Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
July 01, 1980
TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 1, 1980 Vice Mayor Reinke presiding 1) Roll Call at 7:30 PM. 2) Recess for HRA Meeting. 3) Approval of the Minutes of May 6th (Special Session), May 27th, June 3rd, June 10th and June 17th, 1980. 4) Communications: a) NSP Rate Increase ,b) American Legion c) 5) Liaison Reports from Councilmembers: a) Cncl. Colligan from the Fire Department, Joint Seven Man Committee and the Planning Commission. b) Cncl. Hullander from Scott County Criminal Justice Advisory Comm. c) Cncl. Lebens from the Community Services Board d) Cncl. Leroux from the Shakopee School Board e) Cncl. Reinke from the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. f) Mayor Harbeck from Scott County Board of Commissioners. 6) Recognition by the City Council of anyone present in the audience who desires to speak on any item not on the agenda. 7) Old Business: a) Parking Violators (tabled 6/17). b) Application for Off Sale 3.2 Beer License, Brooks Superettes, Inc. 615 Gorman (tabled 6/24). c) Application for On Sale 3.2 Beer License, Velodrome I, Route 1 (tabled 6/24). d) Resolution No. 1636, A jResolution Ordering An Improvement And The Preparation Of Plans - 8.0 -4, Sanitary Sewer And • Watermain In Eagle Creek Boulevard (tabled 6/17). e) Resolution No. 1639, A Ordering The Preparation Of A Report On An Improvement - Trunk Watermain From Jasper Road • and County Road 16 To The Southwest Corner Of Lot 1, Block 1, Valley Park 3rd Addition. f) Resolution No.. 1640, A Resolution Authorizing Condemnation Proceedings For The County Road 16 County Road 83 Trunk Watermain. 8) Planning Commission Recommendations: a) Request to rezone the East 326' of the N 500' of the NE1 /4 or • SW1 /4 of Sec. 5- 115 -22, from R -4 High Density to I -1 Light Ind. Applicant: Shakopee Public Utilities Action: Amend Zoning Ordinance - Ordinance No. 44 P.C. Recommendation: Denial • b) Request to rezone a 0.71 acre parcel lying S of Eagle Creek •Blvd., E of Marschall Rd. and N of thr RR tracks, from R - High Density to B -1, Highway Business. Applicant: Brooks Superette Action: Amend Zoning Ordinance - Ordinance No. 45 P.C. Recommendation: Denial • _. ,.. - . , �reea«�+..E: tic« a.. �+' k+ ? S n:+ 3' C, u#+ : Vx. se`. t:. r .a:u�s,�.aaay.m�:�xsaavan.�•c _ _ .�. ..._. _.. ... TENTATIVE AGENDA . -2- JULY 1, 1980 8.) Planning Commission Recommendations (continued) c) Resolution No.. 1621, A Resolution Setting Forth A City Policy Concerning The Construction Or Completion Of Urban Streets In The City Of Shakopee Before The Issuance Of Building Permits On Property Which Abuts The Streets (sent to Planning Commission for review on 5/20/80) P.C. Recommendation: City Planner to report d) Request to rezone a small parcel of property lying E of . Marschall Rd. and N of Hwy 101 from AG to B -1. Applicant: Wallace D. Bakken Action: Amend Zoning Ordinance - Ordinance No. 46 P.C. . Recommendation: City Planner to report e) Preliminary and Final Plat of Halo 2nd Addition Developer: Wallace D. Bakken Action: Resolution No. 1644 P.C. Recommendation: City Planner to report 9) Routine Resolutions and Ordinances: a) Resolution No. 1642, Resolution Setting Up Policy on Use of the Sr. Citizen Com. Room. b) Resolution No. 1643, Resolution for Condemnations for Public Improvements c) Resolution *No. 1637, Setting fees for Electrical Inspections 10) New Business: a) Approve probation increase for City Planner. b) City Eng. status report on public improvements . c) Progress Report on Kmart Project d) Res'. No. 1641, amendment to Joint & Cooperative Agreement which established the Suburban Police Recruitment System e) Authorize Partial Payment to Wangerin (4th & MN Project). f) 1981 Budget Schedule g) Report on 13th Avenue Watermain h) Appointment to CR 18 Bridge Citizen Advisory Committee i) Authorize Execution of Contract with Electrical Inspector ..j) Res. No. 1645, A Resolution Abating Assessments k) Discussion of PCI /101 Watermain 1) Discussion of Kmart Drive -way Location m) Discussion of HUD 701 Planning Grant 11) Consent Business: 12) Other Business: 13) Adjourn to Tuesday Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator . -- _ ,, __1 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPE'CIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 6, 1980 Mayor Harbeck called the meeting to order at 5:07 with Cncl.Hullander, Lebens, Reinke, Leroux and Colligan present. Also present were City Admr. Doug Reeder, City Att'y. Julius Coller, Utilities Mgr. Lou Van Hout, and members of the Utility Commission Russ Nolting, Wally Bishop and Eldon Reinke. Mayor Harbeck stated that this special meeting was called in order that the Council and the Utility Commission could meet jointly and discuss the three items on the agenda. Discussion ensued on the proposed watermain easterly of the reformatory from 3rd Avenue to 10th Avenue. Comm.Bishop stated that he didn't see a need for the watermain from 10th to 3rd for fire flow unless there was a customer who needs it. Cncl.Hullander questioned future development in the area being rezoned and their needs. Comm.Bishop explained that the Engineering Study suggested going over the State property, but he thinks that there are other alternatives. SPUC is looking at a watermain along Harrison and are suggesting that it would do a better job, whenit is installed in the future. SPUC is recommending that the two sections be completed on 3rd Avenue now and that the Harrison Street watermain be completed later, when needed. The City Engineer 'stated that he takes exception with the statement that there is not a demand now for additional fire flow in the area of the Rahr Malting Plant. He said that if there were a fire there today, it would be very difficult to contain it. The City Admr. reported that three different engineers have reported that there is a deficiency in the fire flow in this area. According to a Utilities resolution, any industry needing a 10 inch watermain for fire flow shall pay for it. The Admr. responded that the City has a responsibility to provide sufficient fire flow. Mayor Harbeck stated that the current object is to get Third Avenue watermain closed up so that there will be adequate service to the homeowners in the area. The costs involved need to be researched. Cncl.Hullander asked if the need for additional fire flow tt> the Rahr Malting area could be substantiated. If so and not installed, how can the . City require the Third Avenue watermain to be installed. Cncl. /Comm.Reinke stated that the Third Avenue watermain will provide the homeowners in the area running water in addition to fire flow, so they will see two benefits. Utilities Mgr. Van Hout stated that the reports from the consult•.irig.Engrs. are a guide for installations of watermains when they ate needed and they don't necessarily need to be installed now just because they are in the report. Mayor Harbeck stated that there needs to be a fund established for reconstruction. Comm.Bishop expressed concern with raising revenues so that large users are chased out of our system. Comm.Bishop reiterated that the Utilities is recommending that the Third Avenue be completed at this time and that the proposed watermain from Third Avenue to Tenth Avenue be postponed. a Proceedings of the City Council May 6, 1980 Page 2 Mayor Harbeck asked if SPUC would prepare a plan for the installation of the watermain from 3rd to 10th. Comm.Bishop responded yes. Both bodies concurred that there would be a public hearing on the 3rd Avenue watermain to close p up the loop. Hullander /Harbeck moved that staff be directed to prepare the appropriate resolution setting a public hearing on the 3rd Avenue watermain project. Motion carriedrunanimously. The City Admr. asked if SPUC is agreeable to the installation of the watermain for the County Road 16 /Gorman Street Project. Comm.Bishop responded that the Utilities concurs that the watermain is needed, but if the developer is no longer interested in the installation at this time, SPUC would rather wait because waiting would fit in better with their long range plans. Comm.Bishop asked if there are any intentions of rezoning the R -4 Multi - Family Residential Zone on CR -16, as this would make a difference in the size of pipe needed to service the area. Because there is very little R -4 property in the City, the Council would like to guard this from happening, as long as there is other undeveloped property available. Both bodies concurred that the watermain for County Road 16 would be built only if the developer who petitioned for its installation still wishes it to be built. Discussion ensued on the color of the 1.5 million gallon water tank in the industrial park. Hullander /Colligan moved to accept the staff recommendation that the water tank be painted a dark beige on the bottom and a light beige on the top. Motion carried with Cncl.Lebens opposed. Hullander /Lebens'moved that the modern block style writing be used for "The City of Shakopee" "ncorporated 1870 ". Cncl. Hullander voted yes with rest opposed. Motion failed. Reinke /Lebens moved that the lettering contain just "Shakopee" and that the same style lettering be used as is on existing water towers. Hand vote: Ayes; Cncl.Reinke,Lebens, Comm.Bishop and Nolting Noes; Cncl.Leroux, Colligan, Hullander and Mayor Harbeck Motion fails . Hullander /Lebens moved to use the modern block style lettering and put the date "Encorporated 1870" on the water tower. Motion carried with Cncl. Reinke and Lebens opposed; and Nolting, Bishop, Leroux, Colligan, Hullander and Harbeck in favor. Mayor Harbeck passed out copies of a suggested "Coordination on Watermain Projects" and suggested that there be another meeting to discuss it. Hullander /Colligan moved to adjourn at 6:35 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Adj. Reg. Session Shakopee, Minnesota May 27, 1980 Vice Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7 :30 PM with Cncl. Leroux, Colligan and Hullander present. Also present: Finance Director, Gregg Voxland; HRA Director, Jeanne Andre and City Attorney, Julius A. Coller, II. Absent: Mayor Harbeck and Cncl. Lebens. Colligan /Leroux offered Resolution No. 1623, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1608 To Enlarge The Ad Hoc Subdivision Committee From Seven To Eight Members, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried with Cncl. Hollander voting "no ". Leroux /Hullander moved to dispense with casting secret ballot for nominations for the Subdivision Review Ad Hoc Committee and.cast a unanimous ballot for the following eight people to serve on this committee: Dean Colligan, Gloria Vierling, Gary Eastlund, Dick Wiggins, Clete Link, Phil Kanning, Ann Tuttle and Wynne Ventling. Motion carried with Cncl. Hullander voting "no ". Leroux /Hullander moved to remove approval of payment of the bills from the table. Motion carried unanimously. Finance Director discussed the corrections and clarified the bills for the Council. Leroux /Colligan moved to authorize payment of the bills as presented. Further discussion was held. Cncl. Leroux called for the question. Roll Call on approval of bills: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Colligan /Leroux moved to award the low bid for contract for demolition on the 4th and Minnesota Project to Wangerin, Inc. at $23,500 and offered Resolution No. 1624, A Resolution Awarding A Bid On The Demolition And Site Grading For The Minnesota Street Revitalization Project and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Discussion was held on the recommendation as received from the City Building Inspector on the proposed dance for June 1st by the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project. The Finance Director stated that since this inspection, the dance had been canceled, but felt the City Council should be aware of the Building Inspectors findings. City Attorney stated that Resolution No. 1622, A Resolution Setting Forth Policy For City Council And City Of Shakopee Employees, needed to be amended. Hullander /Leroux moved to reconsider Resolution No. 1622. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to amend Resolution No. 1622 to include the words, "Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised ". Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to adopt Resolution No. 1622, A Resolution Setting Forth Policy For City Council And City Of Shakopee Employees, as amended. Motion carried unanimously. City Attorney reported on a letter received from Cy Sames regarding the storing of tires in his warehouse and how Mr. Sames is under the impression that he is "grandfathered -in ". Offigial Proceedings of the May 27, 1980 ,Shakopee City Council Page -2- Hullander /Leroux moved to refer Mr. Sames letter to City Staff for further study as to if he is "grandfathered -in" for the storage of tires. Motion carried unanimously. HRA Director stated that the Luckie Construction Company has withdrawn their proposal for the 4th and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project. Discussion was held on second choice contractors for this proposal which was for the 4- bedroom split entry home with single car garage. Colligan /Leroux moved to instruct. the HRA Director to approach the Joe Miller Construction Company for their proposal on the 4- bedroom split entry single family dwelling for the 4th and Minnesota Project. Colligan /Leroux withdrew their motion due to this not being a part of City Council action but a part of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority action. Discussion was also held on a wood foundation vs. a concrete foundation for one the split level dwellings in the 4th and Minnesota Project. Colligan/Hullander moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 PM. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator • • • J 1 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota June 3, 1980 Mayor Harbeck called the meeting to order at 7:46 PM with Cncl. Lebens, Reinke, Hullander and Colligan present. Late: Cncl. Leroux. Also present: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator; H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer; Jeanne Andre, HRA Director; Tim Keane, City Planner and Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney. Colligan /Reinke moved to recess for the HRA meeting at 7:47 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to reconvene at 8:30 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Hullander moved to approve the minutes of May 6th and May 13th, 1980, as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Harbeck reported on a letter received from "An Old Concerned Citizen" regarding the clearing up of Minnesota and Spencer Streets. City Admin. reported on the letter of resignation received from Nancy Engler, Engineering Department Secretary. He stated her resignation would be effective June 13, 1980. Hullander /Colligan moved to accept the letter of resignation from Nancy Engler, with regrets. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Hullander stated the union for. some City employees should be encouraged to act on negotiations. He suggested a letter be sent from the City Council to the unions asking them to start negotiation procedures. He also requested that a legal opinion be obtained as to whether or not the City Council could hold a closed meeting for the purposes of discussing labor negotiations. Cncl. Reinke reported on the Public Utilities Commission meeting where the different water projects were discussed. He stated also discussed was the Kmart Project and the financing of the watermain. He stated SPUC would like to have a joint meeting with the City Council. City Council decided to hold this joint meeting at 5:00 PM on June 10th. Mayor Harbeck questioned ,the progress of the goals from the Council - members. He stated he would like to have these goals by the June 17th City Council meeting. Mayor Harbeck stated he has been in contact with Scott County to speed up the water testing on the PCI sites in consideration for the businesses located in that area. City Admn. stated he had already written a letter regarding this and was hoping for some immediate action. Mayor Harbeck recognized anyone in the audience wishing to speak on any item which was not on the agenda. Clete Link questioned why. the City had cut off the Siedel gravel supply. Mayor Harbeck reported that permits for this gravel pit are being looked into by the City. Mr. Link stated this gravel is badly needed for construction purposes. Cncl. Leroux arrived at 8:55 PM and took his seat. Hullander /Colligan moved to open the public hearing on the improvement of Gorman Street and Eagle Creek Blvd from 4th Avenue to the Easterly line of Section 6- 115 -22 by watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and roadway construction (80 -4). Motion carried unanimously. Bill Price, Suburban Engineering, made the presentation for the Gorman Street /Eagle Creek Blvd. projects. He stated that part of this project had been petitioned for. Mayor Harbeck asked for questions from the audience. • Official Proceedings of the June 3, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Clete Link asked about the petition and stated he did not need another assessment against his property nor did he want any of the projects being proposed. He stated his opposition to these projects at this time. Burt Lindahl, owner of Shakopee East Apartments, requested that Gorman Street be closed because he could see no need for this road. He also stated that he has once been assessed for a lateral and did not want to be assessed again. He further stated he did not need any part of the project because he does not feel benefited. He stated he will oppose this entire project. Gene Hauer stated he could see no reason for paying this large of assessments for a parcel having no development plans. Orlis Schmitt questioned how much he would have to pay for these projects. Keith Carlson, Brooks Superette, questioned the amount of his assessments. Mr. Price stated his portion would be approximately $6,670 for watermain only. Mr. Carlson then stated they are already hooked up to City water and are satisfied with what they have. Dean Walden.,stated that the area they are developing in is in need of these facilities and would like to see this project constructed. Clete Link stated that property which has no need for these services should not be assessed for property owned by others who would benefit Mayor Harbeck questioned the adequacy of the fire flow for the Shakopee East Apartments. Mr. Lindahl stated he felt it was enough to control a large fire and that his building has met all Fire Codes. Discussion was then held on fire flow protection. Mrs. Burt Lindahl stated that she could see no reason why the subject of fire flow is even being brought up when the building has been sufficiently supplied for the last ten years. She stated that if they are assessed for these projects, they in return would have to raise the rent and did not like to do that to'her tenants. Lengthy discussion was then held on whether or not to order this project and if so, how much of the project and for which areas. Hullander /Colligan moved to close the public hearing. Further aiscussion was held. Hullander /Colligan moved to rescind their motion to close the public hearing. Reinke /Leroux moved to continue the public hearing in order to allow time to answer some of the questions and concerns which had been raised at this public hearing held, and that upon continuation of the public hearing all involved property owners be notified. Discussion again held. Dean Walden question the splitting of the projects into two and doing just the East side of County Road 17, which would affect his area. Discussion was held on this suggestion. Cncl. Reinke asked Mr. Walden if he would be willing to assume all the assessments along County Road 16. Mr. Walden replied he would assume the:portion which would be benefited by him but felt it unfair to assume the total assessments for all parcels. Upon question from the chair shall the motion to continue the public hearing now pass? Motion carried unanimously. Harbeck /Leroux moved to reconsider and amend the motion to continue the public hearing for June 17th at 8:00 FM. Motion carried unanimously. • Official Proceedings of the June 3, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Harbeck /Leroux moved to continue the public hearing as amended. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to open the public hearing on Improvement of 3rd Avenue from Webster to Harrison by watermain (80 =5). Motion carried unanimously. Bill Price of Suburban Engineering made the.presentation for the 3rd Avenue Watermain project. Mayor Harbeck asked for questions from the audience. Bob Friendshuh questioned the section of 3rd Avenue which would have to be dynamited. He also questioned who would be benefited by the loop and would some who would not be paying for these assessments be benefited. Renee Friendshuh stated that the only reason for this project was because their new duplexes needed the extra fire flow and she was under the assumption that all benefited property owners would be assessed and not just the front footage. Clete Link questioned the assessments on property already containing sewer and water. Dave Wiggin stated that property owners should not be reassessed once they have been assessed for facilities. Mrs. Plekkenpol questioned who would be assessed for this project. She also questioned what her assessments would be. City Eng. answered her questions. Leroux /Hullander moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan offered Resolution No. 1627, A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And Preparation Of Plans And Specifications - Third Avenue Trunk Watermain 80 -5, and moved for its adoption. City Admin. read the resolution. City Eng. noted an amendment to the Resolution pertaining to Block B. Leroux /Hullander moved to amend Resolution No. 1627 to delete "West side of Lot 8, Block 4, Koeper's" and insert "East side of Lot 2, Block One, Wiggins 1st." Motion carried unanimously. Roll Call on Resolution No. 1627, as amended: Ayes - Harbeck, Reinke, Leroux, Colligan Hullander Noes - Lebens Motion carried Hullander /Reinke moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to the Pullman Club, lac., 124 West 1st Ave. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Hullander moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to Wittles, Inc., 1561 East 1st Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Reinke moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to Clair's Bar, Inc., 124 So. Holmes. Motion carried unanimously. Lebens /Hullander moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to the Family Dining, Inc., Route 1. Motion carried unanimously. t . Official Proceedings of the June 3, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page - Colligan /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License Riverside Liquors, Inc., 507 East 1st Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Reinke /Colligan moved to table applications for Club On Sale Liquor License for The American Legion Post No. 2, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post No. 4046 and Shakopee Council 1685 Home Association, Inc., until their paper work has been completed. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant a license to "Only Allow Consumption and Display of Intoxicating Liquor" to John and Margaret Abeln, 220 West 2nd Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Reinke moved to approve the application and grant a license to "Only Allow Consumption and Display of Intoxicating Liquor" to Jim & Lucy's, Inc., 201 West 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to open the public hearing on the Community Development Program (Bonus Funds). Motion carried unanimously. HRA Director stated that $1,300,000 is to be awarded in September or October of this year for a Community Development Block Grant and she would like to have Shakopee make application for this Grant. She also stated she has spoken with area developers and has found seven lots which could be utilized for this purpose. These are newly - platted lots which will have or already do have services. Discussion was held. The City Council was in favor of this grant application and agreed with the seven possible chosen lots. Mayor Harbeck asked for questions from the audience. There were none. Leroux /Lebens moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Lebens offered Resolution No. 1632, A Resolution Authorizing Submission Of An Application For 1980 Community Development Block Grant Bonus Funds, and moved for its adoption: City Admin. read the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan offered Resolution No. 1633, A Resolution Authorizing The City To Execute An Option Agreement For Acquisition Of Lots Under The 1980 Community Development Block Grant Bonus Funds, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. City Planner presented the Preliminary Plat of East Shakopee 2nd Addition, and gave the recommendation of approval with conditions which had been made by the Planning Commission. Clete Link, Developer, stated his opposition to some of the conditions set forth by the Planning Commission, and City staff. Hullander /Leroux moved to approve the Preliminary Plat of East Shakopee 2nd Addition subject to the following conditions: 1) Approval of drainage plan by City Eng.; 2) Provision of Developer's Security Agreement; 3) Provision of Park Dedication in cash; 4) Removal of garage on Lot 10 prior to issuance of Building Permit to Lot 1, Block 2; 5) Provision of sidewalk or postponed construction agreement for sidewalk along 4th Avenue; 6) Approval of final utility plan by the Utilities Manager. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan offered Resolution No. 1626,.A Resolution Approving The Final Plat of Weinandt Acres 1st Addition, and moved for its adoption. City Admin. read the resolution. Discussion was then held at length on the requirements of the final plat approval. Particular discussion took place on the condition for a 50 foot right -of -way to be provided along County Road 17. Mr. Weinandt, Developer, also voiced his concern with the condition that he execute a drainage easement for property to the North of the plat. • Official Proceedings of the June 3, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -5-' Harbeck /Reinke moved to amend Resolution No. 1626 to modify Condition No. 8 (A 50 foot right -of -way be provided along County Road 17) to read "A 33 foot right -of -way be provided along County Road 17). Roll Call: Ayes - Hullander, Reinke, Harbeck Noes - Lebens, Leroux, Colligan Motion failed. Further discussion was held on the condition of the 33 foot- right -of- way vs. the 50 foot right -of -way. City Admin. stated that 50 feet is now what is being required along County Road 17 to provide for this right -of -way when the County would expand the road. Cncl. Leroux called for the question. Roll Call on Resolution No. 16261 Ayes - Colligan Leroux Noes - Lebens, Reinke, Harbeck, Hulander Motion failed Reinke /Hullander moved to reconsider Resolution No. 1626, A Resolution Approving The Final Plat of Weinandt Acres 1st Addition. Motion carried unanimously. Reinke moved to table Resolution No. 1626 until answers could be received on some of the conditions set forth in the resolution. Motion died for lack of second. Harbeck /Hullander moved to amend Resolution No. 1626 to delete the word "easement" in Condition No. 5 and insert "agreement" and also to insert "Developers secure" rather than "Developers executes" in the same Condition. Motion carried unanimously. Further discussion held on this Condition, as well as the other conditions as stated. Cncl. Leroux ealled for the question. Roll Call on Resolution No. 1626, as amended& Ayes - Colligan, Leroux Harbeck Noes - Lebens, Reinke, • Hullander Motion failed Colligan /Leroux moved for a 5- minute recess at 1105 AM. Motion Carried unanimously. Hullander /Reinke moved to reconvene at 1110 AM. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to reconsider Resolution No. 1626, A Resolution Approving The Final Plat of Weinandt Acres 1st Addition. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to amend Resolution No. 1626, by deleting the Condition No. 8 "A 50 foot right -of -way be provided along County Road 17 ". Roll Call: Ayes - Reinke, Harbeck, Colligan, Leroux, Hullander Noes - Lebens Motion carried Leroux /Colligan moved the question on Resolution No. 1626, as now amended. Roll Call: Ayes - Leroux;'Harbeck, Reinke, Hullander, Colligan Noes - Lebens Motion carried Leroux /Colligan moved to dispense with the secret ballot for further nominations for appointments to the Industrial Commercial Commission and unanimously re- appoint Jim and Roger Peterson to the Industrial Commercial Commission. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Harbeck submitted a list of applicants for the Cable Television Committee. aatnial [alSM1f:l..MR�..w.a+.m..f • Official Proceedings of the June 3, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Mayor Harbeck nominated the following people to the Cable Television Committee: Ralph Gene Foudray, Eileen Christensen, Lee Davis, Lil Abeln, and Barry Kirchmeier. These nominations to be voted on at the meeting of June 10th. Mayor Harbeck then nominated Ralph "Gene" Foudray to serve as Chairman of the Cable Television Ad Hoc Committee until such time as the Committee could appoint its own chairman. Cncl. Colligan nominated Randy Gorman to serve on the Cable Television Ad Hoc Committee. Mayor Harbeck stated he had received no applicants to serve on the Ad Hoc Transportation and Energy Committee. He stated this committee* will need between seven and ten members. Reinke /Hullander offered Ordinance No. 43, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter Four Entitled "Construction Licensing, Permits And Regulations" By Adding A New Section To Be Known As Section 4.19 Electrical Permits And Inspections, and moved for its adoption. City Admin. summarized the ordinance. Discussion was held. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Hullander/Reinke offered Resolution No. 1629, A Resolution Accepting Bid on 80 -2 Eastview 1st Addition, and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Leroux /Hullander moved to appoint Douglas S. Reeder as the City of Shakopee's representative to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) - Bridge Corridor Study. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan offered Resolution No. 1625, A Resolution of Commendation to the American Legion Post No. 2, and moved for its adoption. City Admin. read the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to adjourn to 5:00 PM on June 10th, 1980, Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 1:40 AM. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator Y OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Adj. Reg. Session Shakopee, Minnesota June 10, 1980 Mayor Harbeck called the meeting to order at 5:00 PM with Cncl. Lebens, Leroux, Colligan, Hullander present. Late: Cncl. Reinke. Also present: City Administrator, Douglas S. Reeder; City Engineer,- H. R. Spurrier and City Attorney, Julius A. Coller, II. A joint meeting with the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission was held. Present from the Commission were Russ Nolting, Wally Bishop and Lou VanHout. Discussion was held on the financing of the watermain on County Road 83 and County Road 16 which is part of the Kmart site. Specific discussion was held on whether or not this project could be included in the tax increment. City Council stated that a legal opinion would be needed before anything could be decided on the tax increment financing for this project. Ken Adolf of Schoell and Madsen was present and stated that approximately 1200 feet of pipe would have to be 16 inches wide instead of the proposed 12 inches. This would mean an increase in cost. Ken Adolf made a presentation on the trunk water policy. Specific discussion took place on water production and storage facilities funding. Mr. Adolf suggested that these two items could perhaps be financed through connection charges. It was recommended by SPUC that separate funds be established for separate enpenditures. The City Council concurred and further suggested that these funds remain separate. City Admin. suggested three separate fund accounts: 1) Water Revenue Fund for improvement and replacing old systems; 2) Connection Charge Fund for the building of wells and tanks; 3) Trunk Charge Fund for oversizing costs. He also suggested that when a fund is exhausted, bonding would then have to be considered. Discussion held. City Council voiced their agreement to the preliminary trunk water policy as set up by SPUC and requested SPUC to complete this work on the policy. Discussion was then held on the SPUC storage of their poles, debris, hydrants,' etc.. SPUC requested some type of commitment from the City Council that would allow them permanent storage. The City Council stated their general agreement that the use of City property could continue for the storing of poles provided this would be done with good housekeeping and that all ordinances be met on storage. Staff of SPUC and the City were requested to meet and recommend back to both bodies on a storage plan for the SPUC poles. Mayor.Harbeck asked that coordination of water improvement projects be placed as a priority with SPUC: SPUC Chrmn. Bishop said that it would be. Hullander /Colligan moved to adjourn to 7:00 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 6:15 PM. Lebens /Colligan moved to reconvene at 7:10 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan offered Resolution No. 1628, A REsolution Accepting Bid on 80 -3 Holmes Street Reconstruction, and moved for its adoption. City Admin. read the resolution. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Cncl. Reinke arrived at 7:15 PM and took his seat. Hullander /Colligan moved to offer Resolution No. 1638, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1600, Enlarging the Ad Ho'c Cable Communications Committee, and moved for .its adoption. Motion carried with Cncl. Reinke abstaining due to arriving late on the discussion. • Official Proceedings of the June 10, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -2 Hullander /Leroux moved to cast a unanimous ballot for the following people to serve on the Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee: Barry Kirchmeier Lil Abeln, Gene Foudray, Randy Gorman, Lee Davis and Eileen Christensen. Motion carried unanimously. City Admin. stated that St. Francis Hospital is asking for an opinion from the City Council as to whether Industrial Revenue Bonds might be considered for the expansion of their facilities. Discussion held. Cncl. Hullander stated that the only way he would be in support of the Industrial Revenue Bonds for the expansion of the hospital facilities would be if this would resolve their parking situation. Cncl. Leroux stated his disagreement in that the parking situation at St. Francis Hospital should be kept entirely separate from the expansion of the facilities in the hospital. Further discussion held. Mayor Harbeck then asked for a consensus from the City Council as to their support of the Industrial Revenue Bonds for the expansion of the St. Francis Hospital's facilities. It was stated that the Industrial Revenue Bond application would be in the approximate amount of $9 million. Roll call on the intent to support IR Bonds for St. Francis: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Colligan /Reinke moved to adjourn no later than 11 :00 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution stating the Council policy on not charging rent for the Senior Citizens to use the Elderly Highrise for their meetings, as long as the City is not paying rent (the first 15 years) and then this situation to be re- evaluated at the time when rent must be paid by the City. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to authorize the employment of Nathan Wittenberg as a summer intern in the City Administrator's office at the rate of $750 for the summer for his services. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Discussion was held on the selection of three consultants to solicit proposals for the Infiltration /Inflow Analysis Program. Harbeck /Lebens moved that Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. be included in the request for a proposal for work on the Infiltration/ Inflow Analysis Project. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to solicit proposals from Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc., McCombs - Knutson Associates, Inc., and Reenke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., as well as Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Assoc. Inc., for the Infiltration /Inflow Analysis Program. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Hullander offered Resolution No. 1630, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1481 Adopting The Assessment For The 1978 -1 Public Improvement Program, and moved for its adoption. City Admin. read the resolution. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Hullander /Lebens moved to approve the application and grant a temporary On Sale 3.2 Beer License to the Shakopee Jaycees at Tahpah Park June 14th and 15th, 1980. Motion carried unanimously. City Admin. stated that two quotes had been received for the re- roofing of City Hall and gave the recommendation of the Building Inspectorl'for Nelson Roofing as low bidder. Official Proceedings of the June 10 1980 Shakopee City Council Page - J - Hullander /Lebens moved to accept the low bid from Neilson Roofing at a cost of $2,"140.00, for the re roofing of City Hall. Roll Call: Ayes - Reinke, Harbeck, Lebens, Colligan, Hullander Noes - none Abstain - Leroux (conflict of interest) Motion carried Hullander /Colligan moved to authorize the transfer of $27,067. 75 from the Sewer Fund to the 1979 -A Improvement Fund. Roll Call: Ayes - Lebens, Colligan, Hullander, Reinke, Harbeck Noes - none Absent for vote: Leroux Motion carried Lebens /Hullander moved to authorize the purchase of coffee for the various City meetings from the City Council budget and that $150 be budgeted annually for this expense. Roll Call: Ayes - Hullander, Harbeck, Colligan, Reinke, Lebens Noes - none Absent for vote: Leroux Motion carried Reinke /Lebens moved to authorize the payment of the special assessments for Lots 1 and 2, Block 5 of Timber Trails from the Timber Trails Escrow Account. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Hullander /Colligan offered Resolution No. 1634, A Resolution Authorizing Condemnation Proceedings For The VIP Interceptor Sanitary Sewer, and moved fbr its adoption. City Admin. read the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Harbeck /Reinke moved that staff draw up a resolution stating that further easement acquisition for public improvement projects constructed in accordance with State Statute 429 on private land be acquired by condemnation. Motion carried unanimously. • Leroux /Colligan moved that the Acting.Administrator for June 11, 12 and 13th, 1980 be James.Karkanen during the absence of the City Administrator. Motion carried unanimously. Reinke /Hullander moved to convene as the Board of Review. Motion carried unanimously. Present for the Board of Review was the entire City Council, City Admin., City Assessor, Assessing Secretary and City Attorney. City Assessor explained the reasons for the re- evaluation on market values. He stated this was done for equalization and uniformity. He then explained the formula used. He also explained the loss of the limited market value. He stated the reason for the Board of Review was for citizens to be given the opportunity to give their concerns on their market evaluation to the Board of Review. The Board of Reveiw was then open for public comment. Melvin I.Faust questioned the market value of his home which was set at $82,335 for an old home with not all rooms being completely finished. He stated this is zoned Agriculture based on 22 acres. City Assessor stated the market value is not just on the home but on the total land. This is under "green acres" law. This home is considered a "fair market home ". He then explained how the market value on Mr. Faust's home'had been derived. The.Board of Review suggested that the City Assessor and Mr. Faust get together and re- evaluate the market value. Official Proceedings of the June 10, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page - Marge Bischoff questioned the number of acres of cropland, etc. that the City Assessor had listed for their property. She stated that this list includes more cropland than actual due to the widening of County Road 42. City Assessor stated that he would get together with Mrs. Bischoff to determine a more accurate cropland acreage. Joe Topic stated his taxes had gone up 50% last year and this year another $31,000. City Assessor stated that Mr. Topic had also voiced his disagreement with the replacement cost which was set up for this parcel, and that Mr. Topic had stated there was no sales upon which to base this replace - : ment cost evaluation. The City Assessor then stated he had considered these questions and asked for additional time to go through Mr. Topic's �. valuation to recheck for any justifiable re- evaluation. Roger Piper stated his limited valuation had tripled since 1979. He stated his property is being valued at $1600 /acre for ten acres. City Assessor stated this area is all being treated as residential not farm acreage. Mayor Harbek then questioned if any of these acres were unbuildable and if so perhaps this should be re- evaluated. He requested that Mr. Piper and the City Assessor re -check this piece of property. Clete Link had questions on two of his unplatted parcels located on County Road 17. He stated his taxes payable in 1979 had been $5,197 and taxes payable in 1980 were $11,129 on just one parcel. The Board of Review informed Mr. Link that these taxes were handled at the 1979 Board of Review and tonight's meeting was for taxes payable in 1981. Mr. Link then questioned the market valuation on these two parcels. City Assessor answered his questions and stated that for parcels along County Road 17 having some identical criteria as Mr. Link's, would have to be looked at further in view of new information just received on the valuation process. City Assessor will recheck market valuation again with Clete Link. Clete Link then questioned his parcel on West Third Avenue which consists of four acres. He stated the City Assessor's value is more than what was paid for this piece of property. City Assessor stated he would review this parcel along with the other parcel of Mr. Link's. Elmer Halvorson stated his market valuation went up 41% for a "good" graded home. •He stated the age of the building is more than 50 years old and is in need of much repair work. He stated his disagreement with the classification of "good" as established by the City Assessor. City Assessor stated he had evaluated this before and after improvements had been made on the home and had made adjustments on depreciation but would be willing to relook at this home once again and perhaps regrade it to "fair" home. This would then reduce the value by $2.00 /square foot which would bring the property value down $2000 to $3000. Victor Farley stated that the City Assessor is raising the valuation on one end and that Mr. Sames warehouse is decreasing his market value on the other end. The Board of Review asked the status of the warehouse. • Leroy Houser,.City Building Inspector, stated that two years ago Mr. Sames warehouse did not comply with Fire Codes but that Mr. Sames is now in compliance with all Fire codes so the warehouse was allowed as far as the Fire codes were concerned. Official Proceedings of the June 10, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -5- City Admin. stated that he is not sure if the use is a "grandfathered- in" use from 20 years or so ago when this use originated. City Attorney stated that there is nothing which can legally be done to get this warehouse out of the residential zone since it originated at the time when it did. City Assessor stated that the 1980 evaluation is $55,405 but the property has not been viewed since 1975. Mr. Farley stated that as long as the warehouse is still in his area, this valuation is too high. City Assessor requested to recheck out this area. Richard Ewert stated he has rental property and disagrees with the market value. He has specific disagreement with the replacement value. City Assessor stated that the rental unit under question is a duplex and is comparable with other duplexes in the area. He stated he would be willing to go through this again and look for further comparable valued duplexes. Dick Wiggin questioned his six apartment buildings which he feels are valued too high and not at all comparable with other similar apartment dwellings. City Assessor stated the valuation for apartment buildings is based on cost. He stated its valuation is done on the size of the units. He further stated he would like to recheck into these six apartment buildings valuations vs. other apartment valuations. Sam Gelt owner of North Star Auto Auction, stated that he paid 10% more in taxes than last year and his valuation is 50% more than'last year. He stated he could not understand the increase in market valuation when all indications were that he was located in a rather "bad ":area due to the location of hazardous wastes being adjacent to the property and various other detrimental factors. He stated that for these reasons he is disputing the market valuation plus does not get dollar values for the City services he receives. City Assessor stated he would get together with Mr. Geld and go over these problems in detail and look for a justifiable valuation reduction. David Dennison stated his market valuation went up $9,000. He stated he has valued homes comparable with his and stated these have been lower. City Assessor stated he would recheck the property Mr. Dennison is comparing his valuation with. Eugene Patch stated he built an industrial warehouse facility in 19 78. His first taxable year was 1979 and the market value at that time was $50,000 more than he paid for the building. He also stated that he had planned to build additional buildings similar and these proposals had come in much lower than the fair market value now placed on his property. He stated he has no services from the City of Shakopee to make the valuation this high. Mayor Harbeck asked for clarification of the building or the property as a whole. Mr. Patch stated he has concern with the property as a whole and especially the replacement cost value. He stated he has made comparable comparisons and feels his market value is too high. He felt the City Assessor's value was $110,000 too high. • Official Proceedings of the June 10, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -6- City Assessor stated he has driven out to the site and noticed that the valuation of the land was in error and that the improved acre valuation should be decreased. He also stated he would make contact with contractors who build this type of industrial building to see if the valuation placed on this building is justified. The Board of Review stated that the City Assessor is putting a market valuation on the property and not direct costs of building or replacement costs. Michael Mahoney questioned his parcels which now consist of a lot and a half and questioned the $9230 valuation. He stated this valuation is too high for an unbuildable parcel having no City sewer or water. City Assessor stated that the value of the entire area had been increased. The Board of Review explained the value of a total lot and not a half lot, which is now the case since Mr. Mahoney owns a lot and a half. The City Assessor stated that all downtown area is valued at $2.50/ square foot. Cncl. Hullander voiced his concern that the market valuation for the downtown area is the same on the north side of Highway 101 as it is on the south side of the Highway. Mayor Harbeck asked that the City Assessor recheck into the.market valuation for the north and south side of the business district on Highway Larry Link stated he has no water and sewer in his Cabinet shop which should lower the market valuation. He also questioned the market valuation on his basement home which he stated he had just sold to break even and yet the market valuation was higher than the sale price. City Assessor explained how the market valuation had been derived at for the piece of property having no sewer or-water. He also stated that as far as the basement home is concerned, he would go further and contact other builders to see what the cost figure would be Cncl. Hullander suggested that the City Assessor get together with Larry Link to see what the market valuation of the basement home would be.— Clete Link questioned the market valuation of his property on which he will be placing an office building. He stated that the market valuation on the land had doubled since his purchase of it. This parcel is the one located on First Avenue which was used as residential before his purchase. City Assessor stated that the valuation is determined on the "use" of the property. Discussion was held. City Assessor then stated this parcel would be relooked at also. City Assessor reported on letters received which appealed their market valuation. He stated letters had been received from Happy Chef and Pizza Hut. He also stated he had received a letter from Peavey Company appealing the formula used for their determination of their market value and they are also protesting the loss of their limited market value. City Assessor stated that Furrie's 2nd Addition will also be under review of their market valuation. He also stated that the Donald Booth property will be reviewed again as well as all the other parcels in this same area. City Assessor stated that Harry Weinandt has a 3.45 acre piece of property needing review which has been presented as anbuildable lot but which he claims is not buildable. City Assessor stated the Kenneth Marschall property was reviewed again and was found to be incorrect on the measurements. The result will be a decrease in valuation. Official Proceedings of the June 10, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -7- City Assessor stated that he had received a letter from Robert Schills objecting to the classification of Commercial /Indeavor for his piece of property but zoned Residential. City Assessor also reported on a letter received from the Hustad Corporation stating their complaint of the lots having sever limitations for their market value. City Assessor then stated that after viewing the lots, he was in agreement and is recommending that the valuation be decreased. City Assessor stated he had also received a letter from Certainteed Products which stated the the market valuation is too high and would like to meet with the City Assessor. City Assessor stated he also received a letter from Shakopee Housing stating their concerns on the classification of their property. He reported that this classification in question comes from the •financing company and not from him. City Assessor also received•a letter from Lawrence Stemmer stating his appeal of the market valuation placed on his property. They are protesting on the basis of the location. City Assessor will check into this claim. City Assessor stated he also received a letter from Pioneer Seed regarding their market valuation. This piece of property will also be rechecked into further by the City Assessor. Leroux /Lebens moved to continue the Board of Review to 8:30 PM on June 17, 1980. Motion carried unanimously. Reinke /Lebens moved to adjourn to 7 :30 PM on June 17, 1980. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10 :45 PM. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator • • It OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Adj. Reg. Session Shakopee, Minnesota June 17, 1980 Mayor Harbeck called the meeting to order with Cncl. Lebens, Colligan, Leroux, and Hullander present. Absent: Cncl. Reinke. Also presents City Admin., Douglas S. Reeder; City Eng., H. R. Spurrier; City Assessor, Larry Martin; Finance Director, Gregg Voxland and Assistant City Attorney, Phil Kanning. Leroux /Colligan moved to recess for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Harbeck moved to reconvene at 8:12 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Harbeck read the commendation tothe Shakopee Fire Department for their performance in a recent fire within Shakopee and presented a plaque to Fire Chief, Harold Ring and Assistant Fire Chief, Joe Ries. Hullander /Leroux moved to continue the public hearing on the Improvement of Gorman Street and Eagle Creek Blvd. from 4th Avenue to the Easterly line of Section 5- 115 -22 by watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and roadway construction, Project 80 -4. Motion carried unanimously. City Admin. presented the recommendations from City staff regarding the project. Mayor Harbeck then opened up the public hearing for comments from the audience. Carl Lindstrand, property owner on East side of Eagle Creek Blvd., stated he had not been notified of the public hearing before today and would like to delay any decision on the project until he could consult with his partner. He stated he is not necessarily opposed to the project but would just like a chance to speak with the Mayor and City Admin. also. Mayor Harbeck asked for further comments from the audience on the splitting of the project into two projects; one being Gorman Street and the other being East of County Road 17. Burt Lindahl, Shakopee East Apartments owner, stated his oppostion to the Gorman section being included in the project. Mayor Harbeck cautioned any future developers in this area to be sure of their decision on the Gorman Street Project because the City might not be in a position to do this project in future years. Clete Link stated that as a developer he did not see the need for additional sewer.and water services in this (Gorman Street) area. He further stated that he had been under the understanding 12 years ago that his 22 acres would have ample sewer and water when he would develop the area. He also stated that if these services went into the area, he would have been assessed three times on this piece of property. Gene Hauer questioned the area proposed for storm sewer. He then .stated that he has two parcels; one of which would be assessed twice as much as the other but yet adjacent to each other. Discussion was held. Leroux /Hullander moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux offered Resolution No. 1636, A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And The Preparation Of Plans - 80 -4 Sanitary Sewer And Water - main In Eagle Creek Blvd., and moved for its adoption. City Admin. read the resolution. Further discussion was held. Leroux / Coolligan moved to table Resolution No. 1636, to July lst, to allow Lindstrand the needed time, as he had requested.Motion carried unanimously Colligan /Harbeck moved that adjournment be no later than 11:30 PM. Motion carried with Cncl. Leroux voting "no ". Official Proceedings of the June 17, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Hullander /Colligan moved to convene as the Board of Review. Motion carried unanimously. City Assessor presented ''his findings on the cases presented at the Board of Review on June 10, 1980. Leroux /Hullander moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Melvin Faust Parcel No. 27 -918- 5234 - 016 -00 in that there be no change in valuation. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Kermit Bischoff Parcel No. 27- 920 - 5200 - 007 -00 in that the grading be changed and a new value of $189,500 be placed on the property for the 26 acres which are tillable (previous value placed, S191,900.) Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held on the request made-by Sam Gelt to reduce the property value'on the -North Star Auto Auction Parcel No. 27- 901 - 5233 - 007 -00 in view of this parcel being located in the Pollution Control site Harbeck /Hullander moved that the same valuation as last year be applied this year to the property owned by Peterson Seed, Northstar Auto Auction, Ziegler, and General Tractor in view of possible water contamination to parcels in this area. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Hullander moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Roger Pieper Parcel No. 27- 919 -5210- 015 -04 in that this parcel be placed at a value of $21,800 which has been changed from its previous value of $25,000. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Larry Link Parcel No. 27- 024 - 0000 - 054 -00 in that the valuation be lowered from $5,930 to $4,200. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Elmer Halverson Parcel No. 27 913 - 5230- 062 -00 in that the value be place at $61,190 and not $67,480. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Lebens moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Victor Farley Parcel No. 27 -001- 0000 - 677 -00 in that the adjusted value be placed at $55,065 from $55,405. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Lebens moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Richard Ewert Parcel No. 27 -027- 0000 - 014 -00 in that the property should be adjusted for finished basement, general condition and extra plumbing fixtures and the property value be changed from $86,635 to $80,200. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Dave Denison, Lynn Lebens Parcel No. 27- 001 - 0000 - 068 -00, in that the property value be placed from $40,015 to $38,720. Motion carried unanimously. City Assessor reported that he had been unsuccessful in contacting Mike Mahoney in his request for a lower valuation but would like to hold any decision or recommendation on this parcel until he had been able to make contact with Mr. Mahoney. Colligan /Leroux moved to hold the decision on the Mike Mahoney parcel until the City Assessor could make contact. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Lebens moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Robert Shaw Parcel No. 27 -004- 0000 - 131 -(and 132) -00, in that the change in value be from $123,855 to $102,500 for the 1980 assessment year. Motion carried unanimously: Official Proceedings of the June 17, 1980 • Shakopee City Council Page -3- Hullander /Leroux moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Kenneth Marshall Parcel No. 27- 004 - 0000 - 066 -01, in that a corrected valuation of $44,195 be placed on the property from its previous valuation of $50,710. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Hustad Properties_Parcel Nos. 27 -050- 0000 -002, 003, 004 and 006 -00 and 27 -056- 0000- 001,(04 and 004 -00 and 27- 060 - 0000 -001 and 002 -00, in that the value be placed at $10,000 per lot with the exception of Lot 4, Block 1, Eaglewood 1st Addition which is to remain at $9,000. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Lebens moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor in that the Shakopee Housing Company Parcel No. 27- 906 -5224- 018 -00, does not meet the criteria set forth for the 4 -24 classification and that their request for reclassification be denied. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held on the Thomas Maloney Parcel No. 27- 008 - 0000 - 028 -00. City Assessor stated he had discussed the property with Mr. Maloney and found that it had received limited maintenance and therefore adjusted the valuation. Hullander /Colligan moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Thomas Maloney Parcel No. 27- 008 - 0000 - 028 -00, in that the value be changed from $74,660 to $65,870. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Schilz Parcel No. 27 -004- 0000 - 111 -00, in that the classification should not be changed until the actual use of the property changes. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Lebens moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Wayne Stockman Parcel No. 27- 022- 0000 - 020 -00, in that no change in valuation be made on this parcel and that the parcel remain at its Estimated Market Value of $195,945. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Lebens moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Certain -Teed Parcel No. 27- 904 - 5240 - 006 -00, in that the request to lower the valuation be denied. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux / Hullander moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Peavey Parcel No. 27- 904 -5240- 007 -00, in their protest of the valuation method used be denied. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Leroux moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Warren Stemmer Parcel No. 27- 013- 0000 - 011 -00, in that the valuation be changed from $74,910 to $71,380. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Lebens moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Assessor on the Harris Weinandt Parcel No. 27- 929 - 5240 - 016 -01, in that the 3.45 acre piece be considered as part of Mr. Weinandt's farm and that the 1.16 acres of the site used for County Road 17 which consists of approximately 1 acre wet and the entire acre being fenced for pasture, the valuation be changed from $12,500 to $645 for 1.29 acres of pasture. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Harbeck asked for further comments from the audience for the Board of Review. Walt Muehlenhardt asked if consideration had been given to his parcel. City Assessor replied he would recheck into this parcel for Mr. Muehlenhardt. Discussion was then held on the valuation which had been applied to Jackson Township in Scott County. Lebens /Leroux moved that the valuation be reduced by one grade within the City of Shakopee. Official Proceedings of the June 17, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Leroux /Lebens moved to amend the motion to include that the City Assessor draw up a residential grade to determine the percentage and then reduce the commercial value by the same percentage. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried • Leroux /Hullander moved to amend the motion as it now stands to reduce all property values by the percentage incurred in the grade reduction of residential property. Roll Call: Ayes - Hullander, Leroux, Harbeck, Colligan Noes - Lebens Motion carried Roll Call on the main motion as amended: Ayes - Harbeck, Hullander, Leroux Colligan Noes - Lebens Motion carried Hullander /Leroux moved to continue the Board of Review to June 24, 1980, at 8 :00 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved for a 5- minute recess at 9:32 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Leroux moved to reconvene as the City Council at 9 :41 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Colligan stated he had attended the Fire Department meeting of where they had asked to have a joint meeting with the City Council to discuss the Fire Department's Retirement Fund and the equipment they have requested for the fighting of Industrial fires. Discussion was held and a meeting will be set up in the future. Cncl. Hullander reported that the Scott County Criminal Justice Advisory Commission has been working on the jail facilities. Cncl. Hullander questioned the wage negotiations for the Street Dept. City Admin. stated a meeting has been set up with the union representative. Cncl. Hullander questioned the Holmes Street Project as to when it would start. City Eng. stated within two or three weeks the streets should start to be blocked off for construction. ' Cncl. Hullander asked City policy on alleys where trees and bushes over- hang thereby forcing re- routing. Discussion was held. He then asked that these situations be resolved. Cncl. Hullander questioned the contract let with Scott County on the treating of the urban dirt roads. He stated that something should be done on this immediately, so that the roads could still be treated this summer. Cncl. Leroux stated he had received calls regarding the weeds on 10th Avenue. He stated something should be done on this right away either by the individual property owners or by the City. City Admin. to check into this situation. Mayor Harbeck reported on a new law regarding the public hearings on public improvement projects and the appealing process. Mayor Harbeck recognized the League of Women Voters, of which members • were in the audience, and commended them on their work in the City of Shakopee. • Mayor Harbeck then recognized anyone in the audience wishing to speak on any item not on the agenda. There was no response. Official Proceedings of the June 17, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Leroux/Hullander moved to remove the following applications for On and Off Sale 3.2 Beer Licenses from the table: Pullman Club, Dorothy Stocker, Richard E. Cleveland, Juba's, Inc., Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc., Valleyfair, Inc., Je She, Inc., Holiday Station Stores, Inc., Pizza Huts of the Northwest, Inc., Valley Racquetball and Handball, Inc. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Hullander moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale 3.2 Beer License to Pullman Club, Inc., 124 West First Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale 3.2 Beer License to Dorothy Stocker, 537 South Sommerville. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale 3.2 Beer License to Richard E. Cleveland, 828 East First. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale 3.2 Beer License to Juba's, Inc., 1100 Minnesota Valley Mali. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale 3.2 Beer License to Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Hullander moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale 3.2 Beer License to Valleyfair, Inc., One Valleyfair Drive. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Hullander moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale .and Off Sale 3.2 Beer License to Je She, Inc. (Gerald Bair), 823 East 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale 3.2 Beer License to Holiday Station Stores, Inc., 444 East 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale 3.2 Beer License to the Pizza Huts of the Northwest, Inc., 257 Marschall Road. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale 3.2 Beer License to Valley Racquetball and Handball, Inc., 600 County Road 83. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to remove the following applications for On Sale Club Liquor Licenses from the table: VFW Post #4046, 132 East lst Avenue, Shakopee Council 1685 Home Association, East 4th Avenue and American Legion Club Post No. 2, 1256 East First Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale Club Liquor License to the VFW Post #4046, 132 East lst Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale Club Liquor License to the Shakopee Council 1685 Home Association, East 4th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to approve application and grant an On Sale Club Liquor License to American Legion Club Post No. 2, 1256 East First Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale Sunday Liquor License to the American Legion Post No. 2, 1256 East First Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Hullander offered Resolution No. 1635, A Resolution Abating Special Assessment Interest and Penalties on State Owned Property, and moved for its adoption. City Admn. read the resolution. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried t 1. Official Proceedings of the June 17, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Discussion was held on the recommendation from the Police Department that all vehicles parked in a "No Parking" zone, Parked on sidewalks/ crosswalks or parked in fire lanes be towed. Hullander /Leroux moved to table any recommendation to the Police Department on the towing of vehicles in violation until further investigation could be made with the Chief of Police. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to increase the mileage allowance rate for private vehicles on City business from 190 /mile to 28¢ /mile effective June 17, 1980. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Mayor Harbeck asked for the City goals from the Councilmembers. Discussion on these goals to be held at a future City Council meeting. Harbeck /Leroux moved to hire Jane Wostrel as a probationary employee in the Engineering Department at a salary of $4.90 per hour and that she be eligible for an increase after the six month probationary period, and to concur with the recommendation of the City Admn. in that the City not hire a full -time receptionist until September when the current CETA employee will leave. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Leroux /Colligan moved to concur with the recommendation of the City Admin. in that George Johnson be paid $4.00 per hour in the Assessing Department effective June 16, 1980. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Discussion was held at length on the job description review of the Police Administrative Assistant. Questions were raised as to whether a salary increase should be given in mid -year if the job description changed. Hullander /Leroux moved to approvethe application and grant an On Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License to the House of Hoy, Inc., 101 East 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License to R. Hanover, Inc., 911 East 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to Clair's Bar, Inc., 124 South Holmes. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to approve and grant an On Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License to The Shakopee House, 1583 East 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License to Wittles, Inc., 1561 East 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License to the Friendly Folks Club, Inc., 122 East lst. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Leroux moved to approve and grant an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to the Pullman Club, Inc., 124 West lst. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan Leroux moved to table the application and the granting of an On Sale Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License to Garcia's Inn, Inc., 1145 Minnesota Valley Mall. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the June17, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Leroux /Colligan moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale vuine License to Country Kitchen Internat Inc., 1135 First Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Colligan moved to approve the app ication and grant an On Sale 3.2 Beer License to the Country Kitchen Inte national, Inc., 1135 East 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Lebens moved to approve the app ication and grant an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to the Friendly Folks Club, Inc.., 122 East 1st. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux /Lebens moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to House of oy, Inc., 101 East First Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander /Colligan moved to approve the application and grant a temporary On Sale 3.2 Beer License to the Shakopee Jaycees at Tahpah for June 21st and 22nd, 1980. Motion oadried unanimously. Assistant City Attorney Kanning reported on a closed meeting for labor negotiations. He recommended that the C'ty maintain an open meeting for the preliminary to final negotiations bu' stated that during specific negotiations he was of the opinion that ':t could be a closed meeting. Harbeck /Leroux moved to table the approv.1 of the application and the granting of an On Sale 3.2 Beer License .o Michael Pauluk, 409 East 1st Avenue until it could be determined exac ly which type of a 3.2 Beer License he was requesting. Discussion w.s held. Harbeck /Leroux moved to withdraw their motion. Hullander /Lebens moved to approve the application and grant an Off Sale 3.2 Beer License to Michael D. Paulut, 409 East 1st Avenue for 6/18/80 to 6/30/80 and for 7/1/80 to 6/30/81. Motion carried unanimously. Lebens /Colligan offered Resolution No. 1+31, A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing On Improvement 80 -8 T.H. 101 Frontage Road, and moved for its adoption. City Admin. read the resolution. Bill Brezinski, Suburban Engineering, wa. present and presented the report on the Improvement of 80 -8 T.H. 101 Fron age Road. Discussion was held on the presentation of the frontage road and whether or not.Shiely Road was a private road. Roll Call on Resolution No. 1631: Ayes unanimous Noes none Motion carried City Eng. gave the report on the public : mprovement projects. He stated that the Holmes Street Project would get started in two to three weeks; Parkridge Drive Project is almost completed; Macey's 2nd Addition is in progress with parts of the public improv•ments already completed; Eastview 2nd Addition is underway and the water tower located on County Road 83 is nearing completion and on schedule to be in service this fall. City Admin. gave the progress report on he dispute between Mortenson and Barbarruso and Sons on the Kmart con ract. City Council agreed that City staff could continue to. follow -up o this situation providing the City of Shakopee was left out of the dispute. Colligan /Leroux moved to set a public herring to consider the revocation of the liquor license for House of Hoy, Inc. for August 5, 1980, at 10:00 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Finance Director stated that besides the bills being presented, a bill to Erickson Construction for the 4th and Mi!nesota Project in the amount of $85,238.42 should also be included. Discussion was held as to whether this was a bill for the City of Shakopee -or the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Official Proceedings of the June 17, 1980 Shakopee City Council Page -8- , Harbeck /Colligan moved to table the bill from the Erickson Construction Co. until June 24, 1980, allowing time to determine if this was a City of Shakopee or a Housing and Redevelopment Authority bill. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan /Hullander moved to authorize payment of the bills as presented. Roll Calls Ayes - unanimous Noes - none Motion carried Mayor Harbeck read a certificate of commendation to Officers Gerald Poole and John Flynn for their performance in helping the Fire Department in a recent fire in the City of Shakopee. Leroux /Lebens moved to approve the application and grant a Permit To Only Allow Consumption And Display of Intoxicating Liquor to the Shakopee Council 1685 Home Association, East 4th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. City Admin. reported on the arrival of the new Police squad cars. He stated that the presently used squad cars cannot be turned over because they do not have enough miles on them but the Police Department is working on this situation to allow for the new cars to meet their mileage require- ments before their warranty would expire. Colligan /Leroux moved to adjourn to June 24th at 7 :30 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:35 PM. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator • 2 :7 // e;7.0/ REcEivED • it JUN 1 7 1980 BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION CITY OF SHAKOPEE Roger L. Hanson Chairman Richard J. Parish Commissioner Katherine E. Sasseville Commissioner Juanita R. Satterlee Commissioner Lillian Warren - Lazenberry • Commissioner In the Matter of the Northern Docket No. E- 002 /GR -80 -316 States Power Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for Authority to Change its Schedule of Electric Rates NOTICE AND ORDER FOR HEARING i, for Retail Customers within the State of Minnesota IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a contested hearing in the above- entitled matter will be held, commencing with a pre - hearing conference at 9:30 a.m. on June 16, 1980, in the Large Hearing Room, Seventh Floor, American Center Building, 160 East Kellogg Boulevard, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 and continuing on dates to be set by the presiding officer at the pre - hearing conference. 1 This hearing is being ordered by the Minnesota Public Service Commission (the Commission) to investigate the necessity for and reasonableness of certain electric rate increases proposed by Northern States Power Company (NSP or the Company) in NSP's Notice of Rate Change filed with the Commission on May 1, 1980. The Commission is authorized to conduct this hearing by M.S. 5 2166.16. The proposed increase in gross annual revenues will be 577,530,000, or approximately 12.66%. Although NSP will make an interim adjustment of 12.66% to all customer bills, the Company has proposed rate design changes that will result, if accepted by the Commission, in larger increases for residential, municipal, and street lighting classes. Class Recommended Increase Residential 15.1% • Commercial and Industrial 10.4% Other Sales to Public Authorities 24.0% Street and Highway Lighting 18.5% 12.56% In addition, the Company is p y proposing changes in class rate design ` that will mean, if accepted by the Commission, higher percentage increases +M; for smaller residential users than larger residential users. For example, • • r 'xrr� • a residential customer using 100 kilowatt hours (KWH) of electricity per month would pay an annual bill, under NSP's proposed rate design, 102% higher than at present, while a 300 KWH per month customer would pay an annual bill 37% higher, and a 600 KWH per month customer would pay an annual bill only 9.8% higher. A copy of the Company's requested rates is on file in the offices of the Department of Public Service, and is open to public inspection during normal office hours. A copy of the Company's rate filing also is available for public inspection during normal office hours at the Company's offices in Minneapolis, St. Paul, Faribault, Red Wing, St. Cloud, Winona, Fargo and Sioux Falls. The Commission has suspended the rate schedule filed by the Company pending the hearing ordered herein. However, the Company has notified the Commission that it will exercise its statutory right to place increased rates into effect on July 30, 1980, subject to refund if the Commission ultimately orders a lesser increase. The hearings on the petition will be conducted by a Hearing Examiner , appointed by the Chief Hearing Examiner of the State of Minnesota, and will be held in compliance with the applicable laws relating to the Public Service Commission, the Administrative Procedure Act (M.S. S 15.0411 through 15.052) and the rules of the Office of Hearing Examiners (9 Minnesota Code of ' Administrative Rules 2.201 -222) and the rules of practice of the Public Service `e= Commission (4 MCAR 4.500 -521) to the extent that they have not been superceded by the rules of the Office of Hearing Examiners. These rules may be purchased , from the Documents Section of the Department of Administration, 117 University • ;rky. ?"t< Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 296 -2874. These rules provide generally for the procedural rights of the parties including: rights to y' advance notice of witnesses and evidence, right to a pre- hearing conference, rights to present evidence and cross - examine witnesses, and rights to purchase a record or transcript. Parties are entitled to issuance of subpoenas to compel witnesses to attend and produce documents and other evidence. '14 Any person intending to intervene as a formal party to these hearings must submit a Petition for Leave to Intervene to the Hearing Examiner and serve the Petition on all existing parties. The Petition must state how the Petitioner's legal rights, duties, or privileges may be determined or affected a -2- , f , 1 ' by the Commission's decision in the matter and shall set forth the grounds and purposes for which intervention is sought and shall indicate Petitioner's f statutory right to intervene if one exists. All parties have the right to be represented by legal counsel by a person of their .choice, or by themselves if not otherwise prohibited as the unauthorized practice of law. In addition, any person intending to appear at this hearing should file with the Hearing Examiner a Notice of Appearance within twenty days of the date of service of this Order. The Notice of Appearance must advise the a-' Hearing Examiner of the party's interest to appear and shall indicate the title of the case, the name of the agency for whom the hearing is being con - f ducted, the party's current address and telephone number, and the name, office s ' address and telephone number of the party's attorney. Potential intervenors shall attend the pre - hearing conference scheduled above with information which will facilitate the scheduling of hearings permitting all of the parties to present their evidentiary views in a manner and within a time frame that would be as fair and expeditious as possible. Matters which may be discussed include: the reasonable time period 'f" . required to prepare direct testimony for filing on all of the issues including +5 those discussed below; the time period for preparation of direct testimony a, by intervenors; recommended areas for hearings to receive public input re- garding the petition; time required for parties to prepare for depositions and I other discovery; and other matters that will facilitate full and fair hearings k on the petition. If persons have good reason for requesting a delay of any hearing, r the request must be made in writing to the Hearing Examiner at least five days _ " , prior to the hearing. A copy of the request must be served on the Commission q. and all parties. '> Failure to appear at the hearing may result in the allegation of the ( Notice and Order for Hearing being taken as true, or the issues set out being it deemed proved. A possible result is that the rates proposed by NSP may be 1° adopted by the Commission. Following the contested hearing, the Commission may approve all or any part of the rate increase proposed by NSP but may not approve an overall i s increase greater than that proposed by NSP. However, the Commission may adjust i • rates for classes of customers to levels greater than those proposed by NSP II • -3- n • . 6/.6k,... { and make other rate adjustments based upon the testimony of parties other than NSP. If no person contests the proposed rate increase at this hearing, the i rates may be approved as proposed by NSP. i. Any questions concerning informal disposition of this matter or I +} ,t ' discovery of information should be addressed to Rodney A. Wilson, Special Assistant Attorney General, 720 American•Center Building, 150 East Kellogg Boulevard, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 (612) 296 -6030. ' a x. All other questions concerning this hearing should be addressed to v. the Hearing Examiner assigned to this hearing: .. Richard DeLong Minnesota State Office of Hearing Examiners 1745 University Avenue r ` St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 3• ' (612) 296 -8117 The Commission hereby gives notice, in accordance with M.S. 5 15.0421,' A. subd. 4, that it intends to take administrative notice of published Securities 1; ': and Exchange Commission factual data, and of the Company's published annual reports. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that NSP shall facilitate in every reasonable ,xy way the investigations of the Department of Public Service and the Office of `s Consumer Services which should commence forthwith after the issuance of this '.:), Order. All parties shall furnish adequate responses within 10 days to all reasonable information requests by other parties. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Company submit, as part of its a affirmative presentation in support of its rate request, testimony concerning is the following issues: „a a. A sample of the advertisements for each category included in communications expense. b. A description of the demand forecasting model used to F 9 predict test year electric sales in this filing. k r , " c. A description of the long range forecasting techniques used to t plan capacity additions and Company estimates of average and peak demands for the next ten years, with a specific discussion of the effect that conservation . is expected to have on demand. d. An explanation of the procedure for determining the level of the seasonal rate differential for those rate schedules which include such a ':. differential and of the procedure for determining seasonal rating period. -4- EL— . . 1 #i IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that NSP shall keep records of sales and billings under present and proposed interim rates such that any potential refund can be determined by computing what each customer's bill would have been during the refund period had the finally ordered rates been in effect . and subtracting such amount from the amount actually paid by each customer during that period. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order shall be served on NSP, and that NSP shall mail copies of the same to all counties and municipalities F.! in its electric service territory, all parties who filed petitions for leave to intervene (timely or untimely) in its prior electric rate hearings before the Commission (Docket Nos. E- 002/GR -77 -611 and E- 002/GR -76 -934), and to such further persons as the Department Public Service may request. The eviden- • tiary and public hearings shall be held at representative geographic locations in NSP's Minnesota service territory. In addition to individual notification of its customers as ordered by the Commission on May 14, 1980, NSP shall also { • publish notices of both the pre- hearing conference and the evidentiary and public hearings in the form of newspaper display ads at least 10 days prior 4, to the dates of their commencement in a newspaper of general circulation in ' each county seat town in the counties in its electric service territory. The ; rt heading on the display ad, RATE INCREASE NOTICE, must be minimum 30 point bold face type. This Order shall be effective immediately.' If• BY ORDER 0 OMMISSION SO • t •A; Mary L. Harty Executive Secretary f T, •: SERVICE DATE: June 12, 1980 (SEAL) t ' -5- 9�� • ,, stab • 0 iQV e.Rr P U 7e AtotePrma4 P S " ? a,� e y e k:,.� i �Fa► o� :e t•a1o� • tav Lv1, 4• ROBERT L. FLAHERTY, Commander THIRD ! m �°, -- DISTRICT 't° � f 7912 178th Ave. v S o �c' ea% w' it I J , + � i ', • Fo Lake, MN. 55025 "''' N • Home 612- 464 -6821, 24 hrs. NATION Ae ADJUTANT 3rd DISTRICT MINNESOTA JUN 1 6 Martin Lucking "I. : , e 13830 So. Robert Trail Department of Minnesota n Home 612-4 3 N793, 612- 455 -6186 S nrpzi • PAST COMMANDER Harold Berg June 12, 1980 541 Westview Drive, Apt. 205 Hastings, MN. 55033 Home 612 - 437 -8122 VICE COMMANDERS Warren Hein The City of Shakopee Box 108 Cleveland, MN. 56017 Home 507- 931 -5936 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Ritha Lucking 13830 So. Robert Trail Rosemount, MN. 55068 Home 612- 423 -1793, Bus. 612 - 455 -6186 Dear Sirs: Wilbur G. Moline 325 N. 2nd Street Pursuant to the instruction of the Third District Cannon Falls, MN. 55009 Home 507 - 263 -2342 Convention, American Legion, Department of Minnesota, Raymond Schoebauer I enclose a copy of a resolution adopted by that convention. Rt. 2 Box 110 New Prague, MN. 56071 I am sure that this resolution is a sincere expression Home 507 - 758 -4520 • Elvin Wilson of the feelings of the Legionnaires of the Third District. 1585 Birchwood Drive Red Wing, MN. 55066 I too, congratulate, and thank you. I have attended Home 612- 388 -9518, Bus. 612 - 388 -3526 many District Conventions and this one must be numbered MEMBERSHIP DIRECTOR Kenneth Goettl among the best. Rt. 1. Box 78 Montgomery, MN. 56069 Yours in Comradeship, Home 612- 364 -5271 CHAPLAIN I Daniel Ludwig % ) • 4453 Hickory ) Red Wing, MN. 55066 / N 0 1 i Home 612 -388 -5410 FINANCE OFFICER M' "TIN LUCKING IP Harlowe Johnson THIRD DISTRICT ADJUTANT 720 7th St. Farmington, MN. 55024 Home 612 - 463 -7834 enc. JUDGE ADVOCATE Arthur A Black Lot 88 Woodlund Trailer Court Forest Lake, MN. 55025 Home 612- 464 -7421 HISTORIAN Howard J. McKinney 1762 W. Minnehaha St. Paul, MN. 55104 Home 612 - 647 -0489 SERGEANT AT ARMS Ronald Chapman 1612 Selby Avenue St. Paul Park, MN. 55071 Home 612- 459 -4777 RESOLUTION 0II ' WHEREAS, The American Legion, Third District, Deportment of Minnesota, holding its annual convention in Shakopee, Minnesota, May 16, 17 and 10, 1980, for purpose of transacting its business affairs in the best interest of The American Legion and WHEREAS, The facilities for conducting this convention have been outstanding, and WHEREAS, The preparation for this convention has been carried out in detail, end WHEREAS, The hospitality of this community has been overwhelming; now, therefore, • BE IT RESOLVED, BY The American Legion, Third District, Department of Minnesota, assembled at Shakopee. Minnesota, May 16, 17 and 18, 1980, hereby commends the following people who have ciado this possible: The Shakopee Valley News, Radio Stations l <Sr'9 and RCM(, Tho City of Shakopee, The City Police, The Scott County Sheriff's Department, and Shakopee Post tY2, Arrzrica.n Legion and its affiliated auxiliary, and GE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be sent to each or the above by the District,Adjutant. ,, �; " �� City of Shakopee of t., . I• = K O p , POLICE DEPARTMENT " A f �� ' /4 1 f, . 476 South Gorman Street ` S l ,-- b = , 1 SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 ' , P , = -_i"E i! Tel. 445 -6666 �� ,a L 1 ✓ J,„ - +'ssa�9 tr f AV June 4, 1980 Mr. Douglas Reeder City Administrator 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Doug: Julius A. Coller, City Attorney, has brought to my attention a matter regarding parking citations which are resulting in a considerable expenditure of City funds. Processing formal complaints for persons who fail to pay parking fines results in a loss to the City of $25.00 per complaint. During fiscal year 1979, 465 parking citations were issued and approximately 200 required a formal complaint at a cost of $5,000.00. Three parking violations are responsible for a majority of the problem, as they are generally issued to persons residing outside of the community who fail to pay fines: 1. Parking in a "no parking" zone. 2. Parking on sidewalks /crosswalks. 3. Parking in a fire lane. .I recommend towing vehicles in violation of the aforementioned ordinances - not issuing a citation - providing the operator of the vehicle with notification of the violation and advising them if they wish to contest the violation in court, they may appear at the police department and obtain a citation for the violation. Sincerely, 70:: 7 . h i i'&7,,e Thomas G. Brownell CHIEF OF POLICE TGB:dmh go eSezve Jo Aotecd �; a �,, ,__•••.�..- • r T.. .- ....... ...�...., ..«..- ....,, ..., +n ...�.... • PARKING VIOLATIONS: January through March, 1980 1. Park in "No Parking "'zone 39 2. Park blocking alley /driveway 9 3. Park obstructing traffic 7 4. Double parking -- 5. Park by fire hydrant 1 6. Park on sidewalk /in crosswalk 13 7. Park in handicapped zone -- 8. Park wrong way 6 9. Abandoned vehicle 16 10. Overtime parking 20 11. Park in snow removal area 12 1 2_ Palk �,n f, i e� and 28 • 13. Park on private property -- 14. Improper parking 7 15. Park too far from curb 1 16. Park commercial truck on residential street -- 17. Park in intersection . 1 18. Leave keys in unattended vehicle 2 162 • • • d 1 e� �f \ \ • • V MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: • Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Tabled 3.2 Beer Licenses DATE: June 26, 1980 7b) To date, we have received no further or new information on the application for a Off Sale 3.2 Beer License for Brooks Superette. If no further information is received by the City Council meeting of July lst, this will have to remain on the table. However, if everything is in order by that date, a motion to approve the application and grant an Off Sale 3.2 Beer License should be 7c) The application for On Sale '3-.2 Beer License for the Velodrome I was tabled at the meeting of June 24th due to their insurance papers not being included with the application. To date, attempts•to reach the Velodrome applicant have failed. Therefore, if nothing is obtained from them by •July lst, this too will have to remain on the table. However, if all information is in order, a motion to approve the application and grant an On Sale 3.2 Beer License would be appropriate. • As you will recall, Garcia's application for a Sunday Liquor License was tabled. For your information and not for any needed action, Garcia's will not be seeking a Sunday Liquor License, at this time. jiw • ,. W. 1 �F: �3�"'' tat17s3�r ..._..- ,.,,..�.._:.,. .�.._?s4 --:.. ..._.... :_ �.nMSa.onra„�..• ...,e..,.. ._.. ..._ ..- - -.. -. • Y • MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Resolution No. 1636 DATE: "June -27, 1980 The attached resolution orders the project for the water and sanitary sewer on County Road 16 from County Road 17 east to the east line of Section 6- 115 -22. The public hearing has been held and closed and'action tabled to allow the property owner on•the South side of County Road 16 to consider the project. I have met with Carl Lindstrand concerning this project, and it is my understanding that he does not object to the installa- tion of municipal utilities, however, he is concerned that he may not be able to develop this property immediately and therefore, would have to carry the assessments as a burden for some time. However, several factors will somewhat_ his concerns. 1) It is not practical to expect that we can assess this project this year and, therefore, the assessments would ' not be payable until May of 1982. This will give Mr. Lindstrand some time to begin a development process before he must begin paying assessments. He will, of • course, pay more interest this way, but the cash flow will be better. 2) His property qualifie's for green acres. He could green acre the property and not pay any assessments until the property is sold or subdivided. Because this project is relatively small and there is some reasonable' expect- ation that the other side of the road will have to pay off their assessments when the property is developed, this will probably not be a big problem for the City and an advantage to Mr. Lindstrand. When we sell bonds, we will structure the sale for the potential delayed assess- ment due to the green acres deferrment. • 3) Mr: Lindstrand also inquired whether the City would be willing to work with a residential developer to get the property developed. He questioned specifically the possibility of getting tax increment financing and industrial revenue bonding. I indicated to him that the • • , Mayor and City Council -2- June 27, 1980 • City had done some tax increment financing and some industrial revenue bonding; although not for housing. I told him the City wants the development of multi - family housing and would look at•all.options to work with potential developers. However, I did not commit the City to either tax increment or industrial' revenue bonding. Recommendation: It is staff recommendation that Resolution No. 1636 be adopted to provide the' water and sewer for much needed multiple family hbusing.units. This area is ready for development and should • be the area developed as multiple family. It will set the stage for the development of the large multiple family area contemplated by the Comprehensive Plan and needed to support the growth of the industrial park. • DSR/jiw Attachment • • • RESOLUTION NO. 1636 A RESOLUTION ORDERING AN IMPROVEMENT AND THE PREPARATION OF PLANS - 80 -4 SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN IN EAGLE CREEK BOULEVARD WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 13th day of May, 1980, fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of Gorman Street and Eagle Creek Blvd. from 4th Avenue to Easterly line of Section 6- 115 -22 by water - main, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and roadway construction; and WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held thereon on the 3rd day of June, 1980 and continued on the 17th day of June, 1980, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter described: Installation of sanitary sewer and watermain along Eagle Creek Blvd from County Rd. 17 to the Easterly line of. Section 6- 115 -22 as defined. in the report, prepared by Suburban Engineering, Inc. dated April 1, 1980. 2. Suburban Engineering, Inc., is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. They shall prepare .plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. • Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of June, 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1980. City Attorney 7 • MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: • Resolution No. 1639 DATE: June 26, 1980 The attached resolution authorizes the preparation of a Feasibility Study for the installation of a watermain from County Road 83 to County Road 16 to hook into the existing watermain system constructed for Hauer's Addition. This resolution should 'only be adopted if the City Council wishes • to assess,the benefited property owners for the cost of this watermain' which could also be paid for by the tax increment project: In addition, this resolution could be adopted just to keep that option open .until at leas another public hearing. As the City Council will recall, this piece of watermain was originally scheduled to be included in the tax increment project and when the assessment hearings were held previously on the •entire water system (well, pumph'ouse, tank, watermain) it was determined by the City Council that the establishment of a • large Chapter 429 pending assessment district was not needed to be used as a bacltup for the tax increment project. The property owners were told at that time that assessments would not be used to pay for the water system. At this I am requesting that the City Council again renew that policy decision to determine if a new public hearing should be held on a much smaller area and only for the purpose of assessing the directly benefited property owners for the wat @rmain. The pros and cons of this policy decision are as follows: Pros • • .1) To be consistent with other public improvements where the City has assessed benefited property owners for part of public improvements whether or not they desired the improve- ment at this time; it is suggested that the City Council should look carefully at this project. (Similar conditions • include the Third Avenue Watermain and the Fourth and . Minnesota Watermain.) 2) Looking to the future, it seems that a consistent policy of assessing benefited property in accordance with the policies recently presented by.the Utility Commission and approved by the City Council, will be the best approach. • • Mayor and City Council -2- June 26, 1980 3) Any money that can be saved in the tax increment district should be saved because that will put the Kmart Warehouse • on the tax rolls that much sooner with•.an associated mill levy reduction for the City, County and School District. 4) .There are only several property owners involved and they are probably generally aware of the benefit this watermain will ultimately bring to their property. They may not strongly object to being assessed for at least lateral benefit. 5) Some of the property will be served by the VIP Interceptor and assessed for it. The water will allow this property to be developed in the near future. Cons: • 1) The City, Council and HRA are on record to not assess the property for the improvements constructed under the tax increment district. 2) Some of the property is not sewerable by the VIP Interceptor . and thus the property would be assessed for water and still not be totally developable because TOO sewer is available. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council give serious consideration to assessing the benefited property for the lateral benefit and still paying the oversizing of the pipe from the tax increment district rather than from SPUC. • • DSR/ j iw Attachment ] NO. 16"39 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PHEPARATiON OV A REPORT ON AN IMPROVEMENT - TRUNK WATERMAIN FROM JASPER HOAI) AND COUNTY ROAD 16 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT I, BLOCK i, VALLEY PARK THIRD ADDITION WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve the area between Jasper Road and County Road 16 and the southwest corner or Lot 1, Block 1, Valley Park Third Addition, by connectinr those two points by trunk watermainand to assess the benefited property rOP 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 Henry R. Spurrier, City iMillOCP, for study and that he is instructed to report to the Council with ail 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 imrprovement and the estimated cost of the improvement; as recommended. Adopted in session o1 the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day or , 1980. 7171,y FT; 67f.i.1,,707 Shakopee • ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1980. City Attorney • / MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator • • RE: Resolution No. 1640 DATE: .June 26, 1980 In accordance with Resolution No. 1643, which sets City policy for. the acquisition of easements. and property needed . for public improvements, the attached resolution authorizes • condemnation of the needed easements_ and land for the proposed watermain which connects the water tank to the new well. • Staff will consult with the property owners and if the ease- . • 'merits or property can be secured through negotiations, we will bring back an agreement for Council approval. DSR/jiw . Attachment • • • • • A ✓ I RESOLUTION NO. 16 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONI)EMNA'I' i ON PROCEEDINGS hOR THE COUNTY ROAD 16, COUNTY ROAD 8?) `I'IiUNK WA`:1'1;;RMAIN WHEREAS, it is necessary to provide i.de a connection between the watermain in County Road 83 at the southwest, corner of l:,ot; 1, Block 1,Valley Park Third Addition, and the watermain in County Road lE at Jasper Road; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the construction 'of said trunk watermain to provide water services to the existing and future expanding installations in said area; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee has determined that it would be in the best interest of the general public as well as the area involved to construct said trunk watermain for that purpose and to secure the necessary easements therefor; and WHEREAS, the City has passed Resolution No. /444 which provides that the City shall order condemnation 1'or• any property required for utility construction, roadway construction or other public improvement. THEREFORE, ORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY cou is I:I. 011' Ti 1I'% ci':1.'Y OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that: 1) The obtaining of the permanent and temporary easements as aforesaid is for a public purpose and within t1re powers of the City of Shakopee and that condemnation proceedings is both appropriate, expedient and necessary. 2) That the proper City officials forthwith institute eminent domain proceedings by the City of Shakopee for the purpose of acquiring permanent and temporary easement:; as 5UL forth in Exhibit A and number 1 through 10, a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part thereof. 3) The said condemnation proceedings are authorized by Minnesota Statutes Annotated Chapter 1:1.7, the said proceedings should be instituted and concluded at the earliest, possible time and the proper City Officials are hereby authorized, instructed and directed to do all things necessary and proper to carry out the terms and intentions of this resolution. Resolution No. 1640 Page Two e Adopted in :;0:;:;i011 or thn City Counclil of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1980. -- Mayop . or l. he City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1980. - CiLy Attorney • • DATE: June 19, 1980 CASE: P.C. 80 -20R ITEM: Rezoning R -4 to I -1 APPLICANT: Shakopee Public Utilities Commission LOCATION: 4th Avenue East of the Cemetary • - ZONING /LAND USE: R -4, High Density Residential /Vacant AREA: 3 cares APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: 11.28; 11.32; 11.04 Subd. 7 FINDINGS REQUIRED: 11.04 Subd 7.I PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON JULY 1, 1980 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning from R -4 (high density residential) to I -1 (light industrial) in order to operate an open storage yard and electrical substation. LAND USE COMPATIBILITY: • Surrounding Land Uses: North - I -1, Light Industrial /Vacant South - R -4, Multi - family residential /vacant East - I -1, Light Industrial /vacant West - R -4, Multi - family residential /vacant History: No previous development Land Use Plan: Multi- family residential CONSIDERATIONS: 1. Open storage is a conditional use in an I -1 zone. An electrical substation is a permitted use in all zoning districts. 2. The proposed use consists of a cold storage barn, piles of utility poles of various sizes, and future substation. 3. The site is designated on theLand Use Plan for multi - family residential. The property to the west and south is designated for multi - family residential and to the north and east for light industrial. 4. The site is bounded to the north by Fourth Avenue and to the east by a future collector street. These streets were intended in the development of the Land Use Plan to serve as buffers between the industrial uses and the multi- family residential uses. The present request is an encroachment of the industrial -type land uses into the residential area. 5. The proposed site is located within the VIP sanitary sewer service area. Water is installed along 4th Avenue. The proposed use has no need for sewer or water. Staff believes that the proposed use is an underutilization of land that is well- served by City services. • r CASE: P.C. 80 -20R Page 2 6. Because the proposed use is in a future residential area, there is a high potential for this use to diminish the future value of the surrounding property for residential uses. 7. The request, if granted, would take on characteristics of an illegal spot zoning. These include: - singling out of a particular parcel for a special use - a zoning that is not in conformance with the Land Use Plan - the rezoning confers privileges to a property that are unique to adjacent properties STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the rezoning from R -4 to I -1 based on: - lack of conformance with the Comprehensive Plan - potential impact on property values - the rezoning has the characteristics of an illegal spot zoning. TK:nae • PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: June 19, 1980 Perusich /Stoltzman to recommend denial of the rezoning from R -4 to I -1 based on:• - not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan - potential impact on property values - the rezoning has the characteristics of an illegal spot zoning Motion passed unanimously. • A / ` ..... .:.?. \ �" O E �� � t om . , :. ... t o, , ., iiiii-.. , ..,... ....... , o ■ n � a 7-- Iii A Ts 10\101 III . 7 .- , 4 , s3o a I -2 t ►0 nnn■ ISi111jj r 11{ 'I .y4 n JiCE o a w avE. ¢ o - � .J R 8 J W z miPi . ill a �.� AVE. r \ . I ;l 1111 iti, h k ro SHAKOPEE �J CO �' � j AV: �\, � O 9 Gf� s �� �i I O f iz i j • +,�; ' ( NORTHERN —_ Y :JU■ ■ MP I, ri g 111c_ \ 11 7 __ r +" KILLARNEY ,_.__ HILLS ADEN - ., ......,, Cr ........_, ........., • ,....,,,,„„ , ,.....r,..„.,, • ,..„....„, ..„ ..._, 1- , ___ .... 1 , I.- 4 IN . ' 18 I7 1 _�a s � GLEN 0 1 - 1 1 1 6 0 . I tt'rYN -AYQA HILLSIDE ES TATES .-� �� ,a " r rte .' lc Y j �� CORD77 le , ,72. U.G. ( 6• 1 c1• o0 • TITIONER f AVE E. d M � DATE !� ,- ,-- T�. eO ao� b oob ASE NO. LOT LOCATION SCALE PG � __ 14.-- ,, • is • rSkiY.egm,. ,`p.»3 3# ,,:M1.r.. ?7,`!a:i'ndo. or./ nil nr„tR4,, ,..41..:: !G 1 .;,rvY , ,w.M.tfz tl; � i A O O • zioo w l i Se1vi. 45 , V dt H 6"; r TITIONER DATE /vim. . OF L'( e - 17.-. 8o- 2_0E- zoo ASE NO. LOT LOCATION SCALE j LPG , \ '14 g'; i 1 : ',/';' '- - fk u•s• '11.1 ;1 ' ''.• _2 --------,- .L. ei L-! I ?'417.ct .,....---17----- . • .7. if f'#) • i ...._____, • ... , 74 EttitIt g I • -7----- • ..., ,..::•:-, • A:i I I t II 0 + i IS 8 '"i K• • ■ • • ' 1 1 1 1 1 11. : A .1414 - - - , 4-4 4 . Tf144 il; 6 ..A-, a f, .- ffrii-Ift• 1-i11 ;,'; M 1 ;7 • i '4 e VI MOM .." / Central Business r,•,t k. %.' i 4'.'"......"4:111i1 „---1, 'T.. 1 , ' 1, 1' P l District 1 i IA • ... . .-.::::k:^.Z•YZ.:;:'N''''. Hi -,.. 4 , jurr._4 41:`77 . 4. -- --. -7. r- '”' <74 • '4. ''.. A nil 1 4111411111111111I I I I ii•:. . - . ,, , __Rims= tutasezrzlia.imizzriza.ss_ 1. I 1. 1 g 42 k 4' 4'; . •. 1, 74. r . i 11 , .... . , ...,,. .... ._ _ i . • •••,,,,2.:,:..gailoin•Toa).:::=::::::::::,:•:,:4•.:.:: '11:42 .7.„..7 "j1 .,,.,., 41 , . 3. 5:111.211124:i71.4' ... ...'. ..:::-.----.:'-'. • 1 ',-- ir f 1111:q litliiilliitflii. 1111111101.111 IIIIIIIiiiiiiiih11111111111111111 #: - . .....,.' -* , = f ' SF \ . ,.. SF = ;I; wet tr,t,,,VAM ':cie i t J . . . 1:7' , vo:104 - UM I I ..tr. C 1 1 \ . 13 L 1 li ISTS33i1 VS 41 13 P.S37=10/1 CI 1 990 Li-4-17 ,J1 U tie - 1 2 LA.44 • c IT NI of SHAKOPEE . MINNESOTA Urbanizing Sector PROPOSED DRAINAGE CORRIDOR Proposed Transporation 1990 Land Use Plan • ■ PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL ' SF S I NGLE FAMILY RES I DEP1T I AL URBAN SERVICE AREA . MF MULT I FNIILY RESIDENTIAL MI 1 ECM 1 IC INTERMEDIATE ARTERIAL C COVERC I AL Ea El I LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL • HI HEAVY INDUSTRIA! ...,.,,,,... MINOR ARTERIAL lif IS .11 ii , , Map COLLECTOR _.... • 1111111 : • & - let • eo E R DATE ,TITION ) 11: 5 2 Sa•-•. E--- . Ci i • jc: ASE NO. LOT LOCATION SCALE .. • DATE: June 19, 1980 CASE: P.C. 80 -22R ITEM: Rezoning (r -4 to B -1) APPLICANT: Brooks Superettes LOCATION: S.E. corner County Road 17 & County Road 16 ZONING /LAND USE: R -4, High density residential /Neighborhood Convenience Store AREA: .71 Acres APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: 11.28; 11.29; 11.04 Subd 7 FINDINGS REQUIRED: 11.04 Subd 7.I PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON JULY 1, 1980 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning from R -4, high density residential to B -1, Highway business in order to expand the retail shopping store to include the retail sale of gasoline. • LAND USE COMPATIBILITY: Surrounding Land Uses: North - B -2, Community Business /Vacant South - R -4, Multi - Family Residential /Car Wash East - R -4, Multi - Family Residential /Vacant West - R -4, Multi - Family Residential /Shakopee East Apts. History: Site previously a 7 -11 Store Land Use Plan: Multi - family residential CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The sale of motor fuels is neither a permitted or conditional use in a R -4 zone. Motor fuel stations are a conditional use in the B -1 Highway Business and B -2 Community Business zones. The B -2 zone has a five acre minimum lot size. 2. The site is presently zoned R -4 and designated on the land use plan for multi - family residential. ' 3. The present store is operating under a conditional use permit (CC -105) that was granted in June 1974 to permit a neighborhood support center consisting of a neighborhood grocery store, a dry cleaner, a car wash and an off sale liquor store. Only the grocery store and car wash were developed. 4. The grocery store serves an important function in this high density residential area. 5. If this property were rezoned to B -1, this action would have all the • elements of an illegal spot zoning i.e. - creation of an "island" zone - in conflict with the land use plan - singling out of a selected parcel for special treatment STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the rezoning request based on: - Lack of conformance with the Comprehensive Plan - Effect on potential surrounding land uses - It would constitute a spot zoning CASE: P.C. 80 -22R Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: June 19, 1980 Koehnen /Perusich to recommend denial of the rezoning from R -4 to B -1 based on: - not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan - the potential effect on surrounding land uses - it would consistute a spot zoning. Motion passed unanimously. . i / , I ' \ .. , j . (yS'SHAKO' E _ BW F • 00,i ~ Att _ N I \ 1 . IS ;IA .>. ____ ___ _ _____ r ________ Drill II 194 li e 4 " -- % . . .1 i \ ( - - - j \ z 1 �5 i Ihl b I fl I UE T R ' � � P '' S O U ■ • 8 • ' _ NORTHERN �_ __ __ �_ 1 • f - - -• KILLARNEY MILLS ADEN T ye _ S R N . I i 18 11 17 -o 1 9` r HILLSIDE ESTATES 7 I b.. I; CO RD 77 i 1 ETITIO ER DATE „. 7'e...-• eo'Z - 2000' ASE NO. • . LOT LOCATION SCALE PG I L L� t {x� ' r� v ' 9tar,y� o rim 33 , _ , ti ; ! 41.01 .. V ' O L i ., IS ti ��� 1; i �' 1111 ' L • .' ! ffyy l'' 4•::14.4.. C.WY }c1'.}614Eiats„71i:itiV rti T.t . "1- 1041N?rr"PA ..s. % 451st har :i�,'/•.4! ?4144 `,.04'41,4,s,,y1t3F _ vt , T1.4'. e.i fL.N'75v - ;•r • 111 L ISO S` UTIL 1-: dill, i BL E u ,:::f:5. , ; 'ice%;: I it' 4. g 'ZC III CC I 4102 { A b o ''1 4 MUNICIPAL C no SERVICE Ct BUILDING , + "'na, �` i " GOR MAN '''''Icti. L n 1 1 � � 1 4 •, ry y Y,, r t 7 ' , V - Infi i agri : ,, 7n !..rS..1 :.lI' 1I4Alnc•r Ei i� 'i's,,y 1, 1. { s _ S p y , • ay is III s '1." ,st �, D tr r.; P i lde C , G. ‘.1 1141 a M t . 11111 tiL' b artt F 4 � �,� EN ^p I- !r ;11 P y L... 4 i« M.O ", "4. LUTTH LIYE H p 01110 i t • 14 R z ti FIRST PRESB. Al , 17 2 1;, CHURCH 5 ' _ B.F. PEARSON Z � a 4 O ' —II SCHOOL ' ASSMB'Y OF G00 z • Q 1200K-xfr /2 ) I - ET1 IONER DATE -ter Z 1 7 'i 16 r . eo-2,7_ . ASE NO. LOT LOCATION SCALE PG r ,..,/,'" - ______3• w � {{. �r t r ;4" lig:lir t •?�`d�yAi `�" Zr,Yoi.*NoSNPA" I / � fir v\ .rte• �7., �&''6":,:r <r,.� .ya ..°` ..N,,:',4 i yn s ssn 4 e ti.'", "l' .1 i ! 1,,,,.., .,, :, . • r ` .._-- a [71 , pit ! # �• , 4 4 obiasas�a ' t u a.... .,I I .. .. ,vak,,,I, , •----.-, iik ► +fk • , V1 ??MM r • Q� i 1 4 7 4 �( ' 0 Eri y • - ' .--1,! „ ,1 P : ,-. 1 po Fon ,,,:,'. - - ----- -- - - - - S 5}i a o M • ♦ 1I ?i I 1 1 r. ,, pc) n t r r ..., „, lib „. .., . , ,:, L4'��. Naa - a ,w�i YS �a sr �� � ,'S .GX a.. :; � . a' ,r �:d�xY --? - .n..,, . ., -. : w. �y , ' .a`t I,.., >Zti•w - i. :: (: :: :. ,._,....-7' '141 . '"41y^..r.� L : N r S • 3 i 11, i L v7 ' ri I ______ :...; . ., ,, v, • c____,, .4 ,, i Transporation Townsite 1990 Land Use Plan - PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL SF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ,I:: ai M MEDIU^1 DENSITY RESIDENTIAL INTERMEDIATE ARTERIAL MF MULTI FNIILY RESIDENTIAL L'; +r: El 1 PO PUBLIC/OUASI PUBLIC C COPMERCIAL M INOR ARTERIAL I INDUSTRIAL B EI III I P PARKS /OPEN SPACE COLLECTOR Milli TRANSIT • MTC 1 ITIONER 1 G ' 17 DATE T.4-. eo -- 2.2- 7 1--- / d , ASE NO. LOT LOCATION SCALE P G MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tim Keane City Planner RE: Recommendation to City Council Concerning Unpaved Urban Streets DATE: June 27, 1980 At its special session of June 26, 1980, the Planning Commission made the following recommendations concerning the construction of unpaved urban streets: Perusich /Koehnen moved that Prairie Street between Third and Fourth Avenues be constructed at City expense and assessed to the adjacent property 'owners. Passed 5 -1. Koehnen dissenting. 'Rockne absent. Schmitt /Stoltzman moved that staff develop a 5 or 10 year capital improvement program for street construction and incorporate review • of abandoned railroad crossings and potential movement 'of railroad tracks. Additionally, that this plan be coordinated with the school district • • and utilities commission. Passed unanimously. T•K/ j iw MEMO TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Resolution on Construction of Roads prior to Issuance of Building Permit DATE: May 16, 1980 The City Council requested staff to draw up the attached resolution at its meeting on April 22, 1980., The resolution states that the City will not issue building permits for new principal buildings on property which abuts urban streets which are not fully constructed to urban standards, unless the property owner petitions for the street construction and the Council orders the project or the property owner agrees to construct the road in accordance with City criteria. It is recommended that the City Council discuss this resolution which will apply City -wide, and send it to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation prior to City Council action. DSR/ j iw Attachment /az/ 11,0 g fi)/41-J eltd Z G 1 RESOLUTION NO. 1621 A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH A CITY POLICY CONCERNING THE CONSTRUCTION OR COMPLETION OF URBAN STREETS IN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS ON PROPERTY WHICH ABUTS THE STREETS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee has determined that it is in the best interest of the citizens of Shakopee to provide fully constructed urban streets everywhere in the urban City where new construction occurs; and WHEREAS, there are still some streets in the City of Shakopee which are not paved and which do not have curb and gutter; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that these streets should be constructed before or in conjunction with new residents; commercial or industrial construction. NOW, THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, does hereby determine that the following policy shall be followed: 1. No Building Permits shall be issued for construction of new residential, commercial or industrial buildings if the property abuts a City street which is not fully constructed to urban standards unless one of the following happen: a) Property owner enters into a Developers Agreement to put in the street in accordance with established City criteria at the same time the building is constructed, or. b) The property owner petitions for the City to install the street and the City Council orders the project built and assessed against benefited property owners. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: Approved as to form this day of , 1980. City Clerk City Attorney DATE: June 26, 1980 L1� CASE: P.C. 80 -25R ITEM: Rezoning AG to B -1 APPLICANT: Wallace Bakken LOCATION: Hwy 101 and Marschall Road i� ZONING /LAND USE: Ag, Agriculture /Vacant — AREA: .6 Acre APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: 11.2 11.29; 11.0 Subd 7 FINDINGS REQUIRED:. 11.04 Subd 7 I PUBLIC HEARING CAS(, III ?AIM BY PLANNING COMHISSSION RECOMMENDA'I'I.ON TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON July 1, 1980 PROPOSAL: The Applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning from AG (Agriculture) to B -1 (Highway Business) of a .6 acre parcel that is part of the Halo 2nd Addition Replat (P.C. 80 -26P). LAND USE COMPATIBILITY: Surrounding Land Uses: North - AG, Agriculture /Vacant South - B -1, Highway Business /Vacant East - B -1, Highway Business /Vacant West - B -1, Highway • Business /Perkins Restraunt LAND USE PLAN: Commercial CONSIDERATIONS: • 1. The present request is to rezone an approximately 50' x 5110' strip of land from AG to B -1 in order to "square off" the zoning boundaries and have the entire Halo 2nd Addition plat within one zoning district (13 -1). This situation has arisen because of the addition of this strip of land to the original plat. 2. The rezoning would be in conformance with the Land Use Plan. 3. None of the subject property is within the Floodway. A small area (that below the 722' elevation) is within the Flood Fringe portion of the Flood Plain. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the rezoning :Groin AG (Agriculture) to B-1 (Highway Business) TK:nae PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: June 26, 1980 Perusich /Stoltzmanto recommend approval of rezoning from AG to B -1. Motion passed unanimously. • � /� _ . „ , ... - < .---r. 4. a' a2JN'� d'��.s�:t•1117 • 31ma T+ + ___:_• � III/ / 5,;(x.,a , ...1-F-J3.) .......-..---.. t-----,..-' --..-. I ) : (el. --1 i - - , A tc, -t, . .....„.......„...:___ ., .....„... : - : _w 1 .. 1 ...../..,:_____,- .._.. ,. ___ --- , „,,....„r.,, _,/,.. ........,..:.. ,r N Q n 1.J1,4S•. z1f:lgA lX4%, , ' ) ' / — _ • , a _ \ - 1 11 l .....0_,._ ti. ' 'elli 1 --�` r :\17:-:y3 l � \. V ', __._ •� ^---." °.`.ter _�..� ‘ 1 \1 5 7 . . 7 ..- - -.'......' -' - GiG.b�t9r� \nit;'" J _ _ g: 'N_.,... ■-=I --..--- ,.. ri Ifil : ‘,„...; - VI 1 i _ F is c 11 , ,., A , .11 lit - t \ O.D.1 -- i? '' f.a. J I 1 �1III k, i'' =:C;4'�2..':Zii at-?i:.` :t3<t-:. .. :' JFC�� f L .... 1�TITIONER _ J �..� • ,O ! .= �� ` DATE T. z. . 00 - 2 5 -- PF-0.-->17. .400t j ASE NO ` LOT LOCATION _ J SCALE P _______ i .._____________:, • ..- -.•:••■••••••••••PF-1.4. ' .,:;::::.,..: • y 0 .., '4..•'.'''''-' - rial .- i .::,*,'..°•••:-••.'-'::•••• . ...„„,,, , . • . • • .._ • • . . • : • 1 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF L. HALO SECOND ADDITION ....___ • . , • ..ii, --- • : • e• -z•?? ; .4 '- ----:- • ., \ ' " - . • k 1)-1 _9_22_ F S 0 , ' . ` ‘ 6 • \ \ \ .....,,. ‘111`1E C C ‘ _0. ,- • % .i,z , E', . ..„,,,,... .... 4 .. ____-_ -- .. -- -..or -- -- / E R' MET RO WASTE c om. \ \ \ . ...._°. i i. s i • c-. • -, ( ,...,.. . . I 11 11 4 1, 4 , 41 00:4110 11r . V 9,, ' tr ‘; - -••••'..---.\ . 4, ., A9 ------- --.--- . • I ;g row mr• r , Z -2 Plz• ,, . o r 4r, -, ,, u„,‘ wro...q , -,-, 0 r '.r • WI tr.,t4uL- \* ...: :: ,. . ,, ,.. - • -_____- ..,,_., ,. , .---- .—?.-cr ,..),. ...., ; ',/ rc4iii • .\ 1 \\ ''''''NTr-- :. , 7 . -7 — , - - — --. .k, t' . I ... . c __- , :z.- - - - --- -----=• ' .1-' .! r‘ ci-- : 11/-4,, • to _ - s" {.7 C T?) ' 0 . \J -. S- ---- 51 . ', ___.„- • - - ..,: ...---.- - - - _ kl -k 0, • ) .; 4 ----I" k‘ 1 '‘...._ t -'•• ----___,--* . - ,-;• --)....,:_--• • • ' I, t, • ) • e.- . CO0 . 1 c c. . \ 1 j - t. . . II t g • 1 —'--:-,1--__. 2.i:t : .•, : -.- - : -. :v; • 3 , \ 1( . • i 1 j -1-96. AN 4 4- / 4 \ .. \ ti l • \ N : I 0, j. i< \I b • \\ \ \'—. :I' l' ' ,. • / ' • 'P J1 \ .' t \; Nt 'VI 1 •'; ( %.1" • 0,1 V ' / ' ''''-\"\)- 1 ..--. c s 1 ,, ,,,.. , ik . • ?-;.: ..,,,..,.,___, ...-- .,, L " ' 14 „. . ; I, x • .(:, _ ,■, .... ---- - - ,1; ,. . /--)-.--- - 7 - : .e. , .., , . ----''" . k - - "fv?: 1 . __....--r _,..,,.-• "'":', ___- --- \C LC . . (,) , \J .b, f,:.:: .47 . - .... .__12.•.; ...... . ..... .... ((. ':-..--:-..- ---- J.. .... • .. ______H . e v \ __ V iw/ W _.------ .. - - ____Y--- __oaf L --- etoal Wall • C,..n I. ‘'..V.)11/K __-,,..„“ .1 . 'Zi? .-- w•••41. IT marlfW.,./ ....,.., ,,,,A •'.,• '4 ,e i ' 3 •_, :.` ' 11/ . e e • . ,... . s41 2, 1 . • P • )7 77.- -- FE. ?.0HE. Aq TO - 17 - 1 • vr 711: iTza oN , . .._._. i WA1/41.4_,70,4_ 'ETITIONER ) ) 714 10 I - r 1\47kr----,7_44ALL.. LOT LOCATION Sa DATE: June 26, 1980 CASE: PC 80 -26P ITEM: Preliminary and Final Plat Approval. APPLICANT: Wallace Bakken & Associates; ACE Realty Co LOCATION: Highway 101 and Marschall Road ZONING /LAND USE: B -1 Highway Business, AG (Agriculture) /Vacant • u AREA: 4.6 acres ' APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Chapter 12, Subdivision Regulations Section 11.29 Land Use Regulations PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON: July 1, 1980 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting preliminary and final plat approval of a re -plat of the Halo 2nd Addition. LAND USE COMPATIBILITY: • Surrounding Land Uses: North - AG, Agriculture /Vacant South - B -1, Highway Business /A & W Drive Inn East , - ; -B -1 Highway Business /Trailer Park West - B -1, Highway Business /Perkins Restaurant Land Use Plan: Commercial History: The original. Halo 2nd Addition received Final Plat • approval on July 3, 1979, subject to the following conditions: 1) Favorable Title Opinion by the City Attorney 2) Park Dedication be in cash. 3) Developers execute a Developers Agreement which Agreement shall include: a) Addition of a,watermain loop easterly to the 6 inch watermain b) Acceptable deceleration land c) Installation of a sidewalk along Highway 101 and • Marschall Road I) A 10 foot utility and drainage easement be provided on all lot lines. PC 80 -26P Page -2- .June 26, 1980 • d URBAN SERVICES AVAILABILITY: Storm Sewer: On Marschall Road Sanitary Sewer: Tie in to existing sanitary sewer north of plat within proposed 8 inch P.V.C. pipe. Water: Water looped to 8 inch main on Marschall Road and 6 inch main on First Avenue CONSIDERATIONS: 1) The present request is for approval of a plat consisting of four (4) lots. Lots 1, 2,.and•3, front on TH 101 and Lot 4 fronts on Marschall Road. 2) The proposed plat is consistent with the Land Use Plan. 3) The Utilities Manager offered the following comments concerning this plat: - The existence of a drainage and utility easement on Lot 4 just NE of the NE corner of Lot 1, should be clarified; • does this easement extend across the full North side of Lot 17? (There is an overhead electric line diagonally across the NW corner of the plat.) - A 15,foot° utility easement is needed along the North side of Lot 4 for access to an' - existing overhead electric line. - On a noteof accuracy, there is a 4" water service to the sewer plant in existence. - A fire hydrant is needed for fire protection to Lot 4. - The existing service line on First Avenue is too small to be used as an "existing watermain ". The new line should be shown to the existing 6" line on First Avenue running East - West. 4) None of the street, sidewalk or utility plans have been .submitted for review. The schematic submitted is not in sufficient detail to verify the feasibility of these facilities. 5) The drainage plan has not been submitted. The City Engineer recommends that approval be withheld pending the submission and approval of drainage plans. 6) The designs for the deceleration lane has not been submitted. 7) The plat should indicate an easement across the northeast corner of Lot 4 for future pedestrian access to the river trail. • PC 80 -26P Page -3- . 'June 26, 1980 7E- 8) The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) requires access across the triangle of the northeast corner of Lot 4 in order to get to the pump stations. This easement document must be filed and recorded with the plat. 9) The MWCC has requested an additional 10' wide utility easement along the existing forced -main utility easement across Lots 1 and 4. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Preliminary Plat request be tabled pending the submission of the drainage plan and corrected easements. Staff recommends tabling of the Final Plat request pending submission and approval of the construction plans for utilities, sidewalks and streets. TK/jiw PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION, June 26, 1980 Perusich /Stoltzman to continue the public to July 10, 1980 pending the submission of plans as noted above. Motion passed unanimously . • e .-- . ., I 4 / J 4 ) it ,, j i • ----__.--<--- :.--- - - - -- - --- - f" -- -- - -:___---._ i, I 0' --,-,- /i /. 4f • ,aam . ----;,...„ ............,.. ... v .... : LtA ' • ., --7- ■....1.,._. -Z,..L -••••'.. , ..-."` - • '-', ' =`..-..._:.-- .1"), , , , , ,. .,,, 7 / , / • . . --......"--- _ .."----- , ' ' ' 'N't, 44 .;,','" / — / ' ) s " - - . = - - - ...., -- --„____ ------ ------.- _......------..---,/ • 1 ,—...—.._ / ■ / / .\,..... ( ' -,--,....----■ - 1 1 ( ./. iFV<1 0 /A / • ........- ... 7.).....................■ . . - 7.7...-%" '' / .-.. /. / 0,0% r .---'-.-... \ f ' ,--/— . ''''. • ' ....7,4 -... , / ..., .. , I ,) s. soil_4. 1 - . . / .,...7 l ./.--' . .. . • . . --.P ,../ - , 0,,, e (r. , tal? \ }A E t -"." . ' ' .4" 'atIrVia- 004 ' ' ■ ,* , . fia' . ,. ., ,i,.. • • ri v „Os . • _____y • • . (t 1, 0 , .- -: -...- , v i v d ow it , A 02i.0.4 `t1.1 -Iasi/A* r A i . :iYx:■-' ' -•• : f i ------' ------ t , . 110111 ;111" .... t • . _______------ 4 ' --'2.t g 1 . . . .-- . VI I fl , b 1111.i.4"ialriaal°' V ,gr-1 - - - — - ' ■ 0 • .\A I B - - - - ' - • U - ,7 . \--- w looirr•'' ' ,.,o. _ -- l.. ' ' 1111 k t .. ,_ • ... vl ( kri IS III. V i l : -- a . . 71 " li logwit f rorg. ' 1 - - -_-_- 1 1 rig [Till L .. ,,V,A 3... 1 -...: 7 ----- T --- 7 1 --- • , ...,. ._ ( i • 6 .26 . Oc '1iTITIONER DATE — /1 I 0 1 4 /44p,e,_ 7 - 06 - 00 ' j ASE NO. LOT LOCATION SCALE F .....,0014. • . i PRELIMINARY PLAT • M -' • :_y 1 HALO SECOND ADDITION .: 3 C 1[ A ` pF E. i� al� �I � � 0 ' 1 R 0 ar , part • lino WI' I IIII • . .- . . . • � �, . " > S OWNER, METRO pWNE '«`' _'� a ! . • • 1 ('� �rww [oa[ 0.01 r +r! t1101 •1411211.- -7 i• _ ' • Sy �' �rl l [ ITn • • vICIN l AAP t. 1 1 _� i e 2,-___ • , \I � - , 1�`Vf� f � \ �. / gyp`... III 1 ; +• n Q� a • ,r ter' :1 ••• 1 \ - i - J r `` � _ t ,( t ° i • • 7 v _ 'T ; -" 1 6 t . '! . r F 1 � 1 . f e l c " r1 • , � � ! 1 • 1. • • . . \ : , . • • ; ...: . - - • • p i ,,,, d' \ .... 1 , 1 \ , , A ,.. -- -- " ...) r ( .... \ .� .. rla • .., t 1 ... • li o, L t I ' t . � i• {. • J-� [r. a ° I e ( •r • • I• � 7 ,. •r r , • . [,.1. I 1 ' ,. ' . •' it ,. .. - 'yc.'. ''''''m 7/- TUO''' .. .1 1 t b . / • �- ,-a- , ice'.° \Ol II ` f 0 . 0 .-- 1 ' , , ' ` '. t . i .. ■ 1 _,- - ! /11-11 Y'JI 110J 1. RUN � v�NAlp `a ,l,•t ,l Nllt .1 � ..c� 11 - 1. - j00[[{{rr - - - - - 1C1t1 IN 7111 B r {. 1z • .. !O 100 110 1W (BT • 1 HEP CEAIIET IHAI THIS MET. PLAX OP REPORT VAS • • ?P(PA*ED IT PE OA UNDER AT DIP((1 SUPERVISION AND 11101 I(AAIKS S1prX AP.( BASED On SA ASSUtED DAMS Y 6 I Al A QUIT AE6ISIEP.ED LAND SUAYEIDA UNDER IHE LAWS OF o MR D NOI(S A mo'JnEXT • . s IHE SIAI( CY r.1mhES0IA. DAM 1811 11 DAT OF I li ` h1!1Y 1910. , SION(D1 JAIS B. Hill. IR:. DI[QIT 1 OP I UHIITD • f.� ..one, .o. .0" r r u JAMES R. HILL, INC. 1Mwt1I [s>x r ra nnNwil ty. n r M C.MMt 0.0. v tl(I10 1. ` " "'• AA.' „ BL HAROLD C. POEMS. LAND MANX 00111 ++ONC i 0100(0011 A(61SIP.11100 N0. 11104 rd.. •o. Planners / Engin. of, / D .N'Y. f o., 1 a •'w• . «u • e•... , ..1.0 1.10.101 I...•••..,_. I, , N • I — . ..... 0 _._ — - — — -_- _ — ---- ..--- ---- — 0 • • - . •,- .■.• .■•• r. '''....._ I, flit .e. . • ow* 1 ••••• --....' ............. ' . \ . • 1 ....."'' . ............. • . • . . I I. ............ . ............ \ . ."•' • I • ........... . .1%"" tr• :17. ' :... 1. .• I • ....1 1 . • \ \ ■ 1! • , . .. \ . • 11 2. . . yi .. i N•.,Ir ,,,•b• % . - '' \• . • 11 • . • •• . .1\ . r i • nil '19 ' . s . ,! ' ...--••■••.•7 'I) , • p wit... f"bn . I ...„--•-• -- ••••••••4 p d a' Ch • . I ....,.... ■•••••----•-... 1.-.----° \ 1/"9" •• • •,:t'•,:•.; :. ...... i • . 5. 4.v.c ..„,norf ... . t • . ' • . • . r . ...-. . 1. , I • . . - \ \ v . . • . t s " .".------ 1\- . (..-; . ......-:.. ----_„..- •-• . . 0 f k... ' • ,'. i • .•••, .1 ic -- . . • • : • :-.!• . ; ' • . .• . . , . \ , ' 'si • 19- 1 . . ... . , i ,•4• • • 2 • I:: t • . 4 .•I*Ong S' . It't r"." .. s . • - r• - ,.. • . I , ' -- -• • •\ • t ,' • . , 62% " ' ": . ' . • . tt: . r V .' 1 • . .. I III • . - . • • cc: , . • \ . .. . • . • • ■ ' f . • f. • •• . tri . • . • • • . ;* ' 1 • ' 1.,•) . • ., . . r . 1 1 ,' • ••••. • -*- 1 .• ', .• • ' -I 1 .• . • 1 • ttl . . . \ 1 . t •• ' . . 3 •.. : ..... .. L ^ 4 „,, ......... • . -• • • . .. • ■• I... •• g... PROPOSED trILITIE3 - . ' . . HALO SECOND ADDITION . . , I . . JAMES R. HILL, INC. . I . . Plann•r• / Engln••to / Sur•e pots sloe H.-•••••11 4.•...• •..is ......,..,.... $$$$$ • ft...11•601, 1 f . 4-10-I° !WEFT 7/3 I • tI;. I .2 • . . * . t . .. • e. MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder • City, Administrator RE: Resolution No. 1642 DATE: June 26, 1980 The attached resolution sets up City policy concerning the use of the Senior Citizen Community Robin. The resolution was requested by the Council and provides that no rent will be charged to the Senior Citizens as long as the City does not pay rent for the facility. It further provides that when the City does begin paying rent, that the City Council will, at that time, determine the amount of rent, if any, shall be charged. DSR/ j iw Attachment • • • • 4 RESOLUTION NO. 1642 ?Ct., A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH THE POLICY OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE CONCERNING • THE USE OF THE COMMUNITY ROOM OF THE SENIOR CITIZEN HIRISE WHEREAS the Shakopee City Council has worked with the developer of Two Hundred Levy Drive to insure that a community room would be provided that will be available to the Senior Citizens of Shakopee for Congre- gate Dining and other uses. WHEREAS the Shakopee City Council will not have to pay rent on this facility for the first fifteen (15) years. WHEREAS the Shakopee City Council wants to allow the Senior Citizens of Shakopee to use this facility at no cost to the Senior Citizens individually or their association. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL, that there shall be no fee charged to any group for the use of the Community Space in the Senior Citizen Hirise as long as the City of Shakopee is not paying rent for the use of this space. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that when rent must be paid by the City, that the City Council at that time shall determine what, if any, rent shall be charged for the use of the Community Space. Adopted in Adjourned Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1980. City Attorney • k 96N MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Resolution No. 1643 DATE: June 26, 1980 The.attached resolution was requested by the City Council and sets forth City policy for acquiring or easements needed for public improvements. The resolution directs the City staff to begin condemnation for any land or easements needed on any public improvement as soon as possible after the project has been ordered. It also directs that City staff shall consult with the property owners and if.an agreement can be worked out, staff shall bring the agreement back to the City Council for approval. DSR/ j iw Attachment • • • 9 • RESOLUTION NO. 1643 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE CONCERNING THE CONDEMNATION OF EASEMENTS AND LAND NEEDED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS the Shakopee City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to construct public improvement in a timely and efficient manner as requested by property owners and or determined by the City Council. WHEREAS the City Council realizes that some public improvement projects require the acquisition of easements or fee title to land for public improvement. WHEREAS the negotiations for the needed easements and fee titles require a large amount of staff time and effort which may not be suc- cessful and which may delay the project. WHEREAS Minnesota State Statutes authorize the City of Shakopee to condemn the needed easements or fee title and whereas their pro- cedure provides a uniform and fair method for determining the value of easements or fee title to land needed for public improvement. WHEREAS the condemnation procedure assures the City of a date when the needed easements for property will be available to begin construction of the public improvements needed. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL that the staff is directed to present to the City Council the appropriate resolution to begin condemnation on any easement or property needed for any : public improvement as soon after the project is ordered as feasible. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution does not pre- clude the City staff for negotiating a fair and equitable set- tlement with any property owner while the condemnation process is under way and the staff is directed to bring to the City Council any negotiated settlement which may be reached and if these settlements are approved by the City Council the condemnation action shall be discontinued. • • ? -15 T Adopted in Adjourned Regular Session in the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk - Approved as to form this day of , 1980 • City Attorney • • • • a.2 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: . Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator . RE: End of Probation - Tim Keane DATE: June 26, 1980 Tim Keane will have completed his six month probationary period on July 3, 1980. He has worked hard, and I believe demonstrated good skills in planning. I believe he is a • good City employee and will continue'to improve'his know- ledge of the City and. thus be more valuable to the City of Shakoge•e. The salary range for his position is $14,000 to $23,25U. • It is my recommendation that his.salary be increased to . $16;5.00 from $15,500. COUNCIL ACTION: Approve the completion of the probationary period for Tim Keane and authorize salary increase to $16;500 per year. DSR/ j iw • • • 4 • MEMO S TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator RE: Amendment to the Coopertive Agreement Establishing the Suburban Police Recruitment System DATE: June 26, 1980 Attached is a resloution adopting an amendment to the joint power agreement which established the Sub- urban Police Recruitment System. The affect of their amendment are explained in the attached letter. The amendments are housekeeping amendments recommended to allow the smooth operation of SPRS. Also attached for your information is a copy of the original joint powers'areement. DSR /dac 1 • RESOLUTION NO. 1641 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE SUBURBAN POLICE RECRUITMENT SYSTEM WHEREAS the Shakopee City Council has entered into the Joint - and Cooperative which establishes the Suburban Police Recruitment System. WHEREAS the Board of Directors of SPRS has recommended to the member cities that certain changes must be made in the original Joint and Cooperative Agreement. WHEREAS the Shakopee City Council is in agreement with the changes recommended. WHEREAS the recommended changes are included in Amendment #1 to the Joint and Cooperative Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL, that Amendment #1 to the Joint and Coopertive Agreement is hereby adopted in its entirety and that it shall be attached to and become part of this resolution. Adopted in Adjourned Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1980. City Attorney / • . 'S UBURBAN POLICE RECRUITMENT SYSTEM 326 S. BROADWAY AVENUE, WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 }f PHONE (612) 475 -0110 114: rt A..J Y lCt^J0: JUN 1 I980 ` cIITY ` P- •81'tA1COpE June 6, 1980 Dear SPRS Director: Enclosed is a copy of the First Amendment to the Joint and Cooperative Agreement which established the SPRS. This Amendment has been recommended for adoption in member municipalities by the SPRS Board of Directors. The enclosed Amendment makes the following changes in the Joint and Cooperative Agreement: (1) Article IV is amended so that there are no limitations upon whore may be appointed as a Director and an Alternate Director; (2) Article VIII is amended so that meetings of the Executive Committee are scheduled in conformance with Minnesota's "open meeting" law; (3) Article VIII is further amended to specify the guidelines for disbursing SPRS funds; and (4) Article XII is amended to clarify the distribution of assets (or liabilities) of the SPRS in the event of its dissolution. It is important to remember that all members of the SPRS must adopt the enclosed Amendment and that it must be adopted in exactly the same form in each community. Hopefully this Amendment can be scheduled for approval by your City Council in the near future. Once the enclosed Amendment has been adopted in your community, please return an executed copy of it to Larry Thompson at the above address. If you have any questions regarding the Amendment, please feel free to contact either Larry or me. Very truly yours, ted James Lacina SPRS President cc: City Manager /Administrator, if applicable • JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT • SUBURBAN POLICE RECRUITMENT SYSTEM PREAMBLE. The parties hereto are municipal governmental,units of the State . of Minnesota. This agreement is made and entered into pursuant to Minnesota Statute §471.59. I. General Purpose. The general purpose of this agreement is to establish and provide the operating framework for a joint powers organization which will recruit candidates for entry -level police positions in the cooperating municipalities and which will assist the cooperating municipalities in evaluating candidates for these positions. Establishment of the proposed organization represents the conclusion of the Suburban Police Personnel Selection Standards Project, a four -year research effort by the cooperating municipalities, the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Area Management Association to develop valid, non - discriminatory selection standards and • procedures for entry -level police positions. II. Definitions. Section 1. Board - the Board of Directors of the Suburban Police Recruitment System. 1 Section 2. City Council - the governing body of a member municipality. Section 3. Member - any suburban municipality which has entered into this agreement and which is in compliance with the provisions hereof. Section 4. Suburban Municipality - any municipality within the seven - county metropolitan area other than the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Section 5. Suburban Police Recruitment System (SPRS) - the joint powers organization established pursuant to this agreement. III. Membership. Section 1. Any suburban municipality shall be eligible to become a member of • the SPRS. ryT ;' Section 2. Charter members of the SPRS shall be those members which join the system prior to February 1, 1980. Charter membership shall be restricted to those municipalities which have participated in the Suburban Police Personnel Selection Standards Project. Section 3. Any suburban municipality eligible to join the SPRS prior to February 1, 1980, may indicate its desire to do so by filing a duly executed copy of this agreement with Public Management. Consultants, 326 South Broadway, Wayzata, Minne- sota 55391. Said agreement shall be accompanied by a certified copy of a resolution adopted by the City Council of that municipality authorizing execution of the agreement and designating the municipality's initial Director and Alternate Director. This agreement shall become effective when it has been duly executed by ten eligible suburban municipalities and when executed copies from these municipalities have been filed as set forth herein. Section 4. Suburban municipalities desiring to join the SPRS after February 1, 1980, shall be admitted only upon a favorable vote of fifty -one percent (51 %) of the total membership of the Board at a regular or special meeting. The Board also may impose such conditions upon the admission of members, other than charter members, as it deems appropriate. IV. Board of Directors. Section 1. The governing body of the SPRS shall be its Board of Directors. Each member municipality shall be entitled to appoint one Director to the Board, who shall have one vote. Each member municipality also shall be entitled to appoint one Alternate Director to the Board, who may attend meetings of the Board and who may vote in the absence of that member's Director. Section 2. Directors and Alternate Directors shall be appointed by a reso- lution of each member's City Council. The Director and Alternate Director shall be that member's chief administrative officer, assistant chief administrative officer, chief of police (or equivalent) or chief's first assistant. 2 Section 3. The SPRS shall be notified of the appointment of a Director or an Alternate Director by the appointing member filing with the Board a copy of the resolution making said appointment. Accompanying this resolution shall be the mailing address of the person so appointed, to be used by the Board as that person's official address for the purpose of giving any notice required either by this agreement or by bylaws of the Board. Section 4. Directors and Alternate Directors shall be appointed to serve until their successors are appointed and qualified. Section 5. A Director or Alternate Director may be removed from the Board at any time, with or without cause, by a resolution of the City Council originally . appointing that person to the Board. The SPRS shall be notified of the removal of a Director or Alternate Director by the removing member filing with the Board a copy of the resolution effecting said removal. Section 6. Any vacancy on the Board shall be filled by the City Council of the member municipality whose position on the Board is vacant. Section 7. There shall be no voting by proxy. All votes must be cast in person at Board meetings by a member's Director or Alternate Director. Section 8. If at any time a member municipality is in default on any agreement with the SPRS or is in arrears on any dues or charges of the SPRS, during the existence of such default or arrearage the voting rights of said member shall be suspended. V. Meetings. Section 1. The first meeting of the Board shall be held during the month of February, 1980. At this meeting the Board shall elect a President, a Vice President, and a Secretary- Treasurer, as provided in Section VII -1 hereof, and four additional members of the Executive Committee, as provided in Section VIII -1 hereof. 3 Section 2. At the first meeting of the Board, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible, the Board shall adopt bylaws governing its meetings and proce- dures. Such bylaws may be amended from time to time as provided therein. However, • regular meetings of the Board shall be held at least semi - annually during the months of February and August each year. Section 3. The specific date, time and location of regular and special meetings of the Board shall be determined by the Executive Committee. All meetings of the Board, however, shall be held within the seven - county metropolitan area. Section 4. Notice of regular meetings of the Board shall be given to the Directors and Alternate Directors by the Secretary - Treasurer at least fifteen (15) days • in advance of the meeting, and the agenda for all such meetings shall accompany the notice. However, business at the Board's regular meetings shall not be limited to matters set forth on the agenda. Section 5. Special meetings of the Board may be called by the President, by the Executive Committee, or by the Executive Committee upon the written request of a majority of the Directors. Notice of special meetings of the Board shall be given to the Directors and Alternate Directors by the Secretary - Treasurer at least five (5) days in advance of the meeting, and the agenda for all such meetings shall accompany the notice. VI. Powers and Duties of the Board. Section 1. The Board shall take such action as it deems necessary and appropriate to accomplish the general purposes of the SPRS and to provide the services contemplated herein. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the establishment and operation of a cooperative recruitment and placement system for police officers and the establishment and operation of uniform testing and evaluation procedures for police positions. These activities and any other activities authorized by this agreement or authorized at a regular or special meeting of the Board may be undertaken in any one or more of the manners outlined herein. 4 Section 2. The Board shall have full control over and management of its affairs, which shall include the powers (a) to enter into contracts, leases or similar agreements with others; (b) to provide for the prosecution, defense or other partici- • pation in actions or proceedings at law in which it may have an interest; (c) to employ • • w such persons as it deems necessary on a full -time, part -time or consulting basis; (d) to conduct research into any police selection matter; (c) to purchase, hold and dispose of property, both real and personal; (f) to purchase public liability insurance and other bonds or insurance; and (g) to contract for space, commodities or personal services with a member or a group of members. Section 3. The Board may establish and collect membership dues, charges for services to members and non - members, and charges for services to applicants or • potential applicants for employment. Section 4. The Board may accept gifts, may apply for and use grants or loans of money or other property from the state of federal governments or from any other governmental unit, may enter into any agreements required in connection therewith, and may hold, use and dispose of such moneys or property in accordance with the terms of the gift, grant, loan or agreement relating thereto. Section 5. The Board shall cause an annual independent audit to be made of the books of the SPRS, and it shall make an annual financial report to its members in writing prior to each year's February meeting of the Board. The books and records of the SPRS shall be available and open to examination by all members of the system at any reasonable time. The Board also shall establish an annual budget for the SPRS, in accordance with the applicable provisions of this agreement. Section 6. The Board may delegate authority to the Executive Committee between Board meetings, except that the Board may not delegate its authority to establish membership dues and service charges. Any such delegation of authority shall be made by a resolution of the Board, and it may be conditioned in any such manner as the Board deems appropriate. 5 4. • Section 7. The Board may exercise such other powers and duties as are incidental to the above powers and duties, but which may be required to effectively implement and carry out this agreement. VII. Officers of the Board. • Section 1. The officers of the Board shall consist of a President, a Vice President and a Secretary- Treasurer, all of whom shall be Directors. These officers shall be elected annually at the regular meeting of the Board held during the month of February. New officers shall take office at the adjournment of the Board meeting at which they are elected. Section 2. Upon the resignation or death of an officer, or upon an officer's ceasing to be an employee of the appointing member municipality, a vacancy shall occur in that office. Upon the occurrence of such a vacancy, the Executive Committee shall fill the vacant position on an interim basis until the next meeting of the Board. Section 3. The three officers of the Board all shall be members of the Executive Committee. • Section 4. The President shall preside at all meetings of the Board and the Executive Committee. The Vice President shall act as President in the absence of the President. Section 5. The Secretary- Treasurer shall be responsible for keeping a record of all proceedings of the Board and the Executive Committee, for the custody of all SPRS funds, for the keeping of all financial records of the SPRS, and for such other matters as may be delegated to this position by the Board. - Section 6. The President and the Secretary- Treasurer shall sign all vouchers disbursing funds of the SPRS. VIII. Executive Committee. Section 1. The Board of Directors shall have an Executive Committee consisting of the Board's three officers and four other Directors, all of whom shall be 6 • i elected annually at the regular meeting of the Board held during the month of February. Vacancies on the Executive Committee shall be filled by the Committee on an interim basis until the next meeting of the Board. Section 2. A quorum at any meeting of the Executive Committee shall be four Committee members. Section 3. The Executive Committee may adopt bylaws governing its own • meetings and procedures. Such bylaws, if adopted, shall be subject to this agreement, to the bylaws of the Board, and to any applicable resolution or other directive of the Board. Section 4. The Executive Committee shall meet at the call of the President • or upon the call of any two other members of the Committee. The date, time and location of a Committee meeting shall be established by the person or persons calling the meeting: At least forty -eight (48) hours advance written notice of any meeting of the Executive .Committee shall be given to all members of the Committee by said person or persons. However, such notice may be waived by any five members of the Executive Committee who actually attend a Committee meeting or who give their written waiver of the required notice for that meeting. Section 5. The Executive Committee may exercise those powers and perform those duties delegated to it by the Board, subject to such conditions and limitations as may be imposed by the Board. The Executive Committee shall report on its activities at each regular meeting of the Board. Section 6. . The Executive Committee shall cause to be prepared a proposed budget for the SPRS for each calendar year, which shall be submitted to the Board at least thirty (30) days in advance of the preceding year's August meeting of the Board. The Executive Committee shall receive and disburse funds of the SPRS in accordance with the budget for the system subsequently adopted by the Board. • 7 • / d Section 7. Subject to the provisions of the adopted budget, upon authorization by the Board the Executive Committee may appoint, fix the conditions of employment, and remove any employee of the SPRS, and upon authorization by the Board it may • negotiate and enter into contracts with consultants and contractors to the SPRS. The Executive Committee shall direct and supervise the activities of all employees of the SPRS and of all consultants and contractors to the SPRS. Section 8. The Executive Committee shall not take any action which is not authorized by this agreement or which is not delegated to it by the Board. IX. Financial Matters. Section 1. The fiscal year for the SPRS shall be the calendar year. Section 2. An annual budget for the SPRS shall be adopted by the Board at its regular meeting held during the month of August each year. Copies of the adopted budget shall be mailed promptly thereafter to the chief administrative officer of each member municipality. This budget shall be deemed approved by each member municipality unless, prior to November 15th of that year, a member gives written notice to the Board that it is withdrawing from the SPRS for the following year. Section 3. ' The Board shall have the authority to establish a method for sharing, operating costs of the SPRS in excess of any federal, state or other outside assistance received. Billings from the SPRS to member municipalities shall be due when rendered. Any member whose bill has not been paid within forty -five (45) days after a billing shall be in default, and that member's voting privileges shall be suspended as provided in Section IV -8 hereof. In the event of a dispute regarding an amount which is due and payable, ,a member nevertheless shall make the payment in order to preserve its membership status, but such payment may be made under protest and without prejudice to dispute the bill and to exercise any remedies available to it. X. Administrator. Section 1. An administrator of the SPRS may be appointed by the Board or by • 8 r , r the Executive Committee, upon specific authorization by the Board. Such an adminis- trator may be employed on a full -time, part -time or consulting basis. Section 2. An administrator, if appointed, shall have only those powers and . duties which specifically are delegated to the administrator by the Board. An - administrator shall report to the Executive Committee, which shall be responsible for directing and supervising all activities of the administrator. • XI. Withdrawal. Section 1. Any member may withdraw from the SPRS upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Board. Section 2. The withdrawal of a member shall not affect that member's obligation to pay any fees or charges for which it may be obligated under this agreement. XII. Dissolution. Section 1. The SPRS may be dissolved upon a two - thirds (2/3) vote of all SPRS members. • Section 2. In the event of a dissolution the Board shall determine the measures necessary to effect the dissolution and shall provide for the taking of such measures as promptly as circumstances permit, subject to the provisions of this agreement. Section 3. In the event of a "dissolution, following the payment of all out- standing obligations, all assets of the SPRS shall be distributed among the members in equal proportions. Should such obligations exceed assets of the SPRS, the net deficit of the SPRS shall be charged to and paid by the members in equal proportions. XIIr. Duration. This agreement shall continue in effect indefinitely, unless terminated in accordance with the terms hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned suburban municipality has caused this agreement to be executed and delivered on its behalf. ;. • 9 • /6 • IN THE PRESENCE OF: MUNICIPALITY: By • (Title) RECEIVED AND FILED this day of And , 19 (Title) • 10 • P • fi • FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the undersigned is a municipal governmental unit of the State of Minnesota which has entered into a Joint and Cooperative Agreement with other such governmental units establishing the Suburban Police Recruitment System (SPRS); and WHEREAS, it is the intent of those governmental units which currently are members of the SPRS to amend said Agreement in a uniform manner; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED that the Joint and Cooperative Agreement establishing the Suburban Police Recruitment System shall be amended as follows: 1. Article IV of said Agreement shall be amended by deleting from section 2 thereof the second sentence in its entirety. 2. Article VIII of said Agreement shall be amended by deleting from Section 4 thereof the fourth sentence in its entirety. 3. Article VIII of said Agreement shall be amended by adding at the end of Section 6 thereof the following new sentence: "The disbursement of SPRS funds also shall be made in accordance with Minnesota Statute §471.59, Subdivision 3, and with all applicable bylaws of the SPRS." 4. Article XII of said Agreernent shall be amended by deleting therefrom Section 3 in its entirety and by inserting therefor the following new Section: "Section 3. In the event of a dissolution, following the payment of all outstanding obligations, all assets of the SPRS shall be distributed among the then existing members in direct proportion to their initial SPRS membership 1 fees. Should such obligations exceed assets of the SPRS, the net deficit of the SPRS shall be charged to and paid by the then existing members in direct proportion to their initial SPRS membership fees. For the purposes of this Section, "initial SPRS membership fees" of municipalities •which did not parti- cipate in the Suburban Police Personnel Selection Standards Project shall be considered one -tenth (1 /10) of the membership fees actually paid by them to the SPRS." THIS AMENDMENT shall become effective when it has been duly executed by the current members of the SPRS and copies thereof have been filed with Public Management Consultants, 326 South Broadway Avenue, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned municipality has caused this Amend- ment to be executed and delivered on its behalf. IN THE PRESENCE OF: M UNIC[PALITY: By (Title) • RECEIVED AND FILED this day of And 19 (Title) 2 4 , MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: H. R. Spurrier City Engineer • RE: Partial Payment to Wangerin Inc. DATE: June 27, 1980 The attached partial estimate voucher is for 6,000 cubic . yards of borrow placed at the 4th and Minnesota Project site. The actual yardage exceeded the contract amount. Payment is only for the contract amount. • • HRS/ j iw • Attachment • • • • • o 4 PARTIAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER Contract No. 1980 -2 Partial Estimate Voucher No. 1 Period Enging5 -30 -80 TO: Contractor Wangerin, Inc. A d d re &s 8610 Harriet Avenue So., Suite 201, Bloomington, MN 55420 1. Original Contract Amount $ 9,000.00 2. Change Order No. Thru No. $ 0.00 3. Total Funds Encumbered $ 9,000.00 4. Value Of Work Completed $ 9,000.00 5. 10% Percent Retainage $ 900.00 6. Previous Payments $ none 7. Deductions or Charges $ none 8. Total $ 900.00 Payment Due (Line 4 - Line 8) $ 8,100.00 CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT (I, We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work shown herein is a fair estimate of the work completed to date. CONTRACTOR: i/!ep e _�� BY: 1 TITLE: �` / APPRO ED CITY OF SHA O'EE � r , A Ntt City E.: neer BY: Mayor 7 1 / ) Admin' rotor GG� y + • f �D MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator • RE: 1981 Budget • DATE: June 26, 1980 Attached is the 1981 Budget schedule. The City Council needs to accept or modify this schedule so that we can begin the process of putting together the 1981 budget. You will note that this schedule includes the following elements: 1) Adoption of goals for 1981 2) Assessment Hearings for various Public Improvements • • . 3) Adoption of Five -year Capital Items Budget 4) Adoption of City Budget • 5) Adoption of HRA Budget 6) Adoption of Sewer Fund Budget DSR/ j iw Attachment • • MEMO TO Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator • FROM: G M. Voxland, Finance Director RE: 1981 Budget DATE: June 23, 1980 July 14, 1980 - Department Heads receive Budget Worksheets. July 15, 1980 - Council receives City Administrator's recommended capital items list. - Council discussion on 1981 City Goals. July 31, 1980 - Finance Director receives budget requests from Department Heads. Aug. 5, 1980 = Council discusses capital items budget; council holds three (3) hearings: 1) Proposed use of Revenue Sharing Funds 2) Preliminary Budget Hearing 3) Assessment Hearings - Parkridge, County Road 83 - Council adopts 1981 City Goals. Aug. 19, 1980 - Council discusses and approves capital items list. - Special Assessment Hearings - Holmes, Eastview. Aug. 26, 1980 - Council continues Special Assessment Hearings, if needed. - Council receives City Administrator's recommended General Fund Budget. Sept. 9, 1980 - Last Date for Council to Levy Special Assessments. - Council holds special meeting to discuss budget. Sept. 10, 1980 - Council holds special meeting to discuss budget (WED.). Sept. 16, 1980 - Council has regular meeting - could discuss budget is schedule permits. Sept. 17, 1980 - Council holds special meeting to discuss budget if needed (WED.). Sept. 23, 1980 - Council approves budget. Nov. 4, 1980 - HRA discusses 1981 HRA Budget. Nov. 18, 1980 - adopts 1981 HRA Budget. Dec. 2, 1980 - Council discusses 1981 Sewer Fund Budget. Dec. 15, 1980 - Council approves 1981 Sewer Fund Budget. GMV /ljw c �a /0 5261697 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM': Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: 13th Avenue Watermain DATE: June 26, 1980 The SPUC consultant will be present at the City Council meeting to make a presentation on the Feasibility Study for a 13th'Avenue Watermain. Council is not requested to take any action at this time because of the coordination which will be needed between this project and the storm sewer system in this area. DSR/ j iw • • /—/( / MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Citizen Committee County Road 18 Bridge DATE: June 26, 1980 The City Council has previously appointed the City Administrator to the County Road l8 Technical Advisory Committee. Information is being attached on this Committee. At this time a representative of the City is needed to serve on the Citizen Advisory Committee which will be advisory to the Technical Advisory Committee on this project. The person appointed should be a resident of Shakopee. However, he or she could also be a member of the City Council or the Mayor. This committee is; of course,.very important to Shakopee. It would also be appropriate to appoint an alternate member to this committee to serve in the absence of the appointed person. DSR/jiw Attachments • p , �p1N C �� 320 ENT OF TRANSPORTATION 20 Wa hin ton Av. South *11-: LIUN 6 „8 g Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 NNE50 c{TY OF a • 935 -3381 June 12, 1980 Mr. Douglas Reeder, Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Reeder: • Hennepin County and Scott County have signed a consultant contract with Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. to prepare reports for the Location Study process for County Road (CSAH) 18. As an integral part of this process, the counties have formed a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). Your agency has advised me of your appointment to the committee. The first meeting for the committee will be held at 10:00 a.m., Thursday, June 19, 1980 at the Hennepin County Department of Transportation, 320 Wash- ington Avenue South, Hopkins, Minnesota. Attached is a brief summary of the functions and background information • relative to the CSAH 18 TAC which your agency received. Sincerely, !ern Genzli ger, .. E. • Chief, Design Division VG:lar • • HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer CSAH -18 Technical Advisory Committee Agenda 1st Meeting - June 19, 1980, 10:00a.m. I. Introduction A. Committee Compostion B. Committee Schedule and Function 1. future meeting time 2. frequency C. Consultants Scope of Services and Schedule D. Telephone Hot Line - 332 -0429{ II. Technical Items A. Traffic Assignments - Alternatives B. Location Alternatives 1. those previously shown t: 2. reasonableness, pro -con C. Criteria for Evaluation of Alternatives D. Design Alternatives III. Preview of Next Meeting A. Citizens Advisory Group B. Scoping Process C. Future Public Meeting IV. Summary A. Response to These Items in Future Meetings B. Minutes Will be Mailed Out. • • • • • /off CSAH -18 Technical Advisory Committee Agenda 1st Meeting - June 19, 1980, 10:00a.m. I. Introduction A. Committee Compostion B. Committee Schedule and Function 1. future meeting time 2. frequency C. Consultants Scope of Services and Schedule D. Telephone Hot Line - 332 -0429{ II. Technical Items A. Traffic Assignments - Alternatives B. Location Alternatives 1. those previously shown 2. reasonableness, pro -con C. Criteria for Evaluation of Alternatives D. Design Alternatives III. Preview of Next Meeting A. Citizens Advisory Group B. Scoping Process C. Future Public Meeting IV . Summary A. Response to These Items in Future Meetings B. Minutes Will be Mailed Out. • • (6 June 19, 1980 Preliminary Discussion List Traffic Analysis Alternatives for CSAH -18 The Metropolitan Council has developed a preliminary list of assumptions and alternatives, to be considered by the Technical Advisory Committee for making traffic assignments for CSAH -18. This is to reduce the number of possible combinations making up an alternate. { Assumptions: • 1. I -35W will remain an adequate freeway crossing of the Minnesota River. Its adequacy might be assured by increasing vehicle occupancy, by reducing travel demand, by encouraging development and employment south of the river, by adding lanes to the present bridge, by adding an HOV lane facility or by diversion of trips to routes other than CSAH -18. If this assumption is acceptable CSAH -18 will not have to accomodate a major diversion of trips from I -35W because of anticipated peak hour overloads. 2. The Shakopee Bypass would be in place by 2000 as an arterial or expressway with limited access. The travel speed would be higher than TH 169 -101 in Shakopee as well as other parallel county roads. The speed differential would be moderate so as not to divert trips from other major travel corridors. 3. TH 212 from TH 41 to I -494 can be separated from the TH 169 river crossing. It may be reasonable to assume that TH 212 will be built by 2000. It would have full freeway design for a short distance west of I -494 then high type arterial or expressway design to TH 41 with some type of improved connection to existing TH 212 west of TH 41. 4. The TH 169 bridge may or may not be built by 2000. This re- presents a distinct alternative for the CSAH -18 EIS. /6 e • Based on the above assumptions, the network alternatives suggested for consideration are: 1. Alternate' 2AA No Build Alternate as Base System No CSAH -18 Bridge 37mph for CSAH -18 No. of Old Bridge Shakopee Bypass as arterial 40mph NQ new TH 169 River Crossing TH 212 rebuilt 50mph TH 101 not upgraded 40mph 2. Alternate 2AB Build CSAH -18 as Arterial Bridge 45mph, CSAH -18 37mph No Shakopee Bypass New TH 169 bridge 50mph TH 212 rebuilt 50mph TH 101 not upgraded 40mph 3. Alternate 2AC Build CSAH -18 as Freeway Bridge & CSAH -18mph Same assumptions as Case 2 for other routes 4. Alternate 2AD Build CSAH -18 as Arterial 37mph, Bridge 45mph Shakopee Bypass as Arterial 40mph No TH 169 Bridge TH 212 rebuilt 50mph TH 101 improved near CSAH -18 45mph Additional options may be indicated after the basic assignments have been made. If these first four assignments are available, however, the range design options necessary to handle the forecasted travel could probably be defined. It is recommended, therefore, that these four alternates be approved for testing so that we may proceed with the network at an early date. The Network 2A assignments are currently available should not used to describe any alternate. • June 19, 1980 Preliminary Discussion List Location Alternatives for CSAH -18 1. No Build (2 phases) A. Existing Bloomington Ferry Bridge unitl 1983 B. After 1983 no river crossing between TH -169 and I -35W 2. A river crossing in the vicinity of Normandale Boulevard and Highway 34 3. A river crossing in the vicinity of Highway 13 • 4. The High Level Bridge Location over the Minnesota River between Fisher and Rice Lakes. This list is not all inclusive, but represents identified al- ternatives which have been proposed at one time or another. • • June 19, 1980 Preliminary Discussion List Criteria for Evaluation of CSAH -18 Alternatives The following fourteen (14) issues and questions were raised in the Project Development Report for CSAH -18. 1. How should the local government's response to the provisions of .the Metropolitan Land Planning Act Metropolitan Council's Development Framework be coordinated with a long term solution to expand the number of lanes of traffic crossing the river within the study area? 2. Can a process be defined that allows for combining, where feasible participation of the public and private sectors? 3. How will conflicts between local and regional or with other local units of government be resolved? Also, how will conflicts in regard to adopted plans and current positions be resolved? 4. Any crossing of the Minnesota River will require the construction of a bridge and linking roadways which will impact the recently authorized national wildlife refuge as well as existing or proposed parks and open space areas. How will the structure and roadways be located, designed and built to minimize their impact on the function of these areas? 5. The proposed upgrading of County Road 18 south of I -494 will traverse the Anderson Lakes area, impacting both existing wild- life and existing recreational areas. Can these impacts be minimized? 6. Will any future Minnesota River trails be obstructed by a bridge structure. 7. Will a new bridge structure provide sufficient capacity for bicycle travel? 8. Can a new bridge facility be designed and built in a form that is aesthetically pleasing to minimize its visual impact on the river corridor? 9. How can the state action plan project implementation process be used to resolve the issues being considered by the Ad Hoc Committee? 10. How can the establishment of a priority for a new bridge be made in the light of past commitments to T.H.212? 11. What should be the function and jurisdiction of the bridge and connecting roadways? 12. Are there'alternative locations other than the CSAH -18 corridor that might better serve the river crossing? • `'o�i 13. At what point within the process can the question of interchange locations (where applicable), design, right of way acquisition of dedication be addressed? 14. In studies to be undertaken, can the transportation forecasts for local and regional travel be developed based on a common data source? In addition, the following items should also be considered: 1. The economics of a high bridge versus maintaining navigation on the Minnesota River. 2. The relationship of the CSAH -18 project to the energy situation. 3. The importance of providing for multiple occupancy vehicle prefer- ential .tr.eatment. 4. The effects of Air pollution. 5. The effects of Noise pollution. 6. The effects of Water Quality and Water pollution. 7. Adherence to Executive Order 11990 dealing with Wetlands. .8. Adhere to Executive Order 11988 dealing with flood plains. 9. The treatment of potential Section 4 (f) lands. 10. The treatment of potential 6(f) lands. . 11. The treatment of Community disruption and relocation. 12. The treatment of Historical Cultural Site Impacts. 13. Others? • • ,., '• ..):=•.. - 4-,,,,:q. ..VI l'i-r3,-. I:. / Q i.) :::.'' Ti ::)) ... - Kn'• 33 " . •‘.s.-•;. ... .• Colno .....• ....• -.X. I ..-,.•••,...: ,.... . 1 ,,,_,„,,,, ( . i . i ...... „.. .." ....... .....,:r. .....:.:......: .,., ...:. .... , ...:..,__ . ,Lo. I o;:i• 41.,./ ° 2 a.m!H St ../. ' Sil111 SI. If.. t , • 4.........:o 1 !..,. - .. ,..., , -. " --- 737" .4 L 1 .1% • • • V % ...........9111. . ' ..?...' 1.1..i-. - ..:. - F - 1 •:., IV d ° 4) ‘1%:;) 4.7 a scii Q• .... i • Clan ,. --• ■.,_ ; N c73 EDINA II Sr w. w St ir ....: - 11 a- A....; S A 1_ z ri C War ! - • .-...... ,.......,. . . i ror.1.04ar , 1 vi I tilt: s "k-° "-'-'''' •••••• '''' ----- • • ' .... 'e. .4 i 11(). . V. - 62111 • • Sr.• .4. 21'1..... .. • ; it' 7.. * 2^. 1 . ' .4 - ...V. 1 La k D , i igg nati g 4 t . ... ...... ' 4 ..,.• • • .„.5.,,, ...Ali ,... .4 V ....,..... n ,,....... . L:a Ei , , . d ."-- - - p ,., • .V.'"*.... ) 4:( , ..4. - .. • ...‘C . . e.. . V:li -4 % d • ' Ikli - PI LI ..I ••••••""' 6 • I.._ 11 '' ::A.:"......... W 1/... • 'Ts ' F ...--.. i sul• t t . V ...,("4 .......1.f. .., /a/aad . 1•• s g., .) .11 ....• . '41 t .. •:qa 1 ' ......14 %bud ,,s, • 11, ) Piiicttn,t, ..... ...:. , ; .„... :11 _ Mil ---- ., ____ t.. re o • • .• , LUCT ti O. l ' ; I ''. - \i n/ 1111:15: I di. i. ,4? g II, • IS AND 5 4 -Z-....• rrn - B ant i -- rr i ‘• , . • . 11. MX ST. - Lelk,-- ,. __I - i • Lako d - 0 (AKE ° - - .F.. 3...z......- .-- . tt...._.„--- i 01 •\ 4v...4. • Lucy 'd I • P I " ....: :1i!.3.) §1 t li i t..., 01H _ - ..,...- i fortiori , C uz...i.k. :,1 Corn ,, , t...e La A e ..... 0 ''''' -7---:_t-nhos• . 1 ind,..hcad i w. ........, !! .....r.: .-...:: '' . 4 • 1 L. .1 W.IIIID St ' Lnke . • - • .% ,..i 41 4 qi - - r.'' II 1- .-- ••tifi . 4.... • - Lake •-• - . 4 i :Imo sr . .. go' d 34, •:•:1: .1 lEdin • .. . ..., . 7-1 1 I if I SW. •• / Ili ' ST. ' r ,' V Lake •:■• * 0 es7. -= Y1 :""*.. malt! 4 . vate ft, -,.....v= . .1 4 ,,,... - .; - -c. '"iin AV .- .......i...-.......... VII ( . • Ann -= •.* I ..:.: .:.•.-.. R 0 u ..1 n'''''-'. ''. 8 . : " 0 . - //TH T • •• • - • - :"..."‘' %. S° U th • : :: : : .:::' '.... .■W::....... . . ...44 ....•-• 0=11_14 PA 71 , -4 \ • 0 ' ...4 . - .W.• -`• - • - • !--- Rowand •:•:•ri::::•=-,-41.:. - ts rd, r. Pia - • ••• ......••••• ...."'""............... •-•••••••••............. . . . - . MI a ' l-L I .-' - ' - I[ -----":" - ''' s• l "---,----4 . "" " " 17. r t'l c w. utto 1 - s .-- -,-"1 '.'...:••::::::.:•:....-../..: .7 - 5 „ ' - 3, 71iii •- il - r:•..:■ .. , -1 ' .i% ....: :': Mitchell - "r• - ' 4 " . i ici .,.• re T ., rr m Jct. v. - _ ..._..,„.„ • L ,,,, • • , .WID, ki P' . - 1 le , 1 ........ ....`• Lako "......-.' am %gni 6' pi:Firrii . Nino .-,---. - ',, • . ..1 O.. •.- w. MN AT. UM St. W POP•W vo ___ , ....:::,.. ... . Anderson - • : • sT 8 • • .1.13- Roo noci POP.0311 1 4) m Penn L. ,„ " 4 • • ...e. i I•P , ' '....-----e•• 4 4..• ''1'. .4%. , ,„ 5 Lakes ••• ! t ., ,... •:, , woasa St. 1 . 0.- if .v ,i; Lake) Susan ,, .... MC •••• '..*: Marsh 1 .=>" i. . -• . . - -. •• g coy ' P .b •••• L. a k . . ... . # ,. il . ....e ..',: g % 3 , ..,. , . . ••:' la. w ISS _-4.:-,-4,4.4 . ,..0 • •::: . 4.1 . ,;•.,././..S 4Y14414 1 2 SlY0 ::1 •s ,, 4 .. - 1 -a " 1 : - . V , . ..„. ..-::-.. 4 . 4 . • . 4 ? F..., il .,3 . mu; t_. . 4,,,... „........_...., 7, e :•:•• • . - ----: '‘s •:,' og,-- , .. 4 4 -§_i.jr..Thd. ... c r -- -t ..:' e- •.. . : t , puri., .... silt SS, ' II .,... Q9 .... i l t211. 1 • r• Hazeltine di , '..:.: VI'. • --.--- 1,,V is:i4 I Lak f..: , - 0 BLOOMING TON e 1 F 11011rUt ........ ... i or i,.. w .r.,.._,.5.1. s T. 0:/ Cr. r/ POP.111.970 .. 1 ,.. um_ sT.:. 4 1. Jonathon , for i Ks # Ill ,... • _ ; •,. . 4,', ik • '..:'.... ",.....:,..::: • 41 .9 ' • - --• • • -4- ; ''''••(!9" 4 . . w , 41/i' ' _ “3 w . (1 cr ' •1i 7k I : . - 41)- ' ....: , '' .....;. ...........; .. ls :•*.f4 4:. "._ I. ;: ' . ...t.. 'intro now 212 .. • . • <,,& !ill (I 41::: -• ......g• li/2/10 ST. .„ ., • 4 • • - 1•'' ° 1 . 0 . - (11 -: .,...,-=.,•=.-,,,„..._.4 , .437: . .1 ge l v futon(' •:•:..t 4. :i . : ...... "..t., tomi ,91 0 ° . Lake • b - 1 0 . • . :- -:.--, ." - N., , •-ktr% ' ,...- -, '.."-"/ ''' '' 1 ''''"61 E , :::::1: c yo • , • .... :: ---= - 4 '-' Rice f ' 7 1.90 1 . f w wwii• • 4I ISS' i . 1::..-.1...:. :4_“.•-: ar.- ,•'-- '• .•::..,-;•_-- i F._ -- !. ,ii . • . 4 --- t, :::: •- ....,,H a 1 i g Jit , ,vposa 1 sr„ -.. . • - all • ftir • • „ '''. :::: , . • ....... ••••-1, ,.. .••••••••••,.. - ,.• • - or ES El 13 - Ell el --'y -3 1 _11 , : - , POP.33911 (1 0 ' . ..:: :•••;•.•:::::.: ''-:-- -- • ...• • ' •••••:',./..• `st , •.*:-...........r . ...-X-:::: : ' . 137 • . : k•''' .......:: • :: n61 J • •'• .. " -1 - -....... •• < 6 r i" .,• 8 if - g 1.1 SI. . • • Li •,••:. 7; . • ' • .16....:',1:::: ___,,..._ .. , ", , 1* **** - _ • S t............ -,:••••• _.•,-.13..s1.0_ „_ ::•--=.•,--......:•,,.. "•:„ t ::::: ; . •• 2 k 1 - • - ..- .....) ......i. 1 ,.....- r. , . -----.:"---- ill 9. Fis h eri . ',...,1••••••• ,.. • . .1, tf•,:::. 'Ail fi.1.0 . .f.1:::::: , ..".-- ,•- .1 , :•:•..,,,..,:.••••.,„...- • 101•••••■"" Chic . • 4:: ..: Lake ,k._-, ,.. 3 -... .. 0 ( •: - ....Y ' 7......4: / N ,'• = : -- - -- ..i.::_:: - iG. •••• '.. ::,: I., RD ill .::::: I ,9- • , ' ....,::: " ... -.'...:-' v '.2-. E14.dif i t 4 n e k5 1 ,..;:„... ,..............-' "'"..... V 15 g 7.1' (1) .., 0,4 41. .....: ,, ************ 1 1 --P : c; - 0.i. i 31 • I, ,j, ..;-1, 1 . [ .. l.::: • . - . • .__ .. t 117 4 „.^1_alu.,__________,...,' .____: ....1.... 1 .. . .......... .. . Roll..., It-..... :: z .. ..:.......Y. . ...........:,,....:•............ r . .., ... ...-... : ....... ....__._._...._.____.___......._._..., 3 .011 • - :f - --- •:. '. t. s- "•-••••••.4 , •.:. } 1 o r;........: . s"'.- -.1' 1:4" b•;:i . ::::.::.:::::::::. 13 . 1311'911‘ r...-5 I F 0 ••• - i'•• --- :::.2: , .A: * ....... r :,.....• , •.• i 1 •V • . iN % .. ....: 7°7 7g Dean • ...;; , I i o , _ ...`.•:.M...!. IS . ...--,---,__ l 131 ,•••• ,•`...„.%........ Lako ',, • . :1.......... v al '' s . Chaska ..../ i ‘ -- K , ::[..•:: 13j s •1:•:. ' Lok• ../ r ' J A C K SON ::: 1. .. ..-., ...., . 1, :. ,::: 1 SAVAGE . ...., :: ..: • i4-'` jt . ---"" '. X.4" !Of% 3611 • . - ....• - - -' : - - `...,,,,,,,.. ki ..... I •.' dr (107 ..- tr de „ 4f: I - .. - (71) ?•• :.` 9 .. y ...:. . A lf 1 ..-'' iv• -- % - 7 111 ,,, 14 1. ( ( ) .. .. . ..... . • • - • ..... I 1 " ...,, .... •::..e w. 116/11 • - '.' • /1 • (II .. • L, 1: a • :, ° I I ' • (AO .,.„ • 0 .4 • /1 • . V \ U ,11 1. .., " ft r . 6 , 1 1 e -- - - , ..-. - , -- *1-: - , 4 - ' -.. -, - - 1, rilw i Ail ,---..„ , trC11111..; L (alli f. 43k I 1, t. s • •r 't 0 , 4 - b 1 1 1 It Y •• ivL r (It; , . f i ',...., '',.. , . ,.,' ,' .1 ... ll t . . • . . • CZ) . • , la _ • . • . • . 0' • 1 2 Mlles • rs A rel•"11. I_ A In...1_1.A A IS 1 A its ese•t"ittnr ow yew . �, AO �.. �t�Ft6ri�Uti► vv LPt�,i LAW LU AGRAM ��� • _ \ • HENNEPIN . COUNTY / SCOTT COUNTY j ; I Tv U Evelue etrwllctal ; -, ". V ►roJ Ea Al i9•' / / /' /•� / / i` E 6 Describe Existing II Social, Econoet - • t,.d Suc6.er4 / / . D Prepare outitrws, _, identify Rood -, © v ® r c a1 _ /; /j Guidelines and for the Project Fn.i ror.anut 1 S Identify Measures .. ,/ i ' formats r� ..:...;, .. Area at of tie to Mitti Mitigate Adverse , • x ^C'..i Collect, Review Carpito list Test Altarnattns• * � 1 6 B q u .� 0 Summarize Alternatives M bt •n.b •Describe the Describe Probable Effects 0►WT Ind Sue mmeTteri6 .•j • r� '�� Ma ! E Propo Action 0 ln/oemt; : . • / /; / Previous rt ���� /J /jl Wreloe Criteria 77 11 / : v`. J / � for Detareinlrrg D ycriW Ex 16 Describe Probable {� y,, �7 ? — % / Reasonableness '� ' /: ' Adverse Environmental 27"/.' /. %J i +a r� or At carnet W! — Lana us and '�' �- — - . /'1rA.lmtr Lard use Planning t - pawSe� llatse� 1} fG � tpcxtl0o Aafi �' N Avoided AmVsh ReMrii /.1 �u wit �eley // Public Meeting _' • .� T .. ' ''''''''.../''''' 1 Describe Short Taro % it / r_ ' _' . 1 ►title itaettllr s Ines of the Gw11t., Aev+►Y: // o r c< z ® Enrironaeenrs "+. �� -�` Enhance nt Y ment of Long .- '! y Term Productivity » % Y:• • ..;; ;j?as Dereld0 APr, 6/. . f . 16 mwntble Gwltty AyesY, /• / ' e Describe i 4• and Irretrievable PHASE 1 (6 Months) coibnt* o m ee L • - Resources tt_ • '- PHASE II 4� 1 Y TECHNICAL ANALYSIS ELQ1EUT INPUTS [L a` a s ``' 1 Existing Conditions 3 Transportation • 5 Aeethetlu i 4 7 Historical. Archaeological and 8 Air Duality 10 Energy •t�' ",• Arch tt «tvnl Preservation y 2 Existing Land Us* and Land Use Planning. 6 Impacts on C mmunity Services 6 Land the and Right-of-way Impact 9 Hoke 11 Hydrology of Strom Modification and ,. .. and Community Cohesion 'loot Nazsrd Impacts s x a k:tt xt • ""E�"°� l iP r ' Ravi'o and Edit } a y . . ' , Draft EIS and ryf/r /x / . ' / d ff)Stateent f / / - r R .. // �� l j� � � / / //� •, 31 V , j', j7� •" X r... l( //[ j f ! / i / / / l { / ]0 Summarise and • / ] 7 / / j i Is Pt...../03. • re vavCNJ J + �A f 5 t, , m ote Atterdl Location _ Categorize Comeau 'c: ' Pr'eP1re funs Revise and Edit ' / / /`�Y k; " Mr r us arid/ / / / Ad s i ll / H oe rugs x' on Draft E15 an d �y 211 C1,SF final EIS .ik A4 ,7tl+ °� CO EA . A„ r a p • // n / %`j J y/ gt // r� � % / ' �% % / • If) Statements / �/ /i/ /j /i ot Location r Air A ` 1=6, % 1 / , . . ..,(, j` I c0.31,0 1 �` Y . Milk Pasting* q 9r• _' I PHASE III (9 Months) '; J l .:c PHASE 1! (15 Months) _ f-- �—� r t n 12 Relocation t Vegetation and Wil dlife 20 Water x'r y - a;uctf 14 Terrestrial Y 16 Soil Properties and Erosion Considerations 18 Ground Water Evaluation puallty 3 .��, : T ... 13 Economic !aspects 15 Aquatic Ecology and fisheries Crossing Bridge Corntructton v- 17 Geological Profits 19 Surface Water Runoff Evaluation 21 '.tear Crossl and 6r1 . •• ¢ Y_ at 1. - - k.Ylt' :11•f'..f..' .�..t.' v 1. NM4?ix:' rliulyut .a -,-.:21.:--.-- k�. :;r I TO: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Resolution No. 1645 DATE: June 24, 1980 This resolution abates assessments that appeared on tax statements in error, we did not certify an assessment for this project against this parcel. Council has to authorize the removal under state law as per the County Auditor. • __ . RESOLUTION No. 1645 A RESOLUTION ABATING ASSESSMENTS WHEREAS -the Ronald Scherer owned Parcel No. 27- 001- 0000 - 099 -00 in the City of Shakopee; and • WHEREAS, the above parcel has assessments due for the Street and Parking Lot 72 -1 Project on the payable 1980 tax statements; and WHEREAS, there was no.assessment certified for Street and Parking 72 -1 against this parcel. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the Scott County Auditor is requested to abate the assessment for the No. 27 -001- 0000 - 099 -00. ''Adopted in session of the City Council of the City Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1980 • Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST:: City Clerk Approved as to form this day. of , 1980. City Attorney • • )F:7 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator RE: PCI Potential Pollution Installation of Watermain on TH 101 DATE: June 25, 1980 As you are aware,we have made numerous attempts to de- termine if the quality of the water in the area of PCI was being affected by PCI. Scott County has been working with the various State Agencies to test the water for possible contaminants To date, there is apparently no conclusive evidence in any of the tests which can lead to the absolute conclusion that the water is unsafe to drink.I expect a letter from Scott County by the July 1, 1980 Council meeting stating this. - However, because of the following factors, it is staff recommendation that water be extended to all of the prop- erties on the south side of TH 101 at this time. • 1) Most of the property owners are requesting water and are ready to pay for it. 2) Almost all of the property which will be served is now developed and the extension of the water main will not therefore encourage unwanted de- velopment as long as additional extensions are not made in the near future. This is potentially a problem and the City Council should face this issue. Since sewer isnot available, and we are not recommending that it be made available, the pressure for further water extension will be some- what reduced. 3) There is a good chance that the water table in this area is or will be in the future contamin- ated and therefore be a threat to the growing number of employees and public persons who will drink water in this area. Memo to Mayor and City Council Page 2 4) There exists now a need for water to increase our fire fighting capacities. This was made clear to me as I watched the attempt to fight the small fire at Doc Holidays from little tank trucks coming from as far away as Young America. In addition to the existing struc- tures one additional warehouse facility will be under construction east of the 1 and 44 Liquor Store. This facility is approximately 60,000 square feet and will be fully sprinkled. However, the sprinkler will be supplied by a $30,000 well which is not nearly as reliable as city water and probably costs more. 5) According to the City Engineer, it is possible and practical in this situation to install a dead end water main until the live can be looped. To do this effectively may require a slightly larger than normal size water main. For your information I am attaching to this memo some past and current correspondenceson this matter. If the Council wishes to proceed, the appropriate ac- tion will be'to request SPUC to approve the installation of the water main. If they approve, we could proceed with the appropriate Council action to install a pub- lic improvement and assess it. • DSR:dac K 1 p '6 Y. ' a` rc Sri it CATIERP®LLAe 901 WEST 94TH STREET • MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55420 I N M I N N E S O T A AREA CODE 612 888-4121 June 18, 1980 RE�f • Mr. Douglas S. Reeder JAN 2 0 1980 City Administrator • City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue CITY OF SHAAKOPEE Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Reeder: Last fall the Shakopee City Council and Shakopee Public Utilities Commission determined that a public water and sewer system could not be extended to the General Tractor and Equipment Co. and Ziegler Tire Service properties at the southwest quadrant at Highway 101 and County Road 89. Subsequently, a test by Scott County Environmental Specialist, Al Frechette, on the well water supply to our buildings showed a high enough hazardous chemical content that we were advised to stop drinking the water immedi- ately. Since then we have supplied bottled drinking water to the 76 employees who are employed at both facilities. With the completion of a new shop and office facility in July 1980, our total employment is ex- pected to reach 145. We are aware that North Star Auto Auction and Peterson Forage Seed Division, our neighbors to the west, are also using bottled water and have requested that city water be installed to their facilities. We are all concerned that the PCI hazardous water storage facility site located directly behind Peterson Seed and abutting our property to the west has infected the ground water supply to a point that further use of the water could become a health hazard. General Tractor and Equipment Co., a Division of Ziegler Inc., and Ziegler Tire Service again request that city water and sewer be installed to serve the businesses along the south side of Highway 101 to County Road 89. We would like to be informed as to the status of this request. Should we formally petition the City Council or Public Utilities Commission? I'd like to know what steps need to be taken next. Very truly yours, H. M. Mullinix,Vice Pres. HMM /lm Finance and Secretary CC: LCHoeft TJDwyer q!` 101 g.elfr ' ,i �Y � ; .+ i + ,y '{ 1{.t, t P1 tl ,', d • "ri5,. i �Y q, M'H1 1 . t i b `• V 1,) 101, e, y l r " § : +I ... Y 14y A t � 'f r t °' �' r e.. r ^ "rAi,. ,t .; '. q4 �.I (,� t X �.. q�c,•n ?.; t fir, p � . { ; •� 7 ..�� �` 11 � i t �' ��: i ? •' F i t �,, s • � � � 1 �; , r k , OFFICE OF THE`ADMINIST a K �' '' �� s * . 1980 , . :� , �s SCOTT COUNTY COURT HOUSE 110 OWN i a l" � v • t i ll .�� "j' .p :� K SHAKOPEE MN. 55379 (612)-445-7750, Ext. ioo • , • 1 r p � ; iz 4 y. {,, JOSEPH F. RIES June 6, 1980 Administrator JAMES M. SULERUD Asst. Administrator Mr. Douglas S. Reeder Shakopee City Administrator 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: A[(c ;Ls of PCT H a/ trdous Wastes on W;i Lcr Supp l.y Dear Doug: This will advise you that your letter of May 29, .1980 was reviewed care- fully by the County Board on Tuesday last and was referred to the Department of Planning, Inspections and Environmental Health COP appropriate action. I ant enclosing a copy of Al Frechettc's very prompt and complete response to your concerns which also outlines our plan of action in this matter. I be- lieve his memo is quite self- explanatory but if any aspect of the city's con- cerns appears to have been overlooked, `please contact me at once. As this matter progresses, the county w i l l keep you advised or i I;s activi- ties on a timely basis. Sin:crcly, )se F. Ries Administrator Encl. (1) • JFR:bn • An Equal Opportunity Employer • r e '«7i X � i;r ':•�`a.rl P �h `af o "j ! r,Yr9.r. 3itrr - .r t "- r c�y r . £t t + ;; vt r � . •rr• r �Z } . X , "a •, j:rvS F, r{. T Y1' •.� 7 o ur ,� 3 w c �'' sw3�"`} � , i� � �� •�a �, t i~.�s�y s r t . ,` • y�'� i r' w` r 'COUNTY ;COURT HOUSE' SHA� f'EE MN. 55379 (61 ?j 4 Y �' 'M 45.7750 �} a :".•1`+ .fSLy Y y i hyl .. 't' > r,. -fit - f l , : 1:: ��°' ... `' x ..s' EXT 777 }t . A�. *. fi; 'r,,� �, MEMORANDUM d '� '" J f c • • To: • Joe Ries, Scott County Administrator From: ` '. r' Allen Frechette, Environmental Health Specialist Date: June 4, 1980 Subject: Letter from Doug Reeder, Shakopee regarding Pollution Controls Incorporated and ground water quality, (letter dated May 29, 1980) The above referenced letter was written at my request following a phone conversation with Doug regarding our monitoring of wells surrounding PCI. Doug's concerns are that our monitoring has not been able to identify a definite problem nor rule one out. Thus far we have tested a number of wells on two occasions for various parameters. The results of the first testing indicated some levels that, although not exceeding Federal drinking water standards, were significant enough to warrant concern and further testing. The follow —up tests were collected in December of 1979. We are still awaiting some of the results from these tests. The results that we have received thus far have not exceeded the Federal drinking water standards either. However, I am hesitant to declare that the ground water supplying these wells is safe to drink for the following reasons: 1.) We have not, nor is it possible, to test for every contaminant which may have entered the ground water from PCI. 2.) Some of the parameters we have tested For, were significantly higher than other area wells, indicating that something is different in that area. 3.) Contamination may only show up in surrounding wells sporadically, and not be found when tested. 4.) The bulk of the contamination may not have reached these wells yet. 5.) Corrosion of well casings may allow contaminants to enter which are presently being kept out. 6.) The ground water directly beneath PCI has been shown to be contaminated, and to not meet Federal drinking water standards, this water will migrate from the site. ALLEN J. FRECHETTE Environmental Health Specialist A ' Office of Planning & Zoning ,. •,��,� t r � " "'rFZ tiF , t fall "G 1 y " ,t a Scott County Is An Equal Opportunity Employer t;'�z _A.kxf av �r,vtr 4eM"�7 ^ L. Y : \! Tt% +C ? °• j ` b $� ,fi f i Yt�v Mjfy 1 • ,w' °i'S � r• � {' � ' n ,„ ..r ., pry .` % v f +E•3 �` e lf S ,'. Y 'X- , 4Page, 2 t • 41 + a r �, t . A i ' +• • I j - , !R� ! y �' "'cccc T �T � M 1 1 � • _f a1� •'tJ oe. Ries '• `��. a l { ti.. 'E1 4 June 4,,'198T:1-. ` r l • • • I will be meeting• with officials from the Minnesota Pollution Control,Agency and Minnesota Department of Health within the next week to discuss further testing. This meeting was set because the :Minnesota Pollution Control Agency wanted to reevaluate the need For continued testing before we collected the samples for the next six month sequential test. After this meeting with the Pollution ,Control Agency and Department of Health, I will write a letter to Shakopee which says as much as we can say about this situation. I have talked to Mayor ;Halter Harbeck and suggested that perhaps a meeting could be held to openly discuss this situation with concerned industry and public. If Shakopee is not satisfied with the information we have to date, they may ask for additional testing. This request may not be fundable through M.P.C.A. or the Department of Health, and we may need to bring it to the County Board at that time, to request additional Funds if they feel more testing is needed. I would like to discuss this situation with you following my meeting with M.P.C.A. and M.D.H next week. `6 K • "14 � • •,r CITY ® AK P E • .:a NcoRpoRAT!£O 1870 aaar Jmnw:..c.~44:fai� „y:;g:rn 1irn�nvxaw:i4w u ' , c �W .'i ',. 1..7;4. -Y. zaa:e , . C 11 �� 129E. First Ave., Shako ee, Minnesota 55379 .r�; , {olji''''s p (612) 445 -3650 ` t ` May 29, 1980 ' -fir • Mr. Ronald E. Evans Comptroller Peterson Forage Seed Division Pioneer Ri -Bred International, Inc. P. 0. Box 346 Savage, MN 55378 Dear Mr. Evans: In response to your recent letter. to Mayor Ilarbeck, l: must tell you that the reason you have not received the final results of the tests being conducted on your water is that we have not received thern either. We have been working with the Scott County Office of Planning and Zoning and apparently they are having difficulty getting the several state agencies to complete the appropriate tests. 1 understand and share your frustration in the lack of conclusive results in this matter. I have sent the enclosed Letter to Scott County to try to get the ball rolling again. I have discussed the problem with Al Frechette and I believe that this letter may get things started again. When we get the final results and if there is a health problem, I will present this matter to the City Council and the Utility Commission to allow thern to determine if they wish to proceed with the installation of a watermain. Again, 1 appreciate your concern and 1 will try to get this decision process back on track. Sincerely, - Douglas S. Reeder. City Administrator DSR /jiw Enclosure An Equal Opportunity Employor ,'.y�"1•� ?..7iirt�".l.p r,`y;.t C. !1ry�F�;,it ' �f .,;��va r 1r � �1' o. +:ti�.� � { 7 .,'.J,' y • i�''t�'� • fl: C7 t �' � . �} S � r a .i.l J t � r M1, �� a. �:�, j ..,'i . t x � x z '�' 2 � � r.. .. . 1 . r � 1v� s G • r r� #,�l' "�pn ;c}z c��J a t� • r����. llit� /, (��r. t • • � ' .\ CI -TY OF SHAKOPEE • • INC0R/ 1070 , P •asr .._.. .1.t.: . •%.'vait._.:737.2=.••;er1=7.1 11 �4 >> ; 129 E. First Ave., Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445 -3650 :4111 Q1 .R::? May 29, 1980 ic' : Y E • Mr. Joe Ries Scott County Administrator Scott County Courthouse 428 South Holmes Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Joe: • For some time the Scott County Environmental. Specialist, Al Frechette, has been working with the City of Shakopee: to try to determine what affects the hazardous wastes stored at the PCI site is having on the underground water supply. The City of Shakopee is very interested in these studies because we are committed to putting in City water to the businesses along State Highway 101 if there is a health problem with their water supply. These businesses have been advised not to drink their water; although apparently no conclusive evidence has been found •that :.t problem exists. Apparently, we are again suffering from a lack of - interest or ability on the part of several state agencies to get the proper testing completed. • The purpose of this letter is to ask the Scott County Board to authorize whatever action and expenditure of funds is needed to complete the job of determining what the problem is, if one exists. I am concerned that we proceed with this for two reasons. First, we owe an answer to the businesses. Secondly, with the action now being taken in Congress to create the "Superfund" to provide money to clean up this type of hazardous waste sites, I want to make sure we have all the necessary information to get: the funds we may need to clean up this site. I hope that this matter can be given a high priority in the Office of Planning and Zoning and that if additional, funds are needed for testing, the County Board will authorize them to get the job done. Sincerely, Douglas S. Reeder C.i ty Administrator DSR /jiw cc: Al Frechette Jon Westlake Enclosure 1 .1 17 t 1 1 f: r / / l r 0 4/ r t' : 1 1 1 / t' 1/ An Equal Opportunity Employor • T . /GFq - p Mlfl7 .dl.`. Y� -s ; " ;, 1p " t y, l td: e ti a *: , A I t d ^t �4f , { p .ir''. 4a;.;' ;: a; (l t i , z 4,1:f.•:; ?lip ; { ' x �a ! 1 �.. ''��je" � ( ¢ � hi,W1 t Ct. `,a i ,F,H ,, , :{{>� g } ..r •N M t •t ` i zj r` . [p� f ��yy ' j V �It „ ., .{ y • r: 'i r r� .,,!: i •- 4 .. . -, y� i : � ,4 .'I. `•,- f . i j k ° 1,, , * I rt,, , .," A' :b$4440:1 '.l A� V1: ..d . «4.17 h .,, .! t ' 6 t ' t 1', ^ + ` S ki • :, r . , ( t f 11; V:= . t D � .^ ,, • y'� a,"1r h 1'47 ''� , ' t,.: ., . ; ''', 'il l 'f''I O N'E. E R � k H I j B R E O I N E RrN .. I ,� .. , :'' .1 - }.� , RAGE N"i H � A`I'1ONAt_ INC 1a , f )1 . r i% ,1 PETERSON •F SEED DIVISION • i : i.� r j ,r ,� O P. • Q. COX 346 SAVAGE. MINNESOTA 55370 /PHONE (612) 44 5 -2506 i � - - MINNESOTA WATS 000- 252 -5033 / OUT OF STATE WATS 000•320•5000 -'! P ONEERe • May 23, 1980 • • Honorable Mayor Walt I Iarbeck City of Shakopee 129 E. 'First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Ionorable Mayor Walt Ilarbeck : Late last summer North Star Auto Auction, Ziegler Tire, General Tractor and ourselves submitted a petition to the City of Shakopee requesting city water and sewage. After discussion, the City Council and the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission, determined it would not be feasible at this time and would be delayed until approximately 1990 using a method of a complete loop back system. Unfavorable results of at water sample L e s t (prompted studies to be made by Louis Van !lout, Utilities Superintendent, and Al Frechette, Office of Planning and Zoning. 'These studies were submitted to the City of Shakopee with the suggestion that city water and sewage be extended to industrial loca- tions (the above listed companies) at the east end of high- v. 101. We were advised the information supplied to the city would be taken into consideration. ' We have not yet received any 'final results. In order for our company to make any decisions we must have a reply from you. I would greatly appreciate your contacting; me and the other companies in regard to any plans arrived at by the city.' � )tea r. a� - . :- ; ,..� a i i PT: a 7 " s i` el' t , jr Sincerely, • .„ ;:e.:4 PETERSON FORAGE SEED DIVISION MAY 2 7 1S6U . ) CITY OF SHAKUFkI': • �� ;- ,�; ( ( t;•.. _... _......._ -- _. • Ronald E. Evans, Comptroller • REE :bh i lhaLc: North Star Auto Auction fpm Ziegler Tire ' _ General Tractor ptg srs501 1 Jerry Peterson Ross Porter fORACE SEED. HELPING AGRICULTURE GROW THrOUGtt GENETIC RESEARCH ■ 0,1:› MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Kmart Driveway Location DATE: June 27, 1980 As you will recall, there is,a problem with the alignment of the Kmart driveway with the plat across the street. We have discussed this matter extensively with Kmart and with the representative of the plat, which at this time has received only preliminary approval. At this time the following alternatives appear to be available: 1. Allow the driveway to remain as it is: a) The plat does not appear to be moving • ahead and if we do not receive applica- tion for the final plat by October, the preliminary approval becomes null and void and the road in the plat could then be moved. b) After doing some additional work on the relationship of the Kmart driveway to the Comprehensive Plan the proposed road system for the industrial park and the • plat to the west, it is apparent that the location of the Kmart driveway may not be • as disasterous as we initially anticipated. 2. Insist that Kmart move the roadway: a) The cost identified by Kmart to move the driveway is $70,000 of which $49,000 is for the driveway and the rest are additional improvements that are for Kmart's benefit. This is probably a good cost estimate made by their engineer. b) Kmart has not offered, at this point, to pay any of the $49,000 cost for moving the driveway. • Mayor and City Council -2- June 27, 1980 3. Request Kmart to move the driveway and allow the total cost to be taken out of the $1,820,000 from the Tax Increment District. a) Money is available in the tax increment project. After the fence is built, there will be about $180,000 remaining to be spent for which Kmart has not identified the project todate. b) Kmart, at our last meeting on this subject, ' was somewhat resistent on the approach even . before it was offered. However, at this time, they may be receptive because they may be having trouble identifying projects that are • acceptable for the tax increment money. Recommendation: • Staff will have available at the City Council meeting some maps which will show the relationship between the different traffic systems and traffic generators in this area. • At this time, it is staff recommendation that the Kmart drive - way not be moved but rather to project the major intersection • anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan to the south to connect to the proposed location of the road system proposed by Scottland. • DSR/jiw . , Attachments • • • • • b. T f, A /0 / K MART CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 3100 WEST BIG BEAVER RD. TROY, MICHIGAN 48084 R PPE/ tiro f1Q April 16, 1980 AP R 1 8 1980 • � City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Attention: Mr. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator • Re: #8299 - Shakopee, MN Distribution Center Dear Mr. Reeder: At this time we are writing to you regarding two subjects pertaining to this project. 1. Relocation of driveway: As discussed in our meeting on February 7, 1980, we did instruct our architects, DM, to prepare a preliminary sketch and estimate of construc- tion costs for moving the driveway 56' to the north as outlined in Mr. Tim Keane's letter of February 25, 1980. The construction cost is estimated at $70,000 including $25,000 for extending the truck parking area; engineer- . ing fee would be an additional $4,000. The net cost of moving the driveway for the benefit of the City of Shakopee is $49,000. Please advise how you propose to finance this expenditure. 2. Water Supply: We have recently been advised by our Insurance Underwriters that the new elevated tank pro- vided by the City will maintain only 65 psi static pressure. This will be inadequate for the fire protec- tion system at our facility, and we assume that you are making arrangements to install a booster pump at the tank to increase the pressure to meet Factory Mutual require- ments. • City of Shakopee -2- April 16, 1980 Mr. Douglas S. Reeder Re: #8299 - Shakopee, MN We would appreciate an early reply to the above two items. Very truly yours, 0 I Eva I. Fara, A.I.A. Design Division Construction Department EIF: gn cc: Mr. C. R. Miller Mr. J. A. Kilgore Mr. W. J. Mottershaw Mr. A. D. Kerkau Mr. J. R. Hill Miss H. C. Lefler DMJM - Mr. T. Y. Saeda PMI - Mr. R. E. Gay om ' • - d U S 111 hw ! 4 1 : Y.c( 't..P 1°o-d.`r hr `�; • ir v 1 v a ,IIIIIIII - -- - - -- ® - - - - -- _ - ..... - -- '' ° 11 _ a ® i • Central Business f ; 1„ r, = } District 'Ili :sm. 1 ri iit ' - ' i '‘'f'Zk1/4. i 1 � . :; „ : >., 1 111111! tD ` � r `:'�� \ III1111 .lIIlIIII11111111111111111111`� 111111111111111111111IIII! IIIIIIIIII1 III N I. ; � 1 q r In, . t I4 Y t � " } • r T tl qq, ■ .i .�, ' hH . .' , 4. LS . ;. kit •.wit ,..43 ti 1 al o s.• • C 1 T Y of S HA K O PE E Proposed Transporation MINNESOTA • PROPOSED DRAINAGE CORRIDOR PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL URBAN SERVICE AREA INTERMEDIATE ARTERIAL III ®t® KM III I MINOR ARTERIAL. ®®n6 COLLECTOR Map 21 ■ 1111111 • • >� ' r /five• .. . S. ; _ Minfic$ 1� • • • • .SLR f ` / �- —' • O. 87 -- -- --7 `` 1 z Z.` `may.. • • . I . -" ---- --.' . : • Millfilli . ift -- ' - '`- .-- - -, .... 3 4 !- , . - - - - -.7,-- -... ... Mar i /4/. , a . . .11111111111t IIII it 1 . . INIMMIM immiaiw , . O • • ;�_ • - - - - . t • p • i i 1I I 1 f i r 1 1 ' • ■ i I 1 I L•5 Byposs 1 . • • • i • i(�� jN "0129 • ' J . .. -4 • _ .. ; 1 ... • • . • • �1• 10,,e• Zd OAS J000 ' I 's - -• 13 • • • ._ -- —..—•— - _ --.1. —.— . ` h,,.,..,,,...,,,e.•..--.-... 1 ....sue - — 4. r ■ ` .. .. . _ __ — Pnpar• Dy: � +... I LAWRENCE MAPPING IGRAPNIC$,INC. tt St4ACU . ~ ` • ` • +. _� O<OnS ':� i t ` `'.,, a J • f ...a•..tr • w ... ... r . _._._ _ :r Lek • • Co. �� l�� I f • • • • • . Valley 'Industrial Park • ./C>7 MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator FROM Nathan Wittenberg ""'""----- ---_ -_ Intern - Administrative Assistant RE: Maxi -Audit Grant • DATE: June 27, 1980 • The mini -audit for Shakopee buildings has been completed and the consultant recommends that we go ahead and apply for the maxi - audit. Since this is cost shared by the Federal and State Government 50/50, I recommend we go ahead and apply for the maxi -audit since it will incur no cost on • the City. •NW /j lw •