Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/07/1997 4 TENTATIVE AGENDA CITY OF SHAKOPEE REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 7, 1997 LOCATION: 129 Holmes Street South Mayor Jeff Henderson presiding 1] Roll Call at 7:00 PM 2] Recess for an Economic Development Authority Meeting 3] Re-convene 4] Approval of Agenda 5] Approval of Consent Business - (All items noted by an * are anticipated to be routine. After a discussion by the Mayor,there will be 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] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 7] Mayor's Report 8] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS *9] Approval of Minutes: August 21, 1997, Adj. Reg. Session; August 21, 1997, Worksession; August 28, 1997, Worksession; Sept. 2, 1997, Reg. Session; and Sept. 9, 1997, Adj. Reg. Session *10] Approve Bills in the Amount of$516,961.61 11] Communications 12] Continuation of the public hearing regarding the proposed issuance of$3,544,900 Scott County HRA Revenue Bonds/City of Shakopee General Obligation Bonds to finance the acquisition and construction of a 52-unit senior housing facility to be located on Blocks 3 & 4 a) Res. No. 4744, Approving City general obligation pledge to Series A bonds b) Res. No. 4745, Approving Development Agreement c) Res. No. 4746, Approving TIF Plan modifications for District No. 10 d) Res. No. 4747, Approving guarantee agreement and TIF pledge agreement e) Res. No. 4748, Approving financing documents 13] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions A] Preliminary & Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, located in the southwest corner of Vierling Drive and Marschall Road-Res. No. 4755 TENTATIVE AGENDA October 7, 1997 Page -2- 13] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions continued *B] Final Plat of Boulder Ridge, located in the northwest corner of Vierling Drive and Marschall Road-Res. No. 4756 14] General Business A] Engineering *1. Res. No. 4759, Canceling Assessment Hearing for Valley Park 13th Addition Improvements, Project No. 1996-8 *2. Res. No. 4760, Canceling Assessment Hearing for Lateral Sanitary Sewer Extension East of French Trace, Project No. 1996-9 3. Ordering Feasibility Report for 1998 Street Reconstruction Project-Res. 4761 4. Accepting Feasibility Report for East Dean Lake Collector-Res. No. 4765 B] Police and Fire 1. Hiring New Firefighters 2. Opticom Emitter Purchase for Traffic Signal Override *3. Criminal Justice Data Communications Contracts *4. Memorandum of Agreement to Obtain Surplus Property *5. Acceptance of Grant Money for"Face to Face" Grant to Police Department C] Park and Recreation 1. Naming a Park After George Muenchow 2. Blacktopping Lions Park Outdoor Hockey Rink D] Community Development 1. Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) - CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division-tabled 9/2/97 E] General Administration *1. Release of Escrow Funds for Meadows West 1st Addition *2. Fraternal Order of Eagles Premises Permit- Res. No. 4753 3. Awarding Sale of$1,805,000 G. O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B - Res. 4757 *4. Authorize Advertising for Cable Board Vacancies *5. Appointment of Election Judges - Res. No. 4749 6. Residential Parking Designation - 200 Block West Fifth Avenue - Res. No. 4763 *7. Final Payment- Asbestos Removal *8. Shako-Valley Amateur Hockey Association Premises Permit - Res. No. 4764 9. Police Chief Retirement 15] Other Business 16] Adjourn to Tuesday, October 21, 1997, at 7:00 P.M. TENTATIVE AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting Tuesday, October 7, 1997 1. Roll Call at 7:00 p.m 2. Approval of the agenda A.) Approval of Minutes: August 21 & September 9, 1997 3. Financial A.)Approval of Bills 4. Public Hearing on Master Lease-Blocks 3 &4(Continued from 9/30 meeting) 5. New Business- Blocks 3 & 4: A.)Resolution No. 97-9, approving the Development Agreement and Tax Increment Pledge Agreement B.) Resolution No. 97-10, modifying the TIF Plan for TIF District No. 10 C.) Resolution No. 97-11, approving Financing Documents 6. Other Business: 7. Recess to discuss matters under attorney-client privilege .-. 8. Re-convene 9. Adjourn cdagenda.doc OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ADJOURNED REGULAR SESSION AUGUST 21, 1997 Members Present: Henderson, DuBois,Link, and President Sweeney Members Absent: Zorn Staff Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator Others Present: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and Mark McQuillan, Parks and Recreation Director 1. Roll Call President Sweeney called the meeting to order at 4:09 P.M. Members present were noted as above. 2. Approval of Agenda Henderson/Link moved to approve the agenda as provided. Motion carried unanimously. 3. CPA Reviews - Blocks 3 & 4 Mr. McNeill stated that three firms were solicited to review the proposal for Blocks 3 &4 as directed by the EDA at their August 19th meeting. Being they all declined, Ehlers and Associates was contacted. They are not a CPA firm but they are a public finance advisor, similar to Springsted,the City's financial consultant. They could not quote figures without additional information but estimated four or five hours of their time at$120 per hour. Henderson/Link moved to authorize hiring Ehlers and Associates to perform the tasks as outlined(review of bond projections, housing projections,retail projections, feasibility of the project, element of risk to the City) and that staff be given discretion if to have Mr. Ruff present and when to present the information to City Council. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Other Business: There was no other business to come before the E.D.A. Official Proceedings of the August 21, 1997 Shakopee Economic Development Authority Page -2- 5. Mjourri Henderson/DuBois moved to adjourn to Thursday, August 28, 1997, at 4:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. /Ptai(aj. J dith S. Cox D.A. Secretary Recording Secretary i OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA ADJOURNED REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 9, 1997 Members Present: Jane DuBois, Jeff Henderson, Cletus Link, Burl Zorn and President Bob Sweeney Members absent: None. Staff Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; and Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator. 1. Roll Call. President Sweeney called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Roll was taken as noted above. 2. Approval of Agenda. The following additions were requested: Paul Snook requested Item 4A be added, which was an informational memorandum regarding prospects for a comprehensive revitalization of downtown. Mark McNeill requested Item 4B be added, which was an informational item regarding a draft letter from Ehlers and Associates concerning the River Center project. Henderson/Link moved to approve the agenda with the above additions. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Work Session for Rehab Financial Incentive Program and Related Design Guidelines. Paul Snook distributed an outline regarding the issues and concerns of the Rehab Grant Program. Mr. Snook stated that he broke the matter down into four issues with goals and action plans for each issue. He also distributed the current guidelines and suggested using illustrated guidelines and provided handouts regarding other communities and their illustrated guidelines. He noted that other communities' rehab incentive programs are focused exclusively on the downtown historic district, and do not include adjacent,more recently developed highway business districts,because these areas do not have a critical mass of historic buildings/ architecture like downtown does. Mr. Snook added that these communities recognize that the condition of their downtowns is an indicator of the whole community's economic health(making downtown a priority), and that historic preservation-restoration of the unique architecture and historical facades of its traditional buildings -is the most effective economic development strategy for traditional downtowns. Official Proceedings of the September 9, 1997 Shakopee Economic Development Authority Page -2- Burl Zorn stated that he liked Mr. Snook's overall approach. He did note that the program failed to identify historic buildings and opined that the 1900 standard architecture is important. Mr. Zorn stated he liked the loan program. He also stated that he had a problem with making the program exclusive to the downtown area because everyone pays taxes. Mr. Zorn noted that many of the issues regarding the program could be handled by the Ad Hoc Committee which is being formed and then the Committee's suggestions could be brought before the City Council. Jeff Henderson stated that the EDA will have to decide what it wants to do regarding the Rehab Grant Program and stated that the Program was not there to improve businesses but to help blighted businesses. Mr. Henderson opined that the program is not an issue of fairness but of need and stated that the downtown area is what defines Shakopee. He also supported the idea of a low interest loan program. Jane DuBois also supported the idea of a low interest loan program and stated that the Downtown/101 Ad Hoc Committee was a good starting point to be working on the program. Bob Sweeney stated that there needs to be an inventory regarding what buildings are historic and what are not. He mentioned many of the downtown buildings and noted if they had any historic value. He also stated that if the downtown district was expanded that some of the residences would then be included. Mr. Henderson stated that if a program can be established soon, the historic district could be defined. Cletus Link noted that the Perry building was going to be undergoing some remodeling and that building would have been a great location and building to restore under the Grant Program. Ms. DuBois questioned whether other cities had architectural control committees to which Mr. Snook replied that most have historic preservation commissions. He also noted that some businesses cannot undertake remodelings all in one phase so a financial incentive would be help to them. He noted that there would probably be some type of restrictions such as committing to stay in the building for a certain number of years. Mr. Link stated that the non-historic buildings should be included in the program so that they may have historic facades also. Michael Leek noted that the budget did include an approximate $3,000 for an inventory process. Official Proceedings of the September 9, 1997 Shakopee Economic Development Authority Page -3- Mr. Sweeney stated the first thing that needed to be done was to identify the historical buildings. After that was accomplished, a historical district could be defined and then the historical buildings within the district could be defined. Mr. Snook recommended hiring a consultant to identify the historical buildings. Ms. DuBois stated that she had a problem with hiring anyone who was not an expert to which Mr. Sweeney replied that the County should be able to supply whatever information is needed. Ms. DuBois further noted her concern regarding the credibility of someone who was not an expert defining historical buildings. Mr. Henderson opined that he did not want a consultant to define a historical district but agreed that some help was needed to get the project off the ground and stated that he would be in favor of directing staff to define criteria of what makes a building historic. Mr. Link stated he felt it was important to have a consultant's input. Mr. Snook again noted that illustrated guidelines are a good idea. By consensus, staff was directed to provide a detailed plan and mission to the now- forming Ad Hoc Committee to look into the financial incentive program and necessary prep work for the Rehab Grant Program and then bring any suggestions forward to the City Council. 4. Other Business. 4.A. Mr. Snook distributed a memorandum regarding the downtown revitalization and economic development for the commissioner's review and consideration. 4.B. Mr. McNeill distributed a draft letter regarding the River Center project and asked the commissioners if they had any concerns regarding the letter,to contact him soon. 5. Adjourn Henderson/DuBois moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. akti.d. •ith S. Cox .D.A. Secretary Respectfully submitted, Janet Vogel Freeman Recording Secretary 3,4 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: President & Commissioners Mark H. McNeill, Executive Director FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: EDA Bill List DATE : October 02 , 1997 Introduction Attached is a listing of bills for the EDA and the Blocks 3&4 project for the period 09/12/97 to 10/02/97 . Action Requested Move to approve bills in the amount of $216 .34 for the EDA General Fund and $9, 657 . 60 for the Blocks 3&4 Fund. E. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II H O O O 0 O O 0 O 0 O O O O O I q II 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O O 0 O 0 II W P4 U o 0 Ln 01 0 dr dr dr o o 0 0 o dr N 111 N M O M M M o .o \go rn El O N N N N M H N M H dr O LO LO H O N NII) Ln IIIN r W H N H H H H to 01 . to LO CO ril0 H N N N H N 01 01 0) 01 A E-r II W U] II rncra II 000H0 00 CO Ln CO M CO N Cn O N O N O O LOO IN 0 N dr N ON dr �i, dr dr dr 01 dr C4 0 00000 0) 0 E.. c4 01 00000 Cl) Cil W U] CA Z E4 O E4 a Z Ems) 0 H til Cf) 0) 01 E. E. 0) CE1 zw A. HOW E-4 0+ C - a s C4 C4 u) 04 H aOxx cn O4aa E-+ CDZ 4aaa W h W N 0 a w H w x O d a0 a yr El N CO• CI) 0 x W` G Lzf .4 O0 El Ei 0 H44 0 0) ZC Z Z00 4 H 0 rn 01 F cf) 00) N H r6 0 M r--1 M M CO , Z LO ) CO 0 W N CO O ON dr N 0 01 > N H N 0 N HHLOHd. M r1 H dr LO N Ln 0 In Ln Ln dr Ln Lo Cr) to ...0U � � to In Z 0 N 0 L 0 LO0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N r N rn rn al al 0) 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0J1 H H H H H H '-I 000000 00 IL7 M M M H MM M E.r \\\\\ �1 4 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 it * * * * * * H 01 01 01 01 H M 0 M H H H d• 0 dr 'K 0 a> * Z 0 Z Fp o 0 o H O H 0 o t` F1 0 4 0) H '-i N (\I M R; C4 I . H M Ix cn H IL. o 0 N M M M M 0 > dr dr 0 H 0 0 d d d d d a, H 0 0 H H H H H a 0 CL 0, 0) a 0 Cs. 0 M M 0 W H H H H rn a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F1 rn en 0 0 4 G4 Cr. E-+ Cr. Is. El a H 01 01 01 01 01 0 0 0 0 q i H H H H 4 KC * o o 4 4 E. * Ln 1n u1 in u1 H E1 * 01 a) E-4E1 I. * HHHHH 0 0 * M M 0 0 * * Zw HHr-1HH Ei E-1 * .4. a. Ei H * * River City Centre Project Summary of Development Agreement Project • 52 units of rental housing for seniors • Underground ramp for housing, surface parking available to the public • Approximately 25,000 square feet of retail space • All-brick exterior, flat roofs, bay windows and French balconies. • Project constructed in accordance with the City's design criteria Ownership • EDA retains ownership of Blocks 3 and 4. • Ground Lease to the HRA • The retail space will be leased to a master tenant under a 40-year lease with 12 month (18 months in first year) rental guarantee from partners of tenant. Financing Housing: • $3,544,000 (not to exceed) HRA Revenue Bonds (Shakopee General Obligation) • $1,470,000 (estimate) HRA Special Benefit Tax Bonds Retail: • $970,000 (estimate) Loan from the City • $2,115,000 HRA Tax Increment Revenue Bonds (Shakopee General Obligation) • $235,000 (estimate) HRA Special Benefit Tax Bonds Repayment to City, if necessary: • Any payments made by the City pursuant to its general obligation pledge would be repaid, with interest, from Surplus Revenues or certain available amounts from the HRA's special benefits tax levy. 1574505 H E U U w y N p o o'i .bti 4t. ° g �, a°i ... wyoc o b P4o ro ons on° . 0Vj v" 0 N , -o g <4 re) i a y v ' ! N i 64 0, 0f" U UU c x > oc AC � o w ° U i .s ..,.., > 55 AQC^1 o, HN 0 `"' k It..., Oa a> eA -r.)‘' ° d �a ° 0 . tw ik. -to o E `, A a g P4. E-' W C7 A b •° o C1 e N — N .s vi e�q bA OA a 55 gb o xc N °pCO 5 bo yo ao o ° a> �' •v i ,..., g � ' az ' Qr"' 4 o ''-' .og =' ta' aa' ko 4al� �C a „ a� UQ _, r0A 75 ao ;-4 .oNm .) . 14 0 w '0w a . 0 ., a ti h h Pi b o a c+" Q a a A iw 4 .40 r. C4NE. 4 i , NM i0 4 CU it k E� � g � +_ U y a) U 'C % r` Ili " cs cn ''d G .~ (° W 44 � Qq o 0 0 CI CO m 10 a) 64 0 — CCI z 04 o ona a > _ . O ° 4 op cu •o = �" .�" c .5 ownx O °� pG 0 ao ° oa h cu oo° ° CZI a) '.'y � 0:1 x ° 2^oQ..Ea o0aa mi aI. )A , °, ° ° w iirs. ° 8 a Er z 4 r� Q -.1o N kr; •--i O A N / w d o O A V .R' v ' .> O. M i u O ooN ki � o FROM LEONARD, S'1'hEE'l & VE1NARD (1 U1i) 10, l 9/ 15: 17/b 1. 1 : 1 j/1NU. 4LbU4jjjjb Y ARTICLE VI Property Taxes,PILOT Section 6.1. Real Property Taxes. (a) The Housing Facility will be subject to a payment in lieu of taxes based on actual shelter rents charged for units in the Project(regardless of any subsidies provided to individual tenants) pursuant to Sections 469.040 and 272.01, as provided by law, and at least until the Maturity Date. The Retail Facility will subject to real property taxation as and to the extent provided in Section 469.040, Subd. 2. The Retail Facility Lease will require that the lessee agrees that prior to the Maturity Date it will not do any of the following to the extent that doing so would reduce the estimated market value of the Retail Facility below $1.750.000(the"Minimum Value"),subject to the exceptions in subsection(b)of this Section 6.1: (i) seek administrative review or judicial review of the applicability of any tax statute determined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Retail Facility or such lessee or raise the inapplicability of any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings,including delinquent tax proceedings; (ii) seek administrative review or judicial review of the constitutionality of any tax statute determined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Retail Facility or such lessee or raise the unconstitutionality of any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings, including delinquent tax proceedings; (iii) request to the assessor to reduce the market value of all or any portion of the Retail Facility below the Minimum Value; (iv) petition the board of equalization of the County to reduce the Minimum Value of all or any portion of the Retail Facility; (v) petition the board of equalization of the State or the Commissioner of Revenue of the State to reduce the Minimum Value of all or any portion of the Retail Facility; (vi)take any action in a district court of the State or the tax court of the State pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,Chapter 278,seeking a reduction in the Minimum Value of the Retail Facility; (vii)make application to the City, County or Commissioner of Revenue of the State requesting an abatement of real property taxes pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 270 or Sections 469.1812 to 469.1815; or (viii) pursue any other proceedings, whether administrative, legal or equitable, with any administrative body within the County or the State or with any court of the State or the federal government. The Authority shall not transfer or permit the transfer of the Retail Facility, or any part thereof, to an entity exempt from the payment of real property taxes under State law. The Authority shall not, prior to the Maturity Date,apply or permit any tenant of the Retail Facility to apply for a deferral of property tax on the Retail Facility pursuant to any law or regulation. (b) Notwithstanding any provision of subsection (a) of this Section 6.1 to the contrary, the Retail Facility Lease may contain a provision allowing the lessee to : 15710s1 14 10/7/97,12'50 PM Development Aerc:ernenl FROM LEONARD, STREET & DEINARD (TUE) 10. `I' 9'I 15: 15/51. 15: 13/NU. 4160433336 P 3 (i) take an action described in (i)through(viii)of subsection (a)above to challenge taxes payable with respect to the Retail Facility in 2000, provided, however, that in no event shall doing so reduce the estimated market value of the Retail Facility below the product of(A) $1,500,000, and (B) the percentage (calculated on the basis of square feet)of the Retail Facility which is placed in service;and (ii)take an action described in (i)through (viii)of subsection(a)above to challenge taxes payable with respect to the Retail Facility in any year after 2000,provided, however, that a the first time such an action results in the reduction of the estimated market value of the Retail Facility below A $1,750,000, such reduced amount shall constitute the new"Minimum Value"for purposes of subsection fa), and provided furthero that in no event shall the lessee take any action to reduce the estimated market value of the Retail Facility below$1.500,000. Section 6.2. Use of Tax Increments. Except for its obligations under the this Agreement regarding the Pledge Agreement to the City, described in Section 4.5 and 4.6, the EDA shall be free to use any tax increment received from the Property or the Project for any purpose for which such increment may lawfully be used, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota law, and the EDA shall have no obligations to the Authority with respect to the use of such increment. L5710s1 15 'ono?,12:50PM Development Agreement 6.1q. 5. CITY OF SHAKOPEE C C /2 Memorandum • TO: City Council/EDA FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Blocks 3/4 Actions DATE: October 1, 1997 In the EDA and City Council agenda packets are the resolutions which will need to be considered for Blocks 3 and 4 at the October 7th meeting. We are not resending background information; please bring information from the September 30th meeting. If you need a copy of that information again, contact us, and we will provide that. There will be no new information prior to the meeting, as a meeting with the master tenant candidate could not be scheduled before Monday afternoon (October 6th). Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Resolution No. 97-9 Approving the Execution and Delivery of a Development Agreement and a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement relating to the River City Centre Project WHEREAS, housing and redevelopment authorities and economic development authorities are authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "Act") to undertake redevelopment projects and housing development projects, and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, to undertake any common powers jointly; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.179 (the "Tax Increment Law")the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "EDA"), with the approval of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "City'), has established its Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1, as amended from time to time (the"Project"), and its Tax Increment Financing District No. 10 (the "TIF District"); and WHEREAS, the EDA has acquired and cleared certain property known as blocks 3 and 4 (the"Site"), within the Project and the District; and WHEREAS, the City, the EDA and the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") have entered into a Joint Powers Agreement (the "Joint Powers Agreement") dated as of August 1, 1996, pursuant to which they propose to jointly exercise certain powers to develop a mixed-use retail and senior housing facility (the "Project") on the Site; and WHEREAS, there has been prepared a Development Agreement (the "Development Agreement") by and between the City, EDA and Authority, a draft of which is on file with the Executive Director on the date hereof, which is intended to supersede the Joint Powers Agreement and which details the proposed development of the Project and the manner in which the joint powers of the parties thereto relating to the Project will be exercised; WHEREAS,pursuant to the Tax Increment Law and the Development Agreement: (a) the Authority will issue its Taxable Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, General Obligation - River City Centre Project) Series 1997D and its Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, General Obligation - River City Centre Project) Series 1997E (the "Tax Increment Bonds")to finance a portion of the Project; and (b) the EDA, the City and the Authority will enter into a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement (the "Pledge Agreement"), pursuant to which the EDA will pledge to the City, EDA.Apprm al of Dm clopmcnl and Pledge Agreements 1573346 and the City will in turn assign to the Authority for the payment of the Tax Increment Bonds, certain tax increment(the"Tax Increment")generated by the TIF District; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners of the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota: 1. That the Development Agreement is hereby approved in substantially the form on file with the Executive Director on the date hereof, with such changes or modifications as are not materially adverse to the EDA and which are approved by the President and the Executive Director. 2. That the Pledge Agreement is hereby approved in substantially the form on file with the Executive Director on the date hereof, with such changes or modifications as are not materially adverse to the EDA and which are approved by the President and the Executive Director. 3. That the President and Executive Director, or in their absence or unavailability, any other officers of the EDA, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Development Agreement and related documents which may be necessary or convenient, on behalf of the EDA. Passed and adopted on this 30th day of September, 1997. ATTEST: 2 1573346 7 L- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE RESOLUTION NO. 97-10 RESOLUTION MODIFYING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 10 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota ("Authority") as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The City of Shakopee ("City") approved the creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 10 ("TIF District") and a Tax Increment Financing Plan("TIF Plan") for that district, by resolution No. 4326 approved November 8, 1995, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.176 (the "TIF Act"). 1.02. Under Section 469.175, subd. 4 of the TIF Act, the Authority is authorized to modify the TIF Plan without the notice and approval procedures required for approval of the initial plan if the modification does not involve: reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the district, increase in the amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized, increase in the portion of the captured tax capacity to be retained by the Authority, increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures or designation of additional property to be acquired by the Authority. 1.03. The Authority has determined a need to modify the description of tax increment expenditures without increasing the total estimated budget or total bonded indebtedness in the TIF Plan, and a need to clarify and modify the plan objectives and specific development activities. 1.04. The Authority has reviewed a document titled "Modification No. 1 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 10," dated September 16, 1997. Section 2. Actions Ratified. 2.01. The Board specifically approves and reconfirms adoption of the TIF Plan for the TIF District as approved by the City Council on November 8, 1997. 2.02. The Board ratifies all actions of its Authority and City staff and consultants in prepraring a modification of the TIF Plan and bringing it before the Board for consideration. SJB129870 SH235-2 • Section 3. TIF Plan Modified. 3.01. The TIF Plan modification as presented to the Board is approved. 3.02. Authority staff are authorized and directed to maintain a copy of the TIF Plan modification with Authority's files for the TIF District, and to transmit a copy of the modification to the Scott County Auditor and to the Department of Revenue, for information purposes. Approved by the Board of Commissioners of the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee this 16th day of September, 1997. President ATTEST: Executive Director SJB129870 2 SH235-2 { 1 • ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE RESOLUTION NO. 9 7-' 1 RESOLUTION APPROVING CERTAIN FINANCING DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE RIVER CITY CENTRE PROJECT WHEREAS,the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee(the "EDA"), the City of Shakopee (the "City") and the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") have proposed to undertake a housing development project and redevelopment project known as the River City Centre Project (the "Project") at a site in the city generally described as Blocks 3 & 4 (the "Property"), pursuant to their joint powers under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act") and Section 471.59; and WHEREAS, there has been prepared a Development Agreement between the EDA, the City and the Authority (the "Development Agreement")that details the respective responsibilities of the parties regarding the construction and financing of the mixed use senior housing and retail facility that constitutes the Project; and WHEREAS, as described in the Development Agreement, the Authority will finance construction of the Project through issuance of a series of bonds designated as follows: Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Unlimited Tax General Obligation--River City Centre Project) Series 1997A (the "Series A Bonds"); Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Limited Special Benefit Tax Housing Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota--River City Centre Project) Series 1997B (the "Series B Bonds"); Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Taxable Commercial Development Gross Revenue Note(City of Shakopee,Minnesota--River City Centre Project) Series 1997C (the "Series C Bonds"); Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Taxable Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, General Obligation--River City Centre Project) Series 1997D (the "Series D Bonds"); and Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds(City of Shakopee,Minnesota, General Obligation--River City Centre Project) Series 1997E(the "Series E Bonds") (collectively, the "Bonds"); and WHEREAS, the Property is or will be owned by the EDA and will be leased to the Authority pursuant to a Retail Ground Lease and a Residential Ground Lease among the City, the EDA and the Authority (the "Ground Leases"); and WHEREAS, the retail portion of the Project will be subleased by the Authority to Shakopee River City Centre Associates, LLC pursuant to a Retail Master Lease between those parties (the "Master Lease"); and WHEREAS, as required by the Act, the EDA has held a public hearing regarding lease of the Property as described in the Ground Leases and the Master Lease; and SJB130562 SH235-2 WHEREAS,under the Development Agreement,issuance of the Bonds is contingent upon final approval by the City and EDA of the following documents: In connection with the Series A Bonds: (a) Indenture of Trust between the Authority and First Trust National Association (the "Trustee"); (b) Master Disbursing Agreement between the Trustee, the Authority and the title company; (c) Leasehold Mortgage from the Authority to the City (housing portion); (d) the Residential Ground Lease; In connection with the Series B Bonds: (e) Resolution of the Authority authorizing the issuance and sale of the Series B Bonds; In connection with the Series C, D and E Bonds: (f) Indenture of Trust between the Authority and the Trustee; (g) Master Disbursing Agreement between the Trustee, the Authority and the title company; (h) Leasehold Mortgage from the Authority to the City (retail portion and public facilities); (i) the Retail Ground Lease; (j) the Master Lease (the above-named documents being referred to in the Development Agreement and herein as the "Financing Documents"). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners of the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the Financing Documents are hereby approved in substantially the form on file with the Executive Director on this date, with such changes or modifications that are not materially adverse to the EDA and that are approved by the President and Executive Director, provided that execution of Financing Documents to which the EDA is a party shall be conclusive evidence of approval by those officials of all Financing Documents. SJB130562 2 SH235-2 2. That the President and Executive Director, or in their absence or unavailability, any other officers of the EDA, are authorized and directed to execute any Financing Documents to which the EDA is a party. 3. That the President, Executive Director and other EDA officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent of the Financing Documents, including without limitation execution of certificates and ancillary documents in connection with issuance of the Bonds. Approved by the Board of Commissioners of the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota this 30th day of September, 1997. President ATTEST: Secretary BLOCKS 3 & r. '')14"2' 4 ,. .......____._.. We the undersigned being business owners and employees in the downtown district support the - i RA project as is. 0,‹4, 6E 2f'V s /,�o (3 0',i- s , ,4zie<<#"" -r- 7714144-5, %�/4144- 13craw5r := •q s /4—_- i / N6,145 ! «. L -,)41 A Ai /3e,t,,e 5 , --46'-- ig,....,,,-4 c i-i-lefe he v . lad Rei er f cRa '�2t e 8 e�-en s /,,R,exeT Be4h fi. ga ice, `.,is • /, . 1 , , r - ' a'rr((t/9(,t c e r / Y-4--c. -f-e_ 1---An aid,/ . .ar, 0 1 , ' 1 , 4 , fitzkr Oic.,1 ,_ 1 � 1 i� �° c),IbitifI tge69-1 *- n bR, Ar , s Ba's•;26/1.'1)% :!?/k/ki,,,,(.,(y_ jvicwi Av•e.c,c 4,J *--?9,-/-e-g...f Pla 0� A - 7A6 lc 4mev,Yq,,L `?erVezr-P 1/ • 4k7,S49 ,te X4kty S11 y iii Oarxess- ja,,A,,,A... 6,,,,,,,_ G- ,,,,,ss Slii.ii-Ko f&-&-- S/1/ - 0-1 .11(di,,e: 1-1(/ 7/,' ,047/V/1/1"‘ ' ".;_--.:-`5ii . // I .41 -, ..e/.9/ e.OpikI vik,e0-7 .i.. (gcoe,, ----v1-A (-)' ' 0 )e-z) Cy.A.A>2....:)--,. ._7?-42-)z-g-e5'77 'r-e""viCi / E. g c . , --, ,iti, . 4..:3. i'-:,-,-, 77,-- .4* ' ° , -.'pr,- 1.,,,;,:„ /2 :- ''.-7:4'.C. --..'''-',.. ,'2: y We the undersigned being business owners g and employees in the downtown district - ' '' support the HRA project as is. /3;1/ Ctic r/rt cars tr//' cKc e‘ ��, 7a2z,e. ,e. /J J 4 c / IV / hie i 4.41 a Ail 4 I It.c./is:v 'e,y- */1/ A , , „ „...elife„. • r —1 , ''c". 6-1, , /I J. lier ietsi,',cbeo � / r ' ETt"i Au h'111Ei�.Ei� Jy r� Molly (urt Hoa- tt... MU.,. D Ze - A aiv2 - glits• •T/ ... , 5 (ye- ,&;ce.-.:(,‹ .. I oc,ce,-7 .xte.-,.7 /,, v4,-a?. , aK _ _ v f)ulGu1 01.00u. , JeLSy ilsocet -richni_ C\Zoiy\ 04AAJOR--- R.„,c..is 'A et,,,, SA-ikfl Al_ tin , , /, ',(i. 5„,4 )o 66 -,‹. K. yOKb rSOA) CI-14A V1/01----- aLe_e 76-'7? Litylo. -<u.ielprn- Q, iscri _A„I___ . .. s „et( C We the und 'ryigned being business owners and employees in the downtown district support the. HRA project as is...._. ji,,,,,,._01,,,ez biA4r4' teki,,,,,. .i =4-- . 0.12.. . • 1/t (1.1YN.QX i C.C.:v", I?eP-°--1-a-- 2'''''7 i\- -3\ 13`-'1 SitotAtza.... &At, e),,,,,,r,,,,,,„,,v 13,44.0 :• D Pr rrl Q 07. Rr 1/P r t1 / S ofd ep,f71Pr .�tc 'fill S�/!4 ��l•G�.c..rs Kit( 44-A) *Air OTi re ec,2,izal-i4-\./ eril---41"64.1/ il.....-,V Vie, ,..0. :•%. - 3 ,:i. :c: ....-t. ..r. . ,!, .,:.::,,,.. ..: .: , , .t. : ,,,,„ . ..... „:„7;.;.'t 4n • r . 3 `KC, BI CKS & We the undersigned being business owners and employees in the downtown district support the HRA project as is. &?)PPLI 9/917 —r (As PCf c9/9:7 G� � /%gam jGrerS F-2 . .., BL .'' CKS 3 & 4 We the undersigned being business owners and employees in the downtown district Y support the HRA project as is. - kki./A, o, tc ..,%44--: / ‘.,,,7-‘, 434,,r I.r ce_oi A g 1467../ H { (,' ( 1 7 4 a , AeVra4r - - 1 / ir --PP'- w / c r ,,. ,/,,' okto f , ,z-eii-- , / 1 r ,_,_,,,,.,____ ,1 y ?ic--11,,-7 s�G - ,, ,,-. .. BL 0 *3p, `� 4 . CI($ia Ate -11-1----i:Y-i', f„ ., We the undersi gg ned -•being =business owners- and wnersand employees in the downtown district support the HRA project as is. -.-.J IN..% "71 ,4.,,,,•,‘ _ ti vte4 e t :ft.^.,..% V"-66 6, k 1 L-A--- -\7*...... ("apt% „P. TT 42, \"\a„ter',KA.10. 1./ V°-- 1. - .. frt?/ `O ‘\ .�.r ' !o Q ii't 1 -O,,, ,.,...e �- y-'CJ..JOCs�c� un+� ,( — KM 1 a ..T/ S / i� .►w... g Thk a r.,� i Siffice)(,----14\ .." o-er --\ • . gt., eZuz--. ,d -4;;;--"`-`--- 4/ -7.. -----) apAyfreco ---- t) E ✓�t4 (N ) • /6, l q 7, (X_ CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum ale) cam TO: EDA FROM: Mark McNeill, Executive Director SUBJECT: Closed Session - Pending Litigation DATE: October 1, 1997. Attorney Denny Moriarty will be in attendance at the EDA/City Council meeting at approximately 9:30 PM Tuesday to discuss an item of pending litigation. Depending on where the agenda is at that time, you'll be asked to recess to a closed session to discuss an upcoming court case. Mark McNeill Executive Director MM:tw Denny Moriarty will be in attendance to discuss the appeal of the Imperial Wok Restaurant, and Brambilla case. We appealed the award of the condemnation for the Imperial Wok; Brambilla appealed his decision from the condemnation commissioners. clAio1,10\JVAX J Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw FROM LEONARD, S'I REEI & DEI NAND till!;-) 10. / 9/ 1 : 1 /61. 1 : l J/Nil. 42bU4JJiJb r L ARTICLE VI / Property Taxes,PILOT CZ Section 6.1. Real Property Taxes. (a) The Housing Facility will be subject to a payment in lieu of taxes based on actual shelter rents charged for units in the Project(regardless of any subsidies provided to individual tenants) pursuant to Sections 469.040 and 272.01, as provided by law, and at least until the Maturity Date. The Retail Facility will subject to real property taxation as and to the extent provided in Section 469.040, Subd. 2. The Retail Facility Lease will require that the lessee agrees that prior to the Maturity Date it will not do any of the following to the extent that doing so would reduce the estimated market value of the Retail Facility below $1.750,000(the"Minimum Value"),subject to the exceptions in subsection(b)of this Section 6.1: (i) seek administrative review or judicial review of the applicability of any tax statute determined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Retail Facility or such lessee or raise the inapplicability of any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings,including delinquent tax proceedings; (ii) seek administrative review or judicial review of the constitutionality of any tax statute determined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Retail Facility or such lessee or raise the unconstitutionality of any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings, including delinquent tax. proceedings; (iii) request to the assessor to reduce the market value of all or any portion of the Retail Facility below the Minimum Value; (iv) petition the board of equalization of the County to reduce the Minimum Value of all or any portion of the Retail Facility; (v) petition the board of equalization of the State or the Commissioner of Revenue of the State to reduce the Minimum Value of all or any portion of the Retail Facility; (vi)take any action in a district court of the State or the tax court of the State pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 278,seeking a reduction in the Minimum Value of the Retail Facility; (vii)make application to the City, County or Commissioner of Revenue of the State requesting an abatement of real property taxes pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 270 or Sections 469.1812 to 469.1815;or (viii) pursue any other proceedings, whether administrative, legal or equitable, with any administrative body within the County or the State or with any court of the State or the federal government. The Authority shall not transfer or permit the transfer of the Retail Facility, or any part thereof, to an entity exempt from the payment of real property taxes under State law. The Authority shall not, prior to the Maturity Date,apply or permit any tenant of the Retail Facility to apply for a deferral of property tax on the Retail Facility pursuant to any law or regulation. (b) Notwithstanding any provision of subsection (a) of this Section 6.1 to the contrary, the Retail Facility Lease may contain a provision allowing the lessee to : isms! 14 1017197,12'50 PM Devdopmtnt Agreement FROM LEONARD, STREET & DEINARD (TUE) 10. 'I" 91 15: 15/ST. 15: 13/NO. 4260433336 P 3 (i) take an action described in (i)through(viii)of subsection(a)above to challenge taxes payable with respect to the Retail Facility in 2000, provided, however, that in no event shall doing so reduce the estimated market value of the Retail Facility below the product of(A)$1,500,000, and (B) the percentage (calculated on the basis of square feet)of the Retail Facility which is placed in service;and (ii)take an action described in (i)through (viii)of subsection(a)above to challenge taxes payable with respect to the Retail Facility in any year after 2000,provided, however, that G the first time such an action results in the reduction of the estimated market value of the Retail Facility below = $11750,000. such reduced amount shall constitute the new"Minimum Value" for purposes of subsection (a), and provided further that in no event shall the lessee take any action to reduce the estimated market value of the Retail Facility below$1,500,000. Section 6.2. Use of Tax Increments. Except for its obligations under the this A,greemcnt regarding the Pledge Agreement to the City, described in Section 4.5 and 4.6, the EDA shall be free to use any tax increment received from the Property or the Project for any purpose for which such increment may lawfully be used, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota law, and the EDA shall have no obligations to the Authority with respect to the use of such increment. 1371081 15 1on/97,12:5u PM ncvelopment Agreement TENTATIVE AGENDA CITY OF SHAKOPEE REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 7, 1997 LOCATION: 129 Holmes Street South Mayor Jeff Henderson presiding 1] Roll Call at 7:00 PM 2] Recess for an Economic Development Authority Meeting 3] Re-convene 4] Approval of Agenda 5] Approval of Consent Business - (All items noted by an* are anticipated to be routine. After a discussion by the Mayor,there will be 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] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 7] Mayor's Report 8] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS *9] Approval of Minutes: August 21, 1997, Adj. Reg. Session; August 21, 1997, Worksession; August 28, 1997, Worksession; Sept. 2, 1997, Reg. Session; and Sept. 9, 1997, Adj. Reg. Session *10] Approve Bills in the Amount of$516,961.61 11] Communications 12] Continuation of the public hearing regarding the proposed issuance of$3,544,900 Scott County HRA Revenue Bonds/City of Shakopee General Obligation Bonds to finance the acquisition and construction of a 52-unit senior housing facility to be located on Blocks 3 & 4 a) Res. No. 4744, Approving City general obligation pledge to Series A bonds b) Res. No. 4745, Approving Development Agreement c) Res. No. 4746, Approving TIF Plan modifications for District No. 10 d) Res. No. 4747, Approving guarantee agreement and TIF pledge agreement e) Res. No. 4748, Approving financing documents 13] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions A] Preliminary & Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, located in the southwest corner of Vierling Drive and Marschall Road - Res. No. 4755 TENTATIVE AGENDA October 7, 1997 Page -2- 13] Recommendations from Boards and Commissions continued *B] Final Plat of Boulder Ridge, located in the northwest corner of Vierling Drive and Marschall Road-Res.No. 4756 14] General Business A] Engineering *1. Res. No. 4759, Canceling Assessment Hearing for Valley Park 13th Addition Improvements, Project No. 1996-8 *2. Res.No. 4760, Canceling Assessment Hearing for Lateral Sanitary Sewer Extension East of French Trace, Project No. 1996-9 3. Ordering Feasibility Report for 1998 Street Reconstruction Project- Res. 4761 4. Accepting Feasibility Report for East Dean Lake Collector- Res.No. 4765 B] Police and Fire 1. Hiring New Firefighters 2. Opticom Emitter Purchase for Traffic Signal Override *3. Criminal Justice Data Communications Contracts *4. Memorandum of Agreement to Obtain Surplus Property *5. Acceptance of Grant Money for"Face to Face" Grant to Police Department C] Park and Recreation 1. Naming a Park After George Muenchow 2. Blacktopping Lions Park Outdoor Hockey Rink D] Community Development 1. Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) - CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division-tabled 9/2/97 E] General Administration *1. Release of Escrow Funds for Meadows West 1st Addition *2. Fraternal Order of Eagles Premises Permit-Res.No. 4753 3. Awarding Sale of$1,805,000 G. O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B - Res. 4757 *4. Authorize Advertising for Cable Board Vacancies *5. Appointment of Election Judges - Res.No. 4749 6. Residential Parking Designation- 200 Block West Fifth Avenue - Res.No. 4763 *7. Final Payment-Asbestos Removal *8. Shako-Valley Amateur Hockey Association Premises Permit- Res. No. 4764 9. Police Chief Retirement 15] Other Business 16] Adjourn to Tuesday, October 21, 1997, at 7:00 P.M. OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 21, 1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 4:05 P.M. with Councilmembers DuBois, Sweeney, and Link present. Councilmember Zorn was absent. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Gregg Voxland,Finance Director; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Paul Snook Economic Development Coordinator; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director; Mark McQuillan, Parks and Recreation Director; and Terry Link, Fire Chief. The following item was added to Other Business: 4.A.) Adj. Reg. Meeting of the Economic Development Authority. Sweeney/DuBois moved to approve the agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Leek explained two revisions to the final plat approval for Shenandoah Place. One revision would require the filing of the Common Interest Community (CIC) documents with the CIC Plat(as opposed to filing them with the plat), and one would address the method of payment of the storm water charges consistent with the adopted policy. Sweeney/DuBois offered Resolution No. 4726, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,Approving the Final Plat for Shenandoah Place, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Henderson recessed the meeting for an Economic Development Authority meeting at 4:09 P.M. Mayor Henderson re-convened the meeting at 4:15 P.M. Sweeney/Link moved to adjourn to Thursday,August 28, 1997, at 4:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. lith S. Cox City Clerk Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 21, 1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 4:15 P.M. with Councilmembers DuBois, Sweeney, and Link present. Councilmember Zorn was absent. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Paul Snook Economic Development Coordinator; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director; Mark McQuillan, Parks and Recreation Director; and Terry Link, Fire Chief. In response to a question from Cncl. DuBois, Mr. Voxland explained that the townships participate in the Fire Department budget based on the tax capacity ratio compared to the Fire Department's operating costs. This is in addition to a set amount for each fire call. Mr. McNeill questioned the Councilmembers if they desired to purchase property between CR- 77 and CR-15 north of the bypass for a site to locate the fire station. The property owner(Mr. Haasken)would like to know so that he can take that into consideration when planning his development. He also identified some land currently owned by the City in the southeastern corner of Lions Park that is not developed that could possibly be used for a fire station site. Mr. Loney showed the site within Lions Park on a drawing and explained that with a building of approximately 8,000 sq. ft., a fire station could be placed to provide access to allow the fire trucks to turn around and that there could be up to 30 parking spaces on the site. He explained that there are two possible alignments to get access to the site. Mr. Terry Link indicated that he would be comfortable with the site in Lions Park. Sweeney/DuBois moved to direct staff to inform Mr. Haasken that the City does not need his property. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McQuillan explained that this is the first full year of operation of the Community Center. He feels that the budget is on schedule for 1997 without any anticipated catastrophes. Mr. McQuillan identified major revenue changes anticipated: increased revenues due to an increase in the number of participants in activities, ice rental rates increased, and admission fees are increased effective September 1, 1997. He highlighted major expenses: purchase of a computer management program including software,training and support, and equipment such as cardiovascular exercise machines and strength equipment. Mr. McQuillan explained that with the increase in program income,the City's subsidy to the Recreation Department's programs is down from$16 to $10 per resident. Discussion ensued on how to upgrade the Community Center to attract more users. Cncl. Sweeney stated that he would like to see information for considering adding a position to the department for additional programming of activities for the young and for senior citizens. Official Proceedings of the August 21, 1997 Shakopee City Council (Worksession) Page -2- Members of the Jackson and Louisville Township Boards were present to discuss the budget for the Fire Department. Present: Supervisor Joe Worm, Supervisor Norbert Theis arrived later on in the meeting and Rose Menke, Clerk, from Jackson Township and from Louisville Township: Supervisors Bill Tech, John Weckman, Marion Schmidt, and James Theis, Clerk. Mr. McNeill explained that the City is looking for a site for a fire station and identified the location of the 2.7 acre site located in the southeast corner of Lions Park. This would be a satellite station for the new fire station that is under construction. Terry Link explained the reason for relocating the downtown fire station: in order to get the best insurance ratio, and by relocating the downtown fire station we can better service the area to the south as well as the downtown. Terry Link gave a status report on the current construction of the fire station on Vierling Drive. He explained that the budget proposed includes an hourly increase of 50 cents per hour for the firemen. He reviewed the line items and explained the capital equipment items contained in the proposed budget for 1998. Mr. Voxland explained that the cost between the three jurisdictions for the budget is based on tax capacity value before fiscal disparities and tax increment financing. Mr. McNeill asked if anyone had any recreation questions for Mr. McQuillan. Mr. McQuillan explained that Jackson has a good park which takes a lot of pressure off of the City parks. He invited the townships to let him know if they wanted any particular activity in their park and that he would see what he could do. Norbert Theis stated that they were happy with the relationship of the Recreation Department with the township on sharing. Mayor Henderson thanked the township officials for coming to the meeting. The meeting was recessed from 5:55 P.M. until 6:00 P.M. Mr. Leek explained that the Community Development Department budget is increasing approximately $23,000 over last year. The major portion of the increase is for information systems (GIS). He said that $30,000 is being budgeted for MIS services to include shared personnel with another community plus dollars for help in areas that personnel cannot handle. Mr. McNeill explained that the Cities of Savage, Prior Lake and Shakopee are looking at sharing an individual who can do hardware maintenance and software under a joint powers agreement. Mr. Leek stated that he has a request, along with his budget materials,to add a planning technician position. Funds for this position are not in the Community Development Department Official Proceedings of the August 21, 1997 Shakopee City Council (Worksession) Page -3- budget now. Mr. Voxland stated that$34,055 is in the contingency account if Council desires to authorize the position. In response to a question from Cncl. Link, Mr. Leek stated that he would like to hire a person as soon as possible as he feels that the position ties to the information system issue. In the Building Inspection Department, Mr. Leek stated that there is a fairly substantial increase over 1997 in personnel services. Part of this relates to where he thought we might have to hire a Building Inspector,but may be different based on candidates that were interviewed this week. Under operating supplies,there is additional money budgeted for a permit tracking system. Mr. Leek referred to the memos within the agenda packet relating to reclassifications and noted that his comments relate to the nature of the work that the Building Inspection Secretary undertakes and the amount of workload that she manages. Mr. Leek stated that he is looking at a different role than may have been the case in the past for the Building Official. He currently spends most of his time doing building inspections and that this is not real typical of Building Official positions. He stated that he also submitted a request for an additional position, a Building Clerk Typist, as opposed to a Secretary, due to Building Department activity. Discussion followed regarding the Building Inspector positions and the work performed by them, i.e.: inspections and examination of plans. Cncl.Sweeney suggested that in order to look at the structure rationally and to move toward streamlining,we need to know how much time (in hours) is spent on inspections now,totally, and is that enough? And, under the reconfiguration, how many hours will be spent inspecting buildings? The Mayor summarized what is being requested is one additional position and restructuring. He asked Mr. Leek to provide Council with budget projections, staffing, organizational and a breakdown of task allocation(inspections,plan review, administration). Sweeney/Link moved to adjourn to Thursday, August 28, 1997, at 4:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 6:49 P.M. go th S. Cox y Clerk Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 28, 1997 Mayor Jeff Henderson called the meeting to order at 4:05 P.M. with Councilmembers Jane DuBois, Burl Zorn, and Robert Sweeney present. Cncl. Clete Link arrived at 4:38 P.M. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director; and R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director. Discussion ensued on the general fund tax levy proposed by Mr. Voxland for 1998. Sweeney/Zorn moved to recommend to the City Council adoption of a maximum general fund tax levy as set out by Mr. Voxland at$2,911,313. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on the dates for the public hearing on the tax levy. There was a consensus of the Councilmembers that the dates be set for December 11, 1997, and December 18, 1997, for continuation of the public hearing, if needed. Discussion ensued on the 1998 budget for the internal service equipment fund. Mr. Voxland noted that the fund balance on December 31, 1998, is proposed at $1.3 million. He noted that the revenue should be increased by 50%to equal the purchase amount needed, if Council wanted to go with the recommendation of the auditors, so that there would be enough cash in the fund to pay for about one-half of the replacement of vehicles. Mr. Voxland stated that one thing that could be done is to move the Police Department administration car purchase from 1998 to 1999. Discussion then ensued on the acquisition of a 4x4 compact pickup for both the Engineering Department and the Inspection Department in 1998. There was a consensus to acquire both vehicles in 1998, that the 1999 vehicle for the Engineering Department be eliminated, and to get rid of two used cars. It was noted that there are two 4x4's in the Police Department and that maybe one could be parked at City Hall for 1998. Staff will also look into down-grading the 4x4's for replacement from the proposed extended cab model. Cncl. Link arrived at 4:38 P.M. and took his seat. Discussion ensued on the two vehicles proposed in 1998 for the Street Department and the two vehicles proposed for the Park Department. All were left in the budget. Cncl. Zorn asked if the hover craft for the Fire Department remained in the 1998 budget from the previous budget worksession. Cncl.Sweeney advised that it was not eliminated and that it could be revisited for discussion, if desired. There was a brief discussion on the vehicles proposed in 1998 for the Police Department. Official Proceedings of the August 28, 1997 g Shakopee City Council Page -2- The City Clerk advised of the major increases in her budget for 1998: election judges salaries, two voting booths, and a mailing machine. No changes were made to the budget. The Finance Director advised of the major increases in his budget for 1998: increase in salaries due to step increases, increase in the auditor's contract and the contract with Scott County for assessing. No changes were made to the budget. The City Administrator advised of changes in the Mayor and City Council's budget for 1998: elimination of funds for the quarterly newsletter, funds for professional services were reduced, and he suggested that the dues for the Metro Municipal League in the amount of$2,500 could be eliminated. The City Administrator advised that he is leaving money in the administration budget for an intern in 1998. He said that he will look at this position in the summer to determine whether or not it makes sense to go to a full-time position. Councilmembers acknowledged a need for a position to help the City Administrator and agreed to leave it up to him to determine the extent of the position when it is appropriate to fill it. Cncl.Sweeney recommended that a line item be added to the administration budget in the amount of$3,000 for evaluation training and implementation. Councilmembers agreed. The City Administrator reviewed other portions of the administration budget, including professional service items, rentals, and capital equipment. Discussion ensued on the $40,000 for an imaging system. Mr. McNeill stated that if Council did not want to invest in an imaging system at this time,that this amount could be used for an additional staff person in the Parks and Recreation Department and referenced a memo on the table from the Parks and Recreation Director. After considerable discussion, there was a consensus to move the $40,000 from the administration budget to the contingency fund for technology -to upgrade the computer system. The City Administrator reviewed the budget for legal services. The City Administrator reviewed the budget for government buildings. Mr. Voxland explained that wages are charged to enterprise funds. Mr. Voxland explained that Council has no discretion with the debt service fund because the dollars are needed to pay off bonds. He asked Councilmembers if they wanted to budget now in the 1998 general fund or wait until 1998 to include the transfer to debt service for 1997 levy amount. There was a consensus to wait until 1998. Official Proceedings of the August 28, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Discussion ensued on the general fund fund balance. Mr. Voxland stated that it has been Council practice to target 25 to 35 percent of fund balance unreserved and undesignated for cash flow. If Council desires to retain this target,the City has $1.7 million over this amount. Monies are designated for various purposes by Council leaving approximately$683,000 above the minimum level of 25%. Discussion followed on how much to move out of the general fund and which fund to move it to. Cncl. DuBois suggested setting money aside for a library. Mr. Voxland was directed to come up with a name for a fund in which funds could be transferred to and could also be easily transferred from, should there be a desire sometime in the future. He was also asked to recommend an amount to transfer into this fund. Mr. Voxland reviewed the planned drawdown of fund balance over five years in the amount of $162,500 per year. He explained that 1998 is the last year and the $162,500 will have to be made up somehow for 1999. A change in publication requirements was discussed. Mr. Voxland stated that the proposed expenditures for all governmental funds and percent of change is now included in the public notice. The change from 1997 to 1998 is about 12%. This figure can change greatly from year to year simply due to the timing of revenues and expenditures. Mr. Voxland pointed out that there is $4 million in the CIP for a collector road for East Dean Lake, and because of the cost of the project,he asked if Council wished to request the developer to install improvements or to phase it. Jon Albinson stated that it must be built all at once because there are multiple property owners. After discussion,there was a consensus of Councilmembers to put something in the CIP for 2002 for a library. Mr. Voxland asked if Council would like to look for a site in 1999. Discussion followed and there was consensus for putting site acquisition in 1999. Mr. Voxland noted that when special assessments are required to be paid at 150%because of a developer's agreement, that the 150%requirement cannot be tracked in the computer. He recommended that this option no longer be available to developers. It was suggested that this be discussed at a later time and that Mr. Voxland look into how the computer might be able to track it. Discussion on the enterprise funds was delayed to another meeting. Official Proceedings of the August 28, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -4- In regards to the evaluation of the administrator's performance,Mayor Henderson suggested that Councilmembers turn in their reviews and any comments that they may have to him or Cncl. Sweeney, and that he and Cncl. Sweeney perform the evaluation. This would allow the evaluation to be private as opposed to being held during a worksession. Councilmembers agreed. Sweeney/Zorn moved to adjourn at 6:35 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. tAJAjtind . ay, 4J th S. Cox Clerk Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. with Councilmembers Jane DuBois, Burl Zorn, Robert Sweeney, and Cletus Link present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator, Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Mark McQuillan, Parks and Recreation Director; Ron Stellmaker, Recreation Superintendent; and Terry Link, Fire Chief. A recess was taken at 7:01 P.M. for the Economic Development Authority meeting. The meeting re-convened at 8:24 P.M. The following items were added to the agenda: 14.B.5. Building Inspector Appointment; 14.B.6. Scattered Site Affordable Housing; and 14.B.7. Sign Height Along Freeway. The following item was moved ahead on the agenda: 14.E.5. Setting Proposed Maximum 1997 Tax Levy, Collectible in 1998 - Res. No. 4732. Sweeney/Zorn moved to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried unanimously. The following items were added to the Consent Agenda: 14.C.1. Authorizing Feasibility Report for Vierling Drive from Sage Lane to Miller Street - Res. No. 4729; 14.B.5. Building Inspector Appointment; Hiring of a Maintenance Worker for the Public Works Department; 14.E.1 Southwest West Central Educational Cooperative Service Units - Employee Group Insurance; and 14.E.7. Blocks 3 & 4 Development Agreement. The following items were removed from the Consent Agenda: 14.B.2. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) - CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division; and 14.E.5. Setting Proposed Maximum 1997 Tax Levy, Collectible in 1998 -Res. No. 4732. Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously. A Liaison Report was given by Councilmember Zorn. Mayor Henderson had nothing to report for the Mayor's Report. Mayor Henderson acknowledged Commissioner Art Bannerman's presence and asked if there were any interested citizens present who wished to address the Council on any item not on the agenda. There was no response. Official Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve the minutes of August 5, 1997, Regular Session, and August 7, 1997, Budget Worksession. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Zorn/Sweeney moved to approve bills in the amount of $212,935.01. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Cncl. Sweeney explained that the City must certify a proposed budget, a budget hearing date, and a proposed maximum tax levy to the County by September 15. He said that because there will not be another regular meeting before that date, the budget and a maximum tax levy must be approved at this time. The final levy, which may be less, must be certified to the County by December 29, 1997. The proposed maximum tax levy is the same as last year and represents a reduction in the overall dollar for dollar in tax capacity. However, this is not necessarily a reduction in a single household's actual tax. Cncl. Sweeney said the Legislature has reduced the tax capacity rate multiplier for commercial industrial property. The impact of this is that the larger the total tax base that is commercial/industrial, the greater the number of dollars that will change from commercial/industrial to residential tax. He said because Shakopee has had a large commercial/industrial tax base the impact will be larger than normal. He added that even with the slight impacts, commercial/industrial is a plus. In addition, there is a debt service levy for the Fire Department Referendum this year. This levy is on market value and is $250,569. Last year the City levied a transportation levy which will not be done this year and will cause an apparent reduction in taxes. However, this is off set by a dollar for dollar levy from the Metropolitan Council and will show up under Other Districts. Sweeney/Zorn offered Resolution No. 4732, A Resolution Setting Proposed Maximum 1997 Tax Levy, Collectible in 1998, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Michael Leek stated that the Final Plat of Eagle Ridge 1st Addition is consistent with the Preliminary Plat and the Planning Commission recommends approval with the conditions contained in the resolution. A discussion ensued relating to the density level. Mr. Leek explained that while no variance is requested in relation to the final plat, application will be been made for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) independent of the final plat request. Sweeney/DuBois offered Resolution No. 4727, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Approving the Final Plat for Eagle Ridge 1st Addition, and moved its adoption. Official Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Bruce Bonebright, James Development, approached the podium and addressed scattered site housing. He explained that when he met with staff earlier this year regarding support, the project was going to be a moderate family income project. He said this has changed, and it will now be a market rate project with 96 units (6-16 unit buildings) as opposed to the maximum potential. A discussion ensued regarding park dedication and plans for Outlot A. Mr. Bonebright explained that each building will have its own external garage and Outlot A is likely to be deeded to the property to the west. Mr. Leek stated that one of the conditions is that Outlot A be deeded to the property to the west. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Leek explained that Laurent Builders has requested a PUD (Planned Unit Development) for Orchard Park West. He said the alignment of Vierling Drive through the proposed PUD property is subject to some revision. The PUD proposes single family detached units and twin homes. He said there were a number of variations requested as part of the PUD. One relates to street width, the other to front yard and side yard setbacks. He explained that staff originally recommended a 60 foot right-of-way with 36 foot wide public streets. He said the Planning Commission recommended 32 foot wide public streets with parking on both sides and a 50 foot right-of-way. Variations for 43 single family lots were also requested to allow 55 foot wide lots and side yard setbacks of 5 and 10 feet, resulting in a 15 foot separation of structures. In addition, a front yard setback of 20 feet as opposed to 25 feet was requested. The lots to the North of Vierling Drive are 60 foot wide lots. Mr. Leek said that the proposal meets the total open space requirement, and that the Planning Commission recommended approval, subject to conditions contained in the resolution. A discussion ensued as to who would be responsible for maintaining the property and liability for private streets. Jim Thomson, City Attorney, stated that the Homeowner's Association would own the private streets and would be responsible for their maintenance. A discussion ensued regarding public and private street widths and Fire Department access recommendations. It was noted that there is no existing policy for private street width standards at this time. A discussion ensued regarding the number of variances requested. Michael Leek said he was unaware of a PUD where the high volume of lots involved were the subject of variance requests. Oficial Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -4- It was also noted that 28 foot private streets have been approved in the past as well as requests for similar variances for other PUD's, and that changing rules at this step in the process would not be fair to the applicant. Changing the PUD regulations should not be addressed in conjunction with an application when they were allowed in the past. Bruce Loney explained that the issue of 28 foot streets came about with the Pinewood Estates Development when staff was directed to find a way to allow a private street/driveway. He said private streets were not permitted and a mechanism was created to allow private streets or driveways within a common interest community. He said the private streets are to be maintained by Homeowner Associations within developments and a 28 foot street with parking on one side would allow a 20 foot drive lane for fire access. Staff has also been working with the Subdivision Review Committee regarding public streets, and has presented a report for review which will be coming before the Council. Mayor Henderson stated he would support a work session to address street width standards. Gary Laurent, 100 South Fuller, approached the podium to clarify misconceptions regarding density and variations versus variances. He said there are 3.8 units per acre and that the Ordinance allows for 5 units per acre. He said the variations were requested to achieve a mixed development project. He explained that there are four distinct types of housing that could not occur without the PUD. The various types of homes create a lifestyle of housing and allows people to move from one level or style to another, and that this project achieves some of the goals of the Livable Communities Act. Mr. Laurent stated that the street widths are within the policy set for private streets in other developments, and added that the minimum lot width is 55 feet and many of these lots are in excess of 60 feet. He stated that if staff wishes, he would use a 36 foot wide street but said it would take away from the development by creating a collector street when the goal is to create a closer-knit neighborhood. He explained that the variances are not for all of the units and the side yard setbacks requested are only for one side of the house for five feet, and only one front yard setback is requested for the units. A discussion ensued relating to PUD's and variations within PUD's. Bruce Loney explained that from an engineering point of view, a 36 foot wide street is recommended for Harvest Lane. In order to expedite action, Mr. Laurent asked that a motion be made including any conditions Council or staff wished to be changed. Terry Link, Fire Chief, approached the podium and stated that in order to allow enough room for a fire truck to pass, a minimum of 20 feet -unobstructed, is necessary. He said curved roads typically found in this type of development make access difficult and fire protection can be lost Official Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -5- for those at the end of a cul-de-sac. He recommended 28 foot wide private streets with no parking on one side and 32 foot wide public streets with low use, cul-de-sacs and parking on one side. A discussion ensued as to what width would be acceptable to the Fire Department and staff. Bruce Loney recommended for a low volume residential area 32 foot wide streets with 60 foot right-of-way with parking on both sides, and for more local streets he recommended 36 foot wide streets with 60 foot right-of-way. He stated that a minimum of a 55 foot right-of-way and a 32 foot wide street would be acceptable. Mr. Laurent explained that a 28 foot wide street with no parking on either side would create a 2-foot wider driving lane than a 36 foot wide street with parking on both sides. He also said each unit would have 4 units of parking in addition to on- street parking. A discussion ensued regarding Public Works recommendations as compared to the Fire Department's recommendations. Terry Link stated that he would be comfortable with a 32 foot wide street with parking on one side. Jon Albinson, Valley Green Business Park, approached the podium and stated that creating collector streets will increase traffic speeds in these neighborhoods. A recess was taken at 10:29 P.M. The meeting re-convened at 10:37 P.M. Sweeney/DuBois moved to change the 55 foot right-of-way width within the development to a minimum of 60 feet for local streets (Condition#16 in Resolution No. 4728). Link/Zom moved to table further discussion of the Planned Unit Development for Orchard Park West. Motion failed 3-2 with Cncls. Zorn and Link in favor. A discussion ensued regarding an extension of time for the PUD. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Link opposed. DuBois/Sweeney moved to amend the motion, making Harvest Lane a 36 foot wide street with parking on both sides, Harvest Court and the cul-de-sacs north of Vierling Drive to be 32 feet wide with parking on one side, and all remaining private streets to be 28 feet wide with parking on one side. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Link opposed. Sweeney/Zorn moved that the Homeowner's Association must, by contract, agree to maintain the 28 foot wide streets by plowing curb to curb. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -6- DuBois/Link moved to amend item #10 B, C (Resolution No. 4728) to reflect current set back requirements. Motion carried 3-2 with Cncl. Sweeney and Mayor Henderson opposed. Sweeney/DuBois offered Resolution No. 4728, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Approving Planned Unit Development Overlay District #13, Orchard Park West, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Link opposed. The following items were taken out of the regular order of the agenda: 14.A.2. Prairie Bend Park Project; 14.A.3. The Preserve Golf Course Tunnel; 14.B.3. Canterbury Park Planned Unit Development. Mark McQuillan explained that Brauer and Associates, Ltd, was hired to prepare bids and quotes for the Prairie Bend Park Project with the understanding that the work to be done would be dependent upon those bids and quotes. He said the initial estimate for the entire project was approximately $192,877. The figures were high, but if the Public Works Department was able to do some of the work, this would reduce the overall costs to less than $150,000. Rather than bidding this project through a general contractor, the consultant was directed to prepare bid packages based on project type. This eliminates the general contractor and saves the City between 10 and 15 percent of the project value. Mr. McQuillan said bid proposals were received for all items, except the asphalt work for the trail will have to be bid out, as the original estimate of the project was over $25,000. In addition, the fencing proposals were high and the consultant recommended that it be rebid. With the elimination of the asphalt and fencing proposals, the project costs were reduced to $94,979.34. Zorn/Sweeney moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute documents as necessary with the vendors and Brauer and Associates, Ltd. and the Shakopee Public Works Department for the construction of Prairie Bend Park at the current amount of $94,979.34. Motion carried unanimously. Mark McQuillan explained that Tom Haugen of the Preserve Golf Course would like to construct a tunnel under CR-79 connecting the Preserve Golf Course to O'Dowd Lake Park and a 12 foot wide trail from the tunnel, north to Stonebrooke Golf Course to allow access to both golf courses without crossing the road at grade level. He said that other public agencies holding agreements with private venders who use public land for business purposes were contacted and in most cases, the title of the land remains with the government. According to MN Statute Sec 272.68 the City is required to remit 30 percent of the gross proceeds to the County for taxes if a fee is collected. The estimated cost of the trail extension is $2,800. The trail is to remain open to the public without restrictions to certain users. The lease agreement would be not more than 99 years. Mr. Haugen found the recommendations acceptable. However, he said the length of the agreement would be contingent on what the annual permit fee will be, and how much credit the golf course would receive for extending the trail to the road. Official Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Zorn/DuBois moved to direct staff to draft an agreement (for the Preserve Golf Course) for the Council to review which includes an annual fee; retains the City's right to use of the tunnel; requires the golf course to maintain the tunnel and trail; should ownership of the golf course change, the new owner will be obligated to the agreement; and the agreement shall not exceed 99 years. Motion carried unanimously. Michael Leek reported concerns regarding noise and traffic in relation to the Lilith Fair at Canterbury Park. Staff and Chief Steininger met with Randy Sampson and Mary Pat Monson from Canterbury Park to discuss these concerns. Council was asked if they were interested in pursuing potential PUD amendments regarding traffic management and noise mitigation, and a review process for similar events. Randy Sampson, President, General Manager, Canterbury Park, approached the podium. He said the event was larger than was anticipated. While the event went relatively smooth, Mr. Sampson said there is room for improvement. The biggest problem was getting the people into the parking lot and off the streets. He said additional personnel in the parking areas is needed as well as opening additional gates. He added that additional land adjacent to the property was recently purchased. He said Canterbury's relationship with the community has always been positive and he would like this to continue by working with the City to minimize concerns related to events. A discussion ensued regarding noise mitigation and traffic control. Mr. Sampson said the City Police have a noise measuring device but were unable to use it for this event. He also said every available off-duty officer was utilized for exiting traffic. He said the County Sheriff is contacted for larger events. Mr. Sampson said sound equipment will be used for the upcoming motorcycle event. He has also contacted a sound engineer to discuss sound abatement, understanding that the problem is in the bluff above County Road 16. Mayor Henderson stated that it was more appropriate to work with Canterbury Park to minimize problems as opposed to looking at making changes to their Planned Unit Development. There was a consensus not to amend the PUD for Canterbury Park. The regular order of the agenda was resumed beginning with item 14.A.1 Dasher Board Advertising (Arena). Sweeney/Zorn moved to remove discussion of the Dasher Board Advertising from the table. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Link moved to direct staff to draft an agreement between the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Hockey Association to have advertising on the dasher boards in the Community Center Arena. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -8- Zorn/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 4730, A Resolution Overturning the Decision of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments and Granting a 45 Foot Variance to Permit a Sign Height of 65 Feet Instead of the Permitted 20 Feet for Best Western Canterbury Inn, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Sweeney/DuBois moved to remove discussion of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Shiely from the table. Motion carried unanimously. Michael Leek explained that Met Council and SPUC have asked for additional modeling information from Shiely chemists. He said it would be appropriate to have this information before any determination is made on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. Sweeney/Zorn moved to postpone a decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement for CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division, to the City Council meeting of October 7, 1997, and direct that staff notify the appropriate persons of the postponement. Motion carried unanimously. In the past year a number of requests have been made to expand the availability of Dial-A-Ride into the Township areas. Michael Leek said expansion is limited by the boundaries of the Metropolitan Transit Taxing District, but that there may be some alternatives. He asked whether or not City Council was interested in exploring the possibility of expanded service. A discussion ensued regarding transit taxes. There was a consensus to explore the legal aspects of expanding the Dial-A-Ride service into the Township areas. Staff was also directed to communicate this to Karen Lee in response to her request. Zorn/Sweeney moved to appoint Julie Hagen to the position of Building Inspector effective September 3, 1997, at Step 1 in the Pay Plan, and contingent on successful completion of a pre- employment physical. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) • Zorn/Link moved to direct staff to develop a scattered site affordable housing ordinance, spreading out affordable and multiple housing sites among developers. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. DuBois opposed. Cncl. DuBois discussed how the new freeway effects sign heights. She recommended that staff research other areas and return with information as to how other cities are addressing sign height and size where signs abut freeways. Michael Leek said staff has already begun looking at other city ordinances and potential approaches with the intent to provide alternatives to the Planning Commission. Official Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -9- Zorn/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 4729, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of a Feasibility Report for Vierling Drive, from Sage Lane to Miller Street, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Zorn/Sweeney moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a consultant extension agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. for consulting services to assist in completing the feasibility report of Vierling Drive improvements. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Bruce Loney reported that the settlement agreement regarding Richard Knutson, Inc. has been negotiated consistent with Council direction. He said there are two punch list items remaining which will be completed before monies are disbursed. The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust will be paying $7,500 so that the City is paying only $15,000 for the soil correction. Sweeney/DuBois moved to approve the settlement agreement and authorize its execution, to Richard Knutson, Inc., with monies not being disbursed until the punch list is completed or the appropriate retainage can be held. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Zorn opposed. Zorn/Sweeney moved to direct staff to perform a stop sign warrant study for the intersection of Horizon Drive and Muhlenhardt Road. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Sweeney/Link offered Resolution No. 4731, A Resolution Accepting Bids on Eastway Avenue and Timothy Court, Within the Plat of Pinewood Estates and Shenandoah Place, Project 1997-3, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. DuBois/Sweeney moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. to provide consultant construction services for the City of Shakopee. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Zorn moved to authorize a 5 percent contingency amount for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on the 1997-3 Project. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Sweeney moved to authorize staff to reimburse the developer of Pinewood Estates $3,837 for engineering fees, to date, on the 1997-3 Project, and to assess these costs as part of the project costs. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/Sweeney moved to authorize the hiring of Michael Frassel as Public Works Maintenance Worker at Step 2 of the 1997 Public Work's Union Pay Schedule, with an effective date of September 29, 1997, contingent upon a successful pre-employment physical. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) • Official Proceedings of the September 2, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Zorn/Sweeney moved to join the SouthWest and West Central Service Cooperative for the purchase of employee group insurance policies. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Zorn/Sweeney moved to accept the proposal of Deloitte and Touche for the provision of audit services for the 1997 Fiscal year in the amount of $21,070 and authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a contract for the audit services. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Zorn/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 4734, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Approving Premises Permit for the Multiple Sclerosis Minneapolis Chapter Minnesota, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Zorn/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 4733, A Resolution Levying a Tax at the Request of the Economic Development Authority for the City Of Shakopee, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Sweeney/DuBois offered Resolution No. 4735, A Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of $1,805,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Receipt of the August 29, 1997, draft Development Agreement between Scott County HRA and the City for the Blocks 3 & 4 Project was acknowledged. Zorn/Sweeney moved to adjourn to September 9, 1997, at 4:00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m. on September 3, 1997. IP ut,01,c4). iC • thS. Cox ity Clerk Esther TenEyck Recording Secretary 5. CITY OF SHAKOPEE C•C Memorandum l ' TO: City Council/EDA FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Blocks 3/4 Actions DATE: October 1, 1997 In the EDA and City Council agenda packets are the resolutions which will need to be considered for Blocks 3 and 4 at the October 7th meeting. We are not resending background information; please bring information from the September 30th meeting. If you need a copy of that information again,contact us, and we will provide that. There will be no new information prior to the meeting,as a meeting with the master tenant candidate could not be scheduled before Monday afternoon(October 6th). M )114c ALC¢, 0 Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw f cc Li, . CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA Resolution No. 4 7 4 4 Approving the issuance by the Scott County Housing And Redevelopment Authority of its Housing Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Unlimited Tax General Obligation - River City Centre Project) Series 1997A in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $3,544,900 and pledging the full faith and credit of the City of Shakopee thereto. WHEREAS, housing and redevelopment authorities and economic development authorities are authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "Act") to undertake redevelopment projects and housing development projects, and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, to undertake any common powers jointly; and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the `BDA"), with the approval of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota(the "City"), has established its Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1, as amended from time to time(the"Project"), and its Tax Increment Financing District No. 10 (the "TIF District"); and WHEREAS, the EDA has acquired and cleared certain property known as blocks 3 and 4 (the"Site"), within the Project and the District; and WHEREAS, the City, the EDA and the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") propose to jointly exercise certain powers to develop a mixed-use retail and senior housing facility (the "Project") on the Site pursuant to that certain Development Agreement(the "Development Agreement")between such parties; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Development Agreement, the Authority proposes to issue its Housing Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Unlimited Tax General Obligation - River City Centre Project), Series 1997A (the "Series A Bonds") in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $3,544,900 to finance the housing component of the Project, which constitutes a"qualified housing development project" under the Act; and WHEREAS, on the date hereof, the City has conducted a public hearing following publication of notice pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.034, subd. 2, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the City hereby approves the issuance by the Authority of the Series A Bonds, and the pledge by the Authority of the full faith and credit of the City thereto. 1573341 2. That such approval is subject to (a) final approval of the Financing Documents by the City Attorney and (b) a final determination by the Authority to be made in the Authority's resolution approving the sale of the Bonds that the projected revenues pledged to the payment of the Bonds will equal or exceed 110% of the principal and interest due on the Bonds for each year of their term. 3. That the City hereby approves the uses of the proceeds of the Bonds to acquire and construct the housing component of the Project. Passed and adopted on this 30th day of September, 1997. ATTEST: 1573341 2 (7) CG Li, B . CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA Resolution No. 4 7 4 5 Approving the Execution and Delivery of a Development Agreement by and between the City, the EDA and the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority WHEREAS, housing and redevelopment authorities and economic development authorities are authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "Act") to undertake redevelopment projects and housing development projects, and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59,to undertake any common powers jointly; and WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the `BDA"), with the approval of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "City"), has established its Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1, as amended from time to time(the "Project"), and its Tax Increment Financing District No. 10 (the"TIF District"); and WHEREAS, the EDA has acquired and cleared certain property known as blocks 3 and 4 (the"Site"), within the Project and the District; and WHEREAS, the City, the EDA and the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") have entered into a Joint Powers Agreement (the "Joint Powers Agreement") dated as of August 1, 1996, pursuant to which they propose to jointly exercise certain powers to develop a mixed-use retail and senior housing facility (the "Project") on the Site; and WHEREAS, there has been prepared a Development Agreement (the "Development Agreement" by and between the City, EDA and Authority, a draft of which is on file with the City Administrator on the date hereof, which is intended to supersede the Joint Powers Agreement and which details the proposed development of the Project and the manner in which the joint powers of the parties thereto relating to the Project will be exercised; and WHEREAS, the housing component of the Project constitutes a "qualified housing development project" under the Act, for the financing of which the Authority is authorized to issue its housing revenue bonds secured primarily by revenues generated by such housing component and secondarily by a pledge of the full faith and credit of the City, subject to the satisfaction of certain procedural requirements and the approval of the City; and WHEREAS, as required by the Act, the City has held a public hearing (the "Public Hearing") regarding the issuance by the Authority of its Housing Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Unlimited Tax General Obligation - River City Centre Project), Series 1997A (the "Series A Bonds") in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $3,544,900; City-Approval of Development Agreement 1573323 ) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota: 1. That the Development Agreement is hereby approved in substantially the form on file with the City Administrator on the date hereof, with such changes or modificationswhich are not materially adverse to the City and which are approved by the Mayor and the City Administrator. 2. That the Mayor, City Administrator and City Clerk, or in their absence or unavailability, any other officers of the City, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Development Agreement on behalf of the City. Passed and adopted on this 30th day of September, 1997. ATTEST: 1573323 2 1/ t C CITY OF SHAKOPEE RESOLUTION NO. 4746 RESOLUTION MODIFYING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 10 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ("Council") of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota ("City") as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The City approved the creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 10 ("TIF District") and a Tax Increment Financing Plan ("TIF Plan") for that district, by resolution No. 4326 approved November 8, 1995, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.176 (the "TIF Act"). 1.02. Under Section 469.175, subd. 4 of the TIF Act, the Authority is authorized to modify the TIF Plan without the notice and approval procedures required for approval of the initial plan if the modification does not involve: reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the district, increase in the amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized, increase in the portion of the captured tax capacity to be retained by the Authority, increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures or designation of additional property to be acquired by the Authority. 1.03. The Authority and City have determined a need to modify the description of tax increment expenditures without increasing the total estimated budget or total bonded indebtedness in the TIF Plan, and a need to clarify and modify the plan objectives and specific development activities. 1.04. The City has reviewed a document titled "Modification No. 1 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 10," dated September 16, 1997. Section 2. TIF Plan Modified. 2.01. The TIF Plan modification as presented to the Council is approved. 2.02. Authority staff are authorized and directed to maintain a copy of the TIF Plan modification with Authority's files for the TIF District, and to transmit a copy of the modification to the Scott County Auditor and to the Department of Revenue, for information purposes. - SJB129871 SH23S-2 fi Approved by the City Council of the City of Shakopee this 16th day of September, 1997. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk SJB129871 SH235-2 2 CC 4, bi CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 4 7 4 7 Authorizing the execution and delivery of a General Obligation Tax Increment Guaranty Agreement, guarantying the payment of debt service on the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority's Taxable Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, General Obligation - River City Centre Project), Series 1997D and Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, General Obligation-River City Centre Project),Series 1997E BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota(the"City"), as follows: 1. The Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "EDA") has heretofore created,with the approval of the City,as required by law,its Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Project") in an area (the "Redevelopment Project Area"),located within the City of Shakopee. 2. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.179 (the "Tax Increment. Law") the EDA has heretofore created within the Redevelopment Project Area, with the approval of the City,as required by law,its Tax Increment Financing District No. 10(the"TIF District"). 3. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 and that a certain Development Agreement (the "Development Agreement") dated as of October 1, 1997 to be entered into by the City, the EDA and the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority"), such governmental units propose to jointly undertake the acquisition and construction of a mixed-use facility to be located within the City(the"Development")containing both residential rental housing and an approximately 25,000 square foot retail facility(the"Retail Facility"). The Development is a housing development project as described in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.017 and is an authorized activity of the Redevelopment Project. 4. Pursuant to the Tax Increment Law and the Development Agreement: (a) the Authority will issue its Taxable Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, General Obligation - River City Centre Project) Series 1997D and its Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, General Obligation - River City Centre Project) Series 1997E (the "Tax Increment Bonds")to finance a portion of the Retail Facility; (b) the EDA, the City and the Authority will enter into a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A(the"Pledge Agreement"), pursuant to which the EDA will pledge to the City, and the City will in turn assign to the Flit Authority for the payment of the Tax Increment Bonds, certain tax increment (the "Tax Increment")generated by the TIF District;and (c) the City will execute and deliver to the Trustee (defined below) a General Obligation Tax Increment Guaranty Agreement (the "Guaranty") in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit B, pursuant to which it will guaranty the payment by the Authority of the Tax Increment Bonds, and will pledge to the payment thereof its full faith and credit and taxing powers. 5. The Tax Increment Bonds and the Guaranty together comprise an"obligation"pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.51, Subd 2, issued by the Authority and the City pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 471.59 and 469.178, in that they are a promise to pay stated amounts at a fixed future dates, made for the purpose of incurring debt. The Tax Increment Bonds are expected to be paid from Tax Increment and from certain net revenues to be generated by the Retail Facility (the "Pledged Revenues"), but if necessary for the payment thereof, pursuant to the Guaranty Agreement, the City will levy ad valorem property taxes upon all property within its jurisdiction without limitation as to rate or amount. It is anticipated that the Tax Increment and the Pledged Revenues will equal not less than 105% of debt service on the Tax Increment Bonds in each year. 6. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid execution and delivery of the Guaranty, having been done, now existing, having happened and having been performed, the City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and the City Administrator to execute and deliver the Guaranty in connection with the issuance of the Tax Increment Bonds. The final terms of the Tax Increment Bonds, including particularly the aggregate principal amounts thereof, the maturity dates and the interest rates therefore, shall be determined by a Pricing Committee, which shall be comprised of the Mayor and City Administrator of the City, the President of the EDA and the Chair and Executive Director of the Authority, acting on advice of Miller & Schroeder Financial, Inc., the underwriter, and Springsted, Incorporated, provided that the aggregate principal amount,shall not exceed $2,115,000, the final maturity shall not be later than October 1, 2027,and the net interest cost shall not exceed 9.00%per annum. 7. If the balance in the Bond Fund created under the Indenture is at any time insufficient to pay all payments then due on the Tax Increment Bonds, the payment shall be made from any fund of the City which is available for that purpose, subject to reimbursement from Tax Increment or Pledged Revenues when available, and the City Council covenants and agrees that it will each year levy a sufficient amount of ad valorem taxes to fund any accumulated or anticipated deficiency, which levy is not subject to any constitutional or statutory limitation as to rate or amount. 2 1583006.01 8. For the prompt and full payment of principal of and interest on the Tax Increment Bonds as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and unlimited taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. 9. The Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor of Scott County, together with such additional information as the Auditor may require, and to obtain from the Auditor a certificate that the Tax Increment Bonds and the Guaranty have been duly entered upon the Auditor's bond register. 10. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the purchaser of the Tax Increment Bonds and to Leonard, Street and Deinard, Professional Association, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Guaranty and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Tax Increment Bonds, as the same appear from the books and records in their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 11. The Official Statement relating to the Tax Increment Bonds, prepared and delivered on behalf of the Authority and the City by Springsted Incorporated, is hereby approved, and the officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy,completeness and sufficiency thereof. /S/Jeff Henderson Mayor Attest: /s/Judith S. Cox City Clerk 3 1583006 01 CITY OF SHAKOPEE RESOLUTION NO. 4748 RESOLUTION APPROVING CERTAIN FINANCING DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE RIVER CITY CENTRE PROJECT WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority for the City of Shakopee(the "EDA"), the City of Shakopee (the "City") and the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") have proposed to undertake a housing development project and redevelopment project known as the River City Centre Project (the "Project") at a site in the city generally described as Blocks 3 & 4 (the "Property"), pursuant to their joint powers under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act") and Section 471.59; and WHEREAS, there has been prepared a Development Agreement between the EDA, the City and the Authority (the "Development Agreement") that details the respective responsibilities of the parties regarding the construction and financing of the mixed use senior housing and retail facility that constitutes the Project; and WHEREAS, as described in the Development Agreement, the Authority will finance construction of the Project through issuance of a series of bonds designated as follows: Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Housing Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Unlimited Tax General Obligation--River City Centre Project) Series 1997A (the "Series A Bonds"); Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Limited Special Benefit Tax Housing Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota--River City Centre Project) Series 1997B (the "Series B Bonds"); Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Taxable Commercial Development Gross Revenue Note(City of Shakopee,Minnesota--River City Centre Project) Series 1997C (the "Series C Bonds"); Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Taxable Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds (City of Shakopee, Minnesota, General Obligation--River City Centre Project) Series 1997D (the "Series D Bonds"); and Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Development Revenue Bonds(City of Shakopee,Minnesota, General Obligation--River City Centre Project) Series 1997E(the"Series E Bonds") (collectively, the "Bonds"); and WHEREAS, the Property is or will be owned by the EDA and will be leased to the Authority pursuant to a Retail Ground Lease and a Residential Ground Lease among the City, the EDA and the Authority (the "Ground Leases"); and WHEREAS, the retail portion of the Project will be subleased by the Authority to Shakopee River City Centre Associates, LLC pursuant to a Retail Master Lease between those parties (the "Master Lease"); and WHEREAS, under the Development Agreement,issuance of the Bonds is contingent upon final approval by the City and EDA of the following documents: SJ3130S59 SH235-2 per\ C. Inchon nne with the Series A Bonds: co (a) Indenture of Trust between the Authority and First Trust National Association (the "Trustee"); (b) Master Disbursing Agreement between the Trustee,the Authority and the title company; (c) Leasehold Mortgage from the Authority to the City (housing portion); (d) the Residential Ground Lease; In connection with the Series B Bonds: (e) Resolution of the Authority authorizing the issuance and sale of the Series B Bonds; In connection with the Series C, D and E Bonds: (f) Indenture of Trust between the Authority and the Trustee; (g) Master Disbursing Agreement between the Trustee, the Authority and the title company; (h) Leasehold Mortgage from the Authority to the City (retail portion and public facilities); (i) the Retail Ground Lease; (j) the Master Lease (the above-named documents being referred to in the Development Agreement and herein as the "Financing Documents"). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the Financing Documents are hereby approved in substantially the form on file with the City Administrator on this date, with such changes or modifications that are not materially adverse to the City and that are approved by the Mayor and City Administrator, provided that execution of Financing Documents to which the City is a party shall be conclusive evidence of approval by those officials of all Financing Documents. 2. That the Mayor, City Administrator and City Clerk, or in their absence or unavailability, any other officers of the City, are authorized and directed to execute any Financing Documents to which the City is a party. SJB130559 2 SH235-2 3. That the Mayor, City Administrator, and other City officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent of the Financing Documents, including without limitation execution of certificates and ancillary documents in connection with issuance of the Bonds. Approved by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota this 30th day of September, 1997. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk SJ9130559 - SH235-2 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 9, 1997 Mayor Henderson called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.with Councilmembers Jane DuBois, Cletus Link,Bob Sweeney and Burl Zorn present. Those absent: None. Also present were: Mark McNeill, City Administrator and R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director. Mr. McNeill requested an addition to Item Number 4 on the agenda,which addition related to transit-related issues and the East Dean Lake development. Sweeney/Link moved to approve the agenda with the above addition. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. McNeill distributed a memo regarding the motorcycle races that were to be run at Canterbury on September 13, 1997 and citizens in the neighborhood concerned about the accompanying noise. Mr. McNeill noted that Randy Sampson and Mary Pat Monson with Canterbury Park were present to speak to the issue. Randy Sampson,President and General Manager of Canterbury Park approached the podium. He stated that he had met with Eldon Reinke, a citizen who voiced concern about the event. Mr. Sampson stated that the race was to be run on Saturday only;that practice was to start at 4:00 p.m., qualifying heats were to begin at 5:00 p.m. and the heats would last approximately 10 minutes each. The first race was to be at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Sampson stated the final heat was to take place between 9:05 p.m. and 9:20 p.m., if everything went on schedule. He further stated that tests were performed at the track, however, no sound level equipment was available at the time of testing. Therefore, a sound engineer was hired and some recommendations were made. The recommendations were that"boom boxes" (which is a muffler type device) be required. Mr. Sampson noted that the drivers generally do not like the mufflers because there is a minimal reduction in horsepower and the sound is part of the show,however, Canterbury will be requiring the mufflers. Mr. Sampson stated that he had been told that using the mufflers will reduce the noise by 10 decibels. He also noted that the location itself presents a problem and that Canterbury was intending to have semi trailers parked on the perimeter of the track and hay bales inside the rails to provide additional sound protection. After these precautions have been taken, Mr. Sampson estimated that Canterbury would be able to meet the sound requirements,however, he also stated there would be some noise. Mr. Sampson assured Mr. Reinke that Canterbury is aware of the sound ordinances. Mr. Sampson further noted that testing will be done in Mr. Reinke's backyard and the results will be shared with the City Council. He also noted that Canterbury is trying to be responsible as to the type and amount of events it hosts. Mr. Sampson stated that the homeowners in the Dean's Lake and Hauer neighborhoods have been notified about the event. Oficial Proceedings of the September 9, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. Sweeney asked if Canterbury was also planning to perform testing in the Dean's Lake area and Mr. Sampson replied that Canterbury had not planned on that because that area was further away than the Hauer addition and is in a different direction but was willing to perform testing in the Dean's Lake area also. Mr. Zorn thanked Mr. Sampson for his sensitivity to the community regarding the noise issue. Eldon Reinke, 2569 Hauer Trail, Shakopee, MN approached the podium. He stated that the reason he was so irritated during the initial testing the previous evening was because he thought there was an agreement that the neighborhood was to be informed of these events, and he was not informed. He also recently had to listen to the Lilith Fair concert and was beginning to question what the tolerance level was expected to be. He also expressed his concern about the East Dean's Lake area in the future. Mr. Reinke stated his intent was not to cut Canterbury's events and he was satisfied with Canterbury's efforts to improve the situation. Mr. Sweeney suggested that noise testing be performed at the Joe Zak residence for the Dean's Lake area. Mr. Reinke also suggested that Canterbury look at other sites where races have been held for sound levels and Mr. Sampson replied that this had already been done. Mr. Sampson noted that the other sites that had been checked had homes just outside the track. He further noted that he expected the attendance to be approximately 6,000. When asked if the City would receive a ticket tax, Mr. Sampson replied that he did not think so. Mr. McNeill distributed a memo regarding scheduling a special meeting on September 30 to discuss the East Dean Lake proposal, since it could be a lengthy subject to include in the September 16, 1997, City Council meeting. Mr. Link questioned whether this would be a public hearing, and Mr. Leek replied it would not be, however,the Council would be asked to take action. Mr. Link also questioned whether there would be a cost to the developer to reschedule the matter and the consensus was that there would not be. Zorn/Sweeney moved to schedule a special meeting on September 30, 1997, at 4:00 p.m. to discuss the East Dean Lake proposal. Zorn/Sweeney moved to amend the motion to schedule a special meeting on September 30, 1997, at 5:00 p.m.to discuss the East Dean Lake proposal. Motion carried unanimously. Motion carried unanimously on the main motion as amended. Mr. McNeill noted there were transit issues related to the financial questions that would require approximately one hour to discuss and that perhaps the Council would want to adjourn to a work session for that purpose. Official Proceedings of the September 9, 1997 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Zorn/DuBois moved to schedule a work session at 4:00 p.m. on September 30, 1997. Motion carried unanimously. Zorn/DuBois moved to adjourn the meeting to September 16, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Jilk2 . (,,).) J ith S. Cox ity Clerk Respectfully submitted, Janet Vogel Freeman Recording Secretary 0 /0 CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE .Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: City Bill List DATE: October 02, 1997 Introduction and Background Attached is a print out showing the division budget status for 1997 based on data entered as of 10/02/97. Also attached is a regular council bill list for invoices processed to date for council approval . 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 . Vernice Takumi $8 . 95 Included in the check list but under the control of the EDA are checks for the EDA General Fund (code 0191-XXX) and Blocks 3&4 (code 9439-xxx) in the amount of $9, 899 . 96 . Action Requested Move to approve the bills in the amount of $517, 952 . 66 . 1041 C•4 4 SI CITY OF SHAKOPEE EXPENSES BY DEPARTMENT 10/02/97 CURRENT YEAR ANNUAL MONTH TO PERCENT DEPT DEPT NAME BUDGET ACTUAL DATE EXPENDED 11 MAYOR & COUNCIL 89,410 33 34,560 39 12 CITY ADMINISTRATOR 249,980 5,886 130,019 52 13 CITY CLERK 166,720 4,613 116,561 70 15 FINANCE 322,780 7,306 229,957 71 16 LEGAL COUNSEL 217,320 0 110,095 51 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 451,290 9,320 279,360 62 18 GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 146,940 3,377 102,312 70 31 POLICE 1,703,140 54,102 1,256,161 74 32 FIRE 448,990 732 237,176 53 33 INSPECTION-BLDG-PLMBG-HTG 245,070 6,874 174,184 71 41 ENGINEERING 425,780 13,173 260,466 61 42 STREET MAINTENANCE 781,860 11,360 488,960 63 44 SHOP 126,540 3,254 89,370 71 46 PARK MAINTENANCE 350,420 14,085 215,757 62 91 UNALLOCATED 622,630 107 647,070 104 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 6,348,870 134,223 4,372,008 69 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 496,770 60 314,192 63 TOTAL TRANSIT 496,770 60 314,192 63 19 EDA 140,580 2,013 80,445 57 TOTAL EDA 140,580 2,013 80,445 57 J H a) rn its a a 0 as as as as as a as a a a a a a a a a a a a H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H z W w 0w a2 D z 0 Z O 1/40M O LLl D N aD ID H N 0 H el fn el el M el M M M elNNNNNNNNNN NH d'b 01 co as co Z V'V'V'V'V'V'V'V'V'V' ID V d' U V' d' V' N Z in in in In U)U)in Ln U1 Ln 01 in U) in 0 Ln U) in 0 1/40 0 0 in U) U) H 0000000000 ID 000 0 M0 O 0 e 0 el el 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C H H H H H HI H HI H H N 0 0 H aD O O 0 M H aD co e M 0 E. N N N N N N N N N N N M M as N M 01 O 00 00 N N co co 01 Zx MMMMMMMMMCH) H MM H H in M M H H H H H H M w V'V'V'V'dH C'Tr V'd'V' N V'V' N N d' V' V' N N N N N N dI H O W iiiiiiiiii i I I i I I i i I i I I i ' H U^y HHHH V'HHH HH N H H N N H N N N N N N N N 0Q HMNU)NaMH(NI H H NH H H N H N H _ H H H cr)H ci,H H1 4Z HHHHHHM V'V'M O1 HH 01 01 V' M C 0000000000 0 00 0 0 O1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z H H HH Z H H4 4 x C4 El 44 H 0 H > W W 0 W ZZ 0 U)Hi H 00.i CHn CHI) 0 H H 0 H H Cl) \ a' U \ U Cr)Cfl CO CO Z U m Q W m CO wwWwWWWWWW Z QQ 4 0 rn Q ZZZZZZZZZZ H Cn Cn c0 ci Z W x Z H 0000000000 \\ 00 W W >' 0 0 [Q H 0 w H xxxxxxxxxx a 4H-7 � > x H o 0 In o x aaaaaaaaaa W Ww U) 0 W xI O WwW WwwWwww 0 >> N 1 x a CO Cr) 01 a' GO COO c`' O as asasaaH_]H-7 Z 44 CO en a Z z H N x 0 V• U) 1 Z wwwwwwwwww x x 0 M H 0 H t.n H M M U1 0 N HHHHHHHHHH 0 U HH U w H 0 D N. N 0 N N N N 0 0 al Ell H Ln E. Cil Q W H H U V' x cn cn HH > E. 0 PtC U a w cwn H 4 U 41 x W H .x4 0 w� � 0 < U 0 O SE x 2 41 m H H CL1W X Ha Q > a s 0 H 0 0 H 3 42 3 w HHHHHHHHHH 43 44 HH H E-, 4 00 0 4 4 LHc7 Z Z Z a H U ci H x x Z axxx ax ,.21 ‘21 xx 0 ZZ a Ft 0 F x EE Z c HHHHHHHHHH w me 4 U Z Z carp w 0 0 0 W w a U cn cn 4444 Cr1F=C 444 4 KC4 0 H X ci Z a cn Q Q a a m 0 Ln l)01 CO 01 d'O N H M OO 000 NN NN 1010 00 U)U) HH 00 HH 00 00 N N 00 H U)NOOOMO HM 01 U) MM 000 0101 LOU) IDS 00 N N N N 00 ID ID U)U) 00 In 111 00 z N 01 N N 0 tom•tI)N.(0-t/}t?t?O L)} O ) L") ID 01 N N N N V'V' d'cr ID ID H.D IO N N 0 0 IO ID N N a)O V'd• ti} in- H H ID ID t?t/}VI- N N ID IO N N CO CO CO VI- N N VI-CO-NCO•CO M M N•N tn-t/I• +.11-411. CO.CO? .E.0-L? CO-CO- VI- ../)- M M N N V C I.t? L?{? H H1 U CO x Cd U w H Cn w co co O co o co co co co co co co co co co co co co a) O co O in L[) in H H HH H H HH HH HH H HH H H H H1 H H H H H N N N W Q 01 O1 01 01 dl 01 01 01 O1 a> 01 01 O 01 cn O1 01 O1 01 01 01 01 01 O1 01 x 0000000000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 U N N N r-N N C`N N N N tib N N N N N N N N N N N N U w 01 O1 01 01 O>01 01 01 01 01 O1 01 01 01 O1 O1 01 01 01 O1 01 O1 o1 al 01 W x 01 O1 01 01 01 O1 01 01 01 O1 O1 O1 01 01 01 O1 O1 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 x U H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H O 0 r OD 0\ 0 H N M V' Ln ID N CO 0\ 0 H I-1 Z ID d V. d' U) L/) U) U) Ln U1 U) Ln in U) ID H V. Z V A V A V' A V' A V' A V' A V' A V. A C A V' A V' A CA V' A ' A V' A 0 Z 0 ko * ID* H,D * ID * HD* ID* ID* ID * Hy)* ID * ID* ID * ID* ID * VD* w In V Ln V in V 1.0 V VI V U) V Ul V U) V Ln V 111 V U) V Ln V In V Lfl V U) V O• U , IN a) t51 16 a a 4 H H 0 00 0000000 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 W • W 000 ax z 0 Z W U H m a• (0 (Oococo(co 01 Ln t0 44 0 CO 1O 0 d' H H H H H H H CO 00 H 10 M H V V• to Ln 0 > m d' t0 m O N N N N N N N N N C` 10 H LO N 0 10 0 (0 in m Z N Ln V' H H V'V'V' V'a'a'a' 00 00 V' V' H H H H N 01 c), 0 10 H 0 0 0 00 0000000 \O 10 0 0 0 N W m c}, 0) 0 M10 to O 0 NN 0000000 mm 0 0 10 NN N a' M 0 M M 0 0 0 0 0 H H H H H H H 0 0 0 m 0 O O O O O N 0 0 H H H H V' V NNNNNHN HH V m a' M V' M H H N HH Za' m m W N N M m M m m N M M M N V N N N N N M 10 N N X w V d V w V 1'a'1,1,a'1,c 1,a' at w w at w tcr d' a' m a'a' 0 c0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I U X 0' (.0 V' H H H H H H H H H M V' H H H H M H V' 01 H H H UX V' N co V'V' NmHNHHL- NLn H L, H a'Ln 00 Ln M 10 NN 4Z '.0 H H w V HM V'MmmH NN ' H M a'N H C` a' N mm 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 COco En co W W rzz0 U W W U U U W H U — 0 > Z Z W >> Z Z Z W W W N 0 H W IX W W H a'a' W W G) H fx H H H W w HH 4 Ww H H H 4 Cr) 44 Ln 0 CO Cn Z Z a, Ln Cn Z Z H Z H a, m w a, H H H z CL a,a, -- 04 4 4 4 e 0 44 H 4 `Z HFC H 0 4 D0 0 KC 4 ZZ CO 44 X X <X KC Cm 4 Cn Cn 0)) w 0 0 HH WwWWWCPW 00 H H H C7 Z C7 C7 0) 0 H H Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z H H Z Z 0 Z 0 Z H Z Z H En Cl) En CO CO 00000HO En En Co W Z W Z H CO HH I CO En 4 XX xxxx1H1 ClCn Z E HE H H En HH a w CO 4 a,a, a,a,wa,a,4a, WW a, a, f2.0, 0 4 w En ,,4,c4 Cz, C>:., H H H W W Cx)1i)W LL W Cc,Ci, H CO H 4 H 4 Lx Ci., H 0 C>' 0 0 Z 00 44444 W4 00 0 W 0 HO H W 0 Z WW X IX co OIOI WWW W Wa,W D Lx OL 0 0) Da a, Lx CO a,a, N a, a, 04 co CO HHHHHOH ww W 0 W al CO 00 0 a, Lx 00 0 0 a: CnEnEnEnEnEnco C7 U En 0 WWwWWWC Z Z En al t.)000000 4: HHHHHHH H H ZZ CO ,7>> >,7,7> H CO H H rx LY.a'LY.Ly.a'04 LY. 4 Z E.)Li 0 0 U 0 W w W W W W W H 0 Z Z U U CO L.4 H ZZ En En En En En En U) U0 Cr) H HH Z 0 U 4 H En H H Z z 0 H H CO UF� H X CO H CO CO CO CO CO CO CO HH Z 4 Ix Ix CO Z 0 X 4 H a, 00 En En En En En En En co Cl) U HH En 4 H x },}i 0 W > 4 W W W W w W W W W Z Z ✓ En H Z ZZ U H H O CD 44 4444444 00 'H KC Z 00 W ww Z Z ,23 Lx W W W WWW W W W U U H 0 U U H W Z a Cz,C>~ Cr) Cr) 0 Lx Lx Lx rx LX Cx Lx 0 0 X Ci) Z W 0 FC FC C4 Z W �EO-' 3333333 CHH HnC4 0 H 0 UU CO 4 Cs, a)a) H w 0X Ca C11 H Z U W W x ,t1 Ci) CO CO E W 4 4 HHHHHHH as 4 0 £z co a Z Z >4>4 H Cr) 4 1010 'x ,x,x ,.Yssrxx CO CO 4 4 UU x w 0 N al Gil E 4a z 00 e.ri ,.tl HHHHHHH 44 En a 0 COn E c4 1-I H-, 44 H 0 O 3 U N 44 4444444 q�Q 4 4 44 as 0:1 a U UU K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K 00 '.010 NN H 0 H 0) 0)00100001 N 0)010) 00 00 a,V' 0 NN Lfl Ln co00 00 00 Ln OLI) Z00 N N NN V'LI)01 01 01 01 a'N C`0101 Ln LITH 00 00 1010 CO Ha1 NN NN 1010 00 NLI)0 X. C`N MM 1010 0110 If) 00 rI a'Ln H 010 0 0 H 00 00 V'V' Ln 00M NN 010) 00 Ln Ln O LAN O m M 10 10 LO U) M O a' H H H N'V a'H LI) Ln l/O N N a' V 10 10 H U)N M M V'a' N N H H (-NI N O) CO CO H H 0)0) t?H H i/)•t?N-1/1•1-1 N VI.'.0 i?t?H i/)-1? '-I H i?t/} H N M e-1 H 10 10 to 10 i/}i/? i)-i/}i/)- t?i/} t?CO- i/} 1?i? t? t/} t/j-i/} i?VI-t/} L}t/} M m O1 a1 H H H H t?t/? H H i/}t? i/)•i/} U i/A i) • - CI) X IX U Cr) H Cf) W N 10 H H H HHHHHHH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4, \ - \ \\ \\\\\\\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ W 0 O1 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 H H H HHHHHHH HH H H H H H H H H H H H \ \ \ \\ \\\\\\\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ Z. U N N N N L- N N N N N C^N N N N N N N L- N N N N N L� U Cr) 01 01 01 0)01 O1 0)0)01 01 0)1 01 01 01 0) 01 01 01 01 01 O) 0) 01 01 01 Cr) x O1 rn 01 O1 01 0) a)a)a)01 01 01 O)0) 01 01 O1 01 O1 a1 O) 01 0) 01 01 U 0 H H H HH HHHHHHH HH H H H He-I H H H H e1 H 0 4 Z H N m a' Ln 10 L- co 01 0 H N M a' Ln H to to to 10 10 10 to to 10 C` N N N L� 0- 0 ^L V' A V' A V A V A a' A d' A V A a' A V A V A V' A V A a' A V A V A Z 0 10 K 1) K 10 K '.0 K 10 K t0 K 10 K 10 K 10 K 10 K 10 K IO K ID K 10 K 10 K 0 x Ln V Ln V in V L0 V Ln V I)) V Ln V Ln V Ln V LI) V LO V Ln V Ln V Ln V LI) V U U m a) lT a a 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 000000 000 0 0 0 0 0 x x W OX aX X X 0 z W O O l- (N O mm H m LO Ol M OW O d'N N 0 0 0 N lO m H CA mN N NHHMMM NNW In N vo d' a0 '24 LO l0 00 W Lo Tr O HN m co m m m m m m °' 19 d' d' N M 24 vr Tr H 00 N 0 N 0 W NN d' 01)01)01)01) 0100 l-L-L- H 0 0 H 0 0 0 H O H 0 R,' HH 01 MMMMMM MMM H O O H m O 0 0 0 000000 000 Ill O O O 0 NO O H H r H CO CO HH H Llld'd'd' d'd' HHH M d• m H Zx 01 CO H N M N N N d' N N N N Ll)N NN N N NNN d' N N N N W d'd' N d' N m d' NN d' H d d'd' d'd' d'd d' d' .:14 d' d' d' 001 I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I rIi Ln H I I U NH O N O N H 00 rlJH H HHIHII MMM H UX H r-i d' N d' d' d' d'd' MO d'N d'N N N N N N N CO N Q,'z 0M O\ d' C0 H d' co O H O d'd'd'n d' d'd'd' ri M H H H O O m O m O O m m O m 0 0 0 0 0 000 O O O O z 0 E4 H E E- WWWWW W 41U UUUUU U 0 0 z H W W 44 24 24 24 H - z 04 41 a .4 IwZZZzzww0Z • 0 IIn w In Z 41 24 0 D KCg H WWWWW HHH X W H W H 4 W 4 KC >,>4 4 mEEElF.E-1 ,4.44 a F. 4 E+ E• 44 a Ell ZZZZZ aaa \ Z EI a Z H a s a OHHHHH aaa cn H H O H • H �1lH a a Cl) Z (4444444Db� Z - 0 mm W W x 4 WW In 4 X X X X X mmm 0 X gC cn Z N on .4 CO 0 C7 4 X 0 C7 In H C7 E m 0 Won x m x �' C7 4KC Z C)E-1 24 24 24 W Z C7 Z Z H 0 CX on KC .1 KCu\ In FC In EI Z X H AW WW WW HHH H W Z H W I .4 U H U H H C.) C) E HZXZ Z E-'E'E+ x H E Z I w 0 KC 4aaaaa 444 0 a 0 a H H H H H x x x In H ,4 x H 0 E.-.KC O E O H 00 W WXXXD WWW I X H W X Cl x01010001 aaa 01 D Cl a N Xh C0 X C . H a UU O a4WWWW 000 In W In O W O EA up 24 W 24 24 24 HHH 44 X Z 0 O H 0 0 0 H H m 000 � 0 Z EA• XEi 4 4 4 H 4 0 4 Z aCX C4 4 0 0 a 0 W 0 as a 000000 .-8 8 0 a m a Q UM El H HEA In 000000 ZZZ W a W H 0 Z m C Z 0 Z COCO zZ 4,4 4.4 4 4 000 H rC H H H x Z HHHHHH m m m x W Z • HH Z 4 U om w 00 M 000000 www H >4 0 0 XX 4 H E• XX X zZZZZZ 000 a W M 0 X m x C) Z W 00 4 W W W W W W Z C) x 0 U O4a h E HI 0 C4 a mm H mmmmmm rC 0 X Eq E-1 m WWWWWW Cz.C=.CL. W CO > 4 H �.1 W X X xW W X xxxxxx 0 X z a m UU U 0U U 0 0 00 0 000000 WWW W W W W W * .K * # it * % « « -K corm 00 wk.() 00 00 mm 000 0101 0Lfl lnm NNM Md' H010 00 NN 00 st'd' LCL EI cj401414 00 MM 00 00 NS 000 MM 0II0101010 Mmd l0 00 HH 00 00 r.'0414 ZX CNN 00 LllLn 00 00 HH 000 NN Ind'Od'HH01 N0NO 00 NN 00 NN HH 0 NHd' In in HH Inln NN NN. Ln LO CD if)-t0- NI.0NIn Ino NNIH HH OO „Ci;) O I,D OCO NN ',11-0)-M- '4.'14 WW '4.'4' VT t? 411.M- LT VI-VT M 0 N H VT VT m N d'H m t?VT HH Ill 1.11 VT LT in-0}LO LT VT L?LT -1/).V? ...VT VT LT LT VT L? NH M d'd' LAN LTVT LT LTL)- VT VT x U W In x U W Inn W H H H H H H H HH H HHHHHH HHH H H H H H '.. H E• o o 0 O 0 O O 0 0 O 000000 000 0 0 0 0 0 W 0 00 0 0 0 0 . 0 00 0 000000 000 0 0 0 O O O4 HH H H H H H H H H HHHHHH Hr-Ir, H H H H H U N N N N N N N NLS N N N L-N L-L- NNN I- L- r- I- r- 0 0 W an an o1 an an an an o1 o1 an m m m m m m m m m an on an m 0) W x mm m m m m m mm an mmmmmm mmm an an m In m In U H H H H ri H H H H H HHHHHH H H H H H H H H U 0 4 Z 1.0 LO N a) m0 H N M d' Ln IA N 010 m o a) co co co co m H N co co ao a) co A d, A d' A w n w n d' n d' n Z .''f. d' A d' A d' n n d' A d' n d' A d' n d' M LO it lc) * 19 K I.0 K L9* Il) K 0 U I -K I�V LD ii l0 it LO * L9 it l0 it Lrl V In it l0 v Ln V Ln V Ln V Ln V in V In V p (i] un V In V to V In V to V In V In V ul O In U 0 4) to 0 P4 a 4 5 CO CO CO CO 00 00 CO CO CO CO CO 00 CO CO CO CO 0 Z . a w 0m ag z 0 z U rn H U) VD 0000 o1 O M H d' d' O Tr HI 0 01 M Ul Ln )0 LO Lo N 01 N 0) 0)0) W co O N I > eM Hi O H 010) D w l0 uo l0 10 10 O 00 00 M N l0 01 Z 0 H d' N 0101 VV d' ct V' d' Tr NN H L.o in V' N H N Hi H l0 NN 00 0 0 0 0 0 ch e}' N NJ 00 0 01 N Hi Mm Ln U1 O O O 0 O O O NN MH 01 O H O O O O O O O O co O co co co O O co O M O O E-' H H Ul d' HH V.44 H a' 0) M M W cN d' H M U) H-1 Z a' M N N N NN NN N N M N M NN N N d' M N '.7 W V v' d' d' d'd' cM c' Tr W cM W c)' V V d' N a' d' d' 0 W i 1 1 i 1 i i I I I U X 0 H N M H H H H H U1 H N H N N H O H H H U D N N U1 in HH VN U1 N M co M HH T' Tr M Hi Hi FC Z M M N N mm VM H L0 M Hi M M M d' co M O1 M 0) O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O 0) O O O z H Z H CV W W zW W W W W Q Z H CO 4 CO O) CO F Cr) a Z CO H 0 > Cr) Z al 121 ZZ 111 Z a 0 ZZ Z w H w 0 H a H W HH WW H W 0 24 WW Cr) 4 CO H H W -1 EA 1-1 1-1 E-'E-' '.] H 0 W H E-' E-' Ji m a m a m a 24 as 2424 a 24 CO H H 2424 '24 4 H a H H a H as HH a H U 24 V) HH H a a a C4 .a D FC D KC 4 4 CO H H K4 rC ' 4 In D CO z CO m Z cncn XX CO Z w 4 co £X X CD a CO CA W 0 C7 H H C7 C7 H E-' C7 E-' U D HEA H a C7 01 C] H 24 0 24 2424 2424 24 24 24 C9 CO 2424 24 4 C7 24 H CO H W HH W W H W W 24 - W W W x 24 H 1 CO H 5 X H E+ X X H X a H ,..a X X Z 0 H EA w CO a 4 pC a s 4 a w C] Cr) a s a, EA KC a:a U H a s HH a H Cr. a > HH H • CO Z a J O W a D W W D D W D 24 H KC D O W H W a a w 01 a s as a 01 0 D a 001 a D a a N a O X W O O W Cr] O W U (0 H W W W U Ca a O O U z H 0 m U CO H CO m 24 E+ Z H Z Z x O , IX 4 H Cl) H H 0 > Z Z H W H C7 H 00 00 a HH D 0 IX 0 0 a a 00 00 w C.)-.- a 0 Z w > H a m WW z < 0 w O W a W m ZZ mm 0 as H 24 m 0 Z m co 0) D 00 HH a 0 U W HH Z W CO 0 mm as a Z Z H HH 0 0 W W C> w a w z as 44 H H H a CJ 0 U Z X H Z H XX as X 24 D CCI H H H CO 01 H-1 H x x W W 'tf Chi R] 24 Cr. Fl CO w z HH 2424 a CD 24 aa CO 4 0 w w H 0 HH m H z z HH w X CO C4 w CO X • • DD 4 Cl) H w as 24 a O 24 H a a a W 4g4 2424 0 4 9 KC 0 KC FC Z >i 01 O X H H a 41 al a:, a 0 a Pt ww w w U x 24 W Cr+ Cr. Cr.. C7 C9 C7 C9 C7 C7 C7 C7 CO x x x CO H H H * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NN NN LO U1 Ul U1 Cs U1N IO ION O0 Ul Lf1 OO 1010 MM 000 OO OO OO OO OO zC`N 00 a0 d'd' d'd' N N co 0)10 10 O O 01 01 O O N N M M 0 0 0 O O U1 U) O O Ln U7 0 0 U1 U1 0 O H ri 00 CO N H 01 N H O1 Ul U1 N N O co U1 U1 10 10 N N a' 0) 0) M M up up C`N U1 U1 0 ci'cf' O co H ri ri H L)•U1 U1 U1 Cl)-U1 i/}i? 10 10 M M H H Cl)-1/T T'H U1 Hi H N N 0)o1 M M 1D 10 +?i/} tr cf' N N N N Cl)-t? M M HH in-VD- V)-V)- L}N N . L}(/? M M H H NN VI-V1- 4/1-41). /}i?t/}i/). ii)-0- V1-1.0- i/} i? 4.0-411- VD-V1- V)-V)- i?L} C0 i? U W CO X 0 W H CO W H H H H HH HH H H H H H HH H Hi H H H H H 0 0 0 0 00 CO 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 C9 4 �„, �� . - - .-„, W 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 o O O o• 0 H Hi H Hi HH HH H H H H H HH H H H H H - �- �� �,, .4 U N C` N C` Nr- Nr- N N N N N Nr- N N N N• N U Ix) o1 01 0) 0) 0101 0101 0) 01 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) o1 0) 01 0) W CO 0) o1 o1 on mm 010) 01 o1 0) 0) 01 0) 0) 0) 0) 01 0) 01 U U H H H H HH HH H H H H H HH HH H H H 0 ra Z H N M a' Ln 10 N 00 on o Hi N M V' It) 10 N H 01 0) 0) 0) 01 01 01 0) 01 O O O O O O O O U x d' n v' n d' n r' n a' A d' A d' n c' n d' n U1 n U1 n U1 A U1 n U1 n Ln n Ln n Ln n Z 0 10* 10 ii 1D* 10* 10 * 10 * 10* 10 * 10* 10 * 10* 10 * 10 * 10* 1p * t0* 10 * 0 x Ln V Lf1 v Ln v Ln v inv U1 v Ln v 1.11 V U1 V Ln V Ln V Ul V U1 V Ln v U1 v Lc) v U1 v U U Ln a) m a a 000 0 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 z W W OM aX D z O 01 N z M In M O LO H O U) m Ln Ln Ln Ln In Ln N Ln Ln I O LO H N N H NN M 0\ Ln 0 N N N C.C.N L.N N O O 01 N H O d' N C1 O LU LU LU N N LO L9 LO LO LO VD LO V3 LO N 0 LO N m m LO N W M V V CO ' m N m d'U d' o Z 0 0 0 0 N N N d'0 d'0 d'd'd'd'd' LO H d' C H O O O t` N 0 N LD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � N O O N N N 0 O 000 01 H 0 H M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M LU 0 0 H H H O 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 OH H1 Ln Ln Ln H H N H H H H H H H H H H O d' Ln m HH Z1:4 mm on m N In N N m M M M m M M M N N M m CO NNN M MW d'd'd' d' N d' N d' d'd'd'Sr Sr d'd'd'N d' d' d' d' N N N d' d' 0 W 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O H HLn HLOH01HNO N H H H COO d' H UM HHH H O H cr LUNHNNM0\d' d' N L1) Ln M d'd'd' N H UM NmN OD H Om cr m H LO LO LU Ln LA H d'm d' H H m WWW H M 000 0 CA 01 rn 0 0L,OLOL,OLDL000)0.' 0 0 0 o MMM o 0 co mmmmmmMM w Cn co Z W W U U 41 U U U U 0 U Z U ZZZ H a .4 Cl) HHHHHHHH 'Q' H U H MI 01 W > H Z HHH W W >>>a>>>� Z 0 UH x x x x KG KC H PG PG C4 C4 04 Lx 04 04 W W x Z ClG FC Kt Kt PG KC >4 a wwwwwwwww E. Cl) w w »+>' w m rte-iL a-+ HHH En KC '�' a m m m m m m m m 01 Z H m Cl) 0 0 a Cl) w Cu a C .7.7.1.a.a.1.a.a>' g CA H -1 w m g Kt Kt Kt Kt g g g Kt X D Cl) < www g Z 0 D0D Z W 0 ZZZZZZZZa a CU ZZ 000 Z 0 0 0 000 H g Cl) g 0 HHHHHHHHC 00000000 Z 0 Cl) H egg H H mmmmmmmmEl W Z \ m xxx m m H HHH Cl) U H U E+ mm EnmmmmmH £ H .a m 000 Cl) PG E4 E.E4 E4 Crl C1 Kt WWWWWWWWm a H w w w CC Lx wr�rI4r4ww444 C) H Z > w U HHH 0 0 H 0 a PG PG Q'.PG PG P»a'C4 41 01 PG PG PUG 000 004 O L PGPGa' as a s aaaaq 111 a E. Cu 000 a 3 N aaa a U CO U 0 0 Z. 0 H U E.EE.E.Eq-'AHEE'QgE. c4 000 U a W NNEH xxxxxxxxx 0 Cl) m E. U U U U U U U U U Z H 000 Cl) a' Z ZZZZZZZZZ H HHH W W W W W W W W W 0 X ZZZ 0 MMM U Q 0 • D>9»>�>> 0 0 Z PG ZAQQ 0 C. Kt Kt Kt g Kt K Kt gt xt Kt W PG 010101 H H WCl) PG PG X aax aPG a U W W ClGPG mCil H 7 CD U CD C0 CD CD0CDCD00 .w-7 E H E. CIC21 a 0 000 U co W D Ls,..s LsLs ,sLs Ls,4s 'kt W UW W W W a Ey E. C) x x Kt H 01 Z O >'>'>'>'>4>i>">'>' C4 C7 E. H E. U Cl) W a, C]Ca q q ClC]C]Ga C] W Cl)m x Z Z Z Z Z CC C/) KC O m C7 a WWWWWWWWW Z 0 w H w w w 0 W C> ZZZZZZZZZ .7 ^z H XO c4c4c4 Z U ZZZw Cl) H ZZZZZZZZZ H H 4 a' gam HHH h h h h x z x X x x x X x x x x x a a a H a * i' * i' -K -K * K K K K K K K mOlO d' OO OO OO OO mm HNOOOOONOIn OO d'd' mm OO 0 000 OO O ' E. HO HM Ln in lnln 00 00 mm NN d'd'O OLn L-01M 00 MM MM NN OOULU 00 dd' z 'D r-mL-N H H HH mm 00 In Ln Ln d' d'Ln LD d'MLD 001 NN lO L9 MM HH MOL• O Ln In r� Z LLTVTH MM MM ri r( dd' HH nmOH LTVTHHLO ri HH MM VTC mm d'dmN LTA 01 01 aLi?LLL . . L}LT VT LT .LT .LT L .L . VT LT LT LLT VT LT . +A- co co l0 H N H H H H LT VT LT U H H LT Ix) Ch LT M PG U W El Cl) W HHH H H H 0 0H EA 000 CD CD CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H HHH H H CD 0 Cr) q 000 0 0 0 0 o 000000000 0 0 0 0 000 O o c4 HHH H H 4 H H HHHHHHHHH H H H H HHH ri H U 0 NNN N. N N N N 01 0.'CA 001 0N1 CA CA 001 001 001 001 001 0011 C m 0 01 61 W x 01 o1 on on rn on on 01 C1 01 01 C1 01 01 01 01 01 rn rn CV 0 m m C o1 o1 X U H H H H H H H H HHHHHHHHH H H H H HHH H H U 0 o H H z co 01 0 H N M d' un LHo H H H N N H O O H H LHU H HLU HA in A in A Ln A in A Ln A Ln A Ln A O x M A Ln A Ln A Ln A in A in A Ln A LO x i K LO K l0 A LO ie LO K L9 K Z U LO 'K LO'K LO K LU'K LO* LU* Ln V in V m V in V Ln V in V in V Ln V W In V In V In V 111 V In V In V Ln O x U 0 w CD to ro a I-1 KC 0 0000 0 000000 00 0 00 0 000000000 0 0 0 z ax w 0w a,Z D z 0 z W N M U N N M V H V N N N N V' N N W 00 op 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 O N 01 01 01 O1 01 ,-1 H N 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 N CO ri > r-1 0) 0)0)O O IJHNNww NN '0 I.0 VD wwwwwwwww m V N Z 0 0 0 0 0 N M Lf1 U)0 01 O1 0 0 V' V'V' ll) V'V'V'V'V'V'V'V'V' Ln o 00 H H f=4 W P4 ax 01 010101H riH Nb 0 00 M 0000 00000 H Ln 1-1 H KC444 N NNL-O co CO HH 0 0 o V' 000000000 H w H 0 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 H w H V'H H V H H H i V.H H H H M m V' 0 0 07 c0 CO 03 CO 0 00 M 01 H Z m NN V'V' N NNMNNM NN m MM N MMMmmm 01m0 N M N D W w V•V'V.V' V. V.V V'V.V.'M d'a' V V•V• V' V'V' V'V' V'V'V V'V V' V' N 0{� 1 ) 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 ) 1 I 1 I UE H NNNM H NNNNNN HH H NH V H00NHHNH.4.01 H H O U0 H NNUlU) W NNNNNN 111 w V'N U) NNLnHNO00LnLn V' H V Q,'Z M HHRH V' HHHHHH Nm m V•H N Mw CM V'HHl`L- V' L- c0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 01 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 01 z H z H U'Z U CO CO zU a Z U7FC relU1H PC 4H tnU2 H W W a E. W H 0 41 24 Z 41412>ZZ2> WW D CO C) z ,-7 Cl O H HW W HH L.U)Wo4 HH : 24 24 W O a' H .1 E. H aawHHw as w 41 41 H wwwwwwwww O >4 Ln a aZ Z aaCFI ZZCI) as UO HH 2 000000000 H x r.0 H H 04 H as HH as en C/) H HHHHHHHHH Z 0 a ax DKt rC 4444 00 4 HH FC >>>>>> >"✓ 2, H U] U u)Z Z mm KCXXKC up co KC U)C) X 04axa4a4aaa4axa404 KC w N m Z Z Z wal wwwwwwwww E w C7 m W W COH H (7C70HHO C7 C7 O DD H mmcocococococnw U c4 o1 Q U z z z 2 24 F.24 z H z z H UI co z C7 z KC ri H W m co W H H UI W W m H H U] \\.1 \ W ›.�+�+�+>4�+ y,y, }, Z W x H yl a HHU Z U1 HH as HHHHHHHHH H a: C) ax KC a.tC I0 a rtr.Cwa aw < X W W W a HHHHHHHHH Q W ) D axHHH H C4C44 HHC'.1 C4 04 (s. J> H ,..7,4174FlFl111414 14 Ii. • ) U) W Dzz D W W OQ 'QO W W 0 K4 FC D HHHHHHHHH H Z 0 i Z 0014141 0< as 04 O1 Oafx as a' as 01 HHHHHHHHH D O N H O w(24 a4 w OOawwa O O a H H w 000000000 W U U 0 UUUUUU U 0 HHHHHH Z Z H H H H aat, aaal,a v) 0 a az ax ax a:ax cn rn az z Ul C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 Q 0 W H 04 C7 C7 C7 CD C7 C7 a CO E. E. a Qa HHHHHH as W Z W H al O4 aaaaaa U) H x U O a mcnUrncam up 00 O ad aCLI aaaal,aaa z Z Q H H ZZZZZZ corn ax 4 a a ����,,���- 1.8 D 0 Z CO O) 000000 Z 2 a I UO FC FC gt FC FC FC FC FC FC 0 w H W u1cco W 3 000000000 H i U aaazaag4g4ag4g4g4g4zm w a UU) w as a g4w m z w HHHHHH H t.7.7 CD CD(7 CD CD(7 (7 CD (7 D [z, Z H co cornu) D U)rnU)U] Uoco 00 .7 HH O W W W W W W W W W a 4 W HHHH 01 ZZZZZZ 00 ..a WW ax ZZZZZZZZZ a U] Z U 00CD0 U a'a HHHHHH : K:C ZZ H ZZZZZZZZZ Z aOOOO Z2XXZZZ 2Z22ZZZZZZZXE EZ2 2 Z m m In O w H N k0 V) w00000w V'N w 00 CO UI m 00 01 H N H N 00w M N in in 00 00 Zww LnONNO NN Om0LI U)Ln0 V'V'00 00 V'N N 00 Nu-1.4,N V'V'N N w0% 00 00 00 D 01 01 V'O N L-01 N N w H Ul N N L.V' N N 01 0 0 M 0 V' Ul Ln O V'ri H N w U)N In 01 N Cs 0 0 0 0 C) HriNOH V'w LO l0 MOLT'V'V'Lp 00N Ln 0O 0100 ri Nb N0<`N V'HLp N01M in-Air0O U)U) t?t? Ln N m N 00 411-t1) w V'V'tn.-til-v)-w H t/)N V'V' t?V'Ln 44-4/1- L?t?t/}t/}t/}i?t/}V'00 L- M m V'V' i/l.t/? ...tn. . .t/}i(• t? t/? 4/0410 t/)i/)> . in t/? t/}i/} H Cl m V H H H in- t/} s? 41} in-i? in- 0 ?0 W X I:4 U W H CO W H HHRH H HHHHHH HH H HH H r-IHHH ririHHH H H H H H 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 4 ���� ���,,,,,„ ,,� �� -, �,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, W 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y. H HrIHH H HHHHHH HH H HH H HHHHHHHHH H H H x ���� ������ �� �� ��������� J' 0 N N L.N N N N N N l-l-L- N N N N N N N N N N-N N N N N N- N N W 01 010101101 01 010101010101 0101 01 0101 01 010101010101010101 0) 01 01 W x 0) 01 01 01 01 01 0)01 01 01 0101 01 01 al 01 01 01 01 0,01 01 01 01 01 01 01 T 01 01 0 0 H r-IHHH H HHHHHH HH H HH H HHRH r-IHHHH H H H 0 4 Z N m V' Ln w N 00 01 o H N m H N N N N N N N N M M M M U .''s' 111 A lel A in n U) A In A In A In A Ln A Ln A LO A Ln A Ln 1 Z 0 w K w * ID KK w K w is w# w # w 4K w K w ir w K 1.0 1. DO x U) v Ln V Ln V U) V Ln V LO V U) V La) V in v Inv Ln v U) v U U r N • to ro i1, a KC 00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 z C4 C.4 041 aX D z 0 z w O N H OM NN(N 0 01 H H O LI) 0 O (N OH H O co H OWNNN N r CO M 0 N 0 M d' r H 0 0 cO a0 >0 NMLOWNo 0)Tr r r N r LD Lo Lo Z r Ln 111 l0 r l0 l0 N N W (N N LO N 'crH H M 0 r r H r-co CO CO CO d' d' d' H H Cl) CO 0 0 0 O O H HHHO O O N U1 N 0 O Tr 0 N LO N 0 HHHHH O 0 0 H H 01 0 0 0 41 H H � 0 0 00 00000 0 H O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 OLD H d'd'd'd'cM d' H CO H M H cM H H H H H M M M H H Z a' N N N N N N d' M N N M N N N N N N N d' M NM D W iM a'C d'd' ci M d' N W d' C d' v' W d' d' Tr cM d' .4..4, 0 CO 1 1 i 1 1 11 HHHHH H r 0 H LLnH Ll) H H r H M H H H H 0 0 a' N U D Tr d'W d' r N d' H N d' H N N N H N H M M FA d' Cl) H LD d' H M M d' M r m m HH .Z 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CA 0 lD 0 0 0 0 0 0 E co g4D a E' Ow wwwww w m . Cl) w UUUUU U H W H0 z w U arY 0w i ZZZZZZZ Z X pa FA z Cl) co Cl) co Cl) 0 H wwwww w >A ha a 41 FA H HHHHH H4w w a a a ci w Wal+ ow EA oD EA a H H HHHHH H Z H a Z H a W Cu C I++ Z H co a H X H 0 U1 �- c4 4 KCU Z Z KC gt K4 gC C)Z Z Z H a W KC KC X Cl) Cl) co Cl) m FC rn 0 E+E+ZE+Z Z H 4 U CD EA CD CD CD CD CD H Z Z Z Z Z Z C7 W Cl) Zw cA H 0CD 41 24 24 W W W W W W H >1 Z Z Cl) W H H H H H Z FC \ H H Z .7 H C7 aawaa a Ca' El H U 0 w a 4 KC KC 4C 4 C] 0 w 4Z H > H • .l fs. H 41 fx a' a' Ix H co 4 W H 0 HHHHH H Z H 0 H O 0 Cx) pw,, a a a H w f� ow 1-1 0 cy www0ww 01 a 0 ci ea w w O O O O 0 w Ca E" 0w 0 w U 124 U O z z w H cy U H x O ..7 Cl) Z up 41 al H H H ww a w 0 Cl.. U H Cl) H H o4 24 C7 ,1 0 0 C) 124 O Q H D F, r.0 w D Ga O O WZ 0 0 0 0 0 4 410 <C W 0 Q Z 00 0 Z 0 41 41 UUUUU KC al g O4 w LS Z 0 H Kt H Z 0 H Z 0 0 CM CO CO CElE1PFI)M CCI) H 0 CO Z 0 0 Z H HHHHH Cl) 0 Cl) x CO Cl 0 a' x 0 QQQQQ E EW HE' COu1 Z 0 W COul H x a 0 E' HHHHH Cx Lx a 0 W H 0 c4 E 4 0 H U 0O XXXXX z 0 Cl) 0 0 a a a w x a a x Cl) Cl) mm K K # -K K % * K # * # * * i' * K NCO NL0 r0 HH 00 NN 00 00 00 NN 00 00 0040 MM 0101 00 00 OO OO H N co d'Lc) m LCI OO 00 H H 000 00 00 LCI LCI 00 00 HH LO ID 0101 LOU) 00 NN 0LCI t07 111 M LD ri CO LCI 00 c0 OD NN NN 00 00 NN NN LCl LCl HH ,,,,..2.U) 0101 d' C 00 74.4 N0) 0 d')Ln 01 H H H H d' l' O O 01 0) O O U)LCI M M r r r r H H r N N O O O O H H H H H L1-0)-V).N Ln d'd' M M LO LCI N N 10 LD r NM M 40.01- 40-(0- 4.0-10- 00 t0 U)U> T.O. H H Lk V} L}U)- U} 4/1-4.0- L}L} L}U} 4.0-.W. LOW 4.0-10- 01 M U}U NN x L}L} L?U 4n-ii)- 0 }L}0 W x PG 0 W El H H H H Cl) W HHHHH H H H H H ri H H H ri ri H H E 000 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O 4 ����� „ , W 0 00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 (x HHHHH H H ri H H H H H H H H ri H H H H H U W rnmrnrnrn rn rn m rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn m rn m mm W x 01 01 01 01 01 0) 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0) 01 01 01 01 01 0) 01 01 `,I.' U HHHHH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HH 0 a Z0 Ln LD r co 01 O H N M d' Ln LO r Co 01 O H M M M M M M 'Cr Cr d' d' d' d' d' C cM d' L0 U .� Ln A In A L0 A L[1 A In A LC) A LCI A In A In A 111 A LCI A I11 A LO A In A lIl A Lf) A III Z 0 LD K LO* LD K LO K LO k LD * U i< LO* LO is LD K LO K l0 x LD* LO* LD* LD K LO O W LCI V LCI V LII V LCI V LCI V Ln V LCI V LCI V Ln V Lf) V LCI V LCI V LCI V LCl V LC) V ill V LCI O x O U co al 0 16 a a 00 0000000 0 0 0000000000 0 00 0 0 00 000 0 W W o' aX D Z 0 z W HH U O 0 H M d' N 04 N N N Ln UI m d' l0 N N H M NN OD O 0 0 0000000 0 c0 N O 0 0I O 10U) r-un H 0 > NN lotolOIOwr-L- lD N N oHN�0) oo M Ul OD N r-r- tO d1 i HCO us) N 24 Trcr wTrTrTrd'w cr 41 cP 0NN 0000O1000o Tr CP CP N ao 0000 H Vltfl Tr H 00 0000000 O O Ul un Ul un Ul un lO 1D ID t0 O 00 in O c0 00 0)0101 0 00 0000000 O 0 NNCNC`f`L"NNN 0 00 LO H c1c1 NNN O OW N N N N N 0 0 0 O 0000000000 O 00 0 0 00 000 0 E UlH MMMMMHH H H TI HHHHHHHHH N HH cr H HH HHH N Z24 mm aIWvlcrcrNN M M NMMMMMMMMM tD MM N N NN NNN m W V'VI Tr TrTrTrTr d1 d' Tr d1 Tr dM w CP Q'd'd1 d1 V'Cr m rr CP Tr Cr cP w cr C d' w OM I i I I I I I I i I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I II I I 1 1 1 1 UX HH cO HHCHHCD H cr HIDNCD OH ri Tr H NCO r1 H HH HHH H O MM MMHM crH UI H CO in (NI TIN Cr Cr TP a'ci.H 0 HTr Tr Cr HH a'cPa' 01 KC 24 H H w N O1 dr cr Tr H M H M LO LO LO CD CO cr W VD VD O M C VI cr m m Tr Tr Tr H 00 0)000IC00 O O 0 CO to 1.0 CO CD 01 CD tD Cl) 0) 0D O O 00 000 O WWWWW cococomco 0)Cl)Cl) KC KC KC 4 KC l co co 41cococococococococo u)u) W .1.-1i-]I.1I.1 W W UWW41W WwWW W WW U 0 pg 44KC4 U U UUUUUUUUUU C.)C) 24 24 24 H H H H H m m H H IO H H H H H H H H H H H a co co co co m co H 0 H UUUUU41W > > 242>2>2>2>2>2>2>2>2> 2>2> 24 W WW WWW O H x W W Will WHH a (4 W 14 l4 c4 o4(2404 k(0) (4 l4 41 H HH HHH E co as Cu a a as 41 41 EW4141wWW4141W 4141 E a as aaa til a H comm CO CR as co co 24co co comm coCAU)Cl) Cl)))) 24 a as aaa H H .2 \\\\\a s H co H a a s a a a N mx w < CC 4 4 X444444444 00 <4 X Cl) CC amCli aw EEEEE Z Z ZZZZZZZZZ w ZZ rn W �W 00 0 0 E000000000 �Z 00 E 07 00 000 0) A C)C4 ›.- 4>1'.>I,>-,','Ti`Z., H H ZHHHHHHHHH W HH Z Z ZZ ZZ Z H Z EE -,EE-41-1H U1 Ci) W cn u)co co co U)CI)CA co .) Cl)))) Cr) H HH HHH W I HO r4C44L4(24EE co co X0cocomcomcococo a u)co Z E EE EEE C) •A E24 41414141414Pg w W a44141414141414141 W 4141 a pg 44 444 4 I ZH aaaaa0da' 0)4 C4 HC4C4G4C4C4C4G.C4G4 U C4 G. H (4 14c4 1404 a' E zH n4o4a404p4aa 0 0 OlWc4c4a0a'PWWc4c4 co ILo'c4 0 a as aaa co N 11.G.4 a aaal,la,00 a a waal,aaet.aC4ala, X as Cr) 0 00 000 a 0 0000000000 0 7A›A UUUUUUUUUU U XX Ig as a a a a a a as a 0 Z 0 41 0 W w a a a a a w E E E E E E E E E E E E U Hpg Wa' 41WWWW41W W 0 2D DDDDDDDD D UU c40 W WW xxxaaxx a x co E 4a 000 W AA 2000000 D IC UUUUUUUUUU U 0 C7 X 24 000 0 124 c4 com coCACo U) co co A HHHHHHHHHH H '7_,',4 KC G] ',7"Z.," A 00 KC 4 FC 4 KC 4 KC 4I a.4 4.1.1 a.1.1a ) ) HH H X 00 CJ)U)Ci) Z C.)C) WwwwwWCi1 W a' 0)0)0)0)on 0)0)en 0)0) W 33 ra W mm aaa W 4141 xl4xar4c4c4 a w 2D2DX2D2D2D2D D 00 a a mm 000 a 2> 1414 EEEEHHE E D aC4aaaaaaaC4 Cl. EEA H a WW 000 00 0000000 0 4 WWWWWWWWWW W WW X 33 EE.EE w C)C.) UUUUUUU U U 414141414141414141Cx) 41 4141 24 ,.t1,..t4 24 24 24 I as aaa Cu a a as a as H Z 000 EE EEHEEEE E E 0000000000 0 00 3 0 x24 III 00 0000000 0 0 4444444444 4 44 W W HH 444 0 00 0000000 0 0 0)0)0)0)0)0)0)x0)0) X 0)x 0) H XX ZZZ Z mm mmmmmmm co Cl) mmmmcocommmm co co co co co u)co comm co K K 44 K K is K K K K K 000 M00N0000m mm 00 0 01NNHoommN` COLO 0mm HH 00 NON 0)HOO Ul E7., UI UI UI VD M U)0000 U1 NN 00 O d'C`010 f`OO C 01Ul co co 0010) 0101 000 ID O CD riN cr 01 N p 010301 HOML- O)d1 Tr co )DCO 00 Ul Lfl LI) TrCD O Ul 0H Tr m cr dl UIL-N HH OD OD mmCo tD0)L-M H 0 t/}N LO N N Ul c0 co co 00 M CA CA \O l0 O M N 0 M L-M 0)O tD H HH NC L- l0 l0 MM t?0O 00) 010 N HH N H 0101 011?ih cr t?t/} NN H N Ul H N N H t?M N 00 MM CR t?t? WI-t? CAL} H H c-i H t? i? t?t? t?t/} CRt/}t/}t/}t/}V t/? t? 4.0--M- t/?WI- t/? HHNNUI 01 HC HH ,Y, WI-m-m tn-m- d^ 44-4..n- HH U in- in- in-m- 41 rto41 X c4 U W E CI) W HH HHHHHHH H H H HHH H H H H H H H H H H H HH HHH H H E 00 0000000 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 000 0 0 4 �� ������-,. ���������� �� �� ��--, W 0 00 0000000 0 0 0000000000 0 00 0 0 00 000 0 ✓ HH HHHHHHH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HH H H H H �� \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\ 0 fiN NNNNNNN N N NNNNNNt`NNN N NLS L- L- NN NNN N 0 w 0)0) 0)0)0)0)0)0)0) 0) 01 0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)01 0) 0)0) 0) 0) 0)0) 0)0)0) 0) W x 0)01 01010)01010101 01 0) 010)01010101010)0)01 0) 0)0) 0) 0) 0)0) 010,0) 0) 0) 0 HH HHHHHHH H H H H H H H H H H H r4 H H H ri H HH HHH H U O a Z 0 H N M cr Ln CD N co 0) o H H IC) Ul LI) U) in Ul in in Ul en l0 lD U .Y. Ul A Ul A Ul A Ul A Lil A LI) A U) A LI) A Ul A LI) A LI) A Ul Z U t0 - to i. t0 4. lO iK t0 i1 1D ie to ie l01. L04. LO 1. V) 1s to 0 Cr) Ul V 1.11 V Ul V LII V LII V 1/1 V Ul V In Ul V LAI V In V 111 O U 01 (i) al a, a 00 0000000 000 00 0 00 0 000 00 0 0 0 0 0 X a w 0w a 0 z 0 zco O M H H H O a'U1 0 H H N • • • M M l0 a' U1 H 000 OOH HH H U101 C 0)N HH O N CO N 01 O N O 'J r[� HHHHd'a'a' 1010 N rr N Lf1M CO U1H N [�[� 1D N CO r In Z 0000000 0'410 0 0•14.0 d' O r co ala' a' a r o a' ' H d' )0 0 0 H 00 MMMMMM M 000 00 • 0 rU1 Ol Ul LO 00 0 0 0 0 N 00 HHHHHHH 000 00 O MU) a' 01 01 01 00 0 0 N 0 H 0 O O O r 0 O N 0 0 0 0 co O O O 0 0 0 O O O N 0 0 0 O 0 i MH co co m H co rnH NLI)CO Ha' III a'Tr H HHH HN M H H a' H Z MN MMa'M M•I' 0/ MMM a'N M NN N NNN NN m N d' N N 'a W a'W C a'M C a'M d' a'a'a' C a' C w a' a' C a'a' a'a' d' C a' a' NI O ao L i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L l I I I I I I I I I I I I L I I I 0 OX HH N N N N d'a a' .41'Cr a `CrHH HH H HNN NH H M H 0'0 01 al d'a'a'd'C a'a' ill Ul U1 H a' in d'a' H H H H H H Ul U1 H a' a' HH HHHHN HHH NN ' C ON a.sr m MMM MM H r m a' 0 a Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 U.) H W al 7WW U U al al 0 Ul 0 H a 0 W a Z W Ul H H H H Z H z z W W W W W as 0 w Z al 0 H z H a a x x W x W W H H H H H O Z H W a H zz a aaa as W a Z a H Wa WW WW W HHO H a aaa a H H H Ha HH UlH U1 HHH Z H a H H Ha HHUl HU) 01 al H U) HH a aaa a �2S H 0 C4 HX >>wa>Wa 01al> a as as D DSU) `" 0 Ulu) aaa a a as ==a X P EZ Ul mCnU) ma a m X al N. U) W W Wa0Wa0 aaW -, HH 0 000 0 W 0 0 E a m W COZ U)ulCz.Hcna H 00 H H H 0c� Z 0 zz Z zzz zx H C] \H 7+>+HUI>4HU) ZZ?' En[1.1 Z WW H HHH Hw \ H U) W U 1-1 E1 HHHU E- Hu) HHH 4X H XX a aaa as W a a a HHUIUHUIW HHH as H a,aHH a aaa aO > a H H . 0 al HHZ0 .4 O HHH HH Z 0 aP4 EElE'aaEH-.aa aaH WOI H OI OL a EX) a00 a a Z 01 N H0 OOH0.OHa a,a, aW a al al 0 000 OX H 0 a W 0 0 0 0 Z H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 0 0 0 CCCOUlCUlm zzz zzzzzzHHH aaa CI1 Cil KC 0 (Xa aa04Z cncn aaaaaacil HHHHHHH as 0 a 0 H X 0000000 aaa zz 0 Wawa 0 0 a w O as a a a as U)U)U HH H HE A C:3 HHHHHHH al al 01000 a wCWWw4W UUU) as w 00 Z 0 m z 0 Z• as XXXXXXX mmol L:1 14 Z ulin x as 0 aaa as > m w 0 x aa, HHHHHHH HHH xx w Lal a 0 .Ha as U)V] CgUlUIU)U) i4U)Ul as H 7'J H www W W ` WWWWWWW WWW WW a HH H UUU Xaa H 0 0) H 3333333 333 00 HH H xx xxxxxxE- xxx 00 WW a www ww X a x Z 01 01 00 HHHHHHH HHH hh a U)> 00 =D=D === === a WW 0 a a a as a w ul 3 0 U)m 0000000 mmm mm U) mal � H. EEna)) Ea-' Ex-' 0 0 F * t< 4, - * t' * 4' * * 9' t< 00U1 C)0 o7 WNOMH, 0000 Oa0 a0 00 OHH 00 00011/01 \0[ONO HH HHto OHH� �O fi00d•00 CO E.-, 0(-4.4.' U)O m NMC O\N Loin LI) LO 00101 0000 ONN Mtn 1000Mo OCO OI MM Z X 0NC) NO01U10100HN M WMH CNN wa' NN01 NN d'O UI O M 01 N MM NN 00 NN 0 O HV/1•M NMM'OHMHN a'M a' N O1H0 NN UINN NN a'N(N HHM L0 C0 HH•41•cr 00 NN U1 t? t? LLD H 00 a' H t/}N U1 t/1-t?t?H M H LO 4/1-t? th t?L} t?t?H t?t?t? +?CO. t?t? t?V> 4.0-t? CO. I t? . t? .VI- N N N N N LO LO LO N th t/T t/?t? N t? in O t� W X a 0 W H H w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 0 H 0 0 0 0 0 H H H 0 0 w q o0 0000000 000 00 0 00 0 000 00 0 0 0▪ 0 0 a H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 0 al mm mmmmmmm mmm mm N mm N mmm mm m N m▪ N 01 m al X 0 HH HHHHHHH HHH HH H HH H HHH HH H H H H H 0 -1 Z H N 0 CO W VI LO r OD l0 N H N N N H 10 1.0l0 l0 l0 '.0 U1 U) \ 0 H N m d U ,� LI) A Ul A LI) A LI) A LO A Ln A U1 A LC/ A til A LO A LO A U) A U1 A LCI ZLO 4' t0 is 1-0 9 LO t< l0+ LO * LO 4' LO * L9# l0 1' LO# L0 X U U) * U) V U1 V LI) V LO V LO V LO V N V Ul V LI1 V LO V U1 V Ul V U1 W LO V LO O x O 0 0 H a) fi m a a F4 0 0000 0 0 00000 0 000 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 X 04 ELI 0w CLI Z D z 0 z EU U N N H a0 co a0 a) N 01 01 01 a a\ d• a)a)0) In in 0 l0 N H W In 0 M NNNN a0 in N N N N N H a -5 H H m H H d'c}' a) a0 a) 'a a0 N N N N ID a0 L N N N N N ID in N N N N N N co a0 to d' d' Z ID d•d'd'd' d' N d'd'd'd'd' d' d'N N d'd' d' d' d' d'd' 0) Ln to H N 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\\ 0 0 0 0 0 H H N 0 0 H 0000 O m 00000 0 0 L�01 0 0 0 0 O H H In O O 0 H H HI H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 O N ID H E+ H NNNN N H H H H M M O1 HHH MM CO M a0 H H N N N Z IX N M M M M M N N N N N N M N N N M M m M M N N H H H '.7 W N d'd'd'd' d' d' d' d'd'd'd' d' d'd'd' d'd' W d' d' d+d' N N N 0 U I tilt I I mit I I I I I I I I I I I I I OZ 0 coNMd' H N Hi HiHHH H HHH HH M H H HH N N N U d' N In 1I1 In H H N W N N H-I H Ln In LL) H In d' N [M LI)LL) H H H 4:Z CO l0NN N CO M d'd'lD d'M d' NNN NH H H N HH Ol a1 O1 O1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O O O 0 0 z H z H C4 Cr) El Z a m mmm mmm 41 r4 w mm IW) H o w W www a www C.)C.) U ww U) 0 H 4 H HHH 0 HHH Z Z Z H H 4: El >' ww w w w a aaa 0 aaa as >' Ln a 6:4 a aaaE-IE' x aaa E'El U H U as ,: H H a a U U.0 Z Z 0 aa1-�a cncn H m H as a x 0 000HH U] 000 HH > H > 00 U W CO UlmmAF \ mmm mm 04 m x mm • rn a 0 W W W W 0 0 0 0 Ix) 0 0 0 0 co cwn D cwn 0 0 Z 0 O) A 4 ZZZZ Z ZZZO0 Z ZZZ cncn cn ZZ H 0 m H x 0 0 0 0 W H H H H z z W HHH \\ >' \ >-I H H 3 co I 0 xxxx 0 H HHHHH Ix HHH as H I-7 H HH 04 N aaaa 4 4FCS FC A Q W 444 Wfs7 H W H 44 FC W rn in wwww El 04 0404x44 IL4 x0404 >> a > a 0404 U H N 0 aaaa Ul Ix) W W W H H Z WWW 4 4 H 4 H W W ZLn a) I wWWW 0 04 aaa00 0 a a a, x04 H x H as N U HHRH a 0 000U)U) 0 000 HH 0 El D 00 U X 0 0 x A El r-) U UUUUU w z z Z z z a s H HHHHH z aaaaa H 00 U] III 0H Cl) w mcwnUWnUWncn Z Z 44 a O w ZEZZ H aaaaa w cncncn 00 X za P° X Z Z ZXZZ Ul r.C4:444: 0 HHH WW H W WW ,.tS X W 0 0000 4 HHHHH 04x04 0404 Z 0 E-'H > x UUUU X ZZZZZ H 00000 00 0 44 ZZ m 0 H H H Cl) U H HHRH m x04040404 H commU 0 7 mmmm 0 � m 00 x z wwww a H 00000 04 >'�I>I zz H a ww U 0 W 3333 � 00000 W WWW 4:4: O W /24 ix 0 H >' • x HHHHH > aaa 4 4 H x El HH 4 W I-7 0 CI)mmm m H HHHHH H I-1 ) XX m x m mm )4 0 x C4 a zzzzz z gK4g 0 0 a 1 x [11 r1.1 r. a 4 El 0000 D Q 00000 Q »> >> > 3 3 33 4 X 0 * * * * K K ie K K # K is K K 00 ID co d'ID d' 00" 00 In NOOd'H 00 om0 M ap a0 I0 NN N a) In In roc- ID ID 00 N El 0 0 Hi co N ID d' 0 0 0 0 co N dO M'N L 0 0 Ln N In N In H N to IO ID IO 0 0 M In a co co In in a) 00 [M OO LOH NN MM ID HNMHH 00 MNd'Ln MHd' 1.0%.0 Nc) NN 0 N N 0101 in In N 0 Ln0 NLn d'1-01 O)Ol .1.1, HaIn d4O10) W W NMOHi HNaO HH VI-in- LUN NO)H d' d' NN N d'O1 i?i?ii)-(/)-H H H d'd' N+/)-H 4/1-1/)-In t/}i/} 0 t?N M iA N N a)a) N N i)-if)-H ID ID N N N L}L} i/} i/}i/} V}1J? i/} L} i)- if} . i/?t/} i)- if}i/} i/} N N ID U) H H H H 0 if)- )-if)- i 4/). V}(1)- N N in.4/1- lx) /}W Z 04 U W El m W H Hi H H H-i H H HI H H-I H-I H H H H HI H H H H H H H N N N H El 0 0000 0 0 00000 0 000 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 4 ���� � �,,��� � - �� � �� I-3 00 0000 0 0 00000 0 000 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 . HI H H H H H H HHHHH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 4 0 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 U W O1 a\O1 rn O) ON O) O) O)CA 01 O) O) 01 ON ON O)O) ON CA 01 O1 O) O) 01 O) W x 01 O)O)O)01 01 CA 0101010101 a) a)a)a) a)a) O) O) a) m 6) a) al a) X 0 H Hi HHH H H HHHHH H H"IHH HH H H H HH H H H 0 0 a Z d' In N N co O1 0 H N M a In IO N a) H N N N N N N co a) a) co a) co co co a) 0 ^.4 in A In A In A In A In A Ln A Ln A Ln A in A Ln A In A Ln A Ln A in A In Z 0 IO K ID K ID K ID* ID is IO# Ip K to * LD* Ip * ID K ID K ID * to* ID 0 x Ln v In v in v Ln v in v Ln V in v Ln v In v in V In V In V In if Ln v in 0 0 H ^ H e a) U) ca a Ft 0000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000 0 0 z P: w 0w a z 0 z C.) axxxxxxxxxxxx o) xxxxaxaaxxxxxx H WWWWWWWWWWWWW to r h co WWWWWWWWWWWWWW rn O 01 0q p7 pl W W W al al M al al al co H co co Pq al al 14 al al al al al al al as al al co : 0000000000000 w H d' w 00000000000000 d' Z H H H H H H H H H H H E+E+ In N a In In H E+H H H H H H H H H HHH In N H 0000000000000 o m o 0 0 00000000000000 0 m HHHHHHHHHHHHH 0 00 0 0 h H1-4 HH H H r-I H H H r-I H H lO U) m E. M m M M M M M M M M m M M C71 r In m h m M M M M M M M M M m m M r r a0 Z HHHHHHHHHHHHH m H M m H HHHHHHHHHHHHHH H H ]w d'C d'd'd'e1 CI.4'd'.4' d'd'd' V' N a' d' N v1 d'Trd1 d''4'C'd'd'w d'd'v'N N N o al II I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I i I I I I I I � I I 0 0 0 0 0 H O O O O O O O N N N N O O O O x-10000000 m N H H H N H NM In roo r4 01 rHN d'NU)H H H fc4 N H H H HH 01 H M H N C N N In 01 01 m 01 rH H H rI H H M M d"CP 'II 1O r 01 01 01 a z H H 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000 0 0 0 z H z H W c4 I-] — z \ H U al a KC w Ho O H 0 Cl) w >4 al H a' X HHW KC rA H W W W W W W W W W W W W W U - Cl) a W W W W W W W W W W W W W KC p; r4 G.Ga 44 44 cu 44 W G.W W W G. Cl) al H Cr.W w G..G.w w f=+w W cr.GI+c>:+cu P+ • U HHHHHHHHHHHHH \ \ HHHHHHHHHHHHHH ✓ Cl) 4 1 ] - a rl 7 � a a Cl) a s aa a a a a a a a.a a s CA crl Z Cl) O A us us x us us us Ls us us us us us us \ H ,21 t.2I ,t1 Lt � us us us 2 x uuQ H Z O xxxtt xtt xxxxxa H .1 cx xxxxxxxxxxxxxO I HHHHHHHHHHHHH Z41EAEiEAEAEA Z U -7 a s 7 a a a a a a a a a C) 1410 as 141414 14 0 0 0 D C) (C41a'K.4141K'41414.414141 ZID HK tFtFtCCFCFCFCKCICKCKtFtKC H r xxxxaawwwwwwwwwwwwww z In N xxxxxxxxx0 p, E-I U xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 0 r O r U1 WO EA z WWWWWWWWWWWWWW 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 4A 44 4 44 44 44 D 0 c4 H asaaaaaaaaaaaa U tD a.-laaaaaa.-1.-1 14141414 N �KCKCK•CF.CKCKCFCFtKCKCK.CKCKt m p; EA EA EAulultnu E-1E4E Ecn CAAE- E Z a C7Lp'JtC7t7t)t)t)t)t)t)t) it CDEAHHHHHHHHHHHHH Z 0 EI EA EA EA EA EAHEAHEAEAEHEAEA HHHHHHHHHHHHH 4+ W t0 tJ t)tD tD x D t)t) t)tD t)M cn w wwwwwwwwwwwww a w w > zzzzzzzzzzzzz .1 H H a � � � � �rCrCrC�FC���� H 41 WWWWWWWWWWWWW HHHHHHHHHHHHHH cn CQ al al al al al al al al al al al al W w Ew.i OOo0000000OOOo EFt u]cnvlupcncntou)ulu) u1u] cn Z a O cntoCf)cnultoulu)upcnCn(ninon HHHHHHHHHHHHH W W W W W W W W W W W W W w w W a HHHHHHHHHHHHH 0 < Z ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ H 4244:4P44::P4P4P4 .a X 0 I< ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ W 0000000000000 0 U H H HHHHHHHHHHHHHH Z rr.4rL,a.r=.ELI ELI ELI ELI ELI ELI ELI ELI ELI 0 H H 4 X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX X a * * * * * * ix ix H 0 0U) m m H NO NO 00 LMn 0Tr m m 00 U)Ln HH Mm In Ln 000000000000000 00 HH COtD wr0l In d\cOrNrW CO d'10110 00 un Ln rr lfl Ln 00 IOM NOIOOOM 01 U CO l0 r-i 01'41Ln co co NN N VT-1/)..co-t? tn.I.n t?H v)-v)-.0)-t?N 4J-1-i? ID ID H H M M CO-4/). t?i/f.1?t?t? N-CO-t?t?to to-t?t?In N N M m t/T t? t?t? t?t/T t/T t/T V} LT HH Mm H t.1)t? H H x t?t? C) W x P; U W on W 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 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U• Kyr \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O I a H r-I H H H H H H H H H H H H HH H H \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ U rrrhrhrrrhrrh N h r N r hrrrrhrhhhhrrh r r U 4] 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0 01 01 01 01 01 01 0 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0 0 01 01 01 01 01 0 w x 01 01 01 01 01 0 01 0 01 O1.01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0 01 01 01 01 01 01 X U HHHHHHHHHHHHH H H H H H HHHHHHHHHHHHHH H H 0 c0 01H OZ+ 0 0 0 0 00 001 001 01 01 H O1 0 * LO -lc LOA In n LOA LOA LOA In A In A In A A In * LO ID* ID 9. l0 ix ID* l0 * l0 ix Ln Z V In V LO V U1 V In V U) V In V In V In V O x V U U • N H (1) In al Qa Z 0 000000000000000 0 0 a Z a w 0I a 0 z 0 z w C) H O H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H O CA 01 o1 o1 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 > TV wararcarwTrTrwarTrTrTrTrTr Z Lin Ln to In U1 In U1 Ln Ln Ln U7 U1 un In In In N N H O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 In U1 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cc m H CV 000000000000000 CO CO E4 CO N N co OD 00 CO 00 co co co CO m co co CO N N ZCZ4 H 0O 0+1 01(101M010101010101COon H H 0 W N N N dr Vr V' Vr C Vr C'Vr d'C C ar Cr N N 0 t I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I U E N M 01 H N H H H H N N C 00 N M TM N N C,] H HH co cAH N Ln N N N N N In un un H H 4Z 01 0101HHMMM C dr LOlD lD Cs NC` 01 Q. O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O z H O O H Er W W W W W W W W W W W W W In a 01 Uuuuc) UCJCCJu00u H H E. H H H H H H H H H H H H H 04 Uul»»»»»»> U 41rxcxxrxx04xrxxO4o4O4 a4c4 N 01 zwwwwwwwwwwwwww 01 w 22E 01c0opcn(JP cncncoupmrncncn a H ° OEar>r>r>r>4r>r>rr>r>r>r>A CO 1 io E.Er Er Er Er E E.E.E.Er Er Er E 0 '4 01 0404 H H H H H H H H H H H HH ) N W W a a a a a a a a a a a a a O.I ar E E,I-.H H H H H H H H H H H H O TV J to i o �A4 Er Er E.E.E.E.E E4 Er F E E E. m r1 N U 3 3 x x D a 0 x a a x x a x x N N 0 W EEEEEXEEEEEEEXE Cl) ZZEEEEEEEEXEEEE U 000000000000000 UUUUUUUUUUUUUUU aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa x E.E E. E+E E.E E.E E.E E.E-.E-4 E w :4000:40a000 :40 :40 a a UUC)C)UUUUU000000 0 Cn H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H CI a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a.1 Z W 000102W02020202020201 WWCQW Er H W c4 n0:40D:4DDxDpSx :4:4 U] u) > Er aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 3 3 O W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 0 0 C) WWWWWWWWWWWWWWW H H aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa E E E 000000000000000 E 44a4 4 4 4 4 4:44444x4 E E O FC KCKCgCFCK4g4A4r.Cg4A4g4FCKCFC C) U U x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x CO Cl) ul u]up m up Cn 01 01 01 Cil 01 Cn 01 CO 01 01 x * * * * * 00 0O crl lD 0 to l0 dr N to N lfl CO m ar CO HH U11n %.9 Er 00 000101I� H1001Ln 0Narl0N0I'1 lWl0 00 l0 Z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O a)co N H H H N N O N H O LC/ 01 LO 01010 HH 00 00 N O NN M H1Oww NN MI HON CD LOIn r1 Qr co co U11n U1 NN 01100 Ln o1 Mt/1-CD LO N CO COHNN01 0101 2/1-01• 01 Ln Ln CV NH dr(NI LO N TV NN r- 4 4 N 4/1-t/} i/}t? l/}V)V1 4/1.In +/}4/1? H C) 40- In W .t0- = C4 U W E+ En W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N H E 0 000000000000000 0 0 W o o 000000000000000 0 0 H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H — ��,,����.\\�����-- — � .4 U N Nr-NNNNNNNI-NNNC`C` N N C) C) 0\ 610101 rn 01 CM 01 o101 o101 o101 o101 01 01 W x 01 01 01 o1 o1 o1 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 x U H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H U a 0 0 N ri Cr H O O 0 0 C.) l.0 A ,,Ci A l0 A l0 A Z U lO* l0 * l0* l0* CD CU Ln v In v In v In V O x H cD rn ro a H 0 t11 H N a1 01 H H C) 0 N 0 „ 4, M c0 1D N a1 O to Cl O C' O O m ca 0 N to a' M M N L(1 O r-i 1D t.0 C O N to M M d' N t11 t11 tD to H N N H 0 M 0 N e--I O N N H d' a' N Cl N N LI) N 1.11 N H N c0 N L0 111 M d' N t? 01 t? 0 N %.0 CO N H Cl H N M Lfl a\ t? H a1 C N H r-I c0 N N M M H H t? L1. t? H H H Cl Cl H H t? H i? t? I.1 N r/1 t? 1? Ll- V) H CZt+ 0 Q E-4 El H H C4 a a Z a Z W H H Z z a X E• 0 z z H A Z 0 H 0 E W W U D W AZ 0 Z Z U E H rK O H H Cl.' H Z Z CC0 x. 0�, H H Z OS E a 4 0 O o4 X Cl a 4 E. >+ c4 w H Z 4 H H 4 W � 01 U Cl.' H Cl) H 4 A W 4 Z W Z C7 E. Z \ U `.L A E.H 1Z4Z cn C4 A a 0 O rn H H4 d' H U rn cd Cr. Z 0 W U U ul W a A rn 4 a rn H Oa 01 H H 4 H Cr) W Cl) 0 E. W H U A H U pq H W H cJ.' m ri4 a W U Cr) H LI) 0 H to N CO a1 0 H N 0 0 0 0 O .T. O H H N N N Cl M Cl eM d' CH Cl V' to . U O H H Cl eM d' V' d' d' eN d' er N N N N c0 H Z Z Z °z z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z u w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeil, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Amended Preliminary Plat for Crossroads Center and Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition DATE: October 7, 1997 DISCUSSION Midwest Commercial Development is requesting approval of an amended Preliminary Plat for Crossroads Center and the Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition. The subject site is located south of Vierling Drive and west of County Road 17. A copy of the September 18, 1997,Planning Commission staff memo has been attached for your reference. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the amendment to the Preliminary Plat of Crossroads Center and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, subject to conditions. 2. Modify the recommended conditions, and approve the amended Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, subject to the revised conditions. 3. Do not approve the amended Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition. 4. Table action on this item and request additional information from the applicant and/or staff. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended the approval of the amended Preliminary Plat for Crossroads Center and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, subject to conditions. ACTION REQUESTED Offer and approve Resolution No. 4755 approving the amended Preliminary Plat of Crossroads Center and the final plat of Crossroads Center 2 d Addition with conditions. A 110 tff ulie Kli a Planner II i:\commdev\cc\1997\cc1007\pfcrctu2.doc RESOLUTION NO. 4755 A RESOLUTION OF 1'HJ CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CROSSROADS CENTER AND THE FINAL PLAT FOR CROSSROADS CENTER 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS,Midwest Commercial Development, the applicant, and the Vierling Partnership, owner of said property, have applied for amended Preliminary Plat approval; and WHEREAS,the property for which the request is being made is legally described as: Outlot D, Prairie Estates 1st Addition, Scott County,Minnesota; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did review the amendment to the Preliminary Plat of Crossroads Center and the Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition on September 18, 1997, and has recommended its approval; and WHEREAS,all notices of the public hearing for the Preliminary Plat were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,as follows: That the amendment to the Preliminary Plat of Crossroads Center and the Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: A. The proposed variances are approved, as attached on Exhibits E and F. B. The Final Plat for Crossroads Center(the first phase) must be recorded prior to the recording of the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition. C. The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: 1. Approval of title by the City Attorney. 2. Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) The applicant shall enter into an agreement regarding Park Dedication payments. Park dedication payment shall be made in the amount of$4,500 per acre, as required by Resolution No. 4699. Park dedication payments shall be paid prior to the recording of the Final Plat. f) The applicant shall provide a landscaping bond in the amount equal to 115% of the value of the landscaping to ensure compliance with Section 11.60 of the City Code during the first year after planting. 3. The Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be approved by the City Engineer and Shakopee Public Utilities. 4. The developer shall provide access easements to the ponding areas. 5. The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. 6. The developer shall provide the necessary access agreements for Outlot A. 7. Stormwater trunk charges shall be paid in accordance with adopted City policy. 8. A landscaping plan shall be submitted and reviewed by the Community Development Director to ensure compliance with landscaping standards. The landscaping plan for the site shall also be in conformance with the landscape requirements approved with the retail center conditional use permit for the site. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held the day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk PREPARED BY: City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Amendment to the Preliminary of Crossroads Center and the Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition DATE: September 18, 1997 Site Information: Applicant: Midwest Commercial Development Location: South of Vierling Drive and west of County Road 17 Current Zoning: Highway Business(B 1) Adjacent Zoning: North: Medium Density Residential/Highway Business (R2/B1) South: Highway 169 East: Highway Business (B 1) West: Urban Residential/Medium Density Residential (R-1B/R2) Comp. Plan: 1995: Commercial Area: 24.83 acres in Preliminary Plat 8.39 acres in Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition MUSA: The site is within the MUSA. Introduction Midwest Commercial Development is requesting approval of an amended Preliminary Plat for Crossroads Center and the Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition. The subject site is located south of Vierling Drive and west of County Road 17 (Please see Exhibit A). Considerations The original Preliminary Plat for Crossroads Center was approved by the City Council on May 20, 1997. (Please see Exhibit B). The amended Preliminary Plat proposes a lot split within Block 2 and some minor reconfiguration of Lot 2, Block 1. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP)for the site. The amended Preliminary Plat has been attached as Exhibit C and the Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition has been attached as Exhibit D. The Engineering Department has reviewed the submittal materials and has provided its comments. Staff has incorporated these recommendations into the conditions of approval for the Final Plat. Consistent with previous reviews and approvals of the Crossroads Center development, the applicant is requesting variations as part of the amended Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition. These requested variations are similar in nature to the variations requested and granted as part of the original Preliminary Plat application and approval. The list of requested variations for the amended Preliminary Plat are attached as Exhibit E and those variations requested as part of the Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition are attached as Exhibit F. The Planning Commission should discuss these requested variations and provide a recommendation for consideration to the City Council. The variances largely result from nature of the site plan approved under the city's retail center CUP process, and the applicant's need to divide individual lots for ownership purposes. Following are proposed findings; A. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. The variances result from the applicant's use of the retail center CUP mechanism of the City Code. The design standards for retail centers are specifically designed to insure that such centers will not be detrimental or injurious. Moreover, the applicant's CUP plan, through a number of public meetings, has been tailored to specifically respond to the neighborhood concerns. B. The conditions upon which the request for a variation are based are unique to the property for which the variation is sought, and are not applicable,generally, to other property. The conditions upon which the request for variations are based specifically result from the use of the retail center CUP, which intentionally limits access to the site from public roadways. These conditions are not generally applicable to other property. C. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of this Chapter. Literal interpretationpermit would not the development of a retail center with limited access and a private, internal circulation plan. D. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The special conditions and circumstances result from the applicant's efforts to comply with the terms and conditions imposed on retail centers generally, and this project specifically, and not the independent actions of the applicant. E. Because of the particular physical surroundings,shape,or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result,as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. Because of the size of the property, the fact that it is bounded on 3 sides by significant roadways and on the fourth by a single-family residential area, it would be very difficult to develop the site commercially if public roadways were required on the site itself to mitigate the variances. Section 11.60, Subd. 8 of the City Code states "The City shall require submission of a landscaping bond in an amount equal to 115% of the value of the landscaping to ensure compliance with this section during the first year after planting". A condition requiring compliance with this provision has been incorporated into the recommended conditions of approval. Alternatives 1. Recommend to the City Council approval of the amendment to the Preliminary Plat of Crossroads Center and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, subject to conditions. 2. Modify the recommended conditions, and recommend to the City Council approval of the amended Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, subject to the revised conditions. 3. Recommend to the City Council the denial of the amended Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, stating the reasons for denial. 4. Table the decision to allow staff and/or the applicant to provide additional information. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Preliminary Plat of Crossroads Center and the Final Plat of Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, subject to the following conditions: a) The proposed variances are approved, as attached on Exhibits E and F. b) The Final Plat for Crossroads Center(the first phase) must be recorded. c) The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: i) Approval of title by the City Attorney. ii) Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) The applicant shall enter into an agreement regarding Park Dedication payments. Park dedication payment shall be made in the amount of$4,500 per acre, as required by Resolution No. 4699. Park dedication payments shall be paid prior to the recording of the Final Plat. f) The applicant shall provide a landscaping bond in the amount equal to 115% of the value of the landscaping to ensure compliance with Section 11.60 of the City Code during the first year after planting. iii) The Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be approved by the City Engineer and Shakopee Public Utilities. iv) The developer shall provide access easements to the ponding areas. v) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. vi) The developer shall provide the necessary access agreements for Outlot A. vii) Stormwater trunk charges shall be paid in accordance with adopted City policy. viii) A landscaping plan shall be submitted and reviewed by the Community Development Director to ensure compliance with landscaping standards. The landscaping plan for the site shall also be in conformance with the landscape requirements approved with the retail center conditional use permit for the site. Action Requested Offer a motion to recommend to the City Council the approval of the amended Preliminary Plat of Crossroads Center and the Final Plat for Crossroads Center 2nd Addition, subject to conditions and move its approval. Julie Klima Planner II is\commdev\boaa-pc\1997\sep 18\pfcrsrd2.doc ■ 1!i Oil114-77447". ► ! aili��, a - , II �1.. . I�li� *!,•. ai-a," ,� �" EXHIBIT A i wm is. • - m . , ap ,104111. \ • — Ell EEL. ..,• • rillan • .1'. UP 41:47416 ' 1)';:''p, ''., .. ' i .. , MI .._....._7... . . 613111% IL . $, 0 02 Boa iiis- !J. • !J1Ijt . �i3 } M� 0� ►,i iii —'` • , : 7ir • .• ` OSillimi. )• 0S3 • ►MyL ti Ir 10 !► /ii14 4111 111111141N117.21111g zummill':' IV/ SINICOPIZ Jillat. ION MM.MIIIIMIC.r 70,' - r4 ioi rIai owrfr�TAM= 1/14 $00itt Ne © krtp R 3 E elus= sofinp Ay.. 113 �1is r -' ANI tb Ads. kio *ii Ali - . ' 424111111 or 9 I lir .r. , •„.. SUBJECT SITE> ♦� ,per . _ ult .:. p " _so .-44. 4., o pv . O'.� --' I 0 • B1 ) 1R2 Will% oLW -= = - n.dtik. A G ' - -- . " - _ ,"si: Res:centic, if- _: <esiceniici .T7-7- -C':: 5.^C<JDe.. R sizer.. '1? Je's;z: RsiCe,... i <.. v_. _ rzrr,,y `twce :- _: C. __ �Jsi ess 7 V - ,;9,ness 1( -'C-! ',rC:a Lr CI 0 C.,-..=- LJneS - .;..-r-,.:,, .------ O • EXHIBIT E - ` . . Riscetivo AUG z5i91 Crossroads Center Loucks Project No. 96126 Conditional Use Permit(CUP) Narrative August 25, 1997 To develop this site as retail center and in line with the City CUP procedure,it is necessary to request variations to the City standards as follows. These variations are a direct result of subdividing the property for individual ownership while maintaining common parking and access drives, inherent to retail centers. Street Frontage(Frontage on a public right of way) Lot 2,Block 1 (Frontage on a common outlot for access)) Lot 2,Block 2 (Frontage on a common outlot for access) Lot 3,Block 2 (Frontage on a common outlot for access) Lot Area(1.0 acre minimum) Acura( Variation Lot 2,Block 1 0.67 acre 0.33 acre Lot 2,Block 2 0.34 acre 0.66 acre Lot 3,Block 2 0.48 acre 0.52 acre Lot 4,Block 2 0.82 acre 0.18 acre jgtsrior Building etySback(30' front,20' side,30' rear) Actual Variation Lot 2,Block 1 2' (front) 28' (front) Lot 3,Block 1 19' (rear) 11' (rear) Lot 5,Block 1 8' (rear) 22' (rear) Lot 4, Block 2 28' (rear) 2' (rear) Interior Parking Setback(5' to interior lot lines) Actual Variation Lot 1,Block l 0' 5' • Lot 3,Block 1 2' 3' Lot 6,Block 1 4' 1' Lot 1,Block 2 3' 2' Impervious Surface(75%maximum impervious) Lot 1,Block 1 Greater than 75% Lot 3,Block 1 Greater than 75% Lot 4,Block 1 Greater than 75% Lot 2,Block 2 Greater than 75% Lot 3,Block 2 Greater than 75% Lot 4,Block 2 Greater than 75% All building and parking setbacks to the exterior of the site are per City standards. \96126\misc\cupmraa.doc ZOO(21 'OOSSN 'ir SN0(10'1 MIS nt. ZT9 Y4.4 9£:90 L6/9Z/90 EXHIBIT F Crossroads Ce„tor 2nd Addition Loucks Project No. 96126 Conditional Use Permit(CUP) Narrative August 8, 1997 To develop this site as retail center and in line with the City CUP procedure, it is necessary to request variations to the City standards as follows. These variations are a direct result of subdividing the property for individual ownership while maintaining common parking and access drives, inherent to retail centers. Street Frontage(Frontage on a public right of way) Lot 2,Block 1 (Frontage on a common outlot for access) Lot 2,Block 2 (Frontage on a common outlot for access) Lot 3,Block 2 (Frontage on a common outlot for access) Lot Area(1.0 acre minimum) Actual Variation Lot 2,Block l 0.67 acre 0.33 acre Lot 1,Block 2 0.34 acre 0.66 acre Lot 2,Block 2 0.48 acre 0.52 acre Interior Building Setback(30' front,20' side, 30' rear) Actual Variation Lot 2,Block 1 2' (front) 28' (front) Lot 3,Block 1 19' (rear) 11' (rear) Interior Parking Setback(5' to interior lot lines) Actual Variation Lot 1,Block l 0' 5' Lot 3,Block l 2 3' Impervious Surface(75%maximum impervious) Lot 1,Block 1 Greater than 75% Lot 3,Block 1 Greater than 75% Lot 2,Block 2 Greater than 75% Lot 3,Block 2 Greater than 75% All building and parking setbacks to the exterior of the site are per City standards. 196126\r isciwpnara4.doc £001 'DOSS' '5 SN3,101 ZZ99. tZt, ZT9 TVA OT=9T L6/£T!90 • ----- --- --- Asolaassai �1 W AM F 6o �' n I1! U I 1• l „, Z q O t-`-1 A i:i=i 1� i N z-r4 s 210. i 1-I` , !) r' W U ii. 7 �.1_.•t.•r•^� � n`a yy 1i 1k1�4 1 i 1 K �t ^ �I W r O 8 I:r• :I IV Z F-.a k �:'.3. 9 t �D JB�yitl�St3li Pp' Fit`! lg1 II I 0 ~ z WE hQaw t s i F k�ItlL R " I1 �; fl 11 U r-1 qq 5 Ilii ' r. , 1 K !, �baea3� a I',: t h s t I I • • 8 14/11 I 1 O ¢wt�Si'zpW 1� Ill O nI I t 1,.1E . .; •jiff/11 w Ni3 v z &;g��, boa'�o��go /� !i! id wf-1 n itc—Ezan= o rn - _.. 11�E ,, _ ( ad -1-1`d HOS elVW) L l • ON ' W S ' V ' 0I.{''tw' +t1't II: 4,1 111 LL •-.�-W< " 1- • j LL " Ou OLL1�r<K 4.4y.,1�111<-Z ,,l`� b 111 " W O O F i.1 LLJ 0 .••.✓ {I,;r•••+.I... i..• �•.... A 1 �[ 1 'Jilt 0 1 1 i Z 2W~p,o<d►•o .} i.''1 2 VIII' I Z VII- N %o g W x < I\ 1 1 W y ,y' ��� X WW ZI- •Z t`y�V"`46 ' EI I {V l l Vt s ' I < ZW J 3< �OC7 OS J ''' ya1 )••:,T.41:1 I .-. . 1++•5,10.1109 .__.. _ --.---'"---.7- - - -. 21;1K.70.11.0-1-- - +, 1I' a O O f�. of J" ~ a ouit<-� ~o= 1 '/ 1 LS•iS / _ Lor0! a1T.4171,:' ! Y Y Ii •1 81-1665°-. / �y-rQ- YO'[LL 1 /�� [C'OOi' I/ 1 I{Y^.O 1- mI \/ I1 /tt/ 7.0t,t0JON �lr � qii:5�;CO IN a 1 "o <��o�i I 1 II it ^ MK:�`• ,i:,:1 'I1 i .dt- er e 6g�� I W I�„ I I 1 w �.��- `n 'I1I!l' ''',tiG �,I 4 II I ,- F p n 1 qr,.. ! !J nbyWY 1"e. O�WW W <- y6I I ` I� o / !„,..` !.r 111 1+ , W Wa o5•� rc°plb� ! r �1 j 1 I�'\• r , ••'., 1 1 . 4•••••r~ pVj =<WO() O coiN 1.11 1 II N. 1\ __ :I 1,11 in �” � ¢� �oru I �. \ 1 ,— J ;; I 1y! 77 1 1 1 \ .I 1 1 \ \ +.' N Ji-11K]IRO' IZ C� I t`— 1 0A.. 1 �V16 C..‘° 1 • li i5 + 1 N , 1651 1V+\ \�$ 1 f ornNb V. *. Y"% a a b IN-ION ti -� �� sn ♦ ,m+ o =rb n b ,i . ! 09;L6 \ 4'56 '/ CV `� 1 -O�ap1- N '^ -00 N O - N 1 I- A -1 /� 0 er ix ix 0000 o: b O 0 ix ir00 O 0 ,I.1 1 1 I v, b iQn i 1 I 1 W a 000000 O 000 0 O O I- F F.f F I-)- M LL 1-1-12 1- LL I- 1 h�1 r O W �0 1\ 11�,OL O+' [_' 1-- 12124444 LL • LLLLLL LL LL LL J •1 J1 Yr •1 40 1rJ m-01 "=1 I_- - { , o 00N000 O 0 00 O rn O g m r / J , 40 1 1 -41-911.%_fir JAS N 1 n FI z F g b V1 VI VI N N O N " N VI !! 01 3N -oo*-b YI N ON b O• P A ''••� \ 1 '. 1 /) 01 w m< 1� P" EO NN hOM N b b 3 .IS O h b I 1.0 '•/ / EO 4/ 4 1•. i h • b VI-o b n A n .0 b- + 1 n• h l 0 z 1�:'1L 1)•9 1,. 1 /M v i \ < n r i a or .0 " Eg .r01 o n obi F 0 n rbi z zo /':'�/ / 2'6t '9O,„ r 9 '50,/1,61 s 1 1 0 >11 W 6/\ 01 Q Nrrr-. b N O Q enhrr'1 N J A b b 1`INo 0 / <r(11 N 1 9ZZ 0� l r O 1 D II m 1 p W 1 A 1 _ 4 W F W ! h / / B1t 1 `r _ I—N lit NON NI, J o S� ¢ NH lv O in O ,':/' FOS . !'• ry,+• L 1 1 /� jn a,"-__'-.-__ / X10�q X0-1 L 690L1 I-I-I-I-I-I- X F I-I-F I- ' R O ./ �j gTiif m '•r L a N r to I o O pp0000 pp O 000 Y 0 O O < / q .(b .,,1 p O J JJJJJ Z J J JJ J Z J J W N LL �' , .) y L \ 1 W 9099 "...��I Ia N N N i . K /�'A+� t•4, ( 1 1 -_ !N .Of.9S I" S N I b SO HON L. /�I R " i W m � W < .I >LO'YL � r"----.- ._.1�.:: SO SOS, / Lb a - 1!; X o o a Q %;/ / a!rill!/, !'i 1 1 I'll; 1 /` s to ' of //i C•LL S 1 I N` 1 clml .1 \,♦/, 1, 1 • �' 4 ` i \ • /, \� 11 '/.}BVI O,` �' 1� \ 1 1D I 11' OIiA 'Y o I 6• ly IuaON o r� �\ \L. / ci 1 lgo 9z ,D i• ooui 1= '' ; 1 911 e_ .' • I `r%,�� If • / �� Ac`,� s rn 1 1 0 •'� 1 14 G �l F- I ,� ry"/i/` �'�r'� mY P� 96 CM Ib(8w1; pi / is / ' dP= 1W 1 s1 �-1 r.' I ^,y / W $ 1 v\HL 0 O 01 ' ?• i^'!j y'I' 'B, rSrSS \\ i 1 i •:1`. n1N \ '1' H1 HON Z g� i.. /I y �> I oortl 1 i 1' r 1 oz o I ., s.'' 1 S 1 l 1 1 " 1 j I 1 l'• L6 9S, 1 3,.BS.i , r S-' d. I r b _ � J Is r,�e LN _ /� SI'L9f 1 I ' I I I I Z 1 ry 1\ m -, 4' // HLHON 1 •• 1,I Il 'j) No �* •\ / / // 1 II i 1 N I 1 irk--..._-A /rc/ 14 I A 1 V 1, i 1 5p.•/ 9, 1/ riwI b/ I 1; ;1 11 tti I --- -- 9�b \ ,11., I V, i 1 __ i1 1 N1HON I �'• 1 1 1 Z[•OS 1 1 1 1 cit _ I. \^ '‘ 1 1 a OL 6� �! t\1'1 111 1 O 1 w 1 ,It 111 I I I 1 F7 t\\ .1.t I 1 3.60.[1.00 S I ii IP `` `J 4_ ---1-- `J ���-- 90'5L[ r �y L'9[ 1 m I s. 1 \-14153/i10-� e�• Z l-. I` — ''' '--14153"10- Ib•1 .3 tl; L 1 I+, ; 3„80,[1,00 S ^ - -t -1 r I `1`1��� ..'4.! -_ 00'IOt 1---1- 3.60.[1.00 S - S9'I" -_„ I ri 3 .80•[1,00 s OOU4..,-..„..--,i' -` 1 +1i.• 1 os'68Y 1 OL i_......"" )L- -- 90'[801 330,[).005 - 1 I I �-•--y i%oi I I I1 !A113 1 ��:h1 H1 I Irl I I I�rit'In gi ';77, ,a,. 1 1 c. .,4, l'..".."/ � I • +1 1: a .„ C:,es • ,�,�J iY �. 1 I • 4„,i 11 lr ,i1+ f ,,, .1) 1 ,�`v 4•`\v r • • u . I 'Is:` ,A"' rJ j, l _ -•I 1 1. L t ? ` I 1 A 1 1 Ai:, -.--..:•,.0.,/-••:•:7-7.-_ 141.65 ------- `-----..........._ ----- so0. 13'09.E 093.09 -- 50.00_ ( 499.50 1 1 ''• " 593.59 QI 204.25 '"/�a 1 / 30 00 s 00'13'09•C---- 1 i ^` t6t�Q S89°96'51.` j20j s 00 1309• E • • ms_ 357.74 1 -- V... ' ------ S 00'13'09° E 379_48 - •r ..01::a.._11 J� j ' �� IS00113109°E ZN 1 N 1 N00°V •'09"111 32.50 - -- /' f O4 vg9 = `7----� N jt -1 111146---;�' 302.84 • En II i" 99--T - 1 309.61 z" Y201 .1;. 1 ti� S 01°23119' W -I _�'' c1 a�- S 00°13'09" E myVt. 1 fT3 ti r.D _[.4 I 1 I •':1. 1 f*1�� Q_yDj -CD 3'S - (-i --1 Z ui ( I I: O 27.5 2 l�il Y (n t 1, i1' ..1 ttr !D rn 61.97 y\ f0 � 14 i /~ I So r°N1 11 „k, o`..OA tn. I NORTH r/� z I, 1 z mol 04 1 1� '1-- -1 -F s i N-1.1')% V\ :1', 27 95.. J s li '''--;04 f- j 1 1 1; I 0'_ ��� ti ;' I ; I L. `" P �',`'+ 1� ,1, 1 S ,-'off g"„.s=;•°0 ?•y o "' "p 1�1 y AA 4�i i cis` ( `'S♦ WIC 0) 0. I 1 OV ,1: I` 9y o�\ ,�r?�° to i�>\�1;6. N m I NORTH 120A1 )• 1 NORTH ��rb�1' l/ 9 '; I Z1 '1 59.6' 16 m 6 G �`-._ / 27.26C.:117.:-...j �!! 266.74 > 1 r Z 36.43�� I 'r. ;� , N00°17101"WNORTtII I I 68.92 ' rn 171 ,(q N05'57'23°E 1I • ! ' i c ; 35.00 - Nw ; / 1 ,� 1 11 OUTIAT A I `r^ ' 1 • 11111 • �' -�--DRAINAGE AND UTILITY 1 I QZ s 1 V , In. =- j N(n 1; `89.63` - `I r" EASEMENT OVER OUTLOT A �;, 1, .j. O �,°�,cc, ) o '" 1.'-- 1201 R PI I 112.00 fa o ,Gr,•. v •/ r- k35.00 o P � 1 I 1 ,.'1::, --1 NORTH � �\ ri *'° 4" // 1: x 20 20 s N 1 , \. 2� /01� • 0 bC-1 '/ m I I I 1 1-• rt. CO XI Is, oN� '111' �'vY'9j�•1�_�\ b�/q 4', rnNI I 1 1 ^I =4y �°^i' o' Z -ID rsiU'I 1I (n u�i" Nm0 r- •O u 1 ?.� /.t; i• �' Zco dim Wm 11 _N>I (� -CD 1 1 Y `'�' / )' 1�I (1. i IN 13-1 In a I _►,o q, , b • O = 1 P.11.•_, to f*I f11 I uO / ,/ 0. / ii 21>50 �/ ^ tnr1 ��I j�o 1 1 1 _Jn.00 ii)x. I u�� % , \ '•{ / f I. ° ! '21" 1 1 I 01 1 -1 NO12111 s zo ml 1 171 . / f/.;:r t °° z0 1 I I of & �m m r9 O11 ,.e /, 613 �` r.1 1 r.r ;L�1 a1 _-"....1N 10 {a i /. O NORTH I I j 1 z 172.00 �`V Idr NT"! // 11 366.19 i - - I20i1 1 ,i- o�k NORTH 1• J 1 N11, o? i/ (I1 ,,tY1 1,3 o -- 365.47---- - -------/2O : 1 .1 �1 -::`, /,, ,..1,,,3 I+ ".;, , ; .,../�° ;�°/ ro $O-c.-,� is + l �J I �u'r'/6•d'.3•" �"•- 1'�14/��� Im 1 1 Ill?J. ,,`, ` JJ co a'. 1201D 1P1. 40 � \ l/� • e P -0 W_ ma Sp , / m i0 pN -110 m I :211- o VII IA �!,1 ;1. (n I\ zo co t /// '- • r r I 0 27.5 I o' `SO6°20'30°W6. 'I20 �►u� 1 11:1 / ` /i , a rr 8 '. a a R o a U o Y - �l' 48.76 92.66 ``1 ---J 1_ u� 0� 1 /�k 1'(}(^ ,' o m r m -- - - - ----- -- f' ,' •Ip 4 1!1"llfff�"' r,• n_ a c r r 1 roRTll __ /B .1% ` ;00 1 •�1 1 4.le .0. . r o n m r i o rrr r r z 11 -L.AI I�- 218.21 I`='1, 0 1'3;_ _81.3_5_ - (y' -eeee,`� , o rrrrrr, 1 /, /b.G y O /�, A C > < O m n 0 0 0 0 O w (� 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Ia ` '' ._Nm I I NORTH A 4 - _)_.16 1' 1 41)A''i • /• 0 (1n1 Y p ; mu N 1 1 1 D X 1 1�.ti 1 1 t ,7 �D 1 . it tl 1 7/7 / /. ¢('r) ./.',/ 0 T 0 '101 Y i. Y y T w Y 1 U Y 1 1 V n �� I' u' / m 1 wu uN- n I \ o uI 0,N s--/ , 'I it - /vh'o4 as/B ` 4)y 53,3 /?0 i• u p~ ori Y Y Y r - u N- ♦ 1 r m ♦ m m N w D 1 -_y A-�0 'o O -_- r' I IIS (1 1 .06.. / ~ Z N lI N Oy w 4.O✓•.. O - w N w w W: (> I 'I'O n- UI O '' 1 •,•�\ --1- t j'• Z u O N 131 v m V m'p _� N w U-O O w C_0 •r-). '0 C00'-`ITIN 1 1 >\ 1 :1. Ip t 1'•�,, Z G, ♦ w Y w J'ou u Y N p aw�u n Y • L ,-.y 00 (_D Inn _iz,. 'fl r---- '' 1� ! +;• Y 0 m 0 b ♦ 131 VI N CO N O w u ...w N N D mV -IZ 3 _<D _'8N;,1uiP O Y AP' I J:; / m 0 u 131 O 0000 0 000000 1p. •1 'n T l' T I�I n.1 n r c��e�0 m i 1 Y 1 1 • "''1•t ^: ( 1!1 „ - O 0 0 0 C NO. � 20 Nm mm o ",JN , _ tri.; ( J' . 1-'-1 a .�1�� y r•Ir'1 ^'D D 1 1 15`.cg 1 ,,,,•.- 1 •r D N(n U1D P �'_ ii,rn,o j.,-1 /! 0 O 0000 O 000000 p" (nZ 0 1 MI Z O N m 1 .. I J I O O O .9 A S A 7Y p .L .9ADAA.7 T K0 1'1 !( . . N ,, ... A N . . . . N -ub►0- .. r*1 1 'T O - O w wy(,O Ow ONw . 27.5 .-.1 Z 1 1,\ ��.GJ'-! 1 92.11 11• m w w N m P ♦ P O w w Y1 w t it k1 /w O N y - V • Il \\\` �SO qO\/�(JtJ �i'1NORTIi 1, ++�,t A ., o " A AAA Ti >0 0s Ti AiAAA A • I j % Him n.e1 5-1;-'1,-.' ,:' rti 1 0,'\i' 1 i I t NORTH 1 96 39 r N z o m u I i • 1 CO \')4 174.00 f N(utJ1-1.,\ n'P 1 w I. j �-. / <� 11 NORTH 1 '1 1• 'I1 o-0 ccT�I'�>1o,mi g {nn§ o • ta gy C -Z1>u O-1 m Zr� ``I 0 A114 lAD N CO 1 1' E tl Y zAC" mll71io 91'1 m m02 8 1( \\ S0 20 JD rD r-+ 1 Z 1 o fi 1,1 4.$a• ' n Z� 36m-I2 I Q 'l,\ m rn(n Ce p., b 01-1 In0-1 m1 4E \ L P--i am �Z 'ON I 0 1(110-/V-s� 021 p 1 1 1 0 o. 1v ` -1 In an. .1. mm 'm"u' I' �,', 0r1 . -61 I"'IA m1110 oTA 1 -><1N m1 OO AMA 0�On .DO\-_%� b M., frl PI N•♦ N• II ', �.\; 1$OUTH - (Di1D I N• "I N► I, in or m > m G4��''m .1 '15.00 �'"' PI it g-(•i '---1 'n">>w-U3 CrN ->ii z -1-1-' r T 'o ` J L_ •o ..-1. ► 01100- o' 4 l oiii o m0 I *( A lima 4xliZun-$ 10 „ -1 $ bin. Z w -�-----• 11 I .IU z c.�-1000;0131 1�,u m 159.05 of m/1 a �! A c-q--'til-13Qi(n -1a m u a NORTH '1135.20 NO2'33'25'E // •I4: I m p -( o w 300.37 / 1 1! P • LZTIiN1 O g D a60 - - 22a.950 0 ,, ..- _ zo gr-n>zg a z :: (ni. _ 1C' $ -.. T \. ,4.... r1 m0' S. Opt .7z- -Ir 9 .......... ...._.. ...,. ...•_-..._�.-.....,...._........�.-........ :.......�..,, ..�.... � < O 1�-404C'n••-Z1-(0 mXl 2 Z :::� r: Im11U PI v • ,�I 0 (1I-I > py _ X j �• 1 ._..,_......._,..,... .. 9 L IJEIIJ_Sd, afl..i.H.,s .....NO f.:_._......1.7- C1 lL1l�S�.11AI_L,.. R ..t ).... ..... . . ...-_ 4 u� ._...ts-.i z'1 ernm Ga r.. • \ 0 '.I 9'e�ro ,. m Cr,. SIN I o ' E `' �11Qm F 2 V411. v SZ�oZ8CCZ2G mo>• -c0 a o , M 1 p r r 1 I P Ff 4 444 a ytli G �; t1 I�� 11131• �� ' {{{{7711 • oum m , 1' ,-, A 0 1"3 o yyy git O it ?Ippp7 ' pgq9 % qq oni>� �jTJ r� E1 ;� Y%i i'( �� ° _i f6,•.�i�-% min: .'�l x0 t.1 ''< �V�,..A1 II + ,Ya 1 �, I*1 N r �'•. T, lit �t � r w u `� o O 'D s i r 1 / Wpm .j 1°� I e� al l i C� U O :id . 1 ! . ...................__......... ... AE-4 . licit }J1 CIN as g 0 - ii or,� � N acv ci 16- i W s ... ,IIS 5 I g12 g I� 011 to 0 • • • 8 _ E 8 tt0WQOY ISHII .i L I I Qr;31,.>IaYa I -- — — — — / I — CI Z - — — — -ot: cyoa — g0_ ayoa r,�la_sa:rt — ,_ N _ - tx M.1c10.005 '3 — -9S'GGL - _ — CrI96YLL I ,{ ——G['OOC 3 SL.SS,LON——— OM I A 1oxON LCC< IC.) NPi SO_6SI ai- W I r �- ~ Pix I o0'S I— `.6 F1: C7 t lurgsl �\ a.e I �S W � 1� , << r � . ver, • ��� Q �1, i vis. r �,' nnrnrl I /.1' t I l^ -v a• ♦ R�--astai-- J ,r \' vv�� I c? 'r�3 -.1 : jyYa r r I' rn } d e „: l �� F-—�n�u—�7 v I I o 1 vg, � �il ( u/xnu I I q . . 14 r >11t1 �` �' I - I 1118{{ > 1/.;.‘',,A , 1 - <> G S 17, g n •. /:r ?q n...C.I tl 1 1,`,'; .zi U1 r _ rAg.I I \�-'Z o<I I n f1. OrAg a..r rU a I I .J t I ,f / I Er r`. j � rir,/S •[1.,,„0,, ,) "1',Z.,,,,.0 j� - 1 ^f o ,I i �\I I-• i N > r,• 3. ` L J o! C7 �� / 1,,,,,,,„..i I fe e�r.,o.v �`xsr / / o eo- .L- —frau_µ-ii` )I S? / ' I` 9vtl __ _J vi I 1 g F A°r'er� g1 liixloll�i = • 4'• 4 / H b.:14c tL- / (Z., l°x 1 443 Li ii Ay.4. ,, 1 0 i *4I ��R L '� 13 Jg g maim o I 4 etY / ,4 / �1 4,% rrg� 1 „r 001[1 ,N ' d / / f.x L-' J ) • OC g2 1 i, 1 �J �S .� i A i N a1 yl `iqs / / r, ' 1 MOH � o ' i �{�, v lollfq NO 1N3rv.15r3 r 1 59"990 — NL1gN • • r • • 1 it . • I 1 .f i • • O W 7 -0 • • /3, 8 , RESOLUTION NO. 4756 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT FOR BOULDER RIDGE WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did review the Final Plat for Boulder Ridge on September 18, 1997, and has recommended its approval; and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as: Oudot C, Prairie Estates First Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, all notices of the public hearing for the Preliminary Plat were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,as follows: That the Final Plat for Boulder Ridge is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: A. The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: 1. Approval of title by the City Attorney. 2. Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Street signs shall be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$270.00 per sign pole. f) The developer shall enter into an agreement regarding the payment of the park dedication fees. Park dedication fees will be required in accordance with Resolution No. 4699. The payment of park dedication fees shall be deferred to the issuance of building permit for each of the lots. g) The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water Charges, security for the public improvements (including the improvements to Vierling Drive), engineering review fees, and other fees as required by the City's 1997 Fee Schedule. h) The developer shall be responsible for the costs of upgrading Vierling Drive which are attributable to the developer's project. 3. The Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be approved by the City Engineer and Shakopee Public Utilities. 4. The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. 5. The developer agrees to supply to the Engineering Department a letter agreeing to comply with the following County requirements: a) The Final Plat shall show controlled access along CSAH 17. b) Drainage calculations shall be provided for any drainage entering the County right-of-way. This should include the existing and proposed conditions and a summary denoting the change of conditions for the portion entering the County system. c) With the final plat/construction plans, submit traffic information that analyzes impacts caused by this development at the CSAH 17/Vierling Drive intersection. d) No berming, landscaping, or ponding will be allowed within the County right-of-way. e) Any grading or utility work required within the right-of-way will require a permit prior to the work commencing. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held the day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk PREPARED BY: City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE I S , 3, Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Final Plat for Boulder Ridge DATE: October 7, 1997 DISCUSSION BDM,LLC is requesting approval of the final plat of Boulder Ridge. The subject site is located north of Vierling Drive and west of County Road 17. A copy of the September 18, 1997,Planning Commission staff memo has been attached for your reference. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the Final Plat of Boulder Ridge, subject to conditions. 2. Revise the conditions of approval for the Final Plat of Boulder Ridge, and approve subject to the revised conditions. 3. Do not approve the Final Plat of Boulder Ridge. 4. Table action on this item and request additional information from the applicant and/or staff PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended the approval of the Final Plat of Boulder Ridge, subject to conditions. ACTION REQUESTED Offer and approve Resolution No. 4756 approving the final plat with conditions. Julie Klima Planner II ckommdev\cc\1997 ec1OO TfpbLrdg.doc RESOLUTION NO. 4756 A RESOLUTION OF 1'HE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT FOR BOULDER RIDGE WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did review the Final Plat for Boulder Ridge on September 18, 1997, and has recommended its approval; and WHEREAS,the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as: Outlot C, Prairie Estates First Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, all notices of the public hearing for the Preliminary Plat were duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA,as follows: That the Final Plat for Boulder Ridge is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: A. The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: 1. Approval of title by the City Attorney. 2. Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of required P g q public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Street signs shall be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$270.00 per sign pole. 0 The developer shall enter into an agreement regarding the payment of the park dedication fees. Park dedication fees will be required in accordance with Resolution No. 4699. The payment of park dedication fees shall be deferred to the issuance of building permit for each of the lots. • g) The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water Charges, security for the public improvements (including the improvements to Vierling Drive), engineering review fees, and other fees as required by the City's 1997 Fee Schedule. 3. The Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be approved by the City Engineer and Shakopee Public Utilities. 4. The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. 5. The developer agrees to supply to the Engineering Department a letter agreeing to comply with the following County requirements: a) The Final Plat shall show controlled access along CSAH 17. b) Drainage calculations shall be provided for any drainage entering the County right-of-way. This should include the existing and proposed conditions and a summary denoting the change of conditions for the portion entering the County system. c) With the final plat/construction plans, submit traffic information that analyzes impacts caused by this development at the CSAH 17/Vierling Drive intersection. d) No berming, landscaping, or ponding will be allowed within the County right-of-way. e) Any grading or utility work required within the right-of-way will require a permit prior to the work commencing. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held the day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk PREPARED BY: City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II SUBJECT: Final Plat of Boulder Ridge DATE: September 18, 1997 Site Information: Applicant: BDM,LLC Location: North of Vierling Drive and West of County Road 17 Current Zoning: Medium Density Residential and Highway Business(R2 and B1) Adjacent Zoning: North: Urban Residential (R-1B) South: Highway Business (B 1) East: Highway Business (B1) West: Urban Residential/Medium Density Residential (R-1B/R2) (B1) Comp.Plan: 1995: Medium Density Residential and Commercial Area: 16.21 Acres MUSA: The site is within the MUSA. Introduction BDM,LLC is requesting approval of the Final Plat for Boulder Ridge. Thb subject site is located north of Vierling Drive and west of County Road 17(Please see Exhibit A). Considerations The Preliminary Plat for Boulder Ridge was approved by the City Council on August 5, 1997. The Final Plat, as proposed, is in substantial conformance with the approved Preliminary Plat (Please see Exhibit B). The Engineering Department has reviewed the submittal materials and has provided its comments. Staff has incorporated these recommendations into the conditions of approval for the Final Plat. Alternatives 1. Recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Plat of Boulder Ridge, subject to conditions. 2. Modify the recommended conditions, and recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Plat, subject to the revised conditions. 3. Recommend to the City Council the denial of the Final Plat, stating the reasons for denial. 4. Table the decision to allow staff and/or the applicant to provide additional information. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Plat of Boulder Ridge, subject to the following conditions: a) Prior to City Council review of the Final Plat, the applicant must submit the following: i) A transportation study. The transportation study shall be reviewed and analyzed by City staff. b) The following procedural actions must be completed prior to the recording of the Final Plat: i) Approval of title by the City Attorney. ii) Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of required public improvements: a) Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. b) Electrical system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. c) Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. d) Installation of sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems, and construction of streets in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. e) Street signs shall be constructed and installed by the City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of$270.00 per sign pole. f) The developer shall enter into an agreement regarding the payment of the park dedication fees. Park dedication fees will be required in accordance with Resolution No. 4699. The payment of park dedication fees shall be deferred to the issuance of buildingTermit for each of the lots. g) The developer shall be responsible for payment of Trunk Storm Water Charges, security for the public improvements (including the improvements to Vierling Drive), engineering review fees, and other fees as required by the City's 1997 Fee Schedule. iii) The Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be approved by the City Engineer and Shakopee Public Utilities. iv) The developer shall provide easements, as required by City Code. v) The developer agrees to supply to the Engineering Department a letter agreeing to comply with the following County requirements: a) The Final Plat shall show controlled access along CSAH 17. b) Drainage calculations shall be provided for any drainage entering the County right-of-way. This should include the existing and proposed conditions and a summary denoting the change of conditions for the portion entering the County system. c) With the final plat/construction plans, submit traffic information that analyzes impacts caused by this development at the CSAH 17/Vierling Drive intersection. d) No berming, landscaping, or ponding will be allowed within the County right-of-way. e) Any grading or utility work required within the right-of-way will require a permit prior to the work commencing. Action Requested Offer a motion to recommend to the City Council the approval of the Final Plat for Boulder Ridge, subject to conditions and move its approval. Julie Klima Planner II i:\commdev\boaa-pc\1997\sep18\fpbldrg.doc .. 1 1tt!I ! k �', Tet/I all 1 \ �� EXHIBIT A i .o -- 14414,1• nil al ...1 , s. .... , ...1 v EMI , r • o� • ib "" - . N o� seerow 10,.., 4 , .—...--.0. 0 :. 414,- •- �i 3 • I1I / -P.,.a OWa a mica i..� N.Italb `1 11311 -' 1/041:• 41171p a * es =W mat■: awm'ss '� ,I :� t�i ,� 4►6:r of�� a 4 11211131. 1:1111.* a�a�r�a ailiti Ij► i� til. del Tatum .C47X4 p Val ----- SCOW mellifri o�� 1.0111111474$01410.V14.1111.11 :. kV 4 iiip ��� � -++��l1� a imi memmile. �'.:77_=„. a IP N 1311016140111111 "aids lin cl . s JECT srrE> °„� ° B' 1A � ' ©UPM VIE a■oo 4y ! ml.i. i. i' - ems AG M i �L9� � °` ��a �ii" °t �� : � Di , .. p % p .. vw�� >4 , n ..©ate nab. ca ��,���-A4v :i;:;Y:i:a1:i:i1;a:::lit:i:11....: ':s 1 • ) plIP!"" not ,e,:,,; =ones :7717 Rurc i Ras;ee^tial ,777: Dersty Residential T?' Urcan Residential IRC Olc Snckooee Residentici R_ ; Mec:um Density Resident,.., j R..3 Mu tip;e =amiiy Residentic j Higr'rwcy Susiness 717 Office Business — III C ' Ce-'rci 2csiness r-ii L;g;nt Industncl 0 ET; Hec,,y Inaustriai 111611116 17,176:7 major Recreation v`:er'a'/ Zones —0—Sncre'cnc :occcic District ,e^ 71 ,.D 0v- T IIIIIMMENIIIMIIM7 I /C, ; '1 r- \/-aIA1; "rY, AT'•111YI/^.Ar 7.'I%_ IAr:AM 1:'I L_,-\L••�'YY,... Itl /-..L.'L'I IIV19 Po.,3.7 :.l...7. /...,/ i�• t-J;- 427.38 SO0413'0448- • :g., / I I 11 1 m9000•08'49'W ,} lI N �ORAINACE.ANO I1I9.11Y EASEMENT A'' �.�4 • o Uv )r 500'08'494E ''----''/ .1 j. 207.14 / 0 -..i., o. coCI?M M 1 y o & 8 u 207,14 Oltt7L1't' A !A" d,t"/ i h�NO4.47CASE.' sE 1 I 0. r. Q p m + ,*` g ' 500.08.49.E A.41) °'� DRAINAGAND ou 1 8 q xRti°$.J$$, Ui9ITY MENT g I j $ zo> o o II, )0,188_ \' 117.30- I I SU �. 504.47'35•W• g I I 4 t+ g4 ' '� vbs, Iz 9O t ,P, i-0o2 411 o 0 SI -g I$� �� u au - lf �4 i •;,sti Pn I ANCON 1 ir i' g ,` -A• �i • . S m • ' I '0 O j u_ -500,08,49.E n7. 'V�4A01 I k .' 260.95 ..• j / OUTLOT A , 'I N' �r1 • 25&39 /re I •..4 '3?..-42 9\, 4,,500.09.49.E �.,4 . .t 1 �,:t u N 3r4 y� r53 •• �' W y I �u°n,an i0 f.W \?do v ttio: y f8 , 40,,,„;:‘,4...,4Pi '•_ u �q'� m� i L N 1 I e„,,,,, 5 , La , IEO ' rVI' 0.c.. \ (E.I•S°S �,,`,a DRAINAGE AND <`___-_0 I N I ,.1•�: /� �OSL.'S%`---- UTILITY EASCMENT u J A3 CI O� b7.' Lf.L9.90 a `�\` 1 491 G i' ,41 1 t 1 t n� I,;^r T. h. sl �\�1 1'r� $y rr °aPS.-'= rL- "Y53is N_� "`A• 7.b �-+ m ;.� �1/ � j/i y !II.* 1 t �. +� I fix' F t trr:./' �ws'� 41` r. w�� . 'Noo`47.3e'w',A ,gyp #1 4 it 1.6).:i `,''� ver• `j ^� .,v g 37.`: ; 't0-,,t y , v-0 t . .,Q•0p ' 1A'Fo, $'. o'`'�"°„�"°9"S 44'4°1-° 4.s' 1.4 'xo ' ;0904 i..�'-.._. i i'()()SG t•-. hI g I . / '' //y'�k. • r I I 1 'alk onS,II O NB2`0)j3 W.\ , Q n �6 r•i�t� } \ 1 I I I 1 c ..7.'f ,,,s,,,:-‘,.4- I-,Qc. '� I I _ L P 7�J ..,. 1 c*," 4.0'..yd r� �n�3'.A\ - $p / _�I`,'it b\�11 - �,, , ,,,, 30 >bs%b` d/' 4 0 ' ' 'n otiy41;',.l. m ' cl° g o A� $ yet & - uVm I`9a'5'W CA^' I A A. a Cis..,„ 4' A.N",n I ig,-3m o ,,,„7..i n �^ N00'09'49`W c,,,,,-,1-; S19 0?'r7• c'1,..,..•‘,44'.!:. ,,"oI,8 - w` 1. E; E, 171.71 II 60-. .• / 9-`4‘t)„,..7; u '� P"'. tiu - "1 DRAINAGE&UTILITY EASEMENT i I • 90 �I s'a x' `,a''` m1, , m '4, 171.72 I + 1 m0 9g9s 2.,7' 4?.o:. I �cYc4••A nA' /`� 'i4y.°� 1 900.06'49.W 1 1 4' _,-1\\t 5190?8/ 47.07, Adb93.01\I I 1/�•61.66-.'��• )7 y0 y4 I 1 1 N .,- -. r(�4 W Rv9i°U6"`.•, 228.75 SO4 N2541.99 _,1 3O 1 0 "u o d I4.1j/08.30,',( IXU1NAG'1;AND UIILIfY EASEMENT-W �'m\I • 1 u m,"' `454,0;32 i > 252.29 SO4'44'25'W ' •''\ $u 1 m 1 l 1 ,m G. y� 6L66 -'i ` I' Ile Os ;�r`1 II I j u,i: t C.N•6 `It/ P1:, ,nc 4, - \/\4,,?s,90 T ��O e I N tit u: :IUB �4.0 z„ spa S¢a $4. i L--, � "17., z e o .. w s.s_ 5 m °_ T U su „ -z "�u i 11 O r., yk1 I I 0 e ti ol 0 : • i trig49Z 1 U m A'r i I9'9Y_ 3"05,8Z.01S Z5 I I N I m £ mi° L..1 1••A • 1:- ,0 u I 1 o_ I 20 1 474.18 /_T 1 494.19 S00401'41"W __.... I C . S . A .H . NO . 17 (MARSCHALL RD . ) ci Cl 1 a foul N �� . . _ -- . - y ; Cn :..1 A ", ,I I"I q I'1") .I... 0 r I 1..I..i t',A I �.....r CI .'..,I /I L_v v I I ii',....: i 1 r'•,1-/I..l I I I` 1 7 ' "J 1111111 , ... a • I i inI 0 1 1 I t i l V ..1. 1�.....I i'i t 11 .t._3 \ t_, , 1 I..1 N i 1-1 ,,. Qjll w ( • CeJ _ ldlJSeJ1hJ) LI ON I ' VS J ::r- if l M„14,10,00S 911•6t7 — I I .._ 81.40 / _ � \ io2 510°2g'S0' 46.81 7 ` ra ;' C.Y. w gA.52 z G; n • a ,-- 217.71 *a .-� �� Z 1. IJ.1 Iv 0 z 1 W 'Y ^) . M 10 1 ii I n a.:.:1 in .-inn •.? r J o, 7 � — • f/ N •�-D. N00 _ 'irl \ 6 O 1 5 n m• 11 H II ) M N Cln i fl 4) f ) J<I IY • ��4 aQd,j�a d�t \,� 1:91:N9 4'.2 , //1\ VQb 12: CM I - 93IH - \ 1 %I/ 1 • cv I I`ao 1:3W3V.6056ZZSZ 1'� 0 "ZSOOrb�b�y .o� y°°.,n I , I\n,,. > 3 Alllllll ONb I'VNIVj f 801=�° /�D '^o „I,n • 1 M SZ bI 00' $ z • O 1 Of 1 6H'Ibl b_ SL'BZZ — `n91. 60660& 6r 'H</ J ts a J e I f r U'!-c 71. 4 `1 9H`r, // I , \ 1p fBs) `VO?r Z9t6'gs/S l\\ 'f 'r .OP j1.' •I s'�S' ( „5r7, t `i Q \1 I M„66.90„00N o ..0\3' ..., \\/ A 3 g/ 6 / t. '/ OW) / ( � x.00 9 1 i c�A06U </'t0 6//y ,, I\ / . ; _ ZL'ILI _ 41 03 fi, I, ,, V 't m 1N31V3Stl3 .11llil51 If 30V NIV>,U r'ti' ,�N '^.^4 ry O r ,��r•.,y\ / M„!/S Og \ r OD IL to •in °• ,r/ a a *••• `D `„w w �N in �'4= LO 6/S r O_ 1p M„66,8U.00N / CO N w mow,., o J --Hn I U)a•F'e°'• '� io / pr •y"• . ,o '� Cl) P ^i ^7�0 N n a 1... M.St,bG,GO� C)52 '-'O i h) to pO,. v 'n�n a_, 99 OZI. t -7 0.�` ,� �n , A //y. d` F, x aao a° c o et`-r ;i: >`ah ti� ' ` m "O '7 v Q�!2�c�'1I—�.1{i �F'.bh i 3, vl ^ ��a\h / . `A p$t ry`tci.`P tl"�t\4`)��40 F�t rn� (�`�`..-'-\'''' 'ti'4ecs ^/J��•,�r-1 pry � c2ra ad OC tsri o\ v� • b7`' I,a n V v \ -1`\� 1..711 e\7,5�1�� �YJ O / r 0 45r I 'l �, `' ya / I. \ o"tr;t'?tO.ZBN 025'58 2O StF 1 ' / l� hry6 / c r h f,o-- r '' Oc 4 11'o$ , . $45 1�� is,'r • . I .cr d' A.Pi N r`) b Sea ' ' Nr° _y c ♦ , f` 1 by r 'n /,NO ."...2,15‘.4%, B G -'` TA.<2;11. ��i'a 1 7 "IN/ / ,. 3, 1, ,,,.•., t '�' sr I r�1� NWt1 E � '.4 � Y ,. • ` ♦ ♦ • •, K 1t 't I �� OR ErSE •�� x.63 a.. ,��- �� �. 1 r 1." /�.�l i, :) ,X , . ��t+M„Of,Lb.00N,,o4.44 25 . /ice`� a• , it a 4,V •IP 4A' 't 161 7`(i --,.'14-1,1111041.{tr t \ 4.a 0 t4: AAA, jj`,I' ��1 . W �-1 9r �.� --1— z���-- — �24� '—s—lei err �• \ w1' l J • s t;b 0 bb� I \ p.05.52 X45 , \IP 1 r,._ ? .7-; N. IN3W3SV3 A1Illlll `� --•210, / C.1�1 C\IW n, --�> ONtl 39tlNIb2J0 a= --- 34 E/ , I • , �+ H • d ( r_ , \--- ...., 545.13' \ 1 op V0 16. •Q14' 769'ZLI \\ hryry ,( / \ In O m•— Y \ / ? 1 A)41 R.J i....., ,-„..,i rwi (�ai .C' // \ w t 4h,ry0 2 , _,,, 1t-'') // „� 0, m o_ a o • CP F Nary sS SAS•$\ �'7........?,,6 se 6/,� �� Z II"•�N�/ • .. o 3„64,80.005 0.9,.%4' /g 86� r' 71 ^ 7 . I / i V ,LOILL(10 o w \/ ' o</o .1 ii 56'092 , 'o_ (0^)a/ a 'I 3„66,80.005 • n I.... / O O • p b or o)• . , hNn/ O v gri VCI 1 I en r” N it I \\ \ of 9- N I 3 �N 7 a a0 O �,° aJ Z O Ol n ad ,C� '� Z •— z cep,~ 1=m •4 SOK t/1 c- N In O 1 •as [��*77 p Fo til Z K �O $.1-•6y 1 <W '�8 n \ _ �� o X CC l _ M„Sf.',Lb„605\\�- :0 f oo \ VIII m i o w F z I _ Of•'LII . m ; 111 W n N I 0 ..• 0 1N3W3Sb3 A.I Illlll O, .00 °6'9 ,n . if an w • • J S� ONV 39bNlVaO n/ �0:0;1,,mss/ 3„64,80,005 _ Z W m F 66- / ' Ar;0e 1 bl'LOZ i n o 1/) o rn w K a\. z Luc, z t 3„Gf,Lb„610N I .) v 2, V J,0'L.l0 a, d cp F a 50 o o z o 7 / bI'LOZ n d o • .� / - _-.- 3.64,80.00S /, ,, 4O I�� /i a� n,► 1N3ri3SV3 A1119 0NV 3JVNIViJO� N ,0 ,' CM00'0OI 1 4 M.6$,80.00N N IO 1 I m / . I 1 1 -- / 1 3„40,£I.00S 9£'LZ� I I ;C) i v`._i 1...1...1 _:.../ , , a...,.. 'I v t`_:.../ 7 _11 r r •cr' . NT.moi. 4. / . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Cancellation of Assessment Hearing for Valley Park 13th Addition, Project No. 1996-8 DATE: October 7, 1997 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4759, a resolution canceling the assessment hearing for Valley Park 13th Addition Improvements, Project No. 1996-8. BACKGROUND: On September 16, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4738, a resolution declaring the cost to be assessed, ordering the preparation of proposed assessments and scheduling a public hearing for October 21, 1997 at 7:15 P.M. This project was ordered by City Council after being petitioned by 100% of the property owners affected by the project. These same property owners who have petitioned the project, have also waived their right to appeal the assessments and the right for a hearing. No public hearing was held to order the project and the City Attorney has stated that no public hearing is necessary for the assessments since 100% of the property owners have signed waivers of hearing on the assessments. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4759. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4759. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, as no public hearing is necessary for adopting the assessments with this project due to previously signed waivers of hearing by 100% of the property owners. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4759, A Resolution Canceling the Public Hearing for Valley Park 13th Addition Improvements, Project No. 1996-8 and move its adoption 1 Bruce Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp MEM4759 RESOLUTION NO. 4759 A Resolution Canceling The Public Hearing for Valley Park 13th Addition Improvements, Project No. 1996-8 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4738 adopted on September 16, 1997 by the City Council of Shakopee set a public hearing on proposed assessments on Valley Park 13th Addition Improvements, Project No. 1996-8, on the 21st day of October, 1997 at 7:15 P.M.; and WHEREAS, 100% of the property owners have signed a petition for the improvement and waiver of hearing on proposed assessments for such proposed improvements for Valley Park 13th Addition, thus a public hearing is not necessary. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: that the public hearing scheduled for the 21st day of October, 1997 in the Council Chamber of Shakopee City Hall at 7:15 P.M. or thereafter is hereby canceled. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held this day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk CONSENT /1:1, 4 , � . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Cancellation of Assessment Hearing for Lateral Sanitary Sewer Extension, East of French Trace Project No. 1996-9 DATE: October 7, 1997 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4760, a resolution canceling the assessment hearing for Lateral Sanitary Sewer East of French Trace, Project No. 1996-9. BACKGROUND: On September 16, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4739, a resolution declaring the cost to be assessed, ordering the preparation of proposed assessments and scheduling a public hearing for October 21, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. This project was ordered by City Council after being petitioned by 100% of the property owners affected by the project. These same property owners who have petitioned the project, have also waived their right to appeal the assessments and the right for a hearing. No public hearing was held to order the project and the City Attorney has stated that no public hearing is necessary for the assessments since 100% of the property owners have signed waivers of hearing on the assessments. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4760. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4760. 3. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, as no public hearing is necessary for adopting the assessments with this project due to previously signed waivers of hearing by 100% of the property owners. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4760, A Resolution Canceling the Public Hearing for the Installation of Sanitary Sewer Laterals in the NE1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 17, Township 115, Range 22; and the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 17, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Project No. 1996-9 and move its adoption 6)11(14-C Bruce Loney Public Works Dir- or BL/pmp MEM4760 — -- - RESOLUTION NO. 4760 A Resolution Canceling The Public Hearing For The Installation Of Sanitary Sewer Laterals In The NE1/4 Of The NW 1/4 Of Section 17, Township 115, Range 22; And The NW 1/4 Of The NW 1/4 Of Section 17, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Project No. 1996-9 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4739 adopted on September 16, 1997 by the City Council of Shakopee set a public hearing on proposed assessments on the extension of sanitary sewer laterals through the property east of French Trace, Project No. 1996-9, on the 21st day of October, 1997 at 7:00 P.M.; and WHEREAS, 100% of the property owners have signed a petition for the improvement and waiver of hearing on proposed assessments for such proposed improvements on the installation of sanitary sewer laterals, thus a public hearing is not necessary. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: that the public hearing scheduled for the 21st day of October, 1997 in the Council Chamber of Shakopee City Hall at 7:00 P.M. or thereafter is hereby canceled. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held this day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk % 6. 3, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Ordering Feasibility Report - 1998 Street Reconstruction Project DATE: October 7, 1997 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4761, which order the feasibility report to be prepared for the following streets: • 5th Avenue, from Scott Street to Holmes Street • 6th Avenue, from Scott Street to Spencer Street • Fuller Street, from 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue BACKGROUND: The City Council of Shakopee has reviewed the proposed 1998-2002 Capital Improvement Program, which included a street reconstruction project for 1998. Attached is the proposed 1998 Street Reconstruction Capital Improvement Project worksheet showing the initial street reconstruction area. After the Capital Improvement Program was proposed and reviewed by Council, discussions answered on parking problems associated with the County Government Center. Staff did propose to increase parking for the Justice Center by providing diagonal parking stalls similar to the street design in downtown Shakopee. Attached is a map showing a revised street reconstruction area for Council consideration. Staff has received interest in reconstructing 6th Avenue from the two schools along this street as well. This reconstruction area is a continuation of the reconstructed streets from the 1996 Street Reconstruction project and is being proposed to assist the parking needs around the Justice Center. In order to reconstruct these streets during the summer months of the construction season, the feasibility report needs to be authorized at this time. The public improvement project schedule for this project is projected as follows: Public Improvement Process Date Authorize Feasibility Report October 7, 1997 Approval of Feasibility Report December 16, 1997 Public Hearing January 20, 1998 Approve Plans and Specifications April 21, 1998 Award Bid May 19, 1998 or June 2, 1998 Street Reconstruction June 1, 1998 or June 15, 1998 The project would hopefully be completed by September 30, 1998. If Council authorizes a feasibility report be prepared for a street reconstruction at this time, staff would also request authorization to have the preliminary design surveying work performed to assist in determining costs for the feasibility report. Performing the surveying work in the fall months, versus the winter months, is more cost effective and the data more accurate. If the project is not approved later on, the survey data can be saved for when a street reconstruction project is approved. A surveying cost from WSB & Associates, Inc. has been received and is attached to this memo. Staff is also requesting authorization to solicit quotes on soil investigation work to assist in the feasibility report and preliminary design. Soil information is needed to estimate the street reconstruction and utility replacement costs. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4761. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4761. 3. Table Resolution No. 4761 for a specific reason. 4. Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a consultant contract with WSB & Associates, Inc. for surveying services for the proposed 1998 Street Reconstruction Project in an amount not-to-exceed $9,500.00. 5. Do not authorize the surveying services from WSB & Associates on these proposed projects. 6. Move to authorize staff to solicit quotes for soil investigation work for the proposed 1998 Street Reconstruction project. 7. Do not authorize staff to solicit quotes for soil investigation work. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, No. 4 and No. 6 so that the proposed street reconstruction project for 1998 can be initiated. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Offer Resolution No. 4761, A Resolution Ordering a Feasibility Report for the 1998 Reconstruction Project and move its adoption. 2. Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a consultant contract with WSB & Associates, Inc. for surveying services for the proposed 1998 Street Reconstruction Project in an amount not-to-exceed $9,500.00. 3. Move to authorize staff to solicit quotes for soil investigation work for the proposed 1998 Street Reconstruction Project. �r , ' 4 ruce Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp MEM4761 RESOLUTION NO. 4761 A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A Report On An Improvement For The 1998 Reconstruction Project WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve 5th Avenue, from Scott Street to Holmes Street; 6th Avenue, from Scott Street to Spencer Street; Fuller Street, from 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue by installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street reconstruction and all appurtenant work as necessary and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be referred to Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, for study and that he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk 0 O C) o I I C ci C) M .•' o ` N 411 u) o o oZ o ca No N O N O O C O Z • ..+ to N > - c U I-o Q _CO .V o iii 2 U • o a N c o y a) c . . c ...1 to ; > • 6 N E � 0 6 aQ > o E ca E N > 6 < c S o 0 „ 0 - fi 0 z a ZO , as0 1 To c 0 ° ° 72. iu c o °� � ° > s 0. co tiz > a .� 3 co > Q Q a)oaami aN) + N � z g .q g ) • c y 'off' ao 0 N Nir 8 ' JhflH . + 2 E wI' C N E...=cpp � V 0 N N .4'' rn d � • 4 > 8 ` vcn c� ' - .o0 N Na N ap C Fe U N CO -0 `- a) t d 0101 N b 7 4 c) = o _ .... G N Ocl) cou- 0000 � I- o 03ao O 0 a , a U a, rn rn V Z 0 EL ccn We4a'��� }7 OLINIlls U o 0 0 O 0 0 00 LA Mill-- noir aiMriF 77.i ' If°BITE'IE€1l` I�Bumii O 0 0 1n O Ifs gi- 0 ® nl',f.O N COO N ry N ���I,7 711 _ -er'Bi9 s O ." O tV ""'f}� 11111112'1 Cr) r 5 �n �0-_ ® Illlllli: O .l L--j 11'!j1z MIMI,u11!1, IIII1114i.,..i/ Q. Cl) �11giLe 1==a_11111■ .....m=`_ CCI "E p11el7 111111 ■ Ielh!1,�C p_=n1 ==uuc_••1131 11111111 II= EE C_=111;0111111 '1791 rr�.. }/ i --7=x111.-+/1111111 1111111�Iif N Q� 1_-=11111::.. n l; .iii;-. -o N -Nac co N C r VI "';-d1.,-=1111111,= C coo ■a�1s� 2 IN=diBoI_ NLL ^V N N 33 =_ -1lima mm Q 'C o c N a a3 1a ■� ,-1, a MO � r. c c o = c � No w 13 3 3 3 �r��'=.=_= O c ` 0 X07 00000 o 3 a E N a) c N N N .I: = OLi 7E�Ima.1 ma 10 O E C) E •c CO 1L E N i/1 N N ° ° ° R R >� ®=i■: =1 mu J N 0 O U N vjg o a E Z' Z' '0 0 ®� c-maw cera uu� r �, 7,111/1111011 ■1111'1=.I : 2 V 0 10 y ` c 4-, .75 6 N :C C Y 0 N T :L .tN' . E J 1.-..,a7 ®®�= 'n':r7�-13 4' p f�-I'"_ t N . ea � 0 cC. t`aasc � . . . , x 47 at 07 40 47 oxco ,a� ®'•iiia:::":: .ISI. al lri0 a` Q o0 I mil_ •' MI6 1A1111111111 ,I n In*-. irefrerm i i,. ........_g, > , . Alliarvmuvirm on .is ZEERIPPI p� 1=s 1111111ri�� SI . „W 11111,111:16- ,,., 1111 1111111�� v „ii,,,,_= IA i i h. d1J>IAQ 11� j1------------------------:1�11�. �.� \ 0 sat VIS:111141) 1111 JS3�JN� j '�,,�� II owl% 1 I I 1 1 litlill — 1111111 �. .. �� �. �aI ..► glue i11r ., -' _ �t 111 !9 R- 5 ,�. .. . � ■■.... •� 31 - ��11 1 :1111:1 11111111 Pm "11'llll ��� Uri m : I =1111LI iiiiii 111111 �� j� = v- I_ 11 110 1 = 0 s, ,wiz Vii,gii woum►► - .„, ii = N3d p � p lr = =s ll-- Mil III 'GO �� IN _1M411.� NOO S4,111111.- pp!2iasswqk 31 Soo r- ' d :so _ � \j:\1011 - O O ®.• L., n1....., c , uU i1n , 111111U � .: �= S� G 111111 0 196,,� i :� �'��=1%�1:� I 1111 �,� Z i t� l - �.���111 111111:1 11111 >� 0 .�� 0111IN 111111E1 11111 11 1.014 GSOyspoone.rq)�� 1111 �m es o s�� 0111� / 11i:i �: m. ►► ssess .111 AH rhifitl nut . . I Ituil 0.1-0 CK i �� �� ; IIIIIII1111'I �i. � .� O� ©11 .. i �M,�� uuiui1 111 t,'� �g- JI10VN 'IS i'i* rill1ii HAW Oct-03-97 08: 12A P_O2 350 Westwood Lake Office Muclstcadr,P.F. Bree A.\xrc►ss,P.r. U($ 8441 Wayzata Boulevard Pcrcr K. leafing,P.G. Minneapolis, MN 55426 Donald W.Sterna,P.F. Ronald B.Bray,P.P. 612-541-4800 &Associates, Inc. FAX 541-1700 October 2, 1997 Mr. Bruce Loney, P.E. Public works Director/City gineer City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379-1376 Re: Estimate of Cost to P •vide Preliminary Surveying Services 1998 Downtown Rec•nstruction WSB Proposal No. 0'13.97 Dear Mr. Loney: According to our Agreem- s for Professional Services within the City of Shakopee and Section 1-C-2(Major Proje ,this extension agreement is written to provide you with a cost "not to exceed" for prelimi ,ry surveying services for the above referenced project. The following process will be fol owed: ■ Survey based on co i ty coordinates for vertical control • Survey bench loop fo verification of bench mark elevations • Surveying will be fro, right of way to right of way ■ All storm sewer and •:nitary sewer inverts will be surveyed for as-built conditions ■ All intersections pro• •sed to be serviced with storm sewer will be surveyed for as- built conditions. • Centerline profile ele ations will be shot every 50 feet. • The centerline-center ine location will be established at all crossing streets • The surface elevation and location of all castings and gate valves ■ A point plot hard cop and electronic file will be provided • Electronic base map ill be prepared from the survey data We are proposing to comple e this work on a cost"not to exceed"basis of$9500. We are available to complet- this work as soon as it is authorized and look forward to the opportunity to serve you. e will develop a schedule for completing the surveying upon authorization to proceed. I frastructure Engineers Planners w"w,rv1"xo"oseuo.,.vh roolv�.ec r..QUAM.OPPOR'I UNITY LMPI.OYFR Oct-03-97 08: 13A P . 03 The City of Shakopee agrees I reimburse WSB for these services in accordance with Section IV of the Agreement for Prof ssional Services. If this agreement meets with , our approval, please sign below and return one copy to our office. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Ina Bret A. Weiss, P.E. Vice President Acting City Administrator City Clerk Mayor Date bj f f:1WPWIMPROPO AI.uxi.WUuu177.81 Y. f}: ya CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor& City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Acceptance of Feasibility Report for East Dean Lake Collector Street, Utilities and Appurtenant Work DATE: October 7, 1997 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 4765, a resolution receiving a report and calling a hearing on an improvement for the East Dean Lake collector street, utilities and appurtenant work. BACKGROUND: On July 1, 1997, City Council ordered the preparation of a feasibility report for the East Dean Lake collector street, utilities and appurtenant work. This project was included in the proposed 1998 Capital Improvement Program and the CIP worksheet is attached. Other improvements included in the feasibility report as petitioned for by the majority of the property owners include trunk sanitary sewer, trunk watermain, storm sewer, sidewalk, bituminous trail, landscaping, collector street and appurtenant work. This report has been completed and is attached for Council review. This feasibility report was initiated by a joint petition by three property owners that control the majority of the development area in the East Dean Lake area. These property owners are as follows: • Valley Green Business Park • Shakopee Crossing Limited Partnership • Minneapolis Foundation One other property owner is affected by this project and that property owner is Mn/DOT who owns approximately 52 acres that was acquired by Mn/DOT during the Trunk Highway 169 property acquisition. The feasibility report needs to address in a preliminary way whether the proposed improvements are necessary, cost effective, feasible and whether it should be constructed as proposed or in connection with some improvements. The report includes estimated costs for the improvements and the proposed assessments. The attached resolution sets the date for the public hearing for this project on November 5, 1997. Approval of Resolution No. 4761, does not order the project nor does it commit the Council to construct the improvement. The intent of this resolution is to accept the feasibility report and set a public hearing date. The public hearing will allow input from residents adjacent to the project area and the general public an opportunity to address the Council on this project. The estimated cost for this project is estimated to be $6,046,000.00 including landscaping, irrigation of the median area, and the construction of a collector street, from C.R. 18 to approximately 8700 feet west through the proposed East Dean Lake residential and commercial development. This includes sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street lighting, future signal improvements, future roadway and utility improvements where the street collector is connected to the future C.R. 21 intersection. Staff feels the main items associated with this feasibility report are as follows: 1. City financing of this project. 2. Trunk sanitary sewer oversizing costs reimbursement to developers, due to the sanitary sewer area rerouting through East Dean Lake area. 3. Funding of bituminous trail. 4. Stormwater oversizing of facilities and reimbursement to developers. 5. Street collector funding. 6. Traffic control signal funding. Many of these issues such as financing and funding of the project will have further documentation by the public hearing date. On Item No. 1, the developers have petitioned the City to do a 429 Special Assessment Improvement Project for improvements as outlined in the report so that the City is financing the improvements. Currently, City policy is to require a security in the amount of 25% of the assessments from the developers in order to utilize the Special Assessment process. Due to the magnitude of this project and the potential impact to the City's bonding, staff is suggesting that further analysis be provided from the Finance Department as to the necessary security for payment of the assessments. This analysis will be provided before the Public Hearing. On Item No. 2, trunk sanitary sewer, staff believes that a rerouting of sanitary sewer service area through the East Dean Lake area is cost effective to the City for the following reasons: • Lift stations will be more than likely needed to serve the commercial area for Shakopee Crossings and other areas east of old C.R. 18, with either to the East Dean Lake trunk sewer or the East Industrial Park trunk sewer shown along old C.R. 18. • The East Dean Lake trunk sewer provides sanitary sewer availability to areas east of the proposed residential subdivision. This would allow future commercial areas to be developed without having to extend the East Industrial Park trunk sewer along old C.R. 18 which would require serving existing properties which may not need sewer at that time. • By rerouting the service area to the East Dean Lake trunk sewer, an expensive jacking under the recently constructed Trunk Highway 169 roadway could possibly be avoided. The main question with the rerouting of the service area and utilizing the trunk sewer in the East Dean Lake area, is what the cost reimbursement would be given to the developers. At this time, staff would propose that any trunk sanitary sewer oversizing due to the rerouting of the sanitary sewer service area be considered for reimbursement. The sanitary sewer oversizing has been calculated to be approximately $141,400.00. The trunk sewer cost savings due to this rerouting has been estimated to be approximately $325,000.00, thus it is estimated that there would be $183,000.00 of savings to the Trunk Sanitary Sewer Fund from this change. This development is also eligible for the trunk sanitary sewer charge of$1,360.00 per acre. The funding of bituminous trails along the street collector has typically been a City cost, per City Policy. The East Dean Lake street collector has been designated as a street collector in the City's Comp Plan. This bituminous trail is proposed to be paid for by the City using Capital Improvements Funds, as this trail would be a transportation trail and not a park recreation trail. The cost of the trail including indirect costs is estimated to be $75,000.00. In the report there are areas in which stormwater facilities have been oversized and additional stormwater trunk facilities being proposed, to facilitate drainage of areas outside the development. A Dean Lake Bypass channel is being proposed as part of the ultimate design of the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District channel and Blue Lake drainageway serving the City of Shakopee, City of Prior Lake, Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District, and Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. Installation of trunk facilities or oversizing of storm water facilities to serve property outside the development is a reimbursement cost to the developers. It is planned to request funding support for the East Dean Lake bypass facility from the agencies which have an interest in preserving Dean Lake. The cost estimate for Dean Lake Bypass facility is $185,000.00. The funding for this street collector is considered a developers cost, due to the fact that they are proposing a much different street collector from City Standards and the fact that the developers have stated they will pay for the roadway. The developers have agreed in previous meetings that this would be their cost, including the sidewalk along the street collector, which is as per City Ordinance. In the current City Policy, the City would pay for the oversizing and extra pavement sections costs from a local street to a collector street, thus this development is providing cost savings to the City by constructing this collector. A traffic control signal will more than likely be required at the intersection of C.R. 18 and a temporary signal would need to be installed on the intersection meeting traffic warrants. It is proposed to work with Scott County to construct any future traffic control signals under a County Cooperative Agreement, with payment by the City according to the Cooperative Agreement Policy. Staff will make a brief presentation at the October 7, 1997 City Council meeting to give the City Council an overview of this project. Staff will make a full presentation at the November 5, 1997 public hearing on the feasibility report. The next step in the public improvements process would be for Council to review and accept the feasibility report and set a public hearing for consideration in ordering an improvement project. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4765. This action will receive the feasibility report and set the public hearing for November 5, 1997. City Council can modify the feasibility report as it so chooses. 2. Deny Resolution No. 4765. This action will halt this project until such time at the City Council reconsiders the resolution. 3. Move to receive the feasibility report but do not set a date for the public hearing at this time. 4. Table for additional information as directed by City Council. RECOMMENDATION: If the City Council wishes to pursue this project, staff would recommend Alternative No. 1, to adopt Resolution No. 4765. This would allow a public hearing to be held and consideration of ordering plans and specifications for this project. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 4765, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on an Improvement for the East Dean Lake Street, Utilities and Appurtenant Work, Project No. 1997-4 and move its adoption. dpia," Bruce Loney r Public Works Director BL/pmp MEM4765 RESOLUTION NO. 4765 A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing On An Improvement To East Dean Lake Collector Street, Utilities And Appurtenant Work Project No. 1997-4 WHEREAS,pursuant to Resolution No. 4696 of the City Council adopted July 1, 1997, a report has been prepared by WSB&Associates,Inc.,with reference to the improvement of East Dean Lake by addition of a collector street,utilities and any other appurtenant work and this report was received by the Council on October 7, 1997. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA: 1. The Council will consider the improvement of East Dean Lake by addition of a collector street,utilities and any other appurtenant work, in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting and benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of$6,046,000.00. 2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 5th day of November, 1997, at 7:00 P.M. or thereafter, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 129 South Holmes Street, Shakopee, Minnesota, and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. 3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 1997-4 Public Improvement Program. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held this day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk , 03 D -,0 i � c�nlntncnDtnDG) U -loG) = n � ao <`n' � � � o ' o �+ c+ m o mm335 •-7 3 cFfa) 2 �c22 cfDomc1Re °. r : /44:1; / m m co -Icon m �' m " CD 0 9. &f o • • § T Tt Tl n 3 3 j > > > > a fl > CO • lu � � � � � � �I rA m. 71 0. e IIil- 0 r L.%.%%.*%10 (D a) (0 p � \ O O O O O O O N n 0 O O O O O _ �• -o O O 0 0 O °`� O O O O 00 O p 111110 Ilmr, —1 - ' /4.74 44 ...... • , ';� CDD C) 0 O o0 co 00c o -1 co m -o a 0ir 0 .- -Oi, .z -8 E p 7 R. N n* w 7 'Q 0 0 cD p� CAl 2. ... O 7 Oa N n m' 3 N 1 z O IM P. 0 H a � r, o + o o C) v?g. oto co = m 0 ,� N 0 m '12- 0 0 S 5' m 0 o co c n 1- y co Ft Z O co N n CD A) N y 7 p m � a a • Q 0N O 8 0 o. d J. N a 7 a) N < O co o al rt 3 ^0 O 0 7 coo 0a Ocv 3 ni 0 .& o c.4 In O O CITY OF SHAKOPEE / I. 6 , I , Memorandum TO: Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Terry Link, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Hiring New Firefighters DATE: October 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Shakopee City Council has approved the hiring of 7 firefighters in 1997. We have performed the oral interviews and the physical agility testing of the 21 applicants and have identified qualified personnel. DISCUSSION: We are prepared to hire the 7 firefighters as approved. We are approved for 2 additional firefighters as a part of the 1998 budget to start staffing for two station response. Because of the time involved in bringing the new firefighters on board after Council approval(4-6 weeks), and to best synchronize the training and acclimation of the new firefighters,we recommend hiring 9 firefighters at this time. We presently have 9 well qualified applicants available after the interviews and physical testing. If we wait until after January 1st to hire the 2 additional firefighters it will cause a 2-3 month lag behind the 7 to be hired in 1997. This will make training of the new firefighters more difficult than if they were hired and trained together all at once. RECOMMENDATION: As a result of the hiring process, we recommend hiring the top 9 applicants in the following order: Duane Hoffman Scott Wenisch Duane Slaughter Al Johnson Mark Wandersee Rusty Rice William Beckrich Mark Sullivan MaryJane Buland ACTION REQUIRED: 1. Approve the hiring of the 7 firefighters approved for 1997. 2. Hire the additional 2 firefighters(Mark Sullivan and MaryJane Buland) approved for 1998 now to synchronize them with the other 7 firefighters. TL/tiv CITY OF SHAKOPEE / y. Memorandum To: Mark McNeil, City Administrator FROM: Terry Link, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Opticon Emitter Purchase DATE: 9/26/97 INTRODUCTION: With the increasing traffic in the Shakopee Fire District and the large number of new stop light systems being installed, an emergency vehicle preemption system is required. This system allows emergency vehicles equipped with the proper emitters to gain green light access to stop light intersections. This type of system minimizes the need to pass through"red light" intersections which is a leading cause of emergency response accidents. The required emitters for the Shakopee Fire Department vehicles and to equip priority intersections are a line item for $35,000 in the 1997 Capital Improvement Budget. DISCUSSION: These systems involve detection and switching equipment to be installed at the stop light intersections and emitters need to be installed on the vehicles which will use the system. Most of the intersections with stop lights installed in the last year are already equipped with the sensing and switching equipment. Older key intersections will need to be upgraded. In 1997 we plan to outfit our equipment with the needed emitters to take advantage of the existing intersections and to identify and prioritize the remaining intersections to add the sensing and switching equipment to. The cost to add the 3M Opticom Emitters to our apparatus is $13,433.00 through Rennix Corporation in St. Paul, MN. Rennix Corporation is the sole provider of this equipment in our area. This leaves $21,567.00 to upgrade 1 to 2 priority intersections for this capability(as the budget allows). Two key intersections under consideration are 4th Ave and County Road 17, and the intersection at County Road 16 and County Road 17. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend purchasing the 3M Opticom Emitters for $13,433.00 and outfitting our apparatus. We recommend using the $21,567.00 remaining to upgrade the priority intersections. ACTION REQUIRED: Take appropriate action to utilize the $36,000.00 in the Capital Improvements Budget to purchase the required emitters and upgrade the key intersections. QUOTATION RENNIX CORPORATION 413 WACOUTA ST,SUITE 550 ST PAUL,MN 55101-1957 PHONE 612-222-7252 FAX 612-292-0014 Date: 9118197 Quote Number: R97-62E TO: City of Shakopee Fax: 445-7767 Attn: Marvin Athmann Phone: 445-1988 Shakopee Public Utilities 1030 East Fourth Avenue Shakopee,MN 55379-1699 RE: 3M Opticom''m Emitter We are pleased to quote 3M ITS equipment as follows: ITEM QUAN UNIT DESCRIPTION PRICE EXT. A 1 EA 3M Model 9592 High priority emitter $995 $995 B 11 EA 3M Model 592 High priority emitter $1,195 $13,145 Subtotal $14,140 Less 5% quantity discount(10+ units) 707 Total $13,433 Per our discussion on September 10, 1997, there will be no freight charge and the Fire Department should be exempt from Sales Tax on this purchase. Quoted prices are good for 90 days. Our terms are Net 30 to approved credit. Delivery is stock to 10 days. Thank you, RENNIX CORPORATION F. Denise Miller Vice President enc: sample ordinance Iy. G. , SHAKOPEE POLICE DEPARTMENT Memorandum CONSENT TO: Mayor and CityCouncil Y City Administrator Mark McNeill FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Criminal Justice Data Communications Contracts DATE: September 22, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Police Department is requesting permission from the City Council to renew three Criminal Justice Data Communications contracts with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension(BCA). BACKGROUND: Police Department personnel are required to routinely access the BCA computer(s)to enter information, make inquiries and create records. Before our people are allowed to do this, the BCA requires that certain agreements be in place. Agreement#1, the Criminal Justice Data Communication-Network User Agreement restricts the department to using approved equipment, requires us to follow state rules regarding use of the terminal and requires us to pay our own line and repair costs. Agreement#2, the Computerized Criminal History Information Access Agreement restricts criminal history inquires to authorized employees who have been granted clearance by the BCA. Agreement#3, the Computer Interface Access Agreement sets forth security requirements, requires equipment be used for criminal justice purposes only, requires personnel screening, restricts unauthorized devices and requires correct, legal dissemination of the information. As a practical matter, the Police Department must have access to the BCA computers to operate efficiently, effectively and legally. Access will not be granted if these agreements are not executed. Criminal Justice Data Communications Contracts September 22, 1997 Pg. -2- ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize execution of Criminal Justice Data contracts with BCA. 2. Do not authorize execution of contracts. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative#1 BUDGET IMPACT: Agreement#1 - 0 Agreement#2 - 0 Agreement#3 - $1,560 The $1,560 is for line rental which is a budgeted item. ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate city officials to enter into the following Criminal Justice Data Communications contracts with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. 1. Criminal Justice Data Communication-Network User Agreement. 2. Computerized Criminal History Information Access Agreement. 3. Computer Interface Access Amendment. A STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY CRIMINAL JUSTICE DATA COMMUNICATION NETWORK USER AGREEMENT • This Agreement is entered into on by and between the State of Minnesota, the Department of Public Safety hereinafter called"DPS"and hereinafter called the "Agency". This agreement details the obligations and requirements placed on the Agency who is connected to the State's Criminal Justice Data Communication Network(CJDN). DPS is the organization set forth by Minnesota Statute as being responsible for the administration and operation of the State's Criminal Justice Data Communication Network. Further, DPS is the control terminal agency in the Federal Bureau of Investigation National Crime Information Center(FBI-NCIC) system and the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System(NLETS),Inc. I. EOUIPMENT: 1. Only terminals,printers,computers,and associated equipment approved by DPS may be connected to the CJDN by the Agency. (Note:this does not include terminal equipment on the agency's end of their computers.) 2. No equipment, including terminals and printers on the Agency's end of their computers, may be added to the CJDN without the express permission of DPS. 3. All equipment that the Agency has connected to the CJDN must be identified in a list attached to this Agreement. Updates to the list must be made any time new or additional equipment is connected to the network. 4. All terminals and printers must have a unique device identifier assigned by DPS to enable them to receive data and information from the network. 5. An Agency with intelligent equipment must have at the minimum,one dedicated printer that is always available to receive messages. 6. Due to the time needed to add, change or remove CJDN circuits and equipment, a minimum of a 120 day written notice must be provided to DPS whenever the Agency is going to add,move,replace, or eliminate any equipment on the network. This does not include terminals on the Agency's end of their computer. DPS will attempt to satisfy requests in a shorter period of time if the communication companies are able to provide faster service. II. COMPUTER CONNECTION: If the Agency is connected to the CJDN with a non-stand alone computer (a device that has multiple output units,terminals and printers connected to it,or is part of a network that has multiple devices or computers on it other than CJDN) a "Computer Interface Access Amendment" must be executed and become an incorporated part of this Agreement. 1 III. PERSONNEL: 1. DPS will provide training and certification of all Agency personnel who will be responsible for activity on the CJDN. The Agency must make its personnel available for and require them to participate in this training. 2. DPS will provide documentation and/or manuals on the correct use of the CJDN for network users. The Agency must disseminate the documentation or manuals to all of their employees who utilize the CJDN. This documentation or manuals are to be maintained in a secure manner by the agency. 3. The Agency agrees to initiate, at the request of State, disciplinary action up to and including termination of personnel, where such persons violate the provisions of this agreement or other security requirements estab- lished for the CJDN. The Agency will assist in the criminal prosecution of individuals when Federal or State • laws have been violated. IV. DATA/INFORMATION: 1. Attached to this Agreement is a list of accesses the Agency is allowed under the terms of this Agreement. The Agency may request additional accesses. The Agency agrees that the decision of DPS as to what information shall be made available to the Agency is fmal. 2. If the Agency enters data and information into CJIS,the Agency will have sole responsibility for the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of it. 3. Data and information that the Agency receives from the CJDN must be verified with the originating agency before acting upon it. 4. The Agency must abide by the Minnesota Data Practices Act and applicable Federal Statutes in their access,use, storage and dissemination of all data and information entered into or received from the CJDN. V. ACCESS TO CRIMINAL HISTORY INFORMATION: If the Agency is going to have access to Criminal History Information, a "Computerized Criminal History Information Access Amendment"must be executed and become an incorporated part of this Agreement. VI. COSTS: 1. DPS will pay all network communication line costs to the extent of approved legislative appropriations. Excess costs will be prorated among the network users and the Agency billed accordingly. The agency agrees to pay all such bills when due. 2. DPS will pay the maintenance costs for all equipment that it owns to the extent of approved legislative appropriations, excess costs will be prorated among the network users and the Agency billed accordingly. The Agency agrees to pay all such bills when due. 3. All maintenance costs for Agency owned equipment is the responsibility of the Agency. 4. Equipment installation,delivery,and relocation charges are to be paid by the Agency. 5. If the Agency has a computer to computer interface, DPS will participate in payment only for the expense of network communication line and modem costs between the State and the Agency computer to the extent that DPS would pay for interconnection of a terminal and printer to the Agency. Any additional costs are the responsibility of the Agency. 2 J t VII. ADDITIONAL TERMS: 1. The Agency agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the State and all of its employees,from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, suits, and proceedings by others; against all liability to others in the execution or enjoyment of this Agreement and all amendments. 2. Changes to this agreement and its amendments may be introduced by either the State or the Agency. The modifications will not become effective until an addendum to this agreement has been signed by both parties. 3. This agreement will become effective when signed by the State and the Agency. The agreement and any .addendum will remain in effect until written notification is received to the contrary. Both DPS and.the Agency may,upon 90 days written notice,terminate this Agreement. 4. The Department of Public Safety and the Agency will abide by all present and future rules, policies, and procedures adopted by the State or the NLETS Board of Directors, or as approved by the FBI-NCIC Policy Board and adopted by FBI-NCIC. DPS will propose no changes in the rules,policies, and procedures adopted by it without notice to all agencies and provision of a 30 day period in which an agency can submit written comments to the Department. 5. The Department of Public Safety and the Agency agree that the FBI-NCIC, NLETS, and DPS user/operator manuals,their amendments,and successors are incorporated as part of this agreement. 6. An Agency that provides CJDN access and/or services to another agency must have a written agreement with that agency. The Agency must provide a copy of the agreement and any amendments to DPS. This does not prohibit the Agency from providing information, on a one-time basis per case, to another Law Enforcement Agency who is conducting an investigation in the Agency's jurisdiction. VIII. DEFINITIONS: 1. Criminal History Information. This will have the same meaning as contained in "Title 28" of the "Code of Federal Regulations"or subsequent federal or State law or regulations which may supersede"Title 28". 2. Criminal Justice Data Communication Network. The network including the equipment, circuits, facilities, procedures,agreements,and organizations thereof,for the collection,processing,preservation, or dissemination of criminal justice information. 3. NCIC (National Crime Information Center). A division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the U.S. Department of Justice which maintains a nationwide computerized information system established as a service to all criminal justice agencies- local, state, and federal. NCIC's main purpose is to assist the criminal justice organizations in performing their duties by providing a computerized filing system of accurate and timely documented information,readily available to each criminal justice organization. 4. NLETS (National Law Enforcement Telecommunications Systems). NLETS is an incorporated, non-profit organization whose purpose is to provide a nationwide criminal justice data communications system. 3 - ACKNOWLEDGMENT: • As the individual responsible for the Agency, I hereby acknowledge the responsibilities and duties as set forth in this document as well as those documents incorporated by reference. I acknowledge that these responsibilities and duties were developed and implemented to ensure the reliability, confidentiality, accuracy, timeliness and completeness of Criminal Justice Information. I further acknowledge that failure of this Agency to comply with these duties and responsibilities will subject this Agency to various sanctions including the termination of access to the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network. Agency Administrator Signature Date Department of Public Safety/Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Date Criminal Justice Information Systems 4 . t STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY COMPUTERIZED CRIMINAL HISTORY INFORMATION ACCESS AGREEMENT This Amendment to the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network Users Agreement is entered into on by and between the State of Minnesota,the Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension,hereinafter called"DPS"and a Minnesota Criminal Justice Agency hereinafter called the "Agency". This agreement details the obligations and requirements placed on the Agency that is connected to the State's Criminal Justice Data Communication Network and who will have access to the Computerized Criminal History Information or may acquire Criminal History Information through a third party who has direct access to Criminal History Information through the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network. With respect to criminal history record information and related information as maintained and/or provided by DPS,it is agreed that: 1. DPS is the control terminal agency in the Federal Bureau of Investigation National Crime Information Center(FBI-NCIC)system and the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System(NLETS), Inc. and shall furnish to a Criminal Justice Agency such criminal history record information and other related information as is available from the DPS,through the FBI-NCIC,and through the NLETS. 2. No agency shall furnish to another agency information from its own files which is also maintained by DPS,FBI-NCIC,or another agency as authorized by Minnesota State or Federal statute,or information obtained by it without first querying the designated agency for the most recent information;provided that this section shall not apply to (a) automated Criminal History Information if DPS notifies the disseminating agency that it is technically incapable of responding;or(b)the furnishing of information for the sole purpose of processing a charge through the criminal justice system and it is clear under the circumstances that no disposition has occurred and the information as furnished relates only to the charge in process;or(c)dissemination of information received from DPS within the previous 48 hours. . 3. The Department of Public Safety reserves the right to suspend furnishing Criminal History Information when any rule,policy,or procedure has been or appears to have been violated. The Department may reinstate the furnishing of Criminal History Information upon receipt of satisfactory assurances that such violation did not occur or has been corrected. 4. Batch reports and other hard copy products containing Criminal History Information are to be outputted only on printers within the Agency. All Criminal History output documents must be transported, handled, and stored only by Authorized Employees. The Agency is responsible for the correct and legal dissemination and use of all data and records it receives. 5. The Agency must maintain a log for all III inquiries. This must include the name of the individual receiving the response,the information received and the date the information was received. These logs must be maintained for at least one year from the date of the inquiry. 1 6. III data and records cannot be used for licensing or non-criminal justice employment purposes unless specifically authorized by Federal Statute. 7. An individual's right to review and challenge of his/her own record is an integral part of the system. Appropriate identification, including fingerprinting, of the individual may be required before any Criminal History Information can be disseminated to the individual. The fmgerprints in the record on file may be compared to those of the individual to verify he/she is who they purports to be. II. PERSONNEL: • 1. The Agency will make criminal history checks on all employees that will have access to Criminal History Information. An employee who is not cleared must not have access to the Criminal History • Information,only Authorized Employees will have access to Criminal History Information. 2. The Agency agrees to initiate, at the request of State, disciplinary action up to and including termination of personnel having access to Criminal History Information systems where such persons violate the provisions of this agreement or other security requirements established for the collection, storage, or dissemination of Criminal History Information. The Agency will assist in the criminal prosecution of such individuals when Federal or State laws have been violated. 3. Personnel assigned by the Agency receiving Criminal History Information as terminal operators will be provided system training by the Department of Public Safety. III. ADDITIONAL TERMS: 1. Changes to this agreement amendment may be introduced by either the State or the Agency. The modifications will not become effective until an addendum to this agreement amendment has been signed by both parties. 2. This agreement amendment will become effective when signed by the State and the Agency. The agreement and any addendum will remain in effect until written notification is received to the contrary. Both DPS and the Agency may,upon 30 days written notice,terminate this agreement. IV. DEFINITIONS: 1. Authorized Employee. An employee who has been granted clearance by the Agency thereby allowing access to Criminal History Information. The Agency in granting the clearance must have done a • criminal history check on the employee. 2 . Criminal Justice Agency. This will have the same meaning as contained in"Title 28"of the "Code of Federal Regulations"or subsequent federal or State law or regulations which may supersede"Title 28". 3. Criminal History Information. This will have the same meaning as contained in "Title 28" of the "Code of Federal Regulations"or subsequent federal or State law or regulations which may supersede "Title 28". 4. Criminal Justice Data Communication Network. The network, including the equipment, circuits, facilities, procedures, agreements, and organizations thereof, for the collection, processing, preservation, or dissemination of criminal justice information, and may include related systems that directly contribute to the criminal justice information system. 5. III. The Interstate Identification Index. The FBI-NCIC Interstate Identification Index contains individuals names, aliases, physical description, identifying numbers, fmgerprint classification, and location(s)of criminal history record(s). 2 I 6. NCIC(National Crime Information Center). A division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the U.S.Department of Justice which maintains a nationwide computerized information system established as a service to all criminal justice agencies-local,state,and federal. NCIC's main purpose is to assist the criminal justice organizations in performing their duties by providing a computerized filing system of accurate and timely documented information, readily available to each criminal justice organization. 7. NLETS(National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System). NLETS is an incorporated, non- profit organization whose purpose is to provide a nationwide criminal justice data communications system. V. ACKNOWLEDGMENT: As the individual responsible for the Agency, I hereby acknowledge the responsibilities and duties as set forth in this document as well as those documents incorporated by reference. I acknowledge that these responsibilities and duties were developed and implemented to ensure the reliability, confidentiality, accuracy, timeliness and completeness of Criminal History Information. I further acknowledge that failure of this Agency to comply with these duties and responsibilities will subject this Agency to various sanctions including the termination of access to Criminal History Information. Agency Administrator(Signature) Date Department of Public Safety/Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Date Criminal Justice Information Systems 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY COMPUTER INTERFACE ACCESS AMENDMENT This Amendment to the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network Users Agreement is entered•into on by and between the State of Minnesota, the Department of Public Safety hereinafter called the "DPS" and hereinafter called the"Agency". This agreement details the obligations and requirements placed on the Agency who is connected to the State's Criminal Justice Data Communication Network(CJDN)by means of a Multi-Access Computer Device. I. EQUIPMENT: 1. All electronic equipment that is interconnected to the Criminal Justice Data Communications Network must have adequate physical security to protect against any unauthorized personnel gaining access to the computer equipment or to any of the stored data. This includes equipment provided by the State, the Agency, or acquired from any other source. Failure by the Agency to provide adequate security will warrant the removal of the equipment from accessing the State's CJIS network as well as NCIC and NLETS. 2. All rooms containing interconnected equipment shall remain locked from exterior entry at all times. 3. Tampering with, or attempting to compromise security is to be regarded as a serious offense that will result in disciplinary action being taken by the Agency or the State. 4. Without the express written approval of the State to the contrary, all the hardware between the State's CPU and the user's equipment must be dedicated to criminal justice operations and cannot be shared or used for other purposes. 5. There can be no"dial-in"lines into the Agency's Multiple Access Computer without manual intervention. 6. There must be at least one dedicated printer where messages can always be received. II. PERSONNEL: 1. All personnel who have access to any of the interconnect equipment must be screened under the authority and supervision of the criminal justice agency. This screening will also apply to all maintenance personnel, contract technical personnel, and all other individuals having unescorted access to any of the interconnected equipment. 2. If the Agency has access to Criminal History Information, a criminal history check must be made on all individuals who have access to any of the interconnected equipment as specified within the Computerized Criminal History Information Access Amendment to the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network Users Agreement. 1 3. The criminal justice agency may promulgate policies and procedures directed toward protection, security and dissemination of the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network and its data. These policies and procedures must be followed by everyone at the Data Center. 4. In the event of an emergency related to an individual's health or well being, those persons answering the emergency call must be accompanied by an authorized employee if the event is located in an area where security of the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network and its data could be compromised. 5. Casual visitors or those on tour of the Agency in areas where the equipment is located must be escorted by an authorized employee responsible for their presence at all times. III. DATA SECURITY: 1. The documentation for the criminal justice information systems will be controlled and secured. This includes the NCIC, NLETS and CJIS manuals. The Agency must disseminate all manuals and publications when they are received so that all users have accurate and up-to-date documentation. 2. Batch reports and other hard copy products of the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network are to be delivered to printers approved by the Agency. 3. All output documents must be transported, handled, and stored only by authorized employees. The Agency is responsible for the correct and legal dissemination and use of all data and records it receives. IV. MANAGEMENT CONTROL: If the Agency does not own and/or operate their own equipment, they must have a Management Control Agreement with the entity providing the service that at a minimum includes the following: 1. The ability of the Criminal Justice Agency to set and enforce priorities for the system usage, which includes the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network functions having the highest priority on the system. 2. The Criminal Justice Agency will have the right to screen and reject for employment in areas where the equipment is located or the system is maintained, all persons who do not meet the security screening requirements. • 3. The entity providing service -to the Criminal Justice Agency shall agree to and abide by all the requirements of the Criminal Justice Data Communication Network Users Agreement and all of its amendments and successors. 4. The entity providing service to the Criminal Justice Agency must make their employees available for training. 5. The computer system must provide adequate security to prohibit unauthorized access to any criminal justice function. No unauthorized devices on the computer can be permitted to access, modify, purge, change,overlay or destroy the Criminal Justice Data Communications Network or any of its data. 6. The addition of any devices having access to the CJDN or any of its data by the Agency must be first approved in writing by DPS. 2 • sr V. ADDITIONAL TERMS: 1. Changes to this agreement amendment may be introduced by either the State or the Agency. The modifications will not become effective until an addendum to this agreement amendment has been signed by both parties. 2. This agreement will become effective when signed by the State and the Agency. The agreement and any addendum will remain in effect until written notification is received to the contrary. Both DPS and the Agency may,upon 30 days written notice,terminate this agreement. • 3. The cost of all facilities,devices or equipment set forth in this agreement which contributes to the security and safety of the CJIS System within the Agency is the responsibility of the Agency. 4. The Agency agrees that designated State employees shall have the authority to audit,monitor,and inspect all procedures and facilities established pursuant to this agreement. This shall include State's right to attempt to breach Agency's security as it relates to the provisions of this agreement. VI. DEFINITIONS: 1. Authorized Employee. An employee who has been granted clearance by the Agency thereby allowing access to Criminal History Information. The Agency in granting the clearance must have done a criminal history check on the employee. 2. Authorized Access Device. A device in a user agency which,by virtue of a signed contract with Department of Public Safety,is allowed access to the criminal justice information systems. 3. Casual Visitors. Persons who have irregular access to the Data Center. 4. Computer Center. The specific location(s) of all computers and associated equipment including terminals and printers upon which criminal justice information is processed. 5. Criminal Justice Agency. This will have the same meaning as contained in "Title 28" of the "Code of Federal Regulations"or subsequent federal or State law or regulations which may supersede"Title 28". 6. Criminal History Information. This will have the same meaning as contained in "Title 28" of the "Code of Federal Regulations"or subsequent federal or State law or regulations which may supersede"Title 28". 7. Criminal Justice Information System. The system including the equipment,circuits, facilities,procedures,agree- ments, and organizations thereof,for the collection,processing,preservation,or dissemination of criminal justice information,and may include related systems that directly contribute to the criminal justice information system. 8. Data Center. The total physical space(s), inclusive of the computer center, where criminal justice information systems are developed,maintained,or operated. 9. III. The Interstate Identification Index. The Interstate Identification Index contains individuals names, aliases, physical description,identifying numbers,fmgerprint classification,and location(s)of criminal history record(s). 10. Management Control. The authority to set and enforce standards for the selection and termination of personnel, and for policy governing the operation of computers, telecommunications devices, and circuits used to process criminal justice information insofar as the equipment is used to process, store, or transmit the information. Management control includes the supervision of the systems design,programming,and operating procedures for the development,modification,maintenance,and processing of computerized criminal justice information either as a function by itself or with other non-criminal justice applications. 3 11. Multiple Access Computer. An electronic device that has multiple input and/or output units such as terminal and printers,or is attached to or part of a network that has multiple devices or computers on it. This does not include stand alone micro computers. 12. NCIC (National Crime Information Center). A division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the U.S. Department of Justice which maintains a nationwide computerized information system established as a service to all criminal justice agencies - local, state, and federal. NCIC's main purpose is to assist the criminal justice organizations in performing their duties by providing a computerized filing system of accurate and timely documented-information,readily available to each criminal justice organization. 13. NLETS (National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System). NLETS is an incorporated, no'n-profit • organization whose purpose is to provide a nationwide criminal justice data communications system. 14. Permanent Visitors. Persons having regular access to the Data Center but who are not Authorized Employees. This term shall include contract and vendor personnel who have access to the Data Center. ACKNOWLEDGMENT: As the individual responsible for the Agency,I hereby acknowledge the responsibilities and duties as set forth in this document as well as those documents incorporated by reference. I acknowledge that these responsibilities and duties were developed and implemented to ensure the reliability, confidentiality, accuracy, timeliness and completeness of Criminal History Information. I further acknowledge that failure of this Agency to comply with these duties and responsibilities will subject this Agency to various sanctions including the termination of access to Criminal History Information. Agency Administrator(Signature) Date Department of Public Safety/Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Date 4 Pi. t3. % SHAKOPEE POLICE DEPARTMENT Memorandum TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Memorandum of Agreement DATE: September 18, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Police Department is requesting permission from the City Council to renew an existing agreement to obtain surplus property from the Minnesota National Guard Counterdrug Program. BACKGROUND: For the past few years, through our participation in the Minnesota National Guard Counterdrug Program, the Police Department has been the recipient of numerous items of surplus military equipment at little or no cost to the city. This equipment includes cold weather clothing, weapons, night vision equipment, a portable generator, the pick-up truck you see around town with the speed sign on it, and more. If the department is to continue to participate in this program, the attached memorandum of agreement must be executed. The agreement prohibits obtaining equipment for sale or rent. It does not require any financial commitment from the city. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Renew the agreement. 2. Do not renew the agreement. BUDGET IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the appropriate city official to execute a memorandum of agreement for the Shakopee Police Department to continue participation in the Minnesota National Guard Counterdrug Program. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND SECTION 1208 PARTICIPANT Shakopee Police Dept. ID: SHAPD PURPOSE: This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is entered into between the State of Minnesota Counterdrug Coordinator (hereinafter "CDC"), and the state law enforcement agency (hereinafter"LEA"), to set forth the terms and conditions which will be binding on the parties with respect to excess Department of Defense (DoD) personal property which is transferred pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act of 1990/1991, and to promote the efficient and expeditious transfer of the property. AUTHORITY: The Secretary of Defense is authorized by Section 1208 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 101-189), as amended, to transfer to Federal and State Agencies, for counterdrug activities, personal property that is excess to the needs of the DoD and suitable to be used by such agencies in counterdrug activities under such terms prescribed by the Secretary. On October 1, 1995, the Secretary of Defense transferred this responsibility to the Defense Logistics Agency. The State Governor is authorized by Section 1208 to designate a point of contact (POC) to oversee the transfer of excess property to state and local LEAs. Minnesota Governor Arne H. Carlson appointed Major General Eugene R. Andreotti, the Adjutant General, as the State Counterdrug Support POC. The Adjutant General then designated the State CDC, Major Terrance A. Sieben, as the State Counterdrug Support Action Officer. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The CDC has the authority to determine the type, quantity, and location of excess personal property suitable for use in counterdrug activities, if any; that will be transferred to the LEA. Property available under this agreement is for the use of authorized program participants; not for speculative/possible future use. Property may not be obtained for the purpose of sale, lease, rent, exchange, barter, to secure a loan or to otherwise supplement normal State/Drug Law Enforcement Activity(DLEA) budgets. All requests for property must be based on bona- fide counterdrug requirements. The requisitioning of-condition code"A" property for the purpose of cannibalization is not authorized. Any repair, maintenance, insurance, or other expenses associated with these items is the sole responsibility of the LEA. Property obtained under this MOA must be placed into use within one year of receipt and utilized for a minimum of one year, unless the condition of the property renders it unusable. Aircraft(fixed-wing and rotary), Flight Safety Critical Aircraft Parts (FSCAP), Specialized Equipment, and Munitions List Items (MLI) requiring demilitarization may be transferred to the LEA for its use in counterdrug operations. Such items will be returned to and received by the DLA(i.e., closest Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office[DRMOJ) when no longer needed for counterdrug operations. Such action will be coordinated with the CDC. Exceptions to this policy are as follows: - States/DLEAs which provide evidence to DLA that aircraft are/will be maintained under Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) maintenance and repair guidance will be allowed to permanently retain the aircraft after a period of five years. 2 - LEAs are permitted to exchange aircraft and FSCAP with other authorized LEAs, provided the aircraft and components are maintained under FAA maintenance and repair guidelines and provided further that the LEAs perpetuate repair and maintenance documentation. - LEAs may dispose of Strategic ListfMLI (only those that do not require demilitarization). This procedure must comply with all state and local laws and not hold Minnesota Counterdrug Operations, the State of Minnesota, or the United States Government liable in any way. These items require the U.S. Department of State or Commerce license for export. In lieu of such procedures, and with prior coordination with the CDC, the LEA has the option of returning such items to the closest DRMO or transferring to other authorized LEAs, when no longer required for counterdrug use. - LEAs must return all demilitarized equipment, regardless of condition, to the DoD through coordination with the CDC. - Except where indicated in this MOA,'the LEA may dispose of other types of property. in accordance with State and local laws when it is determined by the CDC and/or the LEA to be no longer needed for counterdrug use. The corresponding Chief of Police (or equivalent) identified below represents that he/she is authorized to enter into this agreement on behalf of their department. This individual will act as the POC for the LEA that desires excess personal property, coordinating their non-operational counterdrug requests with the CDC. Title is granted to the LEA, except for those items identified in this MOA as requiring return to DoD. Costs of shipping or repossession of the property by the U.S. Government will be borne by the LEA. To the extent permitted by State law, the LEA shall indemnify and hold the U.S. Government harmless from any and all suits, actions, demands or claims of any nature arising out of the use of the property. The LEA will maintain adequate insurance to cover damages or injuries to persons or property relating to the use of the property. Self insurance coverage is considered acceptable. The DoD and the State of Minnesota assume no liability for damages or injuries to any person or property arising from the use of the property. THE CDC SHALL: a. Receive applications for participation in this program from the state LEAs and validate their law enforcement mission prior to forwarding to DLA for approval as an authorized LEA. b. Forward requests for excess property which are necessary to meet requirements for LEA counterdrug efforts. Assure the recipient LEA is identified on all requisitions. c. Be responsible for the allocation of property to qualified LEAs. Assure the LEAs agree to maintain, at no expense to the U.S. Government, adequate liability and property insurance coverage and workmen's compensation insurance to cover any claims. 3 d. Identify to LEAs property requiring demilitarization and the special controls on MLI/SLI, and FSCAP. e. Control and maintain accurate records on all property obtained under this MOA in accordance with pertinent State property laws and regulations. These records should identify the destination/receiving LEA or disposition of equipment transferred and must be made available for review by the DoD or its agents upon request. THE LEA SHALL: a. Submit application for participation in this program on department letterhead to CDC. The application must include the following: 1) size (number of sworn officers) and location, include jurisdiction of agency 2) nature of drug activities in geographic area a counterdrug operations conducted by agency 3) name and phone numbers of no more than two equipment screeners (must be sworn officers) 4) DRMO locations at which agency desires to screen property b. Ensure that agency screeners do the following: 1) Contact DRMO for screening appointment. 2)Request"Same Day Pick-up" authorization if desired from CDC no less than two days prior to travel. 3) Have screener letter in hand upon entry to DRMO. 4) Abide by all DRMO regulations and restrictions. 5) Clearly and completely fill out DRMS Form 103 (EQUIPMENT REQUEST) and send to CDC. 6) Contact DRMO periodically after tagging equipment as to status of request. 7) Provide copy of DD FORM 1348 (SINGLE ITEM RELEASE/RECEIPT DOCUMENT) to CDC within 10 days of equipment pickup. 8) Submit no more than two DRMS FORMS in a month. c. Control and maintain accurate records on all property obtained under this MOA in accordance with pertinent State property laws and regulations. These records should identify the disposition of equipment transferred and must be made available for review by the CDC or his/her staff upon request. d. Allow a maximum of two(2) screeners to physically screen at any DRMO. The screeners must be named in a"letter of authorization" provided to the CDC, to be updated annually, or as changes occur. e. Assure that all environmentally regulated property is disposed of in accordance with applicable Federal, State and local environmental laws and regulations. f. Assure that all weapons are registered with the U.S. Treasury Department's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. 4 g. Fully comply with the terms, conditions and limitations applicable to property transferred pursuant to this agreement. NOTICES: CDC may propose modifications or amendments to the provisions of this MOA. In such cases, reasonable opportunity will, insofar as practicable, be afforded the LEA to conform to changes affecting their operations. Violations of this MOA may result in the removal of the LEA in the 1208 Program. TERMINATION: This MOA may be terminated by either party, provided the other party receives thirty(30) days notice, or as otherwise stipulated by Public Law. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the dates below. TERRANCE A. SIEBEN Major, MN ANG Agency Counterdrug Coordinator Title Date Date • • 5 4J o.) �$ to i QII PP .) ' . . Iio� ,UU4.) ,, ,,,•r••4 , o 0f""P..4 •.v:i 4) 'v%.;•:...Iii::::,)C.)rr.i.,riiw CU •I il) iiv<(• ill 6. alb CU ,r LN( v .T4Pa . �' Y Up Y<Yte7r>.r ?rJYQ Y. ii ,>r :. i... %a::Sr. ' '_.. DD ° .•. yoC - vo s0 w . 0" © w . CD 3. CD 1:0 D gill CD CCD el opy OQ O D A Fri •'t CD 1 `C '-1 nA ( G '0-0) ' A D D D O11, O O CD O ° Z' ca. S :13 CIO CCD = - q S. CO O pp, C"' 2H O :' r. CD „q A = y• : D • C5 03 At 'C7Pri . p y ,-• eV O� r'ripSR A CS . `C pp CD Aft .T'`C y' 0' CD" co • E. D D 9O ACbCM _ O C•. O C• GOO. C C) ", n• .n•► ,0, ry. O h (7 5n' C y AD ° 0-- 0- ° ; `4:1 �• .°,, o a) C„ o G� 13 pC �cD . m.'t CD �' AD' CD O 0 cm 4 p ' A�. ;-,1, CDVA� CC cCD�,Q: cr, CDO ' CD0OA ' cDcn pa P • O - 0 �..• C a+ CD O "I f0. 0CO moD C y " 0' CCDA.-Ii CA C0 ' D C. O O CD CD n 1:%3 0 -IA) Otecr AGa 0 1. "Z wr. CD C 0 . ep D ' CD < O CD a C "' Oni CD 0yO Cgo • O O y CUo C 0 D 0_ C . y CCAyryO v O O C1 (D go Al O CD _• y ' CD CD O f9 `0 CD Q'. C-`C `•G 'TS _ tD n CA G a' v� `�' `, ^� "CD A) Cr a O W r. CD O y po C cD c H • • • • • • • O ii I•ll "I CD DQ: 0 7 0 CD OCD � PtD b.„.• — O_ lDn' C 0 CD C CD C - CO O ? " Dr ^ Pl. p 0 C1• C 0. C. . 0Cnp �° CD . Q- o CD o R 3 w = 3 3 0 = cD co Rca. y A, - -•.a Cl,re. .C�' E.- ° ('� m y• - c CDD p+ c. CCD cr w o C ."4.. °q , CDo a. °' Iv CD =o P. co g. § d CD 0 p o 03 y w <• o AD + Cl �G cD 3. 0 " cD C>3 - ^t M � 0 Aa O CD to fa O h ~ .� .-. A) 0 C• A) •'3 CSD r 0D 3 tD n ._, 'CS C O �, CD ,. ,C' b9 rZ p O C7 r CMCJ 0 y r. 'O' AD P U 0 ? C0 fD a -. eD ,mow a• C"p `G Q A� A.'• y ~ al ° 0- CD D CD .-I ¢ C0 C .-I ' ' CD .1 COC Cl.. Cb D CO=a S CO , D A� r. 0CD A .-i. O CR) '°S 3 3_ =. ,. r. CD 0 FIT C"" • f. CONSENT 6, 1/4S, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Grant Money DATE: October 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Police Department is requesting authorization from Council to accept a grant in the amount of$5,146 from the State of Minnesota. BACKGROUND: As part of our ongoing community policing effort, the Police Department has developed and maintained a program of police accountability conferencing for juvenile offenders. A program we call"Face to Face" allows trained officers to removes juvenile offenders from the court system and deal with the offenders behavior, ideally within two weeks of the offense. Earlier this year, the department applied to the State of Minnesota for a grant in the amount of$5,146 to fund this program for the next year. We were successful and the grant was awarded. The grant covers officer overtime and other expenses related to the administration of the program such as printing costs. It requires no matching funds from the City and the administrative time needed to submit required reports is minimal. A method of tracking officer hours for grant accountability purposes has been approved by the Finance Director. Mechanisms to track other program expenses for grant accountability purposes are already in place. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept the grant. 2. Do not accept the grant. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative#1. BUDGET IMPACT: None ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute State of Minnesota Grant #90274 to fund"Face to Face" in the amount of$5,146. FY VENDOR NUMBER FUND AGENCY ORG. SUB ORG. DOCUMENT NUMBER(S)97 B21 0000 APPROP OBJ GRANT/SESA ID N0. CFDA# AMOUNT 2977 90274 16.540 $ 5,146 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY/WORKFORCE PREPARATION BRANCH Funding Source: Juvenile Justice (ILLECP) Grant/SESA ID Number: 90274 This grant agreement, which shall be interpreted pursuant to the laws of the State of Minnesota, between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Department of Economic Security (DES), Workforce Preparation Branch (WPB), (hereinafter the DEPARTMENT), and Shakopee Police Department 476 Gorman Street Shakopee, MN 55739 Social Security or Federal Identification Number: 41-600-5539 Minnesota State Tax Identification Number: 8025237 (Hereinafter GRANTEE) WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, Public Law 93-415, as amended,' hereinafter referred to as the Act, was enacted for the purpose of preventing juvenile delinquency and improving the methods of administration of juvenile justice, and WHEREAS, the DEPARTMENT has been granted funds by the United States, through the Department of Justice, for use to meet the purposes of the Act, and WHEREAS, GRANTEE has made application to the DEPARTMENT for a portion of such funds for the purpose of conducting a project consistent with the purposes of the Act, and WHEREAS, GRANTEE has represented to the DEPARTMENT that it has effectively delivered services of the type called for under the Act, and GRANTEE further represents that it is qualified and willing to perform the services enumerated in Paragraph 1 of this Agreement. NOW,THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the representations made therein,the parties agree that: 1. Program: The foregoing recitals are made part of this grant agreement by reference. The GRANTEE shall implement the Work Plan and Budget hereto attached as Exhibits A and B respectively, which are incorporated herein by reference as a part of this grant agreement. 2. Duties and Payment: GRANTEE shall perform all the services enumerated in#1 above and shall be reimbursed for its expenses in providing these services, provided that the total obligation of the DEPARTMENT for all reimbursement to GRANTEE shall not exceed $ 5.146. These funds are to be expended in the cost categories and amounts shown in the Budget r= Yhibit , which is attached hereto, incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof. The DEPARTMENT shall not be responsible to reimburse GRANTEE for its payments or liability to the Unemployment Compensation Fund as a reimbursing employer after termination of GRANTEE'S participation in programs under the Act or for any liability accrued thereunder before the effective date of this Grant. 3. Term of Contract: This Grant shall be effective on October 1. 1997, or upon such date as it is executed as to encumbrance by the Commissioner of the Department of Economic Security, whichever occurs later, and shall remain in effect until September 30, 1998, or until all obligations set forth in this contract have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. 4. Cancellation: This grant agreement may be canceled by the DEPARTMENT at any time, with or without cause, by giving written notice to the GRANTEE. In the event of such cancellation without cause, GRANTEE shall be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for work or services satisfactorily performed. In the event of cancellation for cause, including but not limited to failure to comply with the provisions of the grant agreement, failure to make timely progress in delivering required services, or use of grant funds for purposes other than those specifically identified in the grant agreement, the DEPARTMENT may take any actions it deems necessary to protect the interests of the State of Minnesota, including but not limited to the refusal to disburse additional funds pending a determination of the DEPARTMENTs right to set-off, and requiring the return of all or part of the funds already disbursed. This grant agreement may be canceled by the GRANTEE at any time,with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days written notice to the DEPARTMENT. Such written notice of cancellation must include proposed terms for winding up GRANTEE's services and an estimated final invoice for work or services performed. Thti.: DEPARTMENT may reject or accept in whole or in part GRANTEE's proposed terms for winding up services and GRANTEE'S estimated final invoice, and shall notify GRANTEE of its decision within(5) business days of receipt of GRANTEE's cancellation notice. In the event of any cancellation under this provision, GRANTEE shall cooperate fully with the DEPARTMENT and help facilitate any transition for the provision of services by a different vendor. Failure to cooperate with or withholding any information or records requested by the DEPARTMENT or a different vendor that impairs in any way the transition of the provision of services shall constitute a material breach of this grant agreement, subjecting GRANTEE to liability for all damages incurred by the DEPARTMENT because of such breach. 5. Request for Payment: Requests for cash shall be made by GRANTEE to the DEPARTMENT on the DEPARTMENTS Cash Request Form. Payments shall be made by the DEPARTMENT as soon as practicable after GRANTEE's presentation of the Request for Cash. The fact of payment of any item shall not preclude the DEPARTMENT from questioning the propriety of any item. GRANTEE acknowledges that funds to finance this grant are to be obtained by the DEPARTMENT through a specific legislative act. If at any time such funds become unavailable under the Act, this Agreement shall be terminated immediately upon written notice of such fact by the DEPARTMENT to GRANTEE. In the event of such termination, GRANTEE shall be entitled to reimbursement, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed. 6. Purchase of Furniture and Equipment: GRANTEE shall not purchase furniture or other equipment without the prior written approval of the DEPARTMENT. 7. Repayment of Funds: The DEPARTMENT reserves the right to offset any over-payment or disallowance of any item or items under this Grant by reducing future payments requested by GRANTEE. This clause shall not be construed to bar any other legal remedies that the DEPARTMENT may have to recover funds expended by GRANTEE for disallowed costs. 2 8. GRANTEE Reports: GRANTEE agrees to provide the DEPARTMENT with such progress reports as th DEPARTMENT may from time to time require including, but not limited to, the following: e a. Quarterly FSR b. Quarterly Progress Report, and c. Quarterly Client Characteristic Report GRANTEE shall also make such reports to the Secretary of Labor, the Comptroller General of the United States or the DEPARTMENT as any of them may require. The DEPARTMENT shall withhold funding if reporting requirements are not met in a complete, accurate and timely manner. 9. Monitoring and Corrective Action: Performance as set forth in Paragraph#1 above is essential to the life of this Grant. GRANTEE agrees to permit monitoring by the DEPARTMENT to determine Grant performance and compliance with Grant provisions. GRANTEE further agrees to cooperate with the DEPARTMENT in performing and completing such monitoring activities and GRANTEE agrees to implement and comply with such remedial action as is proposed by the DEPARTMENT. 10. Liability: GRANTEE agrees to indemnify and save and hold the DEPARTMENT, its agents and employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action, including attorney's fees, arising from the performance of this Grant by GRANTEE, its agents, officers and employees. 11. Special Administrative Provisions Required Under the Act: GRANTEE agrees to administer program in accordance with the Act, as amended, the regulations and guidelines promulgated thereunder. GRANTEE also agrees to comply with other applicable federal and State laws. In the event that these laws, regulations or policies are amended at any time during the term of this Agreement, the GRANTEE shall comply with such amended laws, regulations or guidelines. A. Records/Audits: GRANTEE agrees to use such fiscal, audit and accounting procedures as may be necessary to assure proper disbursement of such payments. The Secretary of Labor,the Comptroller General of the United States and the DEPARTMENT, or a designated representative, shall have access to and the right to examine for audit purposes or otherwise, any books, documents, papers or records of GRANTEE. The books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices of the GRANTEE relevant to the Grant are also subject to examination by the DEPARTMENT and the legislative auditor of the State of Minnesota. GRANTEE agrees to fully cooperate in any such examination and/or audit and to have said audits carried out in accordance with Subgrant Audit Requirements, Attachment 1, which is attached hereto, incorporated by reference herein and made a part hereof. All records pertaining to this Grant shall be retained by the GRANTEE for a period of at least three years after the expiration of the term of this Grant, or on completion of an audit, if one has been commenced within three years, whichever period is longer. B. Program Standards: GRANTEE agrees to comply with OMB Circulars Numbers A-21,A-87, A-102, A-110, A-122, A-128, A-133, OASC-10, Federal Treasury Circular 1075, and DJT Subgrantee Administrative Requirements No. 1 as these circulars and issuances relate to the utilization of funds, the operation of programs and the maintenance of records, books, accounts and other documents under the Act, as amended. C. Non-Discrimination Statement: The GRANTEE will comply with: 1. Title VI of the ivil Ri•hts Act of 1964 as amended b the E•ual Em.1. ment O..ortuni A of 1972, which generally prohibits discrimination on grounds of race, color or national origin, and applies to any program or activity receiving federal financial aid. 3 Z Tt1- VII • t - 'vii Ri• n •f 1••• a amended • E•ual m•lo , - • . .. of 1972, which.. generally � 1'� Act prohibits discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin and applies to all employers, including State and local govemments, public and private employment agencies and labor organizations. Any employment and training sponsor or contractor which falls within one of these definitions would, of course, be covered by Title VII. 3. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, which generally prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicap in all federally-funded programs. The Department of Labor's non- discrimination regulations, which were published in October 1980, were designed to enforce Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 4. The Ave Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended,which generally prohibits discrimination on the basis of age against persons between the ages of 40 and 70. 5. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 amends the Fair Labor Standards Act and which generally provides that an employer may not discriminate on the basis of sex by paying employees of different sexes differently for doing the same work 6. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended, generally provides that no person shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation, be denied the benefits of, be treated differently from another person or otherwise be discriminated against in any interscholastic, intercollegiate, club or intramural athletics offered and no recipient shall provide any such athletics separately on such basis. --------mm7imm 'mmmmmlmmmMMM.lMMMMM.M.7M..M.Ml 7. The Age Discrimination Act of 1975,as amended, prohibits unreasonable discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance. D. Affirmative Action: (If applicable), GRANTEE certifies that it has received a Certificate of Compliance from the Commissioner of Human Rights pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Section 363.073. E. Workers'Compensation: In accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 176.182, the State affirms that GRANTEE has provided acceptable evidence of compliance with the workers' compensation insurance coverage requirement of Minnesota Statues Section 176.181, Subdivision 2. F. Antitrust: GRANTEE hereby assigns to the State of Minnesota any and all claims for overcharges, as to goods and/or services provided in connection with this contract resulting from antitrust violations which arise under the antitrust laws of the United States and the antitrust laws of the State of Minnesota. G. GRANTEE agrees to comply with the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646)which provides for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced as a result of federal or federally assisted programs. H. GRANTEE agrees that program participants shall not be employed in the construction, operation or maintenance of that part of any facility which is used for religious instructions or worship. I• DATA PRACTICES: The GRANTEE understands and agrees that it shall be bound by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Minnesota Statues, Section 13.01 - 13.90), and that it shall inform program applicants that the DEPARTMENT may share applicant data with other agencies for eligibility and program evaluation purposes. GRANTEE shall incorporate into the Tennessen Warning used to provide applicants' an explanation of their rights under the Minnesota Data Practices Act clauses contained in the DEPARTMENTS "DATA USES INCLUSION REQUIREMENTS" 4 (Attachment 2). J. GRANTEE further agrees to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 Title 42 of the United States Code). (Chapter 126, 12. Job Service Listing: GRANTEE shall list any job vacancy in its personnel complement with Minnesota Job Service Office as soon as it occurs. the nearest 13. MIS Reporting: (If applicable) GRANTEES receiving funds under the Act will track participants Minnesota JTPA Management Information System (MIS)either through the area SDA or through arrangements made with the DEPARTMENT. 14. Voter Registration: GRANTEE shall provide non-partisan voter registration services and assistance, forms provided by the Secretary of State, to employees of GRANTEE, program participants and the public'as required by Minnesota Statutes, 1987 Supplement, Section 201.162. 15. Assignment: The GRANTEE shall neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this grant agreement without prior written consent of the DEPARTMENT. The provisions of this grant agreement applicable to the GRANTEE shall also be applicable to subgrants made by the GRANTEE from funds obtained under this grant agreement. t • 16. Pregrant Costs: Costs incurred from 30 days prior to the effective date of this grant agreement, which were in anticipation of this award and specifically authorized and approved in writing by the DEPARTMENT, are- allowable costs to the extent that they would have been allowable had they been incurred after the effective date of this grant agreement provided that the same are approved by the Commissioner of Finance in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 16A. 15, Subdivision 3. 17. Modifications: Any modifications to this grant agreement shall be in writing and shall be executed by the same parties who executed the original grant agreement, or their successors in office. 18. Debarment and Suspension Certification: The SUBGRANTEE agrees to follow the President's Executive Order 12549 and the implementing regulation "Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension; Notice and Final Rule and Interim Final Rule," found in Federal Register Vol. 53, No. 102, May 26, 1988, includingAppendix "Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Loiter Tier Covered Transactions"; unless excluded by law or regulation. 19. Lobbying Certification and Disclosure: (If applicable)The GRANTEE shall comply with Interim Final Rule, Restrictions on Lobbying, found in Federal Register Vol. 55, No. 38, February26, 1990 and an New Rules that are adopted in place of the Interim Rule. The interim rule requires the GRANTEE to certify as to their lobbying activity. The interim final rule implements section 319 of Public Law 101 - 121. Section 319 generally prohibits recipients of Federal contracts, grants and loans from using a riated funds for lobbying th Executive or Legislative Branches of the Federal Government in connectionit with a specific contract, grant or loan. 20. Grant Close-out: The GRANTEE agrees to submit a final Financial Status Report (PAUFSR.006) and a payment for the balance of any unspent and unobligated grant funds to the DEPARTMENT within 45 days after the end of the term of this agreement. Failure to submit a final PAUFSR.006 within this period may result in disallowance of payment for any expenditures not previously submitted. The GRANTEE agrees to submit a revised final PAUFSR.006 to the DEPARTMENT if any additional funds must be returned to the DEPARTMENT after grant agreement closeout. 21. The GRANTEE agrees to acknowledge the DEPARTMENTS funding of any resulting publications, data, or other material whether subject to copyright or not, with the following language: Funding for this publication (or document, paper, data, etc.) was provided by a grant from the Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee, Minnesota 5 Department of Economic Security and the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Grant to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. *FOR THE GRANTEE: FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY: By: By: Title: Title: Director. Program Support Date: Date: FOR THE GRANTEE: By: Title: Date: • * If a corporation, two corporate officers must execute. SIGNA.PG N [ o AY o 14 Mini 44 44 , nil d 0 a) ' b v -it ii CO w � a eu 1.1 v R41-1 is)0. x 0Oa al Q ce W 0 V =. • V •14 a, CD a) U10 a) +) CC W 4 'D C. 0 $4s-1m V Z H l ( 4 4) al ,.. ...i 4.) O O ,g G.) A F}- ^ c.) o p 'vs U U CA C f.. a) o a) a) a, U U Z :? ••.1 •.4 ... OC 4-4 W U0 til 0 O 00 •ea O n .ZZ' OQ , O+ p I w -J C izi Z j W E W •O .41 W CI Z OC 3 y4 $-I +) b :r 01 V _� p ~ a a)HLn 0 0) in O Q a. g Z C O O i •r♦ a. 2. a N a) g Q Q Z CC) c Q a) 4 C 0 O ii O ., i VW a`) 0 E+ Z c O 1-mW a 4.J .� L.LJE a) co O O "" V B •'-I Z d +a O ~ ai O u. .0 .a ,-"I it a- o i 0 O a ea.. Z M1:1 -1-} A Ri 0. N Z U a in e) Q o 117.1 > � :r1.; L C1 «. Na O 3-1 .5 44 3 �u 4 u of 4-I a) . It )I N c co H R a) O 'L7 o $-1 � cn ° v, v w i 0 0 a) :: > a) 5-1 04-1 4.) O 0 O g N9 C7 C.) R) •-4 44 r. lQ 4 ,-4 i v cin Z _W a w 0 f ° a) � (u 0 (Cl a) Q 0 0 r l • r.{ Q v s t a 0 :n r-1 f.. 2 c.) w a w c.) o cu Cp ' as w > in 4 �� 1 r03 4 r- min. co E 4-1 v al 0 O O 0 a Qoo O blIC0 U a grfb E Ma w 0- rat W a) 0 54 d.1 .0 a) 5-1 DI (0CC ..,i 4) ya) >1 0 U 'I"+ pZ �141 -o a 4.I MI vXu x_ > 7.1 CO Cc au E 84, 0 o .. xa - - D f H !yV .O 4- C -NWy^ 111i U = vZO1 V = Co L OyD _ a) 0 a) 0- $a k � O m a) Ts Ct 0 0 Z a -1 g .,...1, , 5+1 (C C o - C7 6L ° ar 'CC ® � a � WQ ° �-IDaE H m .,�LLJ Z IL W - WCC w a) A y > a) Z Z CC 3 � 10 .� I i fU n V O < o b n CO) CZ 0 CC �. 0 a� r0I a) O" O Q •a --� Z � e, o w u• ku o. 3 a 1y O o N u Q Z :B •n < Z t -y�j i .W.a 0 .4J C tn (� W Off. v u. O H Z v a) co > 0 1- = E ,. d A ... w UJ E > o $.1m ° R U fa,it RI Z a o a) ~ O ;Q a .1) R , 0O ZQv O k E Z V •,- r)-; `�' c e4 VI W W 0 O E V a0 inLu U, 4a a a) g > �- ; in Ix D4, No11/11/1r O.) a am= 2, a) 2, A•O E Vaj •3gO 4 04CU a OC W R il CL LAJ 9-1 fa 04 0 co 0 a ce IN V LL. a c 'y r � w W . i p U ra vatt f a) o ao .., Z 03 �+ ce �.�k , 44 �Or • % 0 a 1') U 0 U u a 04 at o �QQHJ a) reid y � � 11111111111!I 1111 .vL •'"1O :: rn It G 0 w w 4a o OU Q a ,1 (4Z a O 8 :~ u) '. '. -a > v t Q W in U = Q Z D p-..< Z a) � c d d 00 4.1 .,..1 a.R = a1 O H � a U 4-1 14.1 O )4 a) E 7, C Q U f:24 rt)• a) 0 0 4)O -0 ,u. cu a+itt d > 7 i Z v u •C+ a) U a� Z a ,n a) _,. 1-- ., > -rte, -1 g $-1 4Oi -,-1 .--1g •> s a 0 U «. u 3 0;.:.)1 (p trs �u„.7 • ti ito 0 g c° " -E U) .,-1t a) )1 3 .0 .. a) 4-) 0 474 cn vaww w � � Fo ›, 0 3u14 .[- 4 u C rn •_ 4.) ta, ,_1 ,t a -6) w p iv Lu ‘' .4� rt1 Sa 4 3 a) Y Z W R 0 O 01 O O O O a) a) U .-4 .4.J U V ar CI) Q O to W Q :; a) A 1--1 U a) { a, u .�c cm to•rl z Urn m .J > >'a 3 •n fa a _� O . c") 1_ a a) o `� •� > , a, 2 0 w x..� I•14 CU ami U 0 H s~ taw x a) v1 r~ )4 t~ � E.-. Hao asp r°'n `3 Z > •� o0 0 o U 0 4a 0 RI U 3 4 0 co 0COan 9-1 ed ' 1C Hco cu r44.0 W aa 3E � EN �•� g {y U etr aJ .,i 4f 0 >- Wa) CO '0 o 11214- = k .a0 =O ), o ° o�� oa `' oZ lig j.... UmU3AqVV y>•• CC E CC Li ea ' o xZ m - n 0a °' O :CUV • O CWy vi ; c v 411i •T-1 VI 5.4 • — " 0 ra •c ace v .� O co) O cu a �� w 44 O V LU m u o 0 Z ] OQ a o -o :: 1... IL,' W - E H Cl)• •� c RI W Q 4-1 WCl cr) Cf) C1 O {! =O Z � 1••• S G o ,. >. 3 aa. 4.1 ate > d, c Q M ..i.r al —� a) O ,, VW `° � ''i g 4 0 F=- 7 U) W a E --I 4a LU E$ 4 N o oX. A V -IU "°ra u. els .0 0 O �' w 3 R Z v .0 al v z Z a `�' ... 4n Z r-1 H I1 E Q Ial~ Uj N d a, s a. •'-f u a '= j a Cl). u� U u t Z .R a) O .� m co C . .0_ b" O 4) .n cc) •,i /.% H y� O a? 3 $.a Cl .0 >a M a co 0 � .0 O a) C V O cos •"Cj U C •.-I 4- Y Z = ea Mr a) C 4-I E _> W C O v p • �; a �i�r -Y a"C 3 a) C I a. Q 0 v, ro a1 4a 0 U CT-, al .0 0 N O a) rq los fa 4 mum ..0 0 $4 a) .1.) 111111.11U 34 a 0 44 W 0 411 E oE � 4a 0. 0 3�. COC C14 b'"' 0 •'� U Z �• FW- .O .0 O to Z ' . . • A E-1 3?1 113•n O i X Z 'n C x 1:3 ta a F— ^ v' u U H _ UU 0 c. V a 0.ca3 3a a) O • Z a) .44� rU,1 O v' 0 ci a �2 8 , ,_., okW <v U C • j OWZ W g Q Q ~ a •° 0 LER W Z E H N •n G W D . C a) a) I= O H > v ... a, to W01 2 e4 O a.. ,d rt, co „, ami F. C a� rUi ^� O 1:6W O it. Q eo •n c CQ a) v _Z .� ,O c oo 4.) .� E 3 O V = a E-1O 3-- 5 Q' 4'' X v. w wE $4 a) a 0 c U Z d aj • A ra 4 E 0 a a '• wO c ) •,- u Z Z a N Z ' W W O C~ Q E V a rd w E ' E m c > •r > c $4 a) c •P a� •.-1 u O - •� RS 0•� a•1 0:E m :a 414 C W 3-1 •.UI .1.' m ":5a) w 0 H C 0 U Dial O > O .41 s a ”' Hd 4-1(D• (7) 0a) � U 41 Z _W b�0 •r•.1 U1 r �' O V O 3-i RJ > >1 R3 a) •N WCow 4.1 g '43 tr) eaU' r-1 r-1 U 0 401 •ri a) .S1 r 1 tw 4-1 E-1300000 INNOVATIVE LOCAL LAWAPPLICATION ENFORCEMENTDUE AND AUGCOMMUNITYUST11997 M POLICING PROGRA FORM 3 , BUDGET PAGE Budget period from September 199 7g September throw h Se 199 8 Applicant Agency/Contact Person Address Telephone/Fax Shakopee Police Department 476 Gorman Street Chief Tom Steininger Shakopee, MN 55379 (612) 445- 6 (612) 445-2323133 Budget Catagory Total Budget Amount Salaries $4, 394.26 fringe Benefits Consultants 751. 92 I Travel 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.111111 i Space Costs & Rentals i Consumable Supplies i lease & Purchase equipment I Indirect Costs* i Other Costss Match •ortion of •rant TOTAL $5, 146. 18 * Indirect/Admininstrative Costs are limited to up to 5 percent of total budget cost. EXHiBIT B Page 7 FORM 4 INNOVATIVE LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND COMMUNITY POLICING PROGRAM Please provide a brief justification for the budget items requested. Include an explanation of how costs were determined. Please describe any other additional sources of funds or in-kind support used to support this project. Attach an additional page, if necessary. APPLICANT AGENCY: Shakopee Police Department PROJECT NAME: Face-to-Face (Family Group Conferencing) Police Officer 3% on-duty time $1098. 50 97% on overtime $3295. 76 TOTAL SALARY $4394.26 FRINGE BENEFITS(Itemize) PERA: $2. 41/hr. Health Care: $2. 09/hr. Medicare: $ . 32/hr. ITOTAL $ 751.92 CONSULTANT& PROFESSIONAL SERVICES(Itemize) ITOTAL N/A TRAVEL(mileage may not exceed .27 per mile) TOTAL N/A • li.Y"wIN11N'+IMMwuvillttr.w Page 8 EXH IBIT B SPACE COSTS AND RENTAL(Itemize) TOTAL N/A CONSUMABLE SUPPLIES(Itemize) TOTAL LEASE AND PURCHASE EQUIPMENT(Itemize) ITOTAL N/A INDIRECT/ADMINISTRATIVE COST(See allowable activity description) Approved Rate:5% of total budget cost This will be our match portion of the grant. ' TOTAL N/A - OTHER COSTS(Itemize) ITOTAL N/A GRAND TOTAL $ 5, 146 . 18 * The cost of operating and maintaining facilities,depreciation, and administrative salaries are examples of the type of cost that are usually treated as"indirect or adminstrative cost". 4.YIMINIINYMMMIMNIIIIf7�AR• EXHIBIT B Page 9 -W/L) Cf , CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMORANDUM Memo to: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan, Parks and Recreation Director Re: Naming a park after George F. Muenchow Date: September 23, 1997 INTRODUCTION At the June 17, 1997 City Council Meeting, Councilor Burl Zorn suggested the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board consider naming a park after former Parks and Recreation Director George Muenchow. Councilor Zorn did not make his recommendation in a form of a motion,therefore,there may, or may not be, a consensus among Council members to name a park after Mr. Muenchow. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board did discuss Councilor Zorn's request at it's September 22, 1997 Meeting. BACKGROUND In rare situations,the City has been known to name a public facility after a person who made a significant impact or contribution to the quality of life in the community. One person who may be worthy of such recognition is former Shakopee Community Recreation Director George F. Muenchow. Mr. Muenchow served as Director of Recreation and Parks for the City of Shakopee for 34 years. During George's tenure,he guided much of the City's park,trail and open space development and facilitated hundreds of community recreation programs and community education activities. Attached to this memo is a bibliography of Mr. Muenchow's accomplishments. On occasions,the City has named some of its parks after various individuals. For example: Huber Park(Edward Huber), John P. Wermerskirchen Park(formerly known as Hiawatha Park), Holmes Park(Thomas Holmes) and Stans Park(Maurice Stans). In each case, these individuals made significant contributions to the community which former City Councils believed were deserving of naming park after them. POTENTIAL PARKS Staff did not have a particular park in mind to be named after Mr. Muenchow. However, the following list of parks and/or park facilities are possibilities. • Rename Killarney Park(3.I acres on Tyrol Drive) George F. Muenchow Park. • Rename Deer View Acres Park(6 acres on Norton Drive) George F. Muenchow Park. • Rename Eaglewood Park(21 acres of prime swamp land in the Eaglewood Development) George F. Muenchow Park. • Name one of the two new parks identified in the East Deans Lake (PUD) Development as George F. Muenchow Park. These parks may not be ready for any type of dedication for two or more years. • Name the new ballfields next to the Shakopee Community Center as George F. Muenchow Fields ALTERNATIVES 1. Rename Killarney Park(3.I acres on Tyrol Drive) George F. Muenchow Park. 2. Rename Deer View Acres Park(6 acres on Norton Drive) . 3. Rename Eaglewood Park(21 acres of prime swamp land in the Eaglewood Development). 4. Name one of the two new parks identified in the East Deans Lake (PUD) Development as George F. Muenchow Park. These parks may not be ready for any type of dedication for two or more years. 5. Name the new ball fields next to the Shakopee Community Center as George F. Muenchow Fields 6. Do nothing. PRAB RECOMMENDATION On September 22, 1997,the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board passed a motion stating"if it is the desire of the City Council to name a park or park facility after former parks and recreation director George Muenchow, it should name the new ballfield complex next to the Shakopee Community Center as George F. Muenchow Fields." The PRAB did not think it was a good idea to change the name of an existing park. ACTION REQUESTED If the City Council wishes to name a park after George Muenchow, it should, by motion, offer and move to adopt a resolution naming the ball fields next to the Shakopee Community Center as George F. Meunchow Fields. Council may also want to set a date to hold a special park naming ceremony and invite Mr. Muenchow's family and the public. Offer Resolution No. 4758, A Resolution naming the ball fields next to the Shakopee Community Center as George F. Muenchow Fields, and move for its adoption. Offer a motion to hold a special ceremony to unveil the new name of the ball fields on Wednesday, October 22, 1997 at 4:30 p.m. at the site. C .774/11/.." /11) Mark i. McQuillan Parks and Recreation Director RESOLUTION NO. 4758 A RESOLUTION NAMING THE BALL FIELDS NEXT TO THE SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY CENTER AS GEORGE F. MUENCHOW FIELDS WHEREAS: The City of Shakopee shall recognize its first Parks and Recreation Director George F. Muenchow, who served the community for 34 years until his retirement on December 31, 1990, by naming the ball fields next to the Shakopee Community Center in his honor; and WHEREAS: During George F. Muenchow's tenure as Parks and Recreation Director,he guided the development of many of the City's existing parks and recreation facilities and facilitated hundreds of community recreation programs and community education activities; and WHEREAS: George F. Muenchow's contributions to the community extended beyond the realm of his job as he assisted in the development of Murphy's Landing, chaired the 1976 Bicentennial Celebration, Shak-O-Valley Days and Scott-Hennepin Parks Advisory Board and is a past-president of the Shakopee Rotary Club, Chamber of Commerce and Church Councils; and WHEREAS: George F. Muenchow professional achievements in the parks and recreation field was widely acknowledged by his peers thereby, bestowing upon him the profession's highest State award,the prestigious Clifton E. French Distinguish Service Award in 1984; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota officially name the ball fields next to the Shakopee Community Center as the George F. Muenchow Fields. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared by:The City of Shakopee,129 South Holmes Street,Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 6C1(W1 card '{d NOMINATION OF GEORGE F. MUENCHOW FOR M.R.P.A. DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD Nominated By: Mark McQuillan October, 1984 Facts about George F. Muenchow Age: 56 Family: Wife - Ardyth Children - Eric, Kurt, Todd, Kristen PROFESSIONAL PREPARATION George F. Muenchow obtained a Bachelor of Science in Economics from the University of Minnesota Business School in 1954. In 195,3 he received a Master of Education Degree in Park & Recreation Administration from the University of Minnesota College of Education. George has attended numerous Great Lakes and MRPA Conferences & Workshops over the years. LENGTH OF SERVICE TO PROFESSION George has been a member of the Scott County Park Advisory Board, Murphy- Hanrehan Park Advisory Board, and Scott-Hennepin Park Advisory Board since its inception in 1970. George has been the Director of Shakopee Community Services since 1957. SERVICE TO COMMUNITY/AGENCY The Shakopee Community Services Board, which is jointly sponsored by School District #720 and the City of Shakopee, was instituted in 1954 and ever since has attempted to be of service to the citizens of this community in helping them to fulfill their lives through the involvement of positive leisure time activities. At the present time areas of responsibility include: Community Education, Adult Education, Recreation and Park Administration. In 1957, this Board saw fit to hire a full-time Director. George F. Muenchow was selected from the field of applicants for this position in the Spring of 1957. In those early years, Shakopee was a city of 5,200 population with 4 park areas, one public school building, and a minimum of community recreational opportuni- ties. The community now has, under the direction of George Muenchow, nine community parks, miles of park trails, five public school buildings with a population of approximately 12,000 and a modern progressive recreational program. Ilee'e#°1 r r'' ....,,•''''' � George's contributions to the community are not just limited to Shakopee. • For example: George is a Board member of the Scott-Hennepin Counties Park Advisory Board. in which he was instrumental in the development of the Scott County Park's Master Plan, and gave special attention to the acquisition of the Spring Lake Park site in Central Scott County, a 344 acre tract of land on Spring Lake and Prior Lake. George has always had a very strong interest and hand in the development of the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, a living memorial museum on 400 acres depicting life in the mid 19th century. George F. Muenchow is truly committed to making Shakopee a great place - to live. He chaired the America Revolution Bicentennial Celebration, and the committee responsible for conducting Shakopee's annual celebration, Shak-O-Valley Days. He was an officer and active member of three school bond referendum committees in conjunction with school facility development. He played a key role in the Minnesota Valley Fine Arts Association's sponsorship of various art activities including two concerts by the Minnesota Orchestra. In areas of public relations George has written a weekly column in the Shakopee Valley News (local community newspaper) for approximately 20 years, and conducts a half hour live radio program Shakopee mornings at a local restaurant for the past 3 years. There is apparent community satisfaction with Shakopee's Park and Recreation system for which George is directly responsible. An in-depth Park and Recreation • survey was taken in 1975 and again in 1980 with a 61% response of strong satis- faction indicating a positive degree of approval. George 's 1984 budget responsibility is: Shakopee Community Services - S 133,000 Municipal Swimming Pool - 43.000 ff , SERVICE TO MINNESOTA RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION • iw George has been a member of MRPA for 23 years. serving as its President in 1973. He also served two terms as Treasurer of MRPA. He has served on numerous other boards and committees such as Conference. Ethics, etc. He has been a member of the MRP Foundation 3oard since 1973, serving as Secretary, Treasurer, and President. Under George 's direction, Shakopee has hosted 10 MRPA State Softball Tournaments and approximately 20 District Tournaments n4 the past ten years. AFFILIATIONS WITH OTHER PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS Shakopee Rotary Club Member (Past President) Metropolitan Association of Park & Recreation Administrators Member Former Member of "old" Association of Suburban Recreation Executives (Past President) Minnesota Community Education Association Member League of Municipalities Member National Recreation & Park Association Member Shakopee Chamber of Commerce Board Member Scott County Historical Society Member University of Minnesota "M" Club Church affiliation: Christian. Member of Christ Lutheran Church. Past President . past elder, past Sunday school superintendent, Sunday school teacher, former youth leader locally, statewide, & nationally. • fi--fiete7. t wce '(- a Data for George F. Muenchow (pronounced Munch chow) Professional •Graduate of the University of Minnesota with a M. Ed. Degree in Parks and Recreation Administration •Hired as the first Director of Shakopee Community Parks and Recreation in 1957 to develop and administer leisure time activities program to 5200 residents. •Retired on December 31, 1990 after 33 years as Director which saw the program grow to serve 12,000 residents and served over 28,000 participants who utilized 12 parks, miles of park trails, a swimming pool and water-slide complex and a modern, progressive recreational and educational program. He will be honored at a public reception on Sunday, January 27 from 1-3pm at the Shakopee Senior High School . •Member of Minnesota Parks and Recreation Association for 33 years serving on various committees and holding various elected offices. He received the group's Distinguished Service Award in 1984 . •Member of Minnesota Parks and Recreation Foundation Board since 1973 and has held various offices and committee positions. •Member of National Recreation and Parks Association -Member of the League of Municipalities •Member of Minnesota Community Education Association •Member of Scott County Parks Advisory Board •Member of Murphy-Hanrehan Park Advisory Board •Member of Scott-Hennepin Parks Advisory Board •Wrote weekly "Leisure Ledger" column for the Shakopee Valley News for 21 years which equals 1,096 columns. •Hosted numerous recreation and leisure-focused programs on the local Shakopee radio station. Community and Civic Activities •Chaired Shakopee's Bicentennial celebration in 1976. •Chaired Shakopee's Annual civic celebration, Shak-O-Valley / - % Days. •Active on past school board referendum committees in conjunction with school facility development •Senior Active member of Shakopee Rotary Club •Member of Shakopee Chamber of Commerce •Member of Scott County Historical Society, active in developing Murphy's Landing •Member of University of Minnesota "M" Club •Active in his church, having served in such capacities as Board President, Elder, Sunday School teacher and superintendent and youth leader on the local, statewide and national levels. � y. G. ).J . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan, Parks and Recreation Director Subject: Blacktopping Lions Park Outdoor Hockey Rink Date: September 24, 1997 INTRODUCTION The Shakopee Hockey Association and Shakopee Lions Club would like to blacktop one of the two outdoor hockey rinks at Lions Park. This would enable in-line skaters to use the rink during summer months to play roller hockey and/or pleasure skate. The rink will be used for ice hockey during the winter months. The rink they wish to blacktop is the site of the former Valley Ice Arena(bubble). BACKGROUND The estimated cost to asphalt one hockey skating rink in Lions Park is about$15,000. The Shakopee Hockey Association and Lions Club have agreed to pay the entire cost to blacktop the hockey rink. The hockey boards at this location are rotted beyond repair and were removed by the Public Works Department last week. So far,the City has spent several thousands of dollars in clean up costs at that location(removing the old boards, asphalt and toxic materials). The cost to replace the hockey boards will range anywhere from $5,000 to $6,000 just for materials. FUNDING The construction of new hockey boards at Lions Park is not a budgeted item. The Public Works Department has $1000 budgeted for minor repairs on all outdoor rinks. Therefore, Council must decide if it wishes to fund the replacement of hockey boards at Lions Park, and if so, how it wants to fund the new boards. Public Works Director Bruce Loney indicated there is $5,000 of unused trail re-hab funds available in his budget. This would bring the total to $6,000 of available funding from the maintenance budget. Another option is to use funds ($6,000) from the Park Reserve Fund for this project. Anything beyond that amount should be absorbed by the Shakopee Hockey Association. CONSTRUCTION The Shakopee Hockey Association is willing to construct the hockey rink themselves using volunteers. This eliminates the need of using Public Works Employees who are busy trying to catch up on other projects which have been delayed this summer due to inclement weather. Naturally, we would require the rink to be constructed in a fashion so it safe to use and not a burden to maintain. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept the contribution by the Shakopee Hockey Association and Lions to asphalt the outdoor hockey rink at Lions Park and authorize construction of new hockey boards with funding to be allocated from the Public Works Maintenance Fund not to exceed $6,000. 2. Accept the contribution by the Shakopee Hockey Association and Lions to asphalt the outdoor hockey rink at Lions Park and authorize construction of new hockey boards with funding to be allocated from the Park Reserve Fund not to exceed $6,000. 3. Table for further information from staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends either alternative#1 or#2. ACTION REQUESTED Move to graciously accept the contribution by the Shakopee Hockey Association and the Shakopee Lions Club to asphalt the outdoor hockey rink at Lions Park and to allow the Shakopee Hockey Association to erect new hockey boards in Lions Park with funding for materials to be allocated from the Fund not to exceed $6,000. Mark J. McQuillan Parks and Recreation Director 3500 Fifth Street Towers , 0 DOHERTY 2800 Minnesota World Trade Center 1401 New York Avenue,N.W. 2370 One Tabor Center RUMBLBLE150 South Fifth Street 30 East Seventh Street Suite 1100 1200 Seventeenth Street E BUTT BMinneapolis,Minnesota 55402-4235 Saint Paul,Minnesota 55101-4999 Washington,D.C.20005 Denver,Colorado 80202-5823 & ER Telephone(612)340-5555 Telephone(612)291-9333 Telephone(202)393-2554 Telephone(303)572-6200 FAX(612)340-5584 FAX(612)291-9313 FAX(202)393-3131 FAX(303)572-6203 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION Attorneys at Law Writer's direct dial number. 612/340-5571 Reply to Minneapolis office October 2, 1997 Mr. Michael Leek City Planner City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 Shakopee City Council - City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Re: Post Comment Analysis of Environmental Assessment Worksheet CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division, City of Shakopee Shiely Quarry Expansion Dear Mr. Leek and City Council Members: The City has distributed for comment an Environmental Assessment Worksheet ('EAW") in the above-referenced matter in connection with CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division's proposal for the western relocation of its existing limestone quarry in the City of Shakopee. The existing quarry has been in operation at its current location since 1961. The proposal for relocation of quarrying operations entails future site preparation, resource removal, processing, reclamation and end use development. As set forth in the EAW which includes, among other things,the results of the detailed studies and analyses conducted by Barr Engineering Company("Barr"), and as set forth in the September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, substantial evidence in the record demonstrates that the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. Thus, in light of this evidence in the record which has not been refuted, there is no need for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") in connection with the proposed project. This letter outlines the legal standards and applicable case law which govern a Responsible Governmental Unit's ("RGU") determination of whether an EIS is required under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act("MEPA"). For this EAW, the City is the RGU. As explained below, the . DOHERTY RUMBLE vL BUTLER TIER Mr. Michael Leek PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATR N Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 2 four mandatory factors which govern the RGU's decision as to the need for an EIS establish that, based on substantial evidence in the record, an EIS is not required in this case. MEPA Requires the Preparation of an EIS for Only those Projects with the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects MEPA requires that governmental bodies consider only the significant environmental consequences of a project. Iron Rangers for Responsible Ridge Action v. Iron Range Resources ("Iron Rangers"), 531 N.W.2d 874, 880(Minn. Ct. App. 1995)(emphasis added). Thus, an EIS shall be ordered for only those projects which have the potential for significant environmental effects. Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subp. 1 (emphasis added);No Power Line, Inc. v. Minnesota Environmental Quality Council, 262 N.W.2d 312, 323 (Minn. 1977) (citing Lockhart v. Kenops, 927 F.2d 1028, 1033 (8th Cir. 1991)). In other words, almost every human activity adversely impacts the environment, but Minnesota's environmental protection statutes regulate only those activities or proposed activities which will materially adversely affect the environment. State by Schaller v. County of Blue Earth, 563 N.W.2d 260, 264-265 (Minn. 1997) (interpreting standard for materiality under MERA). MEPA expressly contemplates that certain projects may impact the environment to a degree, but that such impacts are not necessarily significant. Therefore, those impacts which do not result in significant impact to the environment do not necessitate the preparation of an EIS. The proposed project in this case will not result in any significant impacts; therefore, no EIS is required. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, an RGU is required to consider four factors: 1. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects; 2. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; 3. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and 4. The extent to which the environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or of EIS's previously prepared on similar projects. Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subp. 7. The Environmental Quality Board ("EQB") has declared that these four factors must be considered by the RGU. Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 880; see also, National Environmental Policy Act("NEPA"), 42 U.S.C. §4321, et seq.)(term"significantly" requires consideration of both context and intensity). 40 C.F.R. § 1508.27. . DOHERTY RUMBLE & BUTLER Mr. Michael Leek PROFESSIONAL ASSOC!AT ION Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 3 In analyzing the four factors,there must be substantial evidence that the proposed project will significantly impair the environment; otherwise, MEPA does not apply and no EIS may be required. Reserve Mining Co. v. Herbst, 256 N.W.2d 808, 828-829 (Minn. 1977)(emphasis added). Under the Four Factors, the Substantial Evidence in the Record Demonstrates an EIS is Not Required under MEPA 1. The type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects. The information in the EAW preliminarily indicated that no EIS should be required. Moreover,the extensive supplemental information in Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments confirmed that no EIS is required. In short, the substantial evidence in the record conclusively shows that the type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects as a result of the project do not mandate an EIS. As stated above,the modeling and analyses performed by Barr, which establish that there will be no significant environmental impacts, have not been refuted by any specific evidence. Prior to the analyses, the model used by Barr was closely scrutinized by experts within the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") and determined to be correct. The only questions raised regarding potential environmental impacts were based on speculation, what in typical land use parlance are usually referred to as"concerns"of commenters. All questions raised by such speculative comments have been satisfactorily answered as set forth in Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments. Specifically, the following evidence supports the conclusion that the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects associated with the project do not require an EIS. • Comments from the DNR. 1. Overall,the hydrologic conditions of the surface water features of the project should improve with the proposed operation. (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 3). 2. It is not recommended that an EIS be prepared because of the absence of potential for significant environmental effects. (July 2, 1997 DNR Comment Letter). . DOHERTY RUMBLE & BUTLER Mr. Michael Leek PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 4 • Issues raised by the Scott County Environmental Health Department have all been resolved. 1. Potential impact on groundwater elevations near Dean's Lake. Barr's detailed studies show the Shiely pumping will not affect Dean's Lake since the surficial aquifer, not the Prairie du Chien aquifer, impact Dean's Lake. (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 2). 2. Potential infiltration from the east quarry into the Prairie du Chien aquifer. Extensive groundwater modeling conducted by Barr shows that most of the infiltrated water will be immediately recaptured by dewatering the west quarry and that keeping the east quarry water level slightly lower will permit the recapture of infiltrated water. (Id at 1). 3. The Pearson Quarry. Barr's studies confirm there will be no impact on the exhausted Pearson quarry situated to the northeast of the proposed project. (Id. at 1). 4. Potential infiltration of water from the Prairie du Chien aquifer into the Jordan aquifer. Barr's modeling shows any infiltration would be minimal and that most would be recaptured by the west quarry during late development with the remainder being out of the capture zone of the City wells. (Id.at 1). 5. Post-quarrying condition potentially resulting in City wells drawing water from west quarry. Barr's modeling confirms that the anticipated loss from the quarry to the wells would be less than 1%of the City's total appropriation and that this minimal amount could be successfully mitigated through mining reduction or lining of the western wall and floor of the quarry if necessary. (Id,at 2). 6. Potential impact on groundwater recharge areas for some of Shakopee's wells. Barr's modeling confirms that the project will have a very minor impact on the calculated wellhead protection zone of City wells number 4 and 5. As shown in the figures attached to the Response to EAW Comments,the 10-year zone will shift slightly to the south and widen slightly during the quarry operation. Following quarry operation, the zone will return to its present configuration. The area included is not large, is not developed, and does not represent a significant environmental risk. . I DOHERTY RUMBLE & BUTLER �v Mr. Michael Leek PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 5 • Questions raised by the Metropolitan Council regarding the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility("WWTF")have been resolved. If Shiely were to cease operations entirely,the greatest increase in water levels at the WWTF would occur. (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 5). However, if the east quarry water level is lowered slightly, the impact would be sufficiently mitigated to the satisfaction of the Met Council as explained in additional meetings with the Met Council after the EAW was prepared. (Id). • Questions from Conklin Company, Inc. regarding potential vibrations from operations have been answered. The project has at all times been proposed with the express understanding that a program of seismic monitoring at the new quarry would be in place to ensure that maximum permitted particle acceleration levels are not exceeded so that no significant impacts will occur. (Id.). The City may wish to impose such seismic limitations as part of the conditional use permit ("CUP") just as anticipated traffic flow issues and other issues are commonly addressed through the CUP process. (Id at 6). See Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 884 (RGU is obligated to consider CUP conditions imposed by a regulating authority because such conditions are a form of ongoing public regulation as defined under Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subp. 7(C)). • Valley Green Business Park's questions regarding proposed operations, permits, land use, hydrology, and related issues have been answered. Barr's detailed studies resolve all questions raised by Valley Green Business Park and demonstrate there is no potential for significant environmental impact (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 7-17). Moreover, there is no evidence in the record to refute Barr's detailed, substantiated conclusions. See id. Mere speculative factors, unlikely or remote contingencies, and imprecise, unreliable data are insufficient bases for an EIS. Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 881; Reserve Mining, 256 N.W.2d at 829, 840. For all of these reasons, the substantial evidence in the record demonstrates that the type, extent, and reversibility of the environmental effects associated with the project is not sufficient to require an EIS. ^ I DOHERTY RUMTBT F & BUTLER`LR �r Mr. Michael Leek PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 6 2. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects. The various stages and cumulative effects of the proposed quarry expansion will not result in significant environmental effects for the reasons discussed above and those outlined in the EAW. Moreover, there are no other anticipated future projects which would alter this analysis. Finally, because remote and unlikely predictions of future projects are insufficient as a matter of law to require an EIS, the second factor of the test also indicates that no EIS should be required. See Reserve Mining, 256 N.W.2d at 829. 3. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. Ongoing regulation by the RGU or other governmental authority may mitigate the environmental impact of a project to the extent that there will be no need for an EIS. For example, an EIS is unnecessary where the RGU requires environmental studies relating to water quality, rare plants, archaeology, and forest fragmentation before the issuance of a CUP. Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 877-78. Similarly, an RGU is obligated to consider CUP conditions imposed by a regulating authority because such conditions are a form of ongoing public regulation as defined under Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subp. 7(C). I L at 884. Where state law and local permit controls already regulate a project with respect to mitigation of ground water and surface water impacts, such facts weigh heavily in favor of a finding of no significant impact to the environment making an EIS unnecessary. Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 881 (citing Lockhart v. Kenops, 927 F.2d 1028, 1033 (8th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 863 (1991)). Where it is a requirement that a project be preceded by monitoring as prescribed by the DNR, the PCA, and the MEQB, a determination that no EIS is required because there is no potential for significant environmental effects is proper. Minnesota Public Interest Research Group v. Minnesota Environmental Quality Council 1975, 237 N.W.2d 375, 383 (Minn. 1975) (issue was whether EIS was required prior to construction of exploratory copper-nickel mine 20 miles south of Boundary Waters Canoe Area). The Shiely project will be subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority in various respects. To wit, the following permits and approvals are required for the project: water appropriation(DNR); air permit(MPCA); SDS/NPDES storm water(MPCA);conditional use permit (City); and rezoning(City). (EAW, p. 7). In particular, the groundwater monitoring(and mitigation response, if necessary)for the proposal will provide substantial protection from environmental harm, and it will deliver to the City a valuable data base for its wellhead protection program. Approximately one month ago, the Minnesota Court Appeals confirmed once again the established principle that mitigation is indeed a key criterion for an RGU to consider in determining the need for an EIS. White v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 567 N.W.2d 724, 780 . DOHERTY RUMBLE & BUTLER Mr. Michael Leek PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIO\' Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 7 (Mum. Ct. App. 1997). Shiely's submission and the Barr analysis set forth a range of monitoring and water level choices to which Shiely is amenable. Because ongoing regulation of the Shiely project by various governmental bodies is a significant component of the proposal before the City Council, the mitigating features and oversight over the project demonstrate that there will be no significant environmental effects. 4. The extent to which the environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or of EIS's previously prepared on similar projects. The EAW and the subsequent comments have resulted in extensive mitigating measures which will serve to significantly control any environmental effects associated with the project. Moreover, the model and analyses employed by Barr were founded in large part on earlier analyses undertaken with respect to an AUAR addressing impacts on the Savage Fen and Boiling Springs. Those analyses, as is the case with the analyses incorporated in the EAW, were thoroughly reviewed and then approved by the DNR, the dominant agency with expertise relevant to ground water and surface water in the State of Minnesota. Specifically, in addition to the ongoing regulatory oversight described above, extensive groundwater monitoring, regrading work, landscaping, revegetation, water quality monitoring, and vibration monitoring are part of Shiely's project proposal. (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 17). These extensive mitigating measures demonstrate that the fourth factor also militates against an EIS in this case. See Audubon Society v. Dailey, 977 F.2d 428, 435-36 (8th Cir. 1992) (agency may base its decision of"no significant impact" on mitigating measures to be undertaken as long as more than mere vague statements of good intentions). Conclusion The Shiely Company and its parent, CAMAS, Inc., are committed to operating in an environmentally responsible manner. They have an established history of conducting business operations from a standpoint of cooperation and mutual benefit, rather than from an environmentally antagonistic approach. This is a major reason that CAMAS, Inc. has become a respected name in the industry and a trusted business partner in the communities in which it works. Consistent with Shiely's environmental philosophy, the proposed quarry expansion project will not have significant environmental effects. An analysis of the four factors based on the substantial evidence in the record, including the detailed studies of Barr Engineering Company(which have not been refuted), demonstrates that an EIS should not be required under established Minnesota law. In addition, it is important to keep in mind that the Shiely/CAMAS quarry relocation will develop very slowly over the next 15 years with ample opportunity to monitor and mitigate the two issues of • DOHERTY RUMBT F. & BUTLER Mr. Michael Leek Shakopee City Council PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION October 2, 1997 Page 8 greatest concern—the ground vibration and the groundwater. The additional information generated during monitoring will add volumes to the City's understanding of the groundwater in this part of the City and will contribute to the City's wellhead protection program. Very truly yours, David C David C. Sellergren DCS:JEA:sam:530497 cc: Jim Thomson, City Attorney Bob Bieraugel, CAMAS Nels Nelson, Barr Kennedy Pillsbury Center /Y. Kennedy 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612)337-9300 tcicphonc Graven (612)337-9310 fax CHAR T ER ED e-mail attys@keruiedy-graven.com JAMES J.THOMSON Anosney at Law Direct Dial(612)337-9209 October 6, 1997 Mayor Jeff Henderson and City Councilmembers City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee MN 55379-1376 BY FACSIMILE - 445-6718 RE: EIS for CAMAS/Shiely Proposed Project Dear Mayor Henderson and Councilmembers: I am writing to explain the legal issues involved in your decision as to whether an environmental impact statement (EIS) is necessary in connection with the CAMAS/Shiely proposal to begin quarrying operations at a site adjacent to its existing operations (the "CAMAS Project"). Although this letter considers the October 2, 1997 letter to you from Mr. David Sellergren, an attorney for CAMAS, it is not intended as a point-by-point response to his comments. Rather, this letter is an effort to provide advice regarding your responsibilities and options in this matter. The City of Shakopee is the responsible government unit ("RGU") for the CAMAS Project. Based on the EAW, it does not appear that the CAMAS Project falls within the category of project that triggers a mandatory EIS. One of the City's responsibilities, therefore, is to determine whether a discretionary EIS should be ordered, keeping in mind that the purpose of an EAW is to evaluate the need for, and not to replace, an EIS. Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. Minnesota Dep't of Aeric., 528 N.W.2d 903, 909 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995), pet. for rev. denied (Minn. April 27, 1995). Under the rules established by the state Environmental Quality Board, a discretionary EIS must be ordered if a proposed project "has the potential for significant environmental effects." Minn. R. 4410.2000; see also Minn. Stat. § 116D.04, subd. 2. In determining whether such a potential exists, an RGU must consider the following factors: 1. the type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects; 2. the cumulative potential effect of related or anticipated future projects; DJGi31260 sH155-23 b/Z 3OtVd 0tC6GEEZt9°CI Nantt219 'S AC3NN311:woad L0 SI 46-90-.I.0O Mayor Jeff Henderson and City Councilmembers October 6, 1997 Page 2 3. the extent to which environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and 4. the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as the result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or of EIS's previously prepared on similar projects. Minn. R. 4410.1700, subd. 7. A city council's decision about the need for an EIS will not be overturned by a court unless it is "arbitrary and capricious." Iron Rangers for Responsible Ridge Action v. Iron Range Resources, 531 N.W.2d 874, 880 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). Judicial application of this standard of review is contingent on the City's creation of a "clear and complete record" of the decision. Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.20 at 880 (quoting Swanson v. City of Bloomington, 421 N.W.2d 307, 313 (Minn. 1988)). The council's decision must be based on substantial evidence in the record,which consists of the EAW, the comments submitted in response to the EAW, the responses to those comments, and other materials available to the council at the time that the decision is made. Id Trout Unlimited, 528 N.W.2d at 907-08. An RGU's decision would be arbitrary and capricious if the RGU: (a) relied on factors not intended by the legislature; (b) entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem; (c) offered an explanation that runs counter to the evidence; or (d) reached a decision that was so implausible that it could not be explained as a difference in view or the result of the RGU's expertise. White v_ Minnesota llen't of Natural Resources, 567 N.W.2d 724, 731 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). Resolution of technical disputes or uncertainties is to be left to the RGU's discretion. Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 881. Courts have held that it is arbitrary to ignore planned or likely future projects when evaluating the need for an EIS. Trout Unlimited, 528 N.W.2d at 908. The council should therefore consider the geographic area in which the CAMAS Project is located, and base its EIS decision in part on what other development is likely or planned in that area. Similarly, courts have held that it is arbitrary to defer environmental analysis to a later stage of the permitting process. Id. at 908. This is not to say that the City's conditional use permit process cannot serve a role in establishing mitigation through"ongoing public regulatory authority"under Minn. R.4410.1700, subd. 7. Rather, it means that the EAW/EIS process is the avenue by which the potential need for mitigation should be determined, and the CUP is one of the appropriate ways in which that mitigation can be implemented. The council should therefore consider whether an EIS is necessary to more completely define the scope of the mitigation of the CAMAS Project's environmental impacts. The council should further evaluate the risk that the CUP and other government permits will not adequately address those issues. This evaluation should be done with the idea in mind that mitigation must be "more than vague statements of good intentions." DJG131260 SH155-23 6/E 30t1d 0I E6GEEZ t 9'C I N3Ati219 '8 ACaNN3MWO`c13 80,9 G6-90-1.3O Mayor Jeff Henderson and City Councilmembers October 6, 1997 Page 3 Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 887 (quoting Audobon Soc'v v. Dailey, 977 F.2d 428, 435-36 (8th Cir. 1992)). In my opinion, a court would uphold your decision in this matter regardless of whether that decision is to require or not to require an EIS. The EAW, the comments to it, and the responses to those comments, establish a substantial record upon which the council may base its decision. Given that this record addresses many, if not all, of the environmental concerns raised to date, the council would be within its discretion to determine that no EIS is necessary. On the other hand, the record identifies a number of potentially significant environmental matters, the resolution of which you may decide should not be deferred until later in the permitting process. The council would be equally within its discretion to determine that an EIS is necessary to more comprehensively evaluate whether these concerns can indeed be ameliorated during additional permitting, and if so, how this could best be accomplished. Sincerely, 1k� • �..► J. es •omson DJG:sms cc: Michael Leek Mark McNeill A7G131260 SH.S5-23 b/b 30Vd 0 t EBLEEZ t 9'C I N3AVNO '8 AO3NN3M'WO213 80,91 G6-90-Z3O CITY OF SHAKOPEE PlIaLLI PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 1030 EAST FOURTH AVENUE SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379 612-445-1988 October 7 , 1997 R. Michael Leek, Shakopee Community Development Director City of Shakopee 129 S. Holmes St . Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: CAMAS (Shiely) EAW, Declaration on EIS Dear Mr. Leek: On the October 6 meeting agenda for the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission, the CAMAS EAW was listed under the heading: wrapup of CAMAS (Shiely) EAW comments. At the meeting, the Commission noted my October 1 letter, but concluded that the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process by itself would not have sufficient reach to answer all the questions raised about the impact of this project, and the perspective of an EIS was needed. The points on which this conclusion was based are: a) The tendency of pollution to increase. An example being our experience with nitrates, but the concern is not limited to that chemical only. b) The probable limit on future drilling of municipal water supply wells as a result of this project . c) The potential affect on our Wellhead Protection Area under the state mandated Wellhead Protection Program (WHP) , due to the normal groundwater flow being altered by this project. The Utilities Commission requests the Shakopee City Council declare that an EIS is necessary for this project . Sincerely �yours, Gam - / ui Van Hout Utilities Manager Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Robert Bieraugel, Environmental Affairs Manager, CAMAS Inc. The Heart Of Progress Valley OCT- 7-97 TUE 14: 10 P, 02 ELK RIVER /14 �� CONCRETE PRODUCTS ID DIVISION OF TIIE CRETEX COMPANIES, INC. 6550 WEDGWOOD ROAD • P.O. BOX 1660 MAPLE GROVE, MINNESOTA 56311-6660 TELEPHONE (612) 545-7473 • FAX (612) 545-8399 • WATS 1-800-557-7473 October 7, 1997 Mr. Jeff Henderson, Mayor City of Shakopee 519 West 5th Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mayor Henderson: We understand CAMAS/Shiely is seeking the appropriate permits and approvals required to expand their quarry operation in Shakopee. We have had a plant at 7070 Cretex Avenue in Shakopee since 1979,which is adjacent to their operation. We wish to voice our support for CAMAS/Shiely as they pursue the necessary approvals to expand their operation. CAMAS/Shiely, in our opinion, has been a very good neighbor and corporate citizen. They contribute to the community by providing jobs and adding to the local tax base. They also supply materials to the construction industry which also provides an economic impact to the local economy. We purchase materials from CAMAS/Shiely which are used in the production of our products. This expansion would help to ensure we have a reliable, steady supply of materials to support our own manufacturing operation long into the future. We urge you to vote in favor of this expansion for CAMAS/Shiely. If we can be of any assistance in this matter, please contact us at the phone number above. Yours truly, ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS ctAvudiV41(e-a...a_ Larry G. Koeing, P.E. President I.GK/srnj cc: Council Member Jane Dubois Omitigalalgooliziaduat Counoil Member Cletus Link Council 1VMe tuber Robert Sweeney Council Mcmbur Burl Zorn 064.0.6.61. Illiii mama' .wI,,• e64t1.,1 061.0109. FAX 612E 9+uOlM •EOM CO• Ol1M+l A iV4 TE MDCF. 0000611 •w1TO11 CCDWI IWIW• Et DK 601.110• •FIIWIt CIh' cnr•.'rEx ervcRF.TE PIPE, rlu:Cu:ICd,YAUI rtAA9r rnw*RATR` -t rewimdrmitu<:ATim DQET'Al. cAwan ciftr PIWLuclu,LU L IUN HAI:IMMO rAWr, INJECTWN D60ww rurtxce AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ADI 1393 COUNTY ROAD 18 SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379 (612)445-0934 :A; L►`qb. PEAZEZE LINE, INC. Mayor Henderson and City Council Members 10/6/97 City of Shakopee 129 So. Holmes Street Shakopee, MN. 55379 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Prairie Line, Inc. transports large quantities of ground limestone from Superior Minerals Co. in Shakopee to the CertainTeed Corp. plant in Shakopee. This material is produced from the limestone quarried by the Shiely Company. It is my understanding that the Shiely Co. is applying for a permit to expand their quarry in order to continue uninterrupted production. I am sure that the permitting process is very complex. However, the Shiely Company provides materials that are critical to the industrial, construction and transportation businesses in Shakopee. I urge you to consider all of the factors in your decision on the permitting process. erely, Robert F. Hamill President cc: City Council Members City Staff J /su CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)—CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division MEETING DATE: October 7, 1997 ITEM NO.: 14.D.1. Introduction: On September 2, 1997, the City Council tabled CAMAS/Shiely's request for a negative declaration on the need for an EIS for the proposed quarry project on CAMAS/Shiely's western site. Discussion: Notice of the EAW was published in the EQB Monitor on June 2, 1997, as well as in the City's official newspaper. The review and comment period thus officially closed on July 2, 1997. Despite that closing date, and in keeping with past practice, staff has accepted and is responding to comment received after July 2, 1997. Copies of the comment letters that were received have been attached as Exhibit A. Copies of the City's draft responses to those comments have been attached as Exhibit B. The letter of David C. Sellergren, attorney for CAMAS/Shiely is attached hereto as Exhibit C. One of the reviewing agencies, Scott County, recommended that the City order an Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR). The AUAR process is a relatively new process, generally used for the study of impacts from expected development in a generalized area, rather than for a specific project. Valley Green Business Park, through its representatives, has asked that an EIS be ordered. 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. EAWSHIEL/RML 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 following findings: Alternatives: 1. Offer a motion declaring the sufficiency of the EAW, and directing staff to prepare a resolution consistent with that declaration for approval at the Council's October 21, 1997, meeting. 2. Offer a motion declaring the insufficiency of the EAW, ordering the preparation of an EIS, and directing staff to prepare a resolution consistent with that declaration for approval at the Council's October 21, 1997, meeting 3. Offer a motion requiring the preparation of an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR), including the CAMAS/Shiely quarry project, and directing staff to prepare a resolution consistent with that declaration for approval at the Council's October 21, 1997, meeting 4. Table item for specific reasons. Action Requested: Offer and approve a motion removing the item from the table. Offer and approve a motion consistent with the Council's findings, with appropriate direction to staff. / R. Michael Leek Community Development Director EAWSHIEL/RML 2 Exhibit A: Review Letters 13 • ;) / 6 — 77 _eittet.<-10,22 ) / I •• 6e_b12 AVPVEK. 611-3 e-YVta/112-tj p'414 1(/tt'l / *9 71761/74V('tC .CMeZ/t<dlAtil .)(4-(1131T • CITY OF SHAKOPEE 111411 PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 1030 EAST FOURTH AVENUE SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379 612-445-1988 July 1, 1997 '-;UL 2 1991 Michael Leek, Shakopee City Planner ---- ----� City of Shakopee 129 S. Holmes St . Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Shiely EAW, Public Comment Due July 2, 1997 Dear Mr. Leek: The Shiely Company has submitted an EAW to the City of Shakopee as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) and that EAW has been advertised for public comment . The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission is responsible for the municipal water system of the City of Shakopee. Water supply for the Shakopee municipal water system is from various aquifers, and we are interested in seeing that the purity and adequacy of that water supply is not compromised, either now or in the future. We are aware that Mr. Frechette of Scott County has already offered comments on the Shiely EAW, including concerns about groundwater. The Shakopee Public Utilities wishes to endorse Mr. Frechette' s concerns about the potential affects on groundwater, and request that those concerns be addressed on our behalf as well. We do not have a preference on specific administrative structures for having these groundwater concerns addressed, only that they should include the DNR, the Minnesota Department of Health, and other agencies responsible for safeguarding the aquifers. Sincerely yours, Vui= Van Hout Uti ities Manager Shakopee Public Utilities Commission c.c. Al Frechette, Scott County The Heart Of Progress Valley June 30, 1997 The City of Shakopee Attn: Michael Leek 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379-1376 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division Mine Expansion, WSB Project No. 1014.20 Dear Mr. Leek, The purpose of this memo is to raise some of our concerns over the proposed expansion of Shiely's mining operations. As Conklin's facility is immediately adjacent to the proposed mining expansion site, we will experience the greatest vibrations from blasting. Conklin has been at this location since 1971, and provides employment to over 100 employees, many of whom are from the Shakopee community. Our concerns can be summarized as follows: 1. Hazardous chemical spills resulting from vibration damage to chemical storage tanks, up to 30 feet high and 25,000 gallons in size, and associated piping. 2. Fire, explosions, or fuming resulting from spillage of flammable, combustible, and corrosive liquids from the above chemical storage tanks. 3. Heavy objects falling from warehouse storage racks, causing injury or death to employees or visitors, as well as chemical spills and property loss. Our rack storage is approximately 24 feet high, measured to the top of pallet contents. 4. Tipping over of stacked pallets of empty drums and containers, up to 20 feet high, causing injury or death. 5. Tipping over of objects from forklift forks raised up to 20 feet high, causing injury or death to employees or visitors, as well as chemical spills and property loss. 6. Safety of personnel working on ladders and manlifts during detonations. 7. Damage to expensive R&D lab equipment from vibrations caused by explosions. 8. Inaccurate readings on lab equipment due to vibrations, leading to the inability to use lab equipment during detonations. If detonations occur at unexpected times, lab work in progress could be ruined. 9. The possible increase in truck traffic past our facility. Shiely indicates that they could assign the majority of the 195 daily trips expected by year 2000 to Highway 101; however, there is no assurance that this will happen. According to the December 6, 1992 report written by David Braslau Associates, our facility at 551 Valley Park Drive could experience vibrations at around level of 4.59 in/sec if blasting occurs at the extreme western edge of the quarry. This level would exceed U.S. Bureau of Mines guidelines and cause structural damage, according to the report. As a frame of reference, the report states that 0.84 in/sec is clearly noticeable, and a level of 0.04 in/sec is perceptible. Vibrations would be greater for our large vertical chemical storage tanks and 24 foot pallet storage racks, as well as for chemical tanks located on our second story, since they are all situated above ground level. Although the report states that 4.59 in/sec is a very conservative assumption, nothing in the EAW states what the actual vibration levels will be. Conklin Company Inc. 551 Valley Park Drive P.O. Box 155 Shakopee, MN 55379 612/445-6010 S • David Braslau Associates states that vibration levels at our facility will exceed the U.S. Bureau of Mines guidelines, assuming current practices, and recommends that these practices be modified to ensure meeting the guidelines (1997 EAW report, p. 5-1, first paragraph). David Braslau Associates also states that a level of 0.2 in/sec is required to protect sensitive equipment. This would require that blasting occur no closer than 1,272 to 2,906 feet away from our facility, assuming practices specified in Table 5.1 of the EAW. David Braslau Associates also assumed that blasting would progress from east to west over a 10 to 20 year period, allowing Shiely time to use seismic readings at the Conklin and Tsumura facilities to vary blasting procedures. Shiely, however, intends to begin blasting at the far western edge of the new west quarry in the spring of 1998, and progress eastward (p. 12, last paragraph and p. 13, second paragraph). David Braslau Associates specifically recommended periodic seismic readings be taken at Conklin and Tsumura as work progressed westward, for the purpose of controlling vibrations (p. 5-2, second paragraph). Note that there is an error in the May 6, 1997 letter to the City of Shakopee Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator: The quarry expansion will be west of the existing quarry, not east. We are concerned that not enough data has been gathered for Shiely to know exactly what vibrations our facility will experience. There is too much uncertainty expressed in the 1997 EAW. Statements in the EAW assume that vibration levels can be kept under control, but nothing appears to require Shiely to do so. We are concerned that certain assumptions made by David Braslau Associates on December 6, 1992 may no longer be valid, as they were not aware that mining would begin on the far western portion of the west quarry. We request more accurate data on actual vibration levels to expect at our facility. We feel that Shiely should be required to implement practices that will ensure compliance with U.S. Bureau of Mines guidelines, and any other guidelines which may apply, to prevent chemical spills, fires, explosions, hazards to personnel, and damage to our facility and equipment. We further request that Shiely commit to a blasting schedule with reference to time of day, and communicate to our designated personnel should a change in blasting times occur, in order to guard against the ruining of lab work in progress. Finally, we request Shiely to commit to directing the majority of truck traffic away from our facility. Please direct communications regarding this matter to me or Anita Whittington in the Conklin Risk Management department. I can be reached at 445-6010, extension 2252. Sincerely, Bill Polta Environmental Health & Safety Specialist Conklin Company CC: Charles Herbster, Conklin President Bob Hanson, Controller Anita Whittington, Risk Manager Del Audette, Plant Manager CITY OF SHAKOPEE 011111 PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 1030 EAST FOURTH AVENUE SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379 612-445-1988 a 1 0 1997 July 10, 1997 - .� ... .,,,m,., ,W. � ....., Michael Leek, Shakopee City Planner City of Shakopee 129 S. Holmes St . Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Supplement to July 1 Letter on Shiely EAW Dear Mr. Leek: Considering that the close date for public comment was July 2, please consider this letter as a supplement to my July 1 letter commenting on the Shiely EAW. On July 7 the Utilities Commission confirmed that the comments in their July 1 letter did reflect their official position, but they also directed an additional comment be added to more completely represent their concerns. That additional comment is: The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission requests that the future ability of SPUC to drill wells not be affected as a result of the Shiely proposal. Various state agencies have already been informally advised of our intent to drill another city well in 1998, and our formal application for that well permit is now being prepared. Our ability to drill this new well, or future wells, should not be hampered by the Shiely operations. Sincerely yours, oui Van Hout Uti ities Manager Shakopee Public Utilities Commission c.c . Al Frechette, Scott County The Heart Of Progress Valley Metropolita Council S Working for the Region, Planning for the Future August 1, 1997 Environmental Services Mr. Michael Leek Community Development Director ( �_u� jtr��� City of Shakopee l5l�t �� 1" / 129 Holmes Street AUG 4 1997 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., City of Shakopee Shiely Quarry Expansion Metropolitan Council District 5 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 16525-1 Dear Mr. Leek: The Metropolitan Council (Council) staff reviewed the above-referenced EAW and submitted comments to the city on June 20, 1997. Our review at that time concluded that the EAW was complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns, raised no major issues of consistency with Council policies, and preparation of an EIS would not be necessary for regional purposes. Subsequently, Council staff have determined that the proposed project may have a potentially significant system impact upon the Council's Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility(WWTF), located immediately north of the current quarry site. This potential impact was not addressed in the EAW, resulting in our modified recommendation to the City of Shakopee that the document be found incomplete with respect to its consideration of regional concerns. Of particular concern to the Council is the projected rise in Prairie du Chien Group groundwater levels of approximately five to twenty feet at the WWTF site (EAW Figure 2) during early west quarry development, due to introduction of dewatering pump discharge into the (abandoned) east quarry. Such a rise could have the potential for significant environmental effects, if it were to result in the interruption of operation of the WWTF. The Blue Lake WWTF is the second largest wastewater treatment facility in the metropolitan area, currently treating approximately 27 million gallons of wastewater per day. The facility's last expansion, completed in 1993, was designed to resist hydrostatic uplift to a groundwater surface elevation equivalent to the 100-year flood level of the Minnesota River, an elevation of 721.0 feet MSL. The levee around the WWTF has a surface elevation of 725.0 feet which protects it from flooding surface waters. The ground surface within the levee varies from 702.0 to 720.0 feet. When the WWTF was last expanded, it was determined that some of the older structures on the site could be impacted by hydrostatic pressure at the 100-year flood elevation. After reviewing several 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1633 (612)222-8423 Fax 229-2183 TDD/TTY 229-3760 An Equal Opportunity Employer • Mr. Michael Leek August 1, 1997 Page 2 alternatives to maintain groundwater levels within safe limits, the determination was made to install a four-pump dewatering system on-site. The structures of greatest concern are the tunnels between aeration tanks which have a top-of-slab elevation of 697.0 feet. Our current Department of Natural Resources (DNR) water appropriation permit does not allow activation of the dewatering system until groundwater rises above an elevation of 706.0 feet. The groundwater elevation at which the older WWTF structures can reliably sustain hydrostatic pressure without damage is currently under analysis, but is most likely between 700.0 and 706.0 feet. The Minnesota River flood events experienced during 1993 and 1997 both peaked below the projected 100-year flood frequency level, but required activation of the dewatering system. The system did not perform as well as expected and additional study is underway to look at alternatives which will provide additional protection for the structures vulnerable to high groundwater levels. We do not currently have sufficient data to determine the impact on the groundwater levels at the WWTF if the current Shiely facility pumping strategy were to be discontinued. Groundwater levels at the WWTF are influenced by both the Minnesota River, when the elevation exceeds 700.0 feet, and dewatering at the Shiely Quarry. The normal, non-flooding groundwater elevation in the vicinity of the older tunnels is 700.0 feet, with the current Shiely pumping strategy in place. An increase in groundwater level of 5 to 20 feet for an extended period of time, as projected in the EAW, would most likely result in both a need to operate the plant dewatering system continuously, regardless of the river water surface elevation, and the installation of additional structural anchors to WWTF structures to enable them to resist the increased uplift forces. Such a change in the dewatering operation would most likely necessitate a modification of the current DNR water appropriation permit. Additionally, Council staff is currently facilitating the Southwest Metro Groundwater Work Group (SMGWG) comprised of local, regional, and state units of government. The SMGWG is studying the effect of groundwater withdrawals on surface water features and groundwater sustainability in northern Scott and Dakota counties. Annual groundwater withdrawals at the Shiely Quarry exceed all of the groundwater withdrawals for municipal purposes in Scott County. The effect of existing and proposed dewatering activities at the Shiely Quarry on surface water features and groundwater levels in the study area as well as those at the Blue Lake WWTF have not been fully explored. The SMGWG is developing short-term and long-term water supply strategies, and will have recommendations for implementation by November 1997. The Council urges the City of Shakopee to begin discussion with the DNR and Shiely to strive for a balanced project which will reduce the projected potential negative effects on structures, properties, and sensitive environmental features in the vicinity of the quarry site. • • Mr. Michael Leek August 1, 1997 Page 3 The need to retrofit the WWTF to withstand sustained increases in hydrostatic pressures as projected in the EAW could result in a substantial new expense for all metropolitan disposal system users, over and above the expense of modifying and maintaining the current dewatering system in accord with the current Shiely facility pumping strategy. Failure to sufficiently retrofit the WWTF to accommodate resultant increases in hydrostatic pressures could potentially result in environmental impacts of metropolitan significance. The Council requests the City of Shakopee delay its decision on the need for an EIS until the potential impacts of this proposed project on the Blue Lake WWTF can be further investigated by the project proposer. No formal action will be taken by the Council on the EAW at this time. Council staff requests that a meeting be scheduled at the earliest convenience of all affected parties to evaluate the comments contained herein, and determine the scope of further study needed to mitigate potential impacts to the Blue Lake WWTF and incorporate SMGWG strategies. If you have any questions or need further information with respect to these matters,please contact James Larsen, P.E., in the Council's Environmental Planning and Evaluation Department at 602-1159. Sincerely, Helen Boyer Director, Environmental Services Division HB:jl cc: Neil Peterson, Metropolitan Council District 5 Bill Moore, General Manager, Wastewater Services Department Keith Buttleman,Director, Environmental Planning and Evaluation Department Thomas McElveen, Deputy Director, Housing Development and Implementation Carl Schenk, Metropolitan Council Sector Representative Bob Davis, Marcia Honold, James Larsen, Gary Oberts, Judy Sventek, Dil Stachour, and Lynda Voge, Council Staff ItMetropolitan Council Working for the Region, Planning for the Future Environmental Services September 29, 1997 RECIKCCD Mr. Michael Leek a 1997 Community Development Director City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 Re: Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) CAMAS Minnesota,Inc., City of Shakopee Shiely Quarry Expansion Metropolitan District 5 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 16525-1 Dear Mr.Leek: This letter addresses the issues and concerns of Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) regarding the proposed CAMAS/Shiely Quarry Expansion Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)as it relates to the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Blue Lake WWTP is located approximately 1,500 feet north of the Shiely quarry between the quarry and the Minnesota River. On Figure 2 in the EAW, the facility is shown as "waterworks." Neither the existence of the WWTP nor potential impacts of quarry dewatering operations is addressed in the EAW. During existing quarry dewatering operations, the groundwater level at the center of the WWTP varies from approximately 695.0 feet to 703.0 feet MSL during non-flooding periods. We do not have sufficient data to determine the impact on groundwater levels at the WWTP when the quarry discontinues pumping for a short period of time during the winter months. The groundwater levels at the WWTP are significantly impacted by the Minnesota River and Shiely quarry dewatering operations. The dewatering system currently in place at the WWTP was designed to protect some, but not all, structures at the plant to a 100-year flood elevation of 721.0 feet MSL. During the 1993 and 1997 Minnesota River flooding events, the river adjacent to the WWTP reached an elevation of 717.6, which is equivalent to a 50-year flooding event. The dewatering system at the WWTP did not perform as expected during these flooding periods. MCES is in the process of evaluating alternatives for supplementing the existing dewatering system. An initial assessment of groundwater impacts at Blue Lake from the proposed west quarry expansion and dewatering scenario(maximum east pool elevation of 725.0 feet), indicates the following: 1) With the Minnesota River at a "normal" elevation of 696.0 feet MSL, expected groundwater levels at the plant could reach 704.0 feet MSL. 2) During a 10-year flood with the river elevation at 710.0 feet MSL, groundwater elevations at the plant could reach 714.0 feet. 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul,Minnesota 55101-1633 (612)222-8423 Fax 229-2183 TDD/TTY 229-3760 An Equal Opportunity Employer -2- 3) During a 50-year flood with a river elevation of 718.0, groundwater levels could reach 719.0 feet within the plant site. 4) During a 100-year flood with the river elevation of 721.0 feet, groundwater elevations within the plant could reach 721.0 feet. 5) The highest groundwater impacts occur during initial west quarry development, when the quarry is excavated to an elevation of approximately 674.0 feet MSL, and the east quarry pool level is at an elevation greater than 710.0 feet MSL. There are significant impacts on various structures and systems within the plant site as a result of the proposed project. It appears that the most critical impacts would be expected if all quarry dewatering operations ceased. MCES plans to implement measures at the plant to protect the facility for the long- term groundwater situation. For MCES, the scheduling of the proposed expansion is more critical than the actual groundwater impacts from the proposed expansion. If the quarry is expanded, or if quarry dewatering operations cease prior to required groundwater protection improvements at the WWTP, the following impacts could be expected: 1) Potential structural failure of many structures as the groundwater elevation exceeds 710.0 feet, significantly impacting the treatment capability of the facility, and resulting in a possible total shutdown of the plant. 2) A majority of the liquid-containing structures at the plant cannot be safely dewatered when the groundwater elevation exceeds 703.0 feet MSL. When the groundwater elevation exceeds 703.0 feet MSL, none of the liquid-containing structures could be safely drained for maintenance purposes. This could have a significant impact on plant operations and emergency maintenance requirements. 3) The existing plant dewatering system, which was installed to dewater during Minnesota River flood events, would have to operate continuously. However, even then it would not dewater to "safe" levels for most structures. Also, the existing groundwater appropriation permit would be exceeded due to the greater pumping volumes involved. 4) Some areas of the plant site have ground surface elevations as low as 710.0 feet and some building doorway elevations less than 720.0 feet. In the event that groundwater levels increase to these levels, ponding would occur and groundwater could flow into these structures unless measures are taken to prevent such occurrences. The following information is requested in order to further assess the impacts of the proposed expansion and to enable MCES to plan required groundwater protection improvements at the Blue Lake WWTP: 1) A detailed schedule,which includes the expected dates of: • termination of east quarry dewatering activities • initial, intermediate,and final west quarry development. 2) Phasing of west quarry development,depth of excavation,and expected pumpage. -3- 3) Proposed elevation of east quarry pool over time, and whether those dates are fixed or flexible. 4) Additional modeling to better define impacts on the plant site with varying river flood levels and varying east quarry pool elevations. 5) Dates of east quarry dewatering start/stop operations for the past 10 years. Thank you for your attention to these concerns. If you have questions or require additional information, please contact Dil Stachour (MCES) at 602-1114; Rich Rovang (MCES) at 602-1135; or Lori McIntyre (RCM)at 935-6901. Sincerely, 4LAA7TV Helen Boyer Director,Environmental Services Division HAB:car V:\ALL\LEEK.DOC cc: Neil Peterson,Metropolitan Council District 5 Bill Moore, General Manager, Wastewater Services Department Bryce Pickart,Assistant General Manager,Technical Services Keith Buttleman,Director,Environmental Planning and Evaluation Department Thomas McElveen,Deputy Director,Housing Development and Implementation SEP-30-1997 09 39 FROM TO 94456718 P.01 v Metropolitan Council Working for the Region, Planning for the Future Environmental Services September 29, 1997 Mr.Michael Leek Community Development Director City of Shakopee ROICP11VIFIL 129 Holmes Street Shakopee,MN 55379 S Re: Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) CAMAS Minnesota,Inc.,City of Shakopee i1�1ECIENI5DShiely Quant'Expansiontt Metropolitan District 5 SEP 3 () 1997 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 16525-1 Dear Mr.Leek: This letter addresses the issues and concerns of Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) regarding the proposed CAMAS/Shiely Quarry Expansion Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)as it relates to the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Blue Lake WWTP is located approximately 1,500 feet north of the Shiely quarry between the quarry and the Minnesota River. On Figure 2 in the EAW,the facility is shown as "waterworks." Neither the existence of the WWTP nor potential impacts of quarry dewatering operations is addressed in the EAW. During existing quarry dewatering operations, the groundwater level at the center of the WWTP varies from approximately 695.0 feet to 703.0 feet MSL during non-flooding periods. We do not have sufficient data to determine the impact on groundwater levels at the WWTP when the quarry discontinues pumping for a short period of time during the winter months. The groundwater levels at the WWTP are significantly impacted by the Minnesota River and Shiely quarry dewatering operations. The dewatering system currently in place at the WWTP was designed to protect some, but not all,structures at the plant to a 100-year flood elevation of 721.0 feet MSL. During the 1993 and 1997 Minnesota River flooding events, the river adjacent to the WWTP reached an elevation of 717.6, which is equivalent to a 50-year flooding event. The dewatering system at the WWTP did not perform as expected during these flooding periods. MCES is in the process of evaluating alternatives for supplementing the existing dewatering system. An initial assessment of groundwater impacts at Blue Lake from the proposed west quarry expansion and dewatering scenario(maximum east pool elevation of 725.0 feet),indicates the following: 1) With the Minnesota River at a "normal" elevation of 696.0 feet MSL, expected groundwater levels at the plant could reach 704.0 feet MSL. 2) During a 10-year flood with the river elevation at 710.0 feet MSL, groundwater elevations at the plant could reach 714.0 feet. 230 East Fifth Strcct St. Paul.Minnesota 55101-1633 (612)222-9423 Fax 229-2183 TDD/TTY 229-3760 An Fqua!ammo),Empcouer SEP-30-1997 09:40 FROM TO 94456718 P.02 -2- 3) During a 50-year flood with a river elevation of 718.0, groundwater levels could reach 719.0 feet within the plant site. 4) During a 100-year flood with the river elevation of 721.0 feet, groundwater elevations within the plant could reach 721.0 feet. 5) The highest groundwater impacts occur during initial west quarry development, when the quarry is excavated to an elevation of approximately 674.0 feet MSL, and the east quarry pool level is at an elevation greater than 710.0 feet MSL. There are significant impacts on various structures and systems within the plant site as a result of the proposed project. It appears that the most critical impacts would be expected if all quarry dewatering operations ceased. MCES plans to implement measures at the plant to protect the facility for the long- term groundwater situation. For MCES, the scheduling of the proposed expansion is more critical than the actual groundwater impacts from the proposed expansion. If the quarry is expanded, or if quarry dewatering operations cease prior to required groundwater protection improvements at the WWTP, the following impacts could be expected: 1) Potential structural failure of many structures as the groundwater elevation exceeds 710.0 feet, significantly impacting the treatment capability of the facility, and resulting in a possible total shutdown of the plant. 2) A majority of the liquid-containing structures at the plant cannot be safely dewatered when the groundwater elevation exceeds 703.0 feet MSL. When the groundwater elevation exceeds 703.0 feet MSL, none of the liquid-containing structures could be safely drained for maintenance purposes. This could have a significant impact on plant operations and emergency maintenance requirements. 3) The existing plant dewatering system, which was installed to dewater during Minnesota River flood events, would have to operate continuously. However, even then it would not dewater to "safe" levels for most structures. Also, the existing groundwater appropriation permit would be exceeded due to the greater pumping volumes involved. 4) Some areas of the plant site have ground surface elevations as low as 710.0 feet and some building doorway elevations less than 720.0 feet. In the event that groundwater levels increase to these levels, ponding would occur and groundwater could flow into these structures unless measures are taken to prevent such occurrences. The following information is requested in order to further assess the impacts of the proposed expansion and to enable MCES to plan required groundwater protection improvements at the Blue Lake WWTP: 1) A detailed schedule,which includes the expected dates of: • termination of east quarry dewatering activities • initial, intermediate,and final west quarry development. 2) Phasing of west quarry development,depth of excavation,and expected purnpage. SEP-30-1997 09:40 FROM TO 94456718 P.03 -3- 3) Proposed elevation of east quarry pool over time, and whether those dates are fixed or flexible. 4) Additional modeling to better define impacts on the plant site with varying river flood levels and varying east quarry pool elevations. 5) Dates of east quarry dewatering start/stop operations for the past 10 years. Thank you for your attention to these concerns. If you have questions or require additional information, please contact Dil Stachour(MCES)at 602-1114; Rich Rovang (MCES)at 602-1135; or Lori McIntyre (RCM)at 935-6901. Sincerely, kiellr.6.611T)//// Helen Boyer Director,Environmental Services Division HAB:car V:WLL LEEKDOC • cc: Neil Peterson,Metropolitan Council District 5 Bill Moore,General Manager,Wastewater Services Department Bryce Pickart,Assistant General Manager,Technical Services Keith Buttleman,Director,Environmental Planning and Evaluation Department Thomas McElveen,Deputy Director,Housing Development and Implementation TOTAL P.03 Minnesota Detment of Health • 121 East Seventh Place P.O. Box 64975 St. Paul, MN 55164-0975 , 3 NW July 2, 1997 Mr. Michael Leek City Planner 129 Holmes Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Leek: Minnesota Department of Health(MDH) staff has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) for the Shiely Shakopee Quarry project, Scott County, Minnesota. We understand that the project consists of the expansion of a limestone quarry. We have the following comments for your consideration: 1. We recommend a field well inventory be performed to determine if there are any existing water supply wells (active or unused, unsealed) across the entire proposed gravel mining area. Particular attention should be made in the areas shown on air photos, old maps, etc. where any farmsteads have been located on this property. 2. We understand that the well named, "Monitoring Well#1" is located in part of the quarry expansion area. The project proposes to leave it as is, until the quarry expands through it (Item 13.a. on p. 12). Minnesota Statutes, section 1031 requires that any unused, unsealed well(s) be repaired and put back into service or be sealed by a licensed well contractor, in accordance with Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4725 (also termed the Well Code). Therefore, at the point in time when"Monitoring Well #1" is no longer used as a monitoring well, it must be sealed by a licensed well contractor in accordance with requirements of the Well Code. This will also have the advantage that the well will not become a source of contamination to the aquifer, in the interim before it is excavated in the quarrying process. Please contact Jim Nye in the Well Management Unit at(612)215-0824, if you have any questions on these requirements. 3. We understand that the Kawasaki well, a water supply well that is now unused, is proposed to be used as an additional monitoring well (Item 13.a. on p. 12). The Well Code requires that a monitoring well be permitted as such, and must be reconstructed by a licensed well contractor in accordance with specific requirements. Any monitoring well must also obtain an annual maintenance permit($100 fee) from the MDH. Please contact Mark Hoffman in the Well Management Unit at (612) 215-0813, to obtain the permit and answer any questions you may have. TDD: (612) 623-5522 (Twin Cities) 1-800-627-3529 (Greater Minnesota) An Equal Opportunity Employer Mr. Michael Leek July 2, 1997 Page 2 Thank you for the opportunity to review this EAW. If you have questions or need further information,please call the contacts noted above or Betty Wheeler at(612)215-0807. Sincerely, Lin M. Nelson Environmental Review Coordinator Environmental Health Division LMN:BJW:sdr cc: Mark Hoffman Jim Nye Betty Wheeler • • y�P��OF MIN/ts Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 9motii: 500 Lafayette Road 10 SPP St.Paul,Minnesota 55155-40 r'FNATUO July 2, 1997 ,"f` / 1997 Michael Leek, City Planner - N mw ,. City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Shiely Shakopee Quarry Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Dear Mr. Leek: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EAW for the Shiely Shakopee Quarry project. We offer the following comments for your consideration. Item 11b, Ecologically Sensitive Resources, correctly identifies the presence of the Savage Fen Wetland Complex and Boiling Springs & Eagle Creek as being within the project's vicinity. These unique and highly valuable resources are presently threatened by continued development over a large area. Given this project's location, avoidance of additional groundwater impacts should be an important project feature. Review of the project parameters reveals that overall the hydrologic conditions of these surface water features should improve with the proposed operation. This being acknowledged, we encourage the Company to continue investigating possible beneficial uses of dewatering discharge, and to employ technology and mining techniques which minimize the amount of dewatering necessary. In reviewing the proposed end use of the site offered in Item 6, Project Description, we note that a deep lake is offered as the result of the mining operation. Such a lake would be large enough to provide a significant local fishery in the Shakopee area. Lakes of this type are generally infertile, and therefore without nutrient inputs, production would be low and mortality could be high. The inclusion of shallow water areas for production of bass, bluegills, or forage species would be a desirable final site feature. Any connections between the lake and the river, (e.g., the drainage ditch), could the allow the introduction of unwanted species from the Minnesota River that would result in the eventual degradation of the fishery. There are several management options available in creating such a fishery. Stocking and management by the DNR would require public access to the lake. City ownership(s) of the open space areas could provide parkland and lake access. We note that only a small percentage of the angling public would benefit from this fishery and stocking is expensive. DNR would consider these and other factors in determining whether to manage this lake. The option of the proposer maintaining the lake as a private lake with liminted access is also available; in such a case, DNR would not stock it, but the proposer could apply for a permit from DNR to stock the lake. Regardless of what scenario unfolds, DNR is willing to provide assistance. Please contact Daryl Ellison, Area Fisheries Manager,at(612) 832- 6162, for further information. DNR Information:612-296-6157, 1-800-764-6000 • TTY:612-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer A Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Who Values Diversity till Minimum of 10%Post-Consumer Waste Michael Leek, City Planner July 2, 1997 Also in Item 6, the EAW does not discuss the reclamation of the east pit (the old site). Reclamation would offer opportunities to re-establish some wildlife habitat in this area. Also, are there plans for a fishery to be developed in the east pit? Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. We do not recommend preparation of an environmental impact statement(EIS) for the project. We look forward to receiving your record of decision and responses to comments. Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5, require you to send us your Record of Decision within five days of deciding this action. Please contact Bill Johnson of my staff at (612) 296-9229 if you have questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor �- Natural Resources Environmental Review Section Office of Planning c: Kathleen Wallace Con Christianson Pete Otterson Daryl Ellison, Fisheries Lynn M. Lewis,USFWS Gregg Downing,EQB Bob Bieraugel,CAMAS Minnesota,Inc., Shiely Division #970350-01 SHIELY.WP6 2 110 • dilbMinnesota Pollution Control Agency July 14, 1997 L.3.1.. I o 1997 Mr. Michael Leek City of Shakopee --- - .w 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 RE: Comments on Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Shiely Shakopee Quarry Dear Mr. Leek: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) staff has completed a review of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) for the above referenced project proposed by the city of Savage. Based on the information contained in the EAW, the staff do not believe the project has the potential for significant environmental impacts, and as a result, does not recommend the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for MPCA-related approvals. The only comment we would make is that the company should ensure that their existing Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for the existing quarry be revised to include the new acreage and appropriate best management practices for the site. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. We look forward to receiving your written responses to our comments and receiving your decision on the need for further environmental review. If you have any questions regarding our review,please contact Hans C. Walter-Peterson of my staff at 612/297-8236. Sincerely, Ur/r"- — 4*6.6 Paul Hoff, Director Environmental Planning and Review Office . Administrative Services Division PH:cj c: Jim Strudell, Water Quality Division 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (612)296-6300(Voice); (612)282-5332 (TTY) Regional Offices: Duluth•Brainerd•Detroit Lakes•Marshall•Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer•Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20%fibers from paper recycled by consumers. 0.E.04 11,.9 Minnesota Departmt of Transportation Metropolitan Division I. OF This" Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 June 30, 1997 1 191/ Michael Leek City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Michael Leek: SUBJECT: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division Environmental Document Review EAW97-013 South of Trunk Highway(TH) 101, East of Valley Park Drive Shakopee, Scott County C.S. 7005 The Metro Division of the Minnesota Department of Transportation(Mn/DOT) has reviewed the CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)for impacts to the state highway system. We find it acceptable with consideration of the following comments. • The site drainage to the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch should not increase over current levels. • We request the opportunity to review site plans and grading/drainage plans for any proposed developments next to Mn/DOT right of way or with access to state trunk highways, when plans have been prepared. Mn/DOT review of plans allows potential issues to be identified and considered at a comparatively early phase of the development process. Please send two copies of the plans to Sherry Narusiewicz, Local Government Liaison Supervisor, at the above address. Please allow thirty days for a formal response. This letter represents the transportation concerns of the Metro Division of Mn/DOT. Other environmental concerns raised by a wider Mn/DOT review may be forwarded to you in a separate letter. Please contact me at 582-1654 with any questions regarding this review. Sincerely, cott Peters Senior Transportation Planner/Local Government Liaison c: Gerald Larson, Mn/DOT Environmental Coordinator Brad Larson, Scott County Engineer An equal opportunity employer '4''*-:3 7 MIN4,. T Minnesota Department of Natural Resources m W Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793 ASF roe Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977 .yroFN_P\,P August 20, 1997 c����ss( ����/� A LL tUVEIU Mr.Michael Leek AuG 1 5 1997 Community Development Director City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 RE: CAMAS (SHIELY) SHAKOPEE QUARRY Dear Mr. Leek: Thank you for hosting the informational meeting last Friday at the Shakopee city council chambers for purposes of discussing assorted issues associated with the proposed expansion of the CAMAS (Shiely)quarry. At the meeting, some of the attendees requested a bit more detail regarding the Department of Natural Resources' (DNR)assessment of the hydrologic impacts anticipated as a result of the proposed mining activity. The DNR submitted written comments on the EAW to the city on July 2, 1997. In that letter there was a general statement indicating that we anticipated improvement in the hydrologic conditions for the surface water features (Savage Fen,Boiling Springs,Eagle Creek)which rely on groundwater for their existence,should the CAMAS project proceed as proposed. I'd like to elaborate a bit on our assessment of the hydrology of the area and how the CAMAS proposal might impact that hydrology. Over the past several years,a great deal of groundwater modeling has been performed in the northern Scott and Dakota County area,particularly in the Minnesota River Valley. The DNR has participated in the review of several modeling efforts, including modeling for the city of Eagan and Burnsville well fields, the Savage area (through the AUAR process),the Hastings area,and for modeling done for CAMAS. Our groundwater hydrologists have worked closely with the consultants who perform the majority of the modeling. In the case of the CAMAS Shakopee property, we have met with CAMAS and Barr Engineering on a number of occasions over the past nine months to discuss ground and surface water issues associated with mining,particularly as they relate to Deans Lake and Savage Fen/Boiling Springs/Eagle Creek Data was exchanged with Barr Engineering, which was retained by CAMAS to assess hydrologic impacts of the quarry operation. In December of 1996,Barr Engineering submitted a draft report entitled Potential Groundwater Impacts of Shiely Shakopee West Quarry. That report,along with the computer model upon which it was based,was thoroughly reviewed by DNR staff. Based upon the review of the model and input assumptions,the DNR is in agreement with the findings of the Barr report. The concept of allowing the existing east quarry to fill with water to elevation 732'and mining the west quarry is expected to result in higher water levels in the Prairie du Chien-Jordan Aquifer at the Savage Fen,Boiling Springs,and Eagle Creek. DNR Information:612-296-6157, 1-800-766-6000 • TTY:612-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer MbPrinted on Recycled Paper Containing a Who Values Diversity 'MaMinimum of 10%Post-Consumer Waste Mr.Mstichael201997 Leek Augu , page 2 Computer model results suggest the proposed mining plan will result in more water level drawdown in the Prairie du Chien-Jordan Aquifer beneath the western half of Deans Lake,and less water level drawdown in the bedrock aquifer beneath the eastern half of Deans Lake. The DNR revisited the quarry/Deans Lake relationship from 1996 to 1997. A May 1997 report concluded the surficial sand aquifer,within which Dean's Lake is located,is hydrogeologically separated from the bedrock Prairie du Chien-Jordan Aquifer. These results are in basic agreement with the fmdings of the original investigation performed by the DNR in the early 1980's. Since the surficial sand aquifer and bedrock aquifer appear to be hydrogeologically separated, development of the west mine is expected to have little effect on water levels in Deans Lake. Dewatering to facilitate the current CAMAS mining operation is permitted under DNR Water Appropriation Permit #67-172. Monitoring of groundwater elevations in several observation wells are a condition of that permit. Should the mining of the west area be permitted by the city of Shakopee,an amendment to the existing DNR permit will be required. As a condition of an amended permit,expanded monitoring of both ground and surface water will likely be required. At this time, the exact details of monitoring are not known. If the city wishes to participate in the development of a revised monitoring plan for the CAMAS project,we welcome your input. Finally,I'd like to stress that the DNR has encouraged both CAMAS and the communities in northern Scott and Dakota Counties to continue exploration of techniques to minimize water use,and to investigate the potential of developing a regional water supply system which might capture some of the groundwater up gradient of the CAMAS quarry in a manner which minimizes impacts to both surface and groundwater features, while reducing the amount of quarry dewatering. I trust this helps to clarify the DNR's assessment of the hydrologic impacts associated with the proposed expansion of the CAMAS quarry. If you have further questions,please call me at 772-7910. Sincerely, Patrick J.L III Area Hydrologist c: Bob Bieraugel,CAMAS Lou Van Hout,SPUC Tom Balcom,Office of Planning Evan Drivas,DNR Waters r • • SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS AND LANDS DIVISION ,P .. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT JUYIr COURTHOUSE A102 1 9 1997 428 HOLMES STREET SOUTH SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1393 (612)496-8177 GARY L.CUNNINGHAM Fax: (612)496-8496 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BRADILEY J.LARSON ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR AL FRECHETTE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MANAGER June 16, 1997 ;, _ , 2 J 1YY/ Michael Leek, City Planner City of Shakopee 129 Holmes St. Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division, Environmental Assessment Worksheet, WSB Project No. 1014.20 Dear Mr. Leek: Thank you for the opportunity to review this Environmental Assessment Worksheet. We would like to note for your consideration the following comments: 1 . Question 13b: The explanation of the proposed method of mitigating the impact to ground water quantity (drawdown) from the proposed new deeper quarry did not include any discussion on impacts to the adjacent exhausted quarry to the North East owned by W.G. Pearson. Permits have already been issued to allow this abandoned quarry to be reclaimed with waste concrete. It appears to us that the increased water levels proposed for the east Shiely quarry will result in a water level in the Pearson Quarry close to the ground surface, effectively ending the concrete disposal/reclamation process. 2. Question 20: The proposal to pump ground water from the new west quarry into the old east quarry also did not recognize or discuss any water quality impacts to the ground water. This proposal creates a large ground water recharge basin. The surface water from the east quarry which will be subject to contamination from normal surface sources would be discharged into the limestone basin and Prairie du Chien aquifer. The proposed practice appears to be in conflict with the intent of several state and federal regulations which are written to protect ground water. F:\AL\DOCUMENT\97LET\SHELYEAW.DOC An Equal Opportunity/Safety Aware Employer • • 3. Question 13b: The Barr ground water models discussed in the EAW seem to • conflict with earlier studies by the DNR and Sunde Engineering in regard to the existing quarry's impact on area ground water elevations. It would be helpful if Barr applied the same modeling techniques being used to predict impacts on the Boiling Springs/Eagle Creek/Fen complex to Dean's Lake. Shakopee is currently in the process of preparing a Wellhead Protection Plan. The Shiely proposal will certainly impact the ground water recharge areas for some of Shakopee's wells. This EAW lacks sufficient detail to be able to provide the definition the City will need to determine how this project will impact existing and future water supply needs in both quantity and quality. The City is currently reviewing several large development proposals South and West of the proposed quarry. There will be interrelated impacts between the proposed developments, their demand for potable water and the quarry pumping/recharging. The surrounding land uses are and will be required to address surface water runoff. The plans we have reviewed all included unlined storm water retention ponds which in these highly permeable soils will discharge contaminated surface water into the Prairie du Chien aquifer. The proposed Shiely pumping/recharging will influence the direction this contamination will travel. We find the current EAW lacking in sufficient detail to answer several important questions related to ground water. The current proposal conflicts with the County's Draft Ground Water Plan, as does the use of unlined storm water retention ponds in this area. We are, therefore, recommending that more detailed analysis be completed to define ground water impacts (quantity and quality) in consideration of not only the existing surrounding uses but also planned development. We believe the best approach to evaluate this would be a focused study on ground water participated in by all developers proposing to withdraw or discharge into ground water within the areas shown to be impacted by the Shiely pumping. One approach would be that Shakopee consider an Alternative Urban Areawide Review that would focus on ground water. Sincerely, 7,€ae% Allen Frechette Environmental Health Manager cc: Lou Van Hout, Shakopee Public Utilities Dir. Kathy Hansen, MPCA Marcel Jouseau, Metropolitan Council Bruce Olsen, MDH F:\AL\DOCUMENT\97LET\SHELYEAW.DOC • • BEST 8C FLANAGAN Professional Limited Liability Partnership ROBERT L.CROSBY GREGORY D.SOULE KEVIN J.DUNLEVY OF COUNSEL PLACE M.ADDINGTON CATHY E.GOBLIN 4000 FIRST BANK r LACE JILL B.LAORR WARD B.LEWIS ROBERT R.BARTH PATRICK B.HENNESSY SECOND CRIPPEN MADISON ARCHIBALD SPENCER N.WALTER GRAFF TIMOTHY A.SULLIVAN 601 AVENUE SOUTH ROBERT D.MAHER ROBERT M.SKARE ALLEN D.BARNARD BRIAN F.RICE DAVID H.JOHNSON JOHN R.CARROLL RICHARD A.PETERSON DANIEL R.W.NELSON MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA ANN E.WALTHER JAMES D.OLSON ROBERT J.CHRISTIANSON,JR. TRACY J.VAN STEENBURGH WILLIAM J.MORRIS FRANK J.WALE DAVID J.ZUBKE 55402-4331 MICHAEL H.PINK FRANK VOGL STEVEN R.KRUGER DANIEL A.KAPLAN MARINUS W.VAN PUTTER,JR. JAMES P.MICHELS AMY J.SWEDBERG JAMES 1.BEST DAVID B.MORSE PAUL E.KAMINSKI HTTP.//WWW.BESTLAW.COM 1902-1966 JOHN A.BURTON,JR. JOHN P.BOYLE JAMES C.DIRACLES Ross C.FORMELL ROBERT J .FLANAGAN 4 ROBERT L.MELLER,JR. CARYN S.GLOVER (612) 339-7121 MORRIS E.KNOPF MARY E.SHEARER FAX (612) 339-5897 JUDITH A.ROGOSHESKE BARBARA M.Ross SCOTT D.ELLER CATHERINE J.COURTNEY CHARLES C.BERQUIST JEANNICE M.REDING E.JOSEPH LAFAVE Direct Dial: 341-9720 \�e9 �� �n June 27, 1997 JUN U i Mr. Michael Leek City Planner City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Shiely Shakopee Quarry Dear Mr. Leek: This firm represents Valley Green Business Park. As you are aware, CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division, is proposing expansion of their limestone quarry on a 106 acre parcel which is adjacent to land owned by Valley Green. This firm and STS Consultants, Ltd. have carefully reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet which was prepared for the expanded Shiely mining operation. We believe the STS Consultants, Ltd. report makes it very clear that the proposed Shiely project has a potential for significant environmental affects. The STS report sets forth a number of questions which have not been answered, as well as indications of impacts which will be reasonably expected to occur from the Shiely project. These cumulative irreversible affects will negatively impact future projects in the area. We trust that the city of Shakopee will conclude that it is reasonable for the proposer of this expanded mining operation to develop an Environmental Impact Statement to address the significant potential environmental affects of the project. The proposer should be required to consider alternate approaches to its plan to minimize the impact of the mining expansion. Finally, this report does not address some zoning issues which we believe the city will need to revisit. For example, the Environmental Assessment Statement in Section 28 states [O:\DOCS\PUBL\PIIC\79469_1.LTR • • Mr. Leek June 27, 1997 Page 2 that the Comprehensive Plan "does not address mining nor does it specifically address land use issues in the area of the proposed project." We point out that the Comprehensive Plan in Figure 27 specifically sets forth an area to be included in the mining overlay districts. The proposed Shiely expansion area is not included in this mining overlay district. As such, we believe the city needs to amend its Comprehensive Plan before it could allow Shiely's proposed mining expansion. If you have any questions or comments regarding the above, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely yours, Paul E. Kaminski PEK:kjd cc Jon Albinson, Valley Green Business Park [(i:\DOCS\PUBL\PEK\79469 1.LTR R E P 0 R T I Valley Green Business Park �. 5740 Valley Industrial Boulevard South Shakopee,MN 55379 I I I Review of Shiely Environmental Assessment Worksheet,Shakopee,Minnesota I I I I Valley Green Business Park I Review of Shiely Environmental Assessment Worksheet, Shakopee,Minnesota 1 95394-N June 27,1997 igirl howl 1 I 1 June 27, 1997 Mr. Jon Albinson Valley Green Business Park 5740 Valley Industrial Boulevard South Shakopee, MN 55379 STS Project 95394-N Re: Review of Shiely Environmental Assessment Worksheet, Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Mr. Albinson: Per your request, STS Consultants, Ltd. has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) prepared for the Shiely Shakopee quarry expansion. It is our opinion that the Shiely project has a potential for significant environmental effects. In our opinion, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is warranted to address the potential environmental effects of this project. Specific issues of concern associated with this project include: • Actual magnitude of the mining operation versus that presented in the EAW. • The intensity of mining will be four times greater than the past. • Impacts of groundwater withdrawal. • Potential impact due to groundwater infiltration and mounding of the groundwater system. 111 • Potential impacts to sensitive environmental areas. • Long-term impact associated with surface water discharge. • Final configuration and environment of the two surface water lakes. • Waste handling adjacent to groundwater infiltration area and discharge of process water to a groundwater infiltration basin. • Traffic analysis over the 15 year operation of the mine. • Noise and vibration impacts associated with blasting operations. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the EAW. If you have any questions in reference to the comments provided, please contact me at 509-6317. Sincerely, STS CONSULTANTS, LTD. (124941. Robert L. DeGroot, CPG PE Principal Engineer/Geologist ' RLD/pb cc: Paul E. Kaminski, Best& Flanagan C694N001.DOC 111 STS Consultants Ltd. Consulting Engineers 3650 Annapolis Lane Suite 120 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447 612.559.1900/Fax 612.559.4507 I IReview of Shiely EAW Shakopee,Minnesota 1 INTRODUCTION I STS Consultants, Ltd. reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) prepared for the Shiely Shakopee Quarry per your request. A copyof the EAW was as provided by Mr. Jon Albinson, Project Director for Valley Green Business Park. STS was requested to review the EAW for completeness and accuracy as well as to address technical issues of concern. The EAW review will follow the sections and pages of the report. EAW REVIEW I 1. Project Title: No comment. I 2. Proposer: No comment. I 3. RGU: No comment. I 4. Reason for EAW Preparation: No comment. I 5. Project Location: The project location described the 106 acres west of the existing quarry. The EAW describes an operation that includes not onlythe west u quarry area but also the east quarry operation. Further discussion in reference to the project is included with subsequent sections. 6. Description:p Page 5, first paragraph: The proposed site is described as a "relocation" of Ithe existing quarry. A more accurate description would be an expansion of the existing mining operation west of the existing quarry. The second paragraph describes the operation as an I R694N001.DOC I IShiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N II Iexpansion that "would be contiguous to the existing operation" but for the ditch and easement that separate the east from the west operations. It is our understanding that the conditional use permit referenced in the second paragraph does Inot include the southern portion of the proposed expansion. IThird paragraph: Overburden is described as 30 foot thick. This equates to approximately 3.1 million cubic yards of overburden. Removal of 250,000 cubic yards of overburden annually Iwould require 12 years to complete the overburden removal. Fourth paragraph: The quarry is estimated to yield 11 million tons of limestone. The volume of I limestone however is not provided. The final elevation of the quarry will be 620 feet mean sea Ilevel (MSL). The surface elevation of the quarry area is approximately 750 feet MSL. The total quarry depth, therefore, will be approximately 130 feet. Since 30 feet is overburden„ 100 feet I will be limestone. A 100 foot thickness over 64 acres equals approximately 10 million cubic I yards. Approximately 650,000 cubic yards of rock per year will be quarried over the 15 year life of the quar y. Total material movement, overburden and rock 13.1 milli iii ( on cubic yards), will average approximately 900,000 cubic yards per year over the majority of the quarry life (15 years). to the existing Comparison quant' operation is appropriate. The eastern or existing quarry has a base elevation of approximately 685 feet MSL. Assuming a surface elevation of 750 MSL, the total depth of the existing quarry is 65 feet. The area of the existing quarry is approximately 60 acres for a total volume of approximately 6.3 million cubic yards. The existing quarry has operated for approximately 30 years. The average aggregate mining volume was 210,000 cubic yards per year. The intensity of mining and mining activities over the next 15 years will be more than four times that which has been experienced on the average over the past 30 years. In other words, the i - 2 - Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N proposed mining operations will remove an average of 900,000 cubic yards per year over the next 15 years, compared to 210,000 cubic yards removed over the past 30 years. Page 7: The existing facilities will be used to process materials. As stated previously, the intensity of mining and quantity mined must increase dramatically. No discussion as to the capacity of the processing facilities was included. No discussion as to the necessity for increase in the capacity and potential impacts associated with processing expansion, if required, is discussed. I Paragraph 2: The reclamation of the quarry is discussed in only general terms. The environment and habitat of the final quarry lake should be addressed. A discussion of the "proper attention to habitat requirements" should be included. The lake will be in existence for perpetuity and its environmental condition should be considered. In addition, the habitat conditions for the east quarry lake should also be discussed. The east quarry lake is part of the mining operation and I will be a similar environment to the west quarry lake. Discussions relative to the shoreline configuration for the east quarry should also be incorporated. Third paragraph: Development of the area around the west quarry lake is discussed. No discussion is included in reference to development surrounding the east quarry lake. The quarry lakes apparently will be developed as fisheries. Will public access to these fisheries be available or will the area remain surrounded by private land without access to the fishery? 7. Project Magnitude Data: The mining operation as described in the EAW includes the 106 acres plus utilization of the 60 acre east quarry lake for water infiltration as well as haul roads, processing plants and associated buffer zones. Therefore, the total project area should Iinclude not only the 106 acres but also the 124 acres of the existing mining operation for a total of 230 acres. Areas of specific use including processing buildings, haul roads, infiltration lakes, etc. should be included. I I - 3 - 1 Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N I 8. Permits and Approvals Required: The existing air permit must be reviewed. The I increased mining activity will generate greater potential air emissions. Additional equipment which may require permits may be required because of the additional material processing. This section does not mention the need to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan. I 9. Land Use: Page 9, third paragraph. This paragraph states that the neighboring industrial 1 uses have co-existed for more than 30 years without serious conflicts. In reality, over much of the past 30 years no development existed around the site. This statement therefore is misleading 1 in that it implies that for 30 years there has been no serious conflict. There will also be continued development in the near future which will be impacted by this project. I 10. Cover Types: This section states that no wetlands will be developed during reclamation. IThis is contradictory to section 6, page 7, second paragraph, which states that "portions of the quarry edge will be developed as shallow water wetlands". This is further evidence that site Ireclamation, environmental habitat and end use has not been incorporated into the EAW. 1 11. Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources: No discussion of the ditch and storm water pond being perched above the regional groundwater table is included in the I groundwater report. The effect of dewatering on the shallow groundwater should be reviewed 1 and addressed. 1 Groundwater discharged to the ditch will only continue for the duration of the mining operation, 15 years. No discussion of the affects to the downstream wildlife refuge after pumping has 1 ceased is included. Is continuation of the clear cold water advantageous to the wildlife refuge considering it will be terminated 15 years in the future? I Page 10, last paragraph: The FSFWS general water management plan for Blue Lake was 1 prepared in 1988 and noted concerns over pumping operations. Were any other concerns I - 4 - I Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N I identified in this report? Were any discussions included relative to the habitat changes due to the surface water discharge to Blue Lake versus groundwater discharge that occurs naturally? Y The area of impact of Shiely quarry dewatering and filling of east quarry lake is shown on Figures 4 and 5 in Appendix A. The area of influence extends for a radius of more than 2 miles from the project site. No discussion is included in reference to Deans Lake, Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, and the Minnesota River. The area of influence includes both drawdown and mounding of groundwater. Page 11, second paragraph: This paragraph discusses the Savage Fen, Boiling Springs and Eagle Creek located east of the project site. Filling of east quarry lake is intended to "block" the eastern influence of dewatering. Models show that filling east quarry lake will increase water levels. No discussion of potential impacts as a result of an increase in the groundwater is included. Filling of the quarry apparently will impact the groundwater conditions in this area. To what extent will these changes impact these environmentally sensitive areas? It is assumed that an increase in water levels is acceptable. What will be the impacts which are acceptable? Does filling of the east quarry change the direction of groundwater flow? The modeling shows mounding and drawdowns. The change in groundwater configuration and flowP aths are not presented. Groundwater movement will apparently change as a result of the activities proposed. I12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources: This section appears to be incomplete. No discussion is included on water surface area affected, timing and extent of fluctuations in water surface elevations, or proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. 13. Water Use: a. This section discusses monitoring wells which apparently will be used to monitor groundwater levels during mining operations. No discussion as to the configuration of these 1 - 5 - II Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N wells relative to the dewatering operation is included. The number of monitoring wells appears inadequate for monitoring the groundwater impacts during mining operations. A monitoring program adequate to confirm computer model configurations should be included. Their location, construction and monitoring schedule should be considered. Without a monitoring plan, the true impacts to the groundwater will not be able to be confirmed or denied. Ib. The discussion of water appropriation assumes that the only modification would be the point of appropriation and point of discharge. The second paragraph on page 13 indicates that maximum total withdrawal may be required. This is an additional change in the permit. Page 13, first paragraph: The EAW states in this paragraph that "groundwater levels will increase significantly compared to current levels". Figure 2 of the Barr Engineering report, 1 Appendix A, indicates that groundwater will rise 30 to 40 feet above current groundwater levels. No discussion of the impact of this "significant" groundwater increase is included. Section 16, 111 page 14 indicates depth to groundwater of 20 to 30 feet. The magnitude of mounding indicated suggests that water table may daylight at the surface. This could result in significant impacts to the area and existing and potential developments. 1 Groundwater withdrawal will lower the water table in unconsolidated materials. Will settlement occur due to the increased effective stress on these soils? Will settlements impact any existing structures, roads or utilities? Page 13, second paragraph: The total pumping rate without removal of infiltration will exceed the rate authorized by DNR. Pumping is expected to be 12,300 gpm versus permitted 10,000 gpm. The duration of pumping as well as mining has not been established. Pumping at the rates 1 indicated will exceed the maximum permittable under the DNR permit. It appears to be the intent to submit a request for increase in the total water appropriation. The feasibility of obtaining this additional appropriation is not discussed. - 6 - i Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N I Fourth paragraph: This paragraph states that infiltration and water levels in the east pit were set to "essentially eliminate" impacts to the Savage Fen and Boiling Springs. Modeling in the appendix indicates a rise in water elevations at these locations. The impact of this additional rise is not discussed. The EAW states that there will be impact in the form of a "modest increase in flow to the Boiling Springs and Eagle Creek due to the re-infiltration of pumped water". The impacts are not eliminated and no discussion of the impacts that will occur are included. In ' addition, other environmentally sensitive areas such as Dean's Lake and Minnesota Valley Wildlife Refuge are not discussed. I Fifth paragraph: Deans Lake is a significant environmental resource. Previous studies related to the pumping of the west quarry are inappropriate to the conditions proposed. Methods of analysis, modeling and knowledge of the hydrogeology of this area has improved significantly since the 1970s and 1980s. Past information is of limited value. Models presented in the appendix show increases in the water table in excess of 5 feet in the Deans Lake area. This is in contrast to a groundwater withdrawal created by pumping of the east quarry. Impacts to Deans Lake as a result of these conditions have not been discussed and ' cannot be compared to previous mining operations. Page 14, first paragraph: The report Appendix A indicates costs to be $500 per year. The EAW states costs to be $200 per year. The discrepancy should be explained. Additional impacts to the water supply at city wells 4 and 5 could also occur. The groundwater flow directions and capture zone for the groundwater withdrawal will change. These wells will be within the capture zone created by the dewatering. The effect of this change on water quality is not discussed. This is a concern because of the high nitrate levels in these wells. I 14. Water Related Land Use Management Districts: The project will create two lakes with shoreline. The land use planning and zoning around these water bodies has not been defined. I - 7 - i Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N I 15. Water Surface Use: Two lakes will be created as a result of this activity. Usage of these lakes has not been defined including access and water craft use. 16. Soils Approximate Depth to: No comments. 17. Erosion and Sedimentation: Page 15: The acreage identified is 64. In reality this acreage should include those areas which will be graded for the buffer zone. If the project is considered an expansion of the existing mining operation, grading should also include any required for site activities on the eastern portion of the site. r No discussion of importing of materials is included in this section. It is our understanding that past practices have been to import undesirable soils and export desirable materials. Will this practice continue and be acceptable? How will soils be screened to prevent importing of undesirable or contaminated materials that have the potential for direct impact to the lakes and groundwater system? 18. Water Quality/Surface Water Runoff: Page 15: The east quarry lake is proposed to be used for settlement of discharged water. Are any permits required from the MPCA and/or watershed district for utilization of this water body for sediment control? ' Second paragraph: Water will discharge under Highway 101 and into Blue Lake. Is the ditch and Highway 101 culvert sized appropriately to accept the discharge quantities? Page 16, second paragraph states that groundwater would discharge to Blue Lake via the groundwater system. This discharge however would be much different in transport mechanism, discharge rate, distribution and chemistry. What impacts occur as a result of these differences? I 1 - 8 - f ShielyEAW Review ew STS Project 95394-N Third paragraph: This paragraph suggests that discharge water from quarrying has a positive affect because it "provides an abundant supply of fresh water". This supply of water however may have impacted Blue Lake during the time that pumping of the east quarry occurred. Pumping for the west quarry will maintain approximately the same conditions, however it will ' cease in 15 years. The long-term impacts of ceasing the discharge to Blue Lake is not discussed. An ecosystem may have developed as a direct result of a discharge from the pumping operations. ' These waters will no longer be input into Blue Lake after mining operations have ceased. 19. Water Quality/Wastewater: The east quarry lake is proposed to be utilized for wash water treatment from the existing processing operation. Is discharge to east quarry lake acceptable wastewater handling practice? 20. Groundwater/Potential for Contamination: Page 17: The second paragraph states that there are "no abandoned or unused wells on the property". This is in contradiction to section 13, water use, page 12. 21. Solid Waste; Hazardous Waste; Storage Tanks: Page18, first paragraph:p g ph. Solid waste in the form of concrete, asphalt rubble and NSP bottom ash are stored adjacent to the existing east quarry. The east quarry will change configuration from point of groundwater withdrawal to a point of groundwater infiltration. East quarry lake will be in direct communication with the groundwater system. A release of solid waste into the lake will be in communication with the 1 groundwater system. A review of this solid waste permit in relationship to the change in the storage location adjacent to east quarry lake should occur. 22. Traffic: The traffic patterns in relationship to the intensity of mining should be 1 reviewed. As stated earlier in this review, it appears that the intensity of mining will be approximately four times what it has been over the past 30 years. Theoretically this would result in an average traffic increase four times the average traffic over the past 30 years. This is in contrast to the EAW which states that a 50% increase in traffic would occur. This traffic I Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N increase appears to be extended only out to the year 2000, approximately two years. The entire ' project life is estimated at 15 years. Traffic conditions over the life of the project and in relationship to the total quantity of materials to be moved should be assessed. It should also be noted that most of the increased traffic will be large trucks. 23. Vehicle Related Air Emissions: Page 19: This section states that"additional traffic will not be generated by the proposed quarrying." However, the intensity of mining over the next 15 years is four times that which has occurred over the past 30 years. Additional materials will be handled which apparently will require additional traffic. A traffic analysis in relationship to the quantity of materials to be handled over the life of the project should be completed. Vehicle ' related air emissions should then be assessed in relationship to the traffic requirements. 24. Stationary Source Air Emissions: No stationary air sources are anticipated. However, additional materials will be handled at a higher rate. Will additional equipment be required to handle the additional material volume? Additional equipment may require air emission permits. 25. Will the project generate dust, odors, or noise during construction and/or operation? Page 19: The second paragraph states that the magnitude of dust emissions should not change as a result of the change in quarry location. However, the intensity of mining will be ' significantly greater than previous conditions. Haul distance will be longer and additional vehicles will likely be required to transport the greater quantity of materials over the longer distance. No assessment of this additional dust generation as a result of the greater intensity is included in the EAW. Page 20, second paragraph, Noise: The noise assessment is based upon previous operations. It does not appear to take into consideration the proximity of the businesses adjacent to the proposed development. For example, Conklin Chemical will be within 500 feet of quarrying operations and Chemerex will be within 600 feet. I - 10 - Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N ' The EAW states that earth moving equipment will strip overburden for a period of a few weeks seasonally. Section 6 states that 200,000 to 300,000 cubic yards of overburden must be stripped ' each year. What is the impact and equipment requirements to move that quantity of materials over a two week period of time? Vibration: The second paragraph indicates that monitoring has occurred on the west side of the ' proposed quarry. No interpretation of this information was included in the EAW. Third paragraph: The analysis by Dr. Braslau predicts particle velocities of approximately 4.5 inches per second at the Conklin building. This is approximately 10 times the blasting criteria recommended by the U.S. Bureau of Mines. Recommendations for changing blast procedures were provided. However, no statement as to whether these changes would be acceptable for the mining operation. Blasting must be adjusted to reduce vibrations by an order of magnitude in an operation with an intensity four times previous intensities. ' The report by Dr. Dave Siskind is not included in the EAW. According to the EAW, Dr. Siskind recommends collection of data, review of equipment at nearby businesses and additional analysis to improve the reliability of predictions. Apparently, data collection has begun. However, no presentation of this information or analysis is included in the EAW. ' 26. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? Page 22: d. Other unique resources: No assessment for unique resources are presented. Assessment for such ' resources including endangered species appears appropriate. 27. Will the project create adverse visual impacts? Page 22: A more complete discussion of visual impact from the east quarry operations appears appropriate. I 28. Compatibility with Plans: Page 22: The southern portion of the project area was acquired after approval of conditional use permit No. 375. Therefore, the entire project site has not been included in this permit. 1 - 11 - Shiely EAW Review STS Project 95394-N Page 23, first paragraph: The last sentence states "Infiltration of contaminants has not been a problem during existing quarry operations at the old east quarry and there is not reason to suspect change when the proposed west quarry is begun." However, significant change will occur. The old east quarry will become east quarry lake and will be an infiltration basin for groundwater. Contaminants which enter the east quarry lake will be in direct contact with groundwater and will infiltration to the groundwater system. This is in contrast to the previous operations which was groundwater withdrawal minimizing the potential for infiltration to the groundwater system. The second paragraph is true only for the west quarry itself. The east quarry lake will be an ' infiltration basin which mounds groundwater. Contaminants released into the east quarry lake will infiltrate downward and radially into the groundwater system. The last sentence in the isecond paragraph states that "after the mining is completed, the proposed lake will ... be a groundwater discharge point ..." No information supports this statement. Typically lakes are ' both recharge and discharge to the groundwater system. Groundwater typically flows into a lake ' on the up-gradient side and discharge to the water table system at the down-gradient side. The statement that the two quarry lakes will be groundwater discharge sites has not been i demonstrated. 111 29. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services: No comments. 30. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts: b. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier development? If yes briefly describe the past development, its timing and any past environmental review. I The past environmental review has been limited. The EAW does not encompass the entire project even though this is an expansion of the existing mining operation. Mine restoration, site - 12 - Shiely e y EAW Review STS Project 95394-N ' development, east quarry lake configuration and operational activities on the east portion of the site has largely been excluded from this EAW. Page 24, secondara ra h: Cumulative g p environmental impacts has largely been ignored in the ' EAW. The EAW should be completed with an understanding that this is an expansion of an existing operation. This is contrast to the approach which is presented which addresses only the portion of the site identified as the west quarry. 31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts: This section has been left blank. It is difficult to believe that there are no potential adverse environmental impacts which have not been addressed in the EAW. 32. Summary of Issues: This section has been left blank. Numerous issues remain which require further investigation. These include clarification of groundwater conditions, groundwater ' flow pattern, impacts of water quality on city wells, analysis of blasting and potential vibration, ' clarification of water appropriation permit including expansion of total groundwater withdrawals, and others not specifically identified. 111 No discussion of alternatives or mitigation measures are e presented. It would appear no ' consideration for alternatives have been developed. Alternatives review should be included. One option considered in the past was utilization of dewatering water as a water supply for the City of Savage. This alternative was considered in the past but rejected due to the potential impacts to Boiling Springs and Savage Fen. With infiltration in the east quarry lake, water may 111 be available for the City of Savage. I I - 13 - APPENDIX A Potential Groundwater Impacts of Shiely Shakopee West Quarry This report was apparently prepared for Shiely. The scope of work appears to have been limited as indicated on page 1. Issues not included in the report include: • Discussion of the clay barrier to be added in the east quarry lake. Discussion should include configuration, constructability, physical parameters, effectiveness, potential for failure and alternatives. This issue was also not discussed in the EAW. • Identify previous modeling activities including results of the Alternative Urban Area-wide Review Process (AUARP), Alternative Water Source Study, treatment requirements for quarry dewatering water and Savage Fen management plan and summarize results. • Include a conclusions and recommendations section which discusses the results relative to the ' modeling and previous analyses. I • Includea presentation of additionalhydrogeologic parameters including piezometric surfaces, groundwater flow directions and chan es in these co g nditions with mimng ' operations. • Include a discussion of impacts to environmental resources including Savage Fen, Boiling Springs, Eagle Creek, Deans Lake and Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. i 1 1 I 1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE I Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council I Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director ISUBJECT: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division -Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) IMEETING DATE: May 6, 1997 IIntroduction: State statute and Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rule 4410.4300 Subp. 12 (B) mandates the preparation of an EAW for non-metallic mineral mining of 40 acres or more to a depth of 10 feet or greater. Once the EAW is prepared the City (as RGU) Imust publish notice in the"EQB Monitor" and distribute the EAW for review. CAMAS/Shiely proposes limestone quarrying on a 106 acre parcel of land east of its Iexisting quarry. The mining operation would disturb approximately 64 acres in the center of the site. The project site is the subject of a conditional use permit (CUP) issued by the City of Shakopee in 1984. Amendment of this CUP would be required before mining Icould commence on the site. A draft EAW has been prepared for the proposed project. If the Council approves I distribution of the EAW, notice would be published in the"EQB Monitor," at which time the 30-day comment period commence. At the end of the 30-day review period, Council I would review the comments received and make it's actual determination on the EAW. Alternatives: I1. Authorize publication of notice of the EAW and commencement of the review period. 2. Do not authorize publication of the EAW. I 3. Table the matter for additional information. I I I CAMAS EAW.DOC/RML 1 Action Requested: Offer and pass a motion to authorize publication of notice in the "EQB Monitor" and distribution of the draft EAW for review and comment. Council is not asked to approve the EAW at this time, as it will be brought back after expiration of the review period. /1'71: R. Michael Leek ' Community Development Director 1 CAMASrAW.pOGRMI. 2 April 18,1997 Page 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) This EAW has been prepared to disclose information about potential environmental impacts that may be associated with the proposed limestone quarrying project. In order to frame the impacts and the mitigation measures associated with the operation of the proposed quarry, information will be included about the existing quarrying and processing operation which is located on the adjacent parcel to the east of the proposed project site. This EAW will also include information about the industrial development on adjacent properties and as a potential industrial use on the subject site. The focus of this EAW ' however, is the proposed quarry, not the end use. 1. Project Title: Shiely Shakopee Quarry 2. Proposer: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division Contact person: Bob Bieraugel ' Address: 2915 Waters Road, Suite 105 Eagan, MN. 55121 Phone: (612) 683-8123 3. RGU: City of Shakopee Contact person: Michael Leek ' Title: City Planner Address: 129 Holmes St. Shakopee, MN. 55379 ' Phone: (612)445-3650 4. Reason for EAW Preparation: ' 0 EIS Scoping •Mandatory EAW 0 Citizen Petition 0 RGU Discretion DProposer Volunteered ' If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category number(s) ' 4410.4300 Subp 12 (B) Nonmetallic mineral mining of 40 acres or more to a depth of 10 feet or greater. ' 5. Project Location: County: Scott City/Twp: Shakopee ' Legal Description: Part of the North Y2 of Section 10 and part of the South 1/2 of Section 3, Township 115, Range 22. ' Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW:: a. a state map showing the general location of the project; b. a county map showing the general location of the project; ' c. a copy of a USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map (photocopy is OK) indicating the project boundaries; and d a site plan showing all significant project and natural features. (Figures 1 - 3) 1 I ] eA 1.16.4"""�9 HENNE PIN C 0, TAMES W.WILKIE I.�• M S •� �'':`• REGIONAL PARK 1r t t t2i Is SO:P Ale.:.--:-._ °'"'<<. T,1 l� �O` ••.•.•+"`�P 6DCN PRAIRi6a'il '"`i . % • ..I..... i.9:Z:{i:}{hFi..",..:ir:,�:::. nJ' ..,-::::-Ws..: \ ty r!v ,4.;:..,',0,:••:; ...".:i;..••••:::.' Cti-'�t°Ft"'wrsw..r.. ,:.a.i,..r.>s.:y:� :.C.;:.>.•:.. R 22 W .� 5� ,,� • 411 ' f 11 .. ��'� •' • ''`3 a„ ti..9'�I�; ,�I1,�".�_�v"�'�r�'`'" fi • -Wei"!Pm\0- • mil 5 4111 ASS : :".. .....3....., ‘141111=1"1411 Ili • • r 0 -Ili ®�_ PROP SE I PROD CT .... .,;s7'.,`. I �• `� Ir, 14,E 4-rd 1.'':'y _ sent. 1 -lv � .c+. :""h BI. ,'ir A -.-- ,c ` � SHAKOPEE I• l• ,o-.:: : frig V1:+: OAlY•:`«Rid �wN I _ — ——— —— — r._ r•I ♦` \ ..... /� syr.•nYl4.1`::.; r I� T__--T-_.rte j--17".•4•7-1.:1---,_:17::7---,.....:`: '_ry• 1 Wb,.� �r r 7 4',i;' ers,,i I — ... -T---f ` + r i Tyr-�r-_�,, _ •'-_r--r rJ Yom,__r�,�_t_=r 1 --t 4 '-r,, -.•-•-"--...,,,,,,...--4•44 ui• • • T .'1--H=r—=r* r r•--• r` ` -•�• • r • T—r�r�T�-''f�r�—•Il r i-a:::''• ••••. {^--J—rte, . Allif 1. • • • In �'•9.a^.(.T.. `eT I • y:.+.•• , r� Irl 0 N'• ! ," .Q I fir' e1' ,., , .V pg.,:t<s:' 17 I \ . IS` • \1�~ 13 \t `.•�••` 13 it.i.: . ii :i: ••_ • - `c:°i 1 I \ ` _ _ A-- ~` TCJ t is::•r ,I 1 '-_-_ -i• ec F.A.U.-•`►�'- va• ee. I k.4"'� � yeti: _ _- �. _f' C • •ifi +Y :-...:•:'...•••-1.*::.11131 c 1 • e1`.:: I •y:...0•10MIT• ;;-. .::x xa+c:tr:•r:xf l-^} F S> .; :1.›.`.:k ♦ t{` 1 Yiro`.V::2c •-:r, ::••»:intsno : A `"' tny'-.,-f-5-'h`� ,s'• ,, -Tom...'• ... • f •••. ^I 45. 2 n�'. +• ;—5A r ." :::4.0. .�-- --- a =T T 1 = TT ♦ T YF• w •{ 5 — 1 , 9` £ if# ` ,►I '' r ct:,:.`'',1• -4..,-.). r r r �Z6e¢ru 4 A 2� L /H. 19 • • • '[':f{' • ` ',.7+•cC` I.i ..5:''.J�.v a \. , ' r 'r•• e� r7r�r�� _ ::.c. ;..;.:•4:10.5.7.::::::;.:,;::,.3: ;:o I PRIOR LAKE /Pike' 41-11:...'' • I o l liy •... '; • -�: nr• •vc. i�sFe fA.4 Iwr• •T. �� • Leke... _ , r,-•:`:. tom„ / -.__.'_ • ,P. 4.7,f_ I , , - i 25•• ,..,TTRP/ _" • ,> 3 r r; I� I • Is PRIOR LAKE ,, __^ C • Siy:''• • p s — Vii. • 1t.!..-.=-;;,--_-,� 1 , ? - i5:" ',~3,.;�.M INDIAN RESERVATION I — f .� �� I • 29 • N4 t•I 1• I IW. II,•12 25 G' I • _^tis • Y+irl •Cif11111WOpd Print Lake^ y'� .Cr±%. I Schneider__ wi.;• • ' ' � .1 ��. :Al.,* c?`' \ Lake :';} . . It •• • • ..= 1. `12,••=-;_.. ev'' • • 5 5k • •�F..1�• �� •f J•t®• f .'"" • X91 1:` + ./\../ III I •^ • "{':{r'', ' • Si __�• • ', .^'¢: _=♦ - _ • LAKE SPRING .7 I / R;%‘'.:�.i*,�,� 31 e• • �, '� • • • •'K.,. ....._.�. I• REGIONAL -- •I • ,• ' W.racer • • - } I G+y'+- �,• PARK -^.. ~ ... - "..:...,, •:i:•�"{. - -'C• _�--< 1.1..�_Y':'-�+.,?�:;t.+h"'-r:f!:;::. ;tire` ::•:•Y,' {: .!I:_ ' _ v..•+ Hs �i • m Howard. Imo ./_ •�i': ri `!1 f i if: Q �,• ,•_, • ,; Lek. •• �V- , :F ` ill � • • • •• 1 • • 1 I w ` ..., , /deli, 'k', ---...-w..--:----- k. I M me, '+' . ` . • 1 j 1 • i Campbell^ 1 • - la ' "°Q..::, 2 • y. 21 L._..;j Ct I Int j 27 •I • _ - = :.•:k.:mgr'. ,T 41re® • :4 I .: . GENERAL HIGHWAY MAP A _ SCOTT :2_11-k_ COUNTYj ��7 rjlrrl'{ ' • MINNESOTA -j-lit -Y' ADEPARTMENT OF 1TQ411GILQAYILLS_ThA? ft RTAl7ON I 1'� f _p,'._ ARIT((>4f!'OF TAANSPOB'fAliON 1.. .T_.. .' Ai US DFP -1..:. -L• TmWly e0N/AT ADRINTSTIUMON 7 •.;"}' • SCALE OF STATUTE MILES ! !,! I. Ili I ..., "f. ! 1 1 I I I I 1993 BASIC DATA 1978' I FIGURE 1 .� Grass Lake <._' _' r • ',: : � 1, - `, .1A„- ,w a,. ,. I • 697 , °, •\`\ '"14- , .� 33 � �, il / 1 j \ 1 --• -- -_ 7=00'i=__- ^. / - v .. y e\ . �- - _ �.. - •-- �- -'S11- 4.r 44' OVi....- r! . .1 " r -.1,,. --'r • ��._4 }-;,. ( *-`, :'.4:':';A.:-.41 t 44' P-'i.. ? ; r. , .! o°• ‘C'.-" i ,� s pica { ra�f 2 i-1�. 1111 Water Tan . " x., s, sxnr' 7 ., y� * r , N, 700 r—a—:_11:7:4 N # :, ilimihniiii.......7::.:::.:':::.: on. ---. ----- 14"-,....111 -' .11, Waterwairst 1 72o ;.- " 1 ;--T.,t i- -,_4:f II r ILWO —. , - **"*...nur LIIVit. 41.,ii-,;, . fts.)71 a ii It � O –�\ •PP 4t;*191SI f--•ce-A. , -1 ,,„„v ‘,,,,,4,,,, ,w,_ 1. 0 , , „ , -, ; ....:_. , _ ,i '764 /� :74,,..,).44,;:tet„--;,..-- ts_ _--==i�A'��� ,, ,, /' Ill'ir' g iriz: o . opt.fr....r.z•Tityitili-F--------- --------.-7-----1=---- .;Tor i- --------- _,..7 -__1, Milt / . ‘ \ CO vb % Irli,_ ,„-i, .„ 0, qg ,, , _ . ee DI C.Q 1 / ,____N, , 4i) 41libit-t.L..' 1 MN. -4i 111..H ,,,,, , . _ rk... _- ei .,\„, -11. , r ...7 a f • — �_�.__ 150er s it• ,r-� = a$ caa '�`� ;p.0 ...-: -11411r O 10 •. l 4`' 11.%1 - a---474/7 o '.4.- -: I. S 2..i• *L -44- 14.' -.6.- C `1 \ NC `as•a4111 _= -, O 4 – ©�`.y- _-11� 1815`'.�� 1N._-� i.._' -.111.- .+► _ 4• ..� .1. © Q© B '13i`i�'l j4l nS• 4 t Sc.. \ 'lb- I ��/J ,w., - 4 '�` __ 11� d_ MN GN UNITED STATES I MINN °`19 53'MILS DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR c MiGs GEOLOGICAL SURVEY QUADRANGLE LOCATION EDEN PRAIRIE; MINN. I UTM GRID ANO 1993 MAGNETIC NORTH 44093-G4-TF-024 I SCALE 1:24000 OECLIVATIONATCENTER Of SHEET 0 I MILE ' 1967 �� 1 1 + REVISED 1993 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 1--1 k--11r-i 1_ L 1 1 6000 7000 FEET DMA 7373 IV SW-SERIES V872 5 E=--7 t--1 1---; i—.i f—. 1 KILOMETER CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET INATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 FIGURE 2 1 il I _III ° __,/ L. . - --',„...u. ..-,... -- ,4246, -ow 7,..41,Lip‘rii*F-i,".1-vp--------- is alir. __ , (' - :-—--— Wit en I , .4 L fo / [._. W p{� _ I r,i): , , d B e ,.,'"/, , ,44 , , - - _ — — L r 44 A --- „...,-_-„,„_._,,,-.,., r fifira,r-1 11.-' = ^ Lis frit a _ k,:' ..• -' ,1A%t,r o I Li 4 la (14/.1. 1.' ^ (3 `. a )41 tip, I � NO 3 1J/ 1. i,nr� ``'\ 1/ '.:., :74!1-01-1 oI t. V 4$�vt ( o�C , ii f sr 1,41, •__ - Tom: / r `t timet, Z N. :______ , //ILII7 , sJ o ,, i wa • 411 1.4 ►/ '-‘ o ., . iti,..1 .( ?....) ,,,.. , 9 t .-------- ..///, .;!, = illibb. ..-& -P' ° :,...• -- 11 '1' Ai .w 0.-A , /lit ,__, n',A,‘,. 1) 4 4 I 11 ' 1 i 1 ' /,/,'',,,:,i •',4_,,Ititit. . , . _ . i IF ., _�-i_ritsi-- I Ittirr10 i 0 1--1 � 1-1 ��� -- -4,.....--- -- 4t!'-1', 7*- � moi_' Alp :��1 � �i �i j C�kaft-- yA Fns) ir pNVIlywr V.-) 001.1 44 kir,J" ;,,,, - Q, -�'I .i `,r � � -r,„..,.s �r=7.i � .� w f� L i 1 iffr ---Li.-\14iTi e SU • , -- �e') 41/414.Y i 5,40 .° ' J (" -'�� jl I i - 5 ,,;:.:,%f k':4-. — V . t ____ 11-------4 1 I i lkip - 17 I !+4,?/// 7,11%\ li 1 6,/,,i, y IC....„.1741,, ,,_,____•,,.r--...1 ss_ 04' iV 41/'' -.....- Olt , rf1- 14111°4 i i it. .1 - .: I : " 1 9k 40 4 c 4 I o 1 • of �� JI-J ' gill° —�t 0 .4.. .,...... • !�u -:: IlLed 1 ',\I : 1 I if/ ////1 I //8/"/"• r),. ., ,i.' 1"."?...‘040:11 cillN „, /,... _ •,-,.. ''.„0..4,, IrgiN /. // /r *---t_felk,_-„.,,,, .- Non, . A Q‘D;Irgo -.Ali % o // / -.i. 56— 0,--00- if 11---Awg1,, . A C.,-,, , ift Is,s . „p a MOM �/_ii�_Litt -le” ii _ .�►� iv ' (,...ffismasioadAi --1 1 L. f_________ �—_ va x a1ryn ����� I — �1—ic =--i_ „,i, -----2ilrr MSI° iab_ 1. W I ' April 18,1997 Page 5 6. Description: Give a complete description of the proposed project and ancillary facilities. Emphasize ' construction and operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or produce wastes. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. ' The proposed project is a western relocation of an existing quarry to a 106-acre parcel of land, owned by CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division. The existing quarry lies to the east on the same land holding. The proposed quarrying process will disturb approximately 64 acres in the central part ' of the site. The quarry will be surrounded by 42 acres of undisturbed area together with manmade berms planted recently with deciduous and evergreen trees. The Applicant is proposing to commence quarrying operations in the spring of 1998 and continue for approximately fifteen years. ' CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division is also the owner of the existing quarry and processing operation immediately east of the proposed project site. Shiely is following the limestone resource in ' the area, but must skip over an area used for a drainage ditch and trunk sewer. But for the ditch and easement, the expansion would be contiguous to the existing operation. This existing limestone quarry has been in operation at its current location since 1961. A Conditional Use permit including ' the west project site has been in existence since 1984, but its terms require amendment before mining activity can occur in the western location. Quarrying in the existing cut will be suspended ' shortly after the proposed expansion area is opened. The processing plant which now serves the existing quarry will be left in place to serve the proposed new quarry as described below. ' Quarrying operations as described by the Applicant, (Figure 4), involve the following basic elements: 1) Site preparation, 2)Resource Removal, 3)Processing, and 4)Reclamation and End Use Development. The first part of site preparation is overburden removal. On the proposed site the overburden is approximately 30 feet thick and is made up of sandy soils covered by a thin layer ' of sandy topsoil. In the first few years of quarry development, in addition to the area excavated, a portion of the perimeter will be disturbed in order to build the landscape berms and plant trees. It is ' anticipated that an average of five to seven acres will be stripped of overburden each year. The overburden at this site is a good fill material and, it is expected that 200,000 to 300,000 cubic yards will be sold off annually for construction projects. Topsoil will be stockpiled for reclamation. ' Resource removal involves drilling and blasting and the use of large loaders and haul trucks. Holes (typically 6 inches in diameter) are drilled vertically into the limestone to a depth of approximately ' 45 to 50 feet. Several holes are filled with explosives and detonated with each"shot". The fractured rock will be removed from the quarry floor using large front-end loaders and carried by 50 ton haul trucks to the existing processing plant. The quarrying operations will be conducted during daylight ' hours, Monday through Saturday. It is anticipated that this quarry will yield approximately 11 million tons of limestone to a depth of 620 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL). ' Processing of limestone products will continue to occur at the existing plant on the east parcel. The Applicant will use the existing haul road to transport the quarried materials to the processing plant. There will be no change at the existing plant site as a result of the proposed new quarry. Processing involves crushing, screening, and washing to produce products such as road base, concrete aggregate, and agricultural lime. I 4 z I X111 T. E..* I 4 Id . W I ° o Ai z w I CID 0 ' LI1 <1aa a i.. .1 3F I a w IC UvAv, I [1!1 11 1 � I / 11111.1 1R- ' ,) ft: L-11--" ii'' '1,, i , 0 1 ,,,, , i ii _ . . A.„,.,,,,.,,,,,„ \u - � O / /222 1 ,_._f__________111 : al � � / ‘: ; !! d O ' I / 'Jr F A 1 1 ta I fi I iii . ' ''.; i f: 5 � a N to 1 F 0 1 ,/ ....__Q, C4 I O I .4 I Jr � // 1:4Q .r /.:J 1 a. :7ii4I d I W • / , 7771,/ � 11 l ii • / ' r 11 '---\� -------,L - l� 1 6 L J g I , //L) SS _. /� a o 7-p----1 _______--1 .'iJ1lH6 VIM A99'IVA I /,,, (------, 71 I IApril 18,1997 Page 7 I A significant percentage of the raw limestone is delivered to Superior Minerals Company (an on-site tenant/customer) where it is milled for use in the roofing shingle industry and as a soil conditioner. The Shiely aggregate processing plant and Superior Minerals often run 24 hours per day seven days per week. The reclamation of the quarry(Figure 5), will involve the establishment of slopes around the edge I that average 33 percent. In the end use, the quarry will become a deep, clear, cold water lake. The end use water's edge will be reclaimed with a variety of landscape/waterscape features. Portions of I the quarry edge will be developed as shallow water wetlands which will provide a visual variety and wildlife habitat. Portions will be developed with a shallow underwater grade to a depth of six feet. The water depth in the proposed lake will be 90 to 100 feet. With the proper attention to habitat Irequirements, it could be made suitable for lake trout or other deep water fish. The proposed quarry operation also leaves enough area in the northwest and northeast corners for Iseparate freestanding industrial developments. It also leaves a 200-foot buffer along the west side which could be combined with neighboring property for development. The Applicant has recently platted adjacent property to the south for industrial development. Following the 15 years of Iproposed quarrying, these industrial properties will have frontages on a 58-acre lake. 7. Project Magnitude Data: Total Project Area (acres): 106 acres Number of Residential Units: 0 units Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Building Area: Not Applicable I Indicate area of specific uses: Office 0 Manufacturing 0 I Retail 0 Other Industrial • 64 Acre Quarry Warehouse 0 Institutional ❑ Light Industrial 0 Agricultural ❑ IOther Commercial 0 Open Space • 42 Acre Buffer Area Building Height(s) 0 1 8. Permits and Approvals Required: List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals, and funding required: IUnit of Government Tyne of Application Status City of Shakopee Rezoning Pending I City of Shakopee Conditional Use Permit Amendment Pending MPCA SDS/NPDES Storm Water Existing to be Modified MPCA Air Permit Secured I MDNR Water Appropriation Existing to be Modified I I 1 zLn lil 11 if. ,, -2 id 44 gg I Oz w z w1-1 w z �0 z I a � A w ;14 C' ap I w VCA E: - 1 i 1 i ii I L �_--' i I '� / ( /," ._ 771 wa"A11;,','•:,,,:i.;:iic..1:111 ---zst.: -1�_c �-� ti • s _wog 41 n �JI ----)\._, -- I , I /I 1 ki,:1-r-' : '. <FWF1i 1! . , F I . ,/ /.1,ri:,,,:::I‘::::,14 ., 411:1,`c°i'.-4.1-45:1'1:4,-:::ill ›.—.1 1 // /17,/ ;i1' .-.:. .4. __'. . IC.-7:::.-!....::.___L: .-i.:..-.,n ;i7.1,.. -:-.4-4,14t.i.,,: //// / , . ..-„, s �, ' _______._ I a 6 ,-— 1ANQ NHYd A911VA 7 0 I • IApril 18,1997 Page 9 I9. Land Use: Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. I Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land uses; indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks. IThe proposed project site is currently vacant, with the exception of a small air strip and shed which is used by a remote control model airplane club. The site is also used by the Toro Company as a I proving ground for their lawn care equipment. A portion of the site was used for stockpiling overburden that was removed from the existing quarry operation located to the east of the proposed project site. A large portion of this overburden pile has recently been removed. The remainder of the I pile(approximately 50,000 cubic yards) will be removed by the Applicant over the next few years. The southern portion of the proposed project site was once owned by the Kawasaki Company and used as a test track for their snowmobiles and motorcycles. IThe proposed project site and surroundingproperties p p es are a mix of commercial and industrial uses that are consistent with the existing I-2 Heavy Industrial zoning. The Applicant's existing quarry is I approximately 60 acres in size and occupies the central part of the 128-acre parcel which is immediately east of the proposed project site. The Chicago &Northwestern Railroad borders the Iproposed project site on the north. North of the railroad are these uses: Elk River Concrete Products, Model Stone Company, MAPCO, Raceway Park, Liquor Warehouse, Case Equipment Company, Camp &Boat Sales Company and Mobile Home Minnesota. To the west are the facilities Iof the Conklin Chemical Company, the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission well and pump house, and Chemrex Inc. Businesses located west of Valley Park Drive include: Brambilla's Inc., Shakopee Valley Printing, Valley Green Business Park and tenants and Tsumura International. South of the I project site is the new Valley Park 13th Addition, an industrial plat (currently vacant) and Northern States Power. South of these uses is the new Highway 101/169 Bypass. The Prior Lake Drainage Ditch bisects the Applicant's property, separating the existing quarry and processing operations I from the proposed project site. The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services has an easement for a large sanitary sewer interceptor line which parallels the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch. I The existing quarry has coexisted with these neighboring industrial uses for more than 30 years without serious conflicts. The environmental concerns typically associated with quarrying operations are vibrations from blasting, noise, dust, truck traffic and unsightliness. At this quarry, I since there is a requirement to dewater, groundwater interference is also a concern. These concerns are discussed more completely elsewhere in this EAW. I The Applicant has indicated that there are no known environmental hazards from past land uses on the proposed project site. In 1990, Shiely reported a leaking 10,000-gallon underground storage tank on its adjacent east parcel. The tank was removed and the site was remedied under MPCA I supervision. The site was declared clean on June 24, 1992. I I 1 IApril 18,1997 Page 10 I10. Cover Types: Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after I development. Before After I Types 2 to 8 Wetlands 0 0 Wooded/Forest 4 8 Brush/Grassland 102 40 I Cropland 0 0 Urban/Suburban Lawn Landscaping 0 0 Impervious Surface 0 0 I Other(Open Water) 0 58 Total 106 106 IThe site has been extensively disturbed for several years by equipment testing by the Toro and Kawasaki Companies and by quarry overburden stockpiling and subsequent stripping by Shiely. I11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources: a. Describe fish and wildlife resources on or near the site and discuss how they would be affected Iby the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The proposed project is located west of and adjacent to the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch, and I approximately one-quarter mile north of a wetland complex that has just been substantially altered to accommodate storm water from the new Valley Park 13th Addition industrial plat. Because the project does not include either the wetland itself or its watershed, it appears unlikely that it would I be directly impacted by the project. According to the groundwater report submitted by the Applicant, both the ditch and stormwater pond are perched above the regional groundwater table (see Appendix A). They should, therefore, not be affected by changes in groundwater levels or I direction at greater depth. The groundwater discharge to the ditch will continue at rates similar to those experienced in the past as described in the Applicant's groundwater pumping analysis. This will continue to feed the clear, cold water to the ditch and to the downstream wildlife refuge. IInadvertent damage to the ditch by discharge of suspended solids has not been aroblem according � to monitoring reports and visual inspection. Since water would now be pumped to the old east Iquarry before it is discharged to the ditch, the possibility of discharge of suspended solids will be even less than at present. I The USFWS's general water management plan for Blue Lake (1988) noted a concern that Shiely might stop pumping and thereby cause water levels in Blue Lake to drop. The plan concluded that upward seepage to Blue Lake would be adequate to keep lake levels high, even in the absence of IShiely pumping. IApril 18,1997 Page 11 ' The oak forest habitat on the NSP property will also be unaffected by the proposed quarry. After mining has been completed, the resulting lakes will be suitable for fish, waterfowl and other aquatic plants and animals. ' b. Are there any state-listed endangered, threatened, or special-concern species; rare plant communities; colonial waterbird nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat; or other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site? YES ■ NO ❑ ' If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources was conducted Describe measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse ' impacts. The Minnesota Natural Heritage database was reviewed by the MDNR. No rare or threatened ' species were reported to exist on or near the project site. See Appendix B. The Savage Fen is about 3 miles east of the proposed quarry site and the Boiling Springs&Eagle Creek, are about 2.5 miles ' east. The Applicant has recognized that prevention of groundwater impacts to these resources is a major concern of the City as well as the MDNR and other agencies. To avoid lowering groundwater levels, an unusual approach has been taken to managing groundwater. The old east quarry will ' receive the pumping discharge from the new west quarry. The Applicant's computer models indicate that the presence of this large body of water will"block" the eastward influence of the pumping and keep groundwater levels at the fen no lower than at present and possibly even slightly ' higher than at present. The details of this pumping arrangement have been discussed with the MDNR and are presented in response to Question 13b and in Appendix A. ' 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources: Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration (dredging,filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, impoundment) of any surface water(lake,pond, wetland, stream, drainage ditch)? YES ■ NO ❑ If yes, idents the water resource to be affected and describe: The alteration, including the construction process; volumes of dredged or fill material; area affected; length of stream ' diversion; water surface area affected; timing and extent of fluctuations in water surface elevations; spoils disposal sites; and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. ' The proposed project will result in the creation of a second lake in this area. The Applicant will continue to use an outfall to the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch from the existing east portion of the quarry. The dewatering for the proposed quarry will continue to contribute seasonally high flows of ' clear, cold water to the ditch and down stream through Blue Lake and eventually to the Minnesota River. The flow cycles and volumes from the proposed quarry will remain very similar to that of the existing quarrying operation. 1 ' April 18,1997 Page 12 ' 13. Water Use: a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells? ' YES ■ NO ❑ ' For abandoned wells give the location and Unique well number. For new wells, or other previously unpermitted wells, give the location and purpose of the well and the Unique well number (if known). ' There are three existing monitoringwells on the site,, identified as follows: ' Well Location Unique Well Numbers Monitoring Well#1 (North center of proposed project) 561717 ' Monitoring Well#2 (South buffer of proposed project) 561716 MDNR Monitoring Well (Southwest corner of old east quarry) • The Kawasaki well was a water supply well that is now unused. The Applicant proposes to use it as ' an additional monitoring well during the life of the project. Monitoring Well#2 and the Kawasaki well will continue to exist through the proposed project and will be sealed in accordance with the ' State well code when mining is completed. Well#1 is in the proposed mining area and will remain until the quarry expands through it. Shakopee City Well #s 4 and 5 are located near the southwest corner of the project site; impacts on these wells are discussed below. b. Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water(including dewatering)? YES ■ NO ❑ If yes, indicate the source, quantity, duration,purpose of the appropriation, and Minnesota ' Department of Natural Resources(DNR) water appropriation permit number of any existing appropriation. Discuss the impact of the appropriation on ground water levels. ' Mining requires that the quarry be dewatered during the season of operation. The Applicant's existing MDNR appropriations permit#67-0172 will be amended to reflect the modifications to the point of appropriation and the point of discharge. This permit now authorizes Shiely to pump up to ' 10,000 gallons per minute (gpm) and up to 2,750 million gallons per year. ' Following the closure of the east quarry, which will happen within a few years of the commencement of mining in the west quarry, pumping from the east quarry will cease and the quarry will be allowed to fill with groundwater. Initially an area of about four acres at the west end ' of the project site will be quarried. The pumping rate from this initial area of the west quarry is estimated to be 4,400 gpm to dewater to the initial floor level of elevation 674. Within a few years, the floor will be lowered to elevation 620 and pumping will increase to about 6,800 gpm. April 18,1997 Page 13 ' The dewatering discharge will be routed into the old east quarry, raising the lake level to about elevation 732. This elevation will provide a ground water recharge from the east lake and will allow excess water to flow by gravity from the old east quarry to the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch. When the initial cut of the west quarry is dewatered to elevation 674, the net recharge from the east quarry is projected to be about 900 gpm. When the initial cut is dewatered to elevation 620, the recharge will increase to 1,900 gpm. For most areas around the quarry ground water levels will increase ' significantly compared to current levels. Limited drawdown will occur, however, to the west and northwest. ' As quarrying progresses from west to east, the area to be dewatered will increase and the pumping and recharge rates will increase. At maximum development of the full 58-acre area of the quarry to ' elevation 620, the pumping rate is expected to be about 12,300 gpm. Recharge at the east quarry will increase to about 6,300 gpm. Therefore, the net appropriation(withdrawal minus recharge)will be within the limits of the current permit with respect to rate. The maximum total withdrawal per ' year may be increased, depending on the duration of the mining season. Three types of impacts could be of concern from this pumping. The first potential impact would be ' to the Savage Fen complex, including Boiling Springs and Eagle Creek. A groundwater study of these resources was completed by Barr Engineering as part of the Alternative Urban Area wide Review Process in 1995-1996. This review process evaluated the steps necessary to preserve these ' natural resources as development progresses. The model used for the AUAR study was modified to reflect the proposed quarry modifications. Details of the modifications and modeling results are described in Appendix A. The report concludes that by flooding the east pit and maintainingthelevel water at a predetermined elevation, impacts to the fen and boiling springs can be essentially eliminated. The ' proposed quarry depths and east quarry water level were set based on the need to avoid all potential impacts to the fen, springs and creek. Therefore, these waters should not be impacted by the proposed project. In fact, the model predicts a modest increase in flow to the boiling springs and ' Eagle Creek due to the re-infiltration of pumped water. A second potential impact would be to Dean's Lake, a shallow open-water wetland located ' approximately one mile south of the site. In the 1970's residents of Dean's Lake felt that the quarry dewatering was the cause of low water levels in the lake. This was investigated in the MDNR ' permitting process for the quarry dewatering in 1980. A published MDNR report concluded that the pumping at the quarry had no discernable influence on Dean's lake. The fluctuations in lake level were attributed to variations in rainfall. A second study was conducted for Shiely by Sunde ' Engineering to determine if the quarry dewatering was having a negative impact on the lake or nearby residential wells. The report stated that lake monitoring wells reflected normal cyclical variations of the shallow water table. The present quarry has operated since the time of these studies without noted adverse impacts on Dean's Lake. The proposed re-infiltration at the old east quarry will also help to reduce any quarry impacts on ' Dean's Lake. Figure 2 in Appendix A shows that initially re-infiltration impacts will exceed withdrawal impacts in the underlying Prairie du Chien aquifer in the vicinity of Dean's Lake. Figure 4 in Appendix A shows that at full quarry development, underlying water levels will be higher at the east end of the lake and lower at the west end with the line of zero influence roughly through the middle of the lake. I April 18,1997 Page 14 I The final potential groundwater impact concerns City Well lls 4 and 5 located immediately west of the proposed quarry. The report in Appendix A concludes that the wells will continue to be functional even under the maximum pumping; the effect will be limited to slightly higher electricity I IC.'''' costs (up to $200 per year) for slightly increased pumping head. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? YES 0 NO ■ If yes, identify the supply, the DNR water appropriation permit number of the supply and the quantity to be used 14. Water-related Land Use Management Districts: Does any part of the project site involve a shore land zoning district, a delineated 100 year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? YES El NO ■ If yes, idents the district and discuss the compatibility of the project with the land use restrictions of the district 15. Water Surface Use: Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? YES ❑ NO ■ I If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other users or fish and wildlife resources. I I I I I 16. Soils Approximate depth (in feet) to: Ground water: minimum 20' average 30' Bedrock: minimum 25' average 35' Describe the soils on the site, giving Soil Conservation Service (SCS) classifications, if known. The soil types listed by the SCS for the project site are: Dg Dune land HdA Hubbard fine sand, 0-2 percent slopes HdB Hubbard fine sand, 2-6 percent slopes HeA Hubbard loamy fine sand, 0-2 percent slopes ZaB Zimmerman fine sand, 2-6 percent slopes ZaB2 Zimmerman fine sand, 2-6 percent slopes, moderately wind eroded ZaC2 Zimmerman fine sand, 6-12 percent slopes, slightly and moderately eroded ' April 18,1997 Page 15 17. Erosion and Sedimentation: Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: Acres = 64 Cubic Yards = 4.5 million ' Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and idents them on the site map. Describe the erosion and sedimentation measures to be used during and after construction of the project. The fine sands on the site are highly erodible. These soils will be exposed and removed from the bedrock annually, several acres at a time, as quarrying proceeds. A portion of this overburden will be used to construct landscape berms around the perimeter of the quarry. These berms will be ' dressed with top soil, seeded with a grass mixture and planted with trees and shrubs. After these berms are established, the exterior slopes should be relatively erosion-resistant. Therefore, once quarrying begins any erosion that does occur will be on the exposed cut face ahead of the advancing ' quarry wall. This eroded material will be trapped at two locations: The first will be in the quarry sumps where the water will be treated in a manner similar to a stormwater detention pond. The Applicant's data indicate that this method has allowed the Applicant to meet water quality standards for discharge for many years. The second treatment for internally eroded material will be the discharge from the west quarry sumps into the old east quarry lake. This lake will provide a much larger detention facility that should result in a very high quality effluent. The possibility of erosion of the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch should not change g g since the discharge of quarry dewatering water will continue to occur at rates similar to those experienced in the past, as detailed in the Applicant's groundwater study. See Appendix A. 18. Water Quality/Surface Water Runoff: a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe methods to be used to manage and/or treat runoff Since quarrying will create a depression, the quantity of surface water runoff will be reduced. The quality of the runoff will not change since any surface runoff will come from the undisturbed parts ' of the property. The volume of runoff from the site is believed to be very low under present conditions because of the sandy soils on the site. During and after the proposed quarry operation, rainfall and snow melt will be completely self-contained. Runoff entering the quarry will flow across ' the quarry floor to the sump pump and then be pumped into the quarry lake east of the proposed project from which it will be discharged into the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch. The volume of the east lake will provide more than adequate settling capacity to ensure a high quality discharge to the ' ditch. 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. of the runoff may affect a lake consult "EA W Guidelines"about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed) ' The receiving water for runoff and groundwater discharges from the site will continue to be the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch. This channel crosses under Highway 101 and discharges into Blue Lake, a floodplain wetland of the Minnesota River. Future discharge water quality should be very similar ' to the current discharge from the existing quarry. I ' April 18,1997 Page 16 Discharge samples are analyzed weekly and are typically well below permit limits. The pH averages 7.5 units (permit limits are 6.0 to 9.0) and suspended solids average 8.4 mg/L(permit limits are< ' 60.0 mg/L). A sample of the discharge water was recently analyzed for phosphorus and nitrogen, with the following results: ' Parameter Results Total phosphorus 0.02 µg/L 12/2/96 ' Soluble(ortho)phosphorus 0.02 µg/L 12/2/96 Nitrate nitrogen 2.5 mg/L 2/24/97 It should be noted that even in the absence of pumping, this groundwater would be discharged to ' Blue Lake via the groundwater system. Impacts to Blue Lake from the Shiely discharge were evaluated in the Blue Lake Watershed Study ' prepared for the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge in 1988. The study did not find an impact from the discharge and noted that: "Pumping into the Dean Lake Outlet [Prior Lake Drainage Ditch] from the Shiely quarry provides an abundant supply of clean water..." The major ' concern noted was the runoff from future development in the Blue Lake watershed. 19. Water Quality/Wastewater: ' a. Describe sources, quantities, and composition (except for normal domestic sewage) of all sanitary and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. ' There will be no wastewater generated from the proposed quarry. The existing processing plant on the east parcel will wash approximately 30 percent (approximately ' 150,000 tons annually) of the aggregate produced at this quarry. This washing process requires approximately 300 gallons of water per minute. The wastewater from this process will carry a high load of suspended limestone particles. ' b. Describe any waste treatment t methods to be used and give estimates of composition after ' treatment, or if the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of the site conditions for such systems. Identify receiving waters(including ground water) and estimate the impact of the discharge on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the discharge may affect a lake ' consult "EAW Guidelines"about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed) The wash water discharge from the existing processing operation will be directed through a cyclone to pull out a high percentage of fines before being discharged into the east side of the east quarry lake. The fine particles from this wash water will settle out in the east quarry lake before the clarified water discharges into the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch. This is expected to improve the ' quality of the discharged water. 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. I April 18,1997 Page 17 I20. Ground Water/Potential for Contamination: a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: IMinimum = 20' Average =30' Ib. Describe any of the following site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes; shallow limestone formations/karst conditions; soils with high infiltration rates; abandoned or unused wells. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due Ito any of these hazards. According to the Soil Conservation Service classifications the soils found on this site have high I infiltration rates and are underlain by dolomitic limestone. There are no known sinkholes or karst conditions on this site. I The proposed project site is currently vacant and there are no abandoned or unused wells on the property. There will be no fuel storage on the project site. To prevent contamination of groundwater that might be introduced by mining equipment, all vehicle maintenance will be done in Ithe shop or on a concrete slab on the east parcel at the existing facilities. All fuel supplies are stored in compliance with state and federal guidelines at the existing facility. c. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present on the project site and idents measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating ground water. IDiesel fuels used by mobile equipment and explosives will be present on the proposed project site. The Applicant has indicated that vehicle maintenance will be done in a shop or on a concrete slab near the existing processing facilities, and that spill prevention and response training will be I conducted each year. All fuel supplies will be stored in compliance with state and federal guidelines at the existing facility. IExplosives will be brought to the site on the day blasting is to occur. They will not be stored on the site. The explosives that will be used include ANFO (a mixture of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil) I and Tovan (a waterproof emulsions blend of ANFO). 21. Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks: I a. Describe the types, amounts, and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes to be generated, including animal manures, sludge and ashes. Identify the method and local of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste indicate if there will be a source separation plan; list Itypes) and how the project will be modified to allow recycling There will be no solid or hazardous wastes generated on the proposed quarry site. IShiely will continue to use a parts-washing unit that requires solvent in its maintenance shop at the existing facility. It is covered under a Hazardous Waste permit issued by the Minnesota Pollution IControl Agency. A small amount of municipal solid waste is generated at the office at the existing facility. No change I in waste production is anticipated. 1 ' April 18,1997 Page 18 ' The Applicant has a solid waste permit from Scott County that allows concrete and asphalt rubble and NSP bottom ash to be stored at the processing facility adjacent to the existing east quarry. ' Shiely has been recycling rubble(Spancrete and FabCon waste, comeback concrete and road reconstruction rubble) for many years at the existing east site. In 1996, state and county permits were obtained to include bottom ash (burned, vitrified soil from coal fired power plants) in the ' recycling waste stream. 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). There will be no storage tanks kept on the proposed project site. ' As part of the continuing operations, the following will be stored at the processing facility adjacent to the existing quarry site: 1 - 300-gallon gasoline tank (aboveground) 1 - 12,000-gallon diesel tank(underground) ' 1 - 300-gallon waste oil tank(aboveground) 2 - 265-gallon bulk oil tanks (aboveground) ' These tanks are registered with the MPCA. The Applicant indicates that it is maintaining them in accordance with and performing the monitoring prescribed by state and federal regulations. ' 22. Traffic: Parking spaces added= 0 Existing spaces(if project involves expansion) = 7 ' Estimated total Average Daily Traffic (ADT)generated= 130 trips Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated(if known) and its timing= The total number of ' trips is evenly distributed throughout the day. For each affected road indicate the ADT and the directional distribution of traffic with and ' without the project. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements which will be necessary. ' The Applicant indicates that customer trucks will continue to enter and exit the existing quarry site from either Highway 101 or from Valley Park Drive. Of the approximately 130 daily trips, 100 trips could be assigned to Highway 101 and 30 trips could be assigned to Valley Park Drive. It is ' anticipated that over the next several years demand for construction aggregates will be greater and that daily trips from the existing east site could increase by as much as 50 percent. By the year 2000, it is estimated that 195 daily trips could originate from this facility. This increase in traffic will be directly related to area construction demand. Based on 1994 MnDOT data, the ADT along Highway 101 from CR 17 east to CR 18 is between ' 23,000 and 26,500 trips. Considering that the new bypass will eliminate many of these trips, it does not appear that an additional 65 trips per day will cause an increase in congestion. ' The proposed project is not expected to require any traffic improvements. April 18,1997 Page 19 23. Vehicle-related air emissions: Provide an estimate of the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon ' monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. (If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult "EAW Guidelines" about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed) ' The project should not cause any significant decrease in air quality. Additional traffic will not be generated by the proposed quarry. The number of daily trips will be determined by the local demand for construction aggregates.While an increase in demand for limestone products would result in a localized increase in traffic and, consequently, in vehicle-related air emissions, the increase is approximately 0.3 percent of the 1994 ADT on adjacent Highway 101. ' 24. Stationary source air emissions: Will the project involve any stationary sources of air emissions(such as boilers or exhaust stacks)? ' YES ❑ NO ■ If yes, describe the sources, quantities, and composition of the emissions; the proposed air pollution control devices; the quantities and composition of the emissions after treatment; and the effects on air quality. 25. Will the project generate dust, odors, or noise during construction and/or operation: YES ■ NO ❑ If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration, and quantities or intensity, and any ' proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify the locations of sensitive receptors in the vicinity and estimate the impacts on these receptors. ' Dust will be produced on the site during the following activities: 1. Stripping of overburden 2. Blasting 3. Loading 4. Truck traffic ' 5. Processing The stripping of overburden is usually not a dusty process because the sandy soil is moist from snow melt and rainfall. The proportion of silt and clay sized particles in this soil is relatively small, ' therefore, wind erosion would not be expected to generate significant quantities of dust from the removal of overburden. Protection from wind erosion will focus on revegetation of stockpiles and berms as soon as possible. Trees have already been planted in portions of the proposed buffer. Additional berms and plantings will provide shelter belts that will further reduce wind erosion. Blasting and loading of rock are typically not dusty operations because the rock itself is quite coarse. In addition, both the quarry floor and the blasted material are typically moist from groundwater. Haul roads are watered as required by the MPCA to minimize dust generation. The existing crushing and screening processes at the east quarry site will continue at the same location ' and in the same manner as at present. The magnitude of dust emissions should not change as a result of the change in quarry location. April 18,1997 Page 20 ' Noise There are no sensitive receptors (i.e., residential or institutional uses) to noise surrounding the proposed quarry. However, noise level readings were conducted of the existing quarry operations by the MPCA Air Quality Division in 1995. MPCA test results are well within the state standard. ' See Appendix C There have been no noise complaints received by either the facility or the community in 30 years of ' operation at the existing facility. The quarry is surrounded by heavy industry, adjacent to heavily used railroad tracks and an auto racing facility and is close to Highway 101. The equipment that will be operating in the proposed quarry will include a drill rig, a front-end loader and haul trucks. ' Seasonally, for a period of a few weeks at a time, earthmoving equipment will strip overburden from the limestone deposit. ' Including the top of the limestone, there will be three floor levels below the ground surface. See Figure 6. The drill rig will operate approximately 40 feet and 80 feet below; the loader at 80 feet and 120 feet below; and haul trucks between the ground surface and the quarry floor. This vertical ' separation, combined with the berms and buffer, is expected to significantly reduce noise impacts to the surrounding properties. ' Vibration Excavation of dolomite requires blasting to loosen the rock. Typically, a series of drill holes is bored ' parallel to the existing quarry face. These holes are filled with ANFO explosive by a contract supplier (no explosives are stored on the site). The multiple charges are detonated in a series, milliseconds apart and a slice of the dolomite collapses to the quarry floor. The blasting produces ' sound but its impacts are better described as vibrations which could potentially impact adjacent buildings or equipment. ' In thirty years of operation at the existing site there has not been a negative blasting-related incident or claim reported. Every blast is monitored by a seismograph to determine the extent of vibration ' produced. In the past, vibration has been measured on the east side of the existing quarry at the NSP station and at the Elk River Concrete Products pipe factory. These were the most sensitive adjacent land uses. Recently monitoring has been expanded to include readings at buildings on the ' west side of the proposed quarry. As the operations move to the west side of the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch, blasting will occur closer ' to the Conklin Chemical Company, Chemrex, and FMG Tsumura. Prediction of future blasting impacts was done by Dr. David Braslau in his report attached as Appendix D. Dr. Braslau concludes that blasting impacts will be greatest at the Conklin facilities and adjustment of charge sizes (delay weights) can reduce blasting impacts to levels where no impacts are likely This report was recently reviewed by David Siskind, a blasting expert formerly associated with the ' Bureau of Mines. He concluded that "unless there is some specially sensitive equipment nearby, blasting will initially be possible with 350 lbs/delay without damage problems". He recommends collection of vibration data in the west direction to improve the reliability of predictions and the ' review of any equipment data at nearby businesses. As mentioned above, this program has already begun. I g W I : a T G7 i : " . t� I a ; i { I ' { I i t; y iF I • O 9 R 1 . f z � St b 7 - O I' j I I. 1 n z 1 m o 1 F 1 x V a i ,-- ; ' April 18,1997 Page 22 26. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site: a. Archaeological, historical, or architectural resources YES 0 NO ■ See Appendix E. b. Prime or unique farmlands YES 0 NO ■ c. Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails YES 0 NO ■ d Other unique resources YES 0 NO ■ If any items are answered Yes, describe the resource and identify any impacts on the resource due to the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. ' 27. Will the project create adverse visual impacts: (Examples include:glare from intense lights; lights visible in wilderness areas; and large visible ' plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.) YES ❑ NO ■ The Applicant has indicated that the proposed quarry will be screened fromublic view P by substantial landscape berms and tree plantings.The proposed quarry will involve no new buildings or ' plant facilities. Since the surface of the bedrock(limestone) is about 30 to 40 feet below the natural grade, the quarrying equipment will be virtually unseen. ' As the Applicant's industrial lots along the south edge of the proposed quarry are developed, new buildings and landscaping will provide additional screening. The areas near the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch will also be landscaped and planted to screen the east quarry and plant facilities. In order to ' minimize the visual impact of the operations, the Applicant proposes to begin quarrying on the west side and advance to the east. By the time the quarry comes into view, the plantings will be mature and dense enough to obscure the view of the operations. See Figure 6. 28. Compatibility with plans: ' Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive land use plan or any other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? ' YES ■ NO ❑ If yes, identify the applicable plan(s), discuss the compatibility of the project with the provisions of ' the plan(s), and explain how any conflicts between the project and the plan(s) will be resolved. If no, explain. The proposed site is located in the City of Shakopee I-2 Heavy Industrial District. An application will be submitted to the City requesting inclusion of the parcel in the Mining Overlay Zone. ' In 1991, Conditional Use Permit No. 375, which covers both the existing quarry and proposed expansion, was changed to require an amendment before the western portion could be opened for quarrying activities. An application for an amendment to this permit will also be submitted. ' The City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan does not address mining nor does it specifically ally address land use issues in the area of the proposed project. 1 IA.ril 18,1997 Pa e 2 �3 IThe Scott County Comprehensive Plan generally,designates this site as having the potential for ground water contamination. This appears to be based upon the Scott County Geologic Atlas which notes the presence of soils with high infiltration rate overlying the bedrock. Infiltration of I contaminants has not been a problem during existing quarrying operations at the old east quarry there is not reason to expect change when the proposed west quarryq nY and p p is begun. I Further, during the life of the quarry, pumping from the quarry sump will cause groundwater to flow radially inward and upward toward the quarry.sump. The quarry walls and floor are sources of upwelling groundwater. Therefore, if a spill did occur during the life of the project, infiltration Iwould be very limited. After the mining is completed, the proposed lake will not support any land use and will also be a groundwater discharge site, so infiltration of contaminants will not be likely. I29. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services: Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure, or public services be required to serve the project? IYES ❑ NO ■ IIf yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure/services needed (Any infrastructure that is a "connected action"with respect to the project must be assessed in this EA W; see "EAW Guidelines"for details.) 30. Related Developments;p s, Cumulative Impacts: a. Are future stages of this development planned or likely? I YES 0 ■ NO IIf yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing, and plans environmental review. Ib. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? YES ■ NO ❑ IIf yes, briefly describe the past development, its timing, and any past environmental review. IThe proposed quarry is the last stage of quarrying on the Applicant's property in this area. Quarrying and limestone processing began on the east parcel in 1961 and has continued since. The existing Conditional Use Permit, first approved in 1984, includes the project site. The current Iexisting quarry is near completion. There have been several specific environmental reviews of this quarrying operation over the past decade. They have been cited in earlier sections of this worksheet. Ic. Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or outlots? YES ■ NO ❑ IIf yes, briefly describe the development and its relationship elatronshrp to the present project. I ' April 18,1997 Page 24 ' The industrial plat, Valley Park 13th Addition, is scheduled to be complete and ready for sale and occupancy by the Spring of 1997. The north 26 acres of this plat are owned by the Applicant and ' are being developed in cooperation with Valley Green Business Park. The development of this acreage is part of the end use plan for this quarry. The lots will be sold to users who will construct facilities and build their businesses with full knowledge of the ongoing quarrying operation. d If a, b, or c were marked Yes, discuss any cumulative environmental impacts resulting from this project and the other development. As previously discussed, this project is a continuation of a mining operation that has been in existence for more than 30 years. The cumulative environmental impacts of the existing quarry have ' been relatively minor. The question about a cumulative impact to the groundwater is addressed in the report prepared by Barr Engineering. According to the report, the proposed quarry will have an acceptably low and reversible impact on the groundwater. 31. Other Potential Environmental Impacts: If the project may cause adverse environmental impacts which were not addressed by items 1 to 28, ' idents and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. 32. SUMMARY OF ISSUES ' List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as ' permit conditions. April 18,1997 Page 25 ' 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. O I 0 Signature Ar ' 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 pt. 4410.0200, subp. 9b and subp. 60. Signature /f C. I hereby certify that copies of the completed EAW are being sent to all points on the official EQB EAW distribution list. i Signature ' Title of signer 1Mutl l t'Y Date 1'M�l`1T 19 199 geGTO1 1 1 1 1 i 1 Appendix A 1 Potential Groundwater Impacts of ' Shiely Shakopee West Quarry Barr Engineering Company December 13, 1996 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 Potential Groundwater Impacts of ' Shiely Shakopee West Quarry 1 1 ' Barr Engineering Company ' December 13, 1996 Table of Contents (Continued) List of Tables Table 1 Trial and Error Analysis of Groundwater Impacts, Full Excavation of Western Quarry ' to Elevation 620 Table 2 Impact on Groundwater Flow, Initial Impact of Western Quarry Development (4-Acre Section), Eastern Quarry Water Level at Elevation 732. Table 3 Impact on Groundwater Flow, Full Development of Western Quarry, Eastern Quarry Water Level at Elevation 732. Table 4 Impact on City of Shakopee Wells, Western Quarry Floor Deepened to Elevation 620, Eastern Quarry Water Level at Elevation 732. Table 5 Impact of Quarry Dewatering on City Wells 4 and 5 List of Figures ' - Figure 1 Water Levels in Well MW-1 Figure 2 Impact of Shiely Quarry Dewatering and Filling of Eastern Quarry on Water Levels in Prairie du Chien -- Eariy Quarry Development Figure 3 Impact of Shiely Quarry Dewatering and Filling of Eastern Quarry on Water Levels in Jordan Aquifer— Early Quarry Development Figure 4 Impact of Shiely Quarry Dewatering and Filling of Eastern Quarry on Water Levels in ' Prairie du Chien— Final Quarry Development ' Figure 5 Impact of Shiely Quarry Dewatering and Filling of Eastern Quarry on Water Levels in Jordan Aquifer— Final Quarry Development 2370085\44729-1/NPN ii I 1 .0 Introduction I The Shiely Company proposes to relocate its Shakopee quarry to a new location to the west of the I I I Prior Lake drainage ditch. The new west quarry will require dewatering to a greater depth than the existing east quarry. The proposed project needs to be examined to evaluate whether it will I have any impacts on nearby water resources, including the Savage Fen complex, including Boiling Springs and Eagle Creek. The impact on Shakopee city wells also needs to be evaluated. A groundwater study of these resources was previously completed in 1994-1995. The study was done by Barr Engineering as part of the Alternative Urban Areawide Review Process for the City of Savage. That review process evaluated the steps necessary to preserve these natural resources I I as development in Savage progresses. The model used for the AUAR study was used to evaluate the impacts of the proposed west quarry development. g performed This report summarizes the results of the groundwater flow modeling p rmed to investigate: (1) potential environmental impacts on area groundwater that could be associated with planned - mining operations at the Shiely Shakopee quarry; and (2) mitigative actions that might negate these impacts. The Scope of Work on which this work was based was developed pursuant to a meeting held at I I I I Barr Engineering on Wednesday, August 7, 1996, attended by Bob Bieraugel, Daniel Mergens, and Darcie Brown of Shiely, and David Dahlstrom and Brian LeMon of Barr. This scope was modified after discussion with Bob Bieraugel. The final Scope of Work called for: (1) Reevaluating the leakage resistance between the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers and incorporating the new value of the leakage resistance into the two-layer MLAEM model that was derived from the original three-layer Model. (2) Using the readjusted two-layer model to simulate the effect of deepening the west quarry and maintaining of water levels in the east quarry; assuming that a clay barrier has been added to the west wall of the reinfiltration east quarry. The following sections describe the results of the modeling analysis. 2370085\44729-1/NPN 1 2.0 Description p n of Model Modifications 1 ' 2.1 Two-Layer Model Derived From the Original Three-Layer Groundwater Flow Model In the course of assessing the impact of deepening of the Shiely quarry below theP resent elevation of 685 feet M.S.L., it was concluded that the original three-layer flow model was not best suited for this application because the quarry floor was set below the elevation of the base of the first layer used in the original model. The major drawback to the three-layer model is that the current ' MLAEM code does not allow for an "inactivation" of the areas in the first layer (upper aquifer) that go dry. Wherever a portion of Layer 1 dries, the current model code sets the head to the elevation ' of the base of Layer 1 and continues to provide water to the underlying Layer 2 through the leaky elements linking both layers. ITo avoid this situation and to have a more accurate model of the mass balance, a two-layer model was developed by joining Layers 1 and 2 of the original model into one layer. This results in an ' upper layer that will not go dry under the stresses considered. In the two-layer model, Layer 1 represents a combination of the Sand and Gravel and Prairie du Chien aquifers, and Layer 2 ' represents the Jordan aquifer. Elements that were in Layers 1 and 2 of the original model were incorporated in Layer 1 of the two-layer model. An inhomogeneity doublet was added to model the ' higher transmissivity of the Sand and Gravel and Prairie du Chien in the area where the water table was in the Sand and Gravel aquifer(i.e., east of the bedrock valley and south of the city of Savage). The leakage resistance between the combined Sand and Gravel and Prairie du Chien ' layer and the Jordan layer was kept at ten days, as in the original model. As discussed below, this assumption was later reevaluated. The model was recalibrated to yield similar discharge in the ' Shiely quarry. The calibration was deemed sufficient to perform incremental analysis, such as the current impact analyses. The leakage resistance between the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers was reevaluated based I . on the observed response of water levels in Shiely's monitoring well MW-1 to intermittent pumping of Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Well 4. The effective vertical hydraulic conductivity of the combined units was determined through automatic calibration/parameter estimation using the ' computer codes PEST and WTAQ1. Through this procedure, the leakage resistance of the basal 2370085\44729-1/NPN 2 1 ' layer of the Prairie du Chien aquifer was estimated hmated to be 8,850 days. Details of this analysis are presented in Appendix A. 2.2 Hydraulic Resistance Between the Prairie du Chien and Jordan Aquifers ' 2.2.1 Determination of Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity This appendix describes the procedures used to determine the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the ' basal Prairie du Chien Group. The data used in the evaluation were gathered from the continuous monitoring of well MW-1 over the winter of 1995-1996. A smaller amplitude, cyclic drawdown- recovery pattern caused by intermittent pumping of SPUC Well 4 was superimposed on the overall water level recovery and decline caused by stopping then restarting quarry dewatering. In ' general, the pump in SPUC Well 4 was on for less than 24 hours at a time. The longest pumping phase during the observation period was 40 hours from January 13, 1996, to January 15, 1996, as shown in Figure 1. The pump was operating at approximately 780 gpm. Well MW-i is located I approximately 1,500 feet from SPUC Well 4. The MODFLOW model, developed previously to evaluate the transient effect of quarry dewatering, was used in an attempt to calibrate the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the basal Prairie ' du Chien Group. A steady state stress period representing summer pumping conditions was followed by a transient stress period to simulate pumping of SPUC Well 4 for 40 hours. The ' observations included in the calibration were the discharge in the quarry in the steady state model (observed to be approximately 5,600 gpm) and the transient response of water levels in well MW-1 to pumping of SPUC Well 4. The original MODFLOW model was found to be too coarse in the ' vicinity of the quarry to accurately represent seepage into the quarry. Two submodels were constructed in the quarry area to refine the discharge estimate, but in both cases the boundary ' conditions imposed on the submodel affected the discharge estimate. This indicated that the submodels were too small. The regional MODFLOW model needed to be refined in the quarry area. This was beyond the scope of the proposed work, so another approach was taken. The analytic computer program WTAQ1 (Moench, 1993, 1995) was modified to allow the user to I enter specific times at which the program would calculate drawdown at a partially-penetrating monitoring well, due to pumping of a partially-penetrating pumping well. The aquifer parameters ' transmissivity, storage coefficient, specific yield, and vertical anisotropy were optimized using the code PEST(Watermark Computing, 1994) and the modified version of WTAQ1. This approach 1 2370085\44729-1/NPN 3 ' assumed that the Prairie du Chien Group and Jordan Sandstone act as a single aquifer and that the anisotropy is distributed throughout the aquifer. Although the conceptual model for the ' aquifer system holds that the anisotropy is markedly greater in the basal part of the Prairie du Chien Group, the pumping well and observation well are located on opposite sides of the highly ' anisotropic basal zone. In other words, the effective vertical hydraulic conductivity estimated by WTAQ1 reflects the combined influence of the layered system. Substituting KA/L (vertical ' hydraulic conductivity times area divided by vertical thickness) for C (conductance) in equation 38 of McDonald and Harbaugh (1988, p. 5-6) and expanding the expression for a three-layered system yields: K _ L ' L1LZL3 + + K1 K2 K3 where: K is the effective vertical hydraulic conductivity of the layered system ' L is the total thickness L, is the thickness of the given layer IS is the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the given layer ' Using the optimized parameters from WTAQ1, assuming a vertical anisotropy of 1 (vertical hydraulic conductivity equals horizontal hydraulic conductivity)for all layers except the basal Prairie du Chien, and rearranging terms yields: 1(2_ 219 ft 5 f_ 124 ft _ 90 ft - 5.65 10 ft/day 2.47 10-2 ft/day 32.8 ft/day 32.8 ft/day Dividing the assumed thickness of the basal Prairie du Group (5 ft) by the vertical hydraulic conductivity yields a hydraulic resistance value of 8,850 days. 2.2.2 Recalibration of Two-Layer Model As the leakage resistance of 8,850 days was first incorporated in the two-layer model, the hydraulic head of the first layer increased from the previous calibration. This head increase is likely due to the increased leakage resistance between Layer 1 and Layer 2, resulting in more water being kept in the first layer. The model also computed a smaller discharge to the Shiely 2370085\44729-1NPN 4 Iquarry. Since a large portion of the discharge to the quarry(computed by the original two-layer model) was coming from leaky elements below the quarry, the use of a larger resistance resulted in Ia reduction of this component of the discharge. The two-layer model had to be recalibrated to yield an appropriate discharge to the quarry under pumping conditions. This calibration was achieved I by increasing the hydraulic conductivity of Layer 1 in the area west of the bedrock valley from 27 feet/day to 40 feet/day and by reducing the leakage resistance to a value of 4,000 days. After these adjustments, the computed discharge to Shiely quarry was within two percent of the original Ivalue. I I I I I I I I I . I I2370085\44729-1/NPN 5 1 I I 3.0 Impacts of Future West Quarry Mine Plan I I 3.1 Scenarios Developed IThe scenarios modeled represent mining in the proposed west quarry and pumping the dewatering water from the west quarry back into the old east quarry. It was assumed that a semi-pervious Iclay wall was installed along the western wall of the east quarry to limit the transfer of groundwater between the two quarries. The west quarry was modeled using a series of linesinks Iwith specified heads. The semi-pervious wall was modeled using a DROOT leaky element. The east quarry was assumed to have been converted to a lake and was modeled as a series of linesinks with specified head. I Initially, a trial-and-error method was used to determine the water level that must be maintained Iin the east quarry to effectively prevent an impact on Boiling Springs and other natural resources to the east from the deepening of the west quarry and associated dewatering. Several runs were Iperformed with water level in the east quarry maintained at Elevation 710, 720, 730, and 740. The results are shown in Table 1. It was found that impacts on Boiling Springs are eliminated when the old east quarry is maintained at about Elevation 710 or above. Although several scenarios were modeled for water levels in the east quarry, it was decided to plan Ito discharge all dewatering water from the west quarry into the east quarry and allow any excess water to flow by gravity into the Prior Lake drainage ditch, which flows from south to north Ibetween the two quarries. This would produce a constant water level of about Elevation 732 in the east quarry, well above the point needed to maintain present water levels at Boiling Springs. IThis approach has several advantages. First, it eliminates the need for a second g pumP in station in the east quarry. A second advantage is that it gives a significant margin of safety for Iprevention of groundwater impacts to the sensitive water resources to the east. A third advantage is that the large storage volume of the east quarry will be very effective at removing any I ; particulates in the west quarry discharge water. This will ensure that water quality of the discharge will be very high and production will not be hampered by concerns about discharge Iwater quality. The disadvantage of this plan is that it increases the amount of pumping required from the east quarry by 20 percent at ultimate development of the quarry. I2370085\44729-1/NPN 6 3.2 Initial Development of West Quarry It was assumed that a four-acre area of the west side of the west pit will be mined in two initial cuts. The first cut will be made to Elevation 674. Once the area has been opened, a second cut will be made to Elevation 620. In both cases, the water level in the east quarry is assumed to be ' at Elevation 732. The results are summarized in Table 2. The initial dewatering rate from the west quarry will be around 4,400 gpm. This will occur when the four-acre section is excavated to ' Elevation 674. This would be the critical scenario in terms of groundwater impacts to the east, since the east quarry would raise water levels and the west quarry would not yet be at its maximum depth or area. Groundwater levels would rise, as shown on Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2 shows the drawdown (or mounding) in the upper(Prairie du Chien/surficial sand) aquifer. Figure 3 shows the drawdown in the Jordan aquifer for the same scenario. Overflow from the east quarry to the drainage ditch is projected to be 3,500 gpm or 7.7 cfs. This would be a 35 percent decrease from the present Shiely discharge of approximately 5,400 gpm. As the four-acre section is deepened to Elevation 620, the dewatering rate will increase to 6,800 ' gpm. The overflow from the east quarry to the drainage ditch is estimated to be 4,900 gpm or 10.8 cfs. ' 3.3 Full Development of West Quarry ' The second critical condition will be the maximum excavation of the west quarry,just prior to closure. The quarry will be excavated to Elevation 620 over an area of approximately 58 acres. ' The head in linesinks representing the west quarry were set at Elevation 620. Again, the water level of the east quarry was assumed to be at Elevation 732. The results for each of the water ' levels in the east quarry are summarized in Table 3. The drawdown contours with the east quarry at Elevation 732 are shown on Figure 4 for the upper(Prairie du Chien/surficial) aquifer. Figure 5 ' shows the drawdown contours in the Jordan Aquifer for the same scenario. It can be seen that there is still a net increase in groundwater levels at Boiling Springs and that drawdown is confined to the west side of the new west quarry. Discharge to the drainage ditch would be ' : approximately 6,300 gpm (14 cfs), about 17% above current rates. 2370085\44729-1INPN 7 3.4 Impacts on City Wells The predicted drawdown at City of Shakopee Wells 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 are summarized in Table 4 for the maximum drawdown case (i.e., full west quarry development with water level in the east quarry maintained at 732 feet M.S.L.). Additional drawdowns at existing city wells associated with quarry dewatering were computed to range from 0.46 feet at Well 8 to about seven feet at the closest City Wells 4 and 5. Shakopee Wells 4 and 5 are located immediately west of the proposedrT3'ua on the east side of q ' Valley Park Drive. These two wells were drilled in 1971 and have a static water column of 47 to 52 feet below ground (1991 and 1992 data). Well 4 has a pump set 120 feet below grade, while Well 5 has a pump set 100 feet below grade. Table 5 summarizes the wells' construction and the ' anticipated maximum impact from dewatering of the west quarry site, assuming the water level is maintained at Elevation 732 in the east quarry. The additional six to seven feet of drawdownthese in wells will increase the pumping head against which the pumps operate. The pumps will continue to be functional without modifications, but the drawdown could reduce the pump capacity by approximately 30 to 50 gpm in Well 4 and 20 to 30 gpm in Well 5. 111 The result of this reduction will be that the pumps will have to pump about five percent longer to ' supply the same capacity as currently, thereby increasing City pumping costs by approximately $2.00 per million gallons pumped for each well at ultimate mine expansion. Conservatively, ' assuming that the pumps are used for 100 days of pumping per year, the net impact will be less than $500 per year for both wells. Average impacts over the full quarrying period are likely to be ' less than this, especially in the earlier stages of quarry development when levels in the wells will be slightly higher than at present. ' An alternative to reduced capacity would be adding pumping capacity by increasing the number of bowls on the pumps. The capacity would be the same, but greater pumping energy would be Irequired, probably on the same order of magnitude as the reduced capacity option. The cost of such modifications would not be justified by the small additional pumping costs. 2370085\44729-1/NPN 8 1 1 ' References Moench, A.F., 1993. Computation of Type Curves for Flow to Partially Penetrating Wells in Water-Table Aquifers, Ground Water, Vol. 31, No. 6, p. 966-971. Moench, A.F., 1995. Combining the Neuman and Boulton Models for Flow to a Well in an Unconfined Aquifer. Ground Water, Vol. 33, No. 3, p. 378-384. ' Watermark Computing, 1994. PEST, Model-Independent Parameter Estimation. Computer software manual. 1 1 1 ' 2370085\44729-1/NPN I ITable 1 I Trial and Error Analysis of Groundwater Impacts Full Excavation of Western Quarry to Elevation 620 IEast Quarry Converted to a Pond(Elevation 732) West Quarry Floor at 620 Feet M.S.L. Present I Conditions Quarry Floor East Quarry Water East Quarry Water East Quarry Water East Quarry Level Elev. Level Elev. Level Elev. Water Level Elev. Description Elevation 685 710 720 730 740 IDewatering Rate (gpm) 5,370 10,070 10,965 11,925 12,960 Additional Drawdown at Boiling 0.0 0.2 Springs' (ft) -0.6 -1.5 -2.4 I Total Infiltration Rate at East Quarry(gpm) Not Applicable 3,645 4,740 6,025 7,550 Rate Diverted From the West Quarry(gpm) Not Applicable 2,285 3,900 5,630 7,475 'A negative drawdown represents a rebound. I I I I I I I I I2370085\44729-1/NPN Table 2 ' Impact on Groundwater Flow Impact of Initial Western Quarry Development (Four-Acre Section) Eastern Quarry Water Level at Elevation 732 East Quarry Converted to Pond(Elevation 732) ' Present Conditions West Quarry West Quarry Quarry Floor Mined to Mined to Description Elevation 685 Elev.674. Elev.620 IDewatering Rate(gpm) 5,370 4,370 6,810 Additional Drawdown at Boiling Springs' (ft) 0.0 -2.8 -2.3 Net Discharge to Drainage Ditch(gpm) 5,370 3,475 4,885 negative drawdown represents a rebound. 1 . 1 _ 1 I .. ' 2370085\44729-1/NPN Table 3 Impact on Groundwater Flow ' Full Development of Western Quarry Eastern Quarry Water Level at Elevation 732 ' East Quarry Water Level at Elev. 732; ' Present Conditions West Quarry Quarry Floor Elevation Mined to Description 685 Elev. 620 ' Dewatering Rate (gpm) 5,370 12,330 Additional Drawdown at Boiling Springs' (ft) 0.0 -1.6 ' Net Discharge to Drainage Ditch (gpm) 5,370 6,285 I 'A negative drawdown represents a rebound. 1 I .. ' 2370085\44729-1/NPN ' Table 4 Impact on City of Shakopee Wells ' Western Quarry Floor Deepened to Elevation 620 Eastern Quarry Water Level at Elevation 732 ' Computed Drawdown City of Shakopee Well (ft) 4 6.68 5 6.97 ' 6 2.85 7 2.87 8 0.46 9 1.10 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 '. 2370085\44729-1INPN I ITable 5 i Impact of Quarry Dewatering on City Wells 4 and 5 I Well4 Well5 During Predicted During Predicted During Initial maximum During Initial maximum I Parameter1992 Mining to dewatering 1992 Mining to dewatering, conditions Elevation 674 Elevation 620 conditions Elevation 674 Elevation 620 Static Water Level, Feet Below 47 45 54 52 50.5 59 IGround Level Pumping Water Level, Feet 66 64 73 62 60.5 69 Below Ground Level I Pump Submergence, Feet 54 56 47 48 49.5 41 (Approximate) ( Pumping Capacity,gpm 773 780± 720-740 851 860± 820-830 I I - I I I I I I I I2370085\44729-1/NPN 13. There are three existing monitoring wells on or near the site, identified as follows: ' Well Unique well numbers ' Monitoring Well #1 561717 (North center of proposed project) ' Monitoring Well #2 561716 (South from buffer of proposed project) ' Kawasaki Well (South buffer of proposed project) ' The Kawasaki well was a water supply well that is now unused; it is proposed to use it as an additional monitoring well during the life of the project. Refer to Figure 3 for the locations of these wells. Monitoring well #1 and the Kawasaki well will will continue to ' exist through the proposed project and will be sealed in accordance with the state well code when mining is completed. Well #1 is in the proposed mining area. It will stay in place until the quarry expands through it. Shakopee City wells #4 and#5 are located near the southwest corner of the project site; impacts on these wells are discussed below. ' . 13b Mining requires that the quarry be dewatered during the season of operation. The existing ivIDNR appropriations permit#67-0172 will be amended to reflect the modifications to the ' point of appropriation and the point of discharge. This permit now authorizes Shiely to pump up to 10,000 gallons per minute (gpm) and up to 2,750 million gallons per year. ' Following the closure of the east quarry, which will happen within a few years of the commencement of mining in the west quarry, pumping from the east quarry will cease and the quarry will be allowed to fill with groundwater. -Initially an area of about four acres at the west end of the project site will be quarried. The pumping rate from this initial area of ' the west quarry is estimated to be 4,400 gpm to dewater to the initial floor level of Elevation 674. Within a few years, the floor will be lowered to Elevation 620 and pumping will increase to about 6,800 gpm. The dewatering discharge will be routed into the old east quarry, raising the lake level to about Elevation 632. This elevation will provide a groundwater recharge from the east lake and will allow excess water to flow by'gravity from the old east quarry to the Prior ' Lake drainage ditch. When the initial cut of the west quarry is dewatered to Elevation 674 the net recharge from the east quarry is projected to be about 900 gpm. When the initial cut is dewatered to Elevation 620, the recharge will increase to 1,900 gpm. For most areas around the quarry, groundwater levels will increase significantly compared to current levels. Limited drawdown will occur, however, to the west and northwest. I As quarrying progresses from west to east, the area to be dewatered will increase and the pumping and recharge rates will increase. At maximum development of the full 58-acre area of the quarry to Elevation 620, the pumping rate is predicted to be about 12,300 gpm. Recharge at the east quarry will increase to about 6,300 gpm. Therefore, the net ' appropriation (withdrawal minus recharge)will be within the limits of the current permit with respect to rate. The maximum total withdrawal per year may be increased, depending on the duration of the mining season. 2370085\44479-1/NPN I I I I I 713 Guar/Pumps Turned On 712 1 1 • 711 • I. II . ill I /I. . )" 1708 IN 1Pump/4 \I ing'Period Used in Gaiibradon o707I I 3 • ( Ouary Purncs Turned 011 i I \ t 70:3— . fi I ll itir Ar 11/17195 12107/95 1227195 01/16 02./105/95Dam C225190' 03l16/96 Od1C 625i 5 Figure 1 I Water Levels in Well MW-1 • ' , 0 1 t - .rCi. I lU i ry o 1'‘ c9, • 1• 1 �• 'f' • • O C r 11 i\ `Ort' r ��� / `�!, O I�'- . I C o ------- i•— _ _I ! _ :- Allictvl,vtr i C 3 ._I., __El'+cl.rur�= _ u s.-7,.--N.,: , 4 v-r 1,1)c', ,,,w 1- .w �.• ; �/ .0 ( ' Ic,— .•/.. "�/ //' 9 '' .1 r /i ' + �� V It n\ + f� '�Y�\`,)J C Q L' 1 If( Ai.. 7) ' . i ,,,,17. ,op. tr..._„:" ./ r\• . ),,_., / • , ) < t= (..) z ,'� r E i M 1 SIJ t ;r )••,--) 0, r 1f, i' (7 '�`� -rib t I t + Z I 1 1�_ NCC = t' �:' — t %, I .� �,^�. . z !�:Ci �. n1 � ai"'/`��' �O. Po• � -'�.:, `t N � W < W —i ,/...,.... 15 i ' ' �� ‘ -'''.!•) .,'" U I ala : r�� _W QcAI 1 '-• " •; ,c)-j----.11:,' \__ - r�•.. j ,, } 1 �o — s 11 -` _ ?�� = N D I , t✓ cy ,18."‘...oW1,11.N In, ItQ �i>�, 1 `—;, :_ ,r . —.0 J _ : 1 w �7 i, 1 t0 CC 0.; c 2—M • ( 4 '-U 's 1l 'O f i,.\,1 .1 .CS�-' f Z > > •,�' tiiP it WktS 1 n /w. Ii;I:, i , CA .i } ' C•i 1 ‘!1 1-'. L Q a + a till G..) 1'-1; i` 0 •old - �� )"1, o� �� ,cc" - moi. b•. , o0� is � ,� �/. - _ C i ,, _• `I r, Cl.Z to u % \c7(t :. sl••I ► ' _.i:-. -',< j 1 • ic!1?figI;HG::liia .1 F: ; 11 . • 1 •r • Ti ' , v��\L!'r"'r ate- a - ==...,sa�:>m !�'t}.�'t$n C") I „.._,N), f ' c's•-•••-: \/ sll•il,l; c� 1 "�a�� moo- li Q k,jitkik,,4iht. i:1' I t `� ' •ate. , t' 't, /o IIiit, _.cn t w� 111 1 0 r !ill e w, AI r. 1.•• ‘..\, t yti1,Vi � Old • ,----- 4 II 70J i!'Il ,; cl ". :1 ,....2 * ° ".1111,,111111114\11 / i --. 1 ?.' 1 filll' ' I Or i /*" / :: ' iiiiiiiiki/ 1 sc):: ,,i , • / 1— I �'Ii CJ ,ffitio!) I ,. I -.• - •19 /4 '.1-- Ill • -• Ke) (•',, Ar) /I.5...V.....rt,c4; ..ruitil / Q`ct ..1 (4, . cq, 1 \, ----1-'0 L * iiii/j11: ( ma) r 40,,, \ ,..,_. , %.,, <:::1 ..,.... 1 ‘:V .'s S.1 /o [1: / I el) % i ''' 711414 ?A 2 I " 1\far 0 J "�Au Ilt. LI!i • iiimbow.4. ........• , .......... „.....,....,.:::;,.... . t.::•:,.... .. . _ . \i, \\A in .; i 1 .. / .--; -- :".* 11.4_71. .7,1 / 5-57( r• I / s's)- -14 4,4) ))(- it - 11'1; . • til % • 'I i i / I • • " / 15;i'. : 4- ; t SI:.:,,I 1 ,--,5.-; a' . .. 1)\ i I f. , . •... ..s:e / . cn /50�� r�� +" •7 , —;1" r•.. . C 1,. / eel In (41 [el'. / . a ti / 4,`'1 J� C.J / ,� i, O— /" P o 7 ‘ ?.1 e I • •�' • • ,...1 4--,/ . Al . 1 ti flo \ f o .j o 2 40 o .� �'! Ph Il i. .. . .......i._ 0 a.y � _ I ) K • 1- • , , i yi -.i Tr,__I i ia. 1 /gi /) --. t i .../z , .,,,„,,,, i - -. ,f)m y.,____L.Li <cr)_ --,/.2.\_,4.t.,; ,.,. If. I;.I - w_Q 1.1.1.1*::,-•H ,iv., - ':;111111"1!::,4'7..t / " /i- / ! V . 1 I' f I Q l✓ Q \ -e' _, >,-,!i I....1 sic . I .,_ • :,,,A. ,,,,i 1 •7 cb IC_I- 0, .i 1. i - ► .,3. r__ , ‘ '' :If'. On N_ '. /.'i" ehli,yii ;_1 ;1' h I .,..1 r X� 1. :EV"; — i if ,% © I T:;iii6!i+!,!: /r c, C/ w o,. I �, -- �' J ' n ;,N:11 ,:t:,,,;: /� , / ill l f n:' a i - '•1 _ 0 i .I :11 tl rti�11'hi;?`; \ 7 /1 �r kyr i 1 f �1'� — `, vJ °srfiri C? ,; ilitri4:11:117,111114:fil 1( /- .camI fi t, ' 1: '� • 0 G vk..,:: : f'F 4 4 i lii.Y•'° rteC`c (`�` n0 rA .-. • � s�fIll • (-1 '.1 illi. r : __ • c„ 1 c ,:5 si ) ii; I . .\\ .,1\_ i ik . i j'")gii o4 . c\,I; • irn y, 40 I I i.ii!!tlli: ' 1 '�� m I 14 4 O . Z./ /,' IiiVilgtil,1 ,••-'CD ,I I ‘V—110 L IL" ) I iiiv f i 2 • 1 . F I! Z/w1, 7 _ 1 .... \ J•r,�; t - 17 Ci '\V k•....... i/ \/ L o _ ,..,,, , . v 1 :! .„ a , { • 1 8 \a \1 i / c'� _zeta! I O r4.— � W - 0 I • 44 t/ W \ Ir / C / , C ta/ r �t /. 1 1 / r� l a Cz E �r • C } t O I C ---'----- / \ \ � �-•.5`IitlN,ltltt' 1 _�� [ 3• .— ^—__1tY;It1.1A\ t''J J . \44/ u „...---s. .,..,. --..,t . %, )7 11 a;r1'k--,. ., .\ I:). . VI ik- 1;i-7i/ c-,, ., //. 4 iI /- (JJJJ , / I ;-/.roo., .,:,..Th, , .J7 .-,.. ^ /C` :� y�f 0 •/• ; ,I Z Z , • ..(' 4~ t r L;c� .. -" ,j .,'A' ° 1 .gip I�� �• ~ z '� (1 `�:1 I ,� I � �'% '` -! j)_? Cep 'L 1 1 i -I 'Z. I; Q. a,:_o� t✓' - . ' o- .,5�, 'i-!. .',. , Q Q `u S'J (-11 I , d./O .1•1"--'i\--::•'" ;c of V •l '�-•• ' �;_ c,,;,,•. G to G //)S-� a=a =�(J) �Ji---JI \17): ' ,, 71 ^1 W i, L r•7�fi -�-\ i a Q a.. } 1/4:I ,• - iv.E.4_,J .cc A 3%-D 12-1 f. J d(i,. `0•7 .; `1 I i ,l{• .•r�r '1 :., f tet_ ,. )n/, } `,± I ' Z > J ' LL ICC i ;F I ti A' , a 't• .r', , : �.. .J C J J < _��n fig tJ, `C�1 WW I ! r ..� t _ —f Z 1111 a. .Air Q \ —/�i r — _ •J" SIG. ,ai\ _: �r Wu., ::;::.. I a `'v 1O l; • ..i - ?` ± C E-- v t \111,- gpi,•5-14 r ♦ moi. 1 (i Q sr44,- inp • N. �� om'I _ .a► e�trik!!;.::. 'i, •` .•� j4 , *: X�' —r t , '- -----2-'''''. 3 1• 111111111!: i. , ?";'''H 4. —0111 %•—"•••'-'..::;1-1!:-- , . a ,. (611a 111Y1 • / gl ± .16.1k47 l` .tom , }!1,4. I: / 13 �r ,9 t t 4 1:1=;11. j:a t2 / ` I may • .• 4I• ` i hcui Aiiii liorne • i:- 4 1 41'41 s C ±. ;\6 1 I i 1°.'i . oi j l 1..„ �� ± . i1 \ 2. f i•• O� ar:47 OrII .,-{{ ;0 , ` / ii; I C3 .4 4 I ...,._„__: ,,, ,..,... 1::11,x:::,; • al • "(), Zi( ?1 I .1.::"..a;_2 . ''. . 1 :,,,, L.. / . .......) i fi .1 i,. __ I •••• ,. : illiki,/ 11 1/7 i J =.yr .„_ fi (I7:((/'// ra J.: k : • / / !3%. R•• 1.2_ .1) ii 1, \ '9. ,. .'7,""/,... Sir- . ' -: 1 1 1. / r ,,•y • • r v v o; .9*-"I I.): -•:‘,t\ I t, 1 ,, cs • it c)• I O i ";:;‘4 _\ ILL Co ._------ f /'\ .., _._►__,.,_ • .t�tsatn / _� _, c3 . � . CZ o I z 7 . +\r. .,s\ i , ,,,, ,. e t....,.,i 0,..;- .; •„ :-.3 ° 1 y L '_ furl 1.. 1 1 a�b /,/ .\\ .!' f. $..� . (9 k 1 (3 1 ///A° e + + ri/ l ViJ'■1 !' Vv I F- } wF- '441 . e /3 1 ,.. .... r ..... • It D 1-LI 1 iii,: � o•+ ' % a� � _, CI < !1 r'� r t / } 1 I 511 1` �(\" 1 , Asn�,c + I CI C ' . -,----1+ I I a I /�'e, ( 1%1 t. I r' , f 11't :� = C > I q.'la + {�, i i I 1'.J r i I, 7 9 { + G J» r t 4.e.3.1 w l J .7• s V O — - to C c l •\ -i 1 Pt 7 j . ^ cr �'/ .= cp - f 1.-_I Z ( b , f,\ ° • . 't -r Lu ( ,(-% lie ,�, - _ -\• > w z 1 0 ',....,:�i='•\ ! ,1:14- ��I�" y�) �C 0.��:.! O •I �_pi"' • l� ( 1..,_. I •.li•`) gyp' �/y N N.�� lJ v N lui c e � � jam !11 t ,.--',= \ I •, + `+ , • J.t.i �(I� L. 1,4___... ti • z, , „ I� CJ I ' - L O IW' ••i•- i r,Itt,.pf ;,-,IL. . , 4.^` /��' (• PJ• 1 1 i• 0_ z H r:n�rZ—/ Ili°° ft! , ,,! 1 ,-� ` V°y_ 2.2 •f >� -7\1) t• f L E •• I :1 --.O Z Cn°' / ;1;A j1 l ilii':.... . ,L-. : D./..---1 i:t r ,!j; — It 1 , i .•iiiIIIIAIT,'' :;:y /5:1,-; _, �_ fit„-�.c ���� ../—s =_ � ' _ i 4rw aa' o. Q 7 ,� • ry - ;Niri,57.,,v .: ,.;,::* 2,/,,;(., / , ‘,77 AV ft / I1 o ! : ;ilii• y\ . • 1,1 �Cja i 1 4a 7 s6 i - ' ( i 40 ; ) i / I 4 i ! i ,' f � •• Oji+1.';te !'. ti � i' •}1 .i.'ttat+Iii,, t / al // is ./.0 `n `'I1'`°I f . . • r l0itzt ---, 1 11 ` GSI i l ` ill . cdir (1 . ,: -. ‘ - -• ,-i i a • ,••• ,•\ : l ,/ 1 1 It ,.„ r/r m ___. 1 ^ il). , , . „ : , ,.., 1 I I I I I I Appendix B INatural Heritage Program Letter i Department of Natural Resources March 29, 1995 I I I I I I I I I I rr\\nn��SnnTATE OF /- DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ' 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA • 55155-40ni EoY7- DNR INFORMATION (612) 296-6157 ' March 29, 1995 Mark Suel, Environmental Affairs Shiely Company ' 2915 Waters Rd., Suite 105 Eagan, MN 55121 Re: Quarry expansion and extended cut, T115N R22W sections 2, 3, 10, & 11, Scott County Dear Mr. Suel: 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 above referenced project. Based on this review, there are no known occurrences of rare species or natural features within the vicinity of the above mentioned project that are likely to be impacted. The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage Program and the Nongame Wildlife Program, units within the Section of Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources. ' It is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare, endangered, or otherwise significant plant and animal species, plant communities, and other natural features, and is used in fostering better understanding and protection of these rare features. The information in the database is drawn from many parts of Minnesota, and is constantly being updated, but it is not based on a comprehensive ' survey of the state. Therefore, there are currently many significant natural features present in the state which are not represented by the database. We are in the process of addressing this via the Minnesota County Biological Survey, a county-by-county inventory of rare natural features, which is ' now underway. However, Scott County has not yet been surveyed. Because there has not been an on-site survey of the biological resources of the project area, it is possible that ecologically significant features exist for which we have no record. ' Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in minimizing impacts on Minnesota's rare resources. 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. An invoice for the work completed will be ' forthcoming. You are being billed for map and computer search and staff scientist review. Sincerely, ,/ / 7r # 6 Jennifer Kamm Endangered Species Environmental Review Assistant Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program 612/296-8279, FAX 612/297-4961 nhp #920257 ,f 1 AN FOUAI OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Appendix C Noise Survey ' Minnesota Pollution Control Agency March 29, 1995 1 1 1 i 1 I March 29, 1995 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 1 I I Mr.. Mark Suel Environmental Affairs I I Shiely Company 2915 Waters Road, Suite 105 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 RE: Noise Survey I 1 Dear Mr. Sul: ]'he Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA), was contacted by the Shiely Company to perform a noise survey to determine the level of noise produced by the operation of their Sltalopee mine. On March 23, 1995, a noise survey was performed by Brian Timerson, of the I I I I I I I v1PCA noise program, and Mark Sue! from the Shiely Company. The enclosed noise survey documents the Sound Pressure Level measured at seven monitoring sites located on the enclosed Map. The monitoring was accomplished by using a portable sound level meter that meets the requirements outlined in the MPCA noise rules, Chapter 7030. Spot checks were taken at the seven sites because the noise levels were generally not varying to a significant degree. If :here are any questions regarding this survey or its results,please contact me at(612)296-7898. I.copy of the MPCA noise rule is also enclosed with this noise survey. `�'i;1;erel /.i...� �� -Brian Timerson Noise Control Specialist Air Quality Division BT:jmd I I Enclosures cc: AQD Noise Program File 520 Lafayette Rd. N.;St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (612)296-6300(voice); (612) 282-5332(TTY) 1 1 Regional Offices: Duluth•Brainerd•Detroit Lakes•Marshall•Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer•Printed on recycled paper containing at least 10%fibers from paper recycled by consumers. I ' NOISE SURVEY I MPCA INVESTIGATOR: Brian J. Timerson DATE:03/23/1995 INSTRUMENTATION: Larson Davis Labs Model 700 TIME START: 11:00 a.m. I 'TIME 1704 'TIME END: 12:00 p.m. ISOURCE: Noise Level Measurement. Mining Operations MONITOR LOCATION: Shiely Company. Shakopee 1 ' Refer to Map Attached Meteorological Conditions Wind Speed/ Direction 0 - 5 MPH/West ' 'TEMPERATURE: 10° C CALIBRATION I CALIBRATOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0451 CALIBRATION FREQUENCY: 250 Hz • INITIAL: 114.0 dBA FINAL: 114.0 dBA RESULTS: The following measurements are spot checks taken at various Isites referenced by number on the attached map. Site #1 Northwest Corner 50dBA ' Site #2 Center of Property 48dBA Site #3 Primary Crusher 75dBA ' Site #4 Southeast Corner, by NSP Substation 50dBA Site #5 Center of Quarry 57dBA ' Site #6 Southwest Corner, near Tsumura 46dBA Site #7 South Center Line 49dBA 1 I I I I I I Appendix D IVibrations from Quarry Blasting IDavid Braslau Associates, Inc. i December 6, 1992 1 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 1 for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Shiely Quarry - Shakopee, Minnesota ' VIBRATIONS FROM QUARRY BLASTING 1 . prepared for ' Barr Engineering 1 by David Braslau Associates, Inc. ' 6 December 1992 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 EAHR ' 1.0 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 1,1 2.0 DATA ANALYSIS - CURRENT QUARRY 2-1 3.0 PROPOSED QUARRY EXPANSION 3-1 ' 4.0 PREDICTED VIBRATION LEVELS AND IMPACTS 4-1 5.0 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1.0 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY _ The purpose of this study is to assess vibration impact potential at buildings close to the proposed expansion of the rock and gravel quarry operated by the Shiely Company. Data have been obtained from previous seismic records taken during blasting at the quarry. The data for which sufficient parameters are known have been sum- marized and have served, along with general information on blasting, as the basis for the vibration projections made here. ' The projected vibrations are compared with U.S. Bureau of Mines blasting guidelines to determine what level of impact might be expected from the ex- panded quarry. Recommendations are made to ensure that these guidelines are not exceeded. ' Some definitions may be useful to the reader: ' Delay weight - this is the weight of explosive that is detonated during any given instant of time. Explosives are shot in a pre-planned sequence with 'delays' of 20 milliseconds or more. This provides ' a more efficient method of breaking up rock. It is the maximum weight of explosive detonated at any one instant that determines the peak vibration level. Thus the term 'delay weight' or 'weight per delay' refers to this value. Particle velocity - when a wave from the blast meets the ground surface, the surface is accelerated and reaches a maximum particle velocity ' and displacement. For this study, the particle velocity is used as an indicator of vibration. There are three components of velocity (longitudinal - direction of the blast; transverse - per- pendicular to the direction of blast; and vertical. The resultant particle velocity, which is a vector sum of these three, will be used as the primary indicator of vibration and potential impact on nearby buildings. Scaled distance - this is distance normalized by dividing by the square root of the delay weight. ' Log/log plot - this is a graph in which both axes are logarithmic rather than linear. This type of graph is especially convenient since the average relationship between particle velocity and scaled dis- tance is normally a straight line in this type of graph. 1 ' 1-1 II 2.0 DATA ANALYSIS - CURRENT QUARRY ITable 2.1 contains a summary of seismic data measured from shots over the past year at the Shiely Quarry. Information in the table includes: IIDATE Date of the shot and seismic recording DIST Distance of the seismometer from the shot- LOCATION Location of the seismometer IITYPE Type of shot, i.e. normal or floor FACE .General direction of the exposed face DEPTH Depth of the shot hole I BENCH Height of the exposed face DELAY Maximum explosive delay weight for this shot SCALE D Scaled distance (D/W1'2) I FREQUENCY Frequency in Hz of long, tran and vert velocities PEAK PART VEL Peak long, tran, and vert particle velocity components VEC SUM Vector sum or resultant peak particle velocity IIFigure 2.1 is a layout of the current and future quarry area. Also shown in the figure are the two primary seismic monitoring sites. Most of the measurements I have been made at the Elk River Concrete office which is close to the quarry. Other measurements have been made at the NSP substation which lies several hundred feet south of the quarry. . IFigure 2.2 shows the distribution of shots by date and time of day. It can be seen ::::ds::::rh:viemo. 7::::di::::::::::::K:11:Engl:Ic:::: ween the hours of 10 am and 8 pm. In 1990, most hetswere ween 10 am and 4 pm, while in 1991 most shots' were icates that blasting can occur throughout the working day. I Figure 2.3 is a logarithmic plot of resultant particle velocity (in/sec) versus scaled distance. Scaled distance is a measure of distance normalized using the square root of the delay weight. The U.S. Bureau of Mines has found that the Iwide range of blast data available lies along a straight line on a log/log plot. The normal or average relationship is shown as the line labelled "Normal" in Figure 2.3 and represents all components of particle velocity. It can be seen that most of the data fall below the normal line which is consistent with the I U.S. Bureau of Mines data. However, some of the points lie above the normal line. The line labeled "Max" represents the maximum expected response from the quarry, based upon available data. While two points lie above this line, the I occurrence of this combination of vibration and scaled distance occurred less than 1% of the time. The two data points lying above the "max" line are shaded in Table 2.1. It can be seen that these data points were taken at different Itimes and locations and do not appear to represent any particular physical phenomena. I II I 2-1 I E coNv. mmmoolcv— vmmRm . N .tm * . wmv ,-,.. .. ,\INoomoolm ,,....cm , cvm 61 .- 04 , 0, 61 , . NN , z.iavoS m 1 (I) cid ciddd dd cicid.:dddddde. adoddciaV • • • • -- • 7 • > =i 00000000 w NVWNNOv- NMWOWWMWWWV0/ 000Wfs. MNVOONRON 0 00000v- Ov- v- 01- 00 . . . . . Ov- v- i- v- ON 0 1 v > cididddddddddddcicidddddcidddddddddddd m C • c=, c 0covoJNNcvmwwwcoNtilmmv00w0som0 ,* , s0co0s2 -,-., m .-- 0 ir- 00 v- 0 •-• v- 0 v- v- 0 v- N 151r. ddddddddddcidcidciddddddddciddddddddd e o O. 0 00W01 ,- 01- WNWWv. ONWWWWv.. WNWW0W0) v- MWMM OO -5C v- Ni- 00010 ,- Al 01000 m _j M0 dciddddddciciddddciddciddddddddddddddci 1 O. = ONWMCVMWNONsrOv- NCIMWWNetNNNMWONOMI- 01 0 MMr- NOWNNOT- Nv- NWNNv- .- N NNNNNMOINv- 1- 1. v- 1Z > X . 1 >. c r- omminv- T- otommoNcmcoltocovmvmmomulm , 0 .(2 NWv- srMv- WWv- v, v. NI- Nv- v- NI. v- Z1 .. c.91- 021- 01v- MN4N W = 00 ONW1%. WWOMNWNNNNMMWMWWW.NWVNNMVNWM WC W01 ,- Wnv. N. Mv• v- 0031- NWINI- .4. verv- 0 Crj W v- N V' CI 0,1 M W N v- 0 ,- (pc.- c, mv: ,tmcvwc.. 0- cocowwwww .grvo- c,*.r0Dcm d w CO .- P. Iggcttccgt; 6666666 r: r: *4 .— r.: 1 Z 7:cJ c6 0 w m ol :::OtT •- T.,. i•• V sr .." v- rn COW .41DWN :',77. N — 1-- < } 00C,. C%.. C.. WWIirrt0WW0h0.. 00000000- h0- 00C•. 0. VNWO 1 g3g3 C') mmmg o w m 0 m (\Iv- m .4) 0 (4mm NN m ..tm A3221aS 5 5 NN WWMW •- 01N07 20. WW0. 0. C.. WOWnt000 . 0) MMINCs. C,. MMWN 04 = 0 MO Nrefl, WWWWV Nt •tst WW C') C') I w.-.1 M < Z J w Cl) < M . . - M .:L - Me. 0000WMWerNM0. C... MMMOCIOWWNWM01 .-. W 1-- N ‘I' VV7V-, WerWWWWWWW WWWWWVWWVWsrVmr %r 0 1 5 w < 0 0 ›.- m 61 UUUt uu .oft.c.c = = = tv = mm = tt = I 0 < 2 2220 22200200 000 00 0 w u_ so. ssszo. ssszzszzczzzo.. c.. 0- zzc.. z _1 W. 2 To To Tu , Tu mmmm m cum al m m RI CO CI 03 Cd as al as ca AS (S/ 8 T EEE1- •- Eu- EEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEE I o o o ilj Otitoot0000000000 w 00000000000000 ZZZELLZEZZZZZZZZZo- o- c.- ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ awwW _ WWwWwWwWw.wwW wwwwwww o J n 1 m x < ef CM (4 XMCCMCCMCCMCCMCCMCCMCCM 000W000000000000 0000000 ZZZOZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZzZzzzz 000 ›. 000000.000000 mccmccmcCM '- I 0000000w • cc >- 000 .J000000000000 0000000 ° D w E zMMMWMCCMMIEMMXXXXM MMMMMMM0 1 m WWWIWWWWWWWWWWWW M 4( 0 > > > 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > M P > > > > > > > w , 0 < MMtru_ MmMmX [CxxxxMli wwwwwwwx LLJ XxxxmccM _I 6 ›. 0 YNecolcNcYYYleYx0- 0- 0- (1- 0- 0- 0- 0- Yleld .< 0 z _j 0 -J _I -J —J _J -I _J _I -J _J _Jmommommm02 w -J wwwzwwwwwwwwwwwwzzzzzzzzwwwwwwwww I Y 00000 ,00o.0000000000000000000888888 .- 1 m .- 00000a00000000000cw000000rpoo 9 m u) 0, cm .cr co .., ..t OD ct tr C%1 (93 8 IA il lej I.43 gi cm cm c,1 CD 0 0 0 CD CO CO •1- CV C\I C‘I v- •- ir9 0 8 • 0 x I 0) u_ < < o000. 00000.07-7000 mmm0000000m00mm00mmmm000000000m00 a w cp a - cm cv el cn - - " cm c, c„ c, " " (.1 (.1 CV CV C\I CV CV CV c, " s`• CI CI 1- .- CV I- )- >" >- ZZZ -J -J -1 -J -IZZZZZZZZ -100 (1- M 0 < « « « < DDWWWWW0 MDDDMMDMDDDDDDODDD 1 < m 0 2MMMMMM -) -3 - 7 --) -13 -m -1 -3 ‹ .( 000000 m 0 76 ni- p 0 v- CVMNI- IOMNMMOv- CVCIVI.OWNWMOv- NMstlOWI.,. WM0 ,- C\IM NOICVNOINCNC\INNC.) M-070, 1 I 00_ _ D �" r • g, W Z Ill « ;•0 r� o a<- O WF- $ IH o�^owm a<u LL N 1 pI a uo+ • 3C f�` ZZ � -r.2 •Z. OZ- tn sas wvti�e.<w 0a..0 I o .. awvWi o- A H �N R z _W<& H<U cG W '^a ILIJ I- - > W v • (►) - V a �� t� o �( � / ` / r 1 AI 1 . cr < 1 1"ki• s=t'— NV!' WT -,� '• ID ~ ZI • _ �T W / . .. • 0 a. • III: '. ;•` ,I •- — ArriPai . /111111o /•,,,= =N„... 17 ' /,\`‘,, A', V,k‘,•\\ < , ....,, , •,... ..,.„, 1? „.,,,, 1 / • \‘ :, ' ,\ CV r �\ \� '\\ aur \� C7 1 IS \\�i.� r'o \\ - \moi` U- U`\‘4 :Ik: '\ ` \ D .,Eccl-cr \\ i'''''''.- 1." _ ' ---"---(7. <"6„_emsoy ,.di, ' *I I II Cin< I... R ii X.C° ( . 10 4:•:., 4P.._:....... /./ I - li ,i''' 1 < . lir Osiii I ..i _. •i.R ir . . t ::: ....."-Cis.-- & Ft © 1 1 mi ' CRi AL. ::.:+• n o Yz(g� )i "ii.,c0 <� N VI .i 1 1 ' SHOT TIME VERSUS SHOT DATE SHIELY QUARRY — SHAKOPEE, MN 20 8/27 19 9/19 0 18 9/p06 9/19 /25 17 a 0 ' L. 6/10 10/16 16 0 I 6/25 0 v 15 ' ~ 6/20 N 14 ❑ 0 LsO 13 F 7/09 8/27 12 0 0 it 6/23 0 • 6/24 0 10 June July August September October ' TIME PERIOD (Month/Cloy). ' FIGURE 2.2 I . I I I RESULTANT VELOCITY VS SCALED DISTANCE SHIELY QUARRY - SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 1 r1; FITIIIt 1• i•---•----4 . i- i i I i i—••-i••-•;•••••i•--.- . i ! ! / i i 4-4- 1 W Z v MAX 1 ul • • • _-------_ NORMAL = o ! - ___ » I 0 a ■ Z 0.1 .s _ .. 1-»__....-1-.—.---f_. ._.-.t_-..--.a_-.-s--. s.---s._s-------. V=350(SD) ^ (-1.48) • (.0 _ ......_.............._...j.............._._i--»-----i•.-..._—i...._...j....».i-.....i...y.....i«. - «--.----..i.-.-. V=103I cc • (S ^ (-1.45) ■ ' 0.01 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I 10 100 1000 ISCALED DISTANCE (FT/DELAY^1/2) IFIGURE 2.3 I I 1 ' 3.0 PROPOSED QUARRY EXPANSION • ' Figure 3.1 is a vertical cross section running generally west to east. This cross section has been developed by Barr Engineering using the well data ' indicated in the figure. This cross section is represented by the line "A-A" in Figure 2.1. Figure 3.2 is a vertical cross section running south to north and is represented by the line "B-B" in Figure 2.1. The current quarry and proposed quarry expansion are shown in Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2. From these figures it can been seen that blasting is being carried out in the Prairie du Chien Group Dolomite with sandy lenses. The working base elevation is 685 feet MSL. The potential of going down to 655 feet MSL is being considered for the proposed quarry expansion. This will not have a major effect on surface vibrations, however. A critical factor in determining ground ' vibration is the material between the cohesive rock and the surface. In the present case, the overburden consists of sand and gravel with irregular lenses or discontinuous beds of clay, silt, boulders and till. Depth of this ' overburden is generally on the order of 20 to 50 feet. The overburden depth and the Elk River Concrete monitoring site is on the order of 10-30 feet, based upon information provided by Barr Engineering. From Figure 3.1 it can be seen that ' the depth of overburden west of the proposed quarry expansion is also on the order of 20-30 feet. Thus, the vibration levels monitored at the Elk River Concrete site can be used to realistically predict vibration levels at the buildings located west of the proposed quarry expansion. ' Three buildings west of the proposed quarry qu ry a re considered to be the most critical in terms of potential vibration impacts. There are: Building MINIMUM DISTANCE TO QUARRY ' Conklin Building (NW) 350 feet Conklin Building (SW) 650 feet ' FMG Tsumura Building 1100 feet Each of there contain different types of manufacturing operations. i ' ' 3-1 1 o 8 < I 8 t090ZZ I o w ' w y 0 1a c $ tin e J 0 0K U., 0 c•Q U 2 I c c t 011 EiU r J t O -0 oa0 o E a o� 0 ' 0 aQ aI-c <a= C.- , I --(/ • . 904LOZ I 1 I o c SO4LOZ I I e 0 I -J 1 $0 1 0 ovy •- Ct civ cn • 7 -C----- O O €O C ado d • ca �-o L N$ Vx a c� S c E y - i�_�_l 0 i1- `s o o o LL • c O J Do c 0 401.LOZ o °o y�— O U in to 1- C 1-0.4 xa0 0sQ " t • o J ` I 7I= O p vO a ` d x C N t gm O w I P v 0 104LOZ ( NN co«= O y J v 0 C I 0 s cv" o <°noo • a 0- n� ' 404LOZ z o o Z m L < =m w r? I N 14 w yZ w o w co t0 J 0-'Z Z J (0 N - Z w CZ w -J M3 SSB90Z I cc -o w -N I ._ 3 _ 4S990Z 1 U o_ r. oN N aw ' I I I I 0 m o O Q ^o § �i (lSW '30a j) uo13DA013 I . I I I I Iff co 00o 213 O o o Z 'n m I 1 m I LOl AYMHOIH I v c 0 0 I xoc ° I U ��1= I °o o 'c Cl) °,` npa,o 2 0 0. I en I o0 i QJdOw a 2 0 t u c U 3m o -1 0 o f I q 0 16-7 y •0 Q N E . I GC ° G I O'�= Z04LOZ I c y v v o I 37 vy C9�, I O �C o N -0 0 I I v ° o o °'e'° 0 M I cc O Cl)° oo I I U c0 �• €�° a o I I ID , N c �_oL co in I30� 0 LL ' C04LOZ I apo o , Jin F ° .;i'v. 0 W 0 (1)in g — • W O h N w `L �ffi C ` cc cc i-- <m ©Z O Z 44z ILOLOZ n 3 h w Z CD i I 0 U Cl') 00 0 O CO r.0 8 00 0 C in N I (isri 4496)4) 96)j) U0aDAGO ' 4.0 PREDICTED VIBRATION LEVELS AND IMPACTS I Using the expression shown in Figure 2.3 for estimating maximum particle velocity, given distance and delay weight, peak particle velocities have been estimated for the buildings closest to the expanded quarry. These make the I very conservative assumption that shots are fired at the extreme western edge of the quarry which would not actually occur. The closest approach may in fact be several hundred feet further to the east. The conservative estimates Iof ground vibration are shown in Table 4.1. TABLE 4.1 IIPREDICTED PARTICLE VELOCITY AT CLOSEST BUILDINGS LOCATION DISTANCE DELAY SCALED PEAR VEL (BUILDING) (FEET) (LBS) DISTANCE (IN/SEC) Conklin NW 350 350 18.71 4.59 IConklin SW 650 350 34.74 1.83 FMG Tsumura 1100 350 58.80 0.84 From Table 4.1 it can be seen that a resultant particle velocity of 4.5 in/sec I is projected for the nearest building and 0.84 in/sec at the FMG Tsumura II Building if blasting would occur at the westerly edge of the quarry. I From the basic seismic data contained in Table 2.1, it can be determined that for the observed velocities the frequency range from 10 to 40 Hz with no par- ticular dominant frequency. No relationship between measured particle velocity and depth of shot can be identified. Figure 4.1 is a plot of fre- quency (of vertical particle velocity as an example) versus distance from the shot. It can be seen that the frequency generally decreases with distance from the shot. However, up to about 1600 feet from the shot, there appears to IIbe no dominant frequency. Figure 4.2 presents the blasting criteria currently recommended by the U.S. IIBureau of Mines. The permissible particle velocity is shown as a function of frequency. The permissible velocity is lower for lower frequencies since the acceleration and hence damage potential from blasting is lower at these fre- quencies. Shown in the figure is the range of frequencies observed from the IIquarry (10 to 40 Hz) . Assuming shots fired at the extreme west extremity of the quarry, it can be IIseen that the 4.5 in/sec particle velocity at the nearest Conklin Building would exceed the guidelines, while that for the FMG Tsumura Building lie just below the curve representing some type of structural damage. It should also IIbe emphasized that these guidelines were established primarily for wood frame buildings which are more susceptible to damage than steel or reinforced con- crete structures. IIFor purposes of comparison, the peak vibration level caused by a truck passing over a pothole on a road 100' from a building will cause a particle velocity of 0.04 in/sec. This would be perceptible but not particularly noticeable. A IIvibration of .84 in/sec would be clearly noticeable. II 4-1 I I FMG Tsumura has expressed concerns about vibration impacts on sensitive com- puter and laboratory equipment. The other concerns about sweated joints and building design are addressed by the O.S. Bureau of Mines structural damage II criteria. Potential impact on sensitive instruments is a different issue. Vibration limits vary greatly for laboratory instruments. For a general I electronic apparatus, a particle velocity of 0.19 in/sec is recommended. For an electron microscope, a velocity of 0.00013 is recommended. It is clear that for the most sensitive equipment, vibration isolation must be provided IIanyway to protect from normal heating/ventilating mechanical vibrations and pedestrian traffic. As noted above, a truck hitting a pothole outside of the building could cause a particle velocity of 0.04 in/sec. Assuming that the more sensitive equipment must be protected in any case, a vibration limit of II 0.20 in/sec would appear to provide protection for both the building and sensi- tive equipment. I The vibration levels predicted here are at ground level, and a slight increase might be expected for structural elements placed well above ground level. Since the levels predicted here are conservative and represent maximum ex- ' pected levels, the building response for the closest single story Conklin Buildings is considered to be small and is assumed included in the prediction. Since these structures are closest to the quarry and hence most critical, levels at the FMG Tsumura Building will be considerably lower as can be seen II from Table 4.1. II 1 _ 1 II I 1 I I 1 II 4-2 1 ' FREQUENCY VS DISTANCE FROM SHOT 40 SHIELY QUARRY — SHAKOPEE, MN ID ' 38 36 34 ' 32 to 30 8 ti 0 ' - 28 0 0 26 9 ❑ a 24 113 ° � 22 a 20 ' 18 16 14 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 0 10 1 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.6 3 3.4 3.6 4.2 (Thousands) DISTANCE FROM SHOT (FEET) FIGURE 4.1 1 1 1 I BLASTING CRITERIA I Permissible Particle Velocity as Function of Frequency 10.0 III I I r I V) - 2 in/sec CU N c I } 0.008 in v I I.0 _ y w 0.75 in/sec, > Drywall W - ,/ J I vcc = 0.50 in/sec, ,/ plasfe' �/ a 0.4 in/sec limit a_ - 0.030 in 1 1 _ II 0.2 in/sec limit _ II I .1 II 10 40 100 FREQUENCY, Hz ISource: U.S. Bureau of Mines I FIGURE 4.2 I II 5.0 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IPredicted vibration levels from shots at the western extremity of the quarry expansion, assuming current practices, will exceed the U.S. Bureau of Mines guidelines for the closest buildings. Therefore, it is recommended that these I practices be modified to ensure that these guidelines are met. Table 5. 1 suggests limitations that may have to be imposed on shots at the expanded quarry. The table shows the effect of the 0.2 in/sec limit and a more liberal II0.4 in/sec limit. While the 0.4 limit would protect the structures, the 0.2 limit would be needed to protect more sensitive equipment. The final limit chosen should depend upon activities taking place in the nearest buildings at the time the quarry reaches this point. The limit of the expansion is not ex- II pected to occur for 10 to 20 years. By that time, currently available or new technology equipment can be used which permit blasting procedures to be precisely determined to ensure that pre-established vibration levels are met. ITABLE 5.1 I BLASTING LIMITATIONS AT CLOSEST BUILDINGS CONKLIN CONKLIN FMG I BLDG NW BLDG SW TSUMURA parce velocity of 0.2 in/sec at ground level IMin distance to building (feet) 350 650 1100 Using Maximum Relationship I Min dist at 350 lb/delay (ft) 2906 -2906 2906 Max delay at min distance (ib) 5.1 17.5 50.2 II Using Normal Relationship (ft) I Min dist at 350 lb/delay 1272 1272 1272 Max delay at min distance (lb) 26.5 91.5 261.9 IAssuming maximum particle velocity of 0.4 in/sec at ground level Using Maximum Relationship I Min dist at 350 lb/delay (ft) 1819 1819 1819 I Max delay at min distance (lb) 13 44.7 128 Using Normal Relationship (ft) I Min dist at 350 lb/delay 796 796 796 Max delay at min distance (lb) 67.7 233.4 668.3 II I 5-1 II I From Table 5.1 it can be seen that a 5 lb delay at 350 feet could cause a par- ticle velocity of 0.2 in/sec, based upon current data. it should be em- phasized, however, that the closest measurement for a floor shot is 800 feet. I It is therefore unlikely, that blasting operations will occur this close to buildings and the edge of the quarry property. I It is recommended that once the new quarry is opened, periodic seismic measurements are made at the Conklin Buildings and FMG Tsumura. As the quarry expands to the west, changes in blasting procedures can be made to ensure that I the 0.2 in/sec particle velocity limit is not exceeded. This limit should provide protection for the buildings and office and laboratory equipment that does not otherwise require vibration isolation for its normal operation. II II II quarry.envy 91058-01 II II 1 1 II I I I 1 II II 5-2 1 1 Appendix E ' Review of Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey by Loucks & Associates Inc. 1 Minnesota Historical Society ' August 24, 1995 1 1 I- 11: l�I MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 1 August 24, 1995 Mr. Mark Suel Shiely 2915 Waters Road, Suite 105 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Dear Mr. Suel: ' Re: Shakopee Quarry expansion S2, 3, 10, 11, T115, R22, Scott County SHPO Number: 95-1963 I We have reviewed the results of the survey of the above referenced project area by Loucks and Associates. Based on the results of this survey, we feel that the probability of any unreported properties being located in the area proposed for quarrying activities is low. We do note that there are burial areas in the general vicinity of the project, and that the survey report has also been submitted to the Office of the State Archaeologist and the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council. ' Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. Please contact Dennis Gimmestad at 612-296-5462 if you have any questions on our ' review of this project. incerely, J '' .. ••,,__ _f /tA� ' itta L. Bloo erg Deputy State Historic Preservation fficer ' BLB:dmb cc: David Mather, Loucks Mark Dudzik, OSA Jim Jones, MIAC 1 345 KELLOGG BOULEVARD WEST/SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA 55102-1906/TELEPHONE: 612-296-6126 Exhibit B: RGU Response Letters EAWSHIEL/RML 4 SHAKOPEE October 3, 1997 Paul E. Kaminski Best&Flanagan 4000 First Bank Place 601 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402-4331 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division, EAW Dear Ms. Kaminski: Thank you for your letter, and the accompanying report by STS Consultants, Ltd., dated June 27, 1997, on behalf of Valley Green Business in connection with the above-titled matter. Following are responses to your comments regarding the proposed project. Question 6—Description Valley Green Business Park notes that conditional use permit in second paragraph does not include the southern portion of the proposed expansion. The next sentence of EAW notes that "its terms require amendment". The City would require all appropriate review processes be followed before the quarry project could commence. Valley Green Business Park notes that if overburden is 30 feet thick, removal will require 12 years at 250,000 yards per year. This is correct. The project proposer proposes that overburden removal will not be done at one time but incrementally as the quarry is developed. The overburden is sand and therefore valuable as construction fill. Proposer intends to sell and remove this material from the site, in keeping with their past practice. Valley Green Business Park comments that the proposed mining operations will be at a rate greater than that experienced on average over the last 30 years. This "fact" is then used to evaluate EAW impacts in other comments(p. 3, p. 4, p. 9, p. 10). Mining rates in early years were much lower than in recent years and, thus not directly relevant to the proposed project. The EAW impacts are based on a gradual increase in quarrying rates to meet the increases in demand from local construction projects is already occurring. The assumed rate of extraction in the EAW was 700,000 to 800,000 tons per year. For comparison, the current quarry produced approximately 600,000 tons in 1995, 650,000 tons in 1996 and is projected to produce 700,000 tons in 1997. For that reason, Valley Green's estimates of a four-fold increase in production are not correct. COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South• Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-1351 • 612-445-3650 • FAX 612-445-6718 Valley Green Business Park comments that new processing facilities will be needed to handle dramatic increases. The proposer indicates that their current equipment is capable of handling the planned rates of production. Valley Green Business Park comments that the reclamation of the quarry should be addressed in detail. These issues can appropriately be addressed in the required permitting processes. Valley Green Business Park asks whether public access to fisheries will be available. The decision whether to permit such access is more appropriately a land use issue, which can also be addressed during permitting processes. Question 7- Project Magnitude Valley Green Business Park comments that the existing (east) quarry and processing area should be included in the project area. Because no significant operational changes are indicated for the east quarry area or operations, the city has, for purposes of the EAW, concluded that it is not a related project requiring inclusion in the EAW. Question 8- Permits and Approvals Valley Green Business Park comments that increased mining activity will generate greater potential air emissions. MPCA has not expressed a similar concern. The project does not appear to increase production significantly or beyond the scope of the existing air permit. Valley Green Business Park comments that the City's comprehensive plan will need to be amended. It is not clear that the Comprehensive Plan will require amendment, although the zoning will certainly have to be modified to create a Mining Overlay Zone. City staff will undertake further review of the Comprehensive Plan question with the City Attorney. Question 9- Land Use Valley Green Business Park comments that neighboring industrial uses have co-existed for less than 30 years, not for the full 30 years of quarry operation, and that future development will be impacted by the project. Speculation regarding future impacts on unidentified future uses seems to be beyond the scope of the EAW, although future impacts would seem to be similar to impacts on the closest existing uses. Question 10- Cover types Valley Green Business Park comments that the estimate of no wetlands is in conflict with Section 6, which states that portions of the quarry will be developed as shallow wetlands. Because the final grading plan has not been completed, the potential shallow open-water wetlands were included in "open water" land use. It may be more representative to include approximately two acres of wetland in the final land use. As mentioned previously(question 6), the final grading and landscaping of the wetland edge could be addressed during the permitting reviews. Question 11 - Fish,Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Valley Green comments that the ditch and storm water pond will be perched above the regional groundwater table, and that the effect of dewatering on the shallow groundwater should be reviewed and addressed. The ditch and the original wetland (part of Valley Park 13th Addition) have been perched above the regional groundwater table since Shiely began dewatering of the bedrock in the early 1960's. The fact that the ditch and a stormwater pond will be above the regional water table doe not appear to be a significant environmental impact. Valley Green comments that there is no discussion of the "affects" to the downstream wildlife refuge after pumping is ceased, and asks if continuation of the discharge is advantageous, considering it will be terminated 15 years in the future. This comment is answered in the next paragraph of the EAW. "The USFWS's general water management plan for Blue Lake (1988) noted a concern that Shiely might stop pumping and thereby cause water levels in Blue Lake to drop. The plan concluded that upward seepage to Blue Lake would be adequate to keep lake levels high, even in the absence of Shiely pumping." The USFWS apparently concluded that the presence or absence of Shiely pumping is not a significant impact to the refuge. No other Shiely-related concerns were noted. The water quality impacts of urban development were noted as a concern and construction of detention basins was recommended. Valley Green comments that no discussion is included in reference to Deans Lake, Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, or the Minnesota River. Impacts to Dean's Lake were discussed on Page 13 of the EAW in response to Question 13. Impacts to the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge and Minnesota River are anticipated to be negligible, since any withdrawals from Blue Lake or the river via the groundwater system will be recharged back to Blue Lake and the Minnesota River. See also the response to the previous comment. Valley Green comments that the EAW included no discussion of impacts to the Savage Fen, Boiling Springs and Eagle Creek from increases in groundwater levels in the bedrock. Impacts should be small, but positive. The plan was arrived at after extensive consultation with the MDNR waters and wildlife staff, and their comments indicate no concerns over impacts to the Fen, Springs and Creek. Question 12: Physical Impacts on Water Resources Valley Green comments that the EAW does not include discussion of water surface area affected,timing and extent of fluctuations in water surface elevations or proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. Since Dean's Lake, Blue Lake, the Savage Fen, Boiling Springs and Eagle Creek were discussed elsewhere, this question focused on the physical alteration that will produce the quarry itself. The conclusion in each of these cases was that the effects on these water resources would be minimal and generally beneficial. The original mitigation measure proposed was pumping to the east quarry to block impacts to the east. Beyond this measure, no additional mitigation measures were noted. Question 13: Water Use Valley Green comments that the configuration and number of monitoring wells should be included in the EAW. The monitoring plan is not an environmental impact. The MNDNR has agreed that development and approval of a monitoring plan will be a part of the permit issuance process. required. This is correct. While the total amount of water which will be pumped will increase, the total discharge to the ditch will be approximately the same as at present. Valley Green Business Park comments that mounding of groundwater may produce significant impacts and the water table may daylight at the surface. The increase in groundwater levels will produce a condition to the east of the quarry that will be very slightly lower than pre-quarrying conditions, based on 1955 borings made by E.J. Longyear Co. Computer modeling indicates that the post-quarrying water levels will be somewhat higher than those produced by the proposed quarrying plan. The major impacts noted during the environmental review are to the Metropolitan Council's Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant which may have to increase its dewatering program. The Blue Lake Plant is built directly upon the Prairie du Chien bedrock and has treatment tanks that are affected by Prairie du Chien water levels. Additional modeling has been completed and shared with the City and the MCES that indicates that these impacts can be reduced by lowering the east quarry elevation to approximately Elevation 710 during initial west quarry development. This water level would rise to approximately Elevation 725 during late west quarry development and then rise to near Elevation 732 in post- quarrying conditions. Without the implementation of the west quarry and associated dewatering, the impact of rising groundwater would therefore be much greater and would occur much sooner. Valley Green comments that groundwater withdrawal will lower the water table in unconsolidated materials and asks whether settlement will occur. The existing quarry pumping operation has already lowered groundwater levels in the region without noted problems. The quarry level fluctuates up to 40 feet per year, with no problems having been noted. The area most affected will be the immediate vicinity of the quarry and the industrial park. Soils in this area are highly granular. Changes in soil saturation, if they do occur, should not affect properly constructed foundations on granular soil. Valley Green Business Park comments that the feasibility of obtaining an MNDNR permit amendment is not discussed. The dewatering plan was worked out with consultation and review by the MNDNR prior to thepreparation of the EAW. MNDNR comments indicate that the overall hydrologic condition of these features should improve with the proposed operation. Further, obtaining an AMNR permit amendment is an administrative issue, not an environmental impact. Valley Green Business Park comments that new studies are needed to evaluate Dean's Lake impacts. A new study has been conducted. See the Patrick Lynch letter of August 20, 1997 to Michael Leek Valley Green comments that changes in the capture zones of the wells were not calculated. The wellhead protection areas for the City wells were modeled and presented to Lou Van Hout of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission, Al Frechette of Scott County Environmental Health, and Tim Benetti of the City of Shakopee on September 11. The results (shown in Figures 1 through 5, of Attachment B) indicate that the capture zone in the Jordan will move slightly to the west during quarry development and then return to near present conditions following cessation of mining. No significant environmental impacts were noted from this analysis. According to Mr. Van Hut,the nitrate levels in the wells have been dropping and are now below drinking water standards. The City has not identified the source of the previously high nitrate levels. Question 14-Water-Related Land Use Management Districts Valley Green Park comments that the land use planning and zoning districts around the water have not been defined. The EAW question refers to whether the project lies within three types of land use zoning. The answer in the EAW is clearly correct. The zoning and land use planning have been defined by the City of Shakopee (see question 28). The existence of the lakes does not imply that these definitions need to be changed. Question 15- Water Surface Use Valley Green comments that the usage of the lakes for access and water craft use has not been defined. Boat traffic on the lakes is not anticipated to have the potential for a significant environmental impact. During mining, no boats will be allowed on the east quarry. After mining the lakes are proposed to be in private ownership by the surrounding businesses without public access. The small size of the lakes combined with private ownership is not anticipated to attract significant boat usage. The City has the power to regulate surface water use if it chooses(Minnesota Statutes Section 378.32) and restriction to non-motorized uses might be appropriate once the project is complete. Question 17- Erosion and Sedimentation Valley Green Park comments that the area to be graded should include the buffer zone. The 64 acres does include the buffer berms and all land that will be disturbed in any manner by the quarrying project. Question 19- Water Quality Wastewater Valley Green comments that the east quarry lake is proposed to be utilized for wash water treatment from the existing processing operation and asks if discharge to the east quarry lake is acceptable wastewater handling practice. It is common practice in the aggregate industry to use previously excavated mine areas as settling ponds. The materials settling out is, after all, the same but finer-grained materials as that previously mined out. NPDES permit requirements contain effluent standards for discharges to "public waters". The east quarry will remain an important and integral part of the quarrying process until the end of the operation. At that time these'lakes" could become 'waters of the state". Question 20- Groundwater Potential for Contamination Valley Green comments that there is an unused well on site - the Kawasaki well. The Kawasaki well is currently unused but is proposed to be used as a monitoring well once mining commences. Question 21 - Solid Waste: Hazardous Waste; Storage Tank Valley Green comments that a review of the solid waste permit for storage of concrete, asphalt rubble and NSP bottom ash should occur. Such a review is acceptable as part of the permitting process. Leach tests have shown that the runoff from the bottom ash consistently meets the EPA's Maximum Criteria Levels(MCL's) for drinking water. This water, in conjunction with the quarry pumping, should be of a higher quality than the majority of off-site stormwater runoff that is directed to the ditch. Question 22- Traffic Valley Green comments that because intensity of mining will increase, traffic patterns should be reviewed. This comment is based on the same error as previously noted in responses to Question 6 and 8. Mining rates will remain relatively constant at about 700,000 tons per year, 900,000 tons per year with overburden. The traffic analysis did include an increase in trucking to accommodate a moderate increase in limestone production. It also includes the trucking of the overburden. Question 23- Vehicle Related Air Emissions Valley Green Business Park comments that additional traffic will be generated by increased intensity of mining. This comment is based on the same error as previously noted in responses to Question 6, 8 and 22. Question 24- Stationary Source Air Emissions Valley Green Business Park comments that additional air emissions will be generated by increased intensity of mining. The EAW question addresses stationary sources of emissions. This is not a stationary source. Question 26- Other Unique Resources Valley Green comments that assessment for endangered species would be appropriate. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources stated that ". . . there are no known occurrences of rare species or natural features . .." Thus, the conclusion is that further assessment for endangered species is not appropriate. Question 28-Compatibility with Plans Valley Green Business Park comments that the southern portion of the project area was acquired after approval of conditional use permit No. 375, and therefore the entire project site has not been included in this EAW. This is a reiteration of the response to question 6. An amendment to the conditional use permit would be required. Question 30- Related Developments: Cumulative Impacts Valley Green comments that the EAW should include impacts of restoration, site development, east quarry lake configuration and operational activities on the east portion of the site. The impacts of site development are not part of the mining development and would occur whether or not Shiely's mining operations proceed. They are not a phase of mining nor are they connected to the mining. Mine restoration, processing operations and east quarry lake configuration (especially water levels) has been addressed in the EAW. Question 31 - Other Potential Environmental Issues Valley Green Business Park comments that it is difficult to believe that there are no potential adverse environmental impacts, which have not been addressed in the EAW. The City is unable to respond to Valley Green's statement of belief. Question 32- Summary of Issues: Valley Green notes that this section, has been left blank. There may be some permit conditions and mitigative measures as part of the C.U.P. process; there are no significant issues that require further study. Valley Green notes that many issues require further investigation, and that no discussion of mitigation measures are presented. Responses to previous comments have addressed these items. Valley Green Business Pak notes that alternatives review should be included. State law does not require an EAW to evaluate alternatives to the project (Minnesota Rules 4410.1200). Valley Green Business Park suggests the utilization of dewatering water as a water supply for the City of Savage, noting that this alternative was rejected due to the potential impacts to Boiling Springs and Savage Fen. This approach was considered early in project planning. Minnesota Department of Health regulations require that the Prairie du Chien withdrawal in this area must be treated as a surface water source and treated with coagulation and filtration. The expense and magnitude of the required treatment plant makes this an unfeasible approach for both the City of Savage and for Shiely. Thank you again for your participation in this EAW process. Very truly yours, R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CC. Shiely EAW File DD. MN-EQB SHAKOPEE October 3, 1997 Helen Boyer Director,Environmental Services Division Metropolitan Council 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101-1633 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division, EAW Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 16525-1 Dear Ms. Boyer: Thank you for your letter dated August 1, 1997, commenting on the above-titled matter. I am also in receipt of your September 29th letter. Following are the City's responses to your comments regarding the proposed project. Question 20 Ground Water Metropolitan Council staff commented that the proposed project may have a significant Impact on the Metropolitan Council's Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility, located immediately north of the current quarry site. Older structures may sustain hydrostatic pressure if groundwater levels at the plant rise to between Elevation 700 and 706. An increase in groundwater level of 5 to 20 feet for an extended period of time, as projected in the EAW, would most likely result in both a need to operate the plant dewatering system continuously, regardless of the river water surface elevation, and the installation of additional structural anchors to IVWTF structures to enable them to resist the increased uplift forces. Shiely met with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services staff and conducted additional modeling of both the quarry and the area near the WWTF. The most important finding was that the greatest increase in water levels at the WNVTF would occur if Shiely ceased operations entirely. Groundwater levels are projected to rise about 11 feet at the WWTF in this case. This inevitable event will occur either in fifteen years or immediately(if no permit is granted). A second finding was that the quarry plan of operation could be modified to assist the WWTF by holding the east quarry water level lower than originally planned. During early quarrying, the east quarry could be held to Elevation 705 to 715 without impacts to Boiling Springs or Eagle Creek. During late quarrying, the east quarry could rise to COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-1351 • 612-445-3650 • FAX 612-445-6718 between Elevation 715 and 725 without impacts to the east. These changes in operation would keep water level increases at the WWTF to about half the change that will be experienced at the cessation of quarrying. This will reduce the urgency of change at the WNWF and allow time for the MCES to adjust its own dewatering operations Thank you again for your participation in this EAW process. Very truly yours, R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CC. Shiely EAW File DD. MN-EQB P°1111ILLAI SHAKOPE E October 2, 1997 Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor Natural Resources Environmental Review Section/Office of Planning Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division, EAW Dear Mr. Balcom: Thank you for your letter dated July 2, 1997, commenting on the above-titled matter. Following are the City's responses to the items raised in that letter. Question Ilb. - Ecologically Sensitive Resources Since dewatering represents pure expense to the CAMAS/Shiely, they have indicated that every opportunity to reduce these needs continues to be investigated. While the City, as well as CAMAS/Shiely is in favor of beneficial reuse, thus far the limitations of regulatory requirements for treating of drinking water have not been overcome. Question 6- Project Description Excavation of a "bench" at the ultimate water level may be feasible. These construction details can be further defined in permitting and end-use grading. Shiely has indicated they will work with MDNR in both the permitting and end-use grading to maximize the potential for this resource. Thank you again for your participation in this EAW process. Very truly yours, R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CC. Shiely EAW File DD. MN-EQB COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South• Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-1351 • 612-445-3650 • FAX 612-445-6718 SHAKOPEE October 2, 1997 Paul Hoff, Director Environmental Planning and Review Office/Administrative Services Division Minnesota Pollution control Agency 520 Lafayette Road N. St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division, EAW Dear Mr. Hoff: Thank you for your letter dated June 30, 1997, commenting on the above-titled matter. In the event that the proposed project moves forward, the City will work with both the project proposer and the MPGA through future zoning approvals to insure that the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan be revised to include the new acreage and best management practices. Thank you again for your participation in this EAW process. Very truly yours, R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CC. Shiely EAW File DD. MN-EQB COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South• Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-1351 612-445-3650 • FAX 612-445-6718 PILAI SHAKOPEE October 2, 1997 Lin M. Nelson, Environmental Review Coordinator Minnesota Department of Public Health 121 E. 7th Place P.O. Box 64975 St. Paul, MN 55164-0975 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division, EAW Dear Ms. Nelson: Thank you for your letter dated July 2, 1997, commenting on the above-titled matter. Following are the City's responses to the items raised in that letter. Question 20 - Ground Water: Potential for Contamination Based on 30 years of ownership, Shiely has indicated its belief that all wells have been located. However, they have also indicated that, if required by the City, this inventory can be performed prior to commencement of quarrying at the new site. MDH staff also commented that Monitoring Well #1 must be sealed by a licensed well contractor if it is not used and before it is excavated. CAMAS/Shiely has indicated that this will be done, although they indicate that it is likely that the well will be used as part of the monitoring program during mining. MDH staff commented that if the Kawasaki well is used as a monitoring well, it must be reconstructed as a monitoring well and permitted as such. CAMAS/Shiely have indicated to the City that this will be done. Thank you again for your participation in this EAW process. Very truly yours, R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CC. Shiely EAW File DD. MN-EQB COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South• Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-1351 • 612-445-3650 • FAX 612-445-6718 SHAKOPEE October 2, 1997 Scott Peters, Senior Transportation Planner Minnesota Department of Transportation Waters Edge, 1500 W. County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division, EAW Dear Mr. Balcom: Thank you for your letter dated June 30, 1997, commenting on the above-titled matter. Following are the City's responses to the items raised in that letter. Question 18. Water Quality/Surface Water Runoff Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) staff commented that site drainage to the Prior Lake Drainage Ditch should not increase over current levels. The drainage ditch and culvert are the outlet system for most of the drainage from portions of Shakopee lying between County Highway 17 and County Highway 89 (about 11,564 acres). It is also the outlet route for the Prior Lake watershed. The City's stormwater management plan estimates that the 100-year peak discharge at the Highway 101 culvert is over 900 cfs. An allowance of 35-cfs (15,700 g.p.m.) has been included in the stormwater management plan for this area. Actual discharges to the ditch during and after quarry development are expected to be far less than this. During initial years of quarry development, discharge quantities to the ditch and culvert will be smaller than at present (about 900 g.p.m. as described on page 13 of the EAW). At full development, discharge quantities will be approximately equal to present conditions (6,000 g.p.m.) but still smaller than projected in the stormwater plan. MNDOT staff requested the opportunity to review site plans for developments next to MNDOT right of way or with access to state trunk highways. MNDOT would be notified of further City review required before quarrying could commence, and would have the opportunity for review at those times. Thank you again for your participation in this EAW process. COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South• Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-1351 • 612-445-3650 FAX 612-445-6718 Thank you again for your participation in this EAW process. Very truly yours, R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CC. Shiely EAW File DD. MN-EQB WILLA! SHAKOPEE October 2, 1997 Allen Frechette, Environmental Health Manager Scott County Courthouse A102/428 Holmes St. S. Shakopee, MN 55379-1393 Re: CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division, EAW; WSB Project No. 1014.20 Dear Mr. Frechette: Thank you for your letter dated June 16, 1997, commenting on the above-titled matter. Following are the City's responses to the items raised in that letter. 13b -Appropriation of Groundwater Increases in water levels to the north and east do not appear to be an impact of the project. Water levels in the Pearson Quarry are being kept below natural levels by the existing pumping. Without the project, the water levels in the east quarry and Pearson Quarry would rise to their natural levels. Based on 1955 borings conducted by E.J. Longyear and Company this elevation would be about 730. CAMAS/Shiely has the option of adjusting water levels in the east quarry to mitigate this potential impact. It has been indicated that early in the mining process, the east quarry water surface could be held as low as Elevation 710 without adverse effects on the Savage Fen, Boiling Springs or Eagle Creek. This level could slowly rise to Elevation 725 in later stages. Question 20- Potential for Contamination of Groundwater: CAMAS/Shiely met with you, as well as representatives of the City, three times following the receipt of comment and conducted additional groundwater modeling to clarify the possibility of impacts from infiltration. The modeling predicts that during operation dewatering the west quarry will immediately recapture most of the infiltrated water. Any remaining infiltrated water will move to the north toward Blue Lake. Nearly all of the infiltration will be recaptured if the east quarry water level is kept somewhat lower than initially proposed. The water level is proposed to be held at approximately Elevation 715 in early quarry development and Elevation 725 in late quarry development. COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South• Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-1351 • 612-445-3650 • FAX 612-445-6718 A second impact raised by Mr. Frechette was the possibility of leakage of infiltrated water from the Prairie du Chien to the Jordan and subsequent capture by Shakopee Wells #4 and#5. Barr Engineering's study concluded that with the east quarry held to an elevation of 732, 32 to 52 g.p.m. would infiltrate into the Jordan. During late development, the west quarry would recapture most of this, and the remainder would not be in the capture zone of the City wells. If the City wishes to avoid all potential infiltration of quarry water to the Jordan, the east quarry could be held at or below Elevation 720 in early quarry development or below Elevation 715 in late quarry development. Considering the small amount of water involved and the absence of downgradient groundwater users, a higher quarry level may be justified in late quarry development to avoid impacts to Boiling Spring and Eagle Creek. At Elevation 725, for example, the net infiltration is less than five gallons per minute. A third potential impact you raised was that, in the post-quarrying condition, the City wells could draw water from the west quarry. Computer modeling of this condition predicted that after development water could be drawn from the quarry into the Prairie du Chien and then passes to the Jordan and to the City wells. The total anticipated loss from the quarry to the wells was less than two gallons per minute, or less than 1% of the City's appropriation. This impact would occur only after quarrying is finished. Potential mitigation for this very minor impact would be reduction of mining area or lining of the western wall and floor of the quarry to reduce the infiltration in the vicinity of the wells. You also commented that the EAW predicts impacts on ground water elevations in the Deans Lake area which conflict with earlier studies by the MDNR and Sunde Engineering. The MNDNR and Sunde Engineering studies showed that water levels in the Prairie du Chien aquifer in the vicinity of Dean's Lake were affected by the CAMAS/Shiely pumping. It appeared that up to two feet of head change was experienced in the Prairie du Chien as quarry pumping increased in the spring. These findings are consistent with the current modeling done by Barr Engineering. However, the earlier studies further concluded that Dean's Lake is affected by the surficial (uppermost) aquifer, not the Prairie du Chien bedrock aquifer. The surficial aquifer behaves separately from the Prairie du Chien aquifer. Water levels in monitoring wells in the surficial aquifer could not be correlated with levels in the Prairie du Chien or with Shiely pumping. Three studies have now concluded that the quarry pumping does not affect Deans Lake. The possibility of an indirect impact was raised in public meetings. Water levels in the surficial aquifer are approximately 15 feet higher than water levels in the Prairie du Chien. Some seepage downward will occur due to this gradient. If Shiely pumping increases this head difference by two feet, the seepage would theoretically increase. However, the lack of detectable correlation between Prairie du Chien levels and bedrock levels indicates that this impact is not actually being observed at Dean's Lake. Thank you again for your participation in this EAW process. Very truly yours, R. Michael Leek Community Development Director CC. Shiely EAW File DD. MN-EQB Exhibit C: October 2, 1997,Letter of David C. Sellergren for CAMAS/Shiely EAWSHIEL/RML 5 Sent by: DRB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :27PM;Jx #908;Page 1 /9 DOHERTY 3500 Fifth St.Towers With office in: 150 South Fifth Sweet St.PM MN,Telephone(612)291-9333,FAX(612)291-9313 RUMBLE Muutcapolis,Minnesota 55402-4235 Denver,CO,Telephone(303)572-6200,FAX(303)572-6203 • RUMBLE Telephone(612)340-5555 Washington,D.C.,(202)393-2554,FAX(202)393-3131 & BUTLER FAX(612)340-55114 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION Attorneys at Law FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET Attorneys at Law Writer's direct dial number: (612) 340-5571 Transmission Date: October 2, 1997 To: Michael Leek 445-6718 Jim Thompson 337-9310 Bob Bieraugel 683-8108 Nels Nelson 832-2601 From: David C Sellergren, Esq. Doherty,Rumble& Butler, Minneapolis, Minnesota Re: Letter to City Planner and City Council Pages: 9 (including this cover sheet) Client/Matter No.: 106485-2 if you do not receive all of these pages, please call the fax center at (612) 340-5551. Doherty, Rumble& Butler Minneapolis Fax Number (612)340-5584 COMMENTS: The information contained in this facsimile message is attorney privileged and confidential,intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in err,please immediately notify us by telephone,and return the original message to us at the above Minneapolis address via the U.S.postal service. Sent by: DRB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :28PM;J #908;Page 2/9 DOHERTYtVNIIHIh'v •11,.0 r, p1411 ni .A,:avIIJ Ill't Uty UI IV. . \ •uur,l\t1 dp:: . Gl rri.•nlri RUMBLE I'1"•..��.Ih I II!I�'.h.,l 1 iu •,.I .,, i,;�'.I„•1 'ni:Ir .I�IU , ',,:..4,'�..t+ln,•I \Aln:.ral•.di•. Mlpli •l.•.ul.l ,711'• 'n n,l I'.�.t �IWi„:..d.�'�'�Ila I'rii IYd;.11Uh•I.r�l, 11i ?UtiIPI IJowl'',1 01.1.61.,1ttl:V;' �n.'t Qv ,,•,,•,‘,„,.,,.(i„ t.II:':'.ti'• I.I,:,: ..a, ‘,•I !.••;•Il,l.l alrl•Ira��� i'tl?) 1`,114`.! iclr'I.Ar•n, tV!tl',�!t�:il;! IVT.• FAA 1,•1:I \ aJ:l '' . • ii, Idr\(JI.) I'1.1't l't� )!1> (Nll)aT?r,lil,t 11.1.':d,IVA.I :r•,;Jt'IAI'lt ♦ /y Allornry,..a1 7.3w LV,iI•,•.. ., .6.ri,,iwd.•� 612/340-5571 October 2, 1997 Mr. Michael Leek City Planner City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Shakopee City Council City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Re: Post Comment Analysis of Environmental Assessment Worksheet CAMAS Minnesota, Inc., Shiely Division, City of Shakopee Shiely Quarry Expansion Dear Mr. Leek and City Council Members. The City has distributed for comment an Environmental Assessment Worksheet("EAW") in the above-referenced matter in connection with CAMAS Minnesota, Inc./Shiely Division's proposal for the western relocation of its existing limestone quarry in the City of Shakopee. The existing quarry has been in operation at its current location since 1961. The proposal for relocation of quarrying operations entails future site preparation, resource removal, processing, reclamation and end use development. As set forth in the EAW which includes, among other things, the results of the detailed studies and analyses conducted by Barr Engineering Company ("Barr"), and as set forth in the September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, substantial evidence in the record demonstrates that the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. Thus, in light of this evidence in the record which has not been refuted, there is no need for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") in connection with the proposed project. This letter outlines the legal standards and applicable case law which govern a Responsible Governmental Unit's ("RGU") determination of whether art EIS is required under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act ("MEPA"). For this EAW, the City is the RGU. As explained below, the Sent by: DRB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :28PM;Jx #908;Page 3/9 DOHERTY RUMBLE & BTT7 �Y� Mr. Michael Leek U 1 Lt,l� Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 2 four mandatory factors which govern the RGU's decision as to the need for an EIS establish that, based on substantial evidence in the record, an EIS is not required in this case. MEPA Requires the Preparation of an ELS for Only those Projects with the Potential for Significant Environmental Effects MEPA requires that governmental bodies consider only the significant environmental consequences of a project. Iron Rangers for Responsible Ridge Action v Iron Range Resources ("Iron Rangers"), 531 N.W.2d 874, 880(Minn. Ct. App. 1995)(emphasis added). Thus, an EIS shall be ordered for only those projects which have the potential for significant environmental effects. Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subp. 1 (emphasis added); No Power Line_ Inc. v. Minnesota Environmental Quality Council, 262 N.W.2d 312, 323 (Minn. 1977) (citing Lockhart v. Kenops, 927 F.2d 1028, 1033 (8th Cir. 1991)). In other words, almost every human activity adversely impacts the environment, but Minnesota's environmental protection statutes regulate only those activities or proposed activities which will materially adversely affect the environment. State by Schaller v. County of Blue Fart}, 563 N.W.2d 260, 264-265 (Minn. 1997)(interpreting standard for materiality under MERA). MEPA expressly contemplates that certain projects may impact the environment to a degree, but that such impacts are not necessarily significant. Therefore, those impacts which do not result in significant impact to the environment do not necessitate the preparation of an EIS. The proposed project in this case will not result in any significant impacts, therefore, no EIS is required. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, an RGU is required to consider four factors: 1. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects; 2. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; 3. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority, and 4. The extent to which the environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or ofEIS's previously prepared on similar projects. Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subp. 7. The Environmental Quality Board ("EQB") has declared that these four factors must be considered by the RGU. Iron Rangers, 531 N,W.2d at 880; see also, National Environmental Policy Act("NEPA"),42 U.S.C, §4321, el seq.) (term ('significantly" requires consideration of both context and intensity). 40 C.F.R. § 1508.27. Sent by: DRB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :29PM• ,JetFax #908;Page 4/9 DOHERTY RUMBJ F, BUTLER Mr. Michael Leek Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 3 In analyzing the four factors, there must be substantial evidence that the proposed project will significantly impair the environment; otherwise, MEPA does not apply and no EIS may be required. Reserve Mining; Co. v. Herbst, 256 N.W.2d 808, 828-829 (Minn. 1977) (emphasis added). Under the Four Factors, the Substantial Evidence in the Record Demonstrates an EIS is Not Required under MEPA 1. The type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects. The information in the EAW preliminarily indicated that no EIS should be required. Moreover, the extensive supplemental information in Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments confirmed that no EIS is required. In short, the substantial evidence in the record conclusively shows that the type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects as a result of the project do not mandate an EIS. As stated above,the modeling and analyses performed by Barr, which establish that there will be no significant environmental impacts, have not been refuted by any specific evidence, Prior to the analyses,the model used by Barr was closely scrutinized by experts within the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") and determined to be correct. The only questions raised regarding potential environmental impacts were based on speculation, what in typical land use parlance are usually referred to as"concerns" of commenters. All questions raised by such speculative comments have been satisfactorily answered as set forth in Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments. Specifically, the following evidence supports the conclusion that the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects associated with the project do not require an EIS. • Comments from the DNR. 1. Overall,the hydrologic conditions of the surface water features of the project should improve with the proposed operation. (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 3). 2. It is not recommended that an EIS be prepared because of the absence of potential for significant environmental effects. (July 2, 1997 DNR Comment Letter). Sent by: DRB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :30PM;,Je #908;Page 5/9 DOHERTY RUMBLE & BUTLER Mr. Michael Leek Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 4 • Issues raised by the Scott County Environmental Health Department have all been resolved. 1. Potential impact on groundwater elevations near Dean's Lake. Barr's detailed studies show the Shiely pumping will not affect Dean's Lake since the surficial aquifer, not the Prairie du Chien aquifer, impact Dean's Lake, (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 2). 2. Potential infiltration from the east quarry into the Prairie du Chien aquifer. Extensive groundwater modeling conducted by Barr shows that most of the infiltrated water will be immediately recaptured by dewatering the west quarry and that keeping the east quarry water level slightly lower will permit the recapture of infiltrated water, (LI at 1). 3. The Pearson Quarry. Barr's studies confirm there will be no impact on the exhausted Pearson quarry situated to the northeast of the proposed project. (1.i.at 1). 4. Potential infiltration of water from the Prairie du Chien aquifer into the Jordan aquifer. Barr's modeling shows any infiltration would be minimal and that most would be recaptured by the west quarry during late development with the remainder being out of the capture zone of the City wells. (1d,at 1). 5. Post-quarrying condition potentially resulting in City wells drawing water from west quarry Barr's modeling confirms that the anticipated loss from the quarry to the wells would be less than 1% of the City's total appropriation and that this minimal amount could be successfully mitigated through mining reduction or lining of the western wall and floor of the quarry if necessary. (a at 2). 6. Potential impact on groundwater recharge areas for some of Shakopee's wells. Barr's modeling confirms that the project will have a very minor impact on the calculated wellhead protection zone of City wells number 4 and 5, As shown in the figures attached to the Response to EAW Comments, the 10-year zone will shift slightly to the south and widen slightly during the quarry operation. Following quarry operation, the zone will return to its present configuration. The area included is not large, is not developed, and does not represent a significant environmental risk. Sent by: DRB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :30PM;Je #908;Page 6/9 DOHERTY RUMBLEp 2 BU T1 ER Mr. Michael Leek 'ia,l�•rJ,,� ..� . •,,,, i��a r, Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 5 • Questions raised by the Metropolitan Council regarding the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility ("WWTF") have been resolved. If Shiely were to cease operations entirely, the greatest increase in water levels at the WWTF would occur. (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 5). However, if the east quarry water level is lowered slightly, the impact would be sufficiently mitigated to the satisfaction of the Met Council as explained in additional meetings with the Met Council after the EAW was prepared. (j,). • Questions from Conklin Company, Inc, regarding potential vibrations from operations have been answered. The project has at all times been proposed with the express understanding that a program of seismic monitoring at the new quarry would be in place to ensure that maximum permitted particle acceleration levels are not exceeded so that no significant impacts will occur. (I). The City may wish to impose such seismic limitations as part of the conditional use permit ("CUP") just as anticipated traffic flow issues and other issues are commonly addressed through the CUP process. ad. at 6). Sec Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 884 (RGU is obligated to consider CUP conditions imposed by a regulating authority because such conditions are a form of ongoing public regulation as defined under Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subp. 7(C)). • Valley Green Business Park's questions regarding proposed operations, permits, land use, hydrology, and related issues have been answered. Barr's detailed studies resolve all questions raised by Valley Green Business Park and demonstrate there is no potential for significant environmental impact. (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 7-17). Moreover, there is no evidence in the record to refute Barr's detailed, substantiated conclusions. See id, Mere speculative factors, unlikely or remote contingencies, and imprecise, unreliable data are insufficient bases for an EIS. Cron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 881, Reserve Mining, 256 N.W.2d at 829, 840, For all of these reasons, the substantial evidence in the record demonstrates that the type, extent, and reversibility of the environmental effects associated with the project is not sufficient to require an EIS. Sent by: DRB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :32PM;Jo #908;Page 7/9 DOHERTY RUMBLE & BUTLER Mr. Michael Leek Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 6 2. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects. The various stages and cumulative effects of the proposed quarry expansion will not result in significant environmental effects for the reasons discussed above and those outlined in the EAW. Moreover, there are no other anticipated future projects which would alter this analysis. Finally, because remote and unlikely predictions of future projects are insufficient as a matter of law to require an EIS, the second factor of the test also indicates that no EIS should be required. See Reserve Mining, 256 N.W.2d at 829, 3. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. Ongoing regulation by the RGU or other governmental authority may mitigate the environmental impact of a project to the extent that there will be no need for an ETS. For example, an EIS is unnecessary where the RGU requires environmental studies relating to water quality, rare plants, archaeology, and forest fragmentation before the issuance of a CUP. Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 877-78. Similarly, an RGU is obligated to consider CUP conditions imposed by a regulating authority because such conditions are a form of ongoing public regulation as defined under Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subp. 7(C). Id,.at 884. Where state law and local permit controls already regulate a project with respect to mitigation of ground water and surface water impacts, such facts weigh heavily in favor of a finding of no significant impact to the environment making an EIS unnecessary. Iron Rangers, 531 N.W.2d at 881 (dig). Lockhart v.Kenopg, 927 F.2d 1028, 1033 (8th Cir. 1991), cert_ denied, 502 U.S. 863 (1991)). Where it is a requirement that a project be preceded by monitoring as prescribed by the DNR, the PCA, and the MEQB, a determination that no EIS is required because there is no potential for significant environmental effects is proper. Minnesota Public Interest Research Group v. Minnesota Environmental Oyalily Council 1975, 237 N.W.2d 375, 383 (Minn. 1975) (issue was whether ETS was required prior to construction of exploratory copper-nickel mine 20 miles south of Boundary Waters Canoe Area). The Shiely project will be subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority in various respects. To wit, the following permits and approvals are required for the project: water appropriation(DNR);air permit(MPCA); SDSINPDES storm water(MPCA); conditional use permit (City);'and rezoning(City). (EAW, p. 7). In particular, the groundwater monitoring(and mitigation response, if necessary)for the proposal will provide substantial protection from environmental harm, and it will deliver to the City a valuable data base for its wellhead protection program. Approximately one month ago, the Minnesota Court Appeals confirmed once again the established principle that mitigation is indeed a key criterion for an RGU to consider in determining the need for an EIS. White v. Minnesota Department. of Natural Resources, 567 N.W.2d 724, 780 Sent by: ORB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :32PM ,JetFaX #908;Page 8/9 DOHERTY RUMBI F, BUB ETA Mr. Michael Leek 1:�, 1. :L 1� Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 7 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). Shiely's submission and the Barr analysis set forth a range of monitoring and water level choices to which Shiely is amenable. Because ongoing regulation of the Shiely project by various governmental bodies is a significant component of the proposal before the City Council, the mitigating features and oversight over the project demonstrate that there will be no significant environmental effects. 4. The extent to which the environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer,or of EIS's previously prepared on similar projects. The EAW and the subsequent comments have resulted in extensive mitigating measures which will serve to significantly control any environmental effects associated with the project. Moreover, the model and analyses employed by Barr were founded in large part on earlier analyses undertaken with respect to an AUAR addressing impacts on the Savage Fen and Boiling Springs. Those analyses, as is the case with the analyses incorporated in the EAW, were thoroughly reviewed and then approved by the DNR,the dominant agency with expertise relevant to ground water and surface water in the State of Minnesota. Specifically, in addition to the ongoing regulatory oversight described above, extensive groundwater monitoring, regrading work, landscaping, revegetation, water quality monitoring, and vibration monitoring are part of Shiely's project proposal. (Shiely's September 27, 1997 Response to EAW Comments, p. 17). These extensive mitigating measures demonstrate that the fourth factor also militates against an EIS in this case. See Audubon Society v. Dailey, 977 F.2d 428, 435-36 (8' Cir. 1992) (agency may base its decision of"no significant impact" on mitigating measures to be undertaken as long as more than mere vague statements of good intentions). Conclusion The Shiely Company and its parent, CAMAS, Inc., are committed to operating in an environmentally responsible manner. They have an established history of conducting business operations from a standpoint of cooperation and mutual benefit, rather than from an environmentally antagonistic approach. This is a major reason that CAMAS, Inc. has become a respected name in the industry and a trusted business partner in the communities in which it works. Consistent with Shiely's environmental philosophy, the proposed quarry expansion project will not have significant environmental effects. An analysis of the four factors based on the substantial evidence in the record, including the detailed studies of Barr Engineering Company (which have not been refitted), demonstrates that an EIS should not be required under established Minnesota law. In addition,it is important to keep in mind that the Shiely/CAMAS quarry relocation will develop very slowly over the next 15 years with ample opportunity to monitor and mitigate the two issues of Sent by: DRB 6123405584; 10/02/97 1 :33PM;J #908;Page 9/9 nD7O7 HETR�TY v MB t •r' Mr. Michael Leek JJ 1 Shakopee City Council October 2, 1997 Page 8 greatest concern—the ground vibration and the groundwater. The additional information generated during monitoring will add volumes to the City's understanding of the groundwater in this part of the City and will contribute to the City's wellhead protection program. Very truly yours, David C. Se ergren C J DCSJEA:sam:530497 cc: Jim Thomson, City Attorney Bob Bieraugel, CAMAS Nels Nelson, Barr CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE �/. E. I Memorandum 1 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Release of Escrow Funds for Meadows West 1st Addition DATE: September 29, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The City has received a letter from Horst Graser, Gold Nugget Development, Inc. , requesting the release of the $1, 800 being held in escrow by the City for a trail connection. BACKGROUND: When the City approved the final plat of Meadows West 1st Addition, a condition of the approval required the construction of an eight foot wide trail within the pedestrian access easement between Lots 16 and 17, Block 3 . This trail (located south of the Upper Valley Drainage Way) would provide access for the neighborhood to the trail located within the Upper Valley Drainage Way. The trail within the Upper Valley Drainage Way is actually located on the north side and a very expensive pedestrian bridge would be required to connect the two. On September 19, 1995, City Council discussed trail connection crossings and determined that the City would not install bituminous trail connections in areas where a foot bridge would be required to cross the Upper Valley Drainage Way. At that same meeting, Council directed staff to prepare a policy for trail connections and to look at areas where connections are not provided that can be provided in a feasible manner. Council also directed that the escrow for the Meadows West 1st Addition trail connection, not being paved at the time, continue to be held. Since that time, a trail plan has been prepared and adopted by City Council . Although this plan does not identify all Release of Escrow Funds for Meadows West 1st Addition September 29, 1997 Page -2- possible local connections, it does set forward policies for making such connections. Based on the fact that building a pedestrian bridge to connect the trail connection covered by the escrow to the trail on the north side of the Upper Valley Drainage Way is not going to be constructed because it is cost prohibitive, it would be appropriate to release the $1, 800 escrow. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Release the $1, 800 for a trail connection 2 . Continue to hold the $1, 800 for a trail connection 3 . Build the trail connection between the two lots in Meadows West 1st Addition 4 . Table for additional information RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative number one, release the $1, 800 being held in escrow. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1 . Offer Resolution No. 4762, Amending Resolution No. 4086, A Resolution Approving the Preliminary Plat for the Meadows West, and the Final Plat for the Meadows West 1st Addition, and move its adoption. 2 . Authorize the appropriate City officials to refund $1, 800 being held in escrow for a trail connection between Lots 16 and 17, Block 3, Meadows West 1st Addition, to Gold Nugget Development, Inc. u,a/t, Judi i (;),,Y h S. Cox, City Clerk h:\judy\trailmwl V N Z ? RESOLUTION NO. 4762 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 4086, A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE MEADOWS WEST,AND THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE MEADOWS WEST 1ST ADDITION WHEREAS, on October 4, 1994, City Council approved the Final Plat of the Meadows West 1st Addition with the condition that an eight foot wide trail be constructed within the proposed pedestrian access easement within Block 3; and WHEREAS, the trail located within the Upper Valley Drainage Way is located on the north side of the drainage way; and WHEREAS, if a trail were constructed in Block 3 it would require a connection to the existing trail along the north side of the Upper Valley Drainage Way in order to be useful; and WHEREAS, it would be necessary to construct a costly pedestrian bridge to connect a trail in Block 3 to the existing trail along the north side of the Upper Valley Drainage Way. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA, that Resolution No. 4086 is hereby amended by deleting the condition of approval requiring an eight foot wide trail within the proposed pedestrian access easement within Block 3, between Lots 16 and 17. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1997. Mayor ATTEST: • City Clerk GOLD NUGGET DEVELOPMENT INC. 8857 Zealand Avenue North Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55445 (612) 424-4955 September 10, 1997 The Honorable Jeff Henderson, Mayor of Shakopee, MN, City Council Members of Shakopee, MN Ludy Cox, City Clerk 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 • RE Release of escrow funds in Meadows West 1st Addition t,adies and Gentleman: In October of 1994 Gold Nugget Development Inc. received final plat approval for Meadows West 1st Addition. One of the improvement requirements was to install a 5 foot bituminous trail between lots 16 and 17 of block 3. This trail was to provide neighborhood access to the existing regional trail system directly north of the Upper Valley Drainage Ditch. To complete the connection between the trail terminus and the regional trail required the construction of a costly pedestrian bridge spanning the ditch: On September 19, 1995 the Council directed staff not to install trails where pedestrian bridges are a component of the trail system. The council also directed staff to prepare a trail plan and policies for future direction(see attached copy of official council minutes of September 1995). The council furthermore directed staff to obtain quotes for a path (the location of the path is unclear based on the minutes) and to construct the work. I presume this was for a segment of a path from Alexander Court to Vierling Drive. This work was not completed presumably since the County will be constructing a regional trail on the west side of County Road 79. The council also directed staff to hold the Meadows West trail construction cost in escrow (51800 00) for an unspecified period of time and a purpose which has been somewhat ambiguously documented. The trail plan is now complete which does not contain a provision for a trail in Meadows West 1st Addition nor was a bituminous path constructed as referenced in the minutes anywhere in the first addition. The council should know the trail improvement was not part of the park dedication requirement for the first addition, but rather it was an improvement to expand the existing trail system which is no different than expanding the cities road or utility system: To use the construction funds for the deleted trail to raise the level of service elsewhere in the city is highly irregular especially since the Developers Agreement for Meadows West 14 ;Zddition has not been amended. It has been two years since the Council took action on this item. It appears a trail in the Meadows West 1st Addition is not in the best interest of the city. Therefore I request the council release the 1800.00 escrow currently in place with the city.1Res ectfull , r 1 /I 1� / Horst Graser, Project Manager Gold Nugget Development, Inc attachment 7 Official Proceedings of the Shakopee City Council September 19, 1995 Page -5- There are four potential trail connection crossings of the Upper Valley Drainage trail with future development. The Meadows West 1st Addition trail connection has not been paved as yet. The option of running the trail along side the drainage way and meeting up with the trail at another point rather than directly into the drainage way, and the impact of low flow pipes was discussed. Mr. Loney explained that the MPCA originally did not want low flow pipes installed. The issue of having pedestrians walk a short distance to a crossing and the high cost of a pedestrian bridge were discussed. Cncl. Sweeney inquired as to what policies were currently in place to avoid similar problems in the future. Paul Bilotta stated that this is a level of service policy. A discussion relating to situations when trails or bridges are feasible or practical ensued. A discussion relating to establishing a policy that would give staff direction based on criteria ensued. Brekke%Sweeney moved to direct staff to prepare a policy for trail connections across the Upper Valley Drainage channel to the Upper Valley Drainage trail which would allow staff to make decisions based on criteria, and begin to look at areas where connections are not currently provided that can be provided in a feasible manner and identify those areas. Motion carried unanimously. Sweeney/Beard moved to direct staff to obtain quotes for the Bituminous Path Reconstruction from County Road 79 to Vierling Drive and to construct the work as outlined on the attached plan. (CC Doc #230) . Bruce Loney stated that the cost could come out of the Upper Valley Drainage Project. Motion carried unanimously. Brekke/Beard moved to direct staff not to install bituminous trail connections in areas where a foot bridge would be required to cross the trail. Motion carried unanimously. Beard/Sweeney moved to direct staff to hold the monies in escrow for the trail connection in The Meadows West 1st Addition that we are not paving at this time. Motion carried unanimously. CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE J y. E . 2. . Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Fraternal Order of Eagles Premises Permit DATE: September 29, 1997 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The Fraternal Order of Eagles is applying for a premises permit from the Gambling Control Commission to sell pull-tabs at their site at 220 West 2nd Avenue. Prior to the issuance of a permit, the Commission must receive a resolution from the local municipality approving the application. The Hockey Association is currently selling pull-tabs at this site and I have been informed that they will be discontinuing sales when a license is issued to the Eagles. The Eagles are a local organization and have been informed of the city code requirement that they expend 75% of their expenditures for lawful purposes on lawful purposes conducted or located within the city' s trade area. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 4753, A Resolution Approving Premises Permit for the Fraternal Order of Eagles, and move its adoption. A-L))/L _J . 1/2- ,V J ith S. Cox, Ci y Clerk h:\judy\licenses\premeagl RESOLUTION NO. 4753 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA, APPROVING PREMISES PERMITS FOR THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES WHEREAS, the 1990 legislature adopted a law which requires municipal approval in order for the Gambling Control Board to issue or renew premises permits; and WHEREAS, the Fraternal Order of Eagles is seeking Premises Permit at 220 West 2nd Avenue, Shakopee,Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,AS FOLLOWS: That the Premises Permit for the Fraternal Order of Eagles at 220 West 2nd Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota is hereby approved. Adopted in Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held this 7th day of October, 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk JSC/tiv /2"/ EI3. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: Awarding Sale of 1997B Improvement Bonds DATE: October 3 , 1997 Introduction Council action is needed award the sale of improvement bonds for 1997 . Background Attached is a sample resolution prepared by bond counsel which awards the sale of improvement bonds for 1997 . This is a routine event . The bonds being sold will finance the 1997 Overlay, Maras, Vierling Drive - Presidential to CR69 and Eastway projects . The resolution needs to be adopted at the October 7th Council meeting. Attached is a faxed copy of the resolution. Action Offer Resolution No. 4754 A Resolution Authorizing Issuance, Awarding Sale, Prescribing the Form and Details and Providing for the Payment of $1, 805, 000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B, and move its adoption. Gregg ox and Finance Director N:\cash\bonds\97bbonds 10/03/97 16:36 ET REF: N00D7978.0000 FR:NOODYS TO:6124466718 Page 1 of 2 ATTN: Mr. Gregg Voxland City of Shakopee 1:Plq, E, 3 MOODY'S ASSIGNS A2 RATING TO SHAKOPEE (CITY OF) MN $1,805,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION Ir PROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1997B Shakopee (City of) MN Municipality Minnesota Moody's Rating Issue Rating General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B A2 Sale Amount $1 ,805, 000.00 Expected Sale Date 10/07/97 Rating Description General Obligation NEW YORK, October 3, 1997 -- Moody's has assigned an A2 rating and stable outlook to the City of Shakopee's $1,805, 000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B. The A2 rating is based on the city's substantial and diverse tax base, strong financial position and manageable debt levels. MOODY'S EXPECTS ACCELERATED EXPANSION FOR THIS GROWING SUBURB SOUTHWEST OF THE TWIN CITIES DUE TO IMPROVED ROAD ACCESS AND NEW DEVELOPMENT: Shakopee is a second tier suburb of Minneapolis-St. Paul with a substantial and diverse tax base that includes a sizable and diverse commercial and industrial sector. The tax base has grown at an average annual rate of 7.7% since 1992. Moody's expects this rate to accelerate further due to the recent completion of three major transportation projects that will provide improved access to more fully developed inner ring suburbs. Furthermore, the Metropolitan Council recently approved an additional 1 ,565 acres for expansion and infrastructure development within the city's Metropolitan Urban Service Area, or MUSA line. The socioeconomic profile of city residents, as measured by income levels and housing values, is moderately above average and Scott County unemployment rates remain below the national average. AMPLE FINANCIAL RESERVES; GENERAL FUND BALANCE EXCEEDS 71% OF REVENUES: The city's favorable financial position is characterized by conservative budgeting and a General Fund balance which is sufficient to meet both cash flow and contingency requirements . With an actual operating surplus of $968,000, which was significantly more than anticipated for year-end 1996, the General Fund balance increased to 71% of General Fund revenues. While a draw in reserves is budgeted for fiscal 1997, officials do not expect that to materialize as building permit activity continues to be heavy. MODERATE DEBT LEVELS REFLECT RAPID AMORTIZATION AND STRONG TAX BASE GROWTH: The city's direct debt level of 3. 1% exceeds the median (1 .7%) and reflects the infrastructure needs and activity of a rapidly expanding community. Overall debt burden is 5 . 1% compared with 3.3% for similarly sized cities. Debt service as a percent of the budget is high, at nearly 30%, and is due to both an aggressive amortization schedule and development needs. However, the 10/03/97 16:36 ET REF: MOOD7978.0000 FR:M00DYS TO:6124456716 Page 2 of 2 impact on the general tax levy is mitigated by strong special assessment support. Despite future borrowing of an additional $5 million within the next six months and approximately $2.5 million annually for improvement needs over the next two to three years, Moody's expects the city's debt levels to remain manageable due to anticipated tax base growth and rapid amortization. ANALYSTS: Patricia South, Analyst, Public Finance Group, Moody's Investors Service Dianne Golub, Backup Analyst, Public Finance Group, Moody's Investors Service CONTACTS: Journalists: (212) 553-0376 Research Clients : (212) 553-1625 CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $1,805,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1997B Issuer: City of Shakopee, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on Tuesday, October 7, 1997 at 7:00 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): �I RESOLUTION NO. -/75 / RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $1,805,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1997B I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this _ day of October, 1997. Judith Cox, City Clerk Pursuant to authorization conferred by Resolution No. Springsted Incorporated presented _proposals solicited and negotiated by it for the purchase of $1,805,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B of the City. The terms of the proposals were as follows: Bid for Interest Total Interest Cost Name of Bidder Prinicpal Rates - Net Average Rate Councilmember then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $1,805,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1997B BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. Authorization and Sale. 1.01. Authorization of Bonds. This Council, by its Resolution No. adopted on September 2, 1997, has determined that is necessary for the City to sell and issue its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B in the aggregate principal amount of $1,805,000 (the Bonds) to finance the cost of the local improvements designated in said Resolution (the Improvements). Resolution No. is incorporated herein by reference. 1.02. Proposals Received. The City has received proposals for the purchase of the Bonds, and does hereby find and determine that the most favorable proposal received is that of , of , and associates (the "Underwriter"), to purchase the Bonds at a price of$ plus accrued interest on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 1.03. Sale of Bonds. The sale of the Bonds is hereby awarded to the Underwriter, and the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed on behalf of the City to execute a contract for the sale of the Bonds in accordance with the terms of said bid. The good faith check of the successful bidder shall be retained and deposited by the Finance Director. The good faith checks of other bidders shall be returned to them forthwith. Section 2. Bond Terms; Registration; Execution and Delivery. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.08: 2.01. Maturities; Interest Rates; Denominations; Payment. The Bonds shall be designated General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B, shall be originally dated as of November 1, 1997, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, or any integral multiple thereof, shall mature on February 1 in the respective years -1- and amounts stated below, and shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the respective annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 1999 $80,000 2004 $105,000 2000 395,000 2005 105,000 2001 300,000 2006 105,000 2002 240,000 2007 105,000 2003 195,000 2008 105,000 2009 70,000 The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar for the Bonds appointed herein. 2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond shall be authenticated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case such Bond shall be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) if the date of authentication is prior to August 1, 1998, such Bond shall be dated as of November 1, 1997. The interest on the Bonds shall be payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing August 1, 1998, to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.03. Registration. The City shall appoint, and shall maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the Registrar). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds -2- of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange shall be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of such Bond, whether such Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Bond and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any such Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Bond -3- was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. 2.04. Appointment of Registrar and Paying Agent. The City hereby appoints Minnesota, as the initial Registrar and Paying Agent for the Bonds, which, together with any successor entity is sometimes referred to herein as the Registrar or the Registrar and Paying Agent. The Mayor and the City Clerk are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with said Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon thirty (30) days notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. 2.05. Redemption. Bonds maturing in the years 1999 through 2004 shall not be subject to redemption prior to maturity, but Bonds maturing in the years 2005 through 2009 shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order as the City shall determine and by lot as to Bonds having the same maturity date, on February 1, 2004 and on any date thereafter (whether or not an interest payment date), at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. Prior to the date set for redemption of any Bond prior to its stated maturity date, the Clerk shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published as required by law and, at least twenty (20) days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of the call to be mailed to the registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.03 hereof. 2.06. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction of the City Clerk and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Clerk, provided that all signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if he -4- had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on such Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the Clerk shall deliver the same to the purchaser thereof upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and said purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.07. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be typed or printed in substantially the following form: -5- [Face of the Bonds] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA R-_ STATE OF MINNESOTA $ COUNTY OF SCOTT CITY OF SHAKOPEE GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BOND, SERIES 1997B Interest Maturity Date of Rate Date Original Issue CUSIP February 1, November 1, 1997 Registered Owner: Principal Amount: Dollars KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that the City of Shakopee, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation of Scott County, Minnesota (the City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the registered owner named above, or registered assigns, the principal sum specified above on the maturity date specified above, and to pay interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing August 1, 1998, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the month immediately preceding the payment date, all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Bond before maturity. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender of this Bond, the principal hereof, are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft issued by , in , Minnesota, Bond Registrar and Paying Agent (the Registrar), or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein, or in a manner otherwise agreed with any nationally recognized securities depository which is the registered owner at any time. For the prompt and full payment of such principal -6- and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. Additional provisions of this Bond are contained on the reverse hereof and such provisions shall for all purposes have the same effect as though fully set forth in this place. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution described herein until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the printed facsimile signatures of the Mayor and City Clerk, and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the Date of Original Issue set forth above. CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA (facsimile) Mayor Attest: (facsimile) City Clerk CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. Date of Authentication: Registrar By: Authorized Representative -7- [Reverse of the Bonds] This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $1,805,000, all of like date and tenor, except as to maturity date, interest rate, denomination and redemption privilege, issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on October 7, 1997 (the Resolution), for the purpose of financing the cost of local improvements in the City, and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475. The Bonds of this series are issuable only as fully registered Bonds, in denominations of $5,000 or any multiple thereof, of single maturities. In the Resolution the City Council determined that in calendar year 1997 the City does not expect to issue tax-exempt obligations in an aggregate principal amount greater than $10,000,000 (exclusive of "private activity bonds"), and designated the Bonds as "qualified tax exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Bonds of this issue maturing in 2004 and earlier years are payable on their respective stated maturity dates without option of prior payment, but Bonds having stated maturity dates in 2005 and later years are each subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, and if in part in such order as the City shall determine and by lot as to Bonds maturing on the same date, on February 1, 2004 and any date thereafter (whether or not an interest payment date), at a price equal to the principal amount thereof plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. Prior to the date specified for the redemption of any Bond prior to its stated maturity date, the City will cause notice of the call for redemption to be published as required by law, and, at least 20 days prior to the designated redemption date, will cause notice of the call to be mailed to the registered owner of any Bond to be redeemed at the owner's address as it appears on the bond register maintained by the Registrar. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the principal amount remaining outstanding. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and -8- maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECTI'ED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required; that, prior to the issuance hereof the City has covenanted and agreed to levy special assessments upon property specially benefited by the local improvements financed by the Bonds, and has levied ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City, which special assessments and taxes will be collectible for the years and in amounts sufficient to produce sums not less than 5% in excess of the principal of and interest on the Bonds of this issue when due, and has appropriated such special assessmentsand taxes to the payment of such principal and interest; that if necessary for payment of such principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the City, without limitation as to rate or amount; and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any consitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. (Form of certificate to be printed on the reverse side of each Bond, following a full copy of the legal opinion) We certify that the above is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion rendered by bond counsel on the issue of Bonds of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, which includes the within Bond, dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds. (Facsimile Signature) (Facsimile Signature) City Clerk Mayor -9- The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM-- as tenants UTMA Custodian in common (Cust) (Minor) TEN ENT -- as tenants under Uniform Transfers to Minors by entireties JT TEN -- as joint tenants Act with right of (State) survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Notice: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever. Signature Guaranteed: -10- Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a national bank or trust company or by a brokerage firm having a membership in one of the major stock exchanges. The Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the assignee requested below is provided. Name and Address: (Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is held by joint account) Please insert social security or other identifying number of assignee -11- 2.08. Use of Securities Depository; Book-Entry Only System. The provisions of this Section shall take precedence over the provisions of Sections 2.01 through 2.07 to the extent they are inconsistent therewith. (a) The Depository Trust Company (DTC) has agreed to act as securities depository for the Bonds, and to provide a Book-Entry Only System for registering the ownership interest of the financial institutions for which it holds the Bonds (the DTC Participants), and for distributing to such DTC Participants such amount of the principal and interest payments on the Bonds as they are entitled to receive, for redistribution to the beneficial owners of the Bonds as reflected in their records (the Beneficial Owners). (b) Initially, and so long as DTC or another qualified entity continues to act as securities depository, the Bonds shall be issued in typewritten form, one for each maturity in a principal amount equal to the aggregate principal amount of each maturity, shall be registered in the name of the securities depository or its nominee, shall be subject to the provisions of this Section 2.08, and no Beneficial Owner shall have the right to receive a certificate of ownership or printed Bond. While DTC is acting as the securities depository, the Bonds shall be registered in the name of the DTC's nominee, CEDE & CO.; provided that upon delivery by DTC to the City and the Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of CEDE & CO., the words "CEDE & CO." in this Resolution refer to such new nominee of DTC. With respect to Bonds registered in the name of a securities depository or its nominee, the City and the Registrar shall have no responsibility or obligation to any DTC Participant or Beneficial Owner with respect to the following: (i) the accuracy of the records of any securities depository or its nominee with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any DTC Participant or other person or any other person, other than DTC, of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any DTC Participant or any other person, other than DTC, of any amount with respect to the principal of or premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The Registrar shall pay all principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or upon the order of DTC, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to the principal and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. So long as the Book-Entry Only System is in effect, no person other than DTC shall receive an authenticated Bond. (c) Upon receipt by the City and the Registrar of written notice from the securities depository to the effect that it is unable or unwilling to discharge its responsibilities under the Book-Entry Only System, the Registrar shall issue, transfer and exchange Bonds of the initial series as requested by the securities depository in appropriate amounts, and whenever the securities depository requests the City and -12- • the Registrar to do so, the City and the Registrar shall cooperate with the securities depository in taking appropriate action after reasonable notice (i) to arrange for a substitute depository willing and able, upon reasonable and customary terms, to maintain custody of the Bonds, or (ii) to make available Bonds registered in whatever name or names the Beneficial Owner registering ownership transferring or exchanging such Bonds shall designate, in accordance with clause (f) or clause (g) below, whichever is applicable. (d) In the event the City determines that it is in the best interests of the Beneficial Owners that they be able to obtain printed Bonds, the City may so notify the securities depository and the Registrar, whereupon the securities depository shall notify the Beneficial Owners of the availability through the securities depository of such printed Bonds. In such event, the City shall cause to be prepared and the Registrar shall issue, transfer and exchange the printed Bonds fully executed and authenticated, as requested by the securities depository in appropriate amounts and, whenever the securities depository requests, the City and the Registrar shall cooperate with the securities depository in taking appropriate action after reasonable notice to make available printed Bonds registered on the Bond Register in whatever name or names the Beneficial Owners entitled to receive Bonds shall designate, in accordance with clause (f) or clause (g) below, whichever is applicable. (e) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Resolution to the contrary, so long as any Bond is registered in the name of a securities depository or its nominee, all payments of principal and interest on the Bond and all notices with respect to the Bond shall be made and given, respectively, to the securities depository. (f) In the event that the Book-Entry Only System established pursuant to this Section is discontinued, except as provided in clause (g), the Bonds shall be issued through the securities depository to the Beneficial Owners. (g) In the event of termination of the Book-Entry Only System, the City shall have the right to terminate, and shall take all steps necessary to terminate, all arrangements with the securities depository described herein, and thereafter shall issue, register ownership of, transfer and exchange all Bonds as provided in Section 2.03. Upon receipt by the securities depository of notice from the City, the securities depository shall take all actions necessary to assist the City and the Registrar in terminating all arrangements for the issuance of documents evidencing ownership interests in the Bonds through the securities depository. Nothing herein shall affect the securities depository's rights under clause (d) above. (h) The City Administrator-Clerk is authorized to enter into a Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations with DTC, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. -13- Section 3. Use of Proceeds; Series 1997B Improvement Bond Construction Fund. There is hereby created on the official books and records of the City, a special fund to be designated as the "Series 1997B Improvement Bond Construction Fund" (hereinafter referred to as the Construction Fund), to be held and administered by the Finance Director separate and apart from all other funds of the City. The City appropriates to the Construction fund (a) the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds, less the amount required by Section 4 hereof to be deposited in the Series 1997B Improvement Bond Account therein created, and (b) all collections of special assessments levied for the Improvements until completion and payment of all costs of the Improvements. The Construction Fund shall be used solely to defray expenses of the Improvements, including but not limited to the transfer to the Bond Account created in Section 4 hereof, of amounts sufficient for the payment of interest due upon the Bonds prior to the completion and payment of all costs of the Improvements and the payment of the expenses incurred by the City in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. Upon completion and payment of all costs of the Improvements, any balance of the proceeds of the Bonds remaining in the Construction Fund may be used to pay the cost, in whole or in part, of any other local improvements instituted pursuant to the Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, as directed by the City Council, but any balance of such proceeds not so used and any remaining special assessments shall be credited and paid to the Bond Account. Section 4. Series 1997B Improvement Bond Account. So long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and any principal of or interest thereon unpaid, the Finance Director shall maintain a separate debt service account on the official books and records of the City to be known as the Series 1997B Improvement Bond Account (hereinafter referred to as the Bond Account), and the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable primarily from the Bond Account. The City irrevocably appropriates to the Bond Account (a) unused discount and accrued interest, which shall be used to pay interest accruing on the Bonds through August 1, 1998; (b) all collections of special assessments levied with respect to the Improvements as provided in Section 5, from and after completion and payment of all costs of the Improvements; (c) all ad valorem taxes levied in accordance with this resolution; and (d) all such other moneys as shall be received and appropriated to the Bond Account from time to time. If the balance in the Bond Account is at any time insufficient to pay all interest and principal then due on all Bonds payable therefrom, the payment shall be made from any fund of the City which is available for that purpose, subject to reimbursement from the Bond Account when the balance therein is sufficient, and the Council covenants and agrees that it will each year levy an amount sufficient to take care of any accumulated or anticipated deficiency, which levy is not subject to any constitutional or statutory tax limitation. Section 5. Special Assessments. The City hereby covenants and agrees that, for the payment of the cost of improvements permanently financed by the Bonds the City has done or will do and perform all acts and things necessary for the -14- final and valid levy of special assessments in an amount not less than 20% of the cost of each of the Improvements permanently financed by the Bonds; and that the City will levy assessments in the estimated aggregate principal amount of $1,584,400. The principal of said assessments is payable over a fifteen year period, with interest on unpaid installments thereof from time to time at the estimated rate of % per annum. It is presently estimated that the principal and interest on such special assessments will be collected in the years and amounts as follows: Collection Collection Year Amount Year Amount 1997 2003 1998 2004 1999 2005 2000 2006 2001 2007 2002 2008 In the event that any such assessment shall at any time be held invalid with respect to any lot or tract of land, due to any error, defect or irregularity in any action or proceeding taken or to be taken by the City or by this Council or by any of the officers or employees of the City, either in the making of such assessment or in the performance of any condition precedent thereto, the City hereby covenants and agrees that it will forthwith do all such further things and take all such further proceedings as shall be required by law to make such assessment a valid and binding lien upon said property. Section 6. Pledge of Taxing Powers. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due, the full faith and credit and unlimited taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In order to produce sums which, together with Bond proceeds and special assessment collections appropriated to the payment of the Bonds, will be not less than 5% in excess of the amounts needed to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds -15- when due, there is hereby levied on all taxable property in the City, a direct, irrepealable ad valorem tax, for the years and in the amounts as follows: Levy Collection Levy Collection Year Year Amount Year Year Amount 1997 1998 2003 2004 1998 1999 2004 2005 1999 2000 2005 2006 2000 2001 2006 2007 2001 2002 2007 2008 2002 2003 The collections of such tax levy shall be deposited in the Series 1997B Bond Account. The City reserves the right to reduce or cancel such tax levy in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. Section 7. Defeasance. When all of the Bonds have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of the Bonds shall cease. The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued from the due date to the date of such deposit. The City may also discharge its obligations with respect to any prepayable Bonds called for redemption on any date when they are prepayable according to their terms, by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date an amount equal to the principal, interest and redemption premium, if any, which are then due, provided that notice of such redemption has been duly given as provided herein. The City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time and at such rates and maturing or callable at the holder's option on such dates as shall be required to pay all principal, interest and redemption premiums to become due thereon to maturity or said redemption date. Section 8. Registration of Bonds and Tax Levy. The Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Scott County, together with such additional information as they shall require, and to obtain from said County Auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been duly entered upon his bond register and that the tax required for the payment thereof has been levied. -16- Section 9. Official Statement; Continuing Disclosure. 9.01 Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds dated September , 1997, and the Official Statement Addendum dated October , 1997 (together the "Official Statement"), is a final official statement within the meaning of Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation, 17 C.F.R. Section 240.15c2-12 ("Rule 15c2-12"). The initial purchasers of the Bonds designated in Section 1 hereof (the "Initial Purchasers") are authorized and directed to distribute the Official Statement to all persons to whom the bonds are reoffered. 9.02 Continuing Disclosure. (a) General Undertaking. The City covenants and agrees with the Owners from time to time of the Bonds to comply with Rule 15c2-12, paragraph (b)(5) (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, "Rule 15c2-12"); and, for this purpose, to provide to nationally recognized municipal securities information repositories and any Minnesota state information depository, annual financial information of the type included in the Official Statement, including audited financial statements, and notice of the occurrence of certain specified events which materially affect the terms, payment, security, rating or tax status of the Bonds, as set forth in this Section. The City is the only "obligated person" in respect of the Bonds within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12. As used in this Section 9.02, "Owner" or "Bondowner" means, in respect of a Bond, the Registered Owner or Owners thereof appearing in the Bond Register maintained by the Registrar or any Beneficial Owner thereof, if such owner provides to the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar. As used in this Section 9.02, "Beneficial Owner" means, in respect of a Bond, any person or entity which has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bond (including persons or entities holding Bonds through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or is treated as the owner of the Bond for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information to Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in paragraph (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City Council, the following information (the Disclosure Information) at the following times: (1) Within one year after the end of each fiscal year, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 1997 (each a Reporting Date): (A) the general purpose financial statements of the City for the fiscal year ending on the previous December 31, prepared in accordance with generally -17- accepted accounting principles for governmental entities as prescribed by the Government Accounting Standards Board as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such generally accepted accounting principles, noting the variances therefrom and the effect thereof, together with an independent auditor's report and opinion thereon; provided, however, that if audited financial statements are not available by such date, the financial statements to be delivered shall be unaudited, but the City undertakes and agrees to provide, within 10 days after the receipt thereof by the City, audited general purpose financial statements of the City for such fiscal year and the audit report and opinion of an independent auditor relating thereto; and (B) to the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in clause (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year of the type contained in the Official Statement under the following headings or subheadings: City Property Values; City Indebtedness; and City Tax Rates, Levies and Collections. Any or all of the information may be incorporated by reference from other documents, including official statements, which have been submitted to each of the repositories referred to under this paragraph (b) or the Securities and Exchange Commission. If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City shall clearly identify in the information each document so incorporated by reference. If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided however, if such operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City determines that certain specified data -18- regarding such replacement operations would be a Material Fact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure Information shall include such additional specified data regarding the replacement operations. If the Disclosure Information is changed or this Section 9.02 is amended as permitted by this Resolution, then the City is to include in the next Disclosure Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operation data provided. (2) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events which is a Material Fact (as hereinafter defined): (A) Principal and interest payment delinquencies; (B) Non-payment related defaults; (C) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (D) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (E) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (F) Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax- exempt status of the security; (G) Modifications to rights of security holders; (H) Bond calls; (I) Defeasances; (j) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the securities; and (K) Rating changes. As used herein, a "Material Fact" is a fact as to which a substantial likelihood exists that a reasonably prudent investor would attach importance thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell a Bond or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter the total information otherwise available to an investor from the Official Statement, information disclosed hereunder or information generally available to the public. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a "Material Fact" is also an event that would be deemed "material" for purposes of the purchase, holding or sale of a Bond within the meaning of applicable federal securities -19- laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of the occurrence of the event. (3) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: (A) the failure of the City to provide the information required under subparagraph (1) of this paragraph (b) at the time specified thereunder; (B) the amendment or supplementing of this Section 9.02 pursuant to subsection (d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any explanation provided by the City under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination of the obligations of the City under this Section 9.02 pursuant to subsection (d); (D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial statements constituting a portion of the information required under subparagraph (1) of this paragraph (b) are prepared; and (E) any change in the fiscal year of the City. (c) Manner of Disclosure. The City agrees to make available the information described in paragraph (b) to the following entities by telecopy, overnight delivery, mail or other means, as appropriate: (1) the information described in subparagraph (1) of paragraph (b), to each then nationally recognized municipal securities information repository under Rule 15c2-12 and to any State information depository then designated or operated by the State of Minnesota as contemplated by Rule 15c2-12 (the State Depository), if any; (2) the information described in subparagraphs (2) and (3) of paragraph (b), to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and to the State Depository, if any; and -20- (3) the information described in paragraph (b), to any rating agency then maintaining a rating of the Bonds and, at the expense of any bondholder, to any bondholder who requests in writing such information at the time of transmission under subparagraphs (1) or (2) of this paragraph (c), as the case may be, or, if such information is transmitted with a subsequent time of release, at the time such information is to be released. (d) Term; Amendments; Interpretation. (1) The covenants of the City in this Section 9.02 shall remain in effect so long as any Bonds are outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the City under this Section 9.02 shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of bond counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply with the requirements of this Section 9.02 will not cause participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to be in violation of the Rule 15c2-12 or other applicable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or amendatory thereof. (2) This Section 9.02 (and the form and requirements of the Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in subparagraph (3) of paragraph (c)) or the consent of the Owners of any Bonds, by resolution of the City Council accompanied by an opinion of bond counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City and others and the opinion may be subject to customary qualifications, to the effect that: (A) such amendment or supplement (i) is made in connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or regulation or a change in the identity, nature or status of the type of operations conducted by the City, or (ii) is required by, or better complies with, the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) of Rule 15c2-12; (B) this Section 9.02 as so amended or supplemented would have complied with the requirements of paragraph (B)(5) of Rule 15c2-12 at the time of the primary offering of the Bonds, giving effect to any change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that Rule 15c2-12 is in effect and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the primary offering; and (C) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the interests of the Owners under Rule 15c2-12. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or operating data being provided hereunder. -21- (3) This Section 9.02 is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of Rule 15c2-12 and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of Rule 15c2-12. (e) Failure to Comply; Remedies. If the City fails to comply with any provision of this Section 9.02 any person aggrieved thereby, including the Owner of any outstanding Bond, may take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or appropriate to enforce performance and observance of any agreement or covenant contained in this Section 9.02. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall not be recoverable for any default hereunder. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in no event shall a default under this Section 9.02 constitute a default with respect to the Bonds or under any other provision of this Resolution. (f) Further Limitation of Liability of City. If and to the extent the limitations of liability contained in subsection (e) are not effective, anything contained in this Section 9.02 to the contrary notwithstanding, in making the agreements, provisions and covenants set forth in this Section 9.02, the City has not obligated itself except with respect to the specific pledge for payment of the Bonds. None of the agreements or obligations of the City contained herein shall be construed to constitute an indebtedness of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory provisions whatsoever or constitute a pledge of the full faith and credit or taxing powers of the City. Section 10. Tax Covenant; Arbitrage. (a) The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds herein authorized, that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents, any action which would cause the interest payable on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), and the regulations issued thereunder, in effect at the time of such action, and that it will take, or it will cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative actions within its powers which may be necessary to insure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable treasury regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds. (b) The Mayor and the City Clerk being the officers of the city charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the purchaser a certification in order to satisfy the provisions or Section of the Code regulations promulgated thereunder relating to arbitrage bonds and other tax matters. Section 11. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. This Council hereby determines and declares that the City does not reasonably expect to issue in calendar year 1997 tax-exempt obligations in an aggregate principal amount greater than -22- $10,000,000 (exclusive of "private activity bonds"). This Council hereby specifically designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265 of the Code, and covenants that it will not in any event designate in calendar year 1997 more than $10,000,000 of its obligations as such "qualified tax- exempt obligations." Section 12. Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the City and said County Auditor are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the purchasers of the Bonds, and to the attorneys rendering an opinion as to the legality thereof, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Bonds and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds, as the same appear from the books and records in their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. -23- COUNTY AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE AS TO BOND REGISTRATION AND TAX LEVY I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting County Auditor of Scott County, Minnesota, hereby certify that there has been filed in my office a certified copy of a resolution adopted October 7, 1997, by the City Council for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, setting forth the form and details of an issue of $1,805,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B, dated, as originally issued, as of November 1, 1997. I further certify, as originally issued, that said Bond issue has been entered on my bond register and that the tax necessary for the payment thereof has been levied as required by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475. WITNESS my hand and official seal this _ day of , 1997. County Auditor (SEAL) APPENDIX I PROPOSED FORM OF LEGAL OPINIONS DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS PILLSBURY CENTER SOUTH NEW YORK WASHINGTON,D.C. 220 SOUTH SIXTH STREET DENVER LONDON MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55402-1498 SEATTLE ( BRUSSELS TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 FARGO HONG KONG FAX: (612) 340-2868 DES MOINES BILLINGS $1,805,000 General Obligation ROCHESTER / / ,,] MISSOULA COSTA MESA Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B GREAT FALLS City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota As Bond Counsel in connection with the authorization, issuance and sale by the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota (the City), of the obligations described above, dated as originally issued as of November 1, 1997 (the Bonds), we have examined certified copies of certain proceedings taken, and certain affidavits and certificates furnished, by the City in the authorization, sale and issuance of the Bonds, including the form of the Bonds. As to questions of fact material to our opinion we have assumed the authenticity of and relied upon the proceedings, affidavits and certificates furnished to us without undertaking to verify the same by independent investigation. From our examination of such proceedings, affidavits and certificates, and upon the basis of existing law, it is our opinion that: 1. The Bonds are valid and binding general obligations of the City enforceable in accordance with their terms, except to the extent the enforceability thereof may be limited by the exercise of judicial discretion or by the application of state or federal laws relating to bankruptcy, reorganization, moratorium or creditors' rights. 2. The principal of and interest on the Bonds are payable primarily from special assessments levied with respect to local improvements in the City and ad valorem taxes levied on all taxable property in the City which have been pledged and appropriated for this purpose, but if necessary for payment thereof additional ad valorem taxes are required by law to be levied on all taxable property in the City, which taxes are not subject to any limitation as to rate or amount. 3. Interest on the Bonds (a) is not includable in gross income for federal income tax purposes or in taxable net income of individuals, estates or trusts for Minnesota income tax purposes; (b) is includable in taxable income of corporations and financial institutions for purposes of the Minnesota franchise tax; (c) is not an item of tax preference includable in alternative minimum taxable income for purposes of the federal alternative minimum tax applicable to all taxpayers or the Minnesota alternative minimum tax applicable to individuals, estates and trusts; and (d) is includable adjusted current earnings for purposes of federal and Minnesota alternative minimum tax imposed on corporations. I-1 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP $1,805,000 General Obligation City of Shakopee, Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B Scott County, Minnesota -2- 4. The City has designated the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, and financial institutions described in Section 265(b)(5) of the Code may treat the Bonds for purposes of Sections 265(b)(2) and 291(e)(1)(B) of the Code as if they were acquired on August 7, 1986. 5. The opinions expressed in paragraphs 3 and 4 above are subject to the condition of the City's compliance with all requirements of the Code that must be satisfied subsequent to the issuance of the Bonds in order that interest thereon may be, and continue to be, excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City has covenanted to comply with these continuing requirements. Its failure to do so could result in the inclusion of interest on the Bonds in federal gross income and in Minnesota taxable net income, retroactive to the date of issuance of the Bonds. Except as stated in this opinion, we express no opinion regarding federal or state tax consequences to holders of the Bonds. We have not been asked, and have not undertaken, to review the accuracy, completeness or sufficiency of any offering materials relating to the Bonds, and we express no opinion with respect thereto. Dated: November , 1997. 1-2 APPENDIX II CONTINUING DISCLOSURE UNDERTAKING Section 9. Official Statement; Continuing Disclosure. 9.01 Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds dated September 1997, and the Official Statement Addendum dated October 1997 (together the "Official Statement"), is a final official statement within the meaning of Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation, 17 C.F.R. Section 240.15c2-12 ("Rule 15c2-12"). The initial purchasers of the Bonds designated in Section 1 hereof (the "Initial Purchasers") are authorized and directed to distribute the Official Statement to all persons to whom the bonds are reoffered. 9.02 Continuing Disclosure. (a) General Undertaking. The City covenants and agrees with the Owners from time to time of the Bonds to comply with Rule 15c2-12, paragraph (b)(5) (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, "Rule 15c2-12"); and, for this purpose, to provide to nationally recognized municipal securities information repositories and any Minnesota state information depository, annual financial information of the type included in the Official Statement, including audited financial statements, and notice of the occurrence of certain specified events which materially affect the terms, payment, security, rating or tax status of the Bonds, as set forth in this Section. The City is the only "obligated person" in respect of the Bonds within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12. As used in this Section 9.02, "Owner" or "Bondowner" means, in respect of a Bond, the Registered Owner or Owners thereof appearing in the Bond Register maintained by the Registrar or any Beneficial Owner thereof, if such owner provides to the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar. As used in this Section 9.02, "Beneficial Owner" means, in respect of a Bond, any person or entity which has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bond (including persons or entities holding Bonds through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or is treated as the owner of the Bond for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information to Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in paragraph (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City Council, the following information (the Disclosure Information) at the following times: S (1) Within one year after the end of each fiscal year, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 1997 (each a Reporting Date): (A) the general purpose financial statements of the City for the fiscal year ending on the previous December 31, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for governmental entities as prescribed by the Government II-1 accepted accounting principles for governmental entities as prescribed by the Government Accounting Standards Board as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such generally accepted accounting principles, noting the variances therefrom and the effect thereof, together with an independent auditor's report and opinion thereon; provided, however, that if audited financial statements are not available by such date, the financial statements to be delivered shall be unaudited, but the City undertakes and agrees to provide, within 10 days after the receipt thereof by the City, audited general purpose financial statements of the City for such fiscal year and the audit report and opinion of an independent auditor relating thereto; and (B) to the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in clause (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year of the type contained in the Official Statement under the following headings or subheadings: City Property Values; City Indebtedness; and City Tax Rates, Levies and Collections. Any or all of the information may be incorporated by reference from other documents, including official statements, which have been submitted to each of the repositories referred to under this paragraph (b) or the Securities and Exchange Commission. If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City shall clearly identify in the information each document so incorporated by reference. If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided however, if such operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City determines that certain specified data I1-2 If the Disclosure Information is changed or this Section 9.02 is amended as permitted by this Resolution, then the City is to include in the next Disclosure Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operation data provided. (2) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events which is a Material Fact (as hereinafter defined): (A) Principal and interest payment delinquencies; (B) Non-payment related defaults; (C) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (D) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (E) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (F) Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax- exempt status of the security; (G) Modifications to rights of security holders; (H) Bond calls; (I) Defeasances; (J) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the securities; and (K) Rating changes. As used herein, a "Material Fact" is a fact as to which a substantial likelihood exists that a reasonably prudent investor would attach importance thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell a Bond or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter the total information otherwise available to an investor from the Official Statement, information disclosed hereunder or information generally available to the public. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a "Material Fact" is also an event that would be deemed "material" for purposes of the purchase, holding or sale of a Bond within the meaning of applicable federal securities laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of the occurrence of the event. (3) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: (A) the failure of the City to provide the information required under subparagraph (1) 11-3 of this paragraph (b) at the time specified thereunder; (B) the amendment or supplementing of this Section 9.02 pursuant to subsection (d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any explanation provided by the City under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination of the obligations of the City under this Section 9.02 pursuant to subsection (d); (D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial statements constituting a portion of the information required under subparagraph (1) of this paragraph (b) are prepared; and (E) any change in the fiscal year of the City. (c) Manner of Disclosure. The City agrees to make available the information described in paragraph (b) to the following entities by telecopy, overnight delivery, mail or other means, as appropriate: (1) the information described in subparagraph (1) of paragraph (b), to each then nationally recognized municipal securities information repository under Rule 15c2-12 and to any State information depository then designated or operated by the State of Minnesota as contemplated by Rule 15c2-12 (the State Depository), if any; (2) the information described in subparagraphs (2) and (3) of paragraph (b), to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and to the State Depository, if any; and (3) the information described in paragraph (b), to any rating agency then maintaining a rating of the Bonds and, at the expense of any bondholder, to any bondholder who requests in writing such information at the time of transmission under subparagraphs (1) or (2) of this paragraph (c), as the case may be, or, if such information is 1 transmitted with a subsequent time of release, at the time such information is to be released. 11-4 (d) Term; Amendments; Interpretation. (1) The covenants of the City in this Section 9.02 shall remain in effect so long as any Bonds are outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the City under this Section 9.02 shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of bond counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply with the requirements of this Section 9.02 will not cause participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to be in violation of the Rule 15c2-12 or other applicable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or amendatory thereof. (2) This Section 9.02 (and the form and requirements of the Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in subparagraph (3) of paragraph (c)) or the consent of the Owners of any Bonds, by resolution of the City Council accompanied by an opinion of bond counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City and others and the opinion may be subject to customary qualifications, to the effect that: (A) such amendment or supplement (i) is made in connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or regulation or a change in the identity, nature or status of the type of operations conducted by the City, or (ii) is required by, or better complies with, the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) of Rule 15c2-12; (B) this Section 9.02 as so amended or supplemented would have complied with the requirements of paragraph (B)(5) of Rule 15c2-12 at the time of the primary offering of the Bonds, giving effect to any change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that Rule 15c2-12 is in effect and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the primary offering; and (C) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the interests of the Owners under Rule 15c2-12. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or operating data being provided hereunder. (3) This Section 9.02 is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of Rule 15c2-12 and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of Rule 15c2-12. (e) Failure to Comply; Remedies. If the City fails to comply with any provision of this Section 9.02 any person aggrieved thereby, including the Owner of any outstanding Bond, may take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or appropriate to enforce performance and observance of any agreement or covenant contained in this Section 9.02. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall not be recoverable for any default hereunder. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in no event shall a 11-5 default under this Section 9.02 constitute a default with respect to the Bonds or under any other provision of this Resolution. (f) Further Limitation of Liability of City. If and to the extent the limitations of liability contained in subsection (e) are not effective, anything contained in this Section 9.02 to the contrary notwithstanding, in making the agreements, provisions and covenants set forth in this Section 9.02, the City has not obligated itself except with respect to the specific pledge for payment of the Bonds. None of the agreements or obligations of the City contained herein shall be construed to constitute an indebtedness of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory provisions whatsoever or constitute a pledge of the full faith and credit or taxing powers of the City. 11-6 APPENDIX III SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS,AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION Following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective through 1998 relative to tax levy procedures, tax payment and credit procedures, and the mechanics of real property valuation. The summary does not purport to be inclusive of all such provisions or of the specific provisions discussed, and is qualified by reference to the complete text of applicable statutes, rules and regulations of the State of Minnesota. Property Valuations (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) Assessor's Estimated Market Value. Each parcel of real property subject to taxation must, by statute, be appraised at least once every four years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property is valued at its market value which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the property to be fairly worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value." Limitation of Market Value Increases. Effective through assessment year 2001, the amount of increase in market value for all property classified as agricultural homestead or non-homestead, residential homestead or non-homestead, or non-commercial seasonable recreational residential, which is entered by the assessor in the current assessment year, may not exceed the greater of (i) 10% of the preceding year's market value or (ii) 1/4 of the difference between the current assessment and the preceding assessment. Indicated Market Value. Because the Estimated Market Value as determined by an assessor may not represent the price of real property in the marketplace, the "Indicated Market Value" is generally regarded as more representative of full value. The Indicated Market Value is determined by dividing the Estimated Market Value of a given year by the same year's sales ratio determined by the State Department of Revenue. The sales ratio represents the overall relationship between the Estimated Market Value of property within the taxing unit and actual selling price. Net Tax Capacity. The Net Tax Capacity is the value upon which net taxes are levied, extended and collected. The Net Tax Capacity is computed by applying the class rate percentages specific to each type of property classification against the Estimated Market Value. Class rate percentages vary depending on the type of property as shown on the last page of this Appendix. The formulas and class rates for converting Estimated Market Value to Net Tax Capacity represent a basic element of the State's property tax relief system and are subject to annual revisions by the State Legislature. Property taxes are determined by multiplying the Net Tax Capacity by the tax capacity rate, expressed as a percentage. Property Tax Payments and Delinquencies (Chapters 275, 276, 277, 279-282 and 549, Minnesota Statutes) Ad valorem property taxes levied by local governments in Minnesota are extended and collected by the various counties within the State. Each taxing jurisdiction is required to certify the annual tax levy to the county auditor within five (5) working days after December 20 of the year preceding the collection year. A listing of property taxes due is prepared by the county auditor and turned over to the county treasurer on or before the first business day in March. The county treasurer is responsible for collecting all property taxes within the county. Real estate and personal property tax statements are mailed out by March 31. One-half (1/2) of the taxes on real property is due on or before May 15. The remainder is due on or before October 15. Real property taxes not paid by their due date are assessed a penalty which, depending on the type of property, increases from 2% to 4% on the day after the due date. In Ill-1 the case of the first installment of real property taxes due May 15, the penalty increases to 4% or 8% on June 1. Thereafter, an additional 1% penalty shall accrue each month through October 1 of the collection year for unpaid real property taxes. In the case of the second installment of real property taxes due October 15, the penalty increases to 6% or 8% on November 1 and increases again to 8% or 12% on December 1. Personal property taxes remaining unpaid on May 16 are deemed to be delinquent and a penalty of 8% attaches to the unpaid tax. However, personal property owned by a tax-exempt entity, but which is treated as taxable by virtue of a lease agreement, is subject to the same delinquent property tax penalties as real property. On the first business day of January of the year following collection all delinquencies are subject to an additional 2% penalty, and those delinquencies outstanding as of February 15 are filed for a tax lien judgment with the district court. By March 20 the clerk of court files a publication of legal action and a mailing of notice of action to delinquent parties. Those property interests not responding to this notice have judgment entered for the amount of the delinquency and associated penalties. The amount of the judgment is subject to a variable interest determined annually by the Department of Revenue, and equal to the adjusted prime rate charged by banks, but in no event is the rate less than 10% or more than 14%. Property owners subject to a tax lien judgment generally have five years (5) in the case of all property located outside of cities or in the case of residential homestead, agricultural homestead and seasonal residential recreational property located within cities or three (3) years with respect to other types of property to redeem the property. After expiration of the redemption period, unredeemed properties are declared tax forfeit with title held in trust by the State of Minnesota for the respective taxing districts. The county auditor, or equivalent thereof, then sells those properties not claimed for a public purpose at auction. The net proceeds of the sale are first dedicated to the satisfaction of outstanding special assessments on the parcel, with any remaining balance in most cases being divided on the following basis: county - 40%; town or city -20%; and school district-40%. Property Tax Credits (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) In addition to adjusting the taxable value for various property types, primary elements of Minnesota's property tax relief system are: property tax levy reduction aids; the circuit breaker credit, which relates property taxes to income and provides relief on a sliding income scale; and targeted tax relief, which is aimed primarily at easing the effect of significant tax increases. The circuit breaker credit and targeted credits are reimbursed to the taxpayer upon application by the taxpayer. Property tax levy reduction aid includes educational aids, local governmental aid, equalization aid, homestead and agricultural credit aid (HACA) and disparity reduction aid. Levy Limitations for Counties and Cities (M.S. 275.70 to 275.74 (Laws 1997, Chapter 231, Article 3)) Prior limitations restricting the ability of local governments in Minnesota to levy property taxes expired in 1993. New overall levy limitations are in effect for taxes levied in 1997 and 1998 for all counties and cities with populations exceeding 2,500. Levy increases are limited generally to 2.2% over the payable 1997 tax levy plus any increase due to growth in population. Certain property tax levies are authorized outside of the new overall levy limitation ("special levies"). Special levies include debt service levies for bonded indebtedness, excluding installment payments on conditional sales contracts, debt service on state-aid road bonds, payments on contracts for deed, any levies to pay debt service on tax increment revenue bonds, and lease payments under certificates of participation. In order to receive approval for any special levy claims outside of the overall levy limitation, requests for such special levies must be submitted to the Property Tax Division of the Department of Revenue on or before September 15th in the year in which the levy is to be made for collection in the following year. The Department of Revenue has the authority to approve, reduce or deny a special levy III-2 • request. Final adjustments to all levies must be made to the Department of Revenue on or before December 10th. Debt Limitations All Minnesota municipalities (counties, cities, towns and school districts) are subject to statutory "net debt" limitations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Net debt is defined as the amount remaining after deducting from gross debt the amount of current revenues which are applicable within the current fiscal year to the payment of any debt and the aggregate of the principal of the following: 1. Obligations issued for improvements which are payable wholly or partially from the proceeds of special assessments levied upon benefited property. 2. Warrants or orders having no definite or fixed maturity. 3. Obligations payable wholly from the income from revenue producing conveniences. 4. Obligations issued to create or maintain a permanent improvement revolving fund. 5. Obligations issued for the acquisition and betterment of public waterworks systems, and public lighting, heating or power systems, and any combination thereof, or for any other public convenience from which revenue is or may be derived. 6. Certain debt service loans and capital loans made to school districts. 7. Certain obligations to repay loans. 8. Obligations specifically excluded under the provisions of law authorizing their issuance. 9. Certain obligations to pay pension fund liabilities. 10. Debt service funds for the payment of principal and interest on obligations other than those described above. Levies for General Obligation Debt (Sections 475.61 and 475.74, Minnesota Statutes) Any municipality which issues general obligation debt must, at the time of issuance, certify levies to the county auditor of the county(ies) within which the municipality is situated. Such levies shall be in an amount that if collected in full will, together with estimates of other revenues pledged for payment of the obligations, produce at least five percent in excess of the amount needed to pay principal and interest when due. Notwithstanding any other limitations upon the ability of a taxing unit to levy taxes, its ability to levy taxes for a deficiency in prior levies for payment of general obligation indebtedness is without limitation as to rate or amount. Metropolitan Revenue Distribution (Chapter 473F, Minnesota Statutes) "Fiscal Disparities Law" The Charles R. Weaver Metropolitan Revenue Distribution Act, more commonly known as "Fiscal Disparities," was first implemented for taxes payable in 1975. Forty percent of the increase in commercial-industrial (including public utility and railroad) net tax capacity valuation since 1971 in each assessment district in the Minneapolis/St. Paul seven-county metropolitan area (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, excluding the City of Northfield, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, excluding the City of New Prague, and Washington Counties) is contributed to an area-wide tax base. A distribution index, based on the factors of population and real property market value per capita, is employed in determining what proportion of the net tax capacity value in the area- wide tax base shall be distributed back to each assessment district. III-3 N N i co 0 0 0 0`0 0 >o =00 0 0a) v o 0o 0 00 0 y 0� O V Co Oo O L�p U 5 p O 1.6 v) 0 0 �'O '; N p •�- O C6 0 0 O 0 0 D O > 0 0 C •.>In al� C m -C lb. tC)� >R�p�'I:. O 15 6-- a) > t0 �_ o 0 m cal N la >� a7 O O 0 C LT•2> OCA�(H0 ��_C p W w O 0 yiE C2 L' C > O CO 0 L Tu. a �f U c, V ` Wat- O V C 0 o a) C2 O CO 0 y 0 • W 0 0 0 O 0 • to rj 00 y N .0 C O N O N l6 W e- N 0) 0 p `) N `) N... O'— 0 CO 0 0 N O f0.1 7 C f6 X N d0 O'O N CO O U 0 0 N 0 O'6 0 o a) 00 X CO F03 0. O 0 d O C U co a 0 a) 0 fs U 0 (Daum C o (0_ ,, o_. E o 0 0 0�C +-� 8 > O X\ X Oo O W X O) nu,-0, X O X 0 O co X O)o a)o OXno Co ` c 0 C C a) 0 a)toC) 0 0.O CD a) 0 o C-N ON O U )17 0 a) O-O '0o 00 Efpo._0 N co O)3 0 Z— ti C CO --o C+) n O) C N o C M C M C ca n O)E H O n C ..41.? O 7>)t') to-- c C te H>� o8N C`s > O2 co E� y> ll>N t6> ON>� �N> U t`��N E >.0 o- 5>m 0)i0• 0 0) 2L_ m y2 2 C C) y p)2L com y 10 oU- co L1.1 m o Q—� o `o LL W N W LU LL'IT- W W it. W LU Lt_ W Z U Z Q N y e o C > 0) I O 0 0 o is 0 0 o C n p m N 0 0� o _ �O _d. 0 0• p U Co0o O CV co o co 0 O 0O N 0 0) ass U N L� O ca OtO�g 'O O >g 3 c ca �P•- >v o o m a� > o 2 fy V. o .0 >~ 0 -.uj O40�. O 00 ,,> 69 W0 a mmN 0 CO` W 0 V..O-. a) 0 0 0.0 y as 0 y ca 0_ 0 C O N �6 O y N -0= 0 I X O y en [1 0 0-0 co l�4 O 0 V N U y 0 f0!).0 CO O N O 0 O t6 0 U o 8 C. o O C C0i 0 0 a) 0 Ca 0 `) O m C\a-00\ X\ N N\ N+.+ V V 1-- > 0xo X 0 0 la X 0) C1OO X0 N L a)o Oo a)' E CO co m e Q N co 0 O N a) 0 m.. CrN N U N-O 00 O 0 Q. 0 J n C_O ._O M n 0) c N o M C_M C CO N p 0•C • V >p N `C Q Z , o°- N > O.0 E--• E> N>N > a)>� NM0 CLLWia E Q?w d0 V )>ia vuiia 0) �LN o._'=��=�M rng m m�io 0 0 X LLw ri w LY u. w w w w u_ W Z U ZQ Q N o 0 F- 0 0 0 10 0 00 'ECc CD o o 0 co 0 0 O m p p -0 . M O N O Z Z 00 m 0 ca�_ p co O a al0 co o co o O N APPENDIX IV SELECTED ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The City is audited annually by an independent certified public accounting firm. Data on the following pages was extracted from the audited financial statements for fiscal years ending December 31, 1996, 1995 and 1994. The City's financial statements are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for governmental entities as prescribed by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. For all years presented, the modified accrual basis of accounting is used for governmental fund types; the accrual basis is used for proprietary funds. The reader should be aware that the complete audits may contain additional information which may interpret, explain or modify the data presented here. The City's comprehensive annual financial reports for the years ended 1984 through 1995 were awarded the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA). The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition for excellence in state and local government financial reporting. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, a government unit must publish an easily readable and efficiently organized comprehensive annual financial report, whose contents conform to program standards. Such CAFR must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. The City has submitted its CAFR for the 1996 fiscal year to GFOA. IV-1 Ag nVrals 1§ s. • Q (ppb a rfi-me $n % Acit ymErn fl .- g_ � 8 -.D O nn r 03. m(rO .. m ' OPmNNQrz C !Im ^ O 066 g ^N ^ se ?Qs N - 66 CWfl, OD .- C V7 N E w N N gg rNr�mp�NOpEQOYpNmmn 00E0rN NpN.Q� p � D S ^ us nn R0 "i8 pp m us p N ,0000 0N0iSpp NT ^� pVOn0 • C 11Ts - mV . - N Q^ GO NOG N ^ QN 0 Qg w ww SC 666 8 0 gA� " < uLyapp rN �bOYMvNN 888 odd wow O O n QN� tel P-- , • ar la oN Z g $ aj o, $ O i rpi �, oN. Q n 0 r a N N N N LL LL N V) p g , �p O S. �p t 5 Y}� .j m Q N N .i V Q y� 10.Oto tn mi 6 Q Q R N N o o Rr g9�� gg QQ 5Q� Q a` lg >o��s 2 $m 7� 5 ME 1Q,_ M 25mv 75 a pp�� ��rp, �<y pp, �y �p p CPi P m m ) Rot tD r �� vi N F n T f� o tD tND. In(7 ^^ .� O O' N ^ tD 1� VI N_ Q N W 1n fV N N N N R a e " 8 � Q1 H�� § o Ua 4 gy g °m ui N N N 6 < `'Q m N N N Q 0 01 O� Et t_tpp IO M. § - t0 aD CD CD ofopf n I- N N m m m N N A 1 p N N w LL TS aS m § tn o m La a O > Q N 1 Q c e v, rro o a� OWC9 0 N W r w p p Z N j 1 NQ g Q u f �2U^ cYi�v tai_ §� tD n N r �(B apS�p2 ��po �a<� pip S O Nip e N W _ q! n 10 N 1� O a<O W n cv 01 O n GD l', H,N Ym m 0 6 6 nv Yi X6<2 W <-6w y2d W p M 1N- M p m U• OZ O cc U U 7 5 " ,i W n H Q a 0 gc U v, a L ? " m 3� EE o _� g ZS E a r¢ EL aaoorn ' _ g � A p !� G <D " _ gt -fie T. rnN g.. .0 AywgOS W ✓ W <41.., ,i, y Z g dU °� E aum z �. 8. "g� " p� N Vj!U11{ "yW Ea W c 2 .Y'" 8 3 (j ¢ o .E ii ii c aStz3E2w1311.015<f13131 t" < Utz ¢daru, cc_ aaa a b1IIIIHflU! m A a r J F- u. a a IV-2 C•pp-, h' T.Ia N 2Nn N O app E OO2 1.^-O /� E FN na §ARE A m 1 2`Oi f^O., N IA,O_ N Y Q 0l o 01 N g§ p. Q wt: ocaig -mv w woe, •lV - — i 011- --tri Ol E t� -- N N 15 C N M o AE,ro- LI �mVA gmN g§§ am §§g §. vil m � Ejj ttOp ppb A yp tN� -y N 8 p p tp��y �p tp� On�� N O (�/ Q N Ot 10 m f A Past; coK 82 8 az RO lh Ql IR h O ,N(V s-r r- ri.- t0 vi OO1 aD fV .- ri Iii^1G mU - m1� . tC OO fV p. O fV 1!f OI l'� fV CO OI N N or, N • € rmN §g g€ or qEo rniRwg .3,7� JN QODN' _g_l sr N N{ p t0NOm o N i r g m u3 T _ A r t0 m IR m(y Za- sr 4 1L Qsr 1'1ri N N N N E 8 o 2.2 1v N R Y .5 to ri— •al ei eN Q Q M to r IU N t; lV t(j to .5 m 'iii n ' t� O O N N N N M EEE 03 4-lel oz 55?O�� NN N O r N N N to yS _ 8 . � cwi _ i .E_ i bv .- O N j a LL N N 44 N O Nr ¢ YcY _ 1y�r v O,t. p �p n_ �p ppp pp S pq W C7 E .$ iA f�V W.3 N 10'1 O 10 c• O O Y 1'7 w r E u ,;to _ Q g U U to c xz 7 °° i� § 1a w Z V g N N N w g Q c aQ=w n tri (6 ei LL m)-aa 0 ei Y SID N Ol }OOQ NCI n I.-0Z N N N N U LL J 6 n Q t qq f?Q p i I. c c 3 o C yw. n N _ uDO h H Uu .2 p C yy C �qt Y a c giO 'N d u aOu p t E u a �Ly` S E', A tr c m �' a c o t2 .• S < . E Yt D q� N 307.VVy �i t 'L'Q " 0-Y 13 � , I ; ry t u1-8220-5 LL3 ..22 mawU' a as t� ym C7 JjH1JI1I1it a 11 .�€ z QQ8YEr 'a'� Q- Sar - - 1s QU_c ca<r1n 00_..0-0- a �¢ u0000aJln r. gc ow LL r J b'- U- - �a IV-3 SS- inn ii,s„Eit''eNi,'eZ- -ZE ii WARM�S 2525 c nm 5Q2of 02 F f A n S 25rym � n m f 14 g^ AgA23 a ngNNID2 ga N iSAS§010n $2 O 1')fNY, -No.gtg r1 pgnN ON A .- Pl `A m- O N ^OOOn1110 h ^ = '^ N N Nmf 8 - g G f 28 'nRR§ walil E.o 1 �psiovt §§ f § §UU EWE' R 1 m rycnAn0 m,4mry000 a$ R- i=a - o a� 8� a o o f -m .. r n 'N NN N PI v n-' mm m 4,14-. 00 n 'n .-' mn .. O 1 M N M M • mo R i §§, 3 3 a a� a - Ai Oi m O m 0 O - O . 0 0 M M M M Y § R Ill M N N N N ' M N N M .�f Yl 8 r O M r o Z N n n n MS f f f f LL LL . M M .. 44 o IF ri 11 § 1 N n wt,q SScc m 7� M M M M 13 pph '16"411 O!OI.01-.� SO iND 're NOqq ono ' O tS W Yf O Ipn c r40. ,1.^ no A rAl f O N rv�0 f O 8n O f N Y w N N O C " N m h N ^ M 11 M N M mE E o ^-n N n u"in w f II 'Ot N.4 O arta � m C d N O m n _ O - n n O Mpp N SM - RR O O O Y1 m f V S. O q .. fp n m g E fq q f 0 O ID f f 0, N O f b W N N N m CO O C m M M t. 4 a w 0 € Z 3 '4 r2 N r °i yf�2 r r n n m V Z 2 i ii K -0n �5 n O - f w8 rvn �n " R R n U W ; n N N M N Z a V � $�� go m -8 N nn1 v O ��a n44 6 Nar litz! I Qt- to-0 $ vJIlbellIjili a gg 1p. 3JJq1f EJ 1 o Il i WpJII1IIll I II` I QSTsT LL {'j 3 .. LL VUR CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES • FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,1996 Governmental Fund Types Total Special Debt Capital (Memorandum Only) • General Revenue Service Projects 1996 1995 Revenues Taxes $ 2,873,265 $ 110,565 $ $ 3,022,690 $ 6,006,520 $ 6.540,945 Special Assessments 662,284 269,471 931,755 1,917,056 Licenses And Permits 711,190 158,616 _ 869,806 704,094 Intergovernmental 876,219 398,445 761,739 2,036,403 1,458,328 Charges For Services 1.075,570 66,999 1,142,569 998,518 Fines And Forfeits 95,865 95.865 80,083 Miscellaneous 318,052 19,668 196,581 334,009 868,310 1,299,763 Total Revenues 5,950,161 595,677 858,865 4,546,525 11,951,228 12,998,787 Expenditures Current General Government 1,401,633 1,401,633 1,531,652 Public Safety 2,207,346 69,483 2,276,829 2,052,153 Public Works 1,198,715 460,733 1,659,448 1,495,002 Recreation 282,599 282,599 610,584 Miscellaneous 20,209 20,209 33,780 Capital Outlay 4,860,279 4,860,279 10,609,720 Debt Service Principal 1,715,000 1,715,000 5,965,000 Interest And Other Charges 628,605 186,749 815,354 1,922,843 Total Expenditures 5,110,502 530,216 2,343,605 5,047,028 13,031,351 24,220,734 Excess(Deficiency)Of Revenues Over Expenditures 839,659 65,461 (1,484,740) (500,503) (1,080,123), (11,221,947) Other Financing Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 789,233 1,451,901 218,885 2,460,019 856.461 Operating Transfers Out (663,596) (1,258,530) (1,922,126) (96,971) Proceeds Of Borrowing 13,006 2,529,500 2,542,506 3.158,853 Sale Of Property 2,462 2,462 1,181,192 Total Other Financing Sources(Uses) 128.099 1,464,907 1.489,855 3,082,861 5,099.535 Excess(Deficiency)Of Revenues&Other Financing Sources Over Expenditures &Other Financing Uses 967,758 65,461 (19,833) 989,352 2,002,738 (6,122,412) Fund Balance January 1 3,278,127 350.404 4,921,309 3.913,304 12,463,144 18,890,321 Residual Equity Transfers 368,343 (368.343) (304.765) Fund Balance December 31 $ 4.245,885 $ 415,865 $ 5,269,819 $ 4,534,313 $ 14,465,882 $ 12,463,144 IV-5 I CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 Governmental Fund Types • Total Special Debt Capital (Memorandum Only) General Revenue Service Projects - - 1995 1994 Revenues Taxes $ 2,950,583 $ 95,410 $ 940,029 S. 2,554,923 S 6,540,945 $ 9,355,332 Special Assessments 1,746,342 170,714 1,917,056 1,328,208 Licenses And Permits 589,104 114,990 704,094 455,692 Intergovernmental 779,276 313,528 7,163 358,361 1,458,328 1,532,444 Charges For Services 935,196 63,322 998,518 839,491 Fines And Forfeits 80,083 80,083 64,914 Miscellaneous 323,187 29,985 346,608 599,983 1,299,763 1,359,806 Total Revenues 5,657,429 502,245 3,040,142 3,798,971- 12,998,787 14,935,887 Expenditures Current General Government 1,451,119 80,533 1,531,652 1;442,515 Public Safety 2,050,871 1,282 2,052,153 2,389,890 Public Works 1,123,556 371,446 1,495,002 1,365,048 Recreation 610,584 610,584 641,707 Miscellaneous 33,780 33,780 29,150 Capital Outlay 10,609,720 10,609,720 3,082,228 Debt Service Principal 5,965,000 5,965,000 2,860,000 Interest And Other Charges 750,728 1.172,115 1,922,843 1,025,462 Total Expenditures 5,269,910 -453,261 6,715,728 11,781,835 24,220,734 12,836,000 Excess(Deficiency)Of Revenues Over Expenditures 387,519 48,984 (3,675,586) (7,982,864) (11,221,947) 2,099,887 Other Financing Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 759,490 96,971 856,461 1,757,226 Operating Transfers Out (96,971) (96,971) (1,092,296) Proceeds Of Borrowing 10,653 3,148,200 3,158,853 Sale Of Property 342 1,180,850 1,181,192 126,083 Total Other Financing Sources(Uses) 662,861 107,624 4,329,050 5,099,535 791,013 Excess(Deficiency)Of Revenues&Other Financing Sources Over Expenditures &Other Financing Uses _ 1,050,380 48,984 (3,567,962) (3,653,814) (6,122,412) 2,890,900 Fund Balance January 1 2,227,747 301,420 9,204,653 7,156,501 18,890,321 17,785,324 Residual Equity Transfers (715,382) 410,617 (304,765) (1,785,903) Fund Balance December 31 $ 3,278,127 $ 350,404 $ 4,921,309 $ 3,913.304 $ 12,463,144 $ 18,890,321 IV-6 CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES,EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31.1994 Governmental Fund Types Total Special Debt Capital (Memorandum Only) General Revenue Service Projects 1994 1993 Revenues Taxes $ 2,951,832 $ 26,579 $ 1,194,668 $ 5,182,253 $ 9,355,332 $ 3,808,567 Special Assessments 797,057 531,151 1,328,208 955,237 Licenses And Permits 410,992 44,700 455,692 520,527 Intergovernmental 831,073 294,199 407,172 1,532,444 2,828,375 Charges For Services 781,002 58,489 839,491 1,342,370 Fines And Forfeits 64,914 64,914 63,773 Miscellaneous 199,290 120,656 781,375 258,485 1,359,806 1,706,190 Total Revenues 5,239,103 499,923 2,773,100 6.423,761 14,935,887 11,225,039 Expenditures Current General Government 1,291,772 150,743 1,442,515 1,251,830 Public Safety 2,389,753 137 2,389,890 1,600,013 Public Works 1,017,678 347,370 1,365,048 2.019,015 Recreation 641,707 641,707 635,077 Miscellaneous 29,150 29,150 40,040 Capital Outlay 3,082,228 3,082,228 5,419.249 Debt Service Principal 2,860,000 2,860,000 1,365,000 Interest And Other Charges 1,025,462 1,025,462 975,400 Total Expenditures 5,370,060 498,250 3.885,462 3.082,228 12,836,000 13.305,624 Excess(Deficiency)Of Revenues Over Expenditures (130,957) 1,673 (1,112,362) 3,341,533 2,099,887 (2.080.585) Other Financing Sources(Uses) Operating Transfers In 1,033,499 378,733 335,341 9,653 1,757,226 1,999,299 Operating Transfers Out (242,654) (747,302) (102,340) (1,092,296) (1,450.991) Proceeds Of Borrowing 5,034,032 Payment to Escrow Agent (980,261) Sale Of Property 2,059 124,024 126,083 15,056 Total Other Financing Sources(Uses) 792,904 (244,545) 335,341 (92,687) 791,013 4,617,135 Excess(Deficiency)Of Revenues&Other Financing Sources Over Expenditures& Other Financing Uses 661,947 (242,872) (777,021) 3,248,846 2,890,900 2,536,550 Fund Balance January 1 1,565,800 2,330,195 9,504,410 4,384,919 17,785,324 15,248,774 Residual Equity Transfers (1,785,903) 477,264 (477,264) (1,785,903) Fund Balance December 31 S 2,227,747 $ 301,420 $ 9,204,653 $ 7,156.501 $ 18,890,321 S 17,785.324 ✓-7 cn in fi n25$2p a�a)QQco Dnp nom � cep pj N N^ a gN M N O m G G I V m O7 O CW W 0 E g Rsmco sr a appp�pEpE R E RPQ E 2 2 p� 0 cd O 1 W N��g <NfOD.Ng Of ,221" fD f0 d N •- (O N (n m C 2 11 N W O F g?Ni§§ g N00 12 ON)M((SN F)- co 010 1'1 - Ol r 0 t0 N r N !7 0 E- N N co- O a N (ri N (d ri vi o] W W N N h IF 0 O O I.- -2 y 6- n- 0 0 COmv. N m a a j W m i O LL W N d I �Ypf �$ s ?j� o O O 2 2" to bi l� e0 �i h !- io to co 0 r8 n m COCO V 1 N p • �' 6a Ol N a NN c7 f] m N y N NN rN ((�YY 1f)�p U)st fR P)N U) f�f co ��1� N opcO�pp IV IANPoo SO(Vy 8 n•a"O n f•2 g v NN . (o(D NvloNO OCN r (0 1(p m a) 8 O W H C N u. NhI co to a a c� CD 1�CDIV CT1 1� � �i To O�O)mNQ m (n V N ,_ CO 1.,(O N N Z z § N -- w •-(si.- vi ai .. < a w LL w O 0 w z Z (l w w CO Z Ct 8 8 8 pp pry(p�tpp (pp 8 Opp (� Z Z m H K w d E•-O E O O O) O W Q co N 8 Q O(O /7 n W 7 w 0 U 0 . 0W Qi t(f o p pp(")�.(( :p 11�� 8 f•i (D m (p W w j Q U O m 1 V go (NONN(O-)6- (O, CO^ WW N N N n ww o. 0_,LL 0z w 0 N 7 .-N.-- N F) N O u.g.. Q y w Y O 0 1- 0 Z w M WI_ w N• W O O (l Z w O W U ® 00 ),- "-C.° yy!! y! H D m = _ U N Q 0 )- W Q 7 _Z JQ 0 9 g m a 2 Cc (`) m 0 W c S (0 c0 LL 0 a>i 7 5 co m E'y m () 4 g w 0 E s — 1 a u 52 ; m fin ' E 1sGQ _ ` c y C, (` gg �V uum w rnrna 0 (g g = g ii'h ~ 4d� �w 412 aa� o iii �c (�i `>' LL G Q t2a ~ 1 D] H' Uu O 00 ,00N w 3 d It Lr or w w V w lL LL IV-8 D9 m�V)O�� Off mNN q f7 N m m ffVV O >:' r O j, C w O ". E ���� � iggF f7 '- dr N r In N�- N D w . ro w ibd5oM A FE§§_§ § n �Srn m 17S I 7 N N •(Si•- a - N N m w w 1715 8 Q m N m�{ n O {^p N M N a V N Q N a 1h� N I` c6.; N fD d f7 01 g A ^Q� ^i J C1 O m v > O tl 2 M C w J LL �y O O N N N N COn OI O 17 J fV . Q m I7 Q co. m Q cp. n ^^ > z �1 ml7 m O m f�1 V O CO m ,I; M f� A u w 0 S8 w O C�i t0 O N N O O O (NdN(� m . W W QQQf fes! N . Q M N J M w la m - Q 0 w w V) J - LL g T. a'-o- �m � &g Z LL Sg Nd N.- VI N fel W V) O ,<C) w .. Z Z e W e5 J > m zzoDew .- gQQ QQ y Mn mnm a n r a ¢LL z w 0 N In �N Iri N N LL? Q N W I Z; w V?Ww M U) WZ LL r2 Q O W EC 2‹ O w U m 0 ; w_ U1-0 o Z m = o r Wa a1 1 a o Z .J w 0 Z J b° o a 0 '" o J > - W 0 i U O o D LL C _ 5 C > t mE : ¢ in C O C . ? t._ ..T3-E4 j O Yl pN O O m C do ELLoLL p O(?i p a a a E °C°r�r o 617,1. LL o c , y E y CC -, N W O 4 4�y 22'2.2: q W 9 V O O 2 . 1W1 . 1 o n A " g1.22 n g x 9 p W g a c a p .. i,a c c a �g al- r � a➢�a d�� � m m ii I` `a O , � � m a 2 ,. . " ! , t00..1. . g m g m m V23�Uil� gU to 00In b a v e w w 0 w LL LL IV-9 m ONe'f PC) aD pNMO O W W C) O O M A r)OOA V W CI 0)0 W V W Ip O V O W N N 0 1- c ONU)W OM O aD.-�N V cA W ,-C.110.., 0 O DL U,W O aD C) W 0)4-sir-Cast') C) N W N CO O 0 7 O W N W V W WCONN V U) OC)U) W C) C) O m U) C) co N O A r a C . N 0 E .-N17 C) W 0O C) O NCO C) CO O � A C c '-O A O 0 O N 0 O .-U)10 0 O 1 A A A C)U)W U) W P...0 Cl) E m V O O N V W O 01....0C..� N (N�O C/ O 10 0 W `O 7 W O. U7c7 W A c460.- 0) W O NO W 0 0 0)U) E t A C)A N C) V W W V N W C) .-W N V .- W W N m Q O V W 0. C7 A V C)C)W W v V m r- N V a', U) 2 N '— U) ,-(4.- N .- C)^... (4 W W O H _ N00000 N 170000 M .-. V<0 O O O A 0 W C)U)V A U) U) C) _W W U)0 M C) 1,0 V — VA VU)C)V O V ONOW OC)U) N O WO A N V 0)V N W W N W W C) C) V 0. e0.1CO A 0)O 0 V V 0 0 A U) M V W W A 0 W N N A CO W0 N 7 W C)W W 1-- N U)V V W N O) NO. N C W C) W m N W N W a".- y H mO 0—C) 0 O 5 O O co co V Cl) U) en W 0 m W A CO C) V U) O V W C)O N U) C) 0 W Cm O C)W W. O O V V V 1....C./.0 f0 0) A Da O C)N O V C) co- a) W eO t0 U) N O 7 V 10 W U) 01 A C)V O co C) U) m m •.• v N C) C) U a N y N U) C 7 0- 4) m O O O C) O C) 0 co A F N V N a0 .-C7 O 7A O co co O V A CO C)0 N V 111 A 0 C m ` M N '-eU) W tCO -F)0 W W W O > 7 W V W O W O A a0 coI-V V C7 e7 U) V m L N 001.- O W VO A V N V V NW O Q' Q N •-• V .- M V M C r- .N.. N MC.... N N.- T4 v U a w CO OO O O O co 0 C) 1h 0 0 0 E f7 O (Cl O N CO 0 W O CO U) O 0 0 0 O O no A O N (CF)0 A W W U) r CPU) N co aD O W U) moil.-- W W O 10 A 0U)V aD CfO V a Na.-U) V W W N C CO CO A 10 N N U) V 7 N.- V .- C) V7 '-t,„ N cv e7 C7 C7 U N 10 W O N e7N V O W ANC)O 0 U) O W U) 10 1 421 W O 0)0) 1 f) O V O A V W N — W 1 n N W W C 0)N U)N0)W a0 O -(0N V N V U) O U) W DV VY0 O VO W V NOU)V �p Cl) CO N V O O C)WN� O CO CIi)0N O A ( v CO U) m ~ A a N N N N W C W a 7 N N C)N V O C) N C)W A O 0 P O``O g A 0 A a. LL c')OAO O a AU)AOU7 �p U) ON N O V O V m 7 W OOOON At�WF-.— O ) V COO O O W A F U O O O O h O O O C)N N N N A Z coVm t I" M W 0 O C) O W ``N A C) C)V O W 0 ZZ O O < N V CO A N N C)O{O 1F) .-. ON A W It• N • W W U. N .-c...... cc N 1- XO0co y O WZ Z Cr W N5 W Z W< < W 2 N 0 0 0 0 0 N 00000 0 W « O CO O N ? D m w m m C-C-0 N 0.1 a tFC) 1Wi)- 1W7 O W •"i a 0 CO _„D UU L I O 000 O (p A t p M W cp O N A W U) co Z W 7 ..'OVWO A c0 V_N IDA A O 0 V to CD A W WLL O U 0 m We7W is e7V ID e0 c 0.. W V a Z W O N V 1-011- U) r' O 0 Q N W H < O-W w 0 Z = Z(7 0 W W m H N O W I W 0 W D 0 Q U ] W m c C p m v U aZ 0 a Z m rr a 0 €1). clic CO c W Q O c m m CO c a tL Z Q a E w 0 CO g t V L a7 C m 2 Z v m E j C y • E E C O OS ,I) E U W €�•� ' m m v O m �� U U. Omv m e E 0 0Cmm c om•L 0 c 7 0Cc£ cQ cl►° a m W 0 7 > U m 7 O. o c 0 L U m m` L C•S N m F i c E o W o m 1-000.1:40 . . goF►- O r • C m 4 m > m c U m m.. .••== ...$a V 3 m . =5,5— Y m o.13 c ff c mmcr:-- allm) F rm(9aama FO- -- 0 "O H hoc mW m 7 x m m m m m c m V..t c.� > -n=0u gU m0 m00uo o5 )uf 23 g M W Ui U W tia U. IV-10 CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA ENTERPRISE FUNDS COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES,EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31. 1996 Electric Water Storm Refuse Drainage Collection Recreation Fund Fund Fund Tota Sewer Fund Fund Fund 1996 1995 Operating Revenues Sales $8.911,006 S 1.114.575 $2.114.425 Cost Of Sales 8.911,006 S 495.231 S 587,663 $ 411.129 $13,633,969 $12.715.0179 Gross Profit 6.577.276 6.358.929 2.333.730 1.114.515 2.114.425 495.231 587.663 411.129 7.056.E Operating Expenses 6.356.068 Operations And Maintenance 1.092.642 364.604 Treatment Charges 102.396 158,875 578.933 Depredation And Amortization 304.446 61-4.641 2,912,091 2.134.513 304.446 215,547 162,370 232.032 1,019 1,836 1,816,472 Total Operating Expenses 177.441 1.031.836 806.471 1,397,088 580.151 1,584.302 390.907 578.933 732.082 5.263.463 4.159.526 Operating Income(Loss) 936.642 534.364 530.123 104.324 8.730 Non-Operating Income(Expense) 20• 1.793.230 2.196.562 Interest Income 258,745 114.475 1 Other Incomen99.316 104,644 11,398 Interest Expense (18313.567)7 33.628 73.321 43.037 5,784 x,269 218.6958.692 (88.335) (51,900) 18.932 186.269 Net Non-Operating income 85.885 --_ (326.662) ______M. (304 59.768 272.637 95.781 12.431 Income(Loss)Before 30.330 556.832 554.807 Operating Transfers 1,022.527 594,132 802.760 Operating Transfers In 200.705 21.161 (290.623) 2.350.062 2.751,369 Operating Transfers(Out) (608,304) (180.929) 251,340 251,340 Net Income(Loss) _(789.233) (759.490) 414,223 413.203 802.760 200,105 Add:Depreciation On Contnbuted Assets 21.161 (39.283) 1,812.169 1,981,879 That Reduces Contributed Capital 99006 119.414 185.733 Increase In Retained Earnings 414.223 117.441 521.594 344.E 22 512,209 922,174 385.838 21.161 78.158 2.333.763 2.336.474 Retained Earnings January 1 8,047.369 3.498.149 4,491.267 3,511.012 Retained Earnings7.103 (16.404) 19.538.496 17.202.022 (Deficits)December 31 $8,4� S5 4. 58 $5.4S 3.896 $ ..„ $ 6 S 21.872 259 0 �� .. .. � � � .. Iv-11 CITY OF SHAKOPEE.MINNESOTA ENTERPRISE FUNDS COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES.EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS . FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,1995 Storm Refuse Totals Electric Water Sewer Drainage CoIlecbon Recreation Fe 1995 Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund OSeratinp Revenues160 $1ales 2.715.017 $11.221.369 S 8,740,907 S 896.897 $2,041,341 S 490,775 $544.937 $ 6.358,929 6.026,116 Cost Of Sales 6.358.929 . 490.775 544.937 160 6.356.088 5.195.253 Gross Profit 2.381.978 696.897 2.041.341 �.�.- Operating 89.988 176,705 545.367 20.416 2.134.513 2.035,659 Treatment And Maintenance 971.776 330.2611.218.542 1.021.106 1.218.542 816,571 715.791 ` Charges 259.942 208.354 127.390 210.785 Depreciation And Amortization �---' 20,416 4.159.526 3.772.556 Total Operating Expenses 1231,718 538.615 1,435.920 387,490 545.367 1.150.260 358.282 605.421 1 03.285 (430) (20.256) 2,196.562 1.422.697 Operating Income(Loss) Non-Operating Income(Expense)In443 640.732 553.204 595 157,016 128,917 48,869 113.298 Other Income comele 304, 60,000 5,865 3.409 218,695 15,813 39.090 94.518 (304.620) (293.798) interest Expense (196.965) (89.805 17'850 Interest 554.807 372.704 Total Non-Operating Income i23�3 106.301 223.435 91.019 6. 3.852 1.273.703 464.583 828.856 194.304 6.327 (16.404) 2.751.369 1.795.401 Income(Loss)Before Operating Transfers (759.490) (664.930) Operating Transfers To Other Funds (606306) (154184) 668.397 310,399 828,856 194,304 6.327 (16.404) 1.991,879 1.130.471 Net Income(Loss) Add Depreciation On Contributed Assets344.595 288.657 That Reduces Contributed Capital 89.133 89,421 166,041 668.397 399.532 918.277 360,345 6.327 (16.404) 2.336.474 1,419.128 Increase(Decrease)In Retained Earnings 666397 15.782.894 7.378.972 3.098.617 3,572.990 3.150.667 ns Retained Earnings January 1 Retained Earnings(Deficits)December 31 SS 8.047.369 $$3.4�49, $4491.267 S 3.511.012 $ 7.103 1.04.2.04 SS 19�� $17�� !\%_'2 CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA ENTERPRISE FUNDS COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES,EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,1994 Storm Refuse Totals Electric Water Sewer Drainage Collection Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund 1994 1993 Operating Revenue Sales $ 8,309,834 $ 758,339 $ 1,340233 $ 301200 $ 511,763 $ 11221,369 $ 9200,176 Cost Of Sales 6,026,116 6,026,116 5,198,278 Gross Profit 2,283,718 758,339 1,340.233 301,200 511.763 5,195,253 4,001,898 Operating Expense Operations And Maintenance 965.186 325.083 82,602 138,006 524.782 2,035,659 1,599297 Treatment Charges 1,021,106 1,021,106 1,055,479 Depreciation And AmoAization 238,601 190,843 127.662 158,685 715,791 671,223 Total Operating Expense 1203,787 515,926 1,231,370 296,691 524,782 3.772,556 3,325,999 Operating Income(Loss) 1,079,931 242,413 108.863 4,509 (13.019) 1,422.697 675.899 . Non-Operating Income(Expense) Interest Income 248,813 135,987 93.211 75,193 553204 750.497 Other Income 42.018 53,074 4.411 13.795 113298 76,756 Interest Expense (204,128) (89,670) (293,798) (157,978) Total Non-Operating Income 86,703 99,391 97,622 75,193 13,795 372,704 669.275 Income Before Operating Transfers 1,166,634 341.804 206.485 79,702 776 1,795,401 1.345.174 Transfer:To Other Funds (521,917) (143,013) (664,930) (548,308) Net income 644,717 198.791 206.485 79,702 776 1.130,471 796.866 Add Depreciation On Contributed Assets That Reduces Contributed Capital 83,852 83,565 121240 288,657 267,003 Increase In Retained Earnings 644,717 282.643 290.050 200,942 776 1,419,128 1,063.869 Retained Earnings January 1 6,734,255 2,815.974 3,282,940 2,949,725 15,782,894 14 719,025 Retained Earnings December 31 $ 7,378,972 $ 3,098,617 $ 3,572,990 $ 3 150 667 $ 776 $ 17,202,022 , 1.....11a.1 594 IV 3 ., OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 23, 1997 Rating: Requested from Moody's NEW ISSUE Investors Service In the opinion of Dorsey& Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel, on the basis of laws in effect on the date of issuance of the Bonds, interest on the Bonds is not includable in gross income of the recipient for federal income tax purposes or in taxable net income of individuals, estates and trusts for Minnesota income tax purposes, but is includable in taxable income of corporations and financial institutions for purposes of the Minnesota franchise tax. (For a discussion of related issues see "TAX EXEMPTION"herein.) $1,805,000 City of Shakopee, Minnesota General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B (Book Entry Only) Dated Date: November 1, 1997 Interest Due: Each February 1 and August 1, commencing August 1, 1998 The Bonds will mature February 1 as follows: 1999 $ 80,000 2003 $195,000 2007 $105,000 2000 $395,000 2004 $105,000 2008 $105,000 2001 $300,000 2005 $105,000 2009 $ 70,000 2002 $240,000 2006 $105,000 The City may elect on February 1, 2004, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2005 at a price of par plus accrued interest. The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City pledges its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. Proceeds of the Bonds will be used to finance various improvements within the City. Proposals must be for not less than $1,786,950 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds and shall be accompanied by a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of$18,050, payable to the order of the City. Proposals shall specify rates in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. Rates must be in ascending order. Award will be made on the basis of True Interest Cost (TIC). The Bonds will be bank-qualified tax-exempt obligations pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and will not be subject to the alternative minimum tax for individuals. The Bonds will be issued as fully registered Bonds without coupons and, when issued, will be registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"). DTC will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases may be made in book entry form only, in the principal amount of$5,000 and integral multiples thereof. Purchasers will not receive certificates representing their interest in the Bonds purchased. (See "Book Entry System" herein.) Bonds will be available for delivery at DTC within 40 days after award. The City has named Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association in Minneapolis, Minnesota as Registrar and will pay for registration services. PROPOSALS RECEIVED: October 7, 1997 (Tuesday) until 11:30 A.M., Central Time AWARD: October 7, 1997 (Tuesday) at 7:00 P.M., Central Time Further information may be obtained from SPRINGSTED SPRINGSTED Incorporated, Financial Advisor to the Issuer, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Public Finance Advisors Saint Paul,Minnesota 55101 (612)223-3000 For purposes of compliance with Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission, this document, as the same may be supplemented or corrected by the Issuer from time to time (collectively, the "Official Statement"), may be treated as an Official Statement with respect to the Obligations described herein that is deemed final as of the date hereof (or of any such supplement or correction) by the Issuer, except for the omission of certain information referred to in the succeeding paragraph. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Obligations, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the Issuer with respect to the Obligations, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2-12. Any such addendum shall, on and after the date thereof, be fully incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference. By awarding the Obligations to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a Proposal therefor, the Issuer agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Obligations are awarded copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described in the preceding paragraph in the amount specified in the Terms of Proposal. The Issuer designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Obligations are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a Proposal with respect to the Obligations agrees thereby that if its bid is accepted by the Issuer (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Obligations for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. No dealer, broker, salesman or other person has been authorized by the Issuer to give any information or to make any representations with respect to the Obligations, other than as contained in the Official Statement or the Final Official Statement, and if given or made, such other information or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the Issuer. Certain information contained in the Official Statement and the Final Official Statement may have been obtained from sources other than records of the Issuer and, while believed to be reliable, is not guaranteed as to completeness or accuracy. THE INFORMATION AND EXPRESSIONS OF OPINION IN THE OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND THE FINAL OFFICIAL STATEMENT ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE, AND NEITHER THE DELIVERY OF THE OFFICIAL STATEMENT OR THE FINAL OFFICIAL STATEMENT NOR ANY SALE MADE UNDER EITHER SUCH DOCUMENT SHALL CREATE ANY IMPLICATION THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGE IN THE AFFAIRS OF THE ISSUER SINCE THE DATE THEREOF. References herein to laws, rules, regulations, resolutions, agreements, reports and other documents do not purport to be comprehensive or definitive. All references to such documents are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular document, the full text of which may contain qualifications of and exceptions to statements made herein. Where full texts have not been included as appendices to the Official Statement or the Final Official Statement, they will be furnished on request. TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe(s) Terms of Proposal i-iv Schedule of Bond Years v Introductory Statement 1 Concurrent Financing 1 Continuing Disclosure 1-2 The Bonds 2-3 Authority and Purpose 4 Security and Financing 4 Future Financing 4 Litigation 4 Legality 4-5 Tax Exemption 5 Bank-Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations 6 Rating 6 Financial Advisor 6 Certification 6 City Property Values 7-8 City Indebtedness 8-11 City Tax Rates, Levies and Collections 12 Funds on Hand 12 City Investments 13 General Information Concerning the City 13-16 Governmental Organization and Services 16-17 Proposed Form of Legal Opinion Appendix I Continuing Disclosure Undertaking Appendix II Summary of Tax Levies, Payment Provisions, and Minnesota Real Property Valuation Appendix III Selected Annual Financial Statements Appendix IV Proposal Forms Inserted (This page was left blank intentionally.) THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: TERMS OF PROPOSAL $1,805,000 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1997B (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, October 7, 1997, until 11:30 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota,after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (612) 223-3002 to Springsted. Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal price and coupons, by telephone (612) 223-3000 or fax (612) 223-3002 for inclusion in the submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. Proposals may also be filed electronically via PARITY, in accordance with PARITY Rules of Participation and the Terms of Proposal, within a one-hour period prior to the time of sale established above, but no Proposals will be received after that time. If provisions in the Terms of Proposal conflict with the PARITY Rules of Participation, the Terms of Proposal shall control. The normal fee for use of PARITY may be obtained from PARITY and such fee shall be the responsibility of the bidder. For further information about PARITY, potential bidders may contact PARITY at 500 Main Street, Suite 1010, Fort Worth, TX 76102, telephone (817) 885-8900. Neither the City nor Springsted Incorporated assumes any liability if there is a malfunction of PARITY. All bidders are advised that each Proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless of the manner of the Proposal submitted. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated November 1, 1997, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1998. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360-dayyear of twelve 30-day months. The Bonds will mature February 1 in they ears and amounts as follows: 1999 $ 80,000 2003 $195,000 2007 $105,000 2000 $395,000 2004 $105,000 2008 $105,000 2001 $300,000 2005 $105,000 2009 $ 70,000 2002 $240,000 2006 $105,000 BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond, representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be - i - registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the Bonds with DTC. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2004, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2005. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special assessments against benefited property. The proceeds will be used to finance various improvements within the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $1,786,950 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ("Deposit") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $18,050, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. - ii - • AWARD The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non-substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Bonds. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney LLP of Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no-litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non-compliance with said terms for payment. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE In accordance with SEC Rule 15c2-12(b)(5), the City will undertake, pursuant to the resolution awarding sale of the Bonds, to provide annual reports and notices of certain events. A description of this undertaking is set forth in the Official Statement. The purchaser's obligation to purchase the Bonds will be conditioned upon receiving evidence of this undertaking at or prior to delivery of the Bonds. - iii - OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly-final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223-3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2-12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 75 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated September 2, 1997 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/Judith Cox City Clerk - iv - SCHEDULE OF BOND YEARS $1,805,000 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1997B Cumulative Year Principal Bond Years Bond Years 1999 $80,000 100.0000 100.0000 2000 $395,000 888.7500 988.7500 2001 $300,000 975.0000 1 ,963.7500 2002 $240,000 1 ,020.0000 2,983.7500 2003 $195,000 1 ,023.7500 4,007.5000 2004 $105,000 656.2500 4,663.7500 2005 $105,000 c 761 .2500 5,425.0000 2006 $105,000 c 866.2500 6,291 .2500 2007 $105,000 c 971 .2500 7,262.5000 2008 $105,000 c 1 ,076.2500 8,338.7500 2009 $70,000 c 787.5000 9,126.2500 Average Maturity: 5.06 Years Bonds Dated: November 1 , 1997 Interest Due: August 1 , 1998 and each February 1 and August 1 to maturity. Principal Due: February 1 , 1999-2009 inclusive. Optional Call: Bonds maturing on or after February 1 , 2005 are callable commencing February 1 , 2004 and any date thereafter at par. (See Terms of Proposal. ) c: subject to optional call -v - (This page was left blank intentionally.) OFFICIAL STATEMENT $1,805,000 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1997B (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT This Official Statement contains certain information relating to the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "City") and its issuance of $1,805,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1997B (the "Series 1997B Bonds", the "Bonds" or the "Issue"). The Bonds are general obligations of the City for which the City pledges its full faith and credit and power to levy general ad valorem taxes without limit as to rate or amount. Inquiries may be made to Mr. Gregg Voxland, Finance Director, City of Shakopee, 129 South Holmes Street, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379, or by telephoning (612) 445-3650. Inquiries may also be made to Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, St. Paul, Minnesota 55102-2143, or by telephoning (612) 223-3000. If information of a specific legal matter is desired, requests may be directed to Mr. Thomas S. Hay, Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, Bond Counsel, 2200 First Bank Place East, Minneapolis, MN 55402, or by telephoning (612) 340-2600. CONCURRENT FINANCING On October 1, 1997, the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Minnesota will issue a series of bonds which will finance construction of a new mixed use project in the City. Three of the four financings will carry the general obligation pledge of the City. Approximately $4,680,000 of tax-exempt bonds and $975,000 of taxable bonds will be issued carrying the City's general obligation pledge. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE In order to permit bidders for the Bonds and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with paragraph (b)(5) of Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Rule"), the City will covenant and agree, for the benefit of the registered holders or beneficial owners from time to time of the outstanding Bonds, in the Bond Resolution, to provide annual reports of specified information and notice of the occurrence of certain events, if material, as hereinafter described (the "Disclosure Covenant"). The information to be provided on an annual basis, the events as to which notice is to be given, if material, and a summary of other provisions of the Disclosure Covenant, including termination, amendment and remedies, are set forth in Appendix II to this Official Statement. The City has never failed to comply in all respects with any previous undertakings under the Rule to provide annual reports or notices of material events. - 1 - Breach of the Disclosure Covenant will not constitute a default or an "Event of Default" under the Bonds or the Resolution. A broker or dealer is to consider a known breach of the Disclosure Covenant, however, before recommending the purchase or sale of the Bonds in the secondary market. Thus, a failure on the part of the City to observe the Disclosure Covenant may adversely affect the transferability and liquidity of the Bonds and their market price. THE BONDS General Description The Bonds are dated November 1, 1997 and will mature annually each February 1, commencing February 1, 1999, as set forth on the cover page of this Official Statement. The Bonds are being issued in book entry form. Interest on the Bonds is payable August 1, 1998 and semi-annually thereafter on August 1 and February 1. Interest will be payable to the holder (initially Cede & Co.) registered on the books of Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association in Minneapolis, Minnesota (the "Registrar") on the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding such interest payment date. Principal of and interest on the Bonds will be paid as described in the section "Book Entry System" herein. Optional Redemption The City may elect on February 1, 2004, and on any day thereafter, to prepay the Bonds due on or after February 1, 2005. Redemption may be in whole or in part, and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine. Redemption of the Bonds shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. Book Entry System The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), New York, New York, will act as securities depository for the Bonds. The Bonds will be issued as fully-registered securities registered in the name of Cede & Co. (DTC's partnership nominee). One fully-registered Bond certificate per maturity will be issued in the principal amount of the Bonds maturing in such year, and will be deposited with DTC. DTC is a limited-purpose trust company organized under the New York Banking Law, a "banking organization within the meaning of the New York Banking Law, a member of the Federal Reserve System, a "clearing corporation" within the meaning of the New York Uniform Commercial Code, and a "clearing agency" registered pursuant to the provisions of Section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. DTC holds securities that its participants ("Participants") deposit with DTC. DTC also facilitates the settlement among Participants of securities transactions, such as transfers and pledges in deposited securities through electronic computerized book entry changes in Participants' accounts, thereby eliminating the need for physical movement of securities certificates. Direct Participants ("Direct Participants") include securities brokers and dealers, banks, trust companies, clearing corporations, and certain other organizations. DTC is owned by a number of its Direct Participants and by the New York Stock Exchange, Inc., the American Stock Exchange, Inc., and the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. Access to the DTC system is also available to others such as securities brokers and dealers, banks, and trust companies that clear through or maintain a custodial relationship with a Direct Participant, either directly or indirectly ("Indirect Participants"). The Rules applicable to DTC and its Participants are on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. -2 - l Purchases of Bonds under the DTC system must be made by or through Direct Participants, which will receive a credit for the Bonds on DTC's records. The ownership interest of each actual purchaser of each Bond ("Beneficial Owner") is in turn to be recorded on the Direct and Indirect Participants' records. Beneficial Owners will not receive written confirmation from DTC of their purchase, but Beneficial Owners are expected to receive written confirmations providing details of the transaction, as well as periodic statements of their holdings, from the Direct or Indirect Participant through which the Beneficial Owner entered into the transaction. Transfers of ownership interest in the Bonds are to be accomplished by entries made on the books of Participants acting on behalf of Beneficial Owners. Beneficial Owners will not receive certificates representing their ownership interest in the Bonds, except in the event that use of the book entry system for the Bonds is discontinued. To facilitate subsequent transfers, all Bonds deposited by Participants with DTC are registered in the name of DTC's partnership nominee, Cede & Co. The deposit of Bonds with DTC and their registration in the name of Cede & Co. effect no change in beneficial ownership. DTC has no knowledge of the actual Beneficial Owners of the Bonds. DTC's records reflect only the identity of the Direct Participants to whose accounts such Bonds are credited, which may or may not be the Beneficial Owners. The Participants will remain responsible for keeping account of their holdings on behalf of their customers. Conveyance of notices and other communications by DTC to Direct Participants, by Direct Participants to Indirect Participants, and by Direct Participants and Indirect Participants to Beneficial Owners will be governed by arrangements among them, subject to any statutory or regulatory requirements as may be in effect from time to time. Redemption notices for the Bonds shall be sent to Cede & Co. If less than all of the Bonds are being redeemed, DTC's practice is to determine by lot the amount of the interest of each Direct Participant in such issue to be redeemed. Neither DTC nor Cede & Co. will consent or vote with respect to Bonds. Under its usual procedures, DTC mails an Omnibus Proxy to the Bond Registrar as soon as possible after the record date. The Omnibus Proxy assigns Cede & Co.'s consenting or voting rights to those Direct Participants to whose accounts the Bonds are credited on the record date (identified in a listing attached to the Omnibus Proxy). Principal and interest payments on the Bonds will be made to DTC. DTC's practice is to credit Direct Participants' accounts on the payment date in accordance with their respective holdings shown on DTC's records unless DTC has reason to believe that it will not receive payment on payable date. Payments by Participants to Beneficial Owners will be governed by standing instructions and customary practices, as is the case with securities held for the accounts of customers in bearer form or registered in "street name," and will be the responsibility of such Participant and not of DTC or the City, subject to any statutory or regulatory requirements as may be in effect from time to time. Payment of principal or interest to DTC is the responsibility of the Registrar, disbursement of such payments to Direct Participants shall be the responsibility of DTC, and disbursement of such payments to the Beneficial Owners shall be the responsibility of Direct and Indirect Participants. DTC may discontinue providing its services as securities depository with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving reasonable notice to the Bond Registrar. Under such circumstances, in the event that a successor securities depository is not obtained, Bond certificates are required to be printed and delivered. The City may decide to discontinue use of the system of book entry transfers through DTC (or a successor securities depository). In that event, Bond certificates will be printed and delivered. The information in this section concerning DTC and DTC's book entry has been obtained from sources that the City believes to be reliable, but the City takes no responsibility for the accuracy thereof. - 3- AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475 and will be used to finance various improvement projects within the City. The composition of the Bonds is as follows: Total Project Costs $2,255,205* Less: Available Funds on Hand (445,600) Investment Earnings (4,605) Total Bond Issue $1,805,000 Include costs of issuance and the underwriter allowance for discount bidding. SECURITY AND FINANCING In addition to its general obligation pledge, the City pledges special assessments against benefited property. Special assessments in the principal amount of $480,000 are expected to be filed on or before November 1, 1997 and assessments totaling $1,104,400 of principal are expected to be filed on or before November 1, 1998. Assessments will be filed over a term of five and ten years with even annual principal payments and interest charged on the unpaid balance at a rate of approximately 1.5% over the net interest rate expected to be received on the Bonds, consistent with the City's policy. Ad valorem tax levies and special assessments will be sufficient to pay 105% of the August 1 interest due in the year of collection and the February 1 principal and interest payment due in the following year. The City anticipates making an average annual tax levy of approximately $33,450, beginning in levy year 1997, for payment of the Bonds. FUTURE FINANCING Other than those issues discussed under "CONCURRENT FINANCING", the City does not anticipate any additional general obligation borrowing for at least the next 90 days. LITIGATION The City is not aware of any threatened or pending litigation affecting the validity of the Bonds or the City's ability to meet its financial obligations. LEGALITY The Bonds are subject to approval as to certain matters by Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, as Bond Counsel. Bond Counsel has not participated in the -4 - preparation of this Official Statement, except for guidance concerning the following section, "Tax Exemption," and will not pass upon its accuracy, completeness, or sufficiency. Bond Counsel has not examined nor attempted to examine or verify, any of the financial or statistical statements, or data contained in this Official Statement, and will express no opinion with respect thereto. A legal opinion in substantially the form set out as Appendix I herein will be delivered at closing. TAX EXEMPTION In the opinion of Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, as Bond Counsel, under federal and Minnesota laws, regulations, rulings and decisions in effect on the date of issuance of the Bonds, interest on the Bonds is not includable in gross income for federal income tax purposes or in taxable net income of individuals, estates and trusts for Minnesota income tax purposes. Interest on the Bonds is includable in taxable income of corporations and financial institutions for purposes of the Minnesota franchise tax. Certain provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), however, impose continuing requirements that must be met after the issuance of the Bonds in order for interest thereon to be and remain not includable in federal gross income and in Minnesota taxable net income. Noncompliance with such requirements by the City may cause the interest on the Bonds to be includable in gross income for purposes of federal income taxation and in taxable net income for purposes of Minnesota income taxation, retroactive to the date of issuance of the Bonds, irrespective in some cases of the date on which such noncompliance is ascertained. No provision has been made for redemption of or for an increase in the interest rate on the Bonds in the event that interest on the Bonds becomes includable in federal gross income or Minnesota taxable income. Interest on the Bonds is not an item of tax preference includable in alternative minimum taxable income for purposes of the federal alternative minimum tax applicable to all taxpayers or the Minnesota alternative minimum tax applicable to individuals, estates and trusts, but is includable in book income or in earnings and profits in determining the alternative minimum taxable income of corporations for purposes of the alternative minimum tax and the environmental tax imposed by Section 59A of the Code. Interest on the Bonds may be includable in the income of a foreign corporation for purposes of the branch profits tax imposed by Section 884 of the Code and is includable in the net investment income of foreign insurance companies for purposes of Section 842(b) of the Code. In the case of an insurance company subject to the tax imposed by Section 831 of the Code, the amount which otherwise would be taken into account as losses incurred under Section 832(b)(5) of the Code must be reduced by an amount equal to fifteen percent of the interest on the Bonds that is received or accrued during the taxable year. Section 86 of the Code requires recipients of certain Social Security and railroad retirement benefits to take into account, in determining the taxability of such benefits, receipts or accruals of interest on the Bonds. Passive investment income, including interest on the Bonds, may be subject to federal income taxation under Section 1375 of the Code for a Subchapter S corporation that has Subchapter C earnings and profits at the close of the taxable year if greater than twenty-five percent of the gross receipts of such Subchapter S corporation is passive investment income. Section 265 of the Code denies a deduction for interest on indebtedness incurred or continued to purchase or carry the Bonds or, in the case of a financial institution, that portion of the holder's interest expense allocated to interest on the Bonds, except with respect to certain financial institutions (within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code). The foregoing is not intended to be an exhaustive discussion of collateral tax consequences arising from receipt of interest on the Bonds. Prospective purchasers or bondholders should consult their tax advisors with respect to collateral tax consequences, including without limitation the calculations of alternative minimum tax, environmental tax or foreign branch profits tax liability or the inclusion of Social Security or other retirement payments in taxable income. - 5 - BANK-QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS Prior to the adoption of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (the "Act"), financial institutions were generally permitted to deduct 80% of their interest expense allocable to tax-exempt bonds. Under the Act, however, financial institutions are generally not entitled to such a deduction for tax-exempt bonds purchased after August 7, 1986. However, the City has designated the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) of the Code which would permit financial institutions to deduct interest expenses allocable to the Bonds to the extent permitted under prior law. RATING An application for a rating of the Bonds has been made to Moody's Investors Service ("Moody's"), 99 Church Street, New York, New York. If a rating is assigned, it will reflect only the opinion of Moody's. Any explanation of the significance of the rating may be obtained only from Moody's. There is no assurance that a rating, if assigned, will continue for any given period of time, or that such rating will not be revised or withdrawn, if in the judgment of Moody's, circumstances so warrant. A revision or withdrawal of the rating may have an adverse effect on the market price of the Bonds. FINANCIAL ADVISOR The City has retained Springsted Incorporated, Public Finance Advisors, of St. Paul, Minnesota, as financial advisor (the "Financial Advisor") in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. In preparing the Official Statement, the Financial Advisor has relied upon governmental officials, and other sources, who have access to relevant data to provide accurate information for the Official Statement, and the Financial Advisor has not been engaged, nor has it undertaken, to independently verify the accuracy of such information. The Financial Advisor is not a public accounting firm and has not been engaged by the City to compile, review, examine or audit any information in the Official Statement in accordance with accounting standards. The Financial Advisor is an independent advisory firm and is not engaged in the business of underwriting, trading or distributing municipal securities or other public securities and therefore will not participate in the underwriting of the Bonds. CERTIFICATION The City has authorized the distribution of this Official Statement for use in connection with the initial sale of the Bonds. As of the date of the settlement of these Bonds, the Purchaser will be furnished with a certificate signed by the appropriate officers of the City. The certificate will state that as of the date of the Official Statement, the Official Statement did not and does not as of the date of the certificate contain any untrue statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. - 6 - 1 CITY PROPERTY VALUES 1996 Indicated Market Value of Taxable Property: $779,503,319* * Calculated by dividing the county assessor's estimated market value of$704,671,000 by the 1996 sales ratio of 90.4%for the City as determined by the State Department of Revenue. 1996 Taxable Net Tax Capacity: $13,387,536 1996 Net Tax Capacity $16,871,570 Less: Contribution to Fiscal Disparities (3,288,621) Captured Tax Increment Tax Capacity (1,514,980) Plus: Distribution from Fiscal Disparities 1,319,567 1996 Taxable Net Tax Capacity $13,387,536 1996 Taxable Net Tax Capacity by Class of Property Residential Homestead $ 5,255,231 39.2% Commercial/Industrial, Public Utility and Personal Property 6,788,403* 50.7 Residential Non-Homestead 1,036,321 7.7 Agricultural 300,637 2.3 Other 6,944 0.1 Total $13,387,536 100.0% * Reflects adjustments for fiscal disparities and captured tax increment tax capacity. Trend of Values Assessor's Indicated Estimated Taxable Tax Market Value(a) Market Value Capacity(b) 1996 $779,503,319 $704,671,000 $13,387,536 1995 730,917,813 648,324,100 12,418,111 1994 668,384,780 592,857,300 11,357,936 1993 649,219,249 536,255,100 10,447,562 1992 617,052,435 544,857,300 9,942,149 (a) Calculated by dividing the county assessor's estimated market value by the sales ratio determined for the City each year by the State Department of Revenue. (b) See Appendix Ill for a discussion of tax capacity and other elements of Minnesota property tax law. - 7 - Ten of the Largest Taxpayers in the City 1996 Net Taxpayer Type of Property Tax Capacity Northern States Power Co. Utility $ 931,178(8) Rahr Malting Co. Malting Company 914,122 K-Mart Corporation Warehouse and Retail Store 869,719 Cedar Fair Limited Partnership Valley Fair Amusement Park 572,765 Tsumura International Manufacturing 559,145 Opus North Corp. Industrial 309,056 Certain Teed Products Corp. Asphalt Shingles 299,731 Canterbury Park Holding Corp. Racetrack 274,400 AA Property Holdings Industrial 252,008 Anchor Glass Manufacturing 213,192 Total $5,195,316(b) (a) Northern States Power Company's Blue Lake Substation is located on an 80-acre site in the northeast section of the City and houses oil-fueled gas turbine generators, an electrical substation, and fuel storage and maintenance facilities. (b1 Represents 38.8% of the City's 1996 taxable net tax capacity. CITY INDEBTEDNESS Legal Debt Limit Legal Debt Limit (2% of Estimated Market Value) $14,093,420 Less: Outstanding Net Debt Subject to Limit (3,140,000) Legal Debt Margin at September 2, 1997 $10,953,420 General Obligation Debt Supported by Taxes Principal Date Original Final Outstanding of Issue Amount Purpose Maturity As of 9-2-97 6-1-97 $3,140,000 Fire Station 2-1-2017 $3,140,000 General Obligation Debt Supported by Taxes and/or Special Assessments Principal Date Original Final Outstanding of Issue Amount Purpose Maturity As of 9-2-97 12-1-90 1,930,000 Local Improvements 2-1-2002 $ 985,000 10-1-91 1,725,000 Local Improvements 2-1-2003 1,025,000 12-1-92 1,665,000 Local Improvements 2-1-2004 1,090,000 12-1-93 1,400,000 Local Improvements 2-1-2002 700,000 11-1-95 3,180,000 Local Improvements 2-1-2007 3,085,000 12-1-96 2,555,000 Local Improvements 2-1-2008 2,555,000 11-1-97 1,805,000 Local Improvements 2-1-2009 1,805,000 (Series 1997B Bonds) Total $11,245,000 - 8 - General Obligation Debt Supported by Tax Increments Principal Date Original Final Outstanding of Issue Amount Purpose Maturity As of 9-2-97 12-1-88 $1,015,000 Tax Increment 2-1-2001 $ 435,000 12-1-92 1,885,000 Tax Increment Refunding 2-1-2001 920,000 7-1-93 2,675,000 Tax Increment Refunding 2-1-2003 2,075,000 12-1-93 1,000,000 Tax Increment Refunding 2-1-1998 265,000 Total $3,695,000 General Obligation Debt Supported by Revenues Principal Date Original Final Outstanding of Issue Amount Purpose Maturity As of 9-2-97 11-1-95 $1,150,000 Storm Water Revenue 2-1-2006 $1,070,000 Revenue Debt Principal Date Original Final Outstanding of Issue Amount Purpose Maturity As of 9-2-97 8-24-93 $4,250,000 Utility Improvements 8-1-2005 $3,950,000* * This issue was sold by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission to finance capital improvements, replacements and additions to the electric and water utilities comprising the Shakopee Public Utilities. Annual Calendar Year Debt Service Payments Including This Issue G.O. Debt Supported by Taxes Principal Year Principal & Interest 1997 (at 9-2) -- -- 1998 $ 160,000 $ 343,100.84 1999 100,000 250,995.02 2000 100,000 246,545.02 2001 105,000 246,880.02 2002 110,000 246,907.52 2003 120,000 251,500.02 2004 125,000 250,618.77 2005 130,000 249,402.52 2006 135,000 247,842.52 2007 140,000 245,967.52 2008 145,000 243,770.02 2009 155,000 246,042.52 2010 165,000 247,681.27 2011 175,000 248,756.27 2012 185,000 249,306.27 2013 195,000 249,209.39 2014 205,000 248,459.38 2015 220,000 251,900.00 2016 230,000 249,525.00 2017 240,000 246,600.00 Total $3,140,000* $5,061,009.89 * 39% of this debt will be retired within ten years. - 9 - Annual Calendar Year Debt Service Payments Including This Issue (Continued) G.O. Debt Supported G.O. Debt Supported by Taxes and/or Primarily by Special Assessments Tax Increments Principal Principal Year Principal & Interest(al Principal & Interest 1997 (at 9-2) (Paid) (Paid) (Paid) (Paid) 1998 $ 1,150,000 $ 1,646,646.91 $1,080,000 $1,233,687.50 1999 1,455,000 1,912,358.75 595,000 710,512.50 2000 1,790,000 2,169,948.75 620,000 705,617.50 2001 1,755,000 2,048,753.75 645,000 698,262.50 2002 1,670,000 1,879,206.25 365,000 392,778.75 2003 1,035,000 1,176,916.25 390,000 399,555.00 2004 620,000 720,866.25 2005 490,000 563,886.25 2006 490,000 540,305.00 2007 465,000 492,063.75 2008 255,000 264,541.25 2009 70,000 71,697.50 Total $11,245,000(b) $13,487,190.66 $3,695,000 $4,140,413.75 G.O. Debt Supported by Revenues Revenue Debt Principal Principal Year Principal & Interest Principal & Interest 1997 (at 9-2) (Paid) (Paid) (Paid) (Paid) 1998 $ 100,000 146,755.00 100,000 314,462.50 1999 105,000 147,525.00 100,000 310,162.50 2000 105,000 143,062.50 125,000 330,662.50 2001 110,000 143,385.00 125,000 324,787.50 2002 115,000 143,377.50 125,000 318,725.00 2003 125,000 147,915.00 125,000 312,475.00 2004 130,000 146,952.50 150,000 331,100.00 2005 135,000 145,557.50 150,000 323,225.00 2006 145,000 148,625.00 175,000 340,200.00 2007 175,000 330,400.00 2008 175,000 320,600.00 2009 200,000 335,800.00 2010 200,000 324,600.00 2011 200,000 313,400.00 2012 225,000 327,200.00 2013 225,000 314,600.00 2014 250,000 327,000.00 2015 250,000 313,000.00 2016 275,000 324,000.00 2017 300,000 333,600.00 2018 300,000 316,800.00 Total $1,070,000 $1,337,545.00 $3,950,000(c) $6,786,800.00 (a) Includes the Series 19978 Bonds at an assumed interest rate of 4.85% (b) 97% of this debt will be retired within ten years. (c) 34%of this debt will be retired within ten years. - 10 - 1 Summary of Direct Debt Including This Issue Gross Less: Debt Net Debt Service Funds(a) Direct Debt G.O. Debt Supported by Taxes $ 3,140,000 $(124,764) $3,015,236 G.O. Debt Supported by Taxes and/or Special Assessments 11,245,000 (2,297,327) 8,947,673 G.O. Debt Supported by Tax Increments 3,695,000 (19,598)(b) 3,675,402 G.O. Debt Supported by Revenues 1,070,000 (c) 1,070,000 Revenue Debt 3,950,000 (d) 3,950,000 (a) Debt service funds are as of August 31, 1997 and include money to pay both principal and interest. (b) In addition, $1,034,049 of tax increment funds are available, but not dedicated, for debt service. (c) Monies from the storm water enterprise are transferred to the debt service fund only as required. (d) Monies from the City's various utility enterprises are transferred to the debt service fund only as required. A Reserve Fund of $340,200 has been established for the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission's$4,250,000 Public Utilities Revenue Bonds, Series 1993. Indirect General Obligation Debt Debt Applicable to 1996 Taxable G.O. Debt Tax Capacity in City Taxing Unit Net Tax Capacity As of 9-2-97(a) Percent Amount Scott County $ 55,318,068 $21,660,000(b) 24.2% $ 5,241,720 ISD 720 (Shakopee) 14,888,358 10,565,910 89.9 9,498,753 ISD 191 (Burnsville) 52,979,309 56,110,000 1.1 617,210 Metropolitan Council 2,161,233,611 33,990,000 0.6 203,940 Regional Transit District 1,942,027,826 84,545,000 0.7 591,815 Total $16,153,438 (a) Excludes general obligation tax and aid certificates, general obligation debt supported by revenues and revenue debt. (b) Includes an annual appropriation lease for the Scott County justice center. (c) The Metropolitan Council also has outstanding$428,020,000 general obligation sanitary sewer bonds and loans which are paid from system revenues. Debt Ratios G.O. Net G.O. Indirect & Direct Debt* Net Direct Debt To 1996 Indicated Market Value ($779,503,319) 2.01% 4.08% Per Capita (14,292 - 1996 Metropolitan Council Estimate) $1,094 $2,224 * Excludes revenue supported debt. - 11 - CITY TAX RATES, LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS Tax Capacity Rates for a City Resident in ISD 720 1996/97 For 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 Total Debt Only Scott County 45.564% 48.475% 50.217% 46.060% 41.683% 1.570% City of Shakopee 28.162 27.104 25.245 22.458 23.098 0.753 ISD 720 (Shakopee) 61.499 65.540 62.179 64.917 64.174 4.607 Special Districts* 4.782 5.327 6.101 6.380 3.899 0.167 Total 140.007% 146.446% 143.742% 139.815% 132.854% 7.097% * Special districts include the Shakopee EDA, Metropolitan Council, Regional Transit District, Mosquito Control, Regional Railroad Authority and the Lower Minnesota Watershed District. NOTE: Taxes are determined by multiplying the net tax capacity by the tax capacity rate, expressed as a percentage. (See Appendix III.) Tax Levies and Collections Collected During Collected Gross Net Collection Year As of 6-30-96 Levy/Collect Levy Levy* Amount Percent Amount Percent 1996/97 $3,919,336 $3,476,166 (In Process of Collection) 1995/96 3,217,007 2,785,382 $2,738,008 98.3% $2,738,008 98.3% 1994/95 3,262,510 2,805,961 2,775,864 98.9 2,783,706 99.2 1993/94 3,255,765 2,805,925 2,777,932 99.0 2,793,168 99.5 1992/93 3,114,951 2,697,962 2,555,765 94.7 2,614,766 96.9 * The net levy excludes Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid ('HACA'). The net levy is the basis for computing the tax capacity rates beginning in 1993/94. The gross levy is the basis for computing tax capacity rates in prior years. FUNDS ON HAND As of August 31, 1997 Fund Cash and Investments General $ 4,821,859.78 Special Revenue 504,746.25 Debt Service: G.O. Tax Levy 124,764.10 G.O. Special Assessment 2,297,327.23 G.O. TIF 19,597.69* Capital Projects 4,121,621,78 Enterprise 15,129,946.75 Trust and Agency 707,181.31 Total $27,727,044.89 * Excludes$1,034,049 of tax increment funds which are available, but not dedicated, for debt service. - 12 - CITY INVESTMENTS Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the City's investment program. Investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The objective will be to mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. The investment portfolio shall remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements that may be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that securities mature concurrent with cash needs to meet anticipated demands (static liquidity). Furthermore, since all possible cash demands can not be anticipated, the portfolio should consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets (dynamic liquidity). The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk constraints and liquidity needs. Return on investment is of least importance compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. The core of investments are limited to relatively low risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed. As of August 31, 1997, the market value of the City's investments totaled $28,142,843, including treasury securities purchased at a discount and accruing interest. Of the City's total investments, approximately 37% of the investments will mature in less than one year (including government mutual funds and money market funds), 48% will mature in one to five years, and 15% will mature in five to ten years. GENERAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE CITY Shakopee is located in northeastern Scott County, approximately 25 miles southwest of the City of Minneapolis. Shakopee is the Scott County Seat and is part of the Minneapolis/St. Paul seven-county metropolitan area. The Minnesota River forms the City's northern boundary. The City encompasses an area of 29 square miles (18,560 acres). The City's population trend is shown in the following table. Year Population Count Percent Increase 1996* 14,292 21.7% 1997 11,739 18.1 1980 9,941 44.6 1970 6,876 --- * Metropolitan Council estimate. - 13 - Major Employers in the City Approximate Number Employer Product/Service of Employees Valleyfair Entertainment Center 67-1,200* Scott County Government 495 K-Mart Corporation Distribution Center 424 Shakopee Valley Printing Newspaper 415 Independent School District 720 Education 390 St. Francis Regional Medical Center Health Care 363 Certain-Teed Corp. Asphalt Shingles Mfg. 300 Anchor Glass Container Corp. Glass Container Mfg. 285 Toro Company Turf Care Products 275 Tsumura International Manufacturing 250 Northstar Auto Auction Automotive 220 Shakopee Friendship Manor Corp. Nursing Home 150 * Higher number indicates seasonal peak. Source: "Shakopee Community Profile", Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development, August 1996. Labor Force Data June 1997 June 1996 Civilian Unemployment Civilian Unemployment Labor Force Rate Labor Force Rate Scott County 42,349 2.7% 41,303 3.1% Minneapolis/St. Paul MSA 1,673,186 2.9 1,636,827 3.5 Minnesota 2,700,087 3.6 2,651,453 4.5 Source: Minnesota Department of Jobs and Training. 1997 data is preliminary. City-Issued Building Permits Total Permits New Single Family Homes Number Value Number Value 1997 (to 7-31) 414 $51,529,923 91 $11,360,486 1996 694 61,138,601 198 19,733,852 1995 607 55,189,772 159 18,068,018 1994 632 37,717,177 164 17,669,275 1993 575 64,689,664(a) 174 16,668,086 1992 472 29,328,483 151 13,625,485 1991 426 18,513,241 115 9,634,950 1990 381 30,500,706 100 7,488,490 1989 407 61,598,852(b) 94 6,995,265 1988 347 11,769,593 93 7,012,737 1987 345 14,533,490 61 5,749,600 (a) Includes American Can at$6,140,000, Rahr Malting Company at$20,000,000, Woman's Correctional Facility at$8,000,000 and Independent School District 720 (Shakopee) at$6,600,000. (b) Includes an addition to the Blue Lake Treatment Plant valued at$45,000,000. - 14 - Recent Development Several new development projects are underway in the Valley Green Industrial Park in the City: • ADC Telecom has a new 282,000 square foot facility under construction which will employ a total of approximately 570 employees. Construction of the new facility is expected to be completed by the end of 1997. • Capp Industries completed the first of the three new office/warehouse buildings in 1997. The first building has a total of 71,600 square feet. • First Industrial Realty Trust has the first of seven new office/warehouse/manufacturing buildings under construction. The current building is approximately 125,000 square feet. Upon completion, all seven buildings are expected to total approximately 750,000 square feet. • Hoit completed construction of a new 200,000 square foot distribution facility in 1997. • Haugland Companies has a new 105,000 square foot distribution facility under construction. • Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company has a new 180,000 square foot office/warehouse building under construction. • Quality Forklift, a sales and service provider of forklifts, completed construction of a new 28,000 square foot facility in 1997. • LaserQuit completed construction of a new 15,000 square foot office/warehouse building in 1997. The City completed construction of a new civic center in 1996 which includes an ice sheet, two gymnasiums, and wrestling and gymnastics areas. St. Francis Regional Medical Center opened a new medical campus in 1996 on a 60-acre site in the City. The campus includes a facility for ambulatory and hospital services for St. Francis and a new 22,000 square foot clinic adjacent to the hospital. The complex includes an attached long-term care facility. An expansion to add a cancer care wing was completed in 1997. Scott County has a new three story, $11,000,000 justice center under construction on the former site of the St. Francis Hospital in the City's downtown. The new justice center will house approximately 100 Scott County employees. The South Highway 169 bypass opened in November 1996. A Comfort Suites motel completed construction of a new facility within the City in 1997. In 1996 the City approved 14 new residential plats. The City currently has two retail complexes in the planning stage. The Shakopee Economic Development Authority has demolished the structures in blocks 3 and 4 in downtown Shakopee for redevelopment. Proposed development is for 25,000 square feet of commercial space with 52 market rate residential apartment units on the second and third floors. Shakopee Public Utilities Commission completed construction of a third substation in 1997 to provide for the electrical needs of growth in the City. - 15 - I\ Financial Institutions Full service banks in the City are Citizens State Bank and Marquette Bank of Shakopee. Branches of the Mankato Family Bank and Norwest Bank, Minnesota, N.A. are also located in the City. Health Care Facilities The 40-bed St. Francis Regional Medical Center provides general and acute care facilities and is located in the City. The Center has an active medical staff of 70 physicians and affiliates of approximately 200 physicians. The Center's total full- and part-time employment is approximately 388. Also located in the City is Shakopee Friendship Manor, a 116-bed privately owned nursing home. Education Most Shakopee residents are part of Independent School District 720 (Shakopee); a very small percentage of City residents are within the boundaries of ISD 191 (Burnsville). Independent School District 720 has a fall 1997 enrollment (kindergarten through grade 12) of approximately 3,200 students, and has approximately 405 employees. The Shakopee Area Catholic School provides parochial education for grades kindergarten through eight. The school has approximately 349 students enrolled. GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION AND SERVICES Organization Shakopee was incorporated as a City in 1870 and became a statutory city in April, 1975, having previously been governed under a home rule charter. The City has a mayor-council form of government, with the Mayor elected to a two-year term of office and the four Council members elected to overlapping four-year terms. The present Mayor and Council members are as shown below: Expiration of Term Jeff Henderson Mayor December 31, 1997 Robert Sweeney Council Member December 31, 1997 Cletus Link Council Member December 31, 1999 Burl Zorn Council Member December 31, 1997 Jane DuBois Council Member December 31, 1999 The City's chief administrative officer is the City Administrator who is appointed by the Council. Mr. Mark McNeill was appointed City Administrator by the City Council in July of 1996, prior to his current position, Mr. McNeill was City Administrator with Mason City, Iowa for two years and Savage, Minnesota for ten years. Mr. McNeill holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science and a Master's degree in Public Affairs. Mr. Gregg M. Voxland, the City's Finance Director/Treasurer, has been with the City since 1978. Mr. Voxland previously worked for the City of Anoka, Minnesota for three years. Mr. Voxland holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in business and accounting. Ms. Judith S. Cox is the City Clerk. The City has 71 full-time and 50 part-time employees. - 16 - A Services Police and fire protection for the City is provided by the Police Department, comprised of 21 full- time officers. The City has a volunteer Fire Department, authorized to staff to 44 members. The City has a class 5 rating for insurance purposes. Municipal water and sewer services are provided for all developed areas of the City. Water is supplied by eight wells and stored in a two million gallon standpipe, a 1.5 million-gallon elevated tank, and a 250,000-gallon elevated tank. The water system has a pumping capacity of 6,487 gallons per minute; average demand is estimated to be 2.4 million gallons per day, while peak demand reaches 6.0 million gallons per day. The water system is designed to handle major extensions in the future. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission is responsible for the management and maintenance of the municipal water system and electrical distribution system. The electric system purchases power from Minnesota Municipal Power Agency (MMPA) and has 6,319 metered customers. The Commission is comprised of three members appointed by the City Council to three-year terms. The Commission makes an annual contribution in lieu of taxes to the City in the amount of 23.77% of gross margin, or$240,384 (a limit established by ordinance), whichever is greater. Interceptor sewer lines and wastewater treatment plants in the seven-county metropolitan area are under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council's Environmental Services ("MCES"). MCES finances its operations through user charges based on volume. MCES's Blue Lake Treatment Plant is located in the City and has undergone a major expansion. Employee Pensions All full-time and certain part-time employees of the City of Shakopee are covered by defined benefit pension plans administered by the Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA). PERA administers the Public Employers Retirement Fund (PERF) and the Public Employees Police and Fire Fund (PEPFF) which are cost-sharing multiple-employer retirement plans. PERF members belong to either the Coordinated Plan or the Basic Plan. Coordinated members are covered by Social Security and Basic members are not. All new members must participate in the Coordinated Plan. All police officers who qualify for membership by statute are covered by the PEPFF. The City's contribution for employees covered by PERA for the year ended December 31, 1996 was $227,358. The City contributes to the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association, a single-employer public employee retirement system that acts as a common investment and administrator for the City's volunteer fire fighters. Contributions to the relief association in 1996 consisted of$42,385 from the City and $52,260 from State aids. - 17 - (This page was left blank intentionally.) CITY OF SHAKOPEE CONSENT Memorandum lY. E. Y. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Cable Board Membership DATE: September 29, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to authorize advertisement for replacement of vacancies on the Cable Advisory Commission, and Community Access Corporation Board of Directors. BACKGROUND: Recent events have caused vacancies to exist on the two boards related to cable television. The current make-up is as follows: Cable Advisory Commission(5 member commission) Bryan Freeman Barbara Banios Ken Scannell Shakopee Community Access Corporation Board(7 member commission) Bryan Freeman Bob Zeigler Bob Sweeney Joel Cole Ken Scannell The Advisory Commission meets as needed, and reviews issues related to cable franchise issues. The Community Access Corporation Board of Directors is involved with issues relating to local access programming. It has most recently met on a monthly basis. The Community Access Corporation Board of Directors has voted to recommend to the City Council that it advertise for candidates to fill the vacancies. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City Clerk be authorized to advertise vacancies for the two boards. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize the City Clerk to advertise for vacancies to fill the Community Access Corporation Board of Directors, and Cable Advisory Commission. Names of candidates will be brought back to the Council for future action. VAr--bdig Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE I 4/ E. r MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Appointment of Election Judges DATE: October 1, 1997 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: Minnesota State Statutes require that election judges be appointed by the governing body prior to the election. The attached resolution appoints judges for the November 4, 1997, City Election. All judges have been contacted and have agreed to attend the required training session and work for the election. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 4749, a Resolution Appointing Judges of Election and Establishing g g Compensation, and move its adoption. ( ''(kc,/MA, )- Judi Cox, City Cle� IRES4749.DOC] RESOLUTION NO. 4749 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING JUDGES OF ELECTION AND ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,that: 1. The following persons are hereby appointed Judges of Election for the November 4, 1997, Municipal Election for the eight polling precincts within the City of Shakopee designated in Resolution No. 4407, adopted March 12, 1996: FIRST PRECINCT: Regular Judges Dorothy Breimhorst Winnie Anderson. Chair Vella Gould Evelyn Weckman Hazel Ecklund Irene Bursey SECOND PRECINCT: Regular Judges Bob Neiters Marcie Schmidt. Chair Marilyn Lange Pat Mertz Connie Berens THIRD PRECINCT: Regular Judges Maetta Jurewicz. Chair Darlene Schesso Jerry Klein Barbara Zupan Ann Eva Kubes FOURTH PRECINCT AND SIXTH PRECINCT Regular Judges Edna Wangerin. Chair Muriel Koskovich Pat Clemens Don Zupan FIFTH PRECINCT Regular Judges Virgilla Geske. Chair Carol Link Gayle Madigan Betty Dols Joan Hart SEVENTH PRECINCT Regular Judges Lillian Weinandt. Chair Kim Mueller Jaye Carlson Katheryn Marschall Carla Labarbera Reuben Patrikus EIGHTH PRECINCT: Regular Judges Claudia Meyer. Chair Char Steininger June Douglas Lenore Johnson 2. The Election Judges shall be compensated for their work at the rate of$5.50 per hour and the Chairperson of the Election Judges shall be compensated at the rate of$6.00 per hour. 3. The proper officials be and hereby are authorized and directed to do and perform all acts necessary to carry out the terms, intents, and purposes of this Resolution. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 7th day of October, 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk [I:RES4749.DOC] CITY OF SHAKOPEE / , , Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Residential Parking Designation-200 Block West Fifth Avenue DATE: October 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to designate a temporary residential parking permit program for the 200 block of West Fifth Avenue. BACKGROUND: Earlier this year, the Council gave concurrence to a plan, which, if requested, would designate residential areas in the vicinity of the Courthouse for residential parking only. This was in conjunction with the County Courthouse construction project. At a"neighborhood meeting" in July, residents in the blocks surrounding the project were advised that, if parking as a result of Courthouse construction created problems for them, that they could request a residential parking restriction. Since construction started the last week of July, there had been no requests received until September 18th. That was from the 200 block of West Fifth Avenue, which is located across the street from the site of the addition. The attached letter was delivered to five residences on September 29th. They were to respond regarding their level of interest; staff feels that, for the ease of enforcement, entire block faces should be designated one way or the other, and not restrict individual properties on that block. Therefore, a majority of the residents should be in favor. Four responses were received, two of them either did not drive, or did not have problems, but sympathized with the requester. The fourth respondent is in favor, and requests a total of 3 permits(two per household has been anticipated). As this is the first such request,the process needs to be established. The City Attorney has provided the attached resolution which would establish this on a temporary basis, during construction. The original requester prefers this to be permanent; there are two reasons why we are not recommending that at this time. First,we do not know what the impact of the additional diagonal spaces will be on the Courthouse parking demand - it is possible that the restrictions may not be needed on that block after completion. However, that can be judged later. Second, because this is temporary, a resolution can enact the change; if it is permanent, it would best be done by ordinance. In order to get the signage up as quickly as possible, the resolution is the preferred method. The conditions are noted in the resolution. Basically, it is in effect only during the hours that the main Courthouse is open. Residents were also advised that there would be no "voiding"of tickets which are issued to cars not displaying the permit. RECOMMENDATION: If the Council wishes to enact a residential parking program for permit holders, it should adopt the attached resolution. If approved by the Council, signs will need to be posted; those will be available in about a week. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council wishes to establish a residential parking program in the 200 block of West Fifth Avenue, it should, by motion, adopt the following resolution: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT PROGRAM FOR THE 200 BLOCK OF WEST FIFTH AVENUE DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw PI°ILA! SHAKOPE E September 29, 1997. Dear Resident: If you are one of the courthouse construction project area neighbors who attended a "Neighborhood Meeting"at City Hall earlier this summer, you heard briefly discussed the possibility of implementation of a residential parking permit as a way to combat potential problems with all day parkers. Recently, a request was received at City Hall to have a residential parking restriction placed in the 200 block of West Fifth Avenue. This is the first such request that has been received, and staff is in the process now of preparing action for the Council to consider for implementation. If the City is to do this, it would be with very specific criteria: 1. The restriction would be enforceable from 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM Monday - Friday. 2. Restriction would be for the entire "block face"; in other words, it would be for all properties on one side of a street in a particular block. The majority of residents of the requesting block would have to be in concurrence on whether to restrict parking. 3. Permits must be displayed from rear view mirror during all hours of enforcement. 4. Regular permits to be utilized by residents of that address only; otherwise, permits are subject to revocation, for misuse. Daily"guest permits"would be available through the Police Department for the limited occasions when permission for non- resident parkers is needed. 5. Designation of this"permit only" area will be temporary during the construction project only, and until such time as the current phase of the courthouse under construction is completed and opened to the public. You need to be aware that the Shakopee Police Department would be enforcing this restriction. No "voiding" of tickets will take place if the permit is not properly displayed,or if guests fail to obtain and display temporary permit. COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857 129 Holmes Street South• Shakopee,Minnesota• 55379-1351 • 612-445-3650 • FAX 612-445-6718 Specific implementation of this area will need to be considered by the City Council, and will be if there is a majority of the residents of that block who are in favor of creating the restriction. If there is no majority, no restrictions will take place. So that staff has an understanding as to the degree of support for such restriction, I ask that you leave me a message at City Hall (496-9662) and advise whether you are in favor of such a restriction,with the covenants described, or whether you wish to keep the existing parking as is. I ask to hear from you either way by noon, Thursday, October 2nd. Thank you. Sincerely, VAIL lAf P-61-126H Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw OCT-01-97 17:02 FROM:KENNEDY & GRAVEN ID:6123379310 PAGE 2/3 RESOLUTION NO. 7�0'3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT PROGRAM FOR THE 200 BLOCK OF WEST FIFTH AVENUE DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE WHEREAS, Scott County is currently constructing an addition to the County Courthouse located in the City; WHEREAS, during the construction project, on-street parking in some of the residential neighborhoods adjacent to the courthouse will be limited; WHEREAS, a majority of the residences in the 200 block of West Fifth Avenue have requested that a residential parking permit program be implemented; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, as follows: 1. Parking in the 200 block of West Fifth Avenue is hereby restricted during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday to those persons obtaining a residential parking permit from the City; 2. Residential parking permits must be displayed on the rear view mirror of each vehicle for which a residential parking permit has been obtained; 3. Residential parking permits may be used only by the residents of the homes located in the 200 block of West Fifth Avenue; 4. Daily "guest permits" may be obtained through the police department; 5. The residential parking permit program will expire after the current phase of the courthouse construction project is completed; 6. City staff is hereby authorized to place official signs in the 200 block of West Fifth Avenue restricting parking in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. JJL131002 SH155-23 OCT-01-97 17:02 FROM:KENNEDY & GRAVEN 1D:612337931O PAGE 3/3 Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk JJT131002 SH155-23 CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum Y < TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Final Payment-Asbestos Removal DATE: October 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to release the final 10%retainage to EnviroBate Metro for the City Hall asbestos ceiling tile removal. BACKGROUND: In August, EnviroBate was awarded a contract for the removal of asbestos - containing ceiling tiles in the basement of City Hall. Their bid was $8400; 10%was withheld until the project was completed, and lien waivers received. The contractor has now applied for release of the final 10%; it is recommended by Legend Technical Services, the company which facilitated the contract,to release that retainage. As an aside,a preconstruction conference for the replacement of ceiling tiles was held October 4th;the replacement of the tiles will take place in about a month. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the $840 which had been withheld as retainage be released to EnviroBate Metro. ACTION REQUIRED: If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize payment to EnviroBate Metro in the amount of$840. '1146 V ( Q Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CC: Gregg Voxland,Finance Director CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE I C^� Memorandum l 9j TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Shako-Valley Amateur Hockey Association DATE: October 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION&BACKGROUND: Shako-Valley Amateur Hockey Association is making application to renew their premises permit for their gambling activities at the Main Event Sports Bar. They are in compliance with the Shakopee City Code. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 4764,A Resolution of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,Approving Premises Permit for the Shako-Valley Amateur Hockey Association, and move its adoption. Ju 'th :. Cox, City Cle RESOLUTION NO. 4764 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA, APPROVING PREMISES PERMIT FOR SHAKO-VALLEY AMATEUR HOCKEY ASSOCIATION WHEREAS,the 1990 legiclature adopted a law which requires municipal approval in order for the Gambling Control Board to issue or renew premises permit; and WHEREAS, the Shako-Valley Amateur Hockey Association is seeking a Premises Permit through September 28, 2000, for the site at the Main Event, 911 East 1st Avenue, Shakopee,Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: That the Premises Permit for the Shako-Valley Amateur Hockey Association at the Main Event Sports Bar,911 East 1st Avenue, Shakopee,Minnesota, be approved. Adopted in Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,held this 7th day of October, 1997. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk JSC/tiv CITY OF SHAKOPEE Pi. E. ,, Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Police Chief Retirement DATE: October 2, 1997 INTRODUCTION: The Council is asked to acknowledge the receipt of a letter of resignation due to retirement from Police Chief Tom Steininger. BACKGROUND: Attached is a letter informing the City of the impending retirement of Tom Steininger as Police Chief for Shakopee. As shown,the retirement would be effective February 27, 1998. Sufficient notice is being given so that a transition may take place smoothly. Notice will also be given to the Shakopee Civil Service Commission who,under State law, is to provide the City with a list of qualified candidates. Their input on this will be sought in the very near future. ACTION REQUIRED: Council is asked to pass a motion to receive and file the notification of impending retirement from Tom Steininger as Police Chief, effective February 27, 1998. \A)09-411901(11S1 Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:tw CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council City Administrator, Mark McNeill FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Retirement DATE: October 1, 1997 The purpose of this communication is to advise you that I intend to retire from the Shakopee Police Department at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, February 27, 1998. My reason for notifying you now is to provide you with adequate time to select my replacement so an orderly transition can take place without an interruption in leadership. It has been a privilege to serve the citizens of Shakopee as your Chief of Police and I am proud of the things my staff and I have accomplished over the past eight years, especially the outstanding people we have hired including our first female officers, the elevated level of professionalism which can be found throughout the department and our commitment to community policing which began with our ongoing Citizens Police Academy and citizen survey. If called upon, it would be my pleasure to do anything I can to assist with the forthcoming selection process and transition. cc: Ms. Marcia Spagnolo, President Shakopee Police Civil Service Commission � 66,4,‘_e:LS — J�-, 7 sota Pollution Control Agency i tory Investigation and Cleanup Program Application Request for Assistance Form Complete this form to request assistance from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff in the Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Program pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 115B.17, subd. 14 (or the Land Recycling Act of992, as amended). Answer all applicable questions. Should you have questions when completing this form, please call (612) 296-8407 or toll-free 1-800-657-3864. TDD (for persons who are hearing and speech impaired only): (612) 297-5353. When completed, mail the original copy of this form to: Kristin Lukes MPCA / Site Response Section Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Program 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 General information Property name Shakopee Police Firing Range Address SE corner of Eagle Creek Boulevard and County Road 83 City (or Township) Shakopee State MN Zip Code 55379 Public land survey coordinates: County Scott Twp. 115N Range 22W Sec. 9 Qtr SE Applicants Name Mark McNeill Title City Administrator Organization City of Shakopee Phone 445-3650 Address 129 South Holmes City Shakopee State MN Zip Code 55379 * The applicant is the individual seeking review and approval of a plan or report,or issuance of any applicable administrative or liability assurance by the MPCA.The applicant(or person signing this application)is responsible for payment of MPCA costs of review and oversight.If billing should be directed to other parties, please enclose their consent and billing address on a separate sheet. VIC Version 7.0—Revised January 1995-previous versions obsolete • Page Two Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Program Description of applicant's request ❑ Technical review or third-party review only. ElTechnical review which may lead to a No Association Determination. © Technical review and approval of an investigation or voluntary response action plan which may lead to a No Action Letter. ❑ Technical review and approval of voluntary response action plan which may lead to a No Action Agreement or Covenant Not to Sue. ❑ Technical review and approval of an investigation plan which may lead to an Off-Site Source Determination or Agreement under the Land Recycling Act (Minn. Stat. § 115B.177). ❑ Technical review and approval of a voluntary response action plan leading to a Certificate of Completion under the Land Recycling Act(Minn. Stai.1§B.175).* * If you checked this box,you will be asked to provide further information so that the MPCA staff can determine whether you qualify for issuance of a Certificate of Completion of a Response Action under the Land Recycling Act,Minn.Stat.§115B.175.Persons who are not otherwise responsible under Minn.Stat. §§ 115B.01 to 115B.18 for the release proposed to be cleaned up can obtain liability protection under the Land Recycling Act for themselves and other parties specified in the Act when all necessary response actions have been certified as complete by the MPCA Commissioner(the response actions may not have to address all known releases at the property).Other persons(those who are responsible for the release)may not obtain liability protection for themselves under the Act,but may obtain such protection for other parties specified in the Act when response actions remedying all known releases at the property are certified as complete by the MPCA Commissioner. Current property owner (if different from applicant) Name Jon R. Albinson Title Project Director Organization Valley Green Phone 445-9286 Address 5240 Valley Industrial Blvd. South City Shakopee State MN Zip Code 55379 Applicant's interest in property ❑ Currently owns property ❑ Mortgagee interest in property x❑ Renting or leasing property ❑ Other(explain) ❑ Considering purchasing property Property size (in acres) 1/2 acre Page Three Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Program Nature of the problem or suspected problem Check all that apply: Soil contamination ❑ Not known ❑ Ground water contamination ❑ Other(explain) ❑ Surface water contamination Known or suspected sources Please check all applicable boxes below regarding the nature of the problem source. ❑ Underground tank or pipeline release(s) ❑ Above-ground tank or pipeline release(s) ❑ Drums or other storage containers ❑ Seepage pit or dry well(s) ❑ Septic tank or drainfield ❑ Industrial accident ❑ Surface spillage or discharge ❑ Adjacent property ❑ Dumping or burial of waste ❑ Not known ❑ Lagoons 0 Other(explain) Gun Firing Range Involvement with other regulatory programs Please check all applicable boxes below if any of the following programs or agencies have been involved with the property in question. ❑ MPCA Tanks & Emergency Response ❑ MPCA Superfund Program ❑ MPCA Hazardous Waste (RCRA) ❑ Minnesota Department of Agriculture p MPCA Hazardous Waste (TSCA) ❑ Department of Natural Resources ❑ MPCA Site Assessment (CERCLIS) ❑ Minnesota Department 6 Health ❑ MPCA Water Quality ❑ Metropolitan Waste Control Commission ❑ MPCA Air Quality ❑ County or other agencies (specify) ❑ MPCA Solid Waste Disclosure 0 Yes 0 No To your knowledge, does the release at the property pose an imminent health, safety or environmental hazard? ❑ Yes 0 No Has the release at this site been reported to the MPCA pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 115.061 (Duty to Notify and Avoid Water Pollution)? If so, please indicate notification date. ❑ Yes 0 No Have on- or off-site wells been contaminated? If so, attach a separate she detailing well location, owner,well number, aquifers, depth and use. A si map showing the well locations would be useful. Page Four Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Program Information about attachments to the request form Please list any reports, maps or other attachments to this form (use separate page if necessary). Contact persons Please list the name(s) of your current environmental consultant and legal counsel, if applicable. COnsultantAmerican Engineering Testing, Inc.PhOne 659-1310 Attorney Jim Thompson Phone 337-9209 Certification I certify that I have read and am familiar with the information on this form and all attached documents, and that the submitted information is true, accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I hereby ask the MPCA Commissioner to assist me and the company/organization I represent, as requested by this application. I understand this assistance may include the review of MPCA records and files, and review and approval of investigation plans and reports as well as response action plans and oversight of implementation actions. I understand that the applicant (or other person signing below) must pay the MPCA Commissioner for the MPCA's costs of providing this assistance. I understand that the MPCA Commissioner will send invoices for these costs on a quarterly basis and that failure to pay the MPCA's costs in a timely manner may result in the MPCA Commissioner taking appropriate administrative or legal action. I hereby agree to pay the costs of the MPCA to provide services to the applicant as requested in this application. Furthermore, I hereby certify that I have the authority to submit this application on behalf of the applicant named herein. Typed/printed name Mark McNeill Title City Administrator Signature Date Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 19 Notary Public