormwater I Management Plan,Feb.22, 1999,Section III,page 26. Page 2-14 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR IThe portion of the site north of existing CSAH 16 does not contain any steep slopes, except adjacent to CSAH 16. The portion south and west of CSAR 16 is generally wooded(see FIGURE 9-2)and does have steep slopes,as shown in FIGURE 10-2. IThe site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center,as approved by the City, includes grading,excavation,and the filling of 0.52 acres of wetland. Extensive lot grading of a portion of the project site has already been completed to achieve proper design contours. According to the site plan,a replacement wetland has been constructed to mitigate the filling of two existing smaller wetland areas. The Iconstruction of this replacement wetland includes the excavation and grading to achieve proper design elevation and slope gradients. During all construction phases of this project,erosion control will follow the applicable Best Management Practices(BMP's)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 I water ponds have been constructed to receive storm water runoff and to help mitigate sediment entering Dean's Lake once lot grading and re-vegetation has been completed. All storm water ponds should be surrounded by a buffer area and be consistent with NURP(National Urban Runoff Program)standards. The area also consists of flat well drained soils that will aid in the reduction of water erosion and Isedimentation. 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. However,wind erosion on previously cultivated areas will likely decrease with the introduction of year-round .round cover(•avements, buildings,lawns,native grasses and wetlands). IFollowing completion of grading and construction all disturbed soils should be re-vegetated to prevent future wind erosion. 18. Water Quality-Surface Water Runoff For an AUAR the following additional guidance should be followed in addition to that in I "EAWGuidlines": -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. - present in or adjoining the AUAR area, the following types of water bodies must be given special analyses: Iif -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; -trout streams:if stormwater discharges will enter or affect a trout stream an evaluation of the impacts on the chemical composition I 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 changes the quantities of nutrients,sediments,and other pollutants carried away from the site by runoff. Many factors contribute to the changes including the reduction in use of agricultural herbicides, •esticides and fertilizers;the introduction of year round ground cover;the enhanced conveyance of leaf-fall, grass clippings,pet litter, other litter of both natural and human origin;and I pollutants from the atmosphere(both"wetfall"and"dryfall"); lawn fertilizer use;vehicle emissions and mechanical wear;sanding and salting of streets and sidewalks. Therefore,stormwater detention ponds and other`BMP's"should be utilized to mitigate pollutant loadings from entering Dean's Lake. I The Valley Green site lies across the dividing line between two very lar.e watersheds as shown on FIGURE 18-3. The direct Dean's Lake watershed is a••roximatel 6 900 acres in size with onl 117 acres comin.from VGCC as shown on FIGURE 18-1 FIGURE 18-2 and FIGURE 18-3.Prior to site arading,the total contributing area from VGCC was a'proximately 129 acres. In addition,during •eriods I of hi. rainfall the overflow outlet for Prior Lake Pike Lake and S•rin.Lake drain throu.h Dean's Lake which brin.s the total to over 9,600 acres,plus the area of Prior Lake,itself. The westerly and southerl •ortion of the site(generally,south of CSAH 16)are tributary to the K-Mart linear detention •and on the north side of US 169 where the runoff has the o •ortuni for sedimentation to take •lace. IApparently,the flora around the Dean's Lake water body is notparticularly sensitive as evidenced by 10 years of observations by STS. "Durin.the re-flat.in. of the wetland bound. STS encountered remnants of fla t.in laced durin •revious delineations su estin I I I City of Shakopee,Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2- 15 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. that the wetland plant community had not changed sufficiently to alter the jurisdictional boundary. Some trees had been impacted by Oak Wilt spread and storm damage,but alteration of the plant community was not observed." 19 fted om ean's ke watershed I During the site grading,which has already° cDet filed site draurred,approximly 12 acres ofinage areas andrainage was tflowf routingeaUre shownaon FIGURE to the K-Mart linear pond watershed as shown in FIGURE 18 3. 1 18-4. A"Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan"was completed for the City of Shakopee last year(WSB&Associates, 1999);and ies,the developer has stated that the site evelopment plan. the planthis tl under review by other lic egovernment enun ated inthe plan are se eral that specify pondingrequirrementstforfollowing storm at r ru off ' plan. Among the water quality related policies from new developments: I • All new stormwater systems should comply with the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan and provide runoff treatment to NURP(National Urban Runoff Program)standards prior to discharge. NURP standards include: 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 I the skimmer to less than 0.5 foot per second for moderate storms(1-year return interval). • New ponds in the Dean's Lake drainage area must limit the peak discharge rate to a maximum of 0.1 cfs(cubic feet per second)per I 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.) I The 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 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(1989),and(3)revised Shoreland Ordinance provisions following MDNR directives 20 Adherence to the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan,especially the ponding requirements,is strongly recommended to mitigate the greater part of any contaminant from the developed site. I b. Identify the route(s)and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site. Estimate the impact of the runoff on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the runoff may affect a lake consult "EAW Guidelines"about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed). I FIGURES 12-2 throu.h 12-5,FIGURE 18-3 through 18-4, 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 the K-Mart linear pond located north of US 169 via a culvert. This connection will give the central ponding areas a"relief valve"during I high flow(100 year)storm events. The ponds located along US 169 also includes a network of additional ponding adjacent to other created s from wetlands. This complex of ponds and constructed wetlands on d be taken to prevent directdischarge into ltimately discharges into the Prior Lake Dean's Lake itself.'channel,a ditchatDischarges Dean's Lake north into the Minnesota River. Special care are routed through the stormwater detention basins before eventual release to Dean's Lake or the K-Mart linear pond on the north side of I US 169. FIGURE 18-4 summarizes the storm water pond layout and shows overflow ponding located north of US 169. Impacts on receiving waters can be found in ITEM 18,part a. Dean's 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. I 19 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 3. 20 Erdmann,John,Wenck Associates. 21 STS Consultants Ltd. 1999.Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Documents. Prepared for Valley Green ICorporate Center Page 2-16 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR IWastewater. Observe the following points of guidance in an A UAR: 9. Water Quality- - only domestic wastewater should be considered in an A UAR---industrial wastewater would be coming from industrial uses that are I excluded from review through an AUAR process; - wastewater flows should be estimated by land use subareas of the AUAR 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; I - the relationship of the sewer system extension to the RG U'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 I 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 I produced or treated at the site. Wastewater from the Valley Green Corporate Center would be collected and treated by the Metropolitan Council-Environmental I 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. I 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 Iconsult"EAW Guidelines"about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed). N/A I 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. ISee ITEM 19,part A. 20. Groundwater potential for contamination. A map should be included to show any groundwater hazards identified under b. Under I 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 Iavoid 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 ITEM 16 for references to soils of high I 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 I 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 Dean's 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). IA recent ground water 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 I 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. I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 2- 17 Valley Green Corporate Center-FA UAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. IHowever,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-Dean's Lake vicinity. In this vicinity,the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources(MDNR)has investigated I groundwater levels as related to the quarry dewatering on two occasions: during November 1979-July 1980 initially(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 I 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 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 z2 c. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present on the project site and identify measures to be used to Iprevent them from contaminating ground water. 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. 21. Solid wastes;hazardous wastes;storage tanks. For a,generally only the estimated total quantity of municipal solid waste generated I and information about any recycling or source separation programs of the RGU need to be included.For b,potential 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 the 1 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). A convenience store with gas service is a potential land use within the project site. This convenience store would be located at the CR 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). I 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 and I 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 AUAR area on the roadway system, including:comparison of peak period total I flows to capacities and analysis of Levels of Service and delay times at critical points(f any); - a discussion of structural and non-structural improvements and traffic management measures that are proposed to mitigate problems; I 22 STS Consultants Ltd. 1999.Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Documents. Prepared for Valley Green ICorporate Center I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 2- 18 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. 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 1 measures related to identfing congestion problems, as well as ADTs. The site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center involves the proposed improvement and realignment of CR 83/CSAH 16. This section summarizes the details of the Traffic Impact Studies 23 conducted to analyze the resulting traffic impacts. Full details on the Traffic Impact Studies can be found in VOLUME 2,APPENDIX C. I Existing and Proposed Roadway System The main roadways of the project site can be found in FIGURE 22-1. Major roadways include US 169(principal arterial),CR 83 (A minor arterial)and CSAH 16(B minor arterial). US 169 is a 4 lane divide highway,running east to west and acts as the northern border of the project site. US 169 is also the only major parallel route to the area. CR 83 is a 4 lane highway from US 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. CSAH 16 eventually heads in a IInorthwest direction and acts as a major direct link to downtown Shakopee for area residents. The site plan for the ValleyGreen Corporate Center includes the proposed improvement and realignment of CR 83/CSAH 16 in accordance with the City of Shakopee's draft Transportation Plan. An illustration of the proposed realignment can be found in FIGURE I22-5. This proposed action would include the straightening of CSAH 16 along the southern border so that it would intersect with CR 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 CSAH 16 are opposed to the realignment Ibecause it takes away their direct route to downtown.Thus requiring additional travel time through the added segment along CR 83 and two intersections. The 5-year capital improvement plan for the City of Shakopee includes the extension of 17Th Avenue (FIGURE 22-5), which would give local residents an alternative route to downtown Shakopee. However the City and Scott County need to agree on the Iextension of 17th Avenue taking place. Trip Generation Data I According to the Traffic Impact Study z4 "trip generation data was calculated based on a 20 year traffic forecast,and a background growth rate of 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."25 Business Park Land Use I Traffic 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 CR 83/Site Driveway intersection to the CSAH 16/Site Driveway intersection. This diversion is for southbound AM peak traffic only. Traffic numbers being diverted were I determined by calculating the reserve capacity at the CR 83/County Road 16 and CSAH 16/Site Driveway intersection and rerouting the traffic from the overcapacity site driveway on CR 83 to the under capacity drive on CSAH 16. This reserve capacity was calculated at each intersection using critical lane volumes. 1 I I 23 SRF Consulting Group,Inc.;WSB and Associates,Inc. 1999.Traffic Impact Study for Realignment of CR 83/CSAH 16.Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center. I 24 SRF Consulting Group,Inc.;WSB and Associates,Inc. 1999.Traffic Impact Study for Realignment of CR 83/CSAH 16.Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center. 25 SRF Consulting Group,Inc.;WSB and Associates,Inc. 1999.Traffic Impact Study for Realignment of CR 83/CSAH I16.Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center. I Paget-19 City of Shakopee,Minnesota- T11.20132 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. • 111 . H cs rn V1 r. Co• e- - -r r ' U � zQ, ,0 , , , �z oa bo I2 UwCIWas A2UwUUf� A a Oo o L C1 N t g 2 AWCOAA A g `t az UW ¢ WW A I O o p o Z z aa —' o o gp UUaAAU z tr.) UAaaAA ti p0a IIli 1-1 a H I 0 GA CO 0 POa 4/ Uwpgwpq W UwUAiat A k ' k I 0 o 0 o � m •� . .p ••, .b I I . 4 0 1 1 1 , I �' C t g ° C-4t4 .< 42 AWc�aW A A Q .0 Ulwi¢Iw14 A .� c e I• I 4 z z I O O a U 4a 44 e "' i °4ap UIa m W zQ °wa j p v;i A;aaiA!Ii A a ; j te T 2 0 a ' of aI „ a9 �l oar go.. 1141•1 o° §Ig: a o =(13 ~ 4)11 .1: • !i 11 uas I I 'S ¢ .66 ej INas .4/ ¢ . M. m. i u1)121E 1), °; 0 •y., 1)o 4) 0 o zic ` t- • 46; -: 1§. u '.1az I i i4 a3 ¢I.o;.o u .2 F as V VI t3;1 '4 tw .04 -.[E-II-y U w ¢ ¢ ) -, ,U 1w I IOffice Service Land Use I Traffic volumes for the trip generation estimates assuming an Office Service land use are illustrated in FIGURE 22-4. Traffic volumes for the Office Service land use are similar to those of the Business Park use,but resulted in lower trip generation estimates. Peak AM left- turn volumes for southbound traffic do not change between the alternatives. However,peak PM left-turn volumes drop by less than 100 I vehicles per hour. Again traffic volumes include a diversion,25 percent,between the two site driveway intersection and uses the same methodology as described previously for the Business Park land use. I Both alternatives were analyzed to determine the accuracy of the percentage diverted. The proposed site plan indicates commercial land uses nearest the access onto CR 83,office/warehouse to the east and office towers in the northeast corner of the site. It was determined reasonable to assume that familiar users such as office employees could easily divert to the alternate south access. ITraffic Impacts and Proposed Mitigation The Valley Green Corporate Center is estimated to result in approximately 32,000 to 40,000 additional weekday trips. Due to its location(south of US 169),there are few parallel routes to the area. As a result,it is estimated that 55 percent of site-generated traffic will travel either to the north or from the north on CR 83. This results in peak AM hour volumes of 1,300 to 1,600 vehicles and problems with h the number of left turns into the site from the north. The most critical queuing location is the southbound left turns at the CR 83/Site Driveway intersection. Mitigation for this area could involve a continuous left-turn lane starting from the CR 83/US 169 south ramp I intersection, tapering to a second left-turn lane. This would add additional storage for the left-turn vehicles. This could easily be accomplished through proper striping and signing,but would require Mn/DOT approval due to the proximity to the trunk highway ramp intersection. Queuing problems from US 169 on CR 83 could also be mitigated through the use of special traffic signal timing. IThe CSAH 16/Site Driveway intersection should also be reviewed periodically for traffic signal warrants. A traffic signal is scheduled to be installed by the year 2017 in order to reserve capacity required for the operation of the CR 83/Site Driveway intersection. IAccording to the results of the Traffic Impact Study 26,all individual intersections will be operating at a Level of Service(LOS)D or bette'r during both AM and PM peak hours,for the design year 2017. A LOS of A through D is typically acceptable(under capacity),LOS E is near capacity,and LOS F is over capacity. An overall arterial analysis indicates that the entire corridor would also be at a LOS D or I better for both northbound and southbound traffic during AM and PM hours. Because of the coordinated system however,arterial LOS at specific intersections may deteriorate to an E,and in the case of the north US 169 ramp intersection a F during AM and PM hours. The loss of LOS at the north US 169 ramp is a result of the amount of green time allocated for the north and south traffic. This specific cycle length deters from the amount of green time allocated for the side streets,therefore producing unsatisfactory Levels of Service. TABLE 22-1 shows Level of Service and Queue Length analysis for CR 83-12th Ave to CSAH 16. I 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 and/or access points should be considered to more effectively mitigate traffic impacts. The source of the background traffic of 1.5%is accepted by both the City of Shakopee and Scott County as sufficient to account for future growth in the immediate area. It is recommended that due to the potential impacts to the LOS of the access points to the site,that the City monitor Ithe traffic growth as the site develops. Negotiations for access points to this site are still in progress with both Scott County and Mn/DOT. The RGU may,as a mitigation measure, I impose limits on the size, •e and location of articular develo.ments based upon the traffic impacts of the adjacent access points, and correlate the development potential of this site with the acceptable level of service of the access points. This can be done as the development occurs,and through monitoring of the traffic volumes at the access points. I "The Ci o Shako see's Trans sortation Plan includes a chaster on the Ci 's transit stem. The Ci 's transit mission statement is 'To evaluate and im trove ser ormance eiicien and sroductivi o local transit s stem identii in' the transit service needs o all citizens and delivering the appropriate transit services while balancing the available energy and financial resources.' * 1 I SRF Consulting Group,Inc.;WSB and Associates,Inc. 1999.Traffic Impact Study for Realignment of CR 83/CSAH I26 16.Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center. I City of Shakopee,Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-21 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. The City of Shakopee is currently not served by the Metropolitan Transit Service. Instead, the City of Shakopee is the provider through Shakopee Area Transit(SAT) alternative transit services. The services currently provided are: (1)dial-a-ride service within the City of IShakopee; (2)commuter vanpools. Express bus service to Eden Prairie Center is expected to be re-instated this year. The transit ridership levels overall have been steadily increasin f. With the opening of the new Bloomington Ferry Bridge and US 169 the pace of development in Shakopee has increased significantly. In order to meet increased demand, the City will need to work with other transit providers to ensure that its residents can make the transit connections, they need to yet across the metropolitan area tojobs and other destinations. 111 With the increased residents and development around the area of the US 169 and CR 83 and with CSAH 17 the City has identified the need for a park-and-ride site in these areas. A park-and-ride facility has been identified in the northwest quadrant of US 169 and CR 83 and in the northwest quadrant of US 169 and CSAH 17. IThe Ci will be committed to work with Vail' Green Cor'orate Center to encoura•e car.ools and van.ools within the .ro.osed site as it develops."27 1 The reali.nment of CSAH 16 is still under review b the Ci of Shako.ee and Scott Coun . A ,relimin. anal sis of a non-reali.nment concept was completed by the City's traffic consultant using the existing lane configuration of CR 83 and CSAH 16. This determined that significant changes in the density of the project would be required in order to accommodate the turning traffic. This density however,would not conform with Metropolitan Council policy of smart growth. Thus,this study at least builds the need for improvements to both CR 83 and CSAH 16. I The reali.nment of CSAH 16 also has im.lications in a re:ional sense which has im.acts that are be and the sco.e of this FAUAR. It is therefore recommended that additional study be completed on this roadway relocation to analyze the impacts to the current users of CSAH 16 and the existing travel patterns,as well as the impacts to adjacent site development. IIn 1998,representatives from the City of Shakopee and Scott County have held discussions with representatives from Mn/DOT regarding the CR 83 and CSAH 16 concept plan and the traffic imp acts to the CR 83/US 169 interchange. Concept plans have been develo.ed for this area based u'on the comments received from Mn/DOT and includes si.nals and dual left turn lanes at the westbound US 169 ram.. IA copy of these concepts is shown in FIGURE 22-5. Other potential mitigation measures to the site traffic include the extension of 17th Avenue to connect with the intersection of CR 83 and i realigned CSAH 16. It is recommended that additional study be completed to review whether this is a viable improvement to reduce the traffic impacts potentiallvgenerated by the develo.ment of this site. This roadway extension is in the City of Shakopee's Trans.ortation Plan,and would and an important east-west circulation roadway south of US 169. I23. Vehicle-related air emissions. The guidance provided in"EAW Guidelines:should also befollowedfor an AUAR.Mitigation proposed to eliminate any potential problems may be presented under Item 22 and merely referenced here. The MPCA staffshould be consulted regarding possible ISP requirements for certain proposed developments;although the RGU may not want to assume responsibility Ifor applying for an ISP for specific developments, it may be desirable to coordinate the A UAR and ISP analyses closely. Pollutant emissions will be associated with motor vehicles traveling to and from the project. These and other vehicles already passing r through critical intersections contribute to the overall pollutant concentration near the critical intersections serving the project. The most critical pollutant associated with vehicular traffic is Carbon Monoxide(CO)for which 1-hour and 8-hour ambient air quality standards have been established by the US Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA).The MPCA 1-hour standard is slightly more stringent than the EPA 1-hour standard and will therefore be used in this air quality assessment for the 1 AUAR. The standards are presented in TABLE 23-1. TABLE 23-1 MPCA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CARBON MONOXIDE Period Standard 1-hour 30(parts per million)ppm 8-hour 9 (parts per million)ppm I27 Rickart,Chuck,WSB Associates,attachment to E-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,June 9,2000,page 5. I City of Shakopee,Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 2-22 Valley Green Corporate Center-FA UAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I A CO dispersion analysis was performed for four of the six intersections analyzed for traffic in Item 22. Two of the intersections, ICR 83 at 12th Avenue and CSAH 16 at the site access along the south side of the project,are estimated to have less 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 Iquality are listed in TABLE 23-2. TABLE 23-2 INTERSECTIONS EXAMINED FOR CO CONCENTRATIONS PM Peak Hour Approach Volumes(2017) North/South Roadway (East/West Roadway r Volume I LOS CR 83 12th Avenue 1,972 C CR 83 TH 169 WB Ramp 3,860 D CR 83 TH 169 EB Ramp 5,150 B CR 83 CSAH 16 6.040 E CR 83 17th Avenue(future) 4,130 C South Site Access CSAH 16 1,570 not available i The MOBILE 5A emissions program was used to estimate vehicle emissions in the year 2017 for which the traffic analysis has been completed. An air quality analysis one year after completion of"build out and occupancy"should 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 I 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 potentially be developed in the future. ICarbon Monoxide Background Concentration I Background 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 emission rates from the MOBILE 5A emissions model and assuming an overall regional Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMT)growth I 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 Factor 1996 2017 Emission rate at 25 mph 23.1 20.0 I Emission rate ratio from 1996 0.87 Traffic growth at 2%per year 1.52 I Seasonal correction factor 1.43 Combined correction 1.88 1-HOUR(ppm) 1.8 3.4 8-HOUR(ppm) 1.6 3.0 Assumptions Used in CO Emission and Dispersion Modeling I The 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(without the vehicle inspection and maintenance program that was terminated in 1999). The CAL3QHC model has been used to estimate downwind I concentrations of carbon monoxide at receptor sites adjacent to critical intersections identified in TABLE 23-2. 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 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-23 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I TABLE 23-4 ASSUMPTIONS USED IN CO MODELING I Traffic Approach Speed: 25 mph on all roadways Signal Cycle Time: 150 seconds at all intersections Green Time: Based upon SYNCHRO model results I Percent Cold Starts: 20% _Vehicle Mix: Metropolitan Area mix with no I/M program Wind Speed: 1 meter per second IWind Direction: Direction yielding highest concentration Projected 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 1 presented in TABLE 23-6. TABLE 23-5 PROJECTED CO 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS (Build 2017-ppm) Roadway Background TOTAL I CR 83/WB ramp Receptor 1 NE 2.9 3.4 6.3 Receptor 2 SE 2.8 3.4 6.2 I Receptor 3 SW 2.5 3.4 5.9 Receptor 4 NW 2.9 3.4 6.3 CR 83/EB ramp Receptor 1 NE 3.5 3.4 6.9 I 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 CR 83/CSAH 16 Receptor 1 NE 5.8 3.4 9.2 Receptor 2 SE 4.8 3.4 8.2 I Receptor 3 SW 4.6 3.4 8.0 Receptor 4 NW 5.8 3.4 9.2 CR 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 IMPCA STANDARD 30.0 From TABLE 23-5 it can be seen that the highest 1-hour CO concentration of 9.2 ppm occurs near the CR 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 quality istandard for Carbon Monoxide. TABLE 23-6 I PROJECTED CO 8-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS(Build 2017-ppm) Roadway Background TOTAL CR 83/WB ramp Receptor 1 NE 2.0 3.0 5.0 Receptor 2 SE 2.0 3.0 5.0 I Receptor 3 SW 1.8 3.0 4.8 Receptor 4 NW 2.0 3.0 5.0 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 2-24 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk Inc. I1 TABLE 23-6 PROJECTED CO 8-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS(Build 2017-ppm) I Roadway Background TOTAL CR 83/EB ramp Receptor 1 NE 2.5 3.0 5.5 I Receptor 2 SE 2.5 3.0 5.5 Receptor 3 SW 2.9 3.0 5.9 Receptor 4 NW 3.2 3.0 6.2 ICR 83/CSAH 16 Receptor 1 NE 4.1 3.0 7.1 Receptor 2 SE 3.4 3.0 6.4 I Receptor 3 SW 3.2 3.0 6.2 Receptor 4 NW 4.1 3.0 7.1 CR 83/17Tth Ave Receptor 1 NE 1.8 3.0 4.8 I Receptor 2 SE 1.4 3.0 4.4 Receptor 3 SW 1.5 3.0 4.5 Receptor 4 NW 2.5 3.0 5.5 IMPCA STANDARD 9.0 From TABLE 23-6, the 8-hour concentration is 7.1 ppm at the CR 83 and CSAH 16 intersection. This level as well as others Iprojected at critical intersections are below the 9 ppm 8-hour standard for Carbon Monoxide. 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 I the project. Concentrations one year after the completion of"build out and occupancy"will be addressed in the Indirect Source Permit Application to be submitted for this project.28 I 24. Stationary source air emissions. This item is not applicable to an AUAR.Any stationary air emissions source large enough to merit environmental review requires individual review. I Information regarding stationary source air emissions was not needed for the AUAR. Any stationary source air emissions sources large enough to merit an environmental review would require an individual review. 25. Dust,odors,noise.Dust, odors, and construction noise need not be addressed in an AUAR, unless there is some unusual reason I 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. If the area will include or adjoin major noise sources a noise analysis is needed to determine if any noise levels in excess of I 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. 1 Construction 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 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. I 1 28 David Braslau,David Braslau and Associates I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-25 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. Once theP roject 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. INoise Terminology IdB(A)-A unit of sound level expressed in decibels(dB)and A-weighted. DECIBEL-A unit of sound pressure level,abreviated as"dB". IdBA A special weighting of sound pressure that approximates human hearing. dBLin-Raw levels of sound pressure measure as recorded by the equipment. IL,o-Lso-The sound level,expressed in dBA,which was exceeded 10 percent(or 50 percent)of the time in a 1 hour screening_ ILdn-Average day-night level which includes a 10 dB weighting factor for night-time readings to allow for increased sensitivity to noise during the night-time hours. Ldn is e'ual to the Leq(time weighted average)when a s plied to I day-time hours only(7 am to 10 pm)activities. NAC-Refers to"NOISE AREA CLASSIFICATION"as defined in the Minnesota Rules ICategory 2 refers to COMMERCIAL. Category 3.refers to INDUSTRIAL. ITraffic Noise Impacts-Daytime(PM Peak Hour) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA)noise standards for residential and commercial land uses are listed in TABLE I 25-1. The residential area most likely impacted by noise from immediately adjacent roadways carrying project traffic are those north of 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 I standards no longer apply to roadways except in the cities of Minneapolis and St.Paul. A traffic noise impact analysis is still 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 Ilevels. TABLE 25-1 I MPCA DAYTIME NOISE STANDARDS(dBA) Land Use/Noise Metric Daytime Standard NAC-1 Residential ill L10 65 L50 60 NAC-2 Commercial L 10 70 L50 65 NAC-3 Industrial L 1 80 I L50 75 I This noise assessment also addresses the potential impact on noise levels caused by the removal of trees south of US 169 at the homes south of Dean's Lake. That assessment follows the analysis of noise impacts from immediately adjacent roadways that is presented below. . I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2-26 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. ITraffic 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 I intersections listed in TABLE 23-2 and at the residential area north of CSAH 16 and south of Dean's 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 40 mph along roadways was assumed near intersections and 45 mph along CSAH 16. A vehicle mix of 3%medium trucks and 1% I heavy trucks was assumed on all of the roadways near the critical intersections.Medium trucks were estimated at 5%and no heavy trucks were assumed on CSAH 16 south of Dean's Lake. The projected L10 and L50 noise levels at receptor sites adjacent to the critical intersections for the PM Peak Hour are presented in ITABLE 25-2 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) Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 I CR 83 at WB Ramp NE 72.1 67.9 SE 72.2 68.2 I SW 72.2 68.0 NW 71.5 67.2 CR 83 at EB Ramp I NE SE 72.7 69.1 73.9 70.3 SW 73.0 69.3 NW 72.5 68.6 ICR 83 at CSAH 16 NE 74.4 71.0 SE 73.5 70.1 I SW 73.0 69.4 NW 73.5 70.0 CR 83 at 17th Ave. I/ NE 72.4 68.4 SE 71.7 67.6 SW 72.1 68.0 INW 72.9 68.9 From TABLE 25-2,it can be seen that the projected noise levels are generally consistent along CR 83 from US 169 south to the future I 17th Avenue. L10 levels are generally above 70 dBA and L50 levels are generally above 65 dBA. A comparison of the projected levels with the NAC-2(commercial)noise standards is presented in TABLE 25-3. II TABLE 25-3 LEVEL RELATIVE TO COMMERCIAL STANDARDS at Critical Intersections-(dBA) I Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 CR 83 at WB Ramp NE 2.1 2.9 SE 2.2 3.2 I SW 2.2 3.0 NW 1.5 2.2 CR 83 at EB Ramp I NE 2.7 4.1 SE 3.9 5.3 SW 3.0 4.3 I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-27 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I TABLE 25-3 LEVEL RELATIVE TO COMMERCIAL STANDARDS 1 - at Critical Intersections-(dBA) NW 2.5 3.6 CR 83 at CSAH 16 I NE 4.4 6.0 SE 3.5 5.1 SW 3.0 4.4 I NW 3.5 5.0 CR 83 at 17th Ave. NE 2.4 3.4 I SE SW 1.7 2.6 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 are 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 1 EXCEPTIONS(D)of Minnesota Rules 7030.0050 NOISE AREA CLASSIFICATION, the NAC 3 (industrial)standards can be 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 r (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 Iwhich 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 111 projected levels and the NAC-3 standards are shown in TABLE 25-4. TABLE 25-4 PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS RELATIVE TO NAC-3 STANDARDS at Critical Intersections-(dBA) Receptor Site(100 feet) L10 L50 ICR 83 at WB Ramp NE -7.9 -7.1 SE -7.8 -6.8 SW -7.8 -7.0 INW -8.5 -7.8 CR 83 at EB Ramp NE -7.3 -5.9 I SE -6.1 -4.7 SW -7.0 -5.7 NW -7.5 -6.4 I CR 83 at CSAH 16 NE -5.6 -4.0 SE -6.5 -4.9 ISW -7.0 -5.6 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2-28 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I TABLE 25-4 1 PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS RELATIVE TO NAC-3 STANDARDS INW at Critical Intersections-(dBA) -6.5 -5.0 1 CR 83 at 17th Ave. I NE -7.6 -6.6 SE -8.3 -7.4 SW -7.9 -7.0 I NW -7.1 -6.1 From TABLE 25-4 it can be seen that well-constructed commercial buildings(without continuous outside land uses)are likely to Icomply with the MPCA noise standards. 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. It can be seen that for homes within 100 feet of the roadway centerline,the daytime I standards are exceeded by approximately 2 dBA. However,for most homes which are 150 to 200 feet from the roadway centerline, the predicted traffic noise levels are at or below the daytime noise standards for residential land uses. I TABLE 25-5 PROJECTED NOISE PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS RELATIVE TO NAC-1 STANDARDS at Residential Area North of CSAH 16-(dBA) I NAC-1 Std. D Receptor distance from roadway centerline L,o L Projected Level o Lio L o Lio ifference L.50 100 feet 65.0 60.0 66.9 61.2 +1.9 +L2 200 feet 65.0 60.0 62.0 57.3 -3.0 -2.7 Impact on residential noise levels from the removal of trees on the project site: Two groups of trees,one immediately south of US 169 and the other just north of Dean's Lake,have been removed for the City's Oak Wilt mitigation program,as a result of wind damage during 1999,and as a part of project grading/construction. Each of these I tree areas were 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 provided 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 would have provided up to 3 dBA attenuation of traffic noise,so that a 500 foot band could provide up to 15 dBA attenuation,which is the I maximum provided by a 20 foot barrier(in close proximity to the barrier). However,since traffic along US 169 constitutes a line source,i.e.noise emanates from along the entire highway,these tree barriers only provided partial shielding of the highway. Because of the nature of noise propagation and depending on the positions of future buildings within VGCC,homes south of Dean's Lake may I be exposed to noise from portions of US 169 that were previously shielded by the trees. However,this potential ex,osure was found to be generally less than 1 dBA,as shown in TABLE 25-6. It is commonly accepted ted that the average listener can detect a 3 dBA change in sound levels.Therefore,it is doubtful if this change would generate much impact. I The 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. The assumed tree barriers and residential receptor sites are shown in FIGURE 25-1. IThe results of this simulation with and without the simulated trees and therefore the difference in noise attributed to the trees are presented in TABLE 25-6. ITABLE 25-6 SIMULATED IMPACT OF TREE REMOVAL ON NOISE LEVEL FROM US 169 I at Residential Area North of CSAH 16-(dBA) Site Trees No Trees Impact 1 45.0 45.8 0.8 I2 44.3 45.4 1.1 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 2-29 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. ITABLE 25-6 SIMULATED IMPACT OF TREE REMOVAL ON NOISE LEVEL FROM US 169 Iat 3 Residential Area North of CSAH 16-(dBA) 43.6 44.5 0.9 4 44.0 44.8 0.8 I5 42.9 43.5 0.6 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 Dean's I Lake. However,the predicted noise levels at the sites from US 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 be noted I that the placement of buildings on the project site could provide some shielding of noise from US 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. I Based upon the analysis of traffic noise levels and the impact of tree removal from the project site, the project is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on noise levels at either future commercial areas adjacent to critical intersections or at the residential area adjacent to CSAH 16 and south of Dean Lake.z9 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 any I 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, I recreation areas, or trails to be developed in conjunction with development of the AUAR area. 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® No I Subsequent to the Draft AUAR,archaeological resources were assessed and reported by the 106 Group LTD in their Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the development. The summary reports the following: "The Phase 1 survey identified no archaeological sites within the Valley Green Corporate Center project area, and indicates that there is little probability that the project area contains I unidentified archaeological resources of historical significance. The 106 Group therefore recommends that the project warrants no further archaeological investigation."30 The detailed report is contained in VOLUME 2,APPENDIX E. b. prime or unique farmlands? 0 Yes ®No IThe project site does not contain any prime or unique farmlands. Past land uses have included some agricultural use,mainly in the north and west portions of the project site. Those areas are considered fair for agricultural uses consisting of Dakota Loam and Copas I 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[sic]soils of the Dune Land,Hubbard,Isanti and Zimmerman series with I 1 29 David Braslau,David Braslau and Associates 30 Abel,Elizabeth J.,The 106 Group Ltd,Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Valley Green Corporate ICenter,April,2000,page 11. I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-30 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. marshy soils located along the west edge of Dean's Lake. The southeast portion of the study area is comprised of stoney land and terrace escarpments.31 Ic. designated parks,recreation areas,or trails? ❑Yes ® No Proposed development of the project site would not affect any existing public parks,recreation areas or trails. A portion of the City's Comprehensive Park and Trail Plan is shown on FIGURE 26c-1. The Preliminary Plat does,however,include the proposed dedication of an as sroximatel 75 acres of'ark ad'acent to Dean's Lake as shown on FIGURE 5-2. IDean's Lake is classified as a shallow natural environment lake. Much of the land directly around Dean's Lake consists of marsh and peat muck soils". d. scenic views and vistas? 0 Yes N No The proposed development would not affect any designated scenic views or vistas. e. other unique resources? 0 Yes ®No If any items are answered Yes,describe the resource and identify any impacts on the resource due to the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. I27. 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. IProposed development will alter its appearance from an agriculture/wooded open lot to that of a business park setting. As mentioned earlier development includes 0.52 acres of wetland that were filled,with 2.15 acres of replacement wetland and buffer area I being constructed. Final site occupancy for the proposed development should include the planting of trees,shrubs and other landscaping,at the individual lot owner's discretion.The replacement wetland and buffer areas should be seeded with a mix of native flora to enhance the natural beauty of the area. I Some local residents have voiced protest over the removal of several trees from the project area. Their concerns involve the fact that US 169 is now visible from their homes. Several trees were removed from the north border of the area. A portion of these were removed in compliance with the City of Shakopee's Oak Wilt Suppression Program. The perceived adverse visual impacts will be Imitigated somewhat with the location of buildings and the associated landscaping for this development. 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 AUAR document should discuss the proposed AUAR area Idevelopment 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 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 I noted. If there are any management plans of any other local, state, or federal agencies applicable to the AUAR area, the document must discuss the compatibility of the plan with the various development scenarios studied, with emphasis on any incompatible elements. IAs stated in earlier sections of this report,the plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center should comply with all aspects of the City of Shakopee's current and adopted draft Comprehensive Plan,Storm Water Management Plan33 and Transportation Plan. I I 31 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 32 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." 33 Hubmer,Todd E&Willenbring,Peter R.,WSB&Associates,Inc.,City of Shakopee Comprehensive Stormwater IManagement Plan,Feb.22, 1999. I City of Shakopee,Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 2-31 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I 29. Impact on infrastructure and public services. This item should first of all summarize information on physical infrastructure presented under items(such as 6, 18, 19 and 22). I 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 I part of the AUAR 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. CR 83 offers a direct link between the city and the Valley Green Corporate Center. The I 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. I 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 ONo If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing, and plans for environmental review. After the completion of sitegrading,street and utility construction,individual lots will be sold. Purchasers should then Idetermine their needs are.are the necess. buildin. .lans and submit them to the a..ro a riate authorities. b. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? OYes ®No IIf yes, briefly describe the past development, its timing and any past environmental review. c. Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or outlets? OYes ®No I 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. ISee Item a. I 31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts which were not addressed by items 1 to 28, idents and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. The Shakopee Environmental Protection Association has been an integral part of the AUAR process. Many public concerns were I 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 Dean's Lake area. 32. Summary of Issues. The RGU may answer this question as asked by the form, or instead,may choose to provide an Executive I 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. I I I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2-32 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. 3. Certification by the RGU.In an AUAR document, no certifications as listed at the end of the EAW form are necessary. (The 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 EQB 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. 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 Title of signer Date Minnesota Environmental Quality Board. Revised June 1990. 1 1 r I I 1 City of Shakopee,Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-33 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I I REFERENCES IMinnesota Pollution Control Agency. 2000. Property Audit of proposed Valley Green Corporate Center project site. Prepared for Bolton and Menk,Inc. IDaryll Ellison,MN DNR, West Metro Area Fisheries IDiana Regenscheid,MN DNR-Wildlife Division STS Consultants Ltd. 1999. Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Documents. Prepared for Valley Green ICorporate Center John Erdmann, Wenck Associates, 1800 Pioneer Creek Ctr.,P.O. Box 428, Maple Plain,MN 55359-0428 IBarr Engineering. 1982.Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant Dewatering Evaluation. Prepared for Metropolitan Council Environmental Services. IDrivas E. 1997. "Appropriation Permit 67-172, Shirley Quarry Dewatering, Scott County."MNDNR Office Memorandum(May 19, 1997). Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1989. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas;Best Management Practices for Minnesota. IFrost,J. and S. Schwanke. 1992. Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution to All Metropolitan Water Bodies. Metropolitan Council, St. Paul. IBiessel,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). I 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. Schoell&Madson,Inc.July 1999. "Comprehensive Water Plan, 1999 Supplement."Prepared for the City of IShakopee. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Minnesota Agricultural IExperiment Station. October 1959. "Soil Survey of Scott County Minnesota, Series 1955,No.4." SRF Consulting Group,Inc.; WSB and Associates,Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment of CR 83/CSAH I16.Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center. David Braslau,David Braslau and Associates, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 322,Minneapolis,MN 55414 I I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 2-34 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. B. Graphical Exhibits - Organized Item Number 1 Project Title - No Exhibits. 2. Proposer - No Exhibits. 3. RGU - No Exhibits. 4. Reason for EAW Preparation - No Exhibits. 5. Location and Maps FIGUREs 5-1 Vicinity Map,FIGURE 5-2 Project Property Boundary,and FIGURE 5-3 City Wide Land Use Plan for the area have all been replaced. FIGURE 5-3 City Wide Land Use Plan now represents the 2000 draft version of the Comprehensive Plan. FIGURE 5-4 Zoning has been added to show the current zoning status. ' 6. Description FIGUREs 6-1,6-2 and 6-3 have been deleted. The information contained is now shown on FIGURE 10-2 Overall Grading ' Plan. FIGUREs 6-4,6-5,6-6,and 6-7 have been added to show the infrastructure improvements(sanitary sewer and watermains) to be constructed. 7. Project Magnitude Data - No Exhibits. 8. Permits and Approvals Required - No Exhibits. 9. Land Use ' FIGUREs 9-1 has been added to show aerial view prior to 1999. FIGURE 9-2 has been added to show aerial view-June, 2000. 10. Cover Types FIGUREs 10-1 -Cover Types and FIGURE 10-2- Overall Grading Plan have been replaced. 11. Fish,Wildlife,and Ecologically Sensitive Resources FIGURE 11-1 has been deleted. The information contained is now shown on FIGURE 10-1 Cover Types. 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources ' FIGURE 12-1 has been deleted. The information contained is now shown on FIGURE 10-2 Detention Pond Location& "No Impact"Zone. ' FIGUREs 12-2,12-3,12-4 and 12-5 have been added to show the infrastructure improvements(storm sewer)to be constructed. 13. Water Use - No Exhibits. 14. Water Related Land Use Management Districts 1 City of Shakopee,Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 2-35 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. IFIGURE 14-1 has been deleted.The information contained is now shown on FIGURE 10-2 Detention Pond Location& "No Impact"Zone. I15. Water Surface Use - No Exhibits. I16. Soils FIGURE 16-1 Local Soil Types-No Change. FIGURE 16-2 has been added to exhibit Hydrologic Soil Types. I17. Erosion and Sedimentation - No Exhibits. 18. Water Quality-Surface Water Runoff IFIGURE 18-1 Area Tributary to K-Mart Linear Pond and FIGURE 18-2 Dean's Lake Watershed have been revised to delineate regional tributary drainage areas. FIGURE 18-3 Overall Grading Plan and FIGURE 18-4 Drainage Area Map Ihave been added. 19. Water Quality-Wastewater - No Exhibits. I20. Groundwater-potential for Contamination - No Exhibits. 21. Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks - No Exhibits. 111 22. Traffic I FIGURE 22-1 has been revised. FIGURES 22-2,22-3,and 22-4 required no revisions. FIGURE 22-5 Proposed Concept Layout has been added to show the proposed reconstruction/relocation of CSAH 16 and CR 83. 23. Vehicle-related air emissions - No Exhibits. I24. Stationary source air emissions - No Exhibits. I 25. Dust,odors,noise FIGURE 25-1 required no revisions. I26. Sensitive Resources FIGURE 26c-1 Park and Trail Master Plan has been added. I27. Adverse visual impacts - No Exhibits. I28. Compatibility with Plans - No Exhibits. 29. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services - No Exhibits. I30. Related Developments;Cumulative Impacts. - No Exhibits. 31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts - No Exhibits. I I I I City of Shakopee,Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 2-36 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. •Ir Y .`. I r I,' «= -.. i I _.r.,..,•a- . -...._;,i rF'-. i � ` 'j �'�'•r,s,,, „ , ,, 11 -!•`•,. .:t1-14,e,..; � rJ/ 1-7.'l r...-'f f}� - 1.'Yrl- ' ~-'11' /J i ''1' `. 11 ! \=%`D •••-'0 `\ `): ' i f ! ( , (f,T; tY� o":-� J4£y\(, Ln ;� Y ``� Ii . �..� .I n, i ,.1 4 , %.: 4; I J I .- Aa •-1'./ . ,. 4 s1. '' y.}., 1 Z 1. .J✓✓✓J t *' 1, 7c- •• , ( 1Irl /..�, yet .,, � `" ( -';'-`,.t\,,, i. y .� ,,' i1 , \ % e , t r • 1 1 !f ' '' f//l 'r.� i^ r(.��},�7(! '11 ��/ ' • n MAY R �' �i �� ;,? '.4-;. 1 ` _fff+++ �! ,1 i'( t l/ft�`_?r?�. y}'J J i _� D II ,y.. s\ :; I ij /i. ,` - _18 r71"F �aY_i s,. T's -' t .\'\ l �' ''- ,�.f .,..se .' i \_y-- i` O �:N.a ' 3 (" '�J'. I { P4' @ \� �' l " + 1 n i} `,li ly ti ..��.-.,,, f b/ S r 17--.-4-:94-. 1,);,J.,!_7.'7_,,,,.(:41 j^f .-,- ,- ' :� * ,1 ` ,k,?",!:" .. F;If�, ',41.,._ -y et,/ \ • ?\ ±r /I����I_ � 3.GZ'?tkF}�0)P ti \• s� t r , �. I'' / '1`‘-1 J ,.1(`r i�.` / ' ¢''\- I 1 r`_. .a °�T ' '• 2.. �`y'.�j�=� 'us` ' 1( / .A. _ }1 `\ . `' ' ({ �.��r1t' . / s� , -1'^i- °._.J 1. rR ,41 �" (4r ! I r/V,O.''''' ‘--- ,,,,, 'r/' �' y2 '+ - rr 5,; �'� • r J.Jr,' 4,', 'f'/ \•1`.. �/�7 r\ aNii } 4 t, y, /L�i1 ! (t�� �s,� _ r t,�f'� t'Ji / � ( 'Y 6 T �'"���� ..„3.„,,,, $ �:�1 '' ' ,. 1L. �' 3 s_ ��_r ,• N IL, t r`-, I" f• ''' °G °- V_ ,y f •.�l'' r �/ ',. i / \r \`(f, �� :d ^t'4, I •-.-'ti�'S I!\ \ •. •e:,,,`,.'", 7I i • �� A... r/7 ��-- / j ,i t: \ rihi. _ '-.frigargafflas -; J`g�^ f 11 :it �( • f 4, 14- yS ,`jam 33,t7:42 e _ .3 Na / �\_ l, E} t 1' �- i y, . :f \_` 1" i v,� t �` ! fid" ' \ ;". " '%\ 11 ' � : 2' ( ,,s,''*{c S ).:-.,..1. . O I r l I i '�/� -.� ti',,,' r ,\ ;,,. T5Q '�'.-.ice I 1 cit." r r `c* O rit, I T i A.3. , / ,.Y I �"" f ` ,� d L { � J r. ,� I N rr SL � � , `h � •" �� r �#1 1 1 I ''�rl /I I ?_ �►" 1 1 1 f ' �' �' I # ' �l rl� j I', � \, . 1 ' . . , t� = /azlr. u I ;; }I J� J , 1 Jr"✓ !s� � `V 'f, ' �1itt, �' l''''" ,"-''•,,-\‘'),, \w f lr ?{ Jr'I. Z „` i 1....,1 11 7 %Q ,J f - .t I,. s '. ,fi r ,< I e' I , \-..1`)' V': \ ( �1 f '' `,.'J f�`.. ice 11 ` :_I ?'.�y C; 1:,?' ,i ,r�, r � I .I - ,, j�r`I„ 1,` ac ;. °�” &L,.ii 11,r\•• =, . . ! iil,c, VI I / a r"•i I 'ti _ � - '\s! -�'��.. l4.4 �: r g �' .�I i h�` r �.a G ,a iii"'.imli-. i .,'� \f j•l a i II� -{: t� �.. \, ._: �.'. - - �.,-�'F{i� iiHptt /1.-• / )/� t�,Iku IN1 • ,I 1 l 1. ,,..t.lr r"1J,lI-1/ r� r411, in //sem,, 'I , O `t- /r•: • Q-rr/! 1 r✓-`Ir� (Ir t4.„. Z O- p .1 ..,..,- 4,,',. ! ( {t •�tr� (I 1I' .'/,,,,' ,,, °. 1/ ,- ,, I�, ?,r y, , 'd� S , {el1,1 it `i '' i:.It \ , I U li II )r. -,.\ •� 1 a/. 1 Z `j'C-II r .': r1 "''LRl Ij y I X'at►,�, �° I Al �', ( 1i' r r i a!•� fry W ^ ry,' .._ ,? it.'';',"0„, `tl�S= 'J',11;,! ,11,,. ,,,, a ; i,.' ' �', a... '/ d15 is 11 ; t. .3 I ? ), pl. V� W r,3 r �; - IJ � llr 11 r(, g i ii, ,4 r �� ,J 1 I,tlt �c'....? S f at0. 3 0, -3,, 1+ JY , /:' I ••"tjiel t I i'. {,''_! 1.9 <;:.‘', IIffir J. 1 g, ;ail i ; • (_•' 711 7/ f �� 7���1�1"� � �a .1, i /( Z ,1 J ,4"' Illi ' xr LI.)1) ,.. % ei ly' „'' 1 '�I, I ,11'}�j ! `�.�� ' 1 h, .., i Ce Q -- ,..:7:_ko---; " . -• 8 I. - :74......:T.'''`rti '� 13,...,,i-'1.1&,-? � °; ! . ,. i • ii ^ r a t i/ 4I7tZ z Ili �r I _� )'�,. _I ci i did �> i,. 1�1 ,)I', (n f/C ,�t '� I ` <, s'� „ �a c''Ar In,Itl�` I. ;�.s . 1�r1 ,� (i� ,,..,, H "., 1 • i�' r, j • j �� �• j'r.�..�"�'7 I RI•'' ii , , ,-.. I _ _ 11 W Z Z „.. , • 1, l I r 11 rc. �, W 1 .!�;:. r., �:- ! �. I.d. l I fit- II ° , t II -/ ) 2 W !f i \!tf 1� t It oli t • } r r F } \, , .� t,111', 1/4.1/4t Ud021 f l. ,� - i ! 'rte- �L ' ii` ,i3- I t,' < � t' �Z ', J �_� I , � :7: ,MlqI Z ' ( h \ / 'q 'l [ (... ��r r', it II4} !. 1 r 1 cn Z cc 0 If IL z � Ili 1 `F� • l 1 r `: 1 s I I `1. wr T' ,'411:6 f 1 1 ! ! r-> r fr a Q' f n 1 v� / ,• �` 11 • . r r i i "7 t' 1 , l,j i 1' ,-_r--.- /:� { • I ( ti �.11 I / ', m i il* fr*!> ?I! l V � ',2,'-'i ,i.', ' ' _ I \ •� r{ �.�f �t.�4 /1 tai-_ r el/i ) clif)\ '',. ""77.,e11.-, er-4,> -i-I * i , r • iv , ( ,,/i) ,t I I i(;?.. ,,,.....„., 7,•,, Ji... • /4.-- — ; ( c 'il\ ' (7))` e ) 11,,, . f I ..??.,::::,:::::- ' r::. -..,' ./. 4 i'‘ I.1 1,4, . / „ , r/ -`.k{I r, In•s: rr"��1 1 ;IIV N ( ' ` a' Qy ci W 1 #' 1;, "a ,i_'�� nab � ° " 1 Ga •a, �(wq� nea�nn6o), ,FJ X LAIo pc 1 41 /6/1,'rIf 1 ` '' ai '/r/� r�/� Y� rAft.,' ii j 8 ZI.7 ;11 ,r dt° a ixw „)..11/1/. �( 'lrN J .9 0 'r��. /Y' /� G� ��"-) ' K ' , i n ( v/ (1' L a • 8qa , rer G1. i j II f t� i r ! / t , 1 'I f !/1 Si r I 'J, , i '4' 4S !+� f q --1-/c`,5 d ,' / 1 I s. I t .+.:,4--,r`vk I\ ' r) n 1'..11111 \♦ i.. ', , :5� } ;, ! • `i t {-f ff v"+i . lif ,1 , ,', wet o (.,_,,..) , .......,...., ,c,1 QrD r- / J ,� 4L s7 , 1 �: ,::: t!( i .�' lI S t.,.. 147 I s,'1 ,// - ,�;,c r-. '`.t 1,1 i ( { J\ , ! I _ f� \s.,:,„,, � i � �l t•i C_. 1 ,+ 1 i it S ��'1.,,,,,,,,e,:.,,. � 4 I '% ' 1 f , \ I� f : „:. �/ ,�,. J i j l Ji 'I I ,�t' .r� a1 ,J _( , '�v-,,,;.e.,' i Fi ,� / JJJ Jg 1 FFF u..C1), k " � } r f S J ¢ =jxr� /-4:(,;-•c 4. t 4 ...- 7 -l l -_._. °:ri,' ix' a & } j 8 ,r / I� _ r _. - T '.Jb a i -ear 3. . \ ,. .f:/// ! q 1 M ? 1 '/ jr Ir 1 p 1 '>l!'•�o�1' \\., I•,11 ;s3 / / �('l r k 11 1 1 r:17.7.-1-1------'—i---: ' ` } r fp I 1 ,, _.„, -.L. . e , 41`ai�1., S rb "°r ,�,°+ 4., l"`2'` ,, 'II OF '„,,,,,r---i,...„' [/r i _/ t / s y 5 l Aa �c 1n�❑ r ,1 • Y .... e..,..',,„,,,,-,„ l t '”.F.`•` 3''y ' ' •/"r -,---(fir- �`, 1 asp rf fr �ir /I e 4410 xn, 1t 1 } r 1.4 I, a f t/V 1 � ``fa µ 1 -� ��.' \ ►l , \\. __ ' \,.......„„):‘4',"t. Y� G- Q 'I, <' ) , - ,.,..„, , �:�, r, 1 k ." 'r•'-,i �,�weee. "fi 4.,,. '�� .\ •O `'n` .�'• r;'� j 2-�2L,. -?--;.,,; i O •Mp'ssD• q logs :p - - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — O N �� 7T--- N• 0 INt N o D !- Z \---/ �� Q ia CC I ‹...._ ijitial ex—M (../) 411111L ' W H V ` I 11 < U Li OP 1 II Q d J 1.1.11-•F— Q�] Ii Z 111 IZI �(n w 1 : I I 00_ \\II\ I :• II J �-Q. mI 1.1 Z w 1w: '1 — nl I •VI L III I : AA • 4) — 1\I II1.I '— - -I--+ 1\I I ' I.I - C Iiu I : W I Y CD 0 ��� II U rll I ' .1 � O III I Ii. . ' N fn rrl I : I 1 ) N I ,i I : II• 0:1 C i I • 'I.I O._ cn 111 H I II:I ! �-� HI IIV of 0 / • II'I 0 z a.t O N w,- 111 J •. i (� Y N Uia Gi III m a Ill I. c a co 3 = 111 I • fI.I Q 0) O V) 0 I • rI:I d � Q)- 3z o rl II g I II I ,t- c..D0 =m �^ �o 1 A b i : III:1 m 4) Im z ceQ ceQ g \ (....--i _i H _ m rn o Z O_ "b �1 ~. �o Wuj Op wo~z yl II Q > z oU aZ�UM�� z000�cwn II J •7 O u_v_ �Z N NM�K ..I • .I I , . 0 00 �ONOwMZO OZW/1MM N20 la !II:I If) — wuj mm o,u_cmncr au_ocr Imp' .1:1 OD 0D D Z zU zz m I'i: CO I'1 \ I lU ILI H \ O Iw: I CO .1 r- , I I.- . I Q \ —I I�; II.1\ l• la 'I:I \ J \\ I°.la: 11:1 U I 1i O `\ .. : II'I o \ 1 • I.I I JO I. i \ 1' \I I I . CI YQ t. \ I :�I,�,� I • \ cL \ 11 II 111� JO ;: c ce o ° \ 1 1 I .0 I cm' o m9 \ I .�1 z cEoa w m°w Y \ I1 11 , ~ I z ° amm., N c° I 0IA ci I N x c ,n ��° �r \\ 1 1 pa v '._.\ ) // -1 �11 0 2.0 ooto v rd - as ~m4 . 2w \ 1 �� M 1 U iC U°iO Um1 Tri` L.Cy OCL; C mp I o Lo 0R''0 ' �.s oc c.'° t'_ �o .c..� 1 1 ' / U r Q U C C Yj O m-, ;0 g2"-' d p V l-' • I ' 1 y yo+on (a 030 icy Ec ma m 9.m. OCt° N uYN ' g0 OONC _ t.,, £8 VO Lk; wu N c C CNV O qN N EZr O.N 0 0 Cp OIC G a a'a 1 •11111.111111%. � '0, £' 'OLI '00 va; m m m m 24!o rn `3°'-' c • mcg m a cN rbc oHFm K ani C° °w oC; m`°�; m.°+c 1 tenni o'm or. 3Oo ov Ndo .a 'a ,-- . 'rn \ `q $ a e°.1= iri $cE o`o fy c.rE 'ova PI !i m.. °w Jmo °� o /. —z° a°o$ —t.o N,L„u ;i,c M.o �c Ntrw I 1 S / z ''21 n v ° a E'-at. ° .. E,if- 1-42 Ym° Ly v °L a O1 1 / ��,Q1 cl- Uc°nc cam£ ` er3i !J0 mho np13o to omi / VY+ b X %' Ek E 3 T M O+' 6 C,4' 1 W1-°:1.0 H °0 ocfV v....~y O mC2ovY^N m>of 2323 caL t . °'V ooJ of°off O1 ° � EE (N° a° `- m 8°o 0. .r o o;C m.-0 o c 2v O ,Z 01 o v 0 4 3 m m,`o_M o c°-m .z.• ov cc o c u vmo m�F o °Efi« d m l; ° (/7 T �O U Ain N eCL ❑�° m°° �.fA' �-' L�K U 0. oa «°No o5 °• o fq o.o 00 Acv t Wt g p0 V6.CN C NEE O a°Q C.i 4=. OCU V ,rjN N .+IIS au o>.°o ap§V a °M.00 U `°vv), o°al w M 'Ow _.. ., / v� `°o�« IIo`oo m rno conwm 3°v »iflh ;tro 0 oz aci E tj • 71 ..,CV L � OCE CyC4 J'oo°2 ° Jt !U$ "U bH zt Ntl'm m c°.Liocm.m +L- (n 0. 01"' ° -00 C .' di i:I:I W m ZLOvt ou Oe 0°e° O°O.OL J SFFO O g-,2..0 _ °ZL:Z N'°°wJ�any0 a 'Ma i'w° ' M dl.l ° m ?i= = J• = W JJL.y°y JVl° TD W"_ NULL °i (UVd °.C°U NwOC .3C wd2ooy_q L yL°''=Of. °°V°~ K 1----1 "IPo°o �E >. f°Emo Joi-°o Flm ENO 000� °aomm m wm°u fin z°IIo c°n IIa�i?IIan Ev^ ''g. .2 o.. E8`u o ' a c oLm cNc cw$ cw mrn° rcu (�° g 4 WmC Oa"? mC LCU _mU O2m 0°c U� JL•_OLO V'e x._ez� �Fc� -i c�°u FOU Hf.�V�a«.�za c7KT we:r-oc� Ff U,..0 �- — an ail IIIIII MO an MI — — — — — — — — NM — NM — I I LEGEND I :filo, Q Single Family Reeldeotid v Medium DensityResidential o,--) . MI High Density Residential .,. ".,.�.. I I Rural Residential I / Ng Q Planned ReddenUal , M 12TH AVE � e NM Neighborhood Commercial 12TH AV)" -� ..: _. E li Oinft Commercial D. — /'',tea _ lei - - ® Business Park I —= �� A i NM Light Industrial $ ▪ Heavy industrial g ` tr I Inetltutlonal(comet lead ase) I r ~+tr+a p, fr---*__ - i ; Park f fr r �`.'EN„ I Open Space ✓ / ✓ `:�s , i� AprDEAN '` X �. ® Entertainment I LAKE Boundary .*H �� • • —.City omit. • • . ♦ • • • Q Lake I • • • • • • + + O1TECIT. ® Proposed MUSA 2. 'T !i • • • • . ♦ • . • • ♦ • Expansion Areas ,• • • • • + . • ♦ + • • • • • • • . • Q Overlay Uses ♦ • • • . • • • . • • ♦ •••• ® Mining Overlay a . a ♦ . ••♦••♦•.'♦ • • • • . ♦ •♦• . • ® Existing Residential •'•'•'.'.'/ . ♦ ♦ •'♦`f`•'.`.'.'.'♦ •'•`♦ Developments Within • ♦ ♦ • + • • • • • • • ♦ • • • • + + Jackson Township • . ♦' ` ' ` ' `•' CITY WIDE LAND USE PLAN . .'.'. .`•�.a•`.�•�.�.`♦�.«•�.�•�.�• *DRAFT ONLY* �'�'.'.'.'. • • • ♦ ♦ • • • • • Shakopee I 3 •'a'•'•'•.•.•`•`•`.'a`a'•`♦ Comprehensive Plan • • • • . ♦ . • • • • • • • + • • • City of Shakopee. Minnesota . • ♦ • • • • 2000 • • ♦ • ♦ • . ♦ ♦ • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . . . PilitAl I • • a a a . • ♦ . a ♦ ♦ ` • ` ` ` ♦ ♦ ♦ ` ` S JIL aKO EE ♦ . .'• • • ♦ ♦ ♦ f1aE� COIYPBEE SENCRMdP ♦'•'• ♦♦•' • . . a • • • • • • • ♦`•'• • • • • • I II 1 M O SMSC Land in Trust 2000 t 2000 o SMSC Land Proposed to be /// VGCC SITE SCALE FEET ' a Placed Into Trust N FIGURE 5-3 O SMSC Fee Land I ,, wiiM \ \`��. B1 AG LEGEND Underlvina Zones I �, ..vKifr IN\ �, ma Aaricullun Rurol Reeity Rse Vn \ f;ii.1 Los Doul RNitl.Miol '4 III --------- ` �W Wirt �� Iola u.eo..Reu0eallW 1 I 9 �r IrAT. !'�� ® mui slwlw,..a..loeallol 1�. ® weGm o...lq Rala.,ua moll II MIN .• 1:J B..n Industrial Por. I ,, t11 He v avy Indust x ® Major Recreation 6 ` Dvenov Zones I.LITH AVE ® � .441; ‘,„40, NORr an ifivisay&AIMS! CEE Office Business an Eentrai Business [T�Fwoepwin Olel.kl /2 ID �oAPVROVEo er c11r CouHCR ICEB P , B P HIE "'°' i a>E 'eRE�IA �' .r..e..r . -... ..'- APIIII'A i ;.......... a ..• ..'.... I..? rA • .' ji /:--- .,' lam\ �.��� . ..o�........ . «. .nn. IIII —I �� � '� `� 41 � Ai- ,....„,_ DEAN �������r0449 1 (A :: � I __ .o,i Ell '.4111111111.111j. AG g I ��� A SoD� AiooeI rel AG N AG g I x d z 2000_ _ 1 2000 N II SCALE FEET D EE o I N M O N Y ' VGCC SITE ZONING FIGURE NO. 5-4 I o 1 O N (::' 00 W 8 N X ---______-- 0 o LI S 3 n C v ii v o fJf ( O U 416k ' N N N CC n 'N.:--....„,_ .-~, W m \ ' ' W (0 t): • r, , j' - 7. III co„ -, o_ t- ' Q O . U 2 1 r"...1 Z 2 Z I /III W m O U W �� 2 CL ° E I (f, GL 0 li / I � )m...4Lc):j 1 0_ji. , IL!)iiii -v ir WJJ OLLz Wf ' z° � //:... „,,,, z JHZ ! Z I � ” J Ail—1 IF\ iimg, -Ir --I% `� Wz Tia. V: Q 4W v),X ch<W Y/4$14W jil Q z i4. zo Qz r---, I C< oQQ v; :g0 :17; 62 unp nu' 6Mp. 0-4eM-ues\zE;02;; \ileus\ H I E — MI M I OM M M — Mr r r ■r ■r M I — E M 1 V. II I. . • I DCS I. . I CO . RD . 8 '3 I uv II *D> \. II \ \ I. >w \\ \\ \I —I—< 1 I II \. .. \ \\ • \ <� \. \\ \ D* \. \ I \ \\ • `\ \ 0 /71 \ I \ I .. \ \ G V. \\ I I \ p .37 70 z , 'I \\ �, ' I� I \ O CI• I 1 7l7 0 \• \\ I \ K (I) — \. I \ DQE • \ � •\ I• 1, ,L \ OI Z 0 C) 1 = I • I a' 14 @ i . ipi ' pi-7 I . \\ 7C) CD 9 i---,„ tgo a I I -0 \ -jr-------"-V-""u" , 4 I . I • I 51>1 < ° --.7(,...,,,,,,, Ilp I I • • (1) \ 0 cp O Jil `�I I ir.r. m \ zZ Erl -0 0 8 I � Iso z \\ 37. C) u) O o ' � b. . 1 V —' -< I \ O Q CD Q /n ® ° s: 11/ I' I sN \ 2 N CO N O of N 1 v I • (� CU o I 1 0 • 'n' \ D 1I N 1 CO r+ 1 o 0 CD / .' Io 0 1---- 1 • I I : 0 11,4,1 0 \ I I 0 Nig \ CD 111 Oat 01 11 •I O I \\ ►�41 I I %U I \ �l I . I •I 73 I \ m A it • I O I \\ ---I---Ire U)U) , O —� I : f I 1 *Drn *z D z I I • f 1 mzc� — m Z 1 : I ---I I m p f I-71 I I g \ 73(1),-,-1D �7 I . o I \ 1 ��D D f I I 0 1 0 1\ uN P—j e4o I O I II 0 0 Z I I5 --I 1 o I I I ,� �I I I I � , I1I 1 v H a I � 1 Ho • H C I I I 1il 1 ; c R 1 • I • I g! o I I • m NJ s .A H I 11 • II v � II I . II I I 0) No I I I I I o I . I _ ,EE _SHEET 6 _I 11 S • (44 DCS �`� a SEE77 SHEET 7 �� SEE SHEET 5 N 1 111111 4411 /111 ip' ' ANEW / ie..*Ash '% - I I :• I •IcNno : ' I y0. ' I ; 0 vI 1 I ( ! I -I cri 0. 1 g 84, 1944p,4,4111o. i • 1 I *> is I � / 1\ I D' " I . pp z8Fit 111 fns 1 ! V I 4 I cfl 7£�i,nn+ ! �I I N N N um I I A A 1 I i 1 rn eY x 1: �N 1 :• I 1 44+ d �w Q v �j ��I ' I o W i i IyN v < b�" / I + �f / 1 D I • I ly P j z 1 I h 1 0 I I 6 iv / op 04 1 1 • p ww+ �J II '" I IW ffiEo H I • ( 1 v ; I ! • I I _-i I r 0 i I I /U II71-71 I •. ± • J j Np rAVINNowAi .1 r i i ! f I I 1 JVs I 11 I I I I < amu ' ?� v� .`.�. 1 1 1 • I • 1 c., v 4 4 4) r I • I I • I 0 N u8N I r 11 — I I I 1 1 I . • I P iv p 1I. 1 I I r_ v• 00 I • I I I 'I I. '' C) ' I 0 I I I I 1 yy.r� I 0 1 ' I I m I 2 /_ i • I I i f P I' I'I l V ``\ ' : ' •��� ria i 7 1 Z Oq '1 I`q� 1 : I I J I 1 1 -'}1 I 11 II i cn D Q G7 :)2\ I ( ) I : I . I : 11 I � Z ' I �'(1Z II I I -0 Z i 1 I' Nu$O i i i m i i iui ui oo;, O O \V I 1 I 1m� > I I 1 V Z 11 I I 11 w O 8 II II I j i rel G7 I 1 , _ I m O 1 I I ,+ 0) I l iCD 11 1 I 1 1 cAa� C7 m N CO I I ( • z m I1 i �1 Yo —� D 1 `� ' • ' ! Si ! 0.010 0 / I I I ren i i i C / i s I I 11 1 O I :• 1 /II � /p�� fI I I / I I ( �•� Z 1 1 1I1 r I Il lFri a) 0 I ' 1 O '^ rF I I 11 1 ci s 0 CD 1 I I 1 1 I ! v,tcl COI • I I ' I 1 '"'� go�i o W /I-'f� ! ' 1 1 5 1 1 I 1— �C' Q 0 I : I 1 . I 11 I V A: rnrn 11 I I I l O = l V f • t 1 /n I . 11 I 1 f II O — -h: I I I 1 I 1 y �� I '\ 1 ! I I I I 'n ( nCD I �� I I I 1 C) (I) I I I I I , W I I f 1 1 1 0 n 1 1 I '' • jl j —�� f I ( I� A ? II I • I 1 : I \----_-� ',1 11 1 `1 0O I : I : 1 • I I : I I : I `1 1 '1 X t • I • I 1 1 1 I • I • I 1 1 1 I I I . I J 1 I 1 I • ! • I 1 1 1 O II • I1 f • I // 11 11 111 0 Z I • ; ' I 1, '1 II CO 111 C!)(I) S� ( • m O� iI i + i Ili li i 0731—D rT1 Z m c I : I ! I 1 5 5 mzO r1 _irrl o � r I ! 111 '`I CO 0 I I ! I ) 'I '1 'I c C7 D g f [►� • Lam] II 11, 1I1 0 O� 1 I t 1 , X I 1 I I `I ' ' I I —< 1 ! 1 1' I z I I 1 I I I /� 1 1 1 I • i 1 :i : \ 1 `1 1 I . 1j . I \ i1+ i ' • ' • ' 1 I ` I 0 1 II 1 \ I 1 ° I : I I . : I ` 11 `1 r1- I • 1 I . I I : I \ /--_ � 1'1 ', it ' I .j I �...J 1 1 1 1 : r I 1 1 I I I• ' I I \ I I 1 1 1 1 I . 1 1 1 ° I : IND ON OM ,ter .I► M — U M .O M r — MN — r M N NM / / >(1) ; /D 00 . RD. 88 ,;' UV 04 14 RODS r'1 CO.//(�D ,,8� a lye . w 4 N , //f Q� o >vU xi p, i/ /I ����iDa . Io 0 m �—< / L 10 RDDS J' // /' /// O11 m Q o iv E co i ' / ei)m — / / o WV) -- �' / 1 CI I /// ' / ' /``,/ � Z O / % / / A / , / �0 11 0 / / / wNo O /I I ( ' N / / / 00 j o4 D ' ' ' 0 /,:c-,5,/ l�) _ T /e J /' " e N' O % / // - ten Z m i'4+ ,/ A � o K �8o O ' / / // ' Z O / / . 1 / , z \ ' / / / --Ti Q �; xr/,'' 00 v I/ 0 O — EfiN K (i)"‹ Fri j'', // ' L/ C) f c6 0 / O 0 ;10 ,/ K. ,/... , / 0 0 -D f , �� 0 ' CD ___________ �7 0 0 -H 4rht, i' �'C _, 0K -1 .., as® \\ \ ///� ��vI�1 D -7 CD Q ——® o Nai rt o 0 C7 \ \ �,a) rri NII�� Np O N/ ) rn :,,./1-rir-r7 VvwJ `V o ,cl lN• 1 1 1\ op O O O Ws a O po0 n cc1 C7 0O0 OO Oco b 0 co ,.0WO Q°nwm NDv 0 11.1 1.1111. 7) 7o 2J 0 z —< D Z r"` CD (j--. -\ / L - -- O p "M. O T C mN+ n 1 —� st0� -. // // v O co 71 00 i 0) N I Nill, e 0 � J 0 .., ..-_..:_aLT..'3v:iSi387'fII.�'"s'�7R"..M! lio II 4 1116 1217, 1 '1' ' _ US 169 I r • ' ' it.".416" ...4 ..,..„._ . , 4. ,....,„:.... ,.. ,..... _ . .. ....,, .„. fr ' -. ry A i '''''''''''' . . i - . Ya P` h ep '_,----ti. _ 1 n ' RIO: 4 ..:*)1,-. ._ - ' DEANS ,',, . : tIV 4. • ,, CS, 16 O16 ff*-77, .- '-- ' LAKE . j i t s+ ,,.1 .:{, 4 .w _ - a `tel. ��'�{ i.t. }A' �lx,�a"� ,�..,: -,;;:-.1-1.:;,-'-'::-\:::.:'...%ti", 11*.1--%."-:::*- :— I ktift } ,i'. u� €''^'tt - czcj zs P r 4 ..int T II -i,„-',:=2 ',, t3`,' --i, .-3v.. .. 'SS$S:x 3c� Fy.`ca• ._ �mr+'Pa,e`H._r-s - i N 0 N 0 N MI % BOUNDARY LINE: 0 VALLEY GREEN BUSINESS PARK 0 0 1000 a SCALE FEET IinN N AE I PRIOR RIAL TO 1PHOTO9 99 JUNE, 2000 FIGURE NO. 9-1 I , I 4,,.. ... . - - - - '.. 11 . .-. I . / .7 . -4..- .._ , . --- , ,. US 169 - -gi , . .---- ... ...„.. ... .... .. .,, 111 -....„:„.........„ ... -,„_ .. . -- . .. . .- ....., ..; -,.-. . . - , .., ... ,... J.-..,,, t I . ........... . . . _ . . .... , . • __ I I . ..,,, . , DEAN'S LAKE TWNSHP RD CS /6 I , . . . . ... -, ,,..,-,... , , 1 -''44 -- i _ , ... ..- . .. ...--..... 7----- . I --k- 0 --N-:„:If „, __ 11,- ---,q,„,,,4tit 1'1• .,, ,. r.-:"*".'4,:,'•1 . t•I''''"--1 , -..... 11 : 416ell 1 -4 I 6 ...... i .. I in 0 N I8 9 ,91 BOUNDARY LINE: I E VALLEY GREEN BUSINESS PARK • m 1 0 1000 III 1 — — iin = MI SCALE FEET in n`N I AERIAL PHOTO APRIL 2000 x<'` I () JUNE, 2000 FIGURE NO. 9-2 ± f 4. . t� max . I IUS 169 \•... s../;„)..,),7_._____________ ..,.. N. , 7.A, , ,. .,, 4 i -; \\\\\_\ : .\'-‘,., ,,\•\\\., , V .4% \%\\,,��� ,,,,6 EAN'S i i it r %4 - . I ,,,,,....//- Z ...,w. TWNSHP RD Cg LAKE -, 't W `r. e . ; y4. § . I .1\. . 1 /.''/..--i , It.: �s 0 J wm I WETLAND i____i CULTIVATED, LAND & GRASSLAND r o FEET 0 TREES LAKES AND JUNE, TYPEES SCALE PONDS FIGURE NO. 10-1 bLEQB NW '33dONVHS Sa3NNY1d - Sa33NION3 - 3aft20f121.SVIINl int "`AIM °°y ' 1�tllllWSfONI A311d/1 Ong oou-W9xda •3NI •Sid •^ �,,,,a, AY 03313S303313S3dlOS3NNIW '33d0NVHS atld SS3NIS118 00e1•1.49-Z1,9 �i MOM,o31715 311 1131N33 31tia0d IO3 1133:10 /1311Wt u�,_j�ARIBA az4ea Nw'*� ulw /'i .AS IMS70 .Ao 3:14, MI 3LL Y10111!01018 _,�'••--fes'' aa�s0s1 MO r MI Avxa 4N Wenelnu8 IgM LY48 17710 M 81011 30 AS 0@Nd#N St rouwNim ax Mai a7Aa r 7wtNurar7ias rlru au arw 90WO ell POWAreM ME C li �2l0 131Nd321 _ Q 1111Ni N'tl+ll'�' �� • �. ( _-// w t..� -1-5j �/ imm Nitt iii! , , ; t w�, IIIIIN8immo111t1111 �1 / W11 Z sv n ss C� IHlllijlii j'� II '.\ o i 4 Z 4 S ti IAiiiiNcity II \•.' , \ - / Iillli Ilirnlii ii - \ z 3 iI.... lal I 111111 11011111 111� W Q I Mill 11111lEi1 q"' a W m— la%- INNI NflNldi 1y " ' Z W . tlintII 'Ii ® o$L. / 0 Z �1' �'i0 N1111�11 III < / _ W , F N 11111 11 `i _/ ''� i _ �. , o ¢ H 1 111111 rill! 1 tlI r- `.\ m y 0 < V 4110101141 !f 1111 �� \�'s X N Vi J 0 Q -/J 111111 01011 �1ilr�`��� se\\ `�\ J 1 D �_ 111111'!!1+il1ll 114 �_`..+ss \ f- \ I I tit pO 111111 Illllili it I ` `� \ �' / a Z IINI( 11111tiI 111 �'\ \\ .4".§7-578" ..__ ' i� // Z otS 11111 tiIII}II III(' \-_ / �a \`N\..�\ \ s•za �Q ,� ./ ' / / O IN bolo 1111! 1 \ \ \\ \\ I. 11111 11t1 • \`: \ it �' Z auto / w 111111 t ; \ e i7 1 I .... / 9 \ I ! /( 1 , /• . s5 1 1 I ' '- . i / i 1 1 0 1 \ 1 t (. ti , i ( /1 . r Q / I l \ ZCC / ? ` w t l l's„,,, �� NI ti W / \ cl .: Z I01 I- 1 \ \ \ \ I-y •a• -�' p ,' \ 1 Z w t U j1 ,/ al ILI I i !ss` \ R in II , 1 w ../J I i \ \ 1 3e 'Thrr! ' \' C4 I- I 1 / \ \ t �i —, 1 r \\\ \\ \ X11 / 1 ® 131 \ 1 / / 1 QO '\\\ \\/• IIl / I / \ 1 \ \ v/ / ,li .. �.. > U \\\\\\\\,\\ /I i1 t i 1 \\ \\v ,......../ ,r,.... \ / y1, 1 1 I \ lI� < \\\ \ \ \�\\ l\ 'I � / / / I I \ i \ \ \\ \ \ \� I11 //- i/ 1 1 1 G--\ \\ \\ 1.i ! `\ \\/ \\\\ 111 / r \ ( /.;. 1 11 ��\ \` \ �/! h \ pv \\\\ p ' 1 t t \ /\ \t \� II -t Fl 4 t 1 ..... . Z �_ __, 7!/Nr//,-/ \ . t \\ Iy\ it i \' 1t r \ \ t1 1l /> IV 1 i//i / t 1 I i t 11 I 1 `�� i \ss` \\ 1 LL; / " \ v 1 r\ .,.///,,, // 11 1\ ; 1' II I ti •\ t 1 1 l i i Y - . Ina + //r//// II \ 1 1 I 1 I I / /__-• ` i ' / yJ/I 1 1 1 1t 11 ' '\ \ \ \ / `i / ,./ \ \ .. I / // i \ 1 It 1 \ J / / 1 //r/ r 4 7 , i \ / k 11 , 1 \ \ . / C // i \\ `� \. ,, 11\ 1 '. 1 \ \ sq 1 / \� J / / \ 1 '1_ :'s � //l/j J j 1 ! \ 4/i i1 1 1 1 \ \ \� // 0 \ i I 1- / " /�!J. 0 \ Itlt 1 ti I 1 I 1 \ r �� ''\.\1 / `k k \ JJ JJ //, 11 t i till 1 I i \1 \\ l ., \\ \ 1 .:(.l.//1/// 1 /I//, I i t• \ t \// J/!//j//• I 1 1 1411 1 > 1 1 \\ fj .- \ �� / ... 1 ! 1 ....fly/ill! { i 141y I 1 r♦ ./ / 1 1 f!////1// i i II tit{pi I I I11,4), . /// \ v // ...: / • !s .•.:. �i`�,/ifJ it 11 \ i 1i�� Ili 2 r i i + ' 1 ,,- ! ( 1 /r /11 \ ll 11 t / i r !1 1111 \ \ { 111 { I r . / "` \ - 1.... \ \ ii ,i 111 1 1 r 1 / f!r �. 1 \ !l I 111 I ( 1 / - - \ � Ill/I f \ \ 1.1,-111 f 11 1 I 1 / • f 1.-. , 1 /• ' rl :. 5 // tri/ /1/!l t% 1/ J // c= m----1-,i ill llJ(1 t1 4 1 I", ;`i/' �- 1/ ; ___. "/// / / I// 14�if1 i►11 1 ► 1 =�-,_ I ' _ �i;/�/// i�Jr! yl jl/ / �, iilt I \ / ,; �- /�- /, r/;// /, %I/// �' 1 �g;.�, c�-� / \1111 1 1 { INw 3�.,.; J f t / �/ ..... �J // V •%,.J /,// .r /, / 11111 I C� ;i / / , - 1 / I /r#1 /i` It \\ \ \ U11111 \ t i i_I l i / t , t , IJ /l 11 ///1 i�/111i/ I \ \ 111111 \ 1 t A In t t J `I` /r \ 1/i1 /J • 1 i II '' f� Jt if r // 1 t \ 111111 1 1 If , ,I 1 ? \, / / / tjf Ifit, 1I1J1,/jolt1/0//,/ 1 ) 11114 1 // 11tp11 \ 1 ! tt ._ \ t t 1 f 1 1 1 )JJ)I 11 I // f r1 1 \ - 111Ij l/! U 1 ‘b \\ / \ 1 y, 1 / / ! 1 \1111111 i t \ 11,1 1 i \ \ d •`/ \ 1!//////'g I RI- 1 I I 111/1111 1 1\ 1\ ,ti 4"'- \.. A\ . r`� t VA /Wig,/ ., t I t\I�at11 t \ i , 1 I 1��1N111(;1 `, `v r �k v vv i� v�_� �// i 1�' trf if/, ,` t / 1 1 'it\t T \ \ \ \ j / ',11t1i.li(��11\1\ �� I r 111,1\\\t ' \\ \i t\ \I \i ,1/ //J ,i_10(11(1+1 /)/ / H' , t f \\Iikft\1\\ \ \ \ i 1 1 ,.// i 11 X1!ll!1/ / ,f✓ /I I 11\11d\\i ' 1 +1 // �J�//!1111/ it !1 i \ll\II1b1\I\i\ \\ \ \� \\\ / tt J. 1 t 1 //// ,�J///(/ !1 1 \t‘‘\‘\ . f / ///11 �! l f i 11Ilf A K \: 1 t t i 111/11 I \'�f//11 d1 ! t 1 ,It / 1\\N\11\11\ \ \� I A il r t i t 1 1 t1! / �`, /11 1 1 \i / i\\\41\\\t 111 1 F. f ! 4� f,A� /\ ! 1 / 1 11! /!// +� 1 1 / \\\!\1111\\ \ `, /'. 4/ / \ I t 1 I// /%Jr/ 4•: ) 1 / J / \\I\\,\1 b / I r . I1 \ 1J // //I/�/ii/,y��� �ri� / I 1 J ! \\i\ta\i _--/ J/h `, 1 \ \. J i J J J I///�r��,�ii/i/// ! // / �\ 1 \ / / /////.� / / �,l / 11 / / ! it JJ \\'�\\�\t�\\ /� V. c �� r _—1 // ,J/ /I,'Him(I.it t N. , J 11 1 i /1/1/ / Il\\\ \� ,<Nov) \ 7-t t 1 / / / / /Off//////l/ /1 i I 1 / I 1 1 \V‘‘ \ \' / I cm 1 1 • \ / 1I 1 / ( .../' / /////i/////`i/`" / 1 ' I // // J f I \ 111 l\' / t 1 / ffrr t1 t 1 \ \ 1 (Ha/1: l/if-////j/f ,a// / / ( / / // // rv �\� ✓ I 7 t • \ 1 // // +l/ 1 '1, ( / / / 1 l at \�'\ i; ) l + \ t I IJ( t 1 l `•\\ \ I l/1 !J//JJ2/' lls�. , I J J i i \l\ \ \ • / l 11 \\ 1 i!/1 111J/ 1/I:' ,/ t l 1 \111 `, ! 1 \ / ! !I l r 1 f / / 1 IM\i , , 1 1 1! 1!/Ill , ///!1 /1.-L/ / 4 1 1 / iI , \\11 11It / // J J/t z 11/1 /�r�i(!f/N,/l�/(//I�: I f' •w •v' !t �/i S /1 /1//vA / f "\ ,I„111 1 ,/ , , ill :::;1J`1>St[ttittllt1111_ f1! /1 <� ( 1 /1 ! / 17 t I // / 1\111 lL 1 / .d' / 1 11 1 / �t,lplt/(11111;1-' • d '•`\' ! 1 1J 1 I�/I 1 t / / lyttl,•\ i r / / / tl I1 l! //�/jj/�//J/.(✓ ., t y/ / • • , 11 / i/' I i ► / l 1411 l \ \ / / 1l f ! r(r�l./�iJJJ 1... ....r//:(///"'(":"12.11 ///.\ 1 J 1! 1 t 1 t / \ itla �1 i ,\ f\ 1 Irl 1 r /1!11111!{%� r(—"(i,:" ,;/ \c� M J / �1 1 i I 1 I v 1\1 \ \ 1 \ /II t t // tilillll{li( ?\t\\\'`' </ �.J1 !ll , r I / 1 I / / 111 t \ • V 1 1 // // Il fir; /i/i ;, iii,r, !t4 /I l ll ! / // ! 1 1 1 11\, \\ \\ 1 i \\ 1/ 1'j i /-/l ( � IJ!/ J/11:'"/ `Jai/,��/ 1( J1 it / !1 /! I 4 tt 1 \ I \ \ 11 tit / / f//h'j' /kill :...„(/// ///// / J J 1 1 / t 11 i 1 1 1 1 \ \1 ! I \ III IPI / 1 1r/."J/ ” //111171'1{1 /-"--7.%:.117/41/;-')// / I / I 1 1 !/ lit ( ( 1 i \ \Z t t \ 11 it 1 it .(///1111/ //// /t/// / f 1 / / / 1 t 1 \ 1 It \i r�ig If11v //111{.%/i. /'` .:::-, // /tri v//f// / // / > 11/ It ! I /+ / \\ \ j I 1 j/fi iiy{1 / kI. i' / 1(1��.-.••••-•./J1 '�%J�,�.1 tail/ �� 1 1 !i 1 1 I I t � \\It 1 t t 11+�) ttIt J, // 1�11�., ``�r��/jam\ F.r i..) ( i 1� JIj t \ \ / / / 1i( 1\ r // //./ / �'~:'i/ice l \ l 1 t 1 ` \ 11' M,,111.,„,«.1111\ -� / •'/ •--- _it 1 1 ld\g J ///J! �l I/ \ �3 \ i l / \ -' 1 f--r /(e A t \1 1 /i \ 1 4' -=.-s-' �. \ Y. \ cg. / /''••/ m d;,._ t 1 \I \ \ 1110.1--. \\t 11 1� -��T / I r /� k_ \ \' /./`y" / ,. I �y \ 111kk,1 1 I / J / / /I/ \\ \ ••////,py./// _/ i / / _ i6�! I I I/ { \II I \ 11 IttUIt I\.'dli�nllt, 11 I // / / // // \ / !l! f/\ i\\ \\ 4/fi/ ,%/t/J/// // / I - \+ / $31 as $3ll�s IIIIII r an 111111 IIIIII Mil ale MO Um Om ale MI in ND NM Ills Mill me um O N O 1 0 N N a3 N UJ ____ 0 O O r\ 2 11* tir•-"*1941 ei _ K_ 0 0 0 Paul 11► • 411L s, I i ' ) _ rut lma warm I1 , 0 ,:��, . , d- ��t 1'' t , II ' ,, A 411L' CD li _ $ � 91 11 6 , m k\P1! 4) O � � n�� L � cw %j , II - r? I ' /�'� r 0 �O ado `�� ...... . .,*,,, �� �`. ., � o l ' 0 ` N 0_ z o , )L- , �. Y o o 0 0 I — t : - ,..„.___,.,..,, _J i Z A YQ lik\�" _ c,0 f'11 I,il 41,'11 ''2 W UprC� ) \\,',. I gc-F5D "fr' —ii: \,'. i f 1 I i, '. I :' 1 Hy 7 *IIUIIJ __ _ 1"`�—ri� i'`�a..-I. M'� , r.00 A ,___ < in,. a oc,'" ° z ry W 1r' A► IMA 1—j X� ♦ w tri sn /l I o //i.le I� ,- MN MN In MI r MN MI r MP MO UM NI E MI it — MI mg iim ",_ 0 N) F mK 0 =HS 33S E .,N. II 8 Mo_ ++'7 71 >/ lq�$ aoO 1 � I0 i sl 1 0 I I��1�+<" , . I 8 CO W I II r ' - n I : 1 D ��i, ; L. o I , i I 1 v L1- II ,1, - I ; ; c I 1 'r _ I I 1 I g'a .moi 1 : '!n 1 I I 250 1 1 ,�t �t I I I I rl/'�\\ �vi�v �i'�i I • t o I I e� 1 1 ` \ A.Nin^ w0 1 �� �iOl ; ; _ - e- _- ; N L_I 1 : I " '� �t N'^4 • tt 1 1'1o2m i I 1 1 v I p <@ 0 t , l l l I I : 1 I E------- 'A•16 .2.0_14:rn • , I ___. :: I I 1 \V cip !„, I 7 •f 1 , I xg �i. W: 11 : I � _0 \1 (1) , o:: I • I ) Q Cr) 41 \` �� 1 I +n 11 , 1 U(n W 1 n i _ CD Z W 1 1---LL. N o w ~(nw �a �� 1 I ; UZ vv�� O N z O <nn I �/L�_Q1n . 1 \ w II- 1-11 J cr O gq /\ Cf) I \..J I I • ' p n Q ! EL 1 1 j LiiJ (2 1 Q : I I 1 & �• W 0 I , . I Na C ) I01 , � 1 • \\ z IU: ; I O ( ,1 • , • 11 z ^' � 1 • 1 • I 0 11 CO (--Y M 111477 Ili o. J 1 \ I II1Q.) �' ,,,.: 1n 24 d �< _ _______....._. . \ e e di `' i I : 1 �/ , ›- 0--z_ v 0, 11 I / \ I.11, I" 0:,1„ I\iti i ;ihq _4_, 0 0 ''''4 �inn'Qi inw 11 : `, I no W NH-^ g \ 2g g o 1 TO • A ----i, 0 ..._. i, i ^,,, Ogi \\ I NI'J I \l� I A �Z lb d N' N^w 0I • �,f' I UNN •-O 1 WhifI7 O 2O ZI 1 : _� ' W EL 1 , • �-`iii I 1 C M , ` \ Ilik _ (VI J' ^� N I 0 xK I 1 1 J L L._ _..Y O \\ I \ I I .4. -8$ N a mo �o ^/ 1 • I }N? 1� 7C r MO .DO 0 0 Y `\ '.I Qci tiT re fin.. `\ gR ` 1+1 1. 11 I$ 4,V TI TI >\(l ) l '1 1' :'1 \1V II ''I \1 O 11 1 '1 \1 1 ?\ •.111 z V 1 \ 1 11 1 1I + 1 '.. 11 \ I 11 \1 `' '.11 1 1 1 \1 II 1 1 F 1 1 I 1 Z W1 \ W \\ \ I Cr) 1.\ '\I I 1 l 1, \\1 \ I'I ••1\I �� W W \ '\•\\ \\\ c / w 1 Z • +1v 1\ \j 11 1 ' `\•. 1 •I\\ 1 1II `1 •.II 1, '28. ` C � •• 03 I O1 1 1 , 1\� 1 I— • 1 \A \I am — I NM 1111111 — MN UN MB 111111 Ma — MO 111111 M — MI M UPI O O I A O N 1 1 1 I N I 1 f I f , I I g N W ( , I I J 1 I I D I v CD 0 LD 11-. 1 : I C VGN(108 d'8'0'� • i 1 1 1 / : 1 ; 1 1 I , t 1 I I I 'I `C 'I I •� . I : I "� I 1 : I 1 1 1 �� i I 'V `I I`I ��� l 1 • i - 1 1 1 \ 1 I • I v \ 1 1 I ; I I I - 0 1'i 1`i 1111 it it it Q 1 11 11 `1 \ _! I • I• I I Q� I 1 1 1 I 1 1 6 1 1 1 Z ; I I I � '\ 1'I 1', W i ��1� L'�1 i1 1 0 W 0 Z W / 1 • 1 I z O 5 Li]< 111 1'11 1'11 Q 1 1 I I I = ' ' 1 I- LLLJ ' I LCL O 1 1 1 UJ `` 1 • : I : 1 0 /W/^ LLJ 1— t 11 11 \ 1 I I 1 V 11 11 11 O \ I 11 : 1 W 1 1 1 0 � : I 1 11 `I 1`I Q r I I r 0 L I 1 1 I >- 1111 11 1; W i I• i • i 0 CC I I I z /7" i I i i U CO I 1 1 • • I-- < `I `I `i r�/ I I : I (\ Z i `I `I • 0 (,-) , • . . _,_, 1 `I `I I I I ; 1 C m `I 11 `l \ I 1 • 1 W 0 > • 1 11 1 I • I 1 v CD 1 1 1 I I I II U -�-� I CO 1 1 ) ��-�,-� •\ I II I 0 Q i l I I I •. 1 W 1I , , Vi : � I - y f 1 1 I i / c 11 1 / 1 : I � O I 1 1 1 / 1 1 I I : 1 L- 0 I / 1 �- 11 : 1 1 1 O 1 1 1 I . 1 • 1 / , c CD- / Z Iws 1I I v (I II 1 w I I I Vg 1 N I I ! w I • I I r i+e Ic 1 1 11 Q I : I I i 0 O z I 1 1 NiD w I I I ' I / //(VVV���//J��` - • 1 1 I I I I I !), 1 1 1 a. 1 1 I �� r 1 1 1 (� I I I I / V 11 1 / 1 1 / CD 1 + Z I 1 I I ( (vim) I I 1 �1J Il 11 1 II I 1 •: 1 \ > r^ rt I I1 \l 0 O Ii • IIII• +I I /11/111/ I 1 I , • i I I I / 1 / I II IC ) \r I iI I 11 ' ' I L 4J • I►:.J 1 1 r I I : I rr i 1 I 1 f l i l i • I 1 , I I I I • I • I rll I Ii 0 \_ 1 I I = i i i '� li II1 1 1 ' R I 11 I 1 % }; Sg$ Fa '� f 1 II I , I : I I : Irt I 1 1 c p p ;,� "� I I I `l l �OOCi� $O ^g I 11 • 1 + W / ` - o� p / • I 1 / '1 1 11 I !< �� I I • I I i �` I I I I f l l - I I I : I LL 11 /L� I I : I ci ' 1 1 f F l/ f 1 J ' 1 11 •. I n 1 1 $ i I O�S� n$ w I i I I ' 17 _— 1 : O 1 w 1 I I ' Y U 1��� ..,SONO $ I I I : I w . 0-4 <p p a6 i _ I •1 I I 1 Qac RO I , , ~ mo jr2� Ir 1 I I I I 1�� , : , ( ,1. O<o a°� h8. ; i 1 :• 1 -~' / W Cirnn I� 1 I �� I� N Up n (krtT �J �iK \ I 2Z I I •: I• In� V / 1 1 Q�iE 1 1 N N 'K I I.:, \ YC Q y�� 1 1 1 o `vhf �O Vc`_ i3-r-.N I w^r�1,. tg"; 1�_ �n�'n • Vg'''''''. ',•:_), y OC .8 i 0 'O 0 ♦, \\ ��,f • I I 1 ► .. ��L, Cir£ N te 8 IN ap 11, f I 1 rt nn l6 _•0.! I I I 1 ♦ O< c Z.41J O W Alf ., I J; ,c l I , NN,41p,� ^ I I n c MQ �s,1 , ,., MOI 1 �-- I • N N-/--,,, '� d oR v, 1N: ' I , I r '" in �< ( +Og O NB.iP N 6 133HS AR-1 i4� og 0< 'Y l l 133HS 33S �/ J a. < is); 33S , 1- '8nn n e �r The < �F o � p • < O ��� Mo O�i'� O�� ar �r �r -- gal �■r r • an r +r r r NW am on as — ma r O LO OL 133HS 33S IV W O 71_ O N Nsit.. a z(n YQ n N 08 0 W `, 3e--.:7* J p W N ®iODb N N `OA 1 q Ne 1� pp ap C 0� Nd m11 �— h0 Ui FR Q N Ne �� b ' :" }} 1�.Z U1 J 1r' •• , 1 ��Mr NN2 _ / V O r I >'g_nnn _n4"r' 0 gryn 1� .- f�gw � n r0 .O m.uawaoRR O O * i -,- cI WN F_ J 4t1 1. • �ry 4,4,-,, p.� ari • yN. ng VO tNv p, I O N qy'`W^ z c) O ' 1 g ti °r6 ®Nvl,c2n ♦°W*21P NO $s ED /rl w//1 W14 o tV No o W (l) (1) eW a_ Wt-, � ®NsiID ttaY _� e " WW/F.\,,,,, ,,,, ,K .. N Y N 1 1 " 1 IIVV11 OW Whi St g( rti N fq NO N/t • �. W V / I m N qt +,m c�, +) 1 n F p N F- ci ne fp <Nn gi0 .n- 1 �/ UU ++M JF mm Oji p, N +M^e1 1 • � m 'Nn� ►t Otis �"� W ® to I •I NM \ W O 'n d50 n W Qinr `. L — 0— 1 L_ ia ° N 'GaZ�n�3�� 3N ±� 4.)O•p� FFspn ®gNH1nnl� I ®N,ng / W Li_J ) 1r LL N OD pOp�3�ZryJ go 1G'p te 'JI �� 1� O . (�n ]\jam[/D'Iny^yfppf":YO NO FF<YOOV ' G ONOm . l ♦ l/v�®gH0nn ®NN +� �N p Q `/ (_Cc1ZnZ l° p,q� I \ �/ f �nrFV-3 p +DO .••' ww � '/fir/, � NeQta\, /1/ t1 r 'igi� "r_ I ' I�--IL- N it 0 ]��J 0 H N V P > Li_ w on0q 3w z + pp� ®<m�nmN N� ��} , p ., � MO, `11 004n Nu eA Siaq; 1 p nn� 1}b' nN 11 ;few / Z N I �p fr vv' 0 V / g$.°Q l , :g : i ye® 1111 W -0101 I n! W sao� 01 r ) � o l� l 4 .1.. _ -. III_.. JI1111 . �8 10. '00 sa..' air til oil ____,. r0 9 0 I' • C � • 00 to I" 8 E-- a (.1) MN all r op mg r ma a a — — = NM r V MI — Nr E 9Ma'£3W176£96 , • m 0 { TIUab"J < j �� y J iO rl ` IOS3NNIIN 33d0>IVHS o z .� 31V0 A8 o3ri0addV 3>I`d1 N V 3 a 1S3M 3 W torn ''' LLI II) 31Va J8 03Na3H0 dVIN S1IOS )\1N(100 1100S r - 0 0 U N :0 i J CD 31Va A8 NMVNO C) . 5 N En (Ti . co 1 t t\ _� --- ...—`� --'moi• 6,-,. y- ' \ ) 1 I r C'�" 1if?) Ji/. -/.:' "--`� c\-----, / 'I , .ft _ t „' I ,,, IIII 111 � `Th '' � U • , �! • �I; �� :1 ii oil III 1J/ �/ .1. „ X `;� / l ` 1 (h ftil fi - ---� 1 !�` \ III O'' // ". �' j r r /7 ,,r f (5-. ) `� \ I �l I�� I ` . /f�1 s; II__ r , !, f' F � l ' I �_ `r. -p�{IIU III t��� �. ` /1 / ,s_) }�// I '' III 11 ,rN \ IicomL, ' N \--111 � it II IH 1.4 I } , No :. n .'---_,-<,.,,a .rl N 1 1111 ill n ru I I T\ s�i %- 41 . , 1 If II i 7 , I � !) I _ I ti II I r ` t 1 II J UI i" i �' r ,■,� MIND r III III .4. ...F. �� v g I l J v III IU IN. I / l ` ._ / it I ,' 1 ' • 1t` '. ,.•` ( .� } '.`� I I !)� Oma!L1W�' 0 ! fJ' , y! 'C II) ".,1 \ 1 .,_tt, r! ry I Io r C 1 ''.•-• 1 1 ` ' f r; itt Iil .— _ `� I `C�� 2/1 H it* i ' JJ �" "� �! N 1_ 1 -AVhae:. "01 - _ III ll 'l `-.✓ ` w _ ! — --iii filo 'r r it ) `J�`~ " 12 'i / ; 0 N,p c:I 1 ' . 11 1 / 11 \ Z —I di It ; .. • f I i ' r•-\:\ 1 --C.? 0 .41 ‘ 0 1 , i II ) i' 2 a r ) i i 4/4 1 I I il 1 or%C? ' W �-w0. � � i i Vii _ ISI II 1 'C.** � ,i �•�)(1,!::(it\-- Ilii iii i III •a • l/ �, ` �'I .d 1I ( a „.......\`' _( \l , - t , ..)1 (-_,/ il I. z. ' .,,,\ , .., LI,;, jfiiiii �`�� .I I If 4 1— i �i ` Ilil fill 1)/t3i 1 � :- ~ \ (1 'fr ) r I 1 \ \II i I'li /2-All V j ,.'! I I \ i; IIII . . r "•. ` I I 1 r i• 71 ,r,-'/1 \ 0 `•- -\ y S U. il , \ \ ----: ---, 1 \i'\: r.• kitg\ \ 7 I� i II {'• } 1 i\\, I 1 `: I } '` f r- / /ife- // if ` /,/ 0 c.,,c r_ . 1 • C / w i 1 ,i i 7, )2fIcir,1 _.12 ,> ) ,p_ j------\._.„, , , .) / —i 0 2 )? (miff/ ` t \\\\\ I \-.�l ` , I I j j //r‘r ---11(;;.)--'"t _ _.� -,,Ki �f ., 1 i 17! p/Ili 0 5-LJ '4,,,,..„ � 0, �. I. . ,,lid i �� '�'� '�7 r~i1 ,,.7 Z/ /•i%�� wi t J' i- r 'i...?- ,k 111! -_ c O,--,0,-,,i, 4 )‘4017-__1,k, 'r' // I PL.., V 77/ f' //' I - 02-r...4_� _4tia I �_ J ) (� j(/ 1 r il.-----1=,:, ..,-. _r, z_.-".-ateI n iN3n35V3 VD.09t ` t 4.• + r/ f• i i f 17 '1 • Ic. ' �', I U I \ I j• ' IrV I r if �„ 1\ �"~�`__— ! 1`'I • II Q$ o • • i ' _ # --.4.______ ______\ V\ i ‘N ril I /.0 i 1 '1 ( j 11 ii,7il V I/ i, ii(/ i m c.c1 1,:-'3 Ili ce v� in . , <Th \\ 0 I 1 '-' lj f r 1 I , i '"'�4.--) 4? N i % , W W J W I ,j 11 I \ I /f, dti,; �0 v►Q .,. •!,., \1\\, N c)\ , I \ \`\ ii, .4,/,,/ / i L • ! , � 1' \ - \ +I ` I \\ i iI=' ) � ) fi , j ® OCr �� A fr57,,k,'A-/,' ,,i ) iji / azzo . I a) 1-14 I i ` , ,,,,:= • \$\ � 1 ` IlJ1 -,,,..4/-75//f il W — u.� ¢ ' I{ cfl Q \` 1\,1! ,_ _ {i ' -. i . 1 ;,.,,,,,r. l /� ' 41 L.LI— I- iv f Ai i 11 CU 1'ni IsA > UW 1 I j / 4/ CI I I _ J a `i BS j 1 M 'I ' 'N, ) 7 ..1' 0 ,e- li ____________, /4.11,.... „._../ ci, , : , ,_ . ......„. , ),„/„/i ,, 1 a l 'i li . .., ; iv \ 1 \ 7------\\ 1 0 /A, ! (---,.. ....). ..!i :1 i ; 1 , ; ,, i fi ii i ..., ,, 1 0 i . If;/ifivi j / \Iry 1, 0 ( /, ;,,,,,, ._. ,.., fir 1 ____= ,.._, _ ii i‘ li I i ,, i I ; ,, ) 1 1 z f 1 kil' \ :-) � fJ „fill,„ a �W.1' fi-_:: iVttI , } - 12 ( 111' _t �. ..40.,yI III :rs a ........0.----7,° Ir.y"'■ ry tJ PJTTV[1476' ` i�a I: L�, i i $ f %©21 l.1NflCl ���H ro �f/ ' �,; J ! ~ v `;` � / i W 'I itis.\ « 4 1 d i� NM MO OM NM — — E MN N i OM OM w N all I OR MB O V_LOS3NN I 1A1 a 33cJOAVHS SH3NNYld - SinaNION3 - 3k1t11.0f1iLLSVIIJNI Z-91 32:11101J 300 ,All A4A,099:411 *3'd •ONIVEIN31111i 'V Mad 00[1-141XVa 'ONI '93144iiiillmmir IO'frOt RN NV-1d IN3W3OVNVW 0041P-149-Z 19 &VII NOLLVOIJISSV13 .09 1.13f011.1 .A9 GUM Rat ATI ..ilgiVMWEIOIS 3AISN3H38dWOO 9Z$19 NW'ellodesuulIN 8SM .All MS= fA9 901.1 YADVANNI1 A 31V19 DAL 110S 01901080A1-1 MONO 911311916 10119993X00 93113LS*311 VIM V MI I am a mos Off NCISIA936519 133190 AN nonn VD AO 91111.01,1 Vfi Pirmalno9 elezABAA i.ppg 90k110 9)1e1PooivgleNNOSE Mal VO WALTX1111.19.11fld Sin Vett A..41930 MGM 3d0>WHS 0 AlI0 V 8 w 11 n o .II • s L.; o Q a- aeVAYS A ROVAVS I-Li NOLORII(001% • i i • LU a- (i) allUVIld MIMI , CIF . J--11' =11111M11111W 0, tnrilir',Ill'11111r --• art_ ...t• =1 (\I, = v) / i... ., ,\:, \•!., . , . ,. .k,..„--. .gp •. 7A7.,,... t N, ,i 4,. '''..':'N'O.'k• \\''-r.'. N. ...'..\Y. 'N. ....Z17:1111' —. / ,z,,,,.4' ,,,,SAz.,.:,INN ',N•';A, ..... \ ' 41")...*:"..,.'•'...\ :.t. i. '--- = U- CD CD / N * , ..!.N. • '-C: A . ...* N.A....1104$: LT- . . ‘. i 7/. k \, s•' \N„ g >— 0 \ •<\'‘. E— ti--.- ›- •,,, ..• '4. = ,/ i i 1 i' \ .i '1 •.‘: - s... • .e...• " i / " ' N ' ' : . r- .,-t•%.' .N. , i, ..N,`,..',. . \\....:t \ r • ' .1. i \\-, ,.•,,-, , , ... .,,,. ir ta.1 , V.•:‘ \'''.'... ‘ 4 M 0 / e ‘ %L.V N•.. '' iki •••-;:. • •,..•.„..• 'k. •• z —1 _1 ...I-J Z / . \ \ 4.4.4.‘k%s`N "\...N' ' : ' '••-•41,10, ' ‘'"', ....„, ILlb '\§• \_ i ijj i 1 1 1 cr ,_ %s kNil •\ • \ '.:.:N 1* ,,,\,:i;, •2'1/4,. ,Z.,;•\, \t'k \ ,',..., •-, \ %. v‘ .•V, , . ‘ N\ ••• ••.„.:* , ,Y. . < '44 4 0 0 UN I I ),I ip,,;;;;.:.-- \k: .- •\N 0\'''. NW% / : , .\ \ - . ' \ c/ ,, ,„,._. .. \ ! . 1 • I\ : '.. , ,, , • %\ % S w `. • &` .. ‘'. \ . • • • • .• , VIVI trona ,...\,.. ....-- .„\ • i , ., .. ,7,,.0- ,S .1 iirs• \ \•••• . _.......-:.,\, .. .S,• \ ti9 111‘ . z• t.‘, \\ : ,A ,......?: ,:„,• • .. , , , a \ . • ‘s\N\ 11-$ j• '•4 \ti ..,,' • % ::',7 1 ••••••" \ i` ' " ••• 21111:4 \ ' '.\\N. ' /1.4,:‘`• Q.& 0., . , ., 3 V1/4 % ‘ . s\ • s_ '' \ •, \\ '-' ' N ." 1 - •-z,s ...0, -••••1/ '....4,. \ •:-.4i, ,, ,;.:... ,••v.,u..4 . . IX • ) r,,, ,:v *:.a ;•_*:...... '''' • 1 .1, di, . , . ,\ .. .. . 0 -, AI ifr t'll ti\ V.3. Ik•Ait• :,„' 71:4..ti"--. .. M ' ,:. eI" . sa „ , \ „ : t , ., _...... „. r.... ,,.. • \ . ...-v , N . .11, . :.;%•:-,j .,,, i,._ • !!!:,Nra . .1 C." ,..,' :• i \ SA N. ,S s„ -41‘;...7..''.11 11.1:11111N• ..kit.,,,..i•-:•- \\... .3 \s,'..,' 0.. ' . ''. .. ...N• ,...a•„A.:4. '',.., ... . , 111/: '°3; Nidatma \N''N ZN,'1,.k%':1.''A‘2.'''.k.%1111111111Z illrj:‘... ''.\‘' •-• . "'V- - • ' ' ' ' N---) - - ,....... A. ± i '''S,_\\INS.1/4.., Z., 1/4. iiir iii).•A,:f• NO.. . V. \•,:10 `! E ' MI tkli...-1111.‘li.. ,,••!;... -- .•.ogae - -•. ft . .. .. .1'" '',s•C..'. ‘ 016- ',;?• ''',.•• . ; ,, ,' - ' •1\ 0•• • ', ' \ ‘" •' ‘'fill-N' - ' • &La 0 ' I....* '.' . i OM am: k \ ._, . .,. 0 ' '''.. i ‘,,,,i.ir.virk. -••..,•,.:.,.7: 1 ;. .„, . •,,,,s _..,N•, ,,,, 0.. . •-• .I N. dm Vet " ' • X,',N, ,Vt. Nisi .. 4 ,1- .0.•Nik .' 1 1 \ %N\\*.rof gl 1 a• . ; till"\ •\ N., , .Joia.,1110144e Z.:—,\,'' , •. .• i ls1 ". .11111k, ' . .. - .....::: ... ;;„.. • . N &Z %. • ".' '''. .1\NNW" ,., 3 *311A• 11111 MIN OM MI 111111 Ern — WIN US Milli 111111 all Milt Eli 411111 OMB all NM alli I , ,.....„.„, .--\ , ..vAvs 30VAYS t, I ; r , .4 z,...,F „„#,,,i...,;•,,, •,...rwil..w...,214 3.•• i.... 4r.:48 ' , r''' L1)-1 '-'1k S•q.40', \,' 11.T44 0 =',0L) 40 0 .„," Nin, 0 t w I , • ,,,,er4- __I ii '70de ' ,, . '''. `\•, . - ...•.-.1„vk icy:NIll' Cc-,:: vks wi ;,..,-;,'.. :, (,,D ' ' . • 4 >121— rx . 0 ,-- l'-'- ° V) i )111i 1-1-4(Cul<C -4 -.4C —G-- CC Z CX D 0 0 'elf/ •-,,,,i4:: 0 , ,, ,-,‘,... ,,..,,. ' , ,,.,... 3* 4_,,.., :-,--,,,,,, ' t54 ,o ()I— 0- -.,/ it k 1 i te-"44'1',---q, ),,; •, i c\I 'etc) -•.-" ekNi.::' z z - W CC 0 I )1" N k'N, "1'4 s \''' CO ta) i • \ _I g_J ‘.\*Ig re LLI U- 0 ". f ', ztvc-.^=taset, i \ t __I k‘` ' . CL 6 \NN't • 6° ' Fp ./ Vt. N • , — ANN: • i'",----,f.',.,AM ez, a W _ u) —I w y) I x 0 w _1 x tAW200z I if \ \\ T.', , \,.. `, kt,3,1•,,i, ' .1 ,.... - . 1 \ g '',..N ./..„, ,.•. - ' ' . ..\ 4; . (....) .._, m IX ccv; = 1- a - zzmw ..:( zwaz ,.... a .4 1- wi- m _lz0 1--I-- = 1- < 1-- :1,- 1- c) w en a • m 1.,, w rx tz T rj3 ,,cc ccw it- x ..I 0-< crm 3,,,,. ,- o o -,= ,_ _ - w w • ,-, ‘.. 4 I 11 lr,R.1 g„/ <C„.....1" 0 v.) 0 ci z a_ v) _ ,, -;,-_---etlit a ss,,,. I i Q T.:It ,..-„,7 . ..1 -*p , 1 _J s.,/,l a , , „. • „ ;-,- \• , ,:. . .••- c.„,,,. Es . 1.1 .... 4 ., 1 ikt 11 %, ! .. .... i •ca co sal le e,)$ : -• 'i4 '',"r ,-,ts I „,,..: a • A.)\:-.,-*.'''' k. '.';' sN - . .41 I t s\ .• '5.4.1 offi, -., , ' 1) r‘ 0 i o ,,..•,--''''mft/v , „z'7 i in." i.-.•', TN 0 an to • •••, __i, %. ( • .a Y...; 0 \\ 1-1-11 . 1...4. ''-g• I .. . ' CD t•-• '1' it N ;„... ,, - 40 / CO a) w• al A :119-'''''''''', f--) ‘Aci -oet!Cliii..- 2 a _J :' \K: ,,„. Ns1 CZ kiii:. 1 cn t. \ 2 ,ig ' • - • ,.. . ---r.;—.- '".-4-.,-.' ,-*:-, t• e , krt, v • g !i".! .,,,;:z"4:;- c , of i il ' T..... -, i ,„ --•' 1CCLJ ' I fi ,4'4 d ii a 1 . ' co -r r., Ailib,ti .54' TT —J op s _J -' , 0 —' CD , 5, m _ ,..,,k1/4 , . __, 4•,:-a • --I co i ' 'No co 1 Jk ilitial ,1.4' ..al • I 1 cr 1 % , et co • o• i C E 'all '. 1 • M •,, , st*. _J t A 1 CO I . .'-'"' 1 ; m i v. , ,k N' rr% f g.' ‘, ). '‘.. ). • ,. 0 4 „ I a- , • •-4 ....I 1 • . Q3 cdeD , • ib.,l. 1 t ' ., . *7 1‘...,,,,f, 211 ' 's'i me rA8, .,,..„,tii,i,. -, rg 4- . -, 4.: --.,--,a,,,,'c, t.1 ,! '.:', \ -k . 0, ," ..:ki" •,, 'Cr. 4/ .1,-. 641;`74-‘:f ;41 .... 4-'. ",, -.•., ' ' ' :,.. 03 ,e419P11*4 ° ° .:, : = :.- , 4 , -.,co i v-• , \ , .i I B..... • ir: s , .,', a.. '.., W 0 -;t: \ \ l'a- ' / 4).-gt-'.-0 -`." "- 4, • co p\--' 11 ....;,..N.,z ,, I ,.- ., :io.ta -,. • 0- -, ' - ? T'! -t„•', -4. ti,.., •, " rl •.' , - /--, :.-,7,41, ' ,,.f,.--tic.,,,,,,, t x : i 1 -1 , 0 .- A,.s,c;,,..4 -4,0 •.\ --I , ,0 ,.N t11442,.. : ,,, , gall a. ( It ',, • ,,",,,,., V,'';?,?, ; , ., . (..,) ft ,,,,,, _,_, ,-,„ 1 ,, , „... e, . ., jai, e>.. ,,,,,, :,, , . • ' ,./Q. 2` ' 1'1''''''s' ;'V,41. ' 1 ' 'fillar-i" "4„ ' ' - • ' as , r 4.../F.--..1 ,' c) ef CO t\:- / .;:r V - 111 •:‘,..5, 0 -.. 141, . -.. -*, ,; -- ,.. ,s0,,. s ' o,. • 03 \ \\,..\, :\ ).) ,F „14..-U.3 1 N-, X '1 W ° A .‘, lir, 2 •,--64,,,, '• , „..4-..,--,- ,N 1 350 VVestwood Lake Office AUAR COMMENT RESPONSE :Projeat No. 1014-84 Date:May 31 2000 8441 Wayzata Boulevard I Pi/tB ASSOCIATES, inneaP°119'MN 55426 612-541-4800 ems, INC. FAX 541-1700 VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER FIGURE 18-1 ‘If:FRASTRUCTUFtE - ENGINEERS - PLANNERS SHAKOPEE P M I NNESOT A I ii ii, . ...v. 30VAVSi, -tr. i - ,..............,...,„ ,...iy, _,I.,, .,..--.4,,77,r, 10,-a.,-„,- -0,v--w .. _,;„1 I :ex . a•,,..w..i•,, ,,. _. . 4;4 '%'' VI' - '- ---'' \ : ' ..,...;411 ' h ‘" - A,,,,,, i.c..3 ei5 Ar". CO xi -- _J v 1-1-1 —, -, w -, ....:-_,. ,- — - .,.,; i j „: .,..a.,seilei- .,..,:z ,...a,, I . ...N.: *As' i git ir4eff . CO ' ' ,1/411!''''•'' * ..-4,3;,'' • ' - o ,. 0 cc .4t • 0 IL - ';.01,!,• •, -•<:.W....- ; . 1 •„, m...„.„,,,= 1, tf l 44 cowed ccec u,_ o 1-- o • „. ._:-... - '''''' --.''''- " ''''. ''''''''''.4' '- ''. :,'Cr—..'iat . Ze•i i ,ti,M,Z1,:ti,,,,,,,,..,. 3i `s,k. I--ex 0.... I . V ' .* ,, ` CO tin -,,,.1r.• w5z 30=0 _J ,..t.t...i i ,•,_ i g 0 z z n w ,--) I- CL 0 1/4 , •.., gL, '''. • -• - \-s.,„, -•,, •., . • • ..i.1-. 1-',..'ir9 tz I .-• 0., c,3, _,..— cc o w f11.8Ez . 0 e = (\Jo n 03 o •44 1- -J V) CC W I 0 1.41 M Cr 1.4.1 V) UJ _1 0 = x .,), .sf.,A„ epo CV. .,i ,.) S,, e 1 7,... .,,,i( :At V qo r-')ci-, '• 0 : ill, Wag, .• -. / ri Cr c> Is 744,.4 --3`.4 V 111 CO Ot 'a 4 1 te :.t '':'4 -,4 'F• .-.. gl v4 --1 s• .f ,4144,.\-, ?-,,,,,-=".,::\\\ I 1 . d (1)CO it '.^,t'' 5 'LIZ' ''' " \lir:: .0 ' .. 1 01111.4'.‘ : ...Zr, .1,•'','/ AT,,-. j 0 -,•:.1, tw , . co co D , " CD ,,q.,•\:1 loW 0'.0, • ,- • J'' Cr:j •.--- e 0 . c 0 0 X 11 ..,i h.. .'' N'''' .\\ \ V.,'• •,‘; '.., , .' _J CD _J 03 iii; I , $ •• - ' , A m . .# \ eg ' . f 05 . t . \. • , efir ,.- rk4, ..-..,,,- ,..,- I ...,,,--, . r; ..... 1: ':, Pe, ' ' ' ill , co .1.1.: co \ , i ' cv .p- 1. A i u 4 , , .a ",,, -, , ,4 • % / ujco! I 1 - I 4 - :,1 44111f:I hile m: : C3 0 CO 1 ••••• Ili co ,iirs:' ,,, -., 1 • '• CO i AUS11171 fn la iii, . •* ‘.,, " R ,i ‹.t CO . • 0 1- a: =,.. ! ® C\.1 0 K la 0 ! I-- ,i , Vti UJ _J t I so 1 i ' ,,e _J 03 •,. O''' 0 • CO Vi 110/Ittl I 1 4 -.',4.--.Zi,..,•, " CO !, ,--, _,,i ? ' ' .-,‘" ti 133 AI is, , N 4 ' r; i f, i ' 6. . . :, .,. ci_ , it t CO , l' ID t 4) I . . .. . . • 411itik----- x ;-,j;,'•-•A';'.i, . _. 0 _J 1 . i . • & p ti se rZa :•;.. 4) \ -,1 C° ,' & ...01 co 1 • o c0 xsZa3' ;41111P '. ; 0 lir : ?. . ‘0 6 Iv „..4.., • „...,, T V6 . .1... C 4 :1,4. 111 . . . + ,?......,1,,In .' la /2-tlANI• ews' •••• '•. INFIllip..c.. , • , , .;- - 7-•',.. T. t.,.." . • . 40E -‘'- •.."'Sigtkil.:. ill"'',. CO O. ',\V 0 6 . .,, . . 1..., ,,'"'. 44,31....„RI 4, ,([ ',,;,,,- •'.-.. i 0 . , . •,GO - 14„., ; \ t 1:,', i \• ?.-L- , ..•*•-.,,,,.3.4-, .4 a.. .,. , •\ u § , f.• ! — 1 14 ',f, z 1 . c. . ,p, • I '..;',71.,:7,;i i ' 1111111‘ ,c-.-,,--ki <ir ' '1 it - h co i" §g I 4 1 .,'•dx , - • .'li I 1. I •,, u... ,r1 -•'''.',It a- . a gob '4- crillitittS•\N It , 0 . I• A 350 Westwood Lake Office 8441 Wayzata Boulevard ' AUAR COMMENT RESPONSE WSB Project No. 1014-84 Date:May 31,2000 111 WSB 812-541-4800 filleMniliAltS, I NCM.inneaPdis:1:5415-54170026 VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER FIGURE 18-2 INFRASTRUCTURE - ENGINEERS - PLANNERS SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA N 1 I ()LESS NW '33dO)IVHS SV3NNYId - S2133NION3 - 3ar L3nd svadNl VIVO ,Lo1d�d kilOS3NNIW '33d0�F/HS 1VIa1Sf ONI A3'I1VA OtZS 00Lt-tesxv3 .3N1 'S31' I H )8, �^ lul 13310W 'Al UMW )121dd SS NISI18 o0BY199-Lt8 ■/�■ ••MO CISIS 7d31N30 31ti2IOda00 N332l0 A311dA u��T0 ZTB1� Nw's{loaeeuulw a /'1 +A1 mina .0 r v do nv1 au MOM MOO JO /VLS 311d l pp aaelsnsl Am,IN,i u an neino8 elezA9M wpg 1011YIp1di1] •pl lama, l!A r 1 tlD 1p1M.7IAddS111ML 9LL DIU A 0a0\13ad-3- °111° l31P°'SseMOn MIt111111il•II•;• I.t /,, i / OS HIM II! )) I 11 / n = Z p � mot,1111111111111111111I 11 I- N ~ r 11 HIM Ilitii111 {{ \ _ gili ili MI _ 4 LaW il MI ii it 11 {i�. 1 111111 iiilN[)I 11 ..< ' rn \ 1411 01011 111 z Ce 1 �w 1 111111 ollili ffI //---- F �' �f o Q 1 111111 flliIiII ri�I �� W to ! 1 141Ng1111111 i,i111 — M a O' a N y QQ a I 11110 11;0,1 l 111 `� bs ?.„1 / W r 9 ) Ii 111111(;I I it \ ;' e` I /I Z 3 '/ link 10111111 1111 �..`,�ar �\ \ ..- �. + I ® I 1 �a �/ ! w Hifi !1!11111 III 4. 4� \ \ 1 11lillllllq 1 t I/ Ng 11111111 !111'1' \-- q N ...\.. \ \ S t9 / P / iftIn +ItIIIJ 11111 1 \1\. \\\\ fl{III i Ilii 43 4 I Mild �� \ , $Jipittl 111)1 I ``�' \\� \\ \\ O % ! IJ ti \ �•\ yrs i .... ♦ t 111111 {in /_ _ \ \.....•• a f ! \ / ii/ I / --`91' \ \ 1 \I / % / !N ' 1 ! 1 /// v l. 1'6 • , $11 r 11 5� t /J ` Q i(1 I 1 I 1 \ 1 se,\ \\ I !iJ ! / \\ ;1 w t 1 \ l \\ \t'\ III �� 1 ® ®+ \\ i \ /i / /• 1 Q O \\ \\\\ / I11 / I / \ 1 \ i \ \ �__/ / :;1 �/ U \\ \\\� \ /}� I `, i r i N. i \\�> \ \ \\\\\I\ \\ t1 . / / \ ! 1 1 \ \ I \\ �\ �\\� Iii / r/ I / I 1 `� \` \ ;li ' \ 1 \ \ \\�• 111 / /-. ( ) 1 / ; \\ \ ! / \ ,, V II 1 4 1 1 r �'� \\ //ii \ \\� \ I t ) l \A-i\,. r - \ //,,//4 1 )III 1 \ n / \ \ t e ( -_ ) //#;i1//// \ I 1 I III ) \\ ` ! r ss 1 1444/ ! / /: / / 1 1 i 1ist \ 1 ' 1 t i t $I# ✓�/ \\1 1 1t` \ \ \\ 1 \ / y ' / �� \ \ i / / // //// \\ \ / ii i \\ \ / / / 1 1 �_ /•1 // .. / // \ t \ tir l � / / / 1 1 j / / ////// / 1 `1 \ If 1 1 1 1 \ 7 \� // n`3 \ 1 1re i /✓<..J ! !/ a\ I (V( I 1 \ \ , T �� \ l R \ 't : ..II (%//I, i 1 til\ I I 1 \ \�\\ I \ - \// /,/////.. { I I1 III/ I 1 1 \ / �- \\ / 1 4 V .:.!!( / //I//• 1 jt O 1I 1 1 i 1 /moi .. / i ... I111,/friiii(17+11 1 1f i I W-.r / /\ 1 a l VII\ 1 1 �y / � li'+ / ..• Ig41 / \\,, / / „ /91 il /ill \ \\ ig 12 I la 1 i11t 11 i !/� it s_E 1 /.�� l s�� ,/ /�i/ ! /)llrrfit If � I !/ \ \ �'1 411 I i I i t / 1 \i,\ // / //.,Y / --//ll f/ 11 1 / -._.�_—-'i 1' %111 t { I/ --CC I 1,1 \ _/ / ^__ __✓- .////".....- ,//lOf lI /�(1 / ..,sem _ \... �� �-�� _ /// / ////// // /t// 1111 1 ) ) ``��\ l r////////� /!/1/(// //Pi l s-,...,..21„......-�c�-% \l1\t t + + + k t ) I / ,/.•.__moi `t. ' /��/i;/ /f, i "1" /I 71'! 11r\ �/ 1111\( l i ; 1 d , 167f/ /i/;1 / ii 1iiit \\ ' \\ l 111\ `\ it ) 1 j i —\ ///I /,.1'!l/1 ///III"'ri F1 I 1 1 1 1I \,.....---- /1 / 11I //Hy 1!I !1 II \) tllli\\ t i J II t ? ! / I i I I I IIt 1111y1 f�r ilhlfr ! ( J 1 1111\ 1 1 It \ ) I i ' �` 1 )\ ) t 1 i' ! I I I A 1' Y Si/ !I / r i i 1 I '\ — 1 J 1 1 .' --- " ,\ \ \..\ 1111! / AI! (�/1 1\lt\ 1111 1 O / \ \ 1 1 I/ �l 1 \ 11111\l \ 1 i \ \ 1 I Ail, yl l l k . 1 \ 0 Ir 1 // /I// //1 I 1 l z.,.: \ \ t 1 j1 l \ \ 1 \ \\ I //y'i ! \1 + \Ii\1ti+i 1 \ 1 l . \\ \ \\ ( g 5..., �, '��/E;�1 J(� lk:)- , / i '-/-,..,i' \i1H\tl i \ \ 1 \ \ f • 1 s i�11/l//%• //Il /l 1 1 I,: 1iAy AA A V ' .I v A 1 ,I I 1 ". \ll+ \�\t ` \ ,1 \ \ `�__�.-' r iii)/Ill1,�'/Ili \\\ 7 `� i 1 ; \11111$ \1 ` ` \ \ 11 ill) /Of j 1 1 1 �: \t+NNt11\l\ \ \ l \ \ \ i ! / / i(4111!i 1I 11sm/ 1 11 d / F1- 11 1 r 11\111Wk\\ 1\ \\ \ l. I � I' — i i !l�/f/,/I// g if / 1t \1\111111\\ I ./ /////11 / \ i 1\iNN1\ \1 i \ / t 1 ///i d, 1'/(I l/'d l I r \\\1\N'\ \ \ ! J / ) 1 /// I�I/(j/j/ '/ 9 I l \\ \\\u( �c 1 IrI / /'` //Il !l! / r / i l !( t ' \\1\\\,\ \i ` \\ l 'I ( 1 r ! ( !i '1l I 4J 1/11r \ y \\\ *\1 \ \ / r v A►� �\ i !/ NII l / / sl" \$, \1\ \ �.....//� \—/ / V / \\ / I / / / //// ////// `' I / / / s \l \1\\ 1 /�/1 •< 1 I I \ \ ! // / /!!////%F!///i 411,41! Il I t, \\4\\‘‘‘,‘ ` .— I` `1 1 ! \ `. / r !/ / 1//////,//,/,',/,,,,,,ii,/, , / i/ 1 \ 1 \ I / I ///////, ( 1 ! r' // ' \ \\\\\�\ �� I i \` // / I / II /%!!!�/,te1! / 1 / l I / \\�Nl\\\ l --------_,_____7i / / 1!J!/ff. tt t H / I I i / I ! \1\\\111\\\\ /(�� 1 i 1 \ i t r !1 // / / I I 1!/J� /1 //\• !! ( I 1 (I I 1 Ir \lit / ® \ 1 \ /" ! t /„./ /((1l/y„--/,;--,,-- /I l 1 , I 1 \i \ J 1 / ) ! / L..1.: 1 I//I///1/111/c�. 1 / ! 1 / / 1 1 // / I ! I! // ! I \``1 .I, \ ✓/ ! I f ))1 \ \ \ I r l///„Ili/44,4,2'V' l �; r I / il 1\1\1 \ l\ / i\ 1 I t 1 1 \\\\ \ \ l// . //I/ !!/ 4 ` t)� / ! I I \\\`\\\\\ / l 11 \ \\ \I//i Itj///!1/l: // t / r/ / i / I 1`\1 1 1 / vl J i t t J 1 i illi� !!I/11/1(11 / / !' ! A l! l % i! I \\\\`\\ ! / I t J r 1 , IV / I /I \ )'i ! I \� 1 i \\\01\ / / 1 11' / I!!)11NlIJrrrrrpJ). j/ ! \ . ( ,I �� !I r I 1 ”\ ,q%�\ i ,, / / i t t I/ /L111 titJr✓!r(rl ( //!i �1 .'..12i it( I / I I 1 1 �h I 1 / ! \1Ni \s 1 r / /1,4I ) 1 00 F!!111'l/11 //!f' O ( / / i��'\1\ 1 \ i 1t ! f /////1h� .1/`� // '/ / / \\ ) /t / / / i I I / f '1P\\\`11 \\ I !! r tl 1 / li{ fi,/i//fir/ /h /,(/( 1 M /l I 1 / / ! / t\ \ ) t if /% / //1J / / / I l l I I 1 \\ 1\11\1/ . \\ 1 I `\ IIi 1 /%/liillillhF/ j/j(\ /1/ I1 /( I // / r r r� \ / ! r l 1 / I I 1 I / 1\\ ; \ \ I i \ lil 1 / //!!i/!1/).(!L. /� /i!% IS( I / / ( 11 l / I ) ) I I i\ IL \\ \ I 1 \ I1r V l /_J / // *4.lis / �// / 1' / 1 1 / f ) I l \i \ \ I \ \ I )I t / / )!d/. IVi/i P %yi /Ay!/// ! / / 1 1 1 /! t I J \1 \ \\ \ I `\ it1 Ili) 1 // / )r.,-..,>/' .� ��Ii41(IIW,�,f �.�� �/!!//I j / ( j %/I t/I I ( 1 1 ) 1 1 1 I� i / ) i 1 1 ) \ I 1 1 I I i t / Ir•/ s � I / / l1 ✓1 11 ( 1 1 it Nl.\/ ///itrr,•• - 11',r�'k f1!///♦ / / / / I\ 11 1 \ \ \ I1 1 lt i ! jt,./ /,11 r` _- " t,1�1/ _ ( t / i / r l\ J I 11 //� 1 it I R \\\ \\\` I I I +11�1 �I�\ // //4Illy Ie n 1 !, r r� !!i \ t \ \ / --/ —�/ 1,11 I1\\`�! /��i.!`+ i \ �� y . ! 1/ ! \\ 1 rilLia....sti....lita.m.tiessarg- ...„/ 1 / t'••••:, \......-- tic......7 \> 11' / \ lS. ,-1,...1# �{, / \ ^` t (r 1 /f qi) Y `\it 1� r^.1\-'r.%/ <� / ( r /) \.. `� \ \\;V Ri�i// n.. T+V ;�/ - ses rr�.m'3 / / \\i \ \ I IAN)1 \1tt ! / J > r !ice — \ \ ,a /i / / �"~ c J i / 11 ) \\ \1)11AItl +llta\\A` IiI ,�-- / r / / I'f•./ 1// /`\I\ \ ////,9A/ / / /-`�/'. /// I I I i f !1 1 I/111111Ne I.ti,nil..t 11 1 / / I / / I / / r \ \ MYi- / / / / / / 1 \1 i....� $31V041 S31IJ$ IIIIII M 11111 — EN EMI NM — 11111 MN AI UN Mill — 11111 M NM 11111 11111 bLE95 NMI '33dONVHS Sa3NNY1d - Sa33NION3 - 3U(LLOniLLStllldNI ... IWO 'A°AMMOM s WIHISflONI A3T1UA OtZ9 oou-wsxdd •oNI 'S3J. I 1>. OM 131110121 .A2=OM dlOS3NN I W 33d0AVHS Tadd ss3Nisna ooerir9-zks .•°�~". 'S 1N30 31ddOdd00 N33d0 I\311dA =JD./C2[IBA 84/4 u�»o�sw .ea wvri so sm au+uan mare 9Z49S NW iezAeeuulW T kr 0313150311110 v VIVI DM OM I Wenelnc9 RBM X448 souwarim •a I DIt., or�aw at �lxx 03110111311330101121111111113305MAAR 113001 1 � x Kf 0801 03atld3!!d °WO 8>�l P00%NSOM 04£ g Ailll+l'4'li ,.i i / W11111111 III' i W 111111IUIII+111,1 Ilillij1111111111 \\ ♦- 010 O F O ii:t s s i /J I'1D W � I ffi+,,rill ® W 2 (411INNr}H i J ..,. / I IiilliNlill ``11 z FW )/ ,1 1 1111111{,rill, 1( ll, .__ `.. k 41i1111t11111!I 111 :r. _� b4.'S x I W 411411C11i{.111 1III s� `Sv w I Q 111 'i 4111111,+11[111 IIi� lk ,�s �� \ �J� ill / i Z 4411 iiili111i ii l . -N. - ' \\ I / // 4411 1Illlrili ,( \ `\ \ /- / / 0 / vs itillill I ,fll{ t II ` \ \ \\ \ \ / / , / ��I'�1I111i11 , i \ / .i r , �E_ ),(1:11,1 t 1, i ' \ -,__ i i i 1I \ 1 ' /13 lk /. t (I \jiff // S+s bf` ( eT � J/ \ \ d 1 W / 1 ,,) + 1I p / \ .1:• `` ter.\ \ 1 \ `/ U \ / / 1 -iLLJ 0 1 t \ 1 tit /r-' I [\ ..,, I a, Ig \ 1 \\\ \\\\ \\ j 'fir , k1 \ 1 t \ \\ \ \ N\ \ I t 1 �e- , // t 1 l _ \ \ i/l \ 1\�\�• 111 111 / 7\ i • / 1 / ` •• i / // 1 1/ \\\,\ 111 / / \ / •1 I ..• •\ A I A\ 1�r \b1, 111 I to r, \ .. 1 1 1 \ \ ! %/ 11 \I \\1 I11 \ . \\ 1 1 1 \� /1, �_ _,__� \ ///,/% \ 1 1 / 1 /// 1 ' 11\ 1i+ { \\ t a / .y, 1 i /` //! 1 1 1 �1 intAl �,I �, 1i ts;- A I"q`2/ ,,1 + 1 1 II 11 \ I IIt; \ i ,� , ,' '�/ \ \ 1 !i 111 \ \ + .-..\ A i '/ . /,_ /�// \ 1 1 +! 111 ~\ \ \ + \ '. 1 / /'', t/ \ \ / h if1 ` \ \\\ \ 1 1 f/f// \ \ ! I! j11 1 \ \ \` ,. 1 r / / ///y/' \ 1` t 11 l+\ + 1 1 = / / / ////// \ \III 1 11 1 1III { + \i i, ! a \ \ r /// /,/ j,/ \ 1i t ¢1 • 1 1 �. I,a tf! Rt / \ \ -1 ( L ///.!.. 0 t 1 it 1111\ 1 1 1': / \ \ - t! / //j1,/ a..,' . ... , �� 1 i //// 11. 03 1 i ,III/ I I t ( .1 t { 1,1 1 II I IiI I I '� jf/1// 1/1 kt i I 10 t I I 1', 0 Z° r= /1 I .:n 1 /01//1/////// 11/// ill/ L j + r� S a t \ r/ I g,.7 /,11 ktki A � +� I ttf I 1 I•` g + I i P i / 211 /. /11 1I I\ ► j kik i I / / (I 1/t/A \ i s tki 1 I t I . ! ��\ \ 1 111 : f I -� � ,i I/; 1, 1/!/ V A i I tit :. 1 I ;., f C. o i/' �/ /// f / \ \ t 11 iIl 1 I ,. rt ��r ` /. / i/I// i \ I^ i! i 1111 1 r1 A ti y, �rlllfl it,if / \ 1 i0 I ii 1111 V I \\ '�/ �, /��I/i it ///� --- = -='-- I I Ip1 t I Q /J1i Vik 1 1 ! r ,e, `' in __ ,�t/�l /I/ g�l 4) s,a>�.�=_�/i \1111 + I I�1 .- "�/.: / - //�/ J1, ..l�) j \ 1 ,/ 11111 1 1 1 = �,, 1e / �// 1 1 11 VI i � ;/ 1vv , _ ,,,11 -� t 1%1 1 1 i ( + + € I�'F'• 0 1 I ^ / / 1111\\\ + '. r 1 I 1 \ i k l \ t i l y�% I }rL / <` 1,11\kV V 1 :.4 i \\\ � \ I ill 1 /ri I I 1 �/ 11\1111 t 1 \ A \1 : 1 I ! 1 111!III I ! \I V+,kill,\ +i ++ i r k ... �.,,,, f" \ +� �t/t 1!/�/ 1 i 11111 r + I I v v i' / 1 ,,,1,i"en a� y� 111111, t I _, & I!/IIID l I ++U+IIk I A+ ++ 1 1� � 1 1 i� I II/II(I I S l \ice iA \ ,ll!Jilir,lr tk�� ,y' r k\u�'�1 VA 1 .._ 1 I VII i + / X\krt1V\1\ \\ 11 h.Th $ /J i II ++,+,\iii+\\\ \ \€ 1 1 if I \\III: / V 1V,,\V11V1 VA V ' e 1 1i/ a /1�IlII iI t\ ft'\ 1\\ll\ \ �, "-""5 _ 1 I '. '` l I /leg,//�//;+ 44 I / / / i \1\\1\\,111\\ 1'� , _ t '; r /y,/.. Ili!/ �* /� / / l I 1 / \\�U1 \11 °ti _- f I '' ///,/gyp /!1;! 1 / 1 / II 1 / \1\A \\ \ / / /r \\ i� I / 1 1 I \i\U1111� / 0 •-•L.�\ j , l //,/ /I 1 1 /1 I/ 1 L \�\�A\\ \ l I r_ ?1 ///r>;, / 1 1 ft / / /l 11 l AwAv\ V� t //n i / >I'l, t / / / / / € 1\1\A\\k J i , ! 1! l!� / / it I f . // I / / 1 \+A\�>tt�11 i�T // f t� I r 1 1 ////�"v 1 /1 ,to % I I y1 11 i /—\ \;ik+\\Kik i / // /! ' / r f fJi ,s �G N A" i 1' ii1 i/ I I I / / kVA 1 A / /,/ o f JI 1 i I,-1 I , , 1 111 i• 1 \ + i , /" 7 " //A ,• — \' I I / / / l I I \\ ,, __- / / / / // f $1111,`1 I i / , / // / //,.,l f / // / t i ! i t \ 111\ ` `\ k 1 \ i f r 1 �t 1\i t I J 1 / / l ! 111 1 /t / 1 / 0 + \ \ ,il/ �.. 1.// It / 1 / / I I i + 1 1VAA 1 AV I A\ it '� �:,/��,/ /1/'////1/1 /� / l � / / / I I I 1 ll 1i \ \ i \ \ 11 { '' f+f 7%/' _ '�/i/' l // / / /l i I I i I i i i i t 1 \ 11 lift! / :'.I,' // / I I1/ l / 1111 1 i t l + k\� A 1 k \1 1►t t f i- flklktf/i i4/-F1�%/ , I I /i l/ Ill I i l 1 1 1 1 rte: . -'V 114 // / / / I 11 I Ii (\ N\ 1 n`� _ �''.......-/�r11�- \1\ ,// _ -'r/ girl! 4<4-/�►`` ` `'' / 1�/ i \N k 1 • 1 -.-. - - 1111 'I _, � ,,� I 1 / / \1 ` + I l o rr1 \ \\1 i f I-! , I- r ; t/ \ \Qd�tT�i1/ n.4.- _ �.�j 0 '€,s. r 1 , 1\ / \\ 11A111II i 0 • Mi 111 �-' / I // //> r /••�l\ \\ H�/�// /.... r�r ,/// i ___\ l-- I I / i r1 k IAWI/tit I Iii.t11,.1 , II 1 / , / / \ l / \ \ AY / / , / / i '1/4., r,?; 831\08 *31148 UM NM rr MS c all WS OM r all MI NM a — S r all M M „kis -......_ Atiii..._ --'4411444.4.0morpr- AN IL 1 ... ... 44.1.Huill - 1 �: 1 1 , i .. I )i ti ill LimpL) 1.,,,,,J , ,,.4 _.... if II i it ` 1764edit liel.. . s; , *AL , (3 I - - 4111)11 ) ..1„-, i, 04,.) , __ . ., ,11, iI r‘t_<s,E\ i‘ 1 1 _.,_,,,.. , �,. ._:....\:4i.„,,,..P.,'”Itz.;:yr(...A..........1„41 ei,.......,r.,''„, )1 1: yrs - 1 c.). ( 'S NI 7 1 FUTURE 17 AVE. `��`�``� , - _ ? . .� ,..• »�. k 7.. -' cowl." v- a *......--. ../64----....›,......: .+77-'. w� ..) '..„ .... W - --- -.---o '1 _ _ Cs,4 I VGBP BOUNDARY N 1000 1000 ISCALE FEET — FUTURE STREET VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER ISHAKOPEE,MN MAJOR ROADWAY S FIGURE 22-1 I ,ul••T,I nlra 7j [�1lr1����T7��TTT�TjA�T� �7 V�-Tit C� 6LESS N3^1'a�r,W9S SH3NNVld • SH33NION3 • 3Hf113f1H1SVNiNI lira ,If.d03 awa3. CSLOZ 66-Ot-B vILOSBINn\I f�ado11 v 1117 t1 s p I H 1111Sn U ,Sa 9 '3•d .SS131I run no ¢nano s p I II A04ZS fJ<JLl•IiS7fYi '�4'm°I 'fvY Of'[30t i,YB 11 „c/� ,7�.�17 7 I�,77 [-��(� ;Myr$S:1N13(?8 OOBYIYS-Ll9 w•u3row sec m3uHa r 1��' ld 1✓NICI C1 A/ ��-y r Y OV zr3 clot MIL 3H1 ' I �1�!) 1 �1 .:,--- 9ZPSS NW IW BIW gSM I/1 101$311 „1.rL Ia fel 3H1 1130.1 allure TnlPif]/aw �7r�r�Tr� r�7�.7�� �7 �Tr�r�`r i r7r►r�{..� ILI`'"/`:%V •C ` B dB 31 11 a3111e sr ,nns 173�1ala�in�nA3aril inure c�wlramd 1tl11d31 (1,7,LiV.'13.RJB (lOQ(LOa 1�La.'1(lD !\.R 1 1 Y A ~ P � 90810 ori{bD/N9B141,9 0 E (V 1a11r•r3d33 In XIf Ii31I VO 310111.33)343 Weld All 1111 kiln)Ae3r3H1 N (V W C4 v o II. C08 o ZQ III I' 1 I 1---'f a 'I I I:j ,i I 1- 111 II I I o Z Ill o a I I G III 8 I I I (7 1 I 1 I Iit III W ^F I i I �I1 wJit) zu j I I I•\ V; 1 I I I �� I 1 I 1 ��,i � 111 ; - E I O I lag •I 1 C6I 1 •, �-1 \ 0-uJ I \ I T. g±I I - _ :1; OW ,�, •� � I W 11 I 1 /1 \�' \ -t.¢ i I.I � - \ i W 1 I W W W W W 3 3! 30 7t i 7i 3t 7t `/ I , ,, a 1 at a la k / -• r. O N N 00 O T 01 T NIV N Cu N C/'� I ,\`. �I \ 2 M M N N N N N N N N NCr P Q '1 /..ib I 111 .p p • `‘.\N \ W M M M M M • • • M M / ^„ I I +,ZRQ �� \\ \ m oo mmm o` ` nnn1 hh EtZ I— i „8 G II , 11.1 1 I I 1 R` V/ /Z;Q„ ,N \ .\\ '� •� z z v+In of VI N VI ,n vl v+ I^V' W 3 1 4 �e/ / I / Jaa W w 1 8�i/I I/ •\ \ Ce I- 0 i� I 1 oP ^ P.O.aP ^oPOFmmmm,OM 0 ` I 1 17=— I ( •�o , ` \, /•- ,Om�m F,D OO+F rvMNO,ufNmNN I /�_ I h•• - Il R. \\ //.-. / / 0 IF., N IMA r r N T m.FO m T O N O n. I W -I- yg8 \\\, .... 1 / / W- QN-N NM N N P P P 0,M N^N N N JN 4 O / N H N N M M M M M M N M M M N N N J Ids 1 �� < uoOOaOOUOOvoOuoOCO QO I — Wia �I I „ � / — 1w 113 1 I ..e �1 fn i U a I 1 ®-•1 I O L I , I L.• ICJ I 1 1' \ I &_ N 0 0^ l N-0 0^.a,r,m m m P M Q 1� I ^ O O Ul N P N N^O^ Q M M Vl Vl F M O', 1 R z1 ' I I I I 1 n UI•' P YIMMm m.a m,l1 N2Nti r'In r....N (Si 11 m N m•'F,p V)P P M N P^ m F^.O WI 11 (Si 11JVI J I --- I I ,1 r 11 �i ^NNNNNNNry NNNN^ ^N • \\ < /II'1 I • I! -\I 11/� i W pP�y N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1111 /I .- \\ W f—I I II /I Tg 1 Ir, Z. N CC ry4 II / I ag - as Z N \ LLI le 1 111 I �'� 1 1 n,� n,Yi V J M N M \� O III r , :W ' 1� iW .-? H F F N \ CLI I I I\ I 1 i WCO in IM 1 III O, I I\1---T, gn /. 1 `� += O b F en N N O, \\ C�1 11 I �1 I 1 a� *��� 1.` ` a8 �1 OV > O O \1 „ 1 lI 1 r- --1 1 W ' Ir /' R•P8 ••r• •\2\C `\\ / a ,n N n \ A 11 \ I ... .�rR 4 \1 z W t 1 II I I 1 W �.a 1 1 '�1/ _, m .n ,0 0 \ I I I •tF4 I> \ �1 ,r N M M III \, \'\ I 1 =� I 1 1X \ j/ 1/', W CO Q l I \\ ,\1 \\\ ‘I.7" I.7 e 1 © .1 -:8 1,111' Z o^.O m M.•. P F m F m•• o ur 1,� \I 1'..¢ } I 11 f I O O G n m 10 0, o M.• ry P Q N \\ I \`� \I \\ � II 1W x. / /MIl <� orv� w•mom 38n N.Poe'n No 1l\ ) I- O P O M Q 1O o,O ^P 0 CO P \ `.I. / 1 a VI P P Ir, Y,tO 0 0.p F F F F F m \ .1\ I z ,y r , \\1 z 1 ., j ' IW u S ,\` 1 «I f $u-u,-u u,u uru u I 1 `� \ (� 7 maa Uaa a U0.0.auaa a uaL,v In I \ W I ,t_ 111f :W / \ _ I 1 --f::>./...)":1 / I RI I J' . a N z Q N M tr,0 F m o,O^N M P N.a F m \\\ 1 • d I I i `I 1� /,/ I �I I O$ a` N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N I` \ j ; i s3 I S' 1 1 IO //'/Z i l zW \\\ li II 111 as =v I i ICC '/,// 0 I I I i W O // E§ Itic.) //j/ i i \ / W W W W \ I 1 i", Z p M Ill 0, • \ 1 1 I N N NF. II 1 r— II 0: o Cn m iO4 N O' 1 Q I I m cn en en N M m .- ^ PP • \ I I I I / m NN mm a. / • , CO 1 zz zz \I I1 I gR ,//// U I 1 \ I I I I I I �$n / ' / I I a 0 N m N co N m F F m O N 0^m \ I I I •• �// I� 0,M M O 01 N N Cu 01 0.r,m 0 Q m N O F.p O.0N \I II 1 ,.. I I ...a / / LLI O vin.=r.nco.-,a vi.n r;lrvrrmao ri N P m en m \1 1 i W I ' / (n l I Z .a•-M P m 01••P P O.a m N P 0,m m m Z M M" F F en IF 00000NIVNNNNNIN 1 II �1 I // O W t .a,a to.a.a.a t.0..0.a,a.a b.D.O.a.a.a.D 1 / / • /^� ` 0C.FC P P Q Q P P 1\\ I 1 I • • LL I I Z W W • I I 1 1 I O' m N 0,M M in N N^ m 0,P N F VI.p.p^ Z I\ I I I // / � � I et o0 O I I I I I 00.Z.. N VI VI-00 0 co 41 h0,P NF N NOO, O /'T ea Z F n co.a T f • •_• � ' / LL.I U Ir,n O F N m O F N m N F .p Y't n...:N W O— — —_—__J— I ^�_ § m m m"CO o M1• n n'4 n Yvl O P ^.p .o "'1 U'- no+NN P.a -1- I — Air .•^.- OOM000OO �U N N N N N N II \ I A N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N a,N N V NNNNNN - I � �-.--_�- -� � -�- _� ����yyy { O {CFr'Wj'7•I 2 O I I ,• l I as • M..- N M 1 5 I a" / V J /� WW V P -S H F z P 0 •Q O o1 U n- 0' zW p dT 0 N t-, D Z ` O IJ '- N MCO h O ,..1 N O 0 0 0 o O o 0 O o 0 V °o o 0 0 O M CC o ✓ Q O N P O • O v F 0 Lal 0l m F m O M 'J F ,a of r- 0 r O N to O O Q m< m u0 N M Mut Q ,0 N yl 0, M N M O 0-I 0 N M ▪4- O•F N N M M f F P T N N M O O Q f m N,a M 01 m N F _ N v M 6, O.a O en v N I N N CO N N N N N M M M 151 ln 011 o,aall 01 01 o� maaauaaauaaauaaa`uaa I-z a o ma a8d W CL Z -N M P N b m W O^N M P h,a F m O= 000000000 Z •z ... o o o 0 o a M O. 66 d3S LO u6p io-0CC901\apo16-aidwoo\Of£901\'W 1111. alit 111111/ IIIIIIII MI en IIIII1 MI Nal alli NM 111.1 OW all IIIIII MN MI . DCT-22-99 FRI 14:55 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 05 • if <n AVE. 4 I -1 vAitzi, - • �� I ao� t i so S 3 4— 10 (I of 0 o t 170(200) 1 r'°°(=o) 1 .j l r 1350(1360 I (1a)to—► : 1 e7 k 1t (220)00-•-4 /o o f Z o 0 +q+ • / ....0 V ------ 0 is \: 0 - 12th AVE. TR OR. — I _ .k s^cr_f— --— '10- ity Ph ill litt—___ .... ` .1 ...0 L390(1520 y���� i • I �i]0(500) 14 ~/ iG 0 t (150)240(5015 2\ �6 ((0)2a0-+ 4a (SO)150--► �1 t (� 1 000 { 7O) !0� O O O p. G `� (1C0)330� O .• Ti 0 / � 00 00/ 4 IL I SITE ,--/---- i ZJ. ! ._+FUTURE /YI AVE. 0 e 0 ....• DEANS LAKE RD I11) MON1ECITC f DR. I SV+ N Y 77.;fi 330 10 `O' o ) / r 0 0 0350(130) 1+0(270) 0 0 4--410(270) I70(13) (350)S20f (a0)160 (110)220—IP' (470)180-0 (10)1101, o00 ITai IXX =AM PEAK (XX)=PM PEAK ig SCOTT COUNTY PAC oNSULTING GROUP,. INC. 2017 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BUILD CONDITIONS FIGURE 22-3 SRF NO.0993430 CSAH 83/CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT TRAFFIC STUDY "OCT-22-99 FRI 14:56 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 06 i / \ 4th AVE -__-- ] tok,L.' g I w� I fuzz s 4 we la i.a lig 4 '. tAELEy/u _ a." 20 (00) ooti. i 200(130) e . 1 t. "(2" (260) Q 0 j 4, r 1180(1290) (40)30---t I t -3. o SS g B .3- 0. / ;a.� go .0 0t, Ii 1 LL ei: ' , \\ -''-- o 1211, AVE 1 I 1"1 C j r SECRETA. -.I► . u At �.. O— s_� a , < �N'o »0),290 - liEg � 000 x 20(,20)� 1 � r„o(.2., �, --t 111"�'�� (tet:4o-� I Y�- (1,) s L S oc), (,so)no 0 0 J le 0 tot les+ `0 ON iIN SITE �---\..N. ---- , AVE _ a 18 DEANS LAKE RD I 4, MONTECft'C OR. I aoe tL V L 320(,90) s '' a°° f- 70(I,o) ° c' 4-370(290) It 41 .L. 30(340 (1,0) 41 �_ (s� Soo t (m)540—t (,00)190 S (440)170-0 (90,110-3, 000 -w aVs IXX =AM PEAK ,(XX)=PM PEAK c ISCOTT COUNTY F CONSULTING Cat,Ur, INC. 2017 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BUILD ICONDITIONS WITH OFFICE/WAREHOUSE USE FIGURE 22-4 SRF NO.0993430CSAH 83/CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT TRAFFIC STUDY I /' R% ver ,... .to. ,, I /r.ime.,, , ,,, , ,, _ _ �j%Ij James V. Wilke /�,/,,///,/ Regional Pork :, SCOTT C�� %�% IIIfii 11 .th INE. �� _ /i//i/i/i'i . ' 11111 I hk ill i W M © ,446 ,/// ClT�tp 44 :'7:11111111111111.11.../, - -.1- -- .--1111.1-----------,, , Iiiiiik hi .osr y t_ . Iv°,th 6, '-') A 2 Pr. II 4 wn�""" 3 2 h Tr4 r 0 •Ort 4 YiOh Ca n. I rCC r * er .(.: ' 21 KR CK 12-th A . 1 lig. al 2 SECRETARIAT ' 111111M 1 W.:''gfte- ''''' I •--.... .„,- .- „we- -441..„: • , 1•,---...., ,,, - //5•57 - ,,r5/z/4 15 '/-.4, , ,... 1 83 , � /%�'�%,i/ 45 AL ROI T, > .. I ECM AVE. 11111111 1-"1 '*4k 20 Figil 2,. I le i rI - 4.* 4: - j a I A IPik 0' LAKE s"`"^" nx 41, La I 20 . , ,// / Prior Lake � Indinn Reservation Liz............. ,,elli 4. <I.. 0 1 RP I a LEGEND LEGEND N I M EXISTING PARKS leINTERSTATE TRUNK HIGHWAYPROPOSED NEIGHRORIODD PARK SERVICE AREA U.S. TRUNK HIGHWAY__INTERSTATE 1 3000 W PROPOSED COMJNITY PARK SERVICE AREA ...� STATE TRUNK HIGHWAY__ ® �—�——� IX PARK SERVICE DISTRICT COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY__ ® SCALE FEET N COUNTY ROAD.___.__T NEV NEIGHBORHOOD PARK ACRES N NEV LO..INITY PARK ACRES CORPORATE LINT TS_ M PUBLIC ROAD ._.._—._. NVGCC SITE ® PRIVATE ROAD City of Shakopee Comprehensive II Park&Trail Plan FIGURE NO. 26c-1 I I SECTION 3 Written Public Comments on the i DAUAR and Detailed Responses 1 1 This section contains copies of the comments received during the "public comment period",together with specific responses. In order to facilitate this communication the paragraphs in the original written comments have been identified with number, and in some circumstances,followed by a CAPITAL letter. The letters are NOT related to the lower case letters used to separate issues in the AUAR format. _ In some cases,the numbers do match the AUAR numbering system if the original author used them. 1 • 1 I 1 1 1 r City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 3-1 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. um 1u uu IUL uu• Iu DULIUPI a Ill1111, 1PK/ r1-1A NU. Ubet nbUbb F. U1/U2 I . • i''AY-16-2000 08:33 612 445 6718 P.01i02 DAHLGR EN - �` `. sHARDLow _,,,-, AND . UBAN I UtCoxrORATED g 110 - 8oc� CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH I SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55401 612.3393300 PHONE D � 612.337,5601 FAX 1 r S (j �- n I APR z 7 zuoo j Sy 1 April 12,2000 Michael Leek I City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 IRE: Valley Green Corporate Center AUAR Dear Michael: Please accept our comments on the Valley Green Corporate Center Draft AUAR,on behalf of the project proposer, Valley Green Business Park. Overall,we found the.document thorough and I professionally prepared and we are anxious to cooperate with the City of Shakopee,its consultants, and the other commenting agencies in the review process. I First,a general comment on issues that were brought up in the Draft AUAR. We want to assure the City and other agencies that Valley Green Business Park will follow applicable City,County, State, and other codes and regulations in all phases of the project. Where specific issues were raised that would involve an agency's review of permits under its authority,we will adhere to the duly adopted ordinances and regulations as required. I I 27 Comment: Question 27—Adverse Visual Impacts • The Draft AUAR notes on page 24 the concern of area neighbors over removal of trees for the project, making Highway 169 visible to some of the residents. As individual building projects arc developed in Valley Green Corporate Center,each project will add landscaping according to I the City's landscape codes,which will help mitigate some of this concern. New buildings will block the view of the highway in certain locations,and will also be effective in blocking some highway noise—more so than vegetation. There is of course a required shore impact zone I around Dean's Lake where vegetation will not be disturbed.. As was noted in the AUAR, some tree removal was (and may yet be)necessary under the City's oak wilt program. Tree removal is always a possibility in dealing with dead,damaged or diseased trees. Valley Green will abide by the City's ordinance in relation to providing or replacing landscaping. Post-it'Fax Note 7671 oaten 1 Paas► I To Prom /��uL,� sm.. j 71— co./Dept. Co. Phone A Phone 44 I Fax ti „'y� Fax R /r; (//, 1p� ^�4 v 17 v [�, LVLIMY uc uum, ink) ft1A NU. MCo ,uoUdo r, lid/U2 IINAY-16-2 08:34 612 445 6716 P.02'62 • Michael Leek City,,I-Shakopee April 12, 2000 2 30 Comment: Question 30—Related Developments, Cumulative Impacts The Draft AUAR notes on page 25 the concern of neighbors over potential added noise because of a proposed new runway at Flying Cloud Airport in Eden Prairie that would route aircraft over the Dean's Lake area. While the potential of added noise from flights originating at Flying Cloud may be unwelcome,we do not view it as a"related development"or"cumulative impact" of the Valley Green Corporate Center project as those phrases are understood in the environmental review process. It is entirely separate and not caused by Valley Green or resulting from any action in or around Valley Green. The.Dry AUAR states that it is"not plausible to present detailed information at this time regarding this issue." We want to be clear that regardless of when,or i4 such information becomes available it is not pertinent to the review of the Valley Green Corporate Center project under the EQB Rules and this AUAR. We look forward to completing the commentperiod and review process in a timelymanner. P g P Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions or comments. Sincerely, DAHL: , S . ' ► 0 ,AND UBAN,INC. Philip C,rls• ,AICP, Senior Planner for Valley 4 een Business Park cc: Jon Albinson,Valley Green Business Park Mark McNeill,City Administrator Jim Thomson,Kennedy&Graven,City Attorney Paul Kaminski.Best&Flanagan i I f i I I 111 TOTAL P.02 I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED Commentor Phil Carlson;Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban,Inc. g Comment Date April 12,2000 »» FAUAR Response: Agreed. Your comments were useful in preparing the FAUAR. I 1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 3-2 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. 1 m i-ria-eaue.1 le•ee 612 445 6718 P.09/19 I IreAo.._ LOWER MINNESOTA RIVER I '° - WATERSHED DISTRICT y 3, 2000 *A .... ._ I <t 327 Marschall Road.0200 Jim A.Kephart,President ra Shakopee,Minnesota 55379-1680 �� IL' n C: Office:(612)492 Jim Fax:(612)492-5705/dent Tel:(612)445-7993 Fax(612)445.2106 D �6 u Eayane A.DaPatma,Vice President Office:(812)858.6642 Wallace E.Neal,Jr.,Secretary I Mm 0 3 eM Office:(812)864.1632 Fax:(612)884.7726 Edward A.Salaampp,Treasurer Office:(612)920-4398 Fax:(612)920.0086 Bl '�� Office:(612)404-53122 Fax:(612)404 5318 I Mr. Michael Leek, Community Development Director Bruce D.Malkerson,AtfprneyOffice:(612)344-1111 Fax:(812)344.1414 i.awrance E.Samstae,Aominlstrator&EnpIneer City of Shakopee Office:(612)445-7993 Fax:(612)445-? I 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,MN 55379 Re: Valley Green Corporate Center Draft IDear Mr. Leek: AUAR,Dated March 17, 2000 . II received, on Friday, April 28, a copy of the above AUAR from Mr. Dave Czaja, due to his interest in the activities in and around Dean Lake. Although, the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District was f involved in discussions about this corporate development, the District did not receive a copy. I I list here some comments with regard to the Draft AUAR and indicate that others may be submitted at the May 161, meeting of the Shakopee City Council. 1 — 1. • Page ES-2. Under Item 17, Erosion and Sedimentation, wind erosion, which is a singular problem of this area has not been addressed. Also, on Page 9 of the unsigned and undated Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) included with the AUAR report Item 16, Soils, does not do justice to the wind'and water erodable soils of the area, since there is no discussion about how to deal with these soils, And, under Item 17, Erosion and Sedimentation, "...flat and I well drained soils..." can lead to severe wind erosion problems similar to those problems that have occurred at this site this spring. There is a need to consider very seriously wind erosion forces and to incorporate specific wind erosion barriers, or wind driven silt and sand containment outside the I perimeter of Dean Lake proper. The prevailing winds in this area are from the Northwest and therefore this poses a severe threat to additional sedimentation of Dean Lake due to the removal of brush and trees to the north and west of Dean Lake. I 2. • Page ES-2. Under Item 18, Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff, the project should consider the use of"dry ponds" (or ponds created in the existing soils without required liners)) as a possible alternative for NURP ponds which will have to be lined with impervious soils or Imembranes that will not allow the storm water to replenish the ground water that will be taken away by sealed storm water system. (See also Page 11, Item 18 of the EAW.) Although as a general rule, the ponds are required by the City of Shakopee to be NURP ponds, the nature of this Iarea may require variances to this requirement. This should be addressed and considered. `� . • A subject not addressed by the EAW, or the AUAR is the installation of utilities such as sanitary sewers, storm sewers, water mains, gas, electric and telephone lines. The depths to which these I lines must be lain may interfere with ground water flow in this area. When the Southwest Sanitary Sewer Main was installed east of Dean Lake, it was found that the depth of the trench for that line I 1 oft 1 612 445 6718 P.10/19 j2 of 2 drew ground water that fed Dean Lake and therefore special engineering was required to place seepage collars in the trenches to keep Dean Lake from losing its water level. Similarly, the AUAR must consider depth of trenches required for the infrastructure to accommodate this area and consider the possibility of special construction techniques to maintain ground water levels in the Dean Lake area. The understanding here is that Dean Lake water levels are a direct reflection of the ground water levels.of the surrounding area. I4. • • Although not in the Executive Summary, (See Item 27, Adverse Visual Effects of the EAW) the need for restoration of the visual effects of tree removal is directly related to the item above which should have described wind erosion. Trees, brush, and native plants can help in minimizing wind erosion. However, additional solutions may be necessary to protect these plantings from long range siltation due to wind effects on the very wind erosive soils of the area. They should be a part of the AUAR review. 5. The Managers of the Lower Minnesota RiverWatershed ate shed Distnct, have long known of the nature of Dean Lake and the surrounding area (actually since the early 1960's). It has been known by the District that Dean Lake is not just a body of water that has a finite shoreline. Rather it is the expression of the water table in the fine sandy soils that surround the Lake and that those sands extend far beyond Dean Lake's apparent shoreline. For that reason, the Managers have always recommended great caution in the Engineering and construction of projects in vicinity of Dean Lake. In the past, special attention had to be paid to developments particularly to the south and west of Dean Lake proper. Mike, if you have any questions regarding this commentary please contact me by phone or letter. Thank you for allowing the District to respond to the Draft AUAR. Yours truly, LOWER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT Gent,: ..:.,4044.10,..c_O Lawrence E. S amstad,P.E, Administrator/Engineer cc: Board of Managers Bruce Malkerson Environmental Quality Board Mr. Pat Lynch,Mnt)NR 1 r I I 111 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ICommentor Lawrence E. Samstad,Lower Minnesota River Watershed District IComment Date May 3,2000 I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 5: The developer and its consultants have identified and documented many concerns and specific measures I to be taken to assure the integrity of Dean's Lake. Additional mitigative actions are proposed in Section 4 of this FAUAR. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 1: Wind erosion within the subject area of this AUAR will likely decrease when fully developed with the Iintroduction of year-round ground cover(pavements,buildings, lawns,native grasses and wetlands). Much of the tree removal was a part of the Oak wilt abatement program adopted by the City. 1 The areas where vegetation has been stripped will be revegetated as a part of the next stage of the development,as individual building owners present and implement their plans. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 2: IPonds constructed at lower elevations are designated for lining,to limit the infiltration rate and thus offer some level of protection to ground water. Ponds constructed at higher elevations(along the existing CR 16) are proposed to be 'dry' and not lined in order to promote feeding the ground water system. FAUAR Response to Paragraph 3: I >>>> , The comment is noted and it is recommended that when detailed plans and specifications are submitted for utility construction,the City examine and compare the elevations of the proposed utilities,the apparent surficial ground water level as evidenced by the water level of Dean's Lake and the 747 I contour(OHW). Should elevation conflicts with the potential of affecting Dean's Lake exist,appropriate measures should be required,at that time. However,"The DNR does not anticipate any issue of the seal Iof Dean Lake being `broken"by site grading."34 I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 4: The Mitigation Plan heavily recommends the use of plantins of various types to to achieve several of the goals presented. i 34 Balcom,Thomas W.,MDNR,by comment letter to City of Shakopee,May 3,2000. I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-3 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. JUN-13-2000 08:42 ltd.. Metropolitan Council e;\ D IAi Working for the Region, Planning for the Future ��, 0� D v ° May 2,2000 REVISED 0`l fR.Michael Leek Community Development Director City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 111 RE: Valley Green Corporate Center Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR) Metropolitan Council District 5 (Phil Riveness,952-841-9827) Referral File No. 18241-1 Dear Mr.Leek: Metropolitan Council staff reviewed the Valley Green Corporate Center AUAR to determine its adequacy and accuracy in addressing regional concerns. The project involves 332 acres located south of Trunk Highway(TH) 169 and east of County State Aid Highway(CSAR) 83,northeast of Deans Lake. Staff 1 review has concluded that the AUAR is complete but inaccurate with respect to regional matters. The inaccuracies noted below make it impossible to assess whether the project may raise major issues of consistency with Council policies and/or impacts on regional systems. The Council requests that the traffic section of the AUAR be revised to address staff comments and sent to the Council for re-evaluation. Item 22 Traffic Growth Rate The AUAR states that a growth rate of one and one/half percent(1.5%)was used to estimate the growth of background traffic. However, this is not consistent with the historical growth the two county roads in question have experienced. Historically,the growth of traffic on the two county roads has been higher than 1.5%. Between 1980 and 1998,CSAH 83 exhibited an annual growth rate of 19.5%and CSAH 16,a growth rate of 5.7%. However,increases on CSAH 83 showed a discontinuous pattern,probably related to unique circumstances(i.e.,the opening of the casino.)In this case,a short-term trend may be more indicative of the conditions than future growth. Between 1992 and 1998,CSAH 83 had an annualized growth rate of 4.9%. This higher rate of growth would result in more background traffic on CSAH 83 and poorer levels of service at the critical intersections. Between 1988 and 1998,CSAH 16 exhibited a growth rate of just over 1%. In this case,the assumed rate of 1.5%may be overstating the impacts of development on the road system. Traffic Diversion The AUAR also states that mitigation to minimize.unacceptable levels of service at certain locations adjacent to the site include a 35%diversion of southbound left-turns from the CSAH 83/site driveway intersection to theCSAH 16/site driveway intersection. However,this was purely a manual reassignment of traffic to take advantage of a calculated excess capacity at the CSAR 16 intersection. 230 East Fifth street St.Paul.Minnesota 55101.1626 (651)642.1000 Fax 802.1550 TDD/TIY 291.0904 Metro into Line 602.1888 An Equal C'POrtUrtkil tin,143ycr iJUN-13-2000 08:42 612 445 6718 P.02/03 R.Michael Leek May 2,2000 I Page 2 This is not the path that drivers would prefer to take because it would take them past an entrance to the site, around to the south side and into a more distant entrance. No documentation of how this 35%diversion might be forced to occur is provided in the AUAR. Without some geometric or capital improvement that could be counted on to redirect this diverted traffic,it cannot be counted on to mitigate the traffic impacts of the poor level of service, On page 15 of the AUAR in response to the traffic impacts question,the text states the following: "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 and/or alternative access points should be considered to more effectively mitigate traffic impacts." The Executive Summary states,however,no additional capacity improvements or alternative access points are indicated. This will conclude the Council's review of the A1JAR. The Council will take no formal action on the AUAR. if you have any questions or need further information about the traffic analysis comments,please contact Mark Filipi,AICP,at 651-602-1725. For other questions or concerns,please contact James Uttley, ATCP,principal reviewer,at 651-602-1361. Sincerely, 6rVe— Helen Boyer Director,Environmental Services • cc: Phil Riveness,Metropolitan Council District 5 Keith Buttlernan,Director,MCES Environmental Planning and Evaluation Department Thomas McElveen,Director,Community Development Roger Janzig,MCES Municipal Services Mark Filipi,AICP,Transportation and Transit Development James Uttley,AICP,Planning and Growth Management Department V:Vibrary\commundv\referraNetters\001etters\Shakopee AUAR 18241-1 Revised.doc I 1 •I I I I RESPONSES S S T O COMMENTS RECEIVED I C ommentor Helen Boyer,Metropolitan Council 1 Comment Date May 2,2000 REVISED >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 1. Each specific `inaccuracy' noted in the Council's comments will be addressed in the specific item number of the FAUAR which is applicable. I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 22A& B: The background (non site related)traffic which was part of the site traffic impact study used a 1.5 percent per year for trip generation for the by-pass trips. This value was reviewed by both the City of Shakopee and Scott County during the course of the study,and again with Scott County as a result of this question. Both the City of Shakopee and Scott County had originally agreed to the value of 1.5 percent. The county staff confirmed this through a follow up to this question. The 1.5 percent growth rate is recommended by Scott County transportation staff so as to account for only by-pass trips,and not site generated trips. Without this adjustment,the site traffic would be counted twice. The City's traffic consultant indicated that"It is assumed that the large increase in traffic previously was the result of the increased traffic from Mystic Lake Casino south on CSAH 83. However,the additional increase in traffic through this area is anticipated to be strictly based on future residential and some commercial growth in the area. The Shakopee Transportation Plan includes projected increases of approximately 1.5%per year through this area." >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 22 C &D: The authors of the site traffic study response is as follows: "Based on the proposed location of the anticipated traffic generators on the site, it is anticipated that a significant amount of traffic would divert from the main access point on CSAH 83 to the access on CSAH 16. In addition,past experience has indicated that when an access point approaches capacity traffic will divert to a less congested access point. The reviewer is correct in that this is a manual assignment; however, it is based on engineer's judgment and past experience in similar situations. With respect to the statement to the additional capacity and alternative access points being considered,this statement was intended to identify potential needs to the County with respect to additional access in the form of right-in/right-out and/or additional access on CSAH 16. The executive summary does not indicate any additional access or capacity improvements over and above what is currently planned at this time." Negotiations for access points to this site are still in progress with both Scott County and Mn/DOT. The LGU may,as a mitigation measure, impose limits on the size,type and location of particular developments based upon the traffic impacts of the adjacent access points, and correlate the development potential of this site with the acceptable level of service of the access points. This can be done as the 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-4 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED development occurs, and through monitoring of the traffic volumes at the access points. I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I 1 I i City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-5 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. — •- .C. -4'4..a ones r.11/1 ^ n I . o � . dA°711:s, ilf,,,0o e, --- Minnesota Department of Natural Resource e p 3 y X0007 I ki 4 I 401 S M Lafayette Road 10 M.Paul.Minnesota 55155.4)_ -. 'Post-1t Fax Note 7671 I:gam t pesP Tom, 440 I e ee Fran?%;. A l..m. 1 May 3,2000e°a°kyt5Zaksp22 co'Pvif�c+v./4(/I e=i✓ 'P'°11°'t 612^4(f_ -3bso "me torI_944- F7?‘ I Michael Leek Fa"" �!Z -�IYS-G7tS Fax. Ari--z44-i;0 '�'1 Community Development Director City of Shakopee ............_.�.. ...••-. . . I 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,MN 55379 I RB: Valley Green Corporate Center Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR) Dear Mr.Leek: I The Department of Natural Resources(DNR)has reviewed the Draft AUAR for the ValleyGreen P Corporate Center project. We will offer both general and specific comments on the document and the I - associated environmental analysis. General Comments. I1. Exhibits. Although the AUAR contains the exhibits that are recommended by the Environmental Quality Board(EQB)for this type of document,the exhibits present are reduced copies that are not uniform in I scale. Higher quality exhibits should be provided that allow for easy reading and review. These fi ll- scale exhibits should be provided to all governmental units with permit and/or approval authority as part of the submitral of the Final AUAR and adopted Mitigation Plan. I2. Site C_onditinn. Initiation of construction on the site has resulted in significant site alteration that is not readily addressed by the AUAR process and related permitting. In particular,the ability for the project to I comply with the applicable City shoreland ordinance provisions has been substantially compromised by vegetation(i.e.,tree)removal. 3, Dean Lie. The DNR ordinary high water(OHW)level for Dean Lake of 747.0'should be clearly I depicted on the exhibits. Many of the figures suggest that Dean Lake is significantly smaller than is the actual case, This is an especially important consideration in verifying shoreland ordinance setbacks on the site plans. ISpec?c Comments. I 11A Item 1 ln,paae 5. The discussion should indicate that wildlife displacement,which is expected to occur as a function of project-related habitat conversion,will lead to an overall population decline in the 1 DNR Information:651-296-6157 • 1-888-646-6$67 • TIY:651-296-5484 • 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Oppommity Employer A PriMc0 on Rseyclea Papel Containing a Who Valuer Diversity Nor MI'mum of 10%Post4oreumer Waste ' 1 IIHY—U5-20001 :2.3 612 445 6718 P.12/19 • t. .._ - Michael Leek,Community Development Director .May 3,2000 potentially affected species. When suitable habitat is present on adjacent or nearby parcels,displaced • wildlife will compete with existing populations that already occupy available feeding,nesting,or rearing habitat;it is likely that the habitat will not provide long-term support for the increased number of individuals present. If habitat is not available,mortality is likely to result because basic needs(i.e.,food, shelter)are not met. In terms of cumulative effects from this and other developments,this loss of habitat in combination with other habitat losses from past and future human activity in the area will result in the 1 eventual decline of wildlife numbers and diversity. The wildlife that can be supported in the area by the habitat that remains will likely be dominated by species tolerant of human disturbance and activity,such as crows,starlings,and rabbits. 11g Item 11.b,peat 6. The discussion should indicate whether the site was explicitly surveyed by a qualified individual for the presence of the gopher snake,which is a state-listed special concern species. In terms of potential mitigation for this species,strict adherence to the 300-foot building setback for non-water related structures provides the best opportunity for some habitat retention,even if disturbed,at the site. I 12A Item 32:nage ES-2. The AUAR identifies that project-related construction is not expected to have an impact upon the water level of Dean Lake. This conclusion is based upon"studies conducted by the Lower Minnesota River Watershed and the MDNR"where"Deans Lake is not hydraulically isolated from surficial sand aquifers by a tight`seal."Connecting the findings of these studies to the potential for site grading to affect Dean Lake is misleading;neither the Watershed District nor DNR studied the grading for impacts on the lake. Rather the studies were carried out to assess the impacts of a nearby quarry on water levels of Dean Lake. I12B Regarding wetland impacts,mitigation is considered best whenfor- replacement occurs. The rYPe p Mitigation Plan should indicate that mitigation requires type-for-type replacement. I12C Eigumga. The depiction of Dean bake on this figure is inaccurate. The limits of the lake are significantly larger than what is shown on the drawing. This figure should be reprinted with the OH'W l??vel of 747.0'shown. 12D Figure 6-1. The 747.0'contour is not easily discerned on the figure. The figure should very clearly show the 747.0'contour line and this contour should be marked as the DNR Ordinary High Water elevation on the drawing. 12E Figure 6-2. This figure is labeled as a"grading plan." Rather than a grading plan the figure appears to delineate the road and street locations on the site. This figure should be given another name and retained. In addition,an accurate grading plan should be added to the document. I12F Figure 6-3. This figure is of little value as reproduced in the document. It is not possible to delineate phasing on the site. The Final AUAR should include a quality version of this figure. In addition,the limits of Dean Lake are greatly under-depicted. The OHW of 747.0'should be clearly marked. 111 10 Jtem 10.Daze 4. Although it is not necessary to complete the covertype table in an AUAR,given the poor quality of the exhibits provided to reviewers, information in this table should have been provided. It is not possible to discern covertype change as a function of project development with the overlay maps provided. 2 I IHY-1e:'—e'ir1U to•e4 612 445 6718 P.14/19 I Michael Leek,Community Development Director May 3,2000 I18 C Fie.ure 18-2. This exhibit does not provide sufficient detail to support a conclusion that significant impacts are prevented. I27A,B J 27,page 27. Non-water related structures located within the shoreland district,which is 1000 feet from the OHW of Dean Lake,must be set back 300 feet from the 011W of 747.0',or be substantially screened from view from the water,to prevent potentially significant visual impacts. Provisions should be contained in the Mitigation Plan that ensure compliance with the City's shoreland ordinance such that no variance will be needed for the project. I28 Item 28.page_28. The response to this section should be modified to read: "....,the plan for Valley Green Corporate Center will comply with all aspects of the City of Shakopee's current and adopted draft Comprehensive Plan, Storm Water Management and Transportation Plan elements." This change is consistent with language offered in the EQB publication Guide to the Minnesota Environmental Review I Rules,(1998),which state: "The mitigation plan is not merely a list of ways to avoid significant environmental effects,rather an action plan for how the effects will be avoided. It is a commitment by the WU and other • agencies to take action to prevent impacts that otherwise could occur from project development" (page 16,original emphasis) The Final AUAR should reflect this perspective throughout the Mitigation Plan. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. We look forward to receiving your Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan at a future date. Please contact Bill Johnson of my staff at(651)296-9229 if you have questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, 1 Thomas W.Balcom,Supervisor Environmental Planning and Review Section Office of Management and Budget Services c: Kathleen Wallace Con Christianson Joe Oschwald Russ•Peterson,USFWS Jon Larsen,EQB 02000045e-0003 VAum(GREN.WPD i -.. 4 1 3(.0 vv �� 612 445 6718 P.13/19 IMichael Leek,Community Development Director May 3,2000 I 10F jureb, The 747.0'contour is marked on thisa althoughitisdifficult, to follow. This contour should be labeled as the ANR OHW level. Ii0 Figure 10-Z. This figure would be more useful if provided in a colored format. I 10, Figure 11-1. The 747.0'contour is marked on this figure,however it is difficult to follow. This contour should be identified on the drawing as the DNR OHW. 1Z fItem 12,nage 7. See specific response Item 12.parre S-2. DNR does not anticipate any issue of the seal of Dean Lake being"broken"by site grading. I 14D item 14,,page 8. The project encroaches within the 300-foot setback from Dean Lake that is required under the City's Shoreland Ordinance for,non-water related uses. Agencies reviewing an AUAR are to consider a number of factors according to Minn.Rules part 4410.3610,subp.5B, including identification 1 of"mitigation measures or procedures necessary to prevent significant environmental impacts within the area when actual development occurs." The City's shoreland ordinance provisions should be strictly incorporated into the required Mitigation Plan consistent with Minn.Rules part 4410.3610,subp.5D because otherwise the"proposed plan for mitigation will be inadequate to prevent potentially significant environmental impacts from occurring." 14B,C Adherence to the requisite setback of 300 feet appears necessary because current conditions do not ' appear to allow for vegetative or topographic screening. In addition to the setback,ordinance provisions for limits on impervious surface creation and building height should be strictly incorporated into the adopted Mitigation Plan. Incorporation of the substantive,environmental protection features into the adopted Mitigation Plan should result in a circumstance where no variance for the project should be necessary. Under its review authorities granted by Minn.Rules part 6120.3900,subp. 6,DNR will likely comment that a variance should not be issued for this project should such a request come forward. I17 ,[tern 17,page_9. The discussion correctly identifies the potential for wind erosion associated with this site. Because the site has already been graded,its susceptibility to wind erosion bas been substantially increased. In addition,Table 16-1 includes five(5)-soil'•types.where wind was a factor in development of the soil type. The Mitigation Plan should include a comprehensive listing of measures available to control wind erosion for incorporation into applicable permits and approvals. I16 Figsve 16-1. The 011W of Dean Lake should be clearly delineated as the 747.0'contour. 18 A Item 18.page 11,and Figure 18-1. The discussion in Item IS indicates that stormwater will be routed to avoid Dean Lake. Figure 18-1 does not allow for this assertion to be verified without depicting ponding areas and associated points of discharge. Greater detail should he provided to ensure that Dean Lake is bypassed. In addition,the OHW of Dean Lake should be shown on any stormwater design drawing. 1 18 B Regarding potential mitigation,the Mitigation Plan should require use of appropriate Best Management Practices(BMPs)as well as include monitoring and maintnaneeprovisions. 1 - t . 3 1 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED Commentor • Thomas W. Balcom,Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Comment Date May 3,2000 I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 1. Agreed.New copies of many exhibits have been prepared and are included in the FAUAR. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 2: Several factors were involved in the initial grading of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. 1. Tree Removal: The VGCC site was specifically identified in the Oak wilt suppression program's as a"Large Oak Wilt Infection Center within Shakopee". As such,certain mitigation measures were performed which removed a portion of the trees,however,the specific location of the trees removed was not clearly noted in the report graphics. 2. In addition,a portion of the trees were destroyed by storm damage 36 3. A proposed grading plan was prepared for the developer through its engineer WSB and submitted to the City for its review and approval. The plan included a 75 foot"no impact"zone around the "ordinary high water level"(OHW=747 foot contour)of the lake which appears to meet the City's Shoreland Ordinance for water related uses. The `nearby activities' which the plan included were the construction of storm water interception ponds which were apparently seen as `water related' by the City, since they approved the grading plan. 4. It is recommended that all future site activities including building permit requests be specifically reviewed for compliance with all applicable regulations, including the Shoreland Ordinance. The Developer/City agreement should be part of the process. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 3: Agreed.However,aerial photos tend to reflect the limits of'open water' rather than the 747 foot contour but revised exhibits included in the FAUAR more appropriately depict the OHW contour. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 10: 1 Revised and improved exhibits included in the FAUAR should assist the reviewer in discerning limits of 35 Kunde Co.,Inc.;1999 City of Shakopee Oak Wilt Suppression Program; 1999. 36 Carlson,Steven J.,by telephone interview with Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,May 31,2000. 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 3-6 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I 1 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED I cover type and the position of contours. In addition,the proposed project does not include the specific details of proposed structures, extents of parking areas or limits of vegetation. Therefore,no `before and after' comparison is possible until proposals are made to improve individual parcels. 1 >>>> FAUAR Response 11 A: ISince a significant portion of the site was farmed,most recently,with small grains and previously in row crops, it is difficult to perceive an extensive presence of non-human tolerant species within the project. I area. In fact,the development of green corridors between building sites may result in less area being annually disturbed than with the former routine agricultural activities. I In addition,preservation of the City-mandated"no impact zone"around Dean's lake will maintain a wildlife corridor in the area. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 11B: The site was not explicitly surveyed for the presence of the gopher snake,however,extensive wetland I delineation surveys over a 10 year period and the associated more casual examination of the adjacent farmlands never yielded any observations of gopher snakes.3' IIn addition,the Minnesota Rules which govern activities relating to species of special concern states that, "Species designated as species of special concern are not protected by Minnesota Statutes,section 84.0895 or rules adopted under that section Parts 6134.0100 to 6134.0400 do not address protection I of habitat for species designated as endangered,threatened,or species of special concern,nor do they obligate anyone to survey lands for the presence of designated species."38 Extensive studies and reviews have been conducted by the DNR as part of the County Biological Survey 1 and Woods End Landscaping,a specialist in native plant"rescue"and transplanting. The DNR report concluded that"no rare species or Natural Plant Communities"39 were identified on the Business Park site and "According to the review conducted by Mr.Nelson [sic-of Woods End Landscaping],the 1 native plants were not rare enough to warrant heroic efforts to protect,..."40 I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 12A: The project construction is not expected to impact the lake because the project complies with the City's I Shoreland Ordinance ant the use of stormwater interceptor basins to detain that portion of the VGBP watershed runoff that flows into Dean's Lake.The detention time will provide an opportunity to control I 37 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 1. 38 Minnesota Rules Section 6134.0150 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. 1 39 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 2. 40 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 2. 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3- 7 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED Isediment and improve water quality before the runoff can enter Dean's Lake. It should be noted that the entire immediate Dean's Lake watershed is approximately 6,900 acres and I includes a host of land uses. Therefore,the contribution of the 332 acre VGBP site or,4.8%of the watershed, is relatively limited. I The same can be said for the extent of sand&gravel aquifer that may contribute to maintaining the water level and quality. Figure No. 16-2 in Section 2 shows this vast area of porous soils that contribute water to this aquifer. IIn addition,multiple visits over a 10 year period to specifically observe the wetland limits of Dean's Lake by Steve Carlson of STS observed the lake at many different levels of water regime and changes in the vegetation in the Lake Basin have not been observed.'` III >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 12 B: IType 1 wetlands(0.52 acres)were filled for this project. New wetlands(1.2 acres)will result from mitigation constructed,and 2.15 acres of Public Value Credit were granted by Permit. Of the new I wetland acreage provided,approximately 0.5 acres of Type 1, 0.5 acres of Type 4,and 0.2 acres of Type 2 wetlands are expected. I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraphs 12C thru 12F: Agreed.New copies of many exhibits have been prepared and are included in the FAUAR. 1 . >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 12G: • Agreed. 111 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 14D: I The current project does not include any request for building construction.Therefore,an evaluation of the 300 foot setback rule is premature,at this time. Further,the provisions of the City Shoreland zoning ordinance state, "... or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters frontage,must either be set back I double the normal ordinary high water level setback [sic-twice 150 feet] or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography,assuming summer, leaf-on conditions.' Therefore,the building designer would have the option of constructing appropriate screening rather than meeting the 300 foot setback. 1 1 "' Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 3. 42 City of Shakopee,Chapter 11-Zoning Ordinance,§ 11.54,Subd.5,B, 1,d,page 1292. 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 3-8 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. 1 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraphs B&C: This would be for the building designer and the City to determine at the time of proposed building permits. Again,this would be for the building designer and the City to determine at the time of proposed building permits. Since no request for a variance has been made,this would appear to be premature. 1 >>>> FAUAR Response:to Paragraph 17 Wind erosion within the subject area of this AUAR will likely decrease when fully developed with the introduction of year-round ground cover(pavements, buildings, lawns,native grasses and wetlands). ' »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 16: Agreed.New copies of many exhibits have been prepared and are included in the FAUAR. 1 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18A: Any inference that all storm drainage from the VGBP site will be diverted to avoid Dean's Lake is in error. Approximately 12 acres of storm water runoff will be diverted directly to the K-mart linear pond on the north side of US 169. The portion of the VGBP which was tributary to Dean's Lake before site ' grading was 129.5 acres and the portion that remains tributary is 117.6 acres. The boundaries of these drainage areas are shown on exhibit no. 18-3. In addition,new copies of many exhibits have been prepared and are included in the FAUAR. ' »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18B: Adherence to the BMP's is a requirement of the City's Stormwater Management Plan. »» FAUAR Responseto Paragraph 18C: Exhibit 18-2 has been revised,however,no direct statement or conclusion of"preventing"significant impacts is made in this section of the DAUAR. The FAUAR states that,"Special care will be taken to 1 City of Shakopee,Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-9 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED prevent direct discharge into Dean's Lake itself.43 Discharges are routed through the stormwater detention basins before eventual release to Dean's Lake or the K-Mart linear pond on the north side of US 169." ' The FAUAR recommends adherence to the City's Stormwater Management Plan including the Metropolitan Council's Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution to All Metropolitan Water Bodies 44,BMP's for urban areas as recommended by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(1989), and the revised shoreland ordinance provisions to mitigate the greater part of any load increases. »» FAUAR Response to Paragraphs 27 A&B: ' The current proposed development does not include specific building design or parking area plans. The next step will occur when individual sites are sold then building designers and owners will present their proposals for improvements. That would be the appropriate time for visual impacts, setbacks and necessary screening to be addressed. The Mitigation Plan can only recommend and has no enforcement authority. Further,the need for a variance is determined by the activities proposed by potential tenants. i »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 28: The AUAR does consistently recite the need for all actions to comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan,the City's Stormwater Management Plan, and Transportation Plan. It also identifies compliance with other City Ordinances in the design of the grading plan, etc. Restating these actions and requirements under Item 28 will be made in the FAUAR and the Mitigation Plan. 1 I 1 43 STS Consultants Ltd. 1999.Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Documents. Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center as Frost and Schwanke, 1999. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-10 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. r� -er�nei l e•ems+ 612 445 6718 P.15/19 Minnesota Dopar...ant of Transportation (1) I _ Metropolitan Dlvlsion Waters Edge 1500 West County Road 132 Roseville, MN 55113 ' May 2, 2000 City of Shakopee Attn: Michael Leek 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 ' Dear Michael Leek: SUBJECT: Valley Green Corporate Center ' Minnesota Department of Transportation Review#AUAR00-002 SW Quadrant of TH169&CSAH 83 Shakopee, Scott County C.S. 7005 The Metro Division of the Minnesota Department of Transportation has reviewed the Valley Green Corporate Center Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review(AUAR). Mn/DOT objects to the AUAR due to the negative transportation impacts that would result on TH169. These objections are based on the following: ' 1. • The proposed location of the site entrance as indicated in the AUAR at the northern edge of the property is too close to our eastbound TH169 ramp. Mn/DOT owns the right of way along CSAH 83 in this area and we will not allow full access to Corporate Center Drive at the proposed location. We will consider a right in/out only with the installation or extension ' of a concrete median south to CSAH 16 subject to additional traffic analysis showing that this arrangement will not negatively impact the operation of TH169 and its ramps. 1 2. • The site plan also indicates a realignment of CSAH 16 on the west side of CSAH 83. Mn/DOT review is needed before plans move forward for the proposed realignment. 1 3. • Increased traffic volume from this development will also require that signals and dual left turn lanes be constructed at the westbound TH169 ramp. These transportation impacts are a result of the development and are not addressed in the AUAR. The traffic analysis will need to address westbound movements on the TH169 ramp. 4. All of the above stated transportation system improvements are necessitated by the development and will be the financial responsibility of the developer, the city, or both. An equal opportunity employer I b1G 44J b(i I .' 1 City of Shakopee May 2, 2000 Page 2 1Y 5. ■ The storm water runoff and ponding information as presented in the AUAR is inadequate., Mn/DOT needs to review hydraulic computations and drainage area maps showing existing ' and proposed conditions and addressing 100-year storms. Existing drainage patterns and rates of runoff affecting Mn/DOT right of way should be perpetuated. The site's storm water discharge rate must not increase. If you have any additional questions regarding this action please contact me at(651) 582-1400. Since ly, Sherry Narusiewi Principal Transportation Planner Supervisor Cc: Brian Sorenson/Scott County 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 i 1 TOTAL P.03 I IRESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED Commentor Sherry Narusiewicz,Minnesota Department of Transportation IComment Date May 2, 2000 I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 5: The details requested are contained in the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, and I since the entire watershed for Dean's Lake is over 9,600 as acres (not including Prior Lake itself),the detailed analysis is beyond the scope of this 332 acre AUAR. The Stormwater Management Plan was completed in 1999 and is currently being reviewed by other agencies. 1 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 1: I The authors of the site traffic study has furnished the following response: "On August 11, 1998 representatives from the City of Shakopee and Scott County met with Mr. Scott I Peters of Mn/DOT to review the proposed CSAH 83 and CSAH 16 concept plan. At that time,a preliminary geometric layout and traffic analysis was provided to Mr. Peters for his review and comment. He circulated the plan to eight functional groups within Mn/DOT for their review and Icomment. The comments received were from the following Mn/DOT functional groups. • Planning I . State Aid • Right-of-Way • Pre-Design • Water Resources I Detail Design • Traffic I . Permit Office IIncluded with the comments was a map from the Row section indicating the location of the access control along CSAH 83. The access control ends approximately at the existing driveway into the I proposed site. This is the approximate location where the proposed corporate center drive access point is located. In addition comments were received with respect to the geometrics and impacts to TH 169 as well as CSAH 83. Based on these comments. A revised layout was developed and is I the basis for the current concept plan. A figure(Figure 22-5)has been attached to the AUAR showing the proposed concept plan including geometrics for the roadway alignment." I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 2: 1 as Hubmer,Todd&Gurney,Steven,WSB&Associates,Inc.;by memo to Ron Roetzel,Bolton&Menk,Inc.;June 1, 2000,page 4. City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 3-11 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED The authors of the site traffic study has indicated that "the CSAH 16 realignment was included as part of the Mn/DOT review of the Concept Plan(see the above comment/response)." >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 3: The authors of the site traffic study has indicated that "the proposed concept layout does include traffic signals and dual left turn lanes at the westbound TH 169 ramp. These impacts were addressed as part of the traffic study and are included as part of the AUAR." »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 4: The financial responsibility for the access improvements on CSAH 83 and CSAH 16 which are directly related to site generated traffic will be addressed as part of the development agreement for this project. The balance of the improvements, including the improvements to the westbound TH 169 ramp and CSAH 16 realignment,will benefit areas outside the proposed development,and thus could have funding participation from the developer,City of Shakopee and Scott County. Again,this will be address in the development agreement with the developer. I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 3-12 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I r 11I IMINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY I % STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION 111i-11 d�� MAS 112 IMay 5,2000 . BY Mr.R.Michael Leek ICity of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 fRE: AUAR—Valley Green Corporate Center T115 R22 S9&S10,Shakopee, Scott County SHPO Number.2000-1523 • IDear Mr.Leek: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above AUAR. It has been reviewed pursuant to the responsi- bilities given the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act. With regard to question 26 on page ES-5,we disagree with the conclusion that no further archaeological survey of this Iproject area is warranted. We believe that there is a good probability that unreported archaeological properties might be present in the project area,and we recommend that a survey of the area be completed. The survey must meet the requirements of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification and Evaluation, and should include an evaluation I of National Register eligibility for any properties that are identified. For your information,we have enclosed a list of consultants who have expressed an interest In undertaking such surveys. We note that we also recommended a survey of the project area in a letter of 15 March 2000 to Mr. Ross Knapper of 1 Boulton&Menk. 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. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic IPreservation 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(651)296-5462. Sin erely, ...6.6 i Witkaide.• I Dennis A. Gimmestad • • Government Programs and Compliance Officer Enclosure: List of Consultants • . • I 11.5 KELLOGG 13OUI.I vIRD WEST/SAINT PAUL.MINNESOTA 55102-1906/TELEPHONE.:65I-296-6146 1 1 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED 1 Commentor Dennis A.Gimmestad, Minnesota Historical Society Comment Date May 5,2000 1 »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 1: Subsequent to the Draft AUAR,archaeological resources were assessed and reported by the 106 Group LTD in their Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the development. The summary reports the following: "The Phase 1 survey identified no archaeological sites within the Valley Green Corporate Center project area,and and indicates that there is little probability that the project area contains unidentified archaeological resources of historical significance. The 106 Group therefore recommends that the project warrants no further archaeological investigation."ab 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 r 1 46 Abel,Elizabeth J.,The 106 Group Ltd,Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Valley Green Corporate Center,April,2000,page 11. City of Shakopee,Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-13 1 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. �uuu ic.• tile 445 b(1i� P. .. � 18119 I A 4A sii:, - _:. -. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency I �P ' I May 44 2000 l ii MAY 0 C El 4 2000 I Mr.R.Michael Leek Y Community Development Director 129 South Holmes Street IShakopee,MN 55379 RE: Valley Green Corporate Center Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR) IDear Mr.Leek: I The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA)has completed its review of the above-referenced draft AIJAR. Relative to those areas where the MPCA has cognizance and regulatory responsibility,we have the following comments: ISection 8: Permits and Approvals Required 8A Correctly notes that a Section 404 Permit must be obtained from the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers II (COE),and that a Section 401 Water Quality Certification of that permit will be required from the • MPCA. Your contact at the MPCA is Larry Zdon at(651)297-8219. Your Agency contact for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity I is Jay Michels at(651)296-7036. Your agency contact for the sanitary sewer extension is Don Perwien at(651)296-7762. I 8B Although the densities of the specific land uses and the number of parking spaces is yet to be determined, an Indirect Source Permit(ISP)will most likely be needed for the development given the size of the site and the projected number of weekday trips to the site. An ISP is not included in the list of permits required(and should be in the revised AUAR),however as indicated in No.23 (vehicle related air I emissions),an ISP application will be submitted for the development. Your contact for the ISP Permit is Mary Hoffman-Lynn at(651)297-2331 112. Section 12: Physical Irnnpacts on Water Resources. As noted above,A Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit will be required from the COE and a Section 401 I Water Quality Certification will be required from MPCA. Your contact for this issue is Larry Zdon. 17. Sections 17: Erosion and Sedimentation,and Section 18: Water Quality—Surface Water Runoff. I It appears that stormwater management has been adequately addressed in the AUAR,with one exception. The Revised AUAR should address how and where the stormwater from the realignment of CSAH 16 1 will be treated. Please contact Say Michels if you have questions. I 520 Lafayette Rd. N.;St. Paul,MN 55155-4194; (651)296-6300(Voice):(651)292-5332(TTY) St. Paul • Brainerd • Detroit Lakes • Duluth • Mankato • Marshall - Rochester • Willmar;www.pca.state.mn.us I ram'O000rtunity Employer • Printed on recycled paper containing at least ZO%fibers from paper recycled by consumers. bie 445 b r18 P.19/19 I Mr.R Michael ichael Leek IPage Two 111 22. Section 22: Traffic. . The AUAR has addressed both traffic and air quality impacts expected under the year 2017 development I scenario. Included in the AUAR document is a traffic impact study that assumes two different land use options and includes projected trip generations for AM and PM peak hour for each option,trip distribution estimates,and a Level of Service capacity analysis. The MPCA staff notes that the site plan I for the AUAR study area includes the proposed improvement and realignment of CSAR 16,and that mitigation measures are recommended to address queuing problems and unsatisfactory level of service at specific intersections during peak hours. The revised AUAR document and Mitigation Plan should also I provide some discussion of the transit system,and rideshare and carpool programs as possible mitigation measures to help in reducing the number of single occupancy vehicle trips to and from the project site and traffic congestion in the project area. Your contact regarding traffic and air quality is Mary Hoffman-Lynn. 1 23. Section 23: Vehicle-related Air Emissions. I The potential air quality impacts of the proposed development were identified by modeling future traffic flow and the resulting carbon monoxide concentrations in the development area. The air quality analysis conducted for the project shows that based on the predicted one-hour and eight-hour maximum Carbon I Monoxide(CO)concentrations for the year 2017,no violations of the state ambient air quality standards for carbon monoxide are predicted. The MPCA staff also notes that the traffic and air quality analysis is based on a 20-year traffic forecast, I and that the background CO monitoring data used in the air quality analysis were collected in 1996 at a site approximately 53 miles from the AUAR study area. The air quality analysis in the ISP application should be conducted for one year after completion of each of the major phases and full development of I the project. Additionally,new air quality background CO monitoring must be conducted or most recently collected data must be used when the air quality analysis is performed for the MP application. I Thank you for the opportunity to review this Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Should you have any general questions,please call me at(651) 290-8643. ISincerely, 414 gol" 42l'a7 • IEric J.Kilberg Planner Principal I Operations and Planning Section Metro District IEJK/gs 1 TOTAL P.19 I I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED Commentor Eric J.Kilberg,Minnesota Pollution Control Agency IComment Date : May 4,2000 I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 8A: Mr.Jon Albinson of Valley Green Business Park replied, I "Project did not require a Section 404 Permit from the COE. What was required was a Nationwide Permit(NWP)26,which was issued February 1, 1999. The project did require a Section 401 Water I Quality Certification from the MPCA,which was issued April 21, 1999. The project did require an NPDES General Stormwater Permit be issued,which was issued on September 26, 1999 and defined under Identification Number C00006313.A Sanitary Sewer Permit will be applied for at the appropriate Itime." >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 8B: The developer's consultant was ask to respond to the above comment and provided the following: I "The current phase of the development does not include any specific parking,commercial,or industrial structures. The site preparation activities(grading and utility improvements,etc.)are not `specifically designed' to support an indirect source,and therefore an ISP is premature at this time. This I interpretation was confirmed in an April 18,2000 telephone conversation with MPCA indirect source permits coordinator, Innocent Eyoh. Mr. Eyoh confirmed the site preparation activities that precede activities associated with the construction of a specific structure do not require(and in fact cannot even I apply for)an indirect source permit."47 However,Goal Number 9 in the proposed Mitigation Plan does contain a recommendation concerning an ISP. As development progresses to actual building and parking area design,the appropriate ISP Idocumentation and permitting must be initiated and acquired. I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 12: A Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit has already been granted by the Corps(re: 99-02221-NW- ' GAE).48 The MPCA issued a Section 401 Water Quality Certification in a letter dated April 21, 1999. I 47 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,letter to City of Shakopee,April 24,2000,page 6. 48 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,Amendment to Permit Documents, VGCC,March, 1999,page 1. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-14 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 17: "The K-mart linear regional treatment pond [sic- north of US 169, refer to Figure 18-3 ] and the ponds within the AUAR study area treat the water from CSAH 16."49 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 17: "The K-mart linear regional treatment pond [sic-north of US 169,refer to Figure 18-3 ] and the ponds within the AUAR study area treat the water from CSAH 16."" • I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 22: The City's transportation consultant indicated that"The City of Shakopee's Transportation Plan includes a chapter on the City's transit system. The City's transit mission statement is 'To evaluate and improve performance,efficiency,and productivity of local transit system identifying the transit service needs of all citizens and delivering the appropriate transit services while balancing the available energy and financial resources.' The City of Shakopee is currently not served by the Metropolitan Transit Service. Instead,the City of Shakopee is the provider through Shakopee Area Transit(SAT)alternative transit services. The services currently provided are: (1)dial-a-ride service within the City of Shakopee; (2)commuter vanpools. Express bus service to Eden Prairie Center is expected to be re-instated this year. The transit ridership levels overall have been steadily increasing. With the opening of the new Bloomington Ferry Bridge and TH 169 the pace of development in Shakopee has increased significantly. In order to meet increased demand,the City will need to work with other transit providers to ensure that its residents can make the transit connections,they need to get across the metropolitan area to jobs and other destinations. With the increased residents and development around the area of the TH 169 and CSAH 83 and with CSAH 17 the City has identified the need for a park-and-ride site in these areas. A park-and-ride facility has been identified in the northwest quadrant of TH 169 and CSAH 83 and in the northwest quadrant of TH 169 and CSAH 17. The City will be committed to work with Valley Green Corporate Center to encourage carpools and vanpools(within)the proposed site,as it develops." >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 23 I 49 Hubmer,Todd&Gurney,Steven,WSB&Associates,Inc.;by memo to Ron Roetzel,Bolton&Menk,Inc.;June 1, 2000,page 4. 50 Hubmer,Todd&Gurney,Steven,WSB&Associates,Inc.;by memo to Ron Roetzel,Bolton&Menk,Inc.;June 1, 1 2000,page 4. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-15 ' Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED IAn Indirect Source Permit(ISP)to cover vehicular air emissions associated with the project is recommended to be required in Goal 9 of the Proposed Mitigation Plan in Section 4. The ISP Application requires evaluation of traffic and air quality for the period of one year after completion of I the project or major phases thereof. Air quality monitoring to determine carbon monoxide(CO) concentrations should be performed at that time if no new or recent results are available for the 1 immediate study area. I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 3-16 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. CnHY-u i-UU l Ut: u , Uy tiUL I UN K 11i.NK, 1 NU FAX NO. 9528908065 P. 15 i SCOTT COUNTY 4'' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION '" '}P�4A' ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT v ::,y'�^ j't+3�` GOVERNMENT CENTER A102 {c °Wo 200 FOURTH AVENUE WEST SHAKOPEE,MN 55379-1220 (952)496-8177Fax: (952)496-8489 I May 3, 2000 Michael Leek, Community Development Director. City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 • Dear Mr. Leek: Thank you for the opportunity to review the AUAR for the Valleyy Green Corporate p to Center project. Unfortunately we did not receive a copy of this AUAR until April 19, leaving us about half of the allotted time for review. As a result, we would request that the comment period be extended through May 19th if possible. We do have some preliminary comments which are here limited to environmental and transportation issues and they are as follows by Item #: 18. The AUAR should expand its review of storm water runoff as it did not characterize the nature of the development that is proposed for this site. There was no mention about the increased overall runoff anticipated from the site and how the downstream conveyance system will handle it. Currently, we are aware there are two large box culverts under Hwy 169 capable of conducting significant volumes of runoff. However, downstream under Hwy 101 there is a small steel culvert. An analysis should be provided to address the additional improvements to the downstream conveyance system needed to accept the additional volume of runoff without adverse impacts. 20A According to County and State Geological information the area in which this development is'proposed is highly susceptible to ground waTeVcontarnination_ The information provided does not appear to clearly address the potential for ground water contamination from the proposed development. The information did discuss an evaluation for previous contamination sites and the ground water level impacts from the CAMAS quarry but, did not address the issue for the current proposal. The AUAR should be revised to include an analysis of what is An Equal Opportunity/Safety Aware Employer [1AX-U9-00 TUE 08: 10 BOLTON & MENK, INC FAX NO, 9528908065 P. 16 I proposed for this site, how they will manage their storm water runoff in accordance with the County's Ground Water Protection Plan and how potential I contaminants brought into this site during construction and after development will be managed to prevent release. I206 The AUAR should address the impact that this project will have on ground water infiltration. Currently, the soils on the project site are highly permeable and most of the water falling or running onto the site infiltrates to replenish the ground water. After development, much of the site will likely be impervious surface. Although the rate of runoff will be controlled by retention ponds, the volume will likely increase with a net loss to the ground water. The balance between runoff 1 and percolation should be addressed. I 22A The AUAR does well to mention that variations from the assumptions made in background traffic growth could result in more severe traffic impacts than those depicted in the AUAR_ We therefore recommend the City of Shakopee look at existing and future land uses in this area (especially in undeveloped areas south I of the bypass) in order to determine possible additional future transportation impacts on CSAH 83. i22B The AUAR also does well to mention that variations to site trip distribution patterns could also.result in more severe traffic impacts. The location of any particular building will likely have an effect on the best,possible routes to it. In I order to minimize the future capacity and queuing problems (depicted in the AUAR) on the roadway system, we therefore recommend the City look at the possible locations of trip generators on the site to determine the best location for I each. • I22C It should be noted that from a County perspective, the realignment of CSAH 16 east of CSAH.83 to align it with future 17t Avenue is an integral part of the mitigation of traffic impacts. If it is determined that CSAH 16 will not be realigned as part of this development, further traffic analyses will become necessary. I 220 Was Mn/DOT sent a copy of this AUAR for comment? We recommend the City solicit comments from Mn/DOT(if not already received) because of the potential impacts to I TH 169 and its interchange at CSAH 83. Coordination with Mn/DOT will be critical in implementing the mitigation strategies discussed in the AUAR. I22D We recommend a figure be added to the AUAR showing the proposed lane configuration for all roads to be improved as part of this project. Along with the description of these improvements already provided in the text, this would help to I clearly present the proposed traffic mitigation to the reader. I IAn Equal Opportunity/Safety Aware Employer I •"Jr .... vv .vv vv vv .......v.. u a.,...,u , a„v !-[7L) UV. U:JLVUVVVV:J r. ul 23.The AUAR should discuss potential air pollution from the industrially eveloped site. Documentation for the assumptions presented for vehic a m ss on s should also be provided. The Valley area is being intensively developed with industrial and residential housing. We recommend that an air quality assessment be conducted in the valley to determine no special requirements for industry generated emissions that may be needed for air quality purposes. 29. The AUAR should address the current problems the City is having providing additional sources of potable water. We recommend that the City address this issue in its overall planning. The AUAR should discuss the additional costs and water quality and quantity impacts that this project will pose. If the City is forced S to drill deeper wells to accommodate development, the overall quality of the water in the City could be reduced with more mineralization and higher levels of radioactivity and at a likely higher expense to all city residents and businesses. 1 Recognizing g zing the above issues, we urge the City to amend the AUAR accordingly and resubmit it for review and comment. 111 Respectfully ( ,./AV Allen Frechette Environmental Health Manager • I I I cc: Dave Unmacht, Scott County Administrator Michael Sobota, Community Development Director Brian Sorenson, Transportation Engineer I I I An Equal Opportunity/SafetyAware Employer �C J I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED Commentor Allen Frechette, Scott County-Environmental Health Department Comment Date May 3,2000 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18: "During the development of the City of Shakopee's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan,the entire study area was analyzed. The study investigated the fully developed condition of the watershed, which is intended to be developed into a commercial or industrial land uses [sic]. Under the fully- developed condition,the flow at the Trunk Highway 101 culvert is anticipated to be 760 cfs. The City and Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District are currently undertaking a hydrologic study of the Deans Lake/Prior Lake outlet channel to verify the hydraulic capacity of this channel,and to recommend changes if necessary."51 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 20A: The current proposed development does not include specific building design,parking area plans or even specific activities to be conducted on each parcel. The next step will occur when individual sites are sold then building designers and owners will present their proposals for improvements. That would be the appropriate time for potential contamination from the proposed activities be addressed. Stormwater management has been designed in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan which was written in 1999 and is currently being reviewed by other agencies. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 20B: The total acreage of the proposed site is approximately 332 acres,whereas the total area tributary to Dean's Lake is in excess of 9,600 52 acres(which does not include Prior Lake itself). Therefore,any potential impact is somewhat limited. However,ponds constructed at lower elevations are designated for lining,to limit the infiltration rate and thus offer some level of protection to ground water. Ponds constructed at higher elevations(along the existing CR 16) are proposed to be 'dry' and not lined in order to promote feeding the ground water system. It is felt that this design balances the need for continued groundwater recharge,with the need to protect the groundwater from rapid pond leakage into the bedrock aquifer. 51 Hubmer,Todd&Gurney,Steven,WSB&Associates,Inc.;by memo to Ron Roetzel,Bolton&Menk,Inc.;June 1, 2000,page 4. 52 Hubmer,Todd&Gurney,Steven,WSB&Associates,Inc.;by memo to Ron Roetzel,Bolton&Menk,Inc.;June 1, i2000,page 4. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-17 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 22A: The background(non site related)traffic which was part of the site traffic impact study used a 1.5 percent per year for trip generation for the by-pass trips. This value was reviewed by both the City of Shakopee and Scott County during the course of the study,and again with Scott County as a result of this question. Both the City of Shakopee and Scott County had agreed to the value of 1.5 percent during the original traffic study. The county staff confirmed this through a follow up to this question. The 1.5 percent growth rate is recommended by Scott County transportation staff so as to account for only by- pass trips, and not site generated trips. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 22B: The traffic generation and distribution outlined in the site traffic study was based upon conceptual layouts and locations of buildings,under a"worse case"scenario as depicted by the developer. At this stage,there are only concept plans. Once more detailed site plans and layouts become available,the LGU will monitor the location of the major trip generators for this site,and continue to analyze the impacts to the adjacent roadways and access points. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 22C: The City's traffic consultant indicated that"This issue is currently being addressed by the County,City and Valley Green Corporate Center. It is agreed that should the County determine that the realignment of CSAH 16 is not warranted, additional analysis will be required for this area. However, preliminary analysis of a non-realignment concept was completed and it was determined that significant changes in the density of the project would be required in order to accommodate the turning traffic with the existing lane configurations on CSAH 83 and CSAH 16." >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 22D: 1 Mn/DOT was sent a copy of the AUAR as part of the distribution list and comments have been received from them(see below). The FAUAR has been updated to include proposed concept lane configurations for CSAH 16, it is labeled as Figure 22-5. These concepts are still under review by the City of Shakopee, Scott County and Mn/DOT. Improvements to this roadway,as well as CSAH 83,would be negotiated between the City of Shakopee, Scott County and the developer as to whether they would become part of this development project, or would be completed as a stand alone project under either government agency. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 23: It will be the responsibility of individual lot owners to propose specific building plans and activities for each developed lot. Detailed air quality studies of these stationary sources are beyond the scope of this AUAR. Specific activities covered under Minnesota rules may be required to request the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW),and possibly,an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)to address air emissions as well as other environmental factors. Any facility emitting pollutants I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 3-18 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED into the atmosphere may also be required to obtain a permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA). An Indirect Source Permit(ISP)to cover vehicular air emissions associated with the project is recommended to be required in Goal 9 of the Proposed Mitigation Plan in Section 4. The request for a regional examination of air quality in the valley is more appropriately addressed to the Metropolitan Council,MNDOT,MPCA or some other agency and is beyond the scope of this AUAR. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 29: Potable water treatment and distribution in the study area is the regional responsibility the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission with review by the Metropolitan Council and the State Health Department. The Met Council includes review of the potential water supply when they consider expansion of the MUSA boundary,which it has approved. Specific questions regarding this subject should be directed toward those agencies, since it is beyond the scope of this AUAR. I I i I I 1 I I ■' 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-19 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. CiRY-1[-UU hb1 11 :19 BOLTON & MENK, INC FAX Na 9528908065 P. 02 II MaY-12-2000 09.38 • 612 445 6718 P.02/1 • • 05.'10;00 15:20 FAX 1 9S2 472 4771 THOMAS E. CASEY 01 i I Thomas E. Casey i Attorney at Lew i 12854 Cambridge tone IMound, Minnesota 66364 • (912)472.1099 Fax;(612)472-4771 I/ May 10, 2000 ' Mr. Michaux Leek i 11 community Development Director City of snakopoR 129 Holmes Street South Y3$ ME ONLY Shakopee, MN 55379 ' (612) 445-6718 11 RE: Comments to Draft Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review Valley Green corporate. center, Shakopee, XJ II i Dear .Kr. Leek, r ' • In behalf of my client, Shakopee Environmental Protection Association, I wish to thank -you for extending thea opportunity to submit coMMente :regarding the draft AUAR for IIthe valley Green Corpvrate. Center Until May 10, 20Q0, Pursuant to Minnesota Rule 4410.3610, Subpart 5.$, x' submit the following specific ooiments and recommendations II concerning the AUAR pertai ing .to; ". . . the accuracy completeness contained in the potential draft anal sisand impacts that warrant further analysis, further information that may be required in order to secure permits for specificII • projects in the future, an mitigation measures or procedures • necessary to prevent significant environmental effects within the area when actual development occurs. " IPlease note: the numbering; of my comments corresponds to the question number in the AMR. 11 6. Give a complete description of the proposed p oj out and If ancillary facilities .: . gmpbasieca co�estructionand d operation methods and filatures that Viii clause physical manipulation of the enVironeent or produce wastes. II Indicate the timing and duratioa'of construction activities. 6A The AUAR states that the project is inte4ded " I stimulate a balance of economic development, - • • to community values, ;end the conservation o4 natural resources.u However, there is no substan'ti.ation of this purported "balance" to conserve natural 1 resources. The ivironmentai Quality Hoard' s F E . c • t f • Alp' 1L_ vu 1 n i t 1 •Gu DVL I UN Oc imiYmt 1NL FAX NU. Ub28908U6b P. 03 II MAY-j2-2000 09:39 • n5:10;00 15:20 FAX 1 952 472 4i"! THOMAS E. CASEY 612 445 6718 P.03/1 02 IIMr. Michael Leek 05/10/2000 IIpublication, SAWIeuidQlia (February, 2000) states, "This is the single most important item in the EAW, and care should be taken to ensure that .it ie completed thoroughly and accurately.„ (See page 60 il 6B The AUAR states that potable water will be provided i by extension of the water system. The problem of accessible drinking water needs to be addressed. (See also questio] 13,) j 6C See comment to parparagraph 17 regarding storm water. I/ [Note: the buffer zone should be delineated and the ineffectiveness Of stbrmwater treatment should be made clear. ) II7. Project Magnitude Data. It is very important to describe each planned use in 4 detail because the impacts of particular uses may vary II widely. For exataple,* a light industrial area may have 1 substantially more noise impacts than an office building. . II Also, there is not avorse case scenario that is fully i described for all aspectst of the project. 8, Permits and APpxovale Required. 11 8A Tmy.Boar d s BAW Geidelis (page7) states, "Amy public funding or support must now be I listed, including Tax Increment Financing, public infrastructure constructed to assist the pro ect bond guarantees, and other forms of public assist The 1999 Business Subsidies Law requires governmental I entities that provide sUbsidi.es to private businesses to I ' make specific findings justifying the Subsid?r. Minn. Stat. 116.7.993 ?- .995.) (See • 11 8B The AUAR should either include all public funding or business subsidies Ai include a statement that there will be no public funding or business subsidies. . I 11 It is also unclear what MASA expaneien is netided, if any. Any approved MSA expansion which benefits the projuot should be described in the AUAR. Documents should be attached to the AUR regarding this issue. 11 8C Figure 10-18 shows a po action of CSAR 16 vacated. The i AUAR should state that is not yet vacated and the i entities who must grant approval. II 9. Land One. Degexjbe anrraht and recent past land use and development on the site . ... Identify any potential. I , env3.roomentai hasard ;due to pant lead uses, such as soil I I ..2. t i 1 i 1 MAY-12-00 FRI 11 :20 BOLTON & MENK, INC FAX NO. 9528908065 P. 04 lij MAY-12-2000 09:39 n5:10:00 15:2o FAX I P52 472 4771612 44$ 671e P.04/14 THOMAS E. CASEY Gj 03 1 t f Mr. Michaol Leek ' . 05/10/2000 . • I Centaminatfon . . . ; ' The AUAR states that a summa of uses ia contained in section 2F of the report. 1agowever, it is II ! not stated that the site dentained over 50 acres of woods, which were ciearcut without an EAW. ! The AUAR states II the Minnesota PollutionpControl Agency.audit was conductedrpby should be include in the AUAR for ubc review. i I10. Cover types. The Environmental Quality Board, EAW o ' ttlineji states that acreage estimates before and after (page 8) I development activities should also be included_ r 11. Fish, Wildlife, and iiCoingically Qeneitiv'e ResQuraea. a- Describe fish and wildlife � el resources on or near the sits and discus /2 they would be affected by the pro4eat. Deaari a any measures to be taken to 1ninzaisse or avoid adverse impaata. I I 11A Unfortunatel most ty, the developer clearcut and leveled most to theproperty before anyone had an adequate IIj fully inventory the project site. 11BThe AUAR states that there are no fishery I inventories recorded within the project boundaries and implies that the fish cannot be stocked due to I ..winter kill, In Pact, there appears to ba a viable bass fishery in Dean take. (See David czaja letter, 5/7/00, attached as Exhibit 1. ) Sunfish are aliso 11 i reported in the lake. (See Heidi Graf letter, . /S/off, attached as Exhibit 2. ) 4 11C In spite of my clients best atte Ithat there has been no adequateyear-round,mptsit is obvious professional survey of fish and ildlifersources for the subject pro "A thorough biological surd yQhasAnever robeenit� that II performed for the; pro j.ect site." (See • und, professional,Therefore, a year*ra , Pigg g• 1 survey should a onall, biological rendered for the project Bite.` I11D Mitigation measures would depend on the results of the biological survey. certainly, large buffer zones and restoration of Dean Lake riparian hob tat will be necessary;to enable the return II described by Heidi Graf. (See EXhibit of the a fie. Fish and Wildlife !Sexvioe and other 2.) The u.s. agencies should be consulted or proper . widths and habitat restoration. • ` t: Ij • II ' MAY-12-00 FRI 11 :21 BOLTON & MENK, INC FAX NO. 9528908065 P. 05 I MFaY-12-2009 09:40 612 445 6718 P.05/11 (15,'10 q4 15:20 FAX 1 952 472 477/ • THOMAS E. CASEY 01,0 4 Kr. Michael Leek os/10/2000 I 11D The AVAR also mentions the restoration if a 1.2 acre f wetland. The AUAR should include the restoration Iplan for public review and .comment. 11E The project site has already disturbed the wetlands_ . of Dean Lake, aeevidenced by the high percentage of II cattails (over 50%) . ' [see Appendix H, which states that mixed emergent marshes have lees than 50$ cattail vegetation cover, ] 11 b. Are there any state.-listed, threatened, or special concern epooias; i rare. plant communities; . . . other • rare habitat; or' other sensitive eco1ogioel • resources on or near the eito? I11FThe AUAR unwisely relies on a DNR data base which is •• nct based on a thorough on-site biological inventory_ The AJAR alga stators that none of the ` II flora and fauna on the AUAR's species list has been spotted on the subject property. (See attached Exhibit 2 for contrary evidence.) However, the • ADA".. does not contain. any information pertaining to 11 the effvzt undertaken to spot any state-listed species_ 11G In other words, the AUAitls conclusions are based on II a perfunctory analysis. once again, I request in behalf of my client that a thorough (4 Beason) on-cite professional biological survey be undertaken. b. (continued) Deacribe measures to be taken to avoid adverse impacts: i • 1 . II The measures are, inadegustely described.. • Z2. pttysioal =apscts on Water'Reeouroes, Will the project involve the physiesl;or hydrologic niteratiln . . . of any a surface water? . . , tf yes, identify the . . . proposed mitigation meaeuree to minimise impacts. 12A The AJAR states that•two Wetlands will be felled. The 11 Wetland conservation Aot requires sequencing, with the first priority being: avoidance of any wetland impact. The AUAR should explain the sequencing analsis in detail_I . 12B ' A detailed inventoryof affected species should also be included in the AUR Native species that are removed • or affected should also be included in Tabll 12-2. . .I/ 12C zt appears that the replaamment wetland sloes are too , steep. How does the;proposed grade compare ** optimum I wetland slopes that are recommended by scientific • • -4- F 1 MAY-12-00 FRI 11 :22 BOLTON & MENK, INC FAX NO, 9528908065 P. 06 I I`1AY-12-2000 09:41 612 445 6716 P.96'1 0511040 3..5:2+7 FAX 1 952 472 4771 ?HOW F. CASEY 1 0S . Mr. Michael Leek 05/10/2000 - ' authorities? (Note: The city of Shakopee grading standards may not be :biologically correct. ). II 12 D The site has alreadybeen graded for stormwater and wetland replacement. This is premature. Note: Figure 6--1 indicates that the replaceient wetland 11 is a stormwater pond. Figure 12-1 shows it as a replacement wetland. iThe replacement wetland is too close to the road and as susceptible to road runoff (salts, etc.) . If the present wetlands cannot be I protected, then the replacement wetland must be properly buffered. II12 E Stormwater retention pond are not 100$ efficient. Studies should be cited t:3 in if..fate the efficiency of • stormwater treatment eystet s to protect water quality. • II 12F Moreover, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's publication, Proteoting Water Qualj,ty i ujan Areas (1991) , is due for revision. According to my 5/0/00 telephone conversation With Mr. Lou Flynn of the XPCA (651-2966675) , a publication entitled Stormwater smPs II will be out on the web in about 1 week and available for publication in several weeks. This manual should be consulted for up-to-date stormwater management. The project should conform to thus : new BMPs or other more II s ringent BMPs required by the Lower Minnesota River watershed District. ; t • I 12 C My clients inform melthata "Dean Lake Outlet" is planned to regulate the lake level, in pert1t0 accommodate the development. This is not mentioned in the AUAR. (See Def;Lake Outlet Study, September 1, 1999, prepared by WSB and Associates. ] 1 1 13. Water Use. • I 13B b. Will the projeot require au appropriation of ground or Surface Water : (ina].u4ing devatering)? The AUAR fails to mention that stormwat4r ponds will need to be dewatered. : i 13C e• Will the pxojeat require oonneotion to a public water supply? My clients inform :me that there is no record that a IMSA expansion was approved by the Metropolitan II Council in September, 1999. (If recordsido exist, they should be made a part of the AUAR.) Therefore, it appears that the City of Shakopee will, not have the ability to supply water in a sufficient amount. II The AUAR also inadequately describes other water 1 FIH T-1 e-UU r K 1 11 ;LJ BOLTON & MENK, 1 NU FAX NO. 9528908065 P. 07 I MRY-12-2ggg 09'41 051000 15:20612 445 6718 P.e7i1 FAX 1 852 472 4771 1H01,Gt5 E:• t�ASEI' I08 Mr. Michael Leek os/2o/2000 • • II supply issues. For example, high nitrate levels in current water wells and the DNR's reluctance to grant a water appropriate permit application need to be fully disclosed in the AUAR. I 13D 'i'he LAW Gu del' ;pag4a 9) state that the wells . should be identifi. c. c water quality of each well ' should be F j t describes �r°. the AUAR. I 1 1 1414 . Water-related Land Ode xanagement Districts. Does any part of the project 'site involve a ehdrvland seining 1 district . . ? If poi* identify the district and disOUns the compatibility of the projloot with the land use restrictions of the district. I The AUAR fails to supply any 1 facts to support the conclusion that a 75-root "no impact tone" and a 150 -foot "building setback" are sufficient to protect , Dean Lake's water quality and its animal populations. II The herpetological literature should be searched to determine which species need wider buffer zones; my recollection is that: there are many. .$. Water outface use. Will tins or type or watercraft on any waterrcbody?agiftyyesntimbor indicate the current .a,od projected watercraft usage and disouos any potential overorowdizzg or conflicts with I other users or fish and vildlife r'e*Ouroes. 15A The AR states that;AMRthe project site does not contain i any recreational water bodies and that Dean Lake ". . . 1 not suitable for recreational purposps_Tf is 15B Dean Lake la used for certain recreational ptz The proposed ihtensity of. the project will. dissturbsthe I recreational enjoyment of people who use Dean Lake for fishing, bird watching, quiet solitude, contemplation and study of nature, ; and other activities. These I activities can be undertaken in canoes or shallow draft boats. 15C Furthermore, Dean Lake's natural. history amenities will ' I be adversely impacted by the noise, lights, and other activities on the project site. f 17. Erosion and Sedimentation. 17AContrary to the statement in the AUAR the ac soil to be. moved should be given. reagens of •I 17B Stozmwater ponds should be designed to the most current standard. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's manual, 5 t•o $Prwwater e a should be used if sor�aorws new • pond standards are more stringent. ater I . • -6- i I I • I 1 rfHY-1 C-UU H 111 :23 BOLTON & MENK, INC FAX NO. 9528908065 P. 08 I MAY-12-2000 09:42 ' 'h . 1fl�qi1 15:20 FAX 1 052 472 4771612 445 6716 P.06,1 • THOMAS E. CASEY 'e 07 • IMr. Michael Leek 05/10/2000 . i8. water Quality - Surface Water Runoff. • a. compare the quantity and quality of the site runoff II j before and after the projeet. neserib* the methods used to manage and treat the runoff. 1 II 18A The AUAR admits that, "Land development generally increases the quantities of nutrients, sediments, and other pollutants, carried away from the site by runoff. " II18B It is unclear from the AUAR how much hardcover will be on the project site but it is certainly expected to be substantial. 'Thema GULdel.i.nes (p. 10) state a. . . if significant increase in .runoff . . . I/ ' would result, a more detailed and quantitative assessment would be necessary to adequately characterize impacts." The ALTAR fails to quantify IIthe amount of Off-site impacts, This must be done. 18C It is also unclear when the stormwatei treatment, system will be !installed and functioning as it II compares to the development schedule_ : It should be clarified that :the stormeater treatment be installed and functioning prior to any substantial increase in hardcover, II18D The AUAR states that the City's stormifater plan will follow the 1989 BMPs enacted by the MICA. As stated earlier, the }PCA will publish revised il BMps in a few Weeks: The Shakopee Stormwater Management Plan should be modified, if necessary, to conform to the MPGA's revised BMP Marivai. i •I b. Identify the routes and receiving eater bodies for runoff fram the :site. Estimate the impact of the runoff an the quality of the receiving/eaters, 1 18E The EAW Guidelines (p. 10) state, ". . , there noticeable impairment may occur, howev r, more quantitative assessment methods should a employed, t and predictians ;should be made about w ether any water quality standards will be violet d." The AUAR tails to quantity the amount of off-side pollution impacts. This must be done, especiall because the Minnesota River `is one of the most pol ted rivers in Minnesota and contributes a large s are to oxygen depletion in the Gulf of mexioo. i .i 18F The AUAR states; "Special care will be taken to 1 II prevent direct discharge into Deans Lake itself." It is unclear what `is this "special care."4 1 • • I t I 1 MAY-12-00 FRI 11 :24 BOLTON & MENK, INC FAX Na 9528908065 P. 09 II MAY-12-20000 09:4.5 612 445 6719 P.09/1 . 05/1(.1..00 15:20 FAX l 952 472 4711 • TRONAS E. CASEY • S 08 Mr. Michael reek 05/10/2000 . • I19. Water Quality - Waste Waters. :s, Describe sources, quentitico, and ceapositioe I (except for normal domestic sewage) of all eanitary and indestrial wastewaters produced or treated at the site. i IIThe EAw g. defines (page 10) state, "for any project II that generates wastewater, details of the sources, 1 composition and alcount need to be given . . . " The I AUAP admits that ". . . the anticipated Volumes of 1 11 generated waste are not known at this time. " Therefore, the AUAR is inadequate. These facts must i be known. i • II20. droumdyater -- Potential for contamination. b. cr Des ibe any site is:s3arde to grouadl►ater and sl.so identify them on! the mite map: . . ." II20A The ATJAR states that the water table is shallow (5-lo feet) . Therefore, it is susceptible to contamination. It is very important to identify II what toxic or hazardous materials are proposed on the site in advance to design adequate mitigation. measures. The AUAR fails to consider toxic or hazardous materials used on site after construction 11 is completed_ This must be done. c. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used II or present on the project site and identify *assure to be used to prevent them from contaminating ground water. See comment to 2i0.b. above. 22. Traffic. II There is no documentation that the City of Shakopee and Scott County have agreed on the extension of 17th Avenue. If no agreeMent has been made, then the traffic analysis in this section should be based on the worst 1 case scenario - no extension of 17th AVenue. 23. Vehicle-related air `emissions. provide an estimate of the effect of the project!a trafzic generation, on air II quality, including carbon monoxide .levels . . . The AUAR •does not take into consideration that motor II vehicles have been responsible for .s /ergo share of air pollution in the Twin City area, especially benzine, formaldehyde, 1,3 - butadiene, and .aerclein. Exposure to these chemicals can increase the risk of canner and other health problems. (See Minnesota Pollution Control • I i 11 MAY-12-00 FRI 11 :25 BOLTON & MENK, INC FAX NO. 9528908065 P. 10 II 11PY-12-2900 09:43 612 445 6718 P.10/1 • 05 .10%00 15:20 FAX 1 862 472 4771 ' THOMAS E. CASEY • roe Mr. Michael Leek 05/10/2000 Agency, "Staff Paper' on Air Toxics" (November, 1999) . The affect of traffic generation on air quality should II be taken into consideration, consistent with the MPCA report. 26. Sensitive Resources. , Are any of the following resources Ion or in proximity to the site: 26A a_ archaeological, hiatorioal, or architedtual resources. 1 My clients recommend that a Phase 1 Archaeological Survey be accomplished for the project site far the following reasons; IIi (1) The Minnesota Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) found that ". . . there is a good II probability that unreported archaeological properties may be present . . ." in the project area. (Appendix D, page 1.) The Valley Green corporate Center is very close to the I Southbridge Development. (2) The seuthb .idge Phase Archaeological Survey stated that there are ". . . several recorded sites within one mile of the proj6ct area." 1 (See Appendix D, page 7. ) I Notes The Phase i. Archaeological Surveyrehould be undertaken pursuant to the Minnesota State II Historic Preservation Offices Guidelines E� ArchaooloQical Proiects j Kinney ta. The revised guidelines are scheduled to be released in early June, 2000. (Fir 5/8/00 II telephone conversation with Scott •Anfjnson. SHP0. ) scenic views. f Ia. .T The AUAR does not identify any scenic views. However, the yoj gR eJince (page 13) tate that 1 scenic views ofilocal interest can be Considered. The scenic view ;on CSAH 16 (ovsrlookinci Dean Lake) will be greatly :impacted by the proposed development. I Ti 27. Will the project create adverse visual impacts? (Examples include: glare from intense lights . . . ) ` I II The AUAR is vague about how perceived adverge visual impacts will be n.. . *mitigated somewhat witli the location of buildings and required landscaping u This should be clarified. . II • -9- 4 1 t i 1 um Ic-uu Nu i i i .co tiULTUN & NENK, 1 NC FAX NO. 9528908065 I MAY-12-2000 179:44P. 11 n5/10;o0 16:20 FAX 1 962 472 4771612 445 6716 • THOMAS CASEZ p.11./1 Io • I Mr. Michael Leek os/10/2voo I 2s, Compatibilitywith • ado tai pl+�ns. I9 tb* Project subject to an p local comprehensive pian or cep other applicable land use, water, ori resouro• management plan of a local, regional, state, or; tederal agency? • II 28AThe AUAR does not state that the Cityof proposed comprehensive plan has been eviewedoand s Iapproved by the Metropolitan Council. This should be verified. 28A moth the 1995 compr9hensive Plan and the Comprehensive Plan mpeak, of Dean Lake's' draftce1999b Ito susceptibility pollution and contain8 Warnings about development and its efEecte. The Land Use section of bo p "roost plentiful stands are those of oak daspenstate, scattered north of Dean Lake toward I land tree policy point to. regulationsPoncclearscutt ng and selectinga priate uses which intensive orcreatefdenee development apatternsre not a+IIi 'd Mark McQuillan►s 1993 Nature Center Feasibility Study describes abundant Wildlife and tree stands. 28B The draft 1959 Comprehensive Plan states that 100 acres of park land 'ill be needed in the Dean Lake area. At least one piece is to be a "cominunit 50 acres) . Lakeshora; land. west and north of~DeanrLake I will fit the criteria for a Passive Recreativna/ Area outlined in the plan. The proposed project is inconsistent with the language I/ Stated above. 30. Related Developments; cumulative xmpaete IIThe cumulative ,impacts of other developments, such as the SoUtebridge deve,),opment, have not been analyzed in this AUAR. II 31. Outer Potential 8rrvii`onmeatal Impacts. • contrary to the AUAR'e assertion, my client, the II Shakopee Environmental Protection Association, feels that its members have not been an integral part Of the AUAR report. My client looks forward to hearing how this can be remedied. 1 As T have elaborated above, thereare potential imp II need further analysis and mitigation ztteasure r that. ares that necessary to prevent significant environmental impacts. A proressi.onal survey of flora and fauna should be I during all times of the year to describe al the tual � of natural -10-- 1 11 MAY-12-UU hR1 11 :26 BOLTON & NENK, INC FAX NO. 9528908065 P. 12 I MAY-12-20M 09:44 612 445 6718 P.12/14 n5,10-'00 15:21 F.1X 1 932 472 4771 • THOMAS E. CASEY" 0!1 Mr. Michael Leek 05/20/2000 Iresources that could be affected by the project. Moreover, compensatory mitigation should be required because IIof the extensive grading that was done prior to the AVAR. Pursuant to Rule 4410.3610, subpart 5.D, please send a revised AUAR document and:Mitigation Plan to the enclosed II address. Thank you again for your kind attention in this regard. IResp ct ul u witted, II (4 Thomas E. Casey • Attorney at Law ' • 1 TFC:rf • • cc: Shakopee Environments. Prnteo•tfon Association I file Enclosures: Exhibit 1 - 5/7/on litter from David Czaja Exhibit 2 -- 5/5/00 letter from Heidi Graf • . • 1 • • H-11- I I 1 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED I Commentor Thomas E. Casey, Shakopee Environmental Protection Association IComment Date May 10,2000 I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 6A: In the opinion of AUAR,VGBP will contribute to diverse business and commercial enterprises,which I may stimulate employment,housing and growth in tax base. It will be the responsibility of individual lot owners to propose specific building plans to finally establish the dividing line between `natural' and `developed' areas. Those details are beyond the scope of this AUAR and could require an EAW in their own right. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 6B: Potable water treatment and distribution is the responsibility of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission with approvals as required by both regional(The Metropolitan Council)and state I (Department of Health)authorities. Specific questions regarding this subject should be directed toward those agencies, since this subject is beyond the scope of this AUAR. I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 6C: I Please refer to the response in Item 17. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 7: It will be the responsibility of individual lot owners to propose specific building plans and activities for each developed lot. Those details are beyond the scope of this AUAR. I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 8A: INo direct public funding, including Tax Increment Financing,public infrastructure constructed to assist the project,bond guarantees, and other forms of public assistance is involved in this project. ISome public monies would be involved if and when the City and/or County construct the improvements associated with realigning CSAH 16 and improving CSAH 83.The City and County would pay their I portions of the cost with the remainder being borne by the benefitted property owners,of which it appears the VGBP will be the primary party. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 8B: The City has indicated that the MUSA extension was approved in September, 1999. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-20 1 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED I FAUAR Response to Paragraph 8C: I >>>> Correct. The easement rights,both prescriptive and formally granted,will have to be vacated by the appropriate agencies. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 9: IDifferent factors were involved in the initial grading of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. 9. Tree Removal: The VGCC site was specifically identified in the Oak wilt suppression program53 Ias a"Large Oak Wilt Infection Center within Shakopee". As such,certain mitigation measures were performed which removed a portion of the trees,however,the specific location of the trees removed was not clearly noted in the report graphics. I10. In addition, a portion of the trees were destroyed by storm damage in 1999.54 I It is unrealistic to fully include every report referenced in the AUAR in its entirety. Those documents are already public documents,authored by public agencies. Public review periods may have already passed for those documents. That is beyond the scope of this AUAR. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 10: I Revised and improved exhibits included in the FAUAR should assist the reviewer in discerning limits of cover type and the position of contours. In addition,the proposed project does not include the specific details of proposed structures,extents of parking areas or limits of vegetation. Therefore,no `before and Iafter' comparison is possible until proposals are made to improve individual parcels. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 11A Different factors were involved in the initial grading of the Valley Green Corporate Center site. I1. Tree Removal: The VGCC site was specifically identified in the Oak wilt suppression program55 as a"Large Oak Wilt Infection Center within Shakopee". As such,certain I mitigation measures were performed which removed a portion of the trees,however,the specific location of the trees removed was not clearly noted in the report graphics. 1 53 Kunde Co.,Inc.;1999 City of Shakopee Oak Wilt Suppression Program; 1999. I54 Carlson,Steven J.,by telephone interview with Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,May 31,2000. 55 Kunde Co.,Inc.; 1999 City of Shakopee Oak Wilt Suppression Program; 1999. i City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-21 I Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED 2. In addition, a portion of the trees were destroyed by storm damage.56 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 11B: Although, individuals may have experienced satisfactory fishing in Dean's Lake,"... The low water level in Dean's Lake,coupled with the significant natural accumulation of organic sediment would likely cause winter kill of fish,except for the possible survival of rough fish that are tolerant to very low disolved oxygen levels."' The introduction of higher quality fish to Dean's Lake is primarily through overflow from Spring Lake,Prior Lake and/or Pike Lake through the overflow channel58 and in warmer winters,there may be some survival. Fish migration up from the Minnesota River may be prevented by a series of flow/erosion control wiers. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 11C: The Minnesota Rules which govern activities relating to conducting such a study clearly states,"Parts 6134.0100 to 6134.0400 do not address protection of habitat for species designated as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern,nor do they obligate anyone to survey lands for the presence of designated species."59 Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that a biological survey for common species would also NOT be required. >>>> FAUAR Response tp Paragraph 11D: The construction of the replacement wetlands was included in Phase 1 of the grading plan which was prepared by the owner's engineer,presented to the City for public review and comment, and eventually approved by the City. Subsequently,the stormwater ponds and replacement wetlands were constructed, seeding was completed and mitigation was performed. Therefore,their existence is a pre-existing condition to this AUAR. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 11E: This is a generality and may or not apply in any specific situation. In fact,multiple visits over a 10 year period conducted by Steve Carlson of STS conclude that,"Changes in vegetation in the Lake Basin have 1 56 Carlson,Steven J.,by telephone interview with Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,May 31,2000. 57 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,letter to the City of Shakopee,April 24,2000,page 2. ' 58 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,June 2,2000,page 3. 59 Minnesota Rules Section 6134.0150 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 3-22 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. 1 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED not been observed."60 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 11F: Discussion of the accuracy of the DNR database is more appropriately addressed to the DNR and beyond the scope of this AUAR. As stated previously,no biological survey or inventory is required under State statute. 1 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 11G: The Minnesota Rules which govern activities relating to conducting such a study clearly states,"Parts 6134.0100 to 6134.0400 do not address protection of habitat for species designated as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern,nor do they obligate anyone to survey lands for the presence of designated species."61 >>>> FAUAR Response 12A: These two wetlands have already been removed and replaced in accordance with all local, State and Federal regulations. I >>>> FAUAR Response in Paragraph 12B: The Minnesota Rules which govern activities relating to species of special concern states that,"Species designated as species of special concern are not protected by Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895 or r rules adopted under that section Parts 6134.0100 to 6134.0400 do not address protection of habitat for species designated as endangered,threatened, or species of special concern,nor do they obligate anyone to survey lands for the presence of designated species."62 >>>> FAUAR Response in Paragraph 12C: The grading of the site, including wetland slopes,apparently met the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan. Modifications to the City's grading standards are beyond the scope of this AUAR, however,you may wish to approach the City directly on this subject. I 60 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,June 2,2000,page 3. 61 Minnesota Rules Section 6134.0150 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. 62 Minnesota Rules Section 6134.0150 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-23 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I i IRESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 12D: These Figures have been replace or deleted with a more clearly depicted Figures 10-2 and 10-3. I Confusion between the previous figures was possibly caused by the proximity of the stormwater pond to the replacement wetland. I Since the street will be curb and gutter,drainage from salt usage will follow the routing of stormwater flow to the detention ponds and not overland to the wetland. See the new Figure 18-3. I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 12 E: I The design and construction of the detention basins complies with accepted practices. Review and integration of information regarding the efficiency of stormwater detention ponds and other BMP's is the responsibility of those agencies adopting the BMP's as a part of the adoption process and is beyond the scope of this AUAR. 111 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 12F: IThe storm water ponds were constructed to meet all codes and regulations in force at the time of requested approval and construction. It is unrealistic for anyone to be required to meet all proposed laws I and regulations.Also,according to the individual responsible for the new MPCA BMP Manual, it is not available as of June 8,2000 and they are already aware of changes that must be made in future editions I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 12G: This potential is beyond the scope of this AUAR and questions/comments should be directed to the Iappropriate agency. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 13B: Question 13 - Water Use is directed toward the supply and use of potable water. However,the I stormwater ponds shall dewater through the natural methods of evaporation and infiltration. Flows which exceed the capacity of the ponds will take the overflow routing included in the pond design and approved by the City of Shakopee. I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 13C: P I The Metropolitan Council had the opportunity to object to the statements in the DAUAR which included that the VGBP received MUSA extension approval in September, 1999. They made no objection to that statement. IPotable water treatment and distribution for the area included in this AUAR is the responsibility of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission and the Department of Health with review authority of the I City of Shakopee, Minnesota-TI 1.20132 Page 3-24 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED Metropolitan Council. Specific questions regarding this subject should be directed toward these agencies, since it is beyond the scope of this AUAR. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 13D: The AUAR clearly states that,"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." I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 14: The current project does not include any request for building construction.Therefore,an evaluation of the 300 foot setback rule is premature,at this time. Further,the provisions of the City Shoreland zoning ordinance state,"... or, if located on lots or parcels with public waters frontage,must either be set back double the normal ordinary high water level setback [sic-twice 150 feet] or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography,assuming summer, leaf-on conditions."63 Therefore,the building designer would have the option of constructing appropriate screening rather than meeting the 300 foot setback. The request for herpetological research to study the buffer requirements of every species is beyond the scope of this AUAR. 1 >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraphs 15A, 15B and 15C: Agreed,Dean's Lake has been utilized for more passive recreational purposes by the public for years. No legal access to Dean's Lake has been denied or is proposed as a part of this project The public will have the same legal access they have previously enjoyed. (Please review the recommended Mitigation Plan in Section 4 of this FAUAR.) The current project is in compliance with City codes regarding the 'no impact zone' as evidenced by the City's approval of the grading plan and detailed building plans must comply with the City's setback and screening requirements. These requisites assure that the public's use of Dean's Lake is not inhibited. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraphs 17A& 17 B: The storm water ponds were constructed to meet all codes and regulations in force at the time of requested approval and construction. It is unrealistic for anyone to be required to meet all proposed laws and regulations.Also,according to the individual responsible for the new MPCA BMP Manual, it is not I 63 City of Shakopee,Chapter 11-Zoning Ordinance,§ 11.54,Subd.5,B, 1,d,page 1292. City of Shakopee,Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-25 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I I • I 1 I I IRESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED 111 Iavailable as of June 8,2000 and they are already aware of changes that must be made in future editions.` Actual grading of the portion of the site south of CSAR 16 will be completed with its relocation. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18A: Although,the statement quoted is generally accurate for developing raw land, it is less accurate when taking existing agricultural land out of service and replacing it with this proposed land use. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18B: The current proposed development does not include specific building design,parking area plans or activities to be conducted on site.. The next step will occur when individual sites are sold. Then building designers and owners will present their proposals for improvement and the extent of hardcover can be determined. I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18C: The"schedule"as presented in the DAUAR has been clarified in the Introduction of this FAUAR. The I Istormwater detention basins have already been constructed and the storm sewers will be completed prior to significant increases in hard cover. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18D: Compliance with proposed or envisioned codes and regulations is impossible for any individual. The MPCA acknowledges that when the new version is available,they already have proposed changes to it as well. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18E: This is beyond the scope of this AUAR. I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 18 F: The"special care" involves the routing of stormwater runoff to the series of detention basins which meet NURP standards prior to final release. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 20A: 64 Flynn,Lou,MPCA,by phone interview with Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,June 8,2000. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-26 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED The current proposed development does not include specific building design,parking area plans or activities to be conducted on site.. The next step will occur when individual sites are sold,Then building designers and owners will present their proposals for improvements. That would be the appropriate time for assessment of potential hazardous material impacts. »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 22: The City's transportation consultant indicated that the future extension of 17th Avenue was included in the traffic impact study and has the following response: "The extension of 17th Avenue is included in the City's transportation plan. Should Valley Green Corporation Center,or another development, occur in this area, 17th Avenue would be proposed to be extended. This roadway is an important aspect of the City's(and County's)transportation system, providing east-west circulation south of TH 169. Seventeenth Avenue is currently planned as a city street and the City would be responsible for it's extension. However,discussions on jurisdiction of 17th Avenue are in progress between the City and the County." >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 23: An Indirect Source Permit(ISP)to cover vehicular air emissions, including carbon monoxide(CO), associated with the project is recommended to be required in Goal 9 of the Proposed Mitigation Plan in Section 4. An evaluation of air toxics is not required in the ISP application,however, in addition to the MPCA staff paper mentioned, a summary of this report and more information on air toxics from mobile sources can be found on the MPCA web site(www.pca.mn.state.us). >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 26A: Subsequent to the Draft AUAR, archaeological resources were assessed and reported by the 106 Group LTD in their Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the development. The summary reports the following: "The Phase 1 survey identified no archaeological sites within the Valley Green Corporate Center project area,and and indicates that there is little probability that the project area contains unidentified archaeological resources of historical significance. The 106 Group therefore recommends that the project warrants no further archaeological investigation."65 »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 27: The current proposed development does not include specific building design or parking area plans. The next step will occur when individual sites are sold then building designers and owners will present their proposals for improvements. That would be the appropriate time for visual impacts, setbacks and necessary screening to be addressed. I 65 Abel,Elizabeth J.,The 106 Group Ltd,Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Valley Green Corporate Center,April,2000,page 11. City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 3-27 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 28A : The adopted draft of the City's 1999/2000 Comprehensive Plan is awaiting final review by some agencies. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 28B: A significant park area already exists on the northeast side of Dean's Lake as shown on Figure 26c-1 in Section 2 of this FAUAR.Additionally,the Preliminary Plat does include the proposed dedication of an approximately 75 acres of park adjacent to Dean's Lake,as shown on FIGURE 5-2. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 30: It is unreasonable for the AUAR to address every possibility of"What might be developed in the area?" unless all potential developers came forth with their plans.Further, achieving any specificity of the cumulative impacts using such speculation would be impossible. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 31: As evidenced by the extensive response by you on behalf of your clients,and the clear indications that there has been sufficient time for you and them to discuss the issues, it appears that the group has participated in the way the Statutes seem to have envisioned. I I I i I I I City of Shakopee,Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-28 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. Mt-a-M-0eee 12:21 612 445 6718 P.04/19 Shakopee Mdewakanton OFFICERS Stanley R.Crooks Sioux Community Chairman Glynn A.Crooks a Vice Chairmen 2330 SIOUX TRAIL NW•PRIOR LAKE.MINNESOTA 55372 tori K Crowchlld TRIBAL OFFICE:612.445.5900 • FAX:612'445-5906 sec rsisry/lreasuror May 3,2000 Mr. Michael Leek Community Development Director City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: AUAR Comments Dear Mr. Leek: Attached are comments prepared by tribal staff on the AUAR prepared for the Valley Green Corporate Center development north of CSAI-1 16 and adjacent to the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community's (SMSC)property. The AUAR appears incomplete in several areas. Further attention should be paid to cumulative transportation impacts, ecological resources and archeological resources. It is unfortunate that the site was graded prior to initiation of the AUAR. The grading seriously compromised the AUAR studies. Sincerely, Stanley R. Crooks Chairman I I I I I NAY-05-2000 12:21 612 445 6718 P.05/19 I - I I I AU AR Comments Provided by the Shakopee Sioux Community Tribal Staff For Valley Green Corporate Center City of Shakopee April 28, 2000 I 1 I I I I I I 1 1 MAY-05-2000 12:22 612 445 6718 P.08/19 References Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,6/99. Draft-Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas- Best Management Practices for Minnesota iMcCullah,John. 1999. Erosion Draw 3.0 I I I I I I i I 1 I I I I MPY-b5-2000 12:21 612 445 6718 P.06/19 - /0--• 1. General Comments The AUAR appears to rely heavily on other source documents, many of which are not specific to the project area. It also fails to include some impacts arising from other development planned or possible in the immediate area. This failure reduces the apparent cumulative impacts. The fact that the grading was allowed prior to the AUAR drastically inhibits the ability to evaluate ecological and archeological resources. Although this cannot be remedied some type of compensatory mitigation should he considered. The wildlife and plant communities would clearly benefit from any increase in buffer size and From providing natural area corridors within the development. 11- 2. Archeological Resources The AUAR refers to the Southbridge archeological survey as its basis for the no impact determination. This survey did not specifically refer to the project site but was located to the cast. The Southbridge survey did,however, indicate that there is a fair probability of unreported archeological properties or sites in the area. As it stands, the AUAR is insufficient in this area, An additional survey specifically related to the project area should be completed. If this is donc at a later date it should be published for comment prior to any adoption of the AUAR as a final document. Given the location of trails running through this area as shown on the Trygg maps,the presence of a fresh water body and the pre-contact ecotype of the land in the area,there is a possibility of finding artifacts or other archeological materials. This survey should have been required and completed prior to any grading. 3• Ecologically Sensitive Resources It appears that no actual survey of species was conducted in the project area. Past surveys of nearby areas indicate that Qenothera Rhombipetaia is present in the area east of Deans Lake. The presence, or lack thereof, in the project area is impossible to determine since it was graded without any survey. No survey data was presented for the gopher snake in the project area. Without actual survey data it cannot be definitively determined if the ' species is present. • • Buffers Wildlife(MPCA, 6/99) For the protection of threatened,rare and endangered species the buffer limit should be 100 or more feet, For bird habitat preservation the buffer limit should be 50 or more feet. For protection from human encroachment the buffer limit should be 50 to 150 feet. I i I I IiHY-17 -eula J 612 445 6718 P.07/19 I5. Water Qualify l (‘ I5A Stormwater Management Depending on the vegetation, slope,density and type of adjacent land use and receiving water the buffer width around storm water management areas should be 25 or more feet (MPCA, 1999), 5B Water Courses To protect water courses the buffer length should be calculated in the following way: Buffer width in feet(m)—50+4*(%slope). If the water bodies arc considered sensitive these lengths may need to be increased If sediment can be kept out of the deliver systems, by maintaining buffer strips,then the sediment will not impact the fisheries or cause other water quality impacts. Source: John McCullah- CPESC; Guide to Small Roads; USDA Soil Conservation Service; Shasta County Erosion and Sediment Control Standards Design Manual. • 111 5C No Impact Zone See Section 14-The ordinance also calls for doubling the impact zone and building setback distances for non-water related uses,making the"no impact zone" 150' and the "building setback"300'. It is not clear why Valley Green is currently utilizing a 75' "no 11 impact zone"and a 150' "building setback." A buffer strip should follow the wetland edge. If the"no impact zone" is considered the buffer then is should rnorc closely follow the wetland boundary. The buffer strip should consist primarily of native grasses and sedges and little or no mowed grasses, The wetland buffers should be 50 to 150 feet in width, depending on the quality of the wetland. 6. Traffic Cumulative impacts Although the City need not consider all traffic impacts within its jurisdiction in the AUAR,it should consider those planned or projected that will directly impact traffic in the study area. Increased housing is planned,and being constructed, south of the project area along Valley View Road and Scott County Highway 83. Additional housing is being constructed west of the study area along CSAR 16. The Deans Lake Addition may result in additional traffic in this area as homeowners travel into the Shakopee retail areas. Increased traffic flow from the future development of the agricultural parcel south of CSAR 16 was not considered, I I : I \ . .9:: ...) 0....../ ).11 I I )1F\s„)../ ' )1,1! r ." ( ( is. 013 .. 1 ,i _ _ . _ . _ , . .1. 1 • , , .. .. . . . . , -' .,/! ' /0 \ *1- ) . c'-k„ ' .. *., c . , k iv 1 0 i s \ f ' '�i SE 60� +LVER . , - / / 1.T i1 r � CATION 500 0 I 0 =IMNMNM��1J. * . fit SCALE F' t I . . 1..eil rf j C I � lie) 1 1 t. � •�.'' 2 � lent 0/0T\stii Cli 3....:f.,,rt�r� r, 250 .E .:54;;'—'7:\ \ i ' 'I . ce,',2 /41,/,,,.:( --P-„, ‘,. (--,.,i, ,,),;!. : 0: ' \b....7, :.* ,..) ir ..,,,, I f... il , ' ) ( / i ,..-..\....,„ i...m........,,MI . d .i tis,r,+ • - t \ i flit ) Ili „--- .....,1 c)---)1, ;:\ .,.---- i a. \(\c,,, I 'pr.--\\\\c\*\,,, 4-‘......_„\B--"\::\..) N.N. c_ \_.1 CI Eci. . 0 \,. ' ke— _-\,.. ... 0 c; \\\,,,,,,X / 1 ..."'"..k • '', 41"1"m"—..._ '-i...„4. ( M ®OL'i'�ON $. M E N K, INC MIKE DO NAH U E I -,i, /111\ CONSULTING ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS CULVERT INSTALLATION - MANKATO, MN FAIRMONT, MN SLEEPY EYE, MN LOCATION MAP-SE 1/4 SECTION 14 T 109N R21 W I = BURNSVILLE, MN WILLMAR, MN AMES, IA UBERTY, MO MAY, 2000 FIGURE N0.1 I 1 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED Commentor Stanley R. Crooks, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Comment Date May 3,2000 I >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 1: It is unreasonable for the AUAR to address every possibility of"What might be developed in the area?" and unless other potential developers come forth with their plans,even specific projects cannot be included. STS consulting engineers provided wetland delineation and other environmental/ecological review for project planning purposes.This planning has resulted in selection of plant varieties conducive to the re- introduction of the Karner's blue butterfly, a federally endangered species and the possible extension of the range of the rhombic leaved evening primrose,a plant identified on the Minnesota"Special Concern" 111 species list.66 These are already being provided within the scope of the proposed project. Archaeological resources were assessed and reported by the 106 Group LTD(consulting archeologist)in their Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the development. The summary reports the following: "The Phase 1 survey identified no archaeological sites within the Valley Green Corporate Center project area, and and indicates that there is little probability that the project area contains unidentified archaeological resources of historical significance. The 106 Group therefore recommends that the project warrants no further archaeological investigation."67 »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 3: No,the site was not explicitly surveyed for the presence of the gopher snake,however,extensive wetland delineation surveys over a 10 year period and the associated more casual examination of the adjacent farmlands never yielded any observations of gopher snakes.68 In fact,as stated in the AUAR,the gopher snake prefers dry sandy soils and since this site is either actively farmed or wetland, it would not seem to be an environment that would attract the gopher snake. In addition,the Minnesota Rules which govern activities relating to species of special concern states that, "Species designated as species of special concern are not protected by Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895 or rules adopted under that section Parts 6134.0100 to 6134.0400 do not address protection of habitat for species designated as endangered,threatened,or species of special concern,nor do they obligate anyone to survey lands for the presence of designated species."69 66 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,letter to City of Shakopee,April 24,2000,page 2. 67 Abel,Elizabeth J.,The 106 Group Ltd,Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Valley Green Corporate Center,April,2000,page 11. 68 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 1. 69 Minnesota Rules Section 6134.0150 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 3-29 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton& Menk,Inc. I RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 4: Extensive studies and reviews have been conducted by the DNR as part of the County Biological Survey and Woods End Landscaping,a specialist in native plant"rescue"and transplanting. The DNR report concluded that no rare species or Natural Plant Communities were identified on the Business Park site and "According to the review conducted by Mr.Nelson [sic- of Woods End Landscaping],the native plants were not rare enough to warrant heroic efforts to protect,..."70 The current"no impact"zone is established at 75 feet from the ordinary high water level (011W- 747 foot contour)which is within your requested buffer limit. >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 5C: A proposed grading plan was prepared for the developer through its engineer WSB and submitted to the City for its review and approval. The plan included a 75 foot"no impact"zone around the lake shoreline which appears to meet the City's Shoreland Ordinance for water related uses. The `nearby activities' which the plan included were the construction of storm water interception ponds which were apparently seen as `water related' by the City, since they approved the grading plan. It is recommended that all future site activities including building permit requests be specifically reviewed for compliance with all applicable regulations, including the Shoreland Ordinance. ' Water Quality >>>> FAUAR Response: All pond areas include wider seed buffers than requested. Water Courses »» FAUAR Response: Apparently,the Dean's Lake water body is not particularly sensitive as evidenced by 10 years of observations by STS."During the re-flagging of the wetland boundary, STS encountered remnants of flagging placed during previous delineations, suggesting that the wetland plant community had not changed enough to alter the jurisdictional boundary. Some trees had been impacted by Oak Wilt spread and storm damage,but alteration of the plant community was not observed." ' Q-22 70 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 2. 71 Carlson,Steven J.,STS Consultants,Ltd.,e-mail to Del Jackman,Bolton&Menk,Inc.,May 31,2000,page 3. City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 3-30 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I IRESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED >>>> FAUAR Response to Paragraph 2: I Subsequent to the Draft AUAR, archaeological resources were assessed and reported by the 106 Group LTD in their Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the development. The summary reports the following: "The Phase 1 survey identified no archaeological sites within the Valley Green Corporate Center project I area,and and indicates that there is little probability that the project area contains unidentified archaeological resources of historical significance. The 106 Group therefore recommends that the project warrants no further archaeological investigation."72 I »» FAUAR Response to Paragraph 6 : The authors of the site traffic study has indicated that"a general traffic growth rate or background traffic (1.5%per year)was assumed to account for additional traffic coming from these other potential development areas. Therefore the additional traffic growth from these areas was actually considered as part of the proposed AUAR area study." I I I I I I I I I 72 Abel,Elizabeth J.,The 106 Group Ltd,Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Valley Green Corporate 111 Center,April,2000,page 11. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 3-31 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. i 1 1 1 1 SECTION 4 1 Mitigation Plan 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 4- 1 1 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I IINTRODUCTION I This Mitigation Plan is submitted as a part of the Alternate Urban Area-wide Review(AUAR)process to provide reviewers, regulators,and prospective tenants with an understanding of the actions necessary to protect the environment and limit impacts by the proposed project. Many of the potential environmental Iimpacts within the project boundary are associated with the specific improvements,activities and operations of tenants who will choose to locate within Valley Green Business Park. Therefore,those Iimpacts cannot be precisely defined until the appropriate proposals are made. I The primary vehicles for mitigation are the effective use of existing codes, rules, and regulations together with the enforcement options which pertain thereto. These enforcement options include: • Execution of a Comprehensive Development Agreement Which May Include IPlanned Unit Development(PUD)Requirements • Enforcement of the Permitting Requirements of All Agencies I • Require Submission of Performance Bonds _ • Initiation of Civil Suits&Restraining Orders IThis recommended mitigation plan is divided into three levels: 1. Goals-This level defines broad concepts to be achieved. I2. Strategies- This level identifies basic philosophies which could help achieve the related goal. I 3. Actions-This level precisely lists key activities which may be employed to achieve the associated goal. 1 1 I I I I I City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 4-2 IValley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. GOAL 1 Fulfill and maintain the public's expectations for the character of the city as defined by numerous comprehensive plans,the zoning ordinance,etc. ' Protection Strategies: 1. Modifications to such expectations must be subject to appropriate review and approval by the ' governing agencies and authorities. These reviews may include public hearings and an opportunity for the public to comment. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, Scott County,various State and Federal agencies,and special districts. Action Required : Rigorous enforcement of amendment and variance procedures. 2. Execution of a Development Agreement between the City and the developer. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and the developer VGCC. 3. Execution of performance bonds to provide surety to the City that all necessary requirements are ' met. The amount should be as required by the Development Agreement. Responsible Parties : The developer,VGCC,and the City of Shakopee. Action Required : Careful review of the amount of the bonds to assure adequacy. 4. Enforcement by all governing authorities of their respective rules and regulations ' Responsible Parties : All appropriate agencies. Action Required : Rigorous enforcement of the rules, regulations and Development Agreement. 1 GOAL 2 Perpetuate the wetland habitat surrounding Dean's Lake for continued use by ' wildlife. Protection Strategies: ' 1. The City should accept the dedication of the 75 acre park identified and proposed on the Preliminary Plat. The City should then amend the City Park and Trail System Comprehensive Plan appropriately. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and the developer,VGCC. 2. The developer's plans include a planting schedule of a variety of native grasses and forbes. This should be documented in the Development Agreement and enforced. ' Responsible Parties : The developer,VGCC,and the City of Shakopee. Assistance by the DNR or other appropriate agencies may be helpful. 3. Monitor the health of the native wetlands, the"replacement wetlands"and storm water detention ponds to assure self sustaining growth and maturation of the desired species. City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 4-3 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I Responsible Parties : Within the warranty period defined by the Development Agreement the developer,VGCC. Once public ownership of the wetlands and ponds has been accepted,the City of Shakopee. ' GOAL 3 Allow and promote passive recreational uses of Dean's Lake and the surrounding park lands. Protection Strategies: 1. VGCC should provide an easement for a walking path to access the proposed 75 acre park from the dedicated streets within the Valley Green development. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and the developer,VGCC. 2. The City should accept the easement for public use and may at a future date choose to include it in the City trail system. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee GOAL 4 Preserve the wateruali of Dean's Lake. q h' Protection Strategies: 1. Consider the establishment of a watershed district for the entire Blue Lake watershed as delineated in the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan. Responsible Parties : All appropriate agencies. 2. Initially,provide testing of the current water quality to define the background water quality. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee,DNR,or the water district, if created. Action Required : All records and results should be made available to the City, Scott County,the DNR,and the watershed district, if created.. 3. Annually,provide testing to determine the extent of change. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee,DNR,or the water district, if created. Action Required : All records and results should be made available to the City, Scott County,the DNR,and the watershed district, if created. t 4. Periodically,test both the on-site and the off-site runoff reaching the Lake to help identify the sources of any pollutants. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee,DNR,or the water district, if created. Action Required : All records and results should be made available to the City and Scott County. City of Shakopee, Minnesota- T11.20132 Page 4-4 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. 1 5. Limit and control degradation to the water quality reaching Dean's Lake. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and all public agencies with water quality authority within the watershed. Action Required : Rigorous enforcement of the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan including adherence to the Best Management ' Practices(BMP's)for stormwater. 6. Continue the cooperative relationship of all public and private agencies within the immediate Dean's Lake watershed(6,900 acres). Responsible Parties : All included agencies. ' 7. Create and maintain a vegetative strip along the Prior Lake overflow channel. Responsible Parties : All public agencies with authority over the route of the channel and all land owners adjacent to the channel. 8. Increase public awareness of the effects of residential and agricultural fertilizers on water quality. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and all public agencies with water quality authority within the watershed. ' Action Required : Develop and conduct periodic educational programs for residents. GOAL 5 Stabilize water levels in Dean's Lake. Protection Strategies: 1. Implement the proposed plan to construct,maintain and operate a water level control structure north of US 169. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, DNR,Mn/DOT,or the water district, if created. GOAL 6 Limit the visual impacts of the development from Dean's Lake and the ' properties south of CSAH 16. Protection Strategies: 1. Rigorous enforcement of the City's Shoreland Ordinance regarding setbacks. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee. 2. Encourage tree planting along street boulevards and around stormwater detention ponds within the project area. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and the developer,VGCC. City of Shakopee, Minnesota-T11.20132 Page 4-5 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. Action Required : It may be useful to include these requirements in the Development Agreement. ' 3. Rigorous enforcement of the City's zoning ordinance concerning building height. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and tenants. Action Required : Encourage use of screening with berms and plantings. 4. Rigorous enforcement of City ordinances regarding signage and lighting. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants. I GOAL 7 Limit the impacts of traffic generated by activities within the project area. Protection Strategies: 1. Identify high traffic activities to be conducted within the project area. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants. Action Required : Require the necessary information as a part of the initial building permit request process. This includes a site traffic impact study which should encompass the access points on Co.Rd 18 and CSAH 16,and include the existing traffic on these roadways at the time of lot development. r2. Monitor traffic levels of ingress and egress to the site,and on the collector and arterial streets surrounding the site. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, Scott County,Mn/DOT,Met Council and other interested agencies. Action Required : Enforce maintenance of the Level-of-Service(LOS)for the access points of the overall development to a minimum LOS of D. This may include denial of specific development types due to the high traffic generating impacts to the site,access points and surrounding streets. 3. Monitor changes in tenant traffic activity level and implement any necessary changes to the City's transportation system. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants. Action Required : Require the necessary information as a part of the building permit request process for remodeling and alterations. 4. Monitor traffic generation generated on the adjacent roadways generated by the development and/or modification of adjacent developments and properties. ' Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, Scott County, Mn/DOT,Met Council and other interested agencies. Page City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Pa g Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk,Inc. I 5. Continue to develop and complete the proposed improvements of collector and arterial roadways in the surrounding area. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, Scott County,Mn/DOT,Met Council and other interested agencies. Action Required : Implement the reconstruction/relocation of CSAH 16,CR 21,CR 83 ' and 17th Avenue. 6. Monitor and update the City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan,when necessary. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee I GOAL 8 Limit the noise impacts of the development on the properties south of CSAR 16. Protection Strategies: 1. Separate the issues of a. Noiseg eneration from initial construction, b. Noise generation from US 169,and ' c. Noise generation from tenant activity. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, Mn/DOT, individual lot purchasers and building tenants. 2. Rigorous enforcement of the City's ordinances regarding noise generation. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants. ' 3. Limit hours of construction activity and allowable construction noise. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee. 4. Encourage tree planting along street boulevards within the project site. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and the developer,VGCC. Action Required : It may be useful to include these requirements in the Development Agreement. 1 5. Encourage landscaping and screening of individual building sites to reduce noise transmission.Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants. 1 GOAL 9 Limit the air quality impacts of traffic generated by the development and the ' activities of individual building tenants. 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 4- 7 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. I Protection Strategies: 1. Regulate air emissions through enforcement of State Air Quality Standards Responsible Parties : MPCA, City of Shakopee Action Required : Since individual tenant activity and building construction may not 1 trigger the requirement for an Indirect Source Permits(ISP),the City should consider requiring one as a part of the platting or PUD process. 2. Minimize dust generation during construction activities. Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, Scott County,the developer-VGCC, individual lot purchasers and building tenants. 3. Monitor changes in tenant air emissions potential. 1 Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee,MPCA and building tenants. Action Required : Require the necessary information as a part of the building permit request process for remodeling and alterations. 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota- TI 1.20132 Page 4-8 Valley Green Corporate Center-FAUAR Prepared by Bolton&Menk, Inc. is 8.2 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Notice of Availability and Distribution of a Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR)Document for Valley Green Corporate Center MEETING DATE: July 5, 2000 Introduction: Council is not being asked to rule on the adequacy of the final AUAR document at this time. Rather, Council is asked to approve distribution of the final AUAR document for a 10-day review and comment period. The Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan is expected to be available on Monday, July 3, 2000. If no objection is filed, the next action by the City Council would be to adopt the final AUAR document. Action Requested: Offer and pass a motion to authorize publication of notice in the"EQB Monitor" and distribution of the final AUAR for Valley Green Corporate Center for review and comment. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director AUARNoficeVG.DOC/ML 1 IS. 8. 5. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Co 1 S e M -r Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Amendment of Electrical Inspection Fee Schedule MEETING DATE: July 5,2000 INTRODUCTION: Effective July 1, 2000 the State Legislature amended the electrical inspection fee schedule. Council is asked to adopt the amended schedule as an amendment to the City's 2000 Fee Schedule. A copy of the amended fees is attached for the Council's information. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 5383, amending the 2000 Fee Schedule for electrical inspections. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 5383,amending the 2000 Fee Schedule for electrical inspections with revisions. 3. Do not approve the amended fee schedule. 4. Table a decision in order to allow time for additional information. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and pass a motion approving Resolution No. 5383. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director RESOLUTION NO. 5383 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 5293,ADOPTING THE CITY'S 2000 FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, The Minnesota State Legislature enacted a new fee schedule for electrical inspections,which schedule becomes effective July 1, 2000; and WHEREAS,it is appropriate to modify to City's 2000 Fee Schedule to be consistent with the new State fee schedule;and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the City's 2000 Fee Schedule is amended by adopting the State of Minnesota fee schedule as found on Exhibit A attached: 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 Board of Electricity Inspection Fee Effective Date: July 1, 2000 Page 1 of 3 326.2441 INSPECTION FEE SCHEDULE. Subdivision 1. SCHEDULE. State electrical inspection fees shall be paid according to subdivisions 2 to 13. Subd.2.FEE FOR EACH SEPARATE INSPECTION.The minimum fee for each separate inspection of an installation,replacement,alteration,or repair is$20. Subd.3.FEE FOR SERVICES,GENERATORS,OTHER POWER SUPPLY SOURCES,OR FEEDERS TO SEPARATE STRUCTURES.The inspection fee for the installation,addition,alteration,or repair of each service, change of service,temporary service,generator,other power supply source,or feeder to a separate structure is: (1)0 ampere to and including 400 ampere capacity, $25; (2)401 ampere to and including 800 ampere capacity,$50;and (3)ampere capacity above 800,$75. Where multiple disconnects are grouped at a single location and are supplied by a single set of supply conductors the cumulative rating of the overcurrent devices shall be used to determine the supply ampere capacity. Subd.4.FEE FOR CIRCUITS,FEEDERS,FEEDER TAPS, OR SETS OF TRANSFORMER SECONDARY CONDUCTORS. The inspection fee for the installation,addition,alteration,or repair of each circuit,feeder,feeder tap,or set of transformer secondary conductors,including the equipment served, is: (1)0 ampere to and including 200 ampere capacity,$5;and (2)ampere capacity above 200,$10. Subd. 5.LIMITATIONS TO FEES OF SUBDIVISIONS 3 AND 4. (a)The fee for a one-family dwelling and each dwelling unit of a two-family dwelling with a supply of up to 500 amperes where a combination of ten or more sources of supply,feeders,or circuits are installed,added,altered,repaired,or extended is$80.This fee applies to each separate installation for new dwellings and additions,alterations, or repairs to existing dwellings and includes not more than two inspections. The fee for additional inspections or other installations is that specified in subdivisions 2 to 4. The installer may submit fees for additional inspections when filing the request for electrical inspection. (b)The fee for each dwelling unit of a multifamily dwelling with three to 12 dwelling units is$50 and the fee for each additional dwelling unit is$25. These fees include only inspection of the wiring within individual dwelling units and the final feeder to that unit. This limitation is subject to the following conditions: (1)the multifamily dwelling is provided with common service equipment and each dwelling unit is supplied by a separate feeder.The fee for multifamily dwelling services or other power source supplies and all other circuits is that specified in subdivisions 2 to 4;and (2)this limitation applies only to new installations for multifamily dwellings where the majority of the individual dwelling units are available for inspection during each inspection trip. (c)A separate request for electrical inspection form must be filed for each dwelling unit that is supplied with an individual set of service entrance conductors.These fees are the one-family dwelling rate specified in paragraph(a). Subd.6.ADDITIONS TO FEES OF SUBDIVISIONS 3 TO 5. (a)The fee for the electrical supply for each manufactured home park lot is$25.This fee includes the service or feeder conductors up to and including the service equipment or disconnecting means.The fee for feeders and circuits that extend from the service or disconnecting means is that specified in subdivision 4. EXN 18tT ,� Board of Electricity Inspection Fee Effective Date: July 1,2000 Page2of3 supply equipment is The fee for recreational vehicle park (b)The fee for each recreational vehicle site electricals pp y $5. services,feeders,and circuits is that specified in subdivisions 3 and 4. (c)The fee for each street,parking lot,or outdoor area lighting standard is$1,and the fee for each traffic signal standard is$5. Circuits originating within the standard or traffic signal controller shall not be used when computing the fee. (d)The fee for transformers for light,heat,and power is$10 for transformers rated up to ten kilovolt-amperes and $20 for transformers rated in excess of ten kilovolt-amperes. (e)The fee for transformers and electronic power supplies for electric signs and outline lighting is$5 per unit. (f)The fee for alarm,communication,remote control,and signaling circuits or systems,and circuits of less than 50 volts,is 50 cents for each system device or apparatus. (g)The fee for each separate inspection of the bonding for a swimming pool,spa,fountain,an equipotential plane for an agricultural confinement area,or similar installation shall be$20.Bonding conductors and connections require an inspection before being concealed. (h)The fee for all wiring installed on center pivot irrigation booms is$40. (i)The fee for retrofit modifications to existing lighting fixtures is 25 cents per lighting fixture. Subd. 7.INVESTIGATION FEES: WORK WITHOUT A REQUEST FOR ELECTRICAL INSPECTION. (a) Whenever any work for which a request for electrical inspection is required by the board has begun without the request for electrical inspection form being filed with the board,a special investigation shall be made before a request for electrical inspection form is accepted by the board. (b)An investigation fee,in addition to the full fee required by subdivisions 1 to 6,shall be paid before an inspection is made. The investigation fee is two times the hourly rate specified in subdivision 10 or the inspection fee required by subdivisions 1 to 6,whichever is greater,not to exceed$1,000.The payment of the investigation fee does not exempt any person from compliance with all other provisions of the board rules or statutes nor from any penalty prescribed by law. Subd. 8.REINSPECTION FEE. When reinspection is necessary to determine whether unsafe conditions have been corrected and the conditions are not the subject of an appeal pending before the board or any court,a reinspection fee of$20 may be assessed in writing by the inspector. Subd. 9. SUPPLEMENTAL FEE.When inspections scheduled by the installer are preempted,obstructed,prevented, or otherwise not able to be completed as scheduled due to circumstances beyond the control of the inspector,a supplemental inspection fee of$20 may be assessed in writing by the inspector. Subd. 10. SPECIAL INSPECTION.For inspections not covered in this section,or for requested special inspections or services,the fee shall be$30 per hour,including travel time,plus 31 cents per mile traveled,plus the reasonable cost of equipment or material consumed.This provision is applicable to inspection of empty conduits and other jobs as may be determined by the board.This fee may also be assessed when installations are not accessible by roadway and require alternate forms of transportation. Subd. 11. INSPECTION OF TRANSITORY PROJECTS. (a)For inspection of transitory projects including,but not limited to,festivals,fairs,carnivals,circuses,shows,production sites,and portable road construction plants,the inspection procedures and fees are as specified in paragraphs(b)to(i). (b)The fee for inspection of each generator or other source of supply is that specified in subdivision 3.A like fee is required at each engagement or setup. Board of Electricity Inspection Fee Effective Date: July 1,2000 Page 3 of 3 (c)In addition to the fee for generators or other sources of supply,there must be an inspection of all installed feeders,circuits,and equipment at each engagement or setup at the hourly rate specified in subdivision 10,with a two-hour minimum. (d)An owner,operator,or appointed representative of a transitory enterprise including,but not limited to,festivals, fairs,carnivals,circuses,production companies,shows,portable road construction plants, and similar enterprises shall notify the board of its itinerary or schedule and make application for initial inspection a minimum of 14 days before its first engagement or setup.An owner,operator,or appointed representative of a transitory enterprise who fails to notify the board 14 days before its first engagement or setup may be subject to the investigation fees specified in subdivision 7.The owner,operator,or appointed representative shall request inspection and pay the inspection fee for each subsequent engagement or setup at the time of the initial inspection.For subsequent engagements or setups not listed on the itinerary or schedule submitted to the board and where the board is not notified at least 48 hours in advance, a charge of$100 may be made in addition to all required fees. (e)Amusement rides,devices,concessions,attractions,or other units must be inspected at their first appearance of the year.The inspection fee is$20 per unit with a supply of up to 60 amperes and$30 per unit with a supply above 60 amperes. (0 An additional fee at the hourly rate specified in subdivision 10 must be charged for additional time spent by each inspector if equipment is not ready or available for inspection at the time and date specified on the application for initial inspection or the request for electrical inspection form. (g)In addition to the fees specified in paragraphs(a)and(b),a fee of two hours at the hourly rate specified in subdivision 10 must be charged for inspections required to be performed on Saturdays, Sundays,holidays,or after regular business hours. (h)The fee for reinspection of corrections or supplemental inspections where an additional trip is necessary may be assessed as specified in subdivision 8. (i)The board may retain the inspection fee when an owner,operator,or appointed representative of a transitory enterprise fails to notify the board at least 48 hours in advance of a scheduled inspection that is canceled. Subd. 12.HANDLING FEE. The handling fee to pay the cost of printing and handling of the form requesting an inspection is$1. Subd. 13.NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE USED FOR INTERPRETATION OF PROVISIONS.For purposes of interpretation of this section and Minnesota Rules,chapter 3800,the most recently adopted edition of the National Electrical Code shall be prima facie evidence of the definitions,interpretations,and scope of words and terms used. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima,Planner II SUBJECT: Final Plat of Prairie Village 5th Addition MEETING DATE: July 5,2000 APPLICATION DATE and REVIEW PERIOD DEADLINE: May 31, 2000—July 30, 2000 Site Information Applicant: Thompson Land Development Location: South of STH 169,north of Valley View Road and east of CSAH 17 Current Zoning: Urban Residential(R1B)Zone Adjacent Zoning: North: Urban Residential(R1B)Zone South: Agriculture(AG)Zone East: Urban Residential(R1B)Zone West: Agriculture(AG)Zone 1995 Comp.Plan: Single Family Residential Area: 17.87 Acres MUSA: The site is within the MUSA boundary Attachments: Exhibit A: Location/Zoning Map Exhibit B: Final Plat Map Introduction Thompson Land Development is requesting Final Plat approval of Prairie Village 5th Addition. The property is located south of STH 169,north of Valley View Road and east of CSAH 17(Exhibit A). Considerations 1. The Preliminary Plat for Prairie Village was approved by the City Council on July 2, 1996. The Final Plat for Prairie Village 5th Addition is in substantial conformance with the Preliminary Plat. This is the fifth of six phases. 2. 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 contaminations. 3. Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) has not responded with comments. As a result, staff is not recommending approval of the Final Plat at this time, but has provided a draft resolution of approval (Resolution No. 5381) for the Council's consideration in the event the Council chooses to approve the Final Plat of Prairie Village 5th Addition. Alternatives 1. Approve the Final Plat of Prairie Village 5th 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) Cash payment in lieu of park dedication shall be required in the amount of $700.00 per residential lot. The park dedication payments shall be paid at the time of the recording of the Final Plat. iv) The developer shall pay all existing levied special assessments. v) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. vi) The cover page of the Final Plat shall be revised to eliminate the signature block for the Planning Commission, as final plats are no longer reviewed by the Planning Commission. vii) 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. viii) 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. b) The following conditions shall apply after the recording of the Final Plat: i) 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 2 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. 2. Approve the Final Plat of Prairie Village 5th Addition with revised conditions. 3. Do not approve the Final Plat of Prairie Village 5th 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 Because staff has not received comments from SPUC relative to water capacity, no recommendation will be made at this time. Action Requested Offer and pass a motion consistent with the wishes of th Council. 1.81 J e Klima er II g:\cc\2000\cc0705\fpprairievillage5.doc 3 RESOLUTION NO. 5381 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF PRAIRIE VILLAGE 5TH ADDITION WHEREAS, Thompson Land Development, applicant and property owner, has filed an application dated and received May 31, 2000 for Final Plat approval; and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as follows: Outlot A, Prairie Village 4th 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 Prairie Village 5th 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) Cash payment in lieu of park dedication shall be required in the amount of $700.00 per residential lot. The park dedication payments shall be paid at the time of the recording of the Final Plat. iv) The developer shall pay all existing levied special assessments. v) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. 4 h Final Plat shall be revised to eliminate the signature vi) The cover page of the gn p8 block for the Planning plats as final are no longer reviewed by the Planning Commission. vii) 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. viii) 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. b) The following conditions shall apply after the recording of the Final Plat: i) 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. THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that approval of this plat does not constitute a representation or guarantee by the City of Shakopee as to the amount, sufficiency or level of water service that will be available to lots within the plat as they are developed. 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 5 axiiI SST A i�1:-mS4a.-.t ,�� ��/►„ -III!111111IIIVIIIII71)1l''.I 0''11111\"11 = _�.I6N :VI ,..1. ;;:::.,, f;LamiPP- � 169 um law,- 11111 _ ___,,iiiiima A L,:.= AG IN B 1■I MI-I 1101 :NI:: Mr wriomig--=werao iii 1,4, ow, 40,,p;--. 1111 AG i itII3IViiiiii _ C U Tir,b, 0L. i'.#z E.:E E A G I� III��/ Items- 1/ wira Ley iew R. . UM pitIMI lealraltalli0 44k I- illikatind MO V14211 RR irg -I mi 1 Arm 1s 41 L__)r 11 M i________ I 1 l_]r-r,rn, N OI � W E SHAKOPEE Final Plat of Prairie Village 5th Addition Zoning Parcels 06/7/00 0 z CB Ja IN LL. o W u o .3 '2 4 u a U Y p p .1i g `$i O U {:o — O 0 L i 4' o �c O i. U .7i ,a, e v u U 0 AS t Va. 0. a M a ; g 11 W o W 2s t W N a 0. $ �' p O iW o w o 0 d . O H s ab cn ice E g Q 4 U eO p e O poO yom -c 04 0 O co a T T V t. N FnCwy yU ' ° ✓ 0. o o U Y pqNI 0 U O 1 x OT V O Z -° U .. Y U o U o O '5 au H F, 0) I. ° n,c rtj p 0a c 0 O F, 6 u i O `° O o UQ s Q Ov c gr '� sUn c vUi 9 0, Eo s $ a. 0 g ;Q ce z i F EN ° .> ° ffi w 2 § 3 e O O w q Cd7 .� B O G e0 N E O Z Q O• 1'1I Q U ° Y H - o T x h v g Y L u$ E -E.' s 0 Q i i W 0 a t —J LU .. o� o�� o-O . a NY ° 0 g •g N Q V N a € S u } $rN Q C a 0 2 2 0 a VO1 M ^� p° 0— a 4r d S C . .60 ...gigs. $ ut z0 . !! O ° .1.0. p V e ti `o Y It g Q of 1! E4. a. Y W tt g a QTS WQ y O . ° .si C n'u y C•I2 el 'O .k .1 L p'� 0.0-0m0 Y W nh C % V `• aah Y ' U Is a.Uia di ge g; w° o . Z gRo .c z 6m a ce3 r0 a 0 p ° = vg .gy o e 0 5 U -.9 3 u up QQ 4n 'O E tgu2i .O V ( E 0 3N 65 La 0 B A d a 0-, on y 7 s z ..sd g „ L -a y ro v . o9 P 2 M ooam � iieaaVmU u W' 1i Uy Yugm.eu ; :12 .eaw O 5 VOOoS m v § I O , a C4 v o.k+' H u w > � o H C. xi o Y•: v O E ° i °.5ZM O ?.e 15.1 w .1 1 Ib1 30. H Wy e4 �' cd u 4o u a w °o it 41 _ o° lw 0- Q .1-41$ $� OWy�+, 'u° a .0o�++, b `r. Y WO{�s� �o i° 2 i ., t� D ,o o i G v o F w m Or O 9tu'w c a u gQqw � t!' Ea, O ux a4 o x 2 0. 4 N y U F° °u a.8 a.'O '� vt U a • NI/- I I Inn\_/ I ;, \ I _I N Ing I Inn\_ nt\ I (1 � -� ; 0 I N U I !_IVU V I (-1 I J I I V \_J I J__I \J \_J V \J I N \J \,/_J ,__) Z IN I n \_I I I\ I\_/C\_/_, L J : N I n \_I I N I\J^\_/-1 L 1 Wry ; , INI IC.i 1 N V \� V _J I ICJ I INI I Li _LIN V `i v _J I ICJ $ ,.J Z W = I -..0 u MM8l,90,00N I 60'6L2 CO 00021 - T �i — — W 1 1 \ o 1 i,, 7 1 Q ml: G ' 7 is IZ 1 14 \ • 47 .o L 4119 1 \ 0,1A) \i S \ 4N \- ')s.p I. L °O \/1`\ Q Z\ is I— \ �\N 0 \...., \\ O n S \ ,�/ r,:tb, \\\\� 0 ''""��/)) t\ V 9 j\S 7`J6 f4, G\— /oJA � \\ o.`,J.•\ — \ V) �� Q \� �`4 d• \\A=2 ` / Z Z �� Wto 9ss�� r^ Lv 111 w W SCC 11 ,-__ V) 3VI 2�2 6 ZO C>C01__-1 ;o © I 86 a J K a Z n �aw1^o zo iz Q ....c.-- ,.... ✓ 3.CD.0 1.005 ,^Z ,n w _ �� 3.LO,C 1.00S 96114 1• 0 QO0.Z N z co 99'iZ 00.09 WOO TOZZO 00 O[ 00'0 In U Z ut v N N ,L < OfISCI 1 Z ~ x 0 O - \ w, N 1.•.! gd I r -101 I ?CSO Z x Z P NOLLIOOtl Fd %IF I \ I I O�• U • = t� _ 3Dtl1llA 31tlItlNd N3d7 _ 1F...,..-yJ� , ..--1N3N3SY3 AlIILLO ONY 30VNIYN0� '� I W in IA Q N'� 2 -� L',t. \ co co.0 N .L/ -•_/_ 1 r3 f3 -\ I; -I r; � -I 1 I I In N w Jte o J Z w m .-m / oN M / _ 0,1 In N N n n L_ 3.LC9Z.DON � n j O J Z 14 N r \ �"\)/ \ O ^ / a1 �y \ o , M g !^ g to o•k. Is M1 O ,La w I„I„I �Q N. Z� % -I I \V, - m o o °, o 1.1 r^n CO O W Q W S a W Cr `1, / I jz r (` v• u m . in z� o Inf o z Q / L I ,� 1 v/ I I ry1-\-I, g z • < „ ,--- /c<--0.9 C- ,�✓, t.., I I 3:4 1 ' � I In /�J I„ Io.oz=o I I loll N �i oy C/ �7/ Ci''Boi--1 �-•`�------I J L J L Of OC L J N) .. `„ ► / ///b '•1 L9'09 va� 00'09 00'09 00"004 10"SCI O • .''�J \` `',./l Ofj,� \ $/,',/.`1' SC,6 f.?0N.'O'Jf/B'7 I - //�- M.LO,C LOON C0'OSC _ R_ 1 -M__ttoo..rr��..00QN ' rn gq' •- W \(^/ H ^^'O�^0I 3 sr'o►ny iR ad02J S`d I Nl V I I R I '� / VOA .:)-0„•(‘' �'`', ) ,A)/\ s.►°1141 r =-, r ,t „L N, , '' c 1 a r to CCI LV CC / �ry �-/�� O�0 i i \ J 01 101 n / �/ O /\ N I 1 Y t./i 55 g ! wq ij 0 2 _. • Aa G 7 A? b N3 �� M aG\ -meq �S 14. n O.. / 1& g •.^I ,- / ,§' U M.CO,CI.00N J I L 3.L[.97.00N J Zn. _Z 0. / + \� Z Z€ JO Vooi // + • \�\ ' r 6Y9C1 - 1 W r coccii. 0 0 v. `+ _-6J La_ ___J L 00'LL J L 00'LL pJ 8 q 0 Q ("Ni $ , En z Zr6Zl --, ? "cz a M.9Z�$ .9OS r \' 3„L0,£LOOS I I L 3.([.97.009 J Z<m \ \, L M.LOSI.00N J I O,J Q V s3 r OO OM y,: o f W _�_ (Cf 170 Z9BCI w,,,a toIn o Pr) s Wao _ a3L0,[bODS , a iao wT ` $ tn z L 3.LC,9Z.00N J Z a z NOLL100Y 1LJL, :: W'-... I m G ill, 1 1 ;�133�I1SR I„o 11 { -1-1\1 I ^ A 111.7\-,LJ / I M.LO,C1.00N_ ..__H < • ' I,nn t Q .J-_J_J 1 1.% I V_J I_ V I I 'g • 0/ O 7 H L J �n 1'Z► 1�2 __ — �- — — _,{// ^ 19 Y H g I r 00'SCI tri Y co W \ \.) r- 1 0 In I , / u� I L 3.LC,9Z.00N _J I \_ O ` L / �0 �� a .— a ooscC ---1 I \ i a)9 u - H avoa SVIHIVW \. I co .s-.. - • x r� / Oy� L J o[ o[ L------ - -Jk /h/, k4 S" LB'SB 10'S[{ \ CLO,C LOON 1 -1-1\ 1 1 ^ N 11'7\J\ 1\-/^ o I / / E133�I1S? 1 vNIZb21VS ? 'r_, 99'6lZ ,_, ci 1_J_J I-1.: IVIL_ V(— V � ? . a e v —.II / Imo” ( •�z cai> w ��_ 3 iv ii�v = ♦/ ti D,� — Z Q o Z 3 ---3„L0,£LOOS Z9'00S--- / jut I gWZtn� $� O --4_-1---J ?*''� `o 'J V J(_ /VI Ji�\ /I\_J I I v,A\ -----...� . ¢o --:.-t---; 'RgP 'A / 44 2� I N N§v1�1 1 .„.., n� mtgmgg3a CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum C p ns f i r TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeil, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Request for Time Extension for the Final Plat for Bergs Hilltop Addition DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION&BACKGROUND The City has received a request from Robert Bergs(Please see Exhibit A)to extend the time for approval of a Final Plat after approval of the plat by the City Council. The applicant is requesting a one year extension to the approval of the Final Plat. If approved,this extension would allow the plat to remain valid through July 5, 2001,if a further extension is not granted. On October 20, 1998, the City Council approved the Final Plat for Bergs Hilltop Addition. City Code Section 12.10, Subd. 2 states, "Upon request by the developer, the City Council may extend the approval period for a prelimiruny or finalplat, subject to all applicable performance conditions and requirements. A request for an extension of approval must be filed on or before the expiration date of the preliminary or final plat". A one year extension was previously granted on July 6, 1999. The City Code does not list criteria for determining whether the time period for recording of a plat should or should not be extended. In the past, the City has made the determination on the basis of changes that have occurred relating to the plat which may necessitate the City reviewing the plat again. There are no changes being made to the Final Plat itself. ALTERNATIVES 1. Offer and pass a motion extending the approval of the Final Plat for Bergs Hilltop Addition by one year. 2. Offer and pass a motion extending the approval of the Final Plat for Bergs Hilltop Addition by a different period of time. 3. Offer and pass a motion denying the request to extend the approval of the Final Plat for Bergs Hilltop Addition, and require the developer to resubmit the plat for approval by the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED Offer a motion granting the developer of Bergs Hilltop Addition an additional one year of approval of the Final Plat with the Scott County Recorder's Office, and move its approval. g:\cc\2000\cc0705\exbergs.doc EO+rBIT A N 1 �; � tri '� By a 2000 //2' June 13, 2000 Mayor of the City of Shakopee Members of the City Council On October 20, 1998 the City Council approved the Final Plat for Bergs Hilltop Addition, subject to conditions of Resolution No. 5003. We requested an extension of one year on July 6, 1999. We would like to request a longer extension do to time it will take to get some one to do the work. Sincerely, ROBERT I. BERGS lune rd�111.0 j - _'�\::�*,\`,41"4 -- - IIII9111nufin litviiiiitii 111111111A11111111WIjOW �� ---7- nra iiiilr a '•Wpm" —�11.- .11 iii Mr ssmesitt: .. aIll Mar 111116.410W Hvt 169 nmr ! T EDp11 I — ®D®® :I ®® ■! ®®0D■\ %%Uhl It®fl fi®4 - IIIIII `,A ®® ®®-'1 ■ 11111 == = mil finis 1 ii 1 1 4'44121 44 ti AG - .�_ ��, �.����i IX i"i im 1111.11L00:.41.- sr. U d ' :Il;�pi� 1111111: . IZ AG MI IN m ine.....1.111, 11111111471141i • , fli CR 78, Takil R N'l w 4ik 1IIIt I MAO AG r 7 . � 1� 2_,.. I I N WALLA! Wik E SHAKOPEE COMUNOYMBSINCBV07 S Bergs Hilltop Extension �] Zoning Parcels 06/26/00 070 P. 2/2 Jul, 5. 2000 10.26AM BRAVER & ASSOC. No, 6/ LAND USF MANNING.%ND DESIGN BRAUER ,\55t)c'I\TFti, I,TU COST ESTIMATE 10417 Excelsior Boulevard • Suite One • Hopkins. Minnesota 55343'• Phone 952-238-0831 • Fait 952-238-0833 • www,brauer-ltd.cam Residential Screening Project - Marschall Road City of Shakopee, Minnesota Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate July 5, 2000 1 Removals $1,000.00 -Includes all removals and transplanting of trees as indicated on the plans 2 Wooden Screen Fencing $19,250.00 -Includes footings, connectors, hardware,staining, and all other materials required for construction of fencing and connection to existing chainlink fencing where applicable. 3 Sod& Plantings $16,900.00 -Includes all trees and shrubs, poly edging,geotextile weed fabric,shredded hardwood mulch, and sod. 4 Construction Surveying&Staking $4,000.00 Subtotal $41,150.00 10% Contingency $4,115.00 Grand Total $45,265.00 \\TIMOTHY 01\C\Docs\2000\00-17100-17 estimatc.WPD , Jul. 5, 2000 10:26AM BRAUER & ASSOC, No, 6070 P. 2/2 r LAND USF MANNING AND Dt51GN BRAVER r1,511cI,\TFti, LTD COST ESTIMATE r 10417 excelsior Boulevard • Sulte Onc • Hopkins. Minnesota 55343.• Phone 952-238-0831 • Fax 952-238-0833 • www,brauer-ltd.com Residential Screening Project - Marschall Road City of Shakopee, Minnesota Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate July 5, 2000 1 Removals $1,000.00 -Includes all removals and transplanting of trees as indicated on the plans 2 Wooden Screen Fencing $19,250.00 -Includes footings,connectors, hardware,staining, and all other materials required for construction of fencing and connection to existing chainlink fencing where applicable. 3 Sod& Plantings $16,900.00 -Includes all trees and shrubs, poly edging,geotextile weed fabric,shredded hardwood mulch, and sod. 4 Construction Surveying&Staking $4,000.00 Subtotal $41,150.00 10%Contingency $4,115.00 Grand Total $45,265.00 \\TIMOTHY 01\ \Docs\2000\00-17\00-17 estimatc..WPI) -'** Z0'39tid bki101 ** .II,z.u1,.rl.n mho - a x o a A i, 3 »z -4411 . $P. F I :In.� g I .. . .�.:. • now _ SCC LI 1 16_ •_ a t( M A{�1 Ne.sa i 1:411 1 •► r f I '.T. R« I' ,; i 1 T 4 1 41 ‘3.1!;15 441.11. pg. .1: � ''k7 • C Fo .1I'w : 2411.It �.X. € : . r lit...". 14 W111 ' ' • I Se Ro'".Y 611.111X. 44 '-I. • ITc:1143.Ta ^'t!• # 2:1452 4 N4.26 . : . M: k g! I +11: o i. t e , ` lit. 34yAN . . . . . . . .i. . . . -�' I I ook000° CiF 241.16 . . S i'll " - N9;. \ :E. • Isrt:l3-[0. 14.67'41 •! t Z j -^ i o� ��� '2141114[.SI i :!6 t 147'.71 - i .... . . 'bU11.. 1 u ^ •!' 1�I1� .. 144.ru �C pi • . '.e +_' 441.11+ i E' L' 146.011 ";,: -- '"IS 7'4' 1igr.sr� . . 7'2[41 411.47' gQ •t a Ai -7,-- • §,6.1.r, - p. v$C(I. r 411•06 .,..._ • a 6 6 \\\ 4� 643.70 ••j t� L o_I 141.72 - :^ hi! 7.•1. - $1M , . F! g ' : � i'':4' .. ',I t I �111;f,......".ffT a N1.21. u. .. q: T - a 1 i - Fly wi 2. i , o Z2 : ' N1.4t. : . . .r1.5M pLite .1 D. '.A.1- I' ''!. • _ i. .7'c E., 241.1111 -�-1 .n�.j^R•i==.•� :i -.1 1 l .. A. 4444 . . . . ..1 A: , 4 161.114 - 1; R;WVII __. ••i ; 1147.10 • '� ! =g : \ Li'l ? r , Na.t2 _ 's. 4; •- . I t' fir <i teMrf.T7 • Y• . • SAL CI. • 6677 v 7� « f' :. : : A' •IIT ! ~'13iLtaMa• 2[.61'4T Y• , Ili •tll '4;_ i • •o.+ 2Se iN00..76.t1•Mf1W4661 - -6 •1 lPII __._ _1 1 i 142.Lr a •a ..71 ,.. -r-146�a1.1 / I i. i A Ita.?1172 51►1 I '1• r • 2 . ,� :7x 73 r. :...,Ilc •� c1 f 1 :,� i 2l -646:.6« 1 :41 13 4� O •` O 14▪11.u. : . - µJ _ ... 6'.1 1 ,, T •I CA « •. Sg: I 77L,%_,7• 211.{7'a ..4 643.116 t •- - G. Poi -t 125.I ITM.K..-.. �r j~.-.4'... : cy &T. 6 i' T 4 �1:.n "161 s. - -' I`,,i c C: . utw-:, tie t' O N 5.)1 •li KraK. . ir:�; ;l 4 x"., =uo.T, '�.j r.I n ,A 147.all ' . . . 0;12., .O.IKII W.ti Y1 d 11 -fru "I.Y t3,.. TY - .._ 7i e emZe • rot St. -73.2/.60 :j.4;2.. O ••1144.36 - Of Ll 5 fl . I o_. . . _ _.- _ 7i- i 0.[717'. "g a i 4 147.•[ . .?� ii'• �.�; i I pr. NL n. 7'. . ; , �SnP :: !• k i • 1. 11 y 'L 4� 612.s6 1. a-76.24 u.[1•u; , 1 N : . „II 1 ii :P 1411.52. . t�41 6 i 6'0167 • 141.14 I 1.. .. f r • 2F•ra.1. / tra.r3.6l. HAa7 1 Ip .1 U. ^A • t-: 64111 I .� 1 r. 1144_ 11 � -2 a . .• i i . . �II�. Rr11..TS MEI i o pwp 140.itii • _! i .? • 8N7.71 144_-:.6..' _ -;._. 3 ii . L .. -... 4444 L• + ;� � Il , 444 ; • • • F : d '::3:14: : , • -aa '- ', 1 ; ! nsa� . ; . .. ! . . . .p ovApyI 1 � ii : I zi ;:tl?.T2 . . . :: : .a . _ • • ,. : . : g;a _ _ _ ' qq . , . . . il l: I* S -2 115 _ a 6 'v i r n '144r . " Ube 0111.14 4 [SAI[17(MARSCHALI.ROAD) =- = ==-� 1 pAs CI w m S ""+11"""' Signal,S4eee,StolmSewer 1 «. &Appunrarnt Work .77'.•rMs is0-.Mil m +1M.1+. c+.a.a oraru . a 4 .7'. M I Shakopee,Minnesota S.i1L. _ _ _. Z0/Z0'd 8TL9SVVES6 01 ZLS7i€SZT9 30SSb ndnsdaa a NJ £2:60 Baez S0 inf. J5. C• I1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Presentation of Noise Study and Landscaping Plan Along CSAH 17, Project No. 2000-9 DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Attached to this memo is a Noise Assessment Study for residential properties along the west side of CSAH 17, as prepared by David Brauslau Associates, Inc. This agenda item will consider the study that has been prepared and its recommendations and decide on a course of action in dealing with the traffic noise along CSAH 17 in this area. BACKGROUND: At its May 2, 2000 Council meeting, the Council directed staff to have a feasibility report prepared on the traffic noise for CSAH 17 residential properties. This report has been completed and attached for Council review. With this study the existing and future traffic noise levels were analyzed by David Braslau Associates, Inc. This firm is the same one that did the Hauer's 4th Addition Noise Study. The conclusion of the noise study is that the existing noise levels are higher than the State Standards. However, these standards do not apply to County highways. The future noise levels will increase slightly, however, this increase would not be enough to warrant a mitigation measure by Mn/DOT or Hennepin County Standards. Previously, an estimate to replace the windows and doors and add air conditioning to homes would be approximately $13,000.00 per house. Staff believes the City is not responsible to "insulate" the houses from noise, as the noise level projected "increases" are not substantial. Whether to incorporate noise mitigation measures at this location is a Council policy decision and is precedent setting for future projects. The agenda item also includes the review and consideration of approval of preliminary landscaping/fencing plans along CSAH 17 to create a visual screen between the properties and the County road. The residents have met with Jason Amberg, of Brauer& Associates, Inc., to discuss alternatives of berming, fencing or landscape hedge along the property line. Plans are attached for Council review. It is proposed to construct these improvements as a City project with the residents to enter into an agreement with the City to allow the construction on their property. This agreement is needed as the improvements will be placed on private property and also maintained by the property owners. If Council agrees, then staff is asking for plan approval in order to advertise for bids, and for the City Attorney to draft an agreement between the City and residents in order to construct the improvements. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve a motion receiving the Noise Assessment Report for CSAH 17 residential properties and direct staff to implement the recommendations contained in this report. 2. Approve a motion accepting the Noise Assessment Report for CSAH 17 residential properties and implement the recommendations of the report and as modified by Council. 3. Approve Resolution No. 5379, a resolution approving plans for CSAH 17 Landscaping,Project No. 2000-9. 4. Do not approve Resolution No. 5379. 5. Direct the City Attorney to draft an agreement between the City and residents along CSAH 17 for the landscaping improvements on their property. 6. Table for further information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No.'s 1, 3, and 5, to accept the report and implement the recommendations, as contained in the report, which is to do no noise mitigation measures along CSAH 17 in this area; approve Resolution No. 5379, a resolution approving plans for CSAH 17 Landscaping, Project No. 2000-9; and direct the City Attorney to draft an agreement between the City and residents along CSAH 17 for the landscaping improvements on their property. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Approve a motion receiving the Noise Assessment Report for CSAH 17 residential properties and direct staff to implement the recommendations contained in this report as much as practical. 2. Offer Resolution No. 5379, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for County State Aid Highway Landscaping, Project No. 2000-9 and move its adoption. 3. Direct the City Attorney to draft an agreement between the City and residents along County State Aid Highway 17 for the landscaping improvements on their property. I'A PAP Bruce Loney / Public WorksVirector BL/pmp MEM5379 JUN-14-2000 11 41 MSB 8. ASSOCIATES INC. 7635411700 P.03/06 dovld bra/eu ee.00laees,Ineorpormend 1313 5th street e.e. • sults 322 • mInneepolig,inn 55414 telepl one:1312331 4571 • Mx:612-331-4572 13 June 2000 MEMORANDUM TO: Chuck Rickart WSB &Associates,Inc. FROM Dave Bras]au RE: CSAH 17/Shakopee-Existing and Future Traffic Noise Levels This memorandum presents the results of our assessment of existing and future traffic noise levels at the homes west of CSAH 17 and just south of 17th Avenue in Shakopee, Minnesota. The location of the homes evaluated in this assessment is shown in Attachment 1 which identifies the existing and future roadway configuration. Also shown on Attachment 1 is the Iocation of the sound level monitoring site that was used to confirm the accuracy of the noise prediction model. For modeling of existing traffic in the critical 6-7 AM hour(covered by the state "nighttime"noise standards) and in the PM Peak Hour,traffic volumes were taken from counts in the . a• : jus ' ,'• . R .•rt f. : ,, 1 v..,. •repared in February 2000 by WSB &Associates for the City of Shakopee. For modeling future traffic volumes in the year 2019, PM Peak Hour traffic with and without the proposed developments along CSAH 17 from Vierling Drive to St.Francis Avenue were taken from the CSAH 17 (Vierlin .Drive to St_Frances Avenue)Traffic Study prepared in May 1999 by WSB &Associates for the City of Shakopee. The STAMINA 2.0 highway traffic noise model was used to predict existing and future noise levels at the five homes located just south of 17th Avenue and west of CSAH 17. In order to confirm the validity of assumptions used in the model,traffic noise levels were monitored from 6:00 am to 7:15 am on Thursday,4 May 2000, at the location shown in Attachment 1. Traffic was flowing smoothly along CSAH 17 and the weather was clear with a moderate wind from the southwest. The monitoring results along with predicted levels for the same time period are presented Table 1. JUN-14-2000 11:42 USE & ASSOCIATES INC. 7635411700 P.04/06 Chuck Ricket on CSAH 17'hafdc Noise Levels 13 June 2000 Page 2 Table 1 Monitored and Predicted Traffic Noise Levels(6-7 am) (levels are in dBA) L10 L50 Monitored 68.9 62.2 Predicted 67.9 61.5 Monitored-Predicted 1.0 0.7 The small difference between monitored and predicted noise levels are Moly due to a traffic speed higher than that assumed in the model. A speed of 50 mph was assumed, based upon an estimate of speeds during the monitoring period. These results are close enough, however, to substantiate the model assumptions. It should be noted that environmental noise is normally measured and expressed in terms of dBA or A weighted decibels. This level combines the various frequencies malting up a given noise in a manner sitm err to the human ear and is therefore assumed to be representative of how noise is perceived. The L10 and L50 are noise "metrics" used in the state noise standards,and represent the noise exceeded for 10% or 6 minutes of an hour and 50% or 30 minutes of an hour, respectively. The Minnesota noise standards for residential land uses expressed in terms of L10 and L50 are presented in Table 2. Table 2 Minnesota Noise Standards for Residential Land Uses (levels expressed in dBA) 'Dime Period L10 L50 Nighttime(10 pm•7 atm) 55 50 Daytime(7 am 10 pm) 65 60 It should be noted, however,that applicabi]ity of the state standards are limited primarily to the cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis and do not apply to CSAR 17. Noise sources are exempt from the state standard"except for the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, an existing or newly constructed segment of a road,street, or highway under the jurisdiction of a road authority of a town, statutory or home rule charter city, or county,except for roadways for which full control of access has been acquired." Therefore,comparison of noise levels with state standards in this memorandum is included primarily to provide a frame of reference for discussion of potential noise impacts. JUN-14-2000 11:42 ldSB & ASSOCIATES INC. 7635411700 P.05/06 Chuck Rickert on CSAR 17 Traffic Noise Levels 13 June 2000 Page 3 The homes closer to 17th Avenue will experience slightly higher noise levels due to traffic along 17th Avenue as well as along CSAH 17. However, the expected differences in sound level between the most northerly and southerly of the five homes is estimated to be no more than 0.5 dBA. Therefore, for this assessment,sound level estimated at the most northerly home will be used to represent existing and future traffic noise levels. Based upon observations of motor vehicles along CSAH 17, an assumed mix of 97% automobiles (including vans and SUVs) and 3% medium trucks (reflecting delivery trucks as well as some heavier pickups) was assumed. Following completion of the roadway improvements and installation of a traffic signal at 17th Avenue and CSAH 17, an assumed travel speed of 45 mph was assumed along CSAH 17. A 35 mph speed was assumed along 17th Avenue. The results of AM(6-7 am) and PM (5-6 pm) noise level predictions for the years 2000 and 2019 are presented in Table 3. Table 3 Predicted Traffic Noise Levels at Homes on CSAR 17 just south of 17th Avenue Matins noise levels L10 LSO AM 66.6 60.6 PM 68.9 63.7 2019 without new developments _ L1O LSO AM 67.4 62.4 PM 70.7 66.4 2019 with new developments Li0 L50 AM 68.4 63.8 PM 71.1 67.2 The L10 level is estimated to increase approximately 2 dBA in the year 2019 with the proposed developments, while the L50 level is estimated to increase by 3 dBA An increase of 3 dBA is considered the level below which the increase is not noticeable and above which the increase can be noticeable.A 5 dBA increase is used by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Hennepin County as a threshold above which noise mitigation measures should be consered. The predicted noise levels are compared with the appropriate residential noise standards in Table 4. The table shows the amount by which the predicted noise levels exceed the state noise standards. A negative value means that the predicted level is lower than the standard. JUN 26 2000 15:01 FR D BRASLAU ASSOC 6123314572 TO 9524456718 P.02/02 Chuck Rickart on CSAH 17 Traffic Noise Levels 13 June 2000 Page 4 Table 4 Amount Predicted Levels Exceed the State Noise Standards Existing noise levels L10 L50 AM 11.6 10.6 PM 3.9 -1.3 2019 without new developments L10 L50 AM 12.4 12.4 PM 5.7 1.4 2019 with new developments L10 L50 AM 13.4 13.8 PM 6.1 2.2 The AM or"nighttime" levels are seen to be well above residential noise standards for this period. However, this situation is common along arterial roadways throughout the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Early morning traffic volumes (6-7 am) on CSAR 17 are only slightly lower than in the PM Peak Hour, but the 10 dBA"penalty" for the nighttime standards causes this change in impact relative to the standards. The PM noise levels are 4 dBA above the L10 standards, but 1 dBA below the L50 standards at the present time. The L10 will increase approximately 2 dBA to be 6 dBA over the standards, while the L50 will increase approximately 3 dBA to be 2 dBA over the standards. While some noise impact will be experienced by the five homes along CSAH 17, the increase in level is not significant and is below the 5 dBA threshold for which mitigation measures would be considered by Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. • In conclusion, the current and future sound levels at the five homes are similar to those experienced by most homes adjacent to major highways and arterials in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Scott County does not have specific guidelines for requiring mitigation of sound levels along county roads,since these are exempt from the Minnesota noise standards. In Hennepin County,mitigation measures are to be evaluated if the future L10 level reaches or exceeds 69 dBA and the increase above the existing noise level is 5 dBA or greater. While the predicted L10 levels in 2019 are above the Hennepin County threshold of 69 dBA, the maximum increase in the L10 over existing levels is 2.2 dBA Thus, under these guidelines, no noise abatement measures should be considered. nckO6l3-mem.doc 20037 ** TOTAL PAGE.02 ** RESOLUTION NO. 5379 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For County State Aid Highway 17 Landscaping Project No. 2000-9 WHEREAS, pursuant to a Council motion adopted on March 21, 2000, Bruce Loney, Public Works Director has prepared plans and specifications for landscaping, fencing and any appurtenant work 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 EESO-SEZ-ZI9;d•!E80'BEZZI9�!�A i I o Nd1d .LnOAd1 3dYOSONd1 aNd 30N3d 1. cy rrn' a•=0pvumctamS•anA2m0e�!s!amaLIPOI ! a 1 NNI eedoi/egs i /lo .J 3 �/� PeOLI IIe4�s�ew - ;oe/o�d Ruluee�og lel/e®PIs®!� 1 4NHiNdl� "" NDiS3Q ENV DMNNtl'Id 7SR QPItl?_._._.. _�-.-. _._.- ____.. ...-- _ .__M./..._.. , i /$ iK Bi ; : � I 111111 tip if 'g 1111 1 I 1 A . `f i ill ill g-1 II Ilt 1 1 11 iii I $ iL4 141 li il : 11 4 i !II 1 i Ix i 1 11 4111%[ / fi;t11 !!1; 1/17 1!1 i ti xii :1 11 i } II Xii Oilt 11 IV 41 li :11 li ! il ligi., 15 ; 4Nit 1 gg ? P 4g k4i : p1,1 ,,41 8 i 11 II i tit; a 4 Il '1 : " '12''il :1111'ilt'l 1 1 '' i .1 '11 Al ' 0 le Iti h il 1 1 11 ii! Q 11; " 1 1g;Ilili 1!1 it il .4k 0 P 1 li III 1 i21 d), ! /14 I'l !Q4 1 Pi 11 1 1 i i jfilibt.: II i i f IV 170-_. :A g J : leg DI o 1 1,„ v! Al1 liD 1 li ' 0 1 it Z8# 4111 Alit Ikl ? tills 1 "•'..i' CC �y �g 2 7.ii oaoc�op .31.'1.4j1=E.ii. k ..- 5N . . H ! • 1 -a-u=u-u � Q z i=i1=u=Ti= ill RR {R�,4UJlill :15.i"" doaf I n a 0 e 0 n: ! - e : < 11,1,1iii il; Iiig .I!! III . 4, Ig , , . , 4 , , . .. „ 11 II 1g iiiiIii . ,,: '.,, .nt lie,1;1 1.11 1 14 li 1 i!i; ;'!'i � 1 AtItill: is.019Jigii 1 1! IR 1 10 x2 I 11110icill 1 f ".le ii,,,, 0 ! , 0 ' E ' a ' \ I- . . - I � •-•�� V PA ,1, LL 1 9 . Z a 0 I ! ;{ r l , I lIt, t l 'i 7 x P : O �) ._..--. M • .:III 1 y - I I { i 'I 4-1 ,, ♦ 1 I% 1 • 'e 4 k S 1 R % .9 its+ I, li ; ,..,; :, , , z, -, „r; .. ! , , , ....., . .. , . , ..,, .. :, , , t .. ., . z _ . .... 4 ., ,-'t. ,._ ,,..1 7-..- 11,11. , ::iii::::-.ql!livi, L4 � + , ,.., ;.. ,..i ... : p ,/ li I ♦ E 1t '', .r;....,,f:','1,:7 i i I. k 1 S IP _-_-_-a--,- 11‘ 7,,\.'',.., i r— : ,., :.,, .+-It '',' , , ' -,-,°44;•4'.';',",;, '.::.F.:IC .. I: . ,,,,!,, . 1 friki .i',.:tii,.,1..:.,' r , f9 ,,. �'� ti Jp 4 '� i4 H I ! 3161'41(.7.,:l. „. ! ,s 4. „'''' 1 ti1, !{¢ ;v ��r-i r11: �1 �.� I�; •V . , gin: .i.ot ,•', .,,i'.:.',,, '. pp ."-11.. '''..;::.:_.11,',1: l'-';' 4 ,,,,,,,.,..._ ._,--,_ rti, ::, s- a iI•s I • Q a tr 4 *- Ai '.„:„..,.... ''''.'.'.:.'•'.„:'' ;.'•''''', ' t I • • .., Pik s.a.e.s O s' x / '.° N \ _____„,u, _ _________ 7 . I Ail,"ar (4,4 .. g- .7 Ls-474/ Tht„-.1-1 toz /1 v... I I gliM 9 _44 \ 1 N // ?IRO Q 11 Q LII- 111 ,__ . \ li N ,,G,!q G Zqh i N ' _ \ x \ / t i\ i °w % Z x m w O \g 1 x 1 (..) 1 Y u I .16 4 W g:4id' N x X I xii Z gl 0 git C..) a 9 - /1 -.6---;:te----. 4/I 9 6 E. i P/ 16- 6 i II Fl- I- J1 �O 1 F11 F * O Z `° X 1 X I s 1 i :2).______ ...T.‘ E i. i � 1' - -- I CI:-)6 '' 2 ‘4 g:4 ii li @ 1 ' @P ag____ 1 1 4 1 41 1 ",r/ L J to :4 0E44 _ liI! W m i 6 11 1i_ = gli X 4? is" C . z. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Discuss Future Collector Road DATE: July 5, 2000 BACKGROUND: In the City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan, a future collector street has been identified approximately midway between CSAH 17 and CSAH 83. This street would connect 17th Avenue with Valley View Road, and Valley View Road with CSAH 42. Staff is asking the Council to discuss the general location of this street, and to provide staff with the preferred location. Staff is requesting this information from Council, in order for staff to review future plat applications, and to provide guidance for the developers submitting those applications. DISCUSSION: Staff has met with several individuals requesting comments from staff regarding the exact location for the collector road shown in the City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Based on meetings held with the various landowners and developers, there does not appear to be any alignment that would be agreeable to all the affected landowners and developers. At the request of staff, the affected individuals submitted letters describing the preferred alignment and the reasons for choosing that alignment. Attached are copies of the letters received by staff. Also attached is a memo from Chuck Rickart, of WSB & Associates, Inc., on the need for one street collector between Sarazin Street and C.R. 83. Staff intends to revise the Draft Transportation Plan to include this change in the future. The attached letters refer to two alignment alternatives that have been reviewed by staff. Attached are sketch drawings showing these two alternatives. Alternate 1 (see attached Figure 1) The general location of this alternative is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan; located midway between County Roads 17 and 83. This location was chosen when it was decided to add a park along 17'Avenue. Staff believes the main access to this park should not be off 17"' Avenue because of potential traffic problems. 17t Avenue is expected to have much more traffic than the future north-south collector road. In addition to the park access issues, staff believes Alternate 1 is a better location because it could be constructed sooner than Alternate 2. Constructing a collector street between 17th Avenue and Valley View Road will help reduce the amount of traffic that is currently using local roads as minor collectors, in order to travel to County Road 17. The collector road will provide a better alternative for getting onto 17"'Avenue. Alternate 2 (see attached Figure 2) This alternative was added as an option, based on the meetings and conversations with the affected landowners, and developers. As noted in the attached letters, most of the affected landowners prefer this alternative to Alternate 1. On both drawings, two different options are shown for connecting the collector road alternatives to CSAH 42. These two options are the approximate connection point locations, as determined by the County. When future development occurs south of Valley View Road, and in Prior Lake, the alignment of the road south of Valley View Road, and the connections to CSAH 42, will be clearer. This portion of the road is shown on the attached drawings to illustrate how the location, north of Valley View Road, will affect the entire road from 17th Avenue to CSAH 42. Also attached is a memo from Mark McQuillan regarding the Park Advisory Board meeting on June 26, 2000. The Park Advisory Board prefers Alternative No. 1 for access to the park. However, Alternative No. 2 is acceptable if the proposed school is willing to participate in a"shared"parking lot and road access to the park. To summarize this issue, the location of the collector street in this area depends on how the City wants this area to develop. From a transportation standpoint, both alternatives will work. The difficulty with this issue, is that the school from SACS is not a definite proposal and may not occur. Staff intends to bring this issue to the Council for direction after discussion with the affected property owners on the location of a north/south collector. If no resolution of the issue occurs, Council can provide staff with direction and have this issue brought back to a meeting. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Make a motion approving Alternative No. 1, as the street collector alignment. 2. Make a motion approving Alternative No. 2, as the street collector alignment. 3. Provide staff direction on the north/south collector street location between 17th Avenue and CSAH 42 and bring this item back to the July 18th Council meeting. 4. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is asking for direction on this issue from Council after hearing from the public and a final decision could be made at the July 18th Council meeting. ACTION REQUESTED: Provide direction to staff on the preferred route of this future collector road. Staff is requesting Council direction in order to better review applications for new developments, when they are submitted to the City for review. nice Loney Public Works irector BL/pmp COLLECTOR A.1111523. Ylmne__ l 31VNN31lV aarioxviis SK ••• _ 801D37-103 H1f10S-H12�ON nal a .an .r aro . we „o .WNW. Mn w• v.'w'__ mamma. kill rjril igirI■■ ireirri ,•Irr*.;2' L`'��8 �WP7 JI(` ■i ■ �plY`l Y■Y7■��■ ■■UDS•milia ti �G 1 tr• � � • Milli Iona �� umi 111 tt . hhu19 ! UWi$P$• wpwiliabii.. . • I Ili I li 1 ..,._:; i limo tinimpons\iitigi a ml r�♦) arm SG�ou1 iliii t ia�ieerrrlrrl:RI l o vs, i■■r`lilii► fpteg � P .■e. t of (�. II=, I IMO" 0 Ma s�tel! 11 . ,eit 3���� w ill 1 E w PONDS PI y,r mow sem um !IL1jio1 kt4ii impass 111 RD. E ‘k imswilmil p iw, riprik, i / -- 'vt',. „::,.L, Ilii• ri,. i.-,,,% 1 sir 34_1 .1 ..wrieta illtlici ,m_ ...A.\ __ ! Eli 4 4, Aarlititite467 - ' 1 74.1...:!...:Iii.-. *1"i"Nii-sk....., _, ___,..., ‘1_--‘'''' ,111111- ,ci40411goor---13,„ I. Apti'10 til U Z- •f C%` • II TR. ti L 0.�� ° . U Z > (y q,; 2 p w 0 Q or :,.: _J ._ • o �'_ i wr1; ': U U 1 _ a 2 w F— W F- f I � D W J� a J _ J I O O o o .:. , Q o U t I c:". Ian,,... ;:p. ':: ' ct Sp Z I" iii _ L Z g RI Y � r.04404, Za i . JY r L l r.c ' 6111110 Q6su -.N ll". ea *In /LQ iWAR1 .3w�v a�nae Z 31VN21311d g r-.., ay.a.w yn. ..MUNI ..M aro . �y��..•4.3p .. ,w 801031103 Hinos-H 210Nnal X cV s = ------app V "Wi r• L- . 1n0131 ■i■1.4 1."kVA. �y`� .�'<II� '�!1 __ Jil- tr. l Milli �i1n1!1!ly +iia■�gilts����:''����� 11! � Ii_ 14111NPAS 111 a 1 �.el Le _ .Will i- - : j I[$ I( 01 IIII. 60 ini ilmi .imrluroumu nuuo lip .'� �i�;� ® I- _.���G:` r.,„.. sa MI id� 0[]0U .in ES 1 . j f d i lB I '� o ►111�� 0[]01.9_ ®®®■■h■�,�.� �► �iii'io - lid. 4I �i rrr■rw s Ribli ii "IN 317 ,1117i*5 Zitir4 ‘."i ,, lia ,,.!T fri : Ini - . - _r - '' 11111\ii"rU�4 �r 1r 1`"�i� `� e PONDS.^ V I---� a k ,, 11pa,14 1; . / i •'■•- - _ LLliro (in 6-) tfit*Allk---- -ir.... 0 a, ! ,.\\i - __ _ .,.1., 7 ..pMIS�l�• TIPP• 1f 1---- IVO..:,. -vel ,_ .., p 4111r IL- : _ea __, NI. - ...----' . e _• •• . ... •••. .: . • ,..... . _.. .. ... _____..i._ --- • _____ ____ v ... ,, cr, fr. ..,- ..._.---4',4.1 ..„:„-4., z. .. , i L.- .., ., ■tea- _ Z 4: � *_. \.: �; Mei � I '. o� r.' ��r r �#1 W S s II •. — NIMY ult � O o .� oZ u TR. W 'I pir-4 = N D w O a o I - •�I (!1 U ? O 1 Zf = N rg Q 8441 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 350 B.A.Mittelsteadt,P.E. WSB Minneapolis, MN 55426 Bret A.Weiss,RE. Peter R.Willenbring,P.E. Donald W.Sterna,P.E. tel: 763-541-4800 Ronald B.Bray,P.E. &Associates, Inc. fax: 763-541-1700 Memorandum To: Bruce Loney, P.E. City of Shakopee From: Chuck Rickart, P.E. WSB &Associates,Inc. Date: June 21, 2000 Re: North/South Collector Between CSAH 17 and CSAH 83 WSB Project No. 1247-00 As you requested I have reviewed the proposed north/south collector locations between CSAH 17 and CSAH 83. Currently, the City's transportation plan shows three north/south collectors between CSAH 17 and CSAH 83. The proposed collectors are: 1. Sarazin Street- This collector is proposed to extend from 17th Avenue to Valley View Road. The projected 2020 traffic volume is 3,500 vehicles per day. 2. Middle Collector- This collector street would extend from 17th Avenue to CSAH 42, with a projected 2020 traffic volume ranging from 1900 to 2600 vehicles per day. 3. East Collector- This collector would extend from 17th Avenue to Valley View Road, with a projected 2020 traffic volume of 1800 vehicles per day.. After reviewing these locations in more detail, including looking at location of property lines; potential developments in the area; the park and school access locations adjacent to 17th Avenue; access to CSAH 42; and modeling the proposed traffic volumes in this area, I have determined that two collectors would be sufficient to provide good traffic flow in this area. The two collectors are discussed below: 1. Sarazin Street- This collector street provides access to the hospital and commercial areas adjacent to 17th Avenue. It is an outlet for the existing and proposed residential developments east of Sarazin Street and adjacent to Valley View Road. The projected 2020 traffic volume would be 3,800 vehicles per day. 2. Middle Collector- This collector street would extend from 17th Avenue to CSAH 42. This collector route would provide access to the residential areas east and west of the collector street as well as carrying traffic to and from the 17th Avenue corridor and the CSAH 42 corridor. The projected 2020 traffic volumes assuming full build out in this area are estimated to range from 3,500 to 4,300 vehicles per day. Minneapolis • St . Cloud Infrastructure Engineers Planners F:IWPWIM1247-001062100-bLwpd EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Bruce Loney, P.E. City of Shakopee June 21, 2000 Page 2 The roadway systems between CSAH 83 and the new north/south collector, and Sarazin Street and the new north/south collector will be reviewed as development plats occurs in this area. It should be noted that the only access to these collector streets as well as CSAH 83 will be via street connections. No direct access will be allowed on these streets except for the school and park. This City has recently commissioned WSB to analyze the traffic patterns and flows between CSAH 79 and CSAH 83, and 17th Avenue and CSAH 42. This memo is an initial findings of that study. More details with respect to the entire area will be forthcoming with that traffic study. .1w F:I WPWIM1247-001062100-bL wpd June 13, 2000 e &72 eO City of Shakopee ,.., / 129 Holmes Street South C77) oS4"'9006) Shakopee, MN 55379-1351 F yxifirO RE: North-South Street Collector Location ASF Between 17th Avenue and CSAH 42 Dear Mr. Loney, I received your letter of June 6th, 2000 regarding the location of the collector. I am a resident of Shakopee, a developer, and a contract owner of approximately 31 acres in the area. The location of the collector is a very simple issue for the developers and land owners in the area. None of them want it. The adjacent road would cost a row of lots, additional assessments and the further expense of erecting a berm. The developer to the west of our property framed the issue in simple terms. He said, "We cannot afford to pay the owner the high price for the land if we can not figure out a way to get the road moved." However, he agreed,that if he owned our parcel, he would not want the road either. We as property owners unequivocally support the staff decision for alternative 1 for the following reasons: 1. We would lose a row of single family lots on our western border if the road was shifted. 2. In addition to loss of lots,the additional assessments and the erection of the berm would cause additional expense and hardship of our property. 3. We agree with the staffs assessments for the reasons stated in the June 6th, 2000 letter. 4. We purchased the property based upon the original location described by city staff which is alternative# 1. 5. We do not feel the city should shift the financial burden of the road to our property just because the land owners to the west want to reduce their development expense. Sincerely, By: Darrel E. Gonyea Cc: Joel Rutherford, Assistant City Engineer Michael Leek, Community Development Director Mark McNeill, City Administrator od # co),, 426 40 Op June 20,2000 ft" To Whom It May Concern, We, the following landowners, are writing this in response to the letter we received from the City of Shakopee regarding the location of the proposed collector road which will be located between 17 Avenue and CSAH 42. As landowners we feel that Alternate #2, which is the most easterly site, would be a better choice for all. As you know, in our past conversations, Shakopee Area Catholic Schools has an opportunity to relocate to this area if they so choose.We feel that our children and grandchildren would benefit from being on the west side of a busy collector road so they could utilize both the city park and Sunpath School without having to cross a busy street. We hope you will take into consideration the safety of our children now and in the future. We also feel that the east side is better because the collector road would then follow the property line so it would benefit all property owners near by. We hope you will take all of this into consideration as you are making your decision. Thank You, !n rl 1,�� J• n O'Loughlin Gene Hauer 6,)) 4 A 4111/C. Terry Hauer gely ma/04 19 e L84,447 • r 7 G� o fi 8/7 June 16, 2000 ✓U/ er UAL; Cityof Shakopee � P0A- ''.� 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379-1351FF RE: North-South Street Collector Location Between 17th Avenue and CSAH 42 Dear Mr. Loney, I received a copy of your letter of June 6th, 2000 regarding the location of the collector. I am a long time resident of Shakopee and an owner of several parcels of land in the area. I do not want the collector road switched to my property. The staff decided that alternate 1 was the best location for the city. We should accept the staffs decision. I would assume a Church-School will have a playground for the kids. It is less dangerous to have a Collector between the Church-School and the soccer fields than between the single family homes on our land and the school playground. Additionally, we worked very hard and spent a lot of money to acquire the Railroad R.O.W. on my property. We do not want it replaced with collector roads. Sincerely, Harold Schnieder Cc: Joel Rutherford, Assistant City Engineer Michael Leek, Community Development Director Mark McNeill, City Administrator RECE,iVEO JUN 1 3 2000 CITY OF SHAKOPE Board of Directors SHAKOPEE AREA CATHOLIC SCHOOL (SACS) 305 South Scott Street Shakopee, MN 55379 June 12, 2000 Mark McNeill, Shakopee City Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mark, Shakopee Area Catholic School(SACS) is proud to have played an important part in the education of young people in Shakopee. Our cooperation and relationship with the public educational institutions of Shakopee have been both long standing and mutually beneficial. As you know, SACS purchased 40 acres of land on the southeast corner of 83 & old 16. This land, however, boarders on two major roads and future small industry developments—a good area of business but questionable for a new school. So we are currently negotiating a land-swap with the people who own property just of east of the athletic and recreational park being planned east of SunPath school. This land would be good for a private school because it is in a residential area, beside public athletic facilities and on the same block as the SunPath school. We have already share these hopes and dreams with Michael Leek and Bruce Loney of the city of Shakopee. We know that a major north-south feeder street is being planned in that area connecting 17`h Avenue to Valley View Road and eventually Hwy. 42. Some have proposed putting that feeder street to the west of the land being proposed for a future SACS school, separating it from the propose athletic fields and the SunPath school. Rather,we request your support for putting that feeder street to the east of the land for the proposed SACS school. Please consider the following advantages for putting the feeder street to the east, rather than the west, of the land being considered by SACS for a school in the future. • A feeder street is wider and more trafficked than an ordinary street, and there would be significant safety issues in our students to and from those public athletic facilities during the school day. • On the other hand, with the feeder street to the east of the proposed school, there would be no streets for the students to cross for using those public facilities. • By law,parochial students have access to certain programs in public schools. Currently our students are bussed back and forth from public school facilities. With no feeder street between the public and private school, the students could easily walk between buildings that are on the same block. With a feeder street between these two schools, it would be more difficult for our students to go from one school to the other and back—and for safety reasons the state may insist that the city pay for bussing students that short distance. • If the feeder street is placed to the west of our proposed school, there would be frequent interruptions to traffic flow as students cross the street—which is not a goal of a feeder street. • There will be a large parking lot associated with our school. We talked about opening that parking lot after school hours to the public when large practices and tournaments took place in the city athletic fields. But that would become impracticable if a large feeder street separated SACS school from those athletic field. For the safety of our kids, for ease of access of our students to the nearby public athletic facilities, and for easy non-costly student movement between the proposed Catholic school and public school for special educational program, and for continued close cooperation between the public and Catholic schools of the Shakopee area, we strongly encourage you as a leader in the city of Shakopee to advocate for and support the placement of the feeder street to the east of the proposed site for a future SACS school. Sincerely yours, � o Rev. -717,(, )k220 illiam F. Stolzman President of the SACS Board of Directors This letter was approved unanimously by the SACS Board of Directors on June 7, 2000. Members of the SACS Board of Directors are: Fr. Bill Stolzman, pastor of St. Mark's. Fr. Joe Fink, new pastor of St. Mary's. Deacon Jack Weiland, PLA of St. Mary's of Marystown. Dawn McQuillan, St. Mark's representative. Kevin O'Brien, St. Mary's representative. Steve Wagner, St. Mary's of Marystown representative. Sr. Dominica Brennan, representative of archdiocese. June 13, 2000 City of Shakopee _4 fr 129 Holmes Street South c/7.), ; Shakopee, MN 55379-1351 r`i�f � .2 RE: North-South Street Collector Location 0p, Between 17th Avenue and CSAH 42 Dear Mr. Loney, I received your letter of June 6th, 2000 regarding the location of the collector. I am a resident of Shakopee, a developer, and a contract owner of approximately 31 acres in the area. The location of the collector is a very simple issue for the developers and land owners in the area. None of them want it. The adjacent road would cost a row of lots, additional assessments and the further expense of erecting a berm. The developer to the west of our property framed the issue in simple terms. He said, "We cannot afford to pay the owner the high price for the land if we can not figure out a way to get the road moved." However, he agreed,that if he owned our parcel, he would not want the road either. We as property owners unequivocally support the staff decision for alternative 1 for the following reasons: 1. We would lose a row of single family lots on our western border if the road was shifted. 2. In addition to loss of lots,the additional assessments and the erection of the berm would cause additional expense and hardship of our property. 3. We agree with the staffs assessments for the reasons stated in the June 6th, 2000 letter. 4. We purchased the property based upon the original location described by city staff which is alternative# 1. 5. We do not feel the city should shift the financial burden of the road to our property just because the land owners to the west want to reduce their development expense. Sincerely, f . •r By: Darrel E. Gonyea Cc: Joel Rutherford, Assistant City Engineer Michael Leek, Community Development Director Mark McNeill, City Administrator c..„-pp,/ 7, _ ...... . .. A,' / --- June 21, 2000 City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379-1351 Re: North-South Street Collector Location Between 17th Avenue and CSAH 42—Schmitz Property Dear Council Members: The purpose of this letter is to provide a written comment outlining Pheasant Run of Shakopee's reasons for their preference of Alternative No. 2 for the North-South Street Collector location. Pheasant Run prefers Alternative No. 2 for the following reasons: 1. Equal spacing between SARAZIN and County Road#83. The staff and Transportation Plan have indicated the need for one additional North-South Street Collector and this would be the most centrally located alignment. 2. The Catholic Church and School would be separated from the 40-acre regional park by a collector road,thus creating a safety issue for their children. 3. The Road in this location would provide the best access to future development for nearly twice the developable land as compared to Alternative No. 1. 4. Under our development plan, Pheasant Run has contributed 10 acres to the central comprehensive park plan and will be required to make available an additional 10 acres from the Schmitz Parcel. This coupled with the additional forfeiture of right- of-way and cost sharing creates an undo hardship. 5. Alternative No. 1 places great hardship on both the Schmitz Parcel and Hauer Parcels due to their unique characteristics(long and narrow). This in turn would create an inefficient use of the property. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to express our concerns on this issue. If you need any additional information please feel free to contact us. Pheasant Run of Shakopee L.L.P. 2500 West County Road 42 • Suite 11 • Burnsville,MN 55337 • (612)894-2440 • Fax(612)890-9281 http://www.PheasantRunHomes.com In Re: North-South Street Collector Location City of Shakopee June 21 2000 Page 2 Regards, Shawn L. Dahl Pheasant Run of Shakopee L.L.P. cc: Raymond("Butch") Ames, Ames Construction, Inc. Joel Cooper, James R. Hill, Inc. CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMORANDUM To: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director From: Mark J. McQuillan, Natural Resources Director Subject: Future Collector Street between CR17 & 83 Date: June 27, 2000 Last night(June 26, 2000)the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board went on record stating the location of the north/south Collector Road should be aligned next to the City park(Alternative#1). Their decision was based on the knowledge SACS has an interest in locating a school next to the park property but cannot commit to it at this time. However, the PRAB is not adverse to locating the road east of the potential private school site (Alternative#2)if there were definite assurances that A)the SACS School would be located next to the park and B)they would be willing to participate in a shared parking lot with access to the north/south Collector Road. L„ Ak..,__. ___A Mark J/ cQuillan Natural Resources Director Is. C. 3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Michael Hullander, Public Works Supervisor SUBJECT: Extension of Storm Drainage Outlet DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The Public Works Department is requesting to enter into an agreement with S.M. Hengtes & Sons, Inc. to extend the storm drainage outlet by the Shakopee R.V. Park. BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has been requested by the Shakopee R.V. Park to look into an embankment erosion problem that threatens to undermine the roadway leading into the Shakopee R.V. Park. In order to correct the problem the outlet needs to be extended 16 feet and properly backfilled and riprapped to prevent the high volumes of water from further eroding and undermining the roadway. The Public Works Department has received two quotes to correct the problem, with the low quote of$8,150.00 from S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc., with payment to be funded by the Storm Drainage Fund. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept the low quote and enter into an agreement with S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. in the amount of$8,150.00 to be funded by the Storm Drainage Fund. 2. Deny the request and quote. 3. Table for additional information. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to accept the low quote and enter into an agreement with S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. in the amount of$8,150.00 to be funded by the Storm Drainage Fund. i 4z1i2 Michael Hullander Public Works Supervisor MH/pmp OUTLET /s, l, To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill From: Marvin Athmann, Fire Chief P11 971 Subject: Payment for Thermal Imaging System Date: June 27, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The 1999 budget included a line item under capital expenditures in the amount of $28,000 to purchase a Thermal Imaging System. After opening bids,the Council at an August 1999 meeting awarded the purchase of the imaging system to Front Line Plus for $23,815.95. BACKGROUND: Due to technologic improvements to and high demand for this type of system,the delivery of the Thermal Imaging System was delayed until May 2000. Although the selling vendor of this unit was unsuccessful in obtaining the delivery of the unit in a more timely fashion, he did provide a demonstrator model for our use while we anticipated delivery. The 2000 capital budget does not include money for this purchase. A source for the funding of the purchase of the Thermal Imaging System is needed. DISCUSSION: The City financial director, Greg Voxland, has informed me that when a item is budgeted for and a purchase order is issued, but the item is not received during the same year,the money is put into the general fund balance. This general fund balance may be the source for the purchase. OPTIONS: • Purchase the Thermal Imaging System with funds from the General Fund. • Purchase the Thermal Imaging System with funds from a source to be identified. • Return the Thermal Imaging System,budget for and purchase the system in 2002. • Do not purchase a Thermal Imaging System. RECOMMENDATION: Purchase the Thermal Imaging System with funds from the General Fund. ACTION REQUESTED:Authorize the payment for the Thermal Imaging System from the General Fund. CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE / Memorandum' Z---7 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Successful Completion of Probationary Period for Planner I, Beth Thorp MEETING DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Ms. Thorp was appointed to fill the position of Planner I effective January 19, 2000, and her probationary period expires July 19, 2000. As Council is aware, recently Planner I Jared Andrews left, leaving the planning division short-staffed. Ms. Thorp has done an excellent job of taking over some of Mr. Andrew's previous responsibilities, in addition to her own. Ms. Thorp's performance during the probationary period, like her previous performance, has been very satisfactory, and the Council is asked to appoint her to full-time regular employment in the position of Planner I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the Council find that Beth Thorp has successfully completed the 6- month probationary period, and afford her regular, full-time employment as Planner I ACTION REQUESTED: The Council is asked to offer and pass a motion declaring that Beth Thorp has successfully completed the 6-month probationary period, and afford her regular, full-time employment as Planner I. > d R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE /S P Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Successful Completion of Probationary Period for Fire Inspector, Tom Pitschneider MEETING DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: Mr. Pitschneider's probationary period expired June 27, 2000. Council is asked to appoint him to full-time regular employment in the position of Fire Inspector. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council find that Tom Pitschneider has successfully completed the 6-month probationary period, and afford him regular, full-time employment as Fire Inspector. ACTION REQUESTED: The Council is asked to offer and pass a motion declaring that Tom Pitschneider has successfully completed the 6-month probationary period, and afford him regular, full-time employment as Fire Inspector. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director i5. E- 3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Ice Arena Maintenance Operator Job Description/Funding DATE: June 29, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to approve a job description for an Ice Arena Maintenance Operator, and discuss funding. BACKGROUND: At its meeting of April 18th,the City Council was asked to approve a Ice Arena Maintenance Operator position, a job description, and advertise for filling the position. The minutes from the meeting show that Councilor Sweeney had noted that the position was currently funded out of surplus,but that in subsequent years it would be a budgeted item. He asked for a report from the Finance Department on the City's budget surplus. No other action was action that evening. I do recall that the direction from Council was to proceed on this (owing to the urgent nature of trying to get the ice arena staffed at that time),and, as such, I had staff proceed with advertising. That was an error on my part, as the Council did not take formal action to advertise the position. However,that advertising and interviewing has been done, and, unless Council decides otherwise at the July 5th meeting, a recommendation for hire will be forthcoming at the July 18th meeting. BUDGET IMPACT: To follow up on the information requested by Mr. Sweeney at the April 18th meeting,the position will be funded out of the Recreation Fund. In 1999, before transfers,there was an operating loss of$448,353 in the Recreation Fund(that was reduced to $111,384 following transfers). In FY 2000,the budget provides for a$435,810 operating loss,not counting this position. It is probable that the addition of this position will not increase the net operating deficit by the entire amount of the cost of this position, as it is our intent to be able to operate the ice arena later into the evening (thus creating more rentable ice time). As to how much this will offset, I do not know. However, Facilities and Recreation Director Mark Themig has noted that there is a sizeable amount of maintenance which has been deferred (part of that is a result that the ice arena has been relatively new, but is now starting to age). Without a maintenance operator doing preventative maintenance, contracted repair work and maintenance will increase significantly. It is my hope that the Council is still supportive of this position. Without a full time Maintenance Operator, we will have to make some difficult decisions regarding the ice arena. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend the following: 1. City Council approve the attached job description for the Ice Arena Maintenance Operator. 2. Affirm the recruitment process, which will result in a recommendation for hire at the July 18th meeting. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should,by motion, approve the following: 1. Job description for Ice Arena Maintenance Operator. 2. Affirming that staff fill the position, and bring a recommendation for hiring back to the July 18th meeting. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw Job Description Job Title: Ice Arena Maintenance Operator Division: Parks&Recreation Department: Location: Community Center Shift: Flexible schedule, including nights and weekends. Reports To: Facilities&Recreation director FLSA Status: Nonexempt Prepared By: Prepared Date: 04/00 Approved By: Approved Date: Salary Level: Grade D SUMMARY Under the supervision of the Facility and Recreation Director,this position is responsible for work involving construction,maintenance and repair of the Shakopee Ice Arena,including the ice sheet,refrigeration system,surrounding grounds,etc. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES include the following.Other duties may be assigned. Oversee as well as perform the physical operations as a working supervisor during evenings and on weekends. Operate and repair ice resurfacer and various other type of hand operated equipment. Control flow of money during scheduled hours. Handle services for general public,such as sharpening skates, sales,registration and information. Maintain ice sheet in usable condition at all times. Direct and perform janitorial cleaning whenever need to maintain the arena in respectable condition. Assist in the training and supervision of arena rink attendants. Assist in daily crowd control;and during large paid spectator events. Responsible for mechanical readings and minor repairs to compressors. Follow established safety practices and procedures. Perform and accept other duties and responsibilities as assigned by the Facility and Recreation Director. Page 1 • QUALIFICATIONS To perform this job successfully,an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily.The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge,skill,and/or ability required.Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. EDUCATION and/or EXPERIENCE This full-time position requires a high school diploma or general education degree(GED); a two year degree in ice arena or facility management,recreation of related field preferred.Two years related experience in an ice arena operation is desired. Requires the knowledge of ice arena operation methods and procedures,refrigeration systems used in ice arenas,and the ability to perform routine facility maintenance activities.Knowledge of small engine repair desirable. LANGUAGE SKILLS Ability to read and interpret documents such as safety rules,operating and maintenance instructions,and procedure manuals.Ability to write routine reports and correspondence.Ability to speak effectively before groups of customers or employees of organization. REASONING ABILITY Ability to apply commonsense understanding to carry out instructions furnished in written,oral, or diagram form.Ability to deal with problems involving several concrete variables in standardized situations. CERTIFICATES,LICENSES,REGISTRATIONS Possession of Class C Boilers License(low)or the ability to obtain one within one year is preferred.Employee must possess valid Class D Drivers License. OTHER SKILLS AND ABILITIES Ability to work weekends,evenings and irregular hours,outside of regularly assigned shift, in order to fully respond to the maintenance and scheduling needs of the facility. Ability to work industriously without constant supervision.Ability to work cooperatively and establish good relations with co-workers and the public.Ability to perform moderately strenuous manual labor for extended periods of time. Ability to operate,repair and maintain equipment in a safe and efficient manner. Ability to ensure that preventative maintenance schedules are directed followed consistently,and when possible,problem areas anticipated and repairs made prior to peak ice usage periods.Ability to communicate effectively verbally and in writing. Ability to count and record money. Ability to read equipment gauges. PHYSICAL DEMANDS The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job,the employee is regularly required to stand;walk;use hands to forger,handle,or feel objects,tools,or controls;reach with hands and arms;and talk and hear.The employee frequently is required to climb or balance and stoop,kneel,crouch,or crawl.The employee must frequently lift and/or move up to 50 pounds. Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision,distance vision,color vision,peripheral vision,depth perception,and the ability to adjust focus. Page 2 WORK ENVIRONMENT The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job.Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job,the employee frequently works near moving mechanical parts.The employee occasionally works in outside weather conditions and is occasionally exposed to toxic or caustic chemicals and risk of electrical shock. The noise level in the work environment is usually loud. Page 3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE f J ' ' ` • Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Temporary 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License—Shakopee Jaycees DATE: June 26, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The Shakopee Jaycees have made application for a temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license for Derby Days on August 4 and 5, 2000. The application and certificate of insurance are in order. I have been in contact with the Chief of Police regarding the application. He recommends approval of the license with sales to cease at 11:00 p.m. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the application and grant a temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license to the Shakopee Jaycees, Inc., municipal parking lot at 2"Avenue and Lewis Street, for August 4 and 5, 2000, with sales to cease at 11:00 p.m. JSC/jms (jeanette/I iquor/jctemp) is. F. 2., CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum conszAlr TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Apportionment of Special Assessments for Southbridge 5th Addition DATE: June 28,2000 INTRODUCTION: City Council is asked to consider adopting the attached Resolution No. 5385,which apportions existing special assessments against newly created lots located within the plat of Southbridge 5th Addition. BACKGROUND: Prior to the platting of Southbridge 5th Addition,there were existing special assessments against it for the Southbridge Parkway Collector Street,Project No. 1997-4 and 1997-4A. 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. 5385 apportions the existing special assessments against the newly created lots within the plat. The developer has agreed to the apportionment in the Developers Agreement for this subdivision. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 5385,A Resolution Apportioning Assessments Among New Parcels Created As A Result Of The Platting of Southbridge 5th Addition,and move its adoption. ) Cet-) lerk I:clerk/jeanette/app-spec/memo RESOLUTION NO. 5385 A RESOLUTION APPORTIONING ASSESSMENTS AMONG NEW PARCELS CREATED AS A RESULT OF THE PLATTING OF SOUTHBRIDGE 5TH ADDITION WHEREAS,on November 17, 1998,Resolution No. 5016 adopted by the City Council levied assessments against properties benefited by the Southbridge Parkway Collector Street, Project No. 1997-4 and 1997-4A; and WHEREAS,on September 7, 1999,Resolution No. 5219 adopted by the City Council apportioned the installments unpaid against the parcels created because of the platting of Southbridge 4th Addition; and WHEREAS, Outlot B of Southbridge 4th Addition has been subdivided into the plat of Southbridge 5th Addition; and WHEREAS,it is the desire of the City Council to apportion the installments remaining unpaid against this parcel because of the platting of Southbridge 5th Addition. 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- 284065-0 for the 1997-4 and 1997-4A Southbridge Parkway Collector Street)are hereby apportioned as outlined in Exhibit"A"attached hereto and made a part hereof. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that all other parts of Resolution No. 5016 and Resolution No. 5219 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 Attest: City Clerk Exhibit A Levied Amount s/a 27110 City Project 1997-4 Parent Parcel=27-284065-0(Outlot B,Southbridge 4th Addition) $ 299,190.26 Number of Lots(Not Including Road) 72 Lots Assessment per Lot $ 4,155.420 27-308001-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 1,Block 1 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308002-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 1,Block 2 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 ' Addition 27-308003-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 2,Block 2 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308004-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 3,Block 2 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,W. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308005-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 4,Block 2 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308006-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 5,Block 2 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308007-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 6,Block 2 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308008-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 7,Block 2 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308009-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 1,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308010-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 2,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308011-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 3,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308012-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 4,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308013-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 5,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308014-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 6,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition Page 1 27-308015-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 7,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308016-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 8,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308017-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 9,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308018-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 10,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308019-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 11,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W , Southbridge 5th Madison,WI. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308020-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 12,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308021-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 13,Block 3 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308022-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 1,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308023-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 2,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308024-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 3,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308025-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 4,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308026-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 5,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308027-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 6,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308028-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 7,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308029-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 8,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308030-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 9,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308031-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 10,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition Page 2 27-308032-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 11,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308033-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 12,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308034-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 13,Block 4 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308035-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 1,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308036-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship*vac Inc Lot 2,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308037-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 3,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308038-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 4,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308039-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 5,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308040-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 6,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308041-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 7,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308042-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 8,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308043-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 9,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308044-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 10,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308045-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 11,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308046-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 12,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308047-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 13,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition Page 3 27-308048-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 14,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308049-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 15,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308050-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 16,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308051-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 17,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308052-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 18,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308053-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 19,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308054-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 20,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308055-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 21,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308056-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 22,Block 5 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308057-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 1,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308058-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 2,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308059-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 3,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308060-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 4,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308061-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 5,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308062-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 6,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308063-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 7,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308064-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 8,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition Page 4 27-308065-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 9,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308066-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 10,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308067-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 11,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308068-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 12,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308069-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 13,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308070-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 14,Block 6 $ 4,155.42 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308071-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 15,Block 6 $ 4,155.43 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition 27-308072-0 Shakopee Crossings Ltd.Ptnship Nevac Inc Lot 16,Block 6 $ 4,155.43 122 Washington Ave.W Southbridge 5th Madison,Wi. 53703-2718 Addition TOTAL= $ 299,190.26 Page 5 lS, r; 3 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Derby Days Street/Parking Lot Closings DATE: June 28, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to approve a request from the Derby Days Committee regarding street and parking lot closures. BACKGROUND: Derby Days will be held this year from Thursday,August 3rd- Sunday,August 6th. Events similar to those in previous years, including the Taste of Shakopee on Thursday, beer tent and dance on Friday and Saturday, and a parade on Saturday will again be held. There is a classic car cruise and show in the downtown on Friday. Derby Days Co-Chair Jack McGovern has submitted a letter showing the requested street closures,parking lot closures, and other restrictions. This is being reviewed by the Police Department. Mr. McGovern informs me that he has advised, or will advise the major users of the parking lots of the times for closure. If there are issues of concern for the Police Department,they will so indicate prior to the Council meeting. Mr. McGovern will be in attendance at the July 5th meeting to answer any questions. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the following traffic and parking related lot or street closures be approved, subject to any modifications recommended by the Police Department: 1. Parking lot and Second Avenue north of the railroad tracks between Sommerville Street and Lewis Street from August 3 at 8:00 AM until Noon or Sunday,August 6th. 2. Parking lot between Lewis and Holmes Street August 3-5 (carnival rides). 3. Lewis Street from 3rd to 1'Avenue, and 1st Avenue between Holmes and Sommerville Streets from 4:30 PM until midnight, Friday, August 4th (Classic Car Cruise). 4. Lewis Street, and Holmes Street north of 2nd Avenue, and 1'Street from Holmes to Sommerville Streets on Thursday August 3rd through Saturday August 5th from 8:00 AM until 8:00 PM. (Sidewalk Sales) 5. 3rd Avenue from Sommerville to Lewis Streets on Saturday August 5th from noon until 3:00 PM. (Water Fights) 6. Lewis Street from 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue on Saturday August 5th, from noon to 3 PM. (Soap Box Derby) 7. Exit from County Road 69 onto Holmes Street and 1'Avenue August 3-5. 8. 3`d Avenue and 4th Avenue from Naumkeag Street to Holmes Street from 9:00 AM until 1:00 PM. (Parade Route) 9. Authorize sidewalk sales by downtown merchants-Thursday through Saturday 10. Authorize the assistance of Public Works for set up of picnic tables,benches, and clean up as needed. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should,by motion, approve the listed parking and traffic related issues relating to Derby Days,August 3rd—5th. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CC: Judy Cox Dan Hughes Public Works e l 1D o D The Derby Days Committee PO Box 312 Shakopee,MN. 55379 Mark McNeil City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street Shakopee,MN. 55379 Co-Chairs Jack McGovern (952)445-5791 Dear Mark, Dave Thompson (952)445-7200 It's that time of the year for Derby Days and the Derby Days Secretary Committee is seeking your support to make this year's festival a Mariah Barlow success. Here is a list of requests that we need your assistance with. (612 )3964594 Derby Days is August 3-5 this year. Fundraising Lisa Goemer Please note the work needed for sand volley courts is listed under (952)496-0533 Friday,August 4,but may be done earlier if it is more convenient Parade Chairs for you and your staff. Everything else is listed for specific days Terri Jo Jorgenson and if needed times. (952)403-9429 Brenda Reedy yoursupport. appreciate 953-9731 you We would like to thank for We a reciate all the time and labor that is spent on this festival by the City of Shakopee. Public Relations Joy Stark (952)361-5526 Vendors Mike Barlow (952)368-4968 Sincerely, Event Chairs Carl Bilda Pat Meyers Jeff Rodelius Tracy Rodelius Loretta Mc Neil Jack McGovern iel Jeff Yonke Derby Days Co-Chair Tammy Abrahamsen end. Carol Schultz Paul Burton Ron Schmaltz Carrie Ross Thomspon Mary Athman Sandy Doherty Co D o D c 1.NOTICE TO DOWNTOWN BUSINESS OWNERS AND RESIDENTS This years Derby Days Committee is bringing the following request to the City Council meeting on the evening of Tuesday July?,2000 1.Request to close the parking lot and Second Avenue north of the railroad tracks between Sommervile Street and Lewis Street on August 3 at 8:00 AM to set up the tent and area for Taste of Shakopee. This area will also be closed for food vendors until noon on Sunday the 6th. 2.Request closing of parking lot between Lewis and Holmes Street(by Pablo's)August 3-5 for carnival rides. 3.Request closing of Lewis Street from 3RD to 1ST Avenue and 1ST Avenue between Holmes and Sommerville Streets form 4:30 PM until midnight for the Classic Car Cruise. 4.Request Closingof Lewis Street and Holmes Street north of 2ND Avenue and 1ST Street from �1 Holmes to Sommervile Streets on Thursday August 3RD through Saturday August 5th from 8:00 AM until 8:00 PM for the Sidewalk Sales. 5.Request closing of 3RD Avenue from Sommerville to Lewis Streets on Saturday August 5TH from noon until approximately 3:00 PM for the Water Fights.Closing of Lewis Street from 3RD Avenue to 2ND Avenue for the Soap Box Derby Races. 6:Request closing of entrance from Cty.Rd. 69 onto Holmes Street and 1ST Avenue August 3-5. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE! 7.Request closing of 3RD Avenue and 4TH Avenue from Naumkeag Street to Holmes Street from approximately 9:00 AM until 1:00PM for the Parade. We would like to thank-you for your cooperation and support. Although some of these closings may cause inconveniences,we hope you will take advantage of the added pedestrian traffic. Many people attending the events this year will be new to the community. This is the community's opportunity to accentuate our uniqueness as well as goods and services we can provide. If you have any specific concerns please contact Jack McGovern prior to the council meeting in July. We would like the opportunity to work together to prevent problems. We will work with you to ensure this is enjoyable for everyone. There will be a council meeting in July. Sincerely, Jack McGovern Derby Days Co-Chair 445-0937 Home 445-5791 Work REQUEST FOR STREET AND PARKING LOT CLOSINGS Please find enclosed a copy of the notice concerning all street closings and parking lot closings for the Classic Car Cruise,Carnival Rides and entrance from 69 to Holmes through 1ST Ave. This notice will be given to all businesses and residents in the area. Wednesday August 2 Block off part of the parking lot for tents to be set up. Thursday August 3 By 9:00 AM Please place 10 pylon cones in front of Bill's Toggery Please place road barriers on 3rd Ave.and Lewis St,the parking lot entrance on Holmes St. on the corner of 1st Ave. and Holmes,and corner of 1ST Ave.and Sommerville FYI Derby Days volunteers will: Post notice of parking restrictions by 8:00 AM Post notice of parking lot closings by 8:00 AM Supply signage By 1:00 PM Please place 40 Picnic Tables and Renaissance Benches in parking lot by tent and 20 at the intersection of 1ST Avenue and Lewis Street. Please place 20 garbage receptacles at the intersection of 1ST Ave. and Lewis St. and 25 in parking lot by tent Please place 1 tent at 1ST and Lewis,and 1 tent at 2ND and Lewis Please place Road Barriers: 1ST Ave.and Lewis,east edge 1ST Ave. and Holmes,east edge 2ND Ave and Lewis,north edge 2ND Ave.and Sommerville,west edge,east of entrance to Performance Shop FYI Derby Days Volunteers will Post parking restriction notices by 8:00 AM Wednesday morning Set up for Taste of Shakopee at 1:00 PM Arrange picnic tables for Friday's Street Dance FRIDAY AUGUST 4 Early AM Please empty garbage cans,sweep parking lot,and sweep Lewis St. and 1ST Ave. Anytime Please deliver picnic tables Please deliver Public Utilities Parade Registrars,see Lou Von Hout,should be placed inside garage area. Please place 13 barriers as indicated on the enclosed map and description page Please deliver keg container to Library,next to water fountain on north face. By 3:00 PM Please place 20 garbage receptacles near large tent,6 at Public Utilities parking lot and 100 along parade route,2 on opposite corners of each intersection an 1 on every block of the route. Please hall and fare fine court sand,drag sand,install poles and side line rope,and deliver 2 8 foot step ladders and rakes behind library on northeast corner. FYI Derby Days volunteers will: Post parking restriction notices by 8:00 AM Set up for Food Vendors and Street Dance by 8:00 AM Begin fencing beer garden area by 10:00 AM SATURDAY AUGUST 5TH By 7:30 AM Please empty garbage receptacles in parking lot Please place 24 garbage receptacles near hydrant on 2ND Ave.and Lewis St., 14 near large tent, 8 at intersection of 2ND Ave and Lewis St.6 by the Volleyball Court. Parade Please consult with Parade Coordinators for needed street sweeping during the parade and clean up after the parade,anytime after 12:00 PM. FYI Derby Days volunteers will: Sell pop along the parade route from 9:45 until noon Cluster tables and benches Arrange garbage cans,barricades,fencing,and keg SUNDAY AUGUST 6TH By 6:00 AM Please sweep parking lot between Lewis and Sommerville for Pancake and Sausage Breakfast. MONDAY AUGUST 7TH Please return Renaissance Benches Pick up picnic tables and canopy from Public Utilities Building Thank-you for supporting Derby Days 2000. Call Jack if you have any questions. 445-0937 home 445-5791 work /S F. '/, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: Vehicle Policy Amendment DATE: June 23, 2000 Introduction & Background Council authorized the acquisition of a light duty vehicle for the 3rd Fire Chief to use to respond to fires and commute from home/work. The vehicle policy currently allows only two vehicles to be used for commuting. Action Offer Resolution 5386 a Resolution Amending The Vehicle Acquisition, Use & Replacement Policy Adopted By Resolution No. 4582, and move its adoption. 41.1 Gegg Voxland Finance Director G:\DOCS\VBHIC3.DOC RESOLUTION No. 5386 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE VEHICLE ACQUISITION, USE& REPLACEMENT POLICY ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 4582 WHEREAS,the city council has adopted a formal policy for the acquisition,use and replacement of vehicles WHEREAS,the city council desired to up date the formal policy for the acquisition,use and replacement of vehicles, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, COUNTY OF SCOTT, MINNESOTA,that the Vehicle Policy is adopted by Resolution 4582 is hereby amended to read as follows: IV.A.4. Three officers of the Fire Department may use a light duty vehicle for commuting use including their regular place of employment if it is within 15 miles of the City of Shakopee. 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. 5 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: City Administrator Annual Evaluation DATE: June 28, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to approve the format and who should perform the City Administrator's annual performance evaluation. BACKGROUND: On July 22nd, I will be observing my fourth anniversary as City Administrator in Shakopee. It is appropriate at this time to affirm the annual performance evaluation format. Previously, each of the members of the City Council submitted written comments about my performance to the Mayor. The Mayor and one other member of the Council then met with me to review those performance comments and set goals for the upcoming year. Previously,tied to the performance evaluation was a salary adjustment,which then came back to the City Council for action. However, last year, it was decided to place me on the City's step and range system, with a cost of living adjustment equal to other City employees which takes place at the first of the year. Unless there was a performance problem, it is assumed that I would progress to the next step on the employment anniversary date. I am currently at Step 6 of Grade Q of the City Pay Plan($81,401). At this time, I ask that the Council affirm an evaluation format. Mayor Brekke will need to appoint one Councilor to serve with him on an evaluation subcommittee. All of the Council will be provided with evaluation forms to assist them in their comments. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council should approve Mayor Brekke and one Councilor to serve as a City Administrator performance evaluation subcommittee,to discuss areas of performance and set goals for the upcoming year. ',i()S—kekiLt.gt Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: 15.F.6.—Energy Service Agreement- Minnegasco DATE: July 5, 2000 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to authorize the City to enter into an Energy Service Agreement with Reliant Energy(Minnegasco). This would be for energy savings at the Community Center. BACKGROUND: Reliant Energy has contacted the City,proposing that it enter into a Energy Service Agreement, in which the City would agree to purchase natural gas from Reliant for the next 12 months. It would automatically renew for successive 12 month terms, until such time as a 60 day notice would be given prior to the end of a term. In exchange for this,the City would realize the savings of$1386 annually. The Community Center is the only facility owned by the City which is large enough to qualify for the program. Reliant Energy has requested that this be considered and approved prior to August 1st, which is their date for negotiating wholesale gas supplies. This has been reviewed by the City Attorney, who indicates that it is a City Council decision. RECOMMENDATION: In as much as the City has no other feasible option for natural gas supply at this time, staff's recommendation would be to authorize the agreement. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should,by motion, authorize the execution of the Energy Service Agreement by and between the City and Reliant Energy(Minnegasco). 2iu i' &w Mark McNeill City Administrator A Agreement No. J1eIiant \ EnergY y ENERGY SERVICE AGREEMENT Reliant Energy Retail, Inc. ("Seller") agrees to sell and Buyer agrees to purchase Buyer's entire natural gas requirements and/or energy management services pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Natural gas sold under this Agreement is for Buyer's own use and shall not be resold. Buyer: City of Shakopee Facility Address(es): 1255 Fuller Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 Mailing Address(es): 129 Holmes Street S Shakopee, MN 55379 Natural Gas Utility: Reliant Energy Minnegasco Rate Class: Small Volume Utility Account#(s): 270-008-696-500 Term: Initial term will be for a period of 12 months, beginning on August 1, 2000, and will renew automatically for successive 12-month terms unless either party terminates the Agreement by providing the other party with written notice at least 60 days prior to the end of the initial or renewal term. Pricing: The Customer shall receive a $.15/dekatherm ($.015/therm) discount from the monthly delivered price ("Delivered Price") of the firm sales service class the Customer would have otherwise received from Reliant Energy Minnegasco. The Delivered Price shall include the posted first of month price for the applicable firm sales service, plus any franchise fees, customer charges, sales tax and other fees that may occasionally be assigned to the firm sales service. Delivery Terms: All deliveries will be firm under the same terms and conditions as described in Utility's tariffs, which terms and conditions are incorporated herein by reference. Delivery Point: Buyer's Utility Meter Special Terms: This Agreement is not binding until Seller obtains acceptable agreements with Utility and intrastate/interstate pipelines, and shall be subject to all terms and conditions set forth therein. By signing below, each individual warrants that they are authorized to sign this Agreement on behalf of the party for which it was executed. BUYER'S AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE RELIANT ENERGY RETAIL, INC. By By Date Date GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Exclusive Limited Agency: Buyer hereby appoints Seller as its exclusive limited agent and authorizes Seller to(i)obtain Buyer's usage data, payment and credit history from Utility, (ii) make nominations, (iii)determine measurement and metering methods, (iv) execute required documents on Buyer's behalf necessary to commence service under this Agreement, (v)aggregate Buyer's natural gas supply and balancing, banking, advancing, storage and pooling thresholds, as applicable,with those of other customers and (vi)to perform all other appropriate tasks. Date of Initial Deliveries: The date of initial deliveries under this Agreement is dependent on the Utility's processing Buyer's request, the date Buyer's meter is read by the Utility, approvals of any regulatory body, and Buyer's satisfaction of Seller's standards for extending credit. Payment: Seller will invoice Buyer on a monthly basis. Buyer will remit in full to Seller the invoice amount within 20 days of the invoice date. If Buyer fails to pay amounts when due, Seller may collect from Buyer, in accordance with applicable law, a late charge equal to the lesser of one and one-half percent(1'/z%)of the outstanding balance per month or the maximum interest rate allowed by law. Buyer agrees to pay Seller for all costs and expenses incurred by Seller(including reasonable attorney fees)to collect amounts due and owing hereunder. Failure to pay amounts when due shall be just cause for suspension of deliveries of natural gas under this Agreement and/or termination of this Agreement. Seller is not responsible for any penalties that result from any suspension. Credit: Seller may terminate this Agreement or require a deposit if Buyer does not meet Seller's credit standards at any time. Buyer agrees to provide Seller credit information, including billing and payment history with Utility. Buyer represents that all information supplied to Seller is correct and that Buyer is validly existing,financially able to continue in business, unaware of any situation which would alter its financial abilities and has not filed, planned to file or have had filed any bankruptcy proceeding. Title and Measurement: Title to natural gas sold under this Agreement will pass to Buyer at the delivery point(s). Buyer's transporting pipeline or Utility will determine all gas measurements. Although either party can contest the determination, both parties agree that the pipeline or Utility's ultimate determination will be final and binding. Taxes: Buyer will be responsible for and will pay all taxes and assessments assessed against the natural gas and services being sold to Buyer at and after delivery to Buyer's Utility(including any gas revenue tax). If Buyer is entitled to a tax exemption, it is Buyer's responsibility to provide Seller with evidence of such. Contract performance: This Agreement shall be effective from the date it is signed by both parties, however,the sale and purchase obligations of this Agreement will not become operable until the Utility qualifies Buyer for the appropriate rate schedule permitting implementation of this Agreement. Seller's obligation to Buyer is no greater than the service obligation of Utility, and Seller will be excused from performing its obligations to the same extent Utility is,or would be, excused from the performance of like obligations under Utility's effective tariff. No waiver or forbearance of any provision of this agreement shall be held to be a waiver or require forbearance in the future. THIS DOCUMENT REPRESENTS THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND CANNOT BE CHANGED EXCEPT IN WRITING SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES. THIS AGREEMENT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS WITHOUT REGARD TO ANY CONFLICT OF LAW RULES THAT WOULD REQUIRE APPLYING THE LAWS OF ANOTHER JURISDICTION. Any portion of this Agreement which may be deemed to be unenforceable or illegal shall not affect the enforceability or legality of the remaining terms and conditions. Early Termination and Liabilities: Buyer acknowledges that Seller may, in its sole judgment, terminate this Agreement in advance of the end of the initial term or any extension thereof upon 30 days notice if changes to applicable laws, tariffs, rules, regulations or procedures adversely affect Seller's ability to economically perform its obligations and earn a reasonable profit. Liabilities not excused under the terms of this agreement shall be limited to direct actual damages. Neither party will be liable to the other for consequential, incidental, punitive, exemplary or indirect damages. There are no third party beneficiaries to this agreement. Assignment: Buyer may not assign this Agreement without Seller's written consent. This Agreement will be binding on the parties' respective successors and assigns. Notices: Notices and invoices to Buyer under this Agreement shall be hand delivered or transmitted by mail to the mailing address on the front page of this Agreement. Notices to Seller should be sent to: Reliant Energy Retail, Inc. 800 LaSalle Ave, Suite 2230 Minneapolis, MN 55402-2033 Confidentiality: This Agreement and its terms are confidential except to the extent disclosure is necessary for its implementation or otherwise required by law. Buyer's Initials