Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 03, 1980 /dt) TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 3, 1980 Mayor Harbeck presiding. 1] Roll Call and invocation at 7:30 P.M. 2] Approval of the Minutes of May 6th and May 13th, 1980 3] Communications: a] Concerned Citizen b] 4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers: a] Cnc from the Fire Dep't.; Jt. Seven Man Committee and the Planning Commission f b] Cncl.Hullander from Scott County Criminal Justice Advisory Comm. f ,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 5] RECOGNITION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ANYONE PRESENT IN THE AUDIENCE WHO DESIRES TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA 6] Old Business: a] Appointments to the Industrial Commercial Commission b] Nominations to the Ad Hoc Cable T.V. Committee c] Nominations to the Ad Hoc Transportation & Energy Committee 7] Planning Commission Recommendations: a] Preliminary Plat of East Shakopee 2nd Add'n. (PC 80 -18P), which lies between Prairie and Naumkeag Streets and between 3rd and 4th Avenues (Lots 1,2,6, and 7, Blk. 27 East Shakopee) Developer: Clete Link, Rr #2, Glen Ellyn Park Action: Approve /Deny Planning Comm. Recommendation: Approval w /conditions • b] Final Plat of Weinandt Acres (PC 80 -11P), consisting of approximately 42 acres, lying S of CR -42 and W of Marschall Road in Sec. 30- 115 -22 • Developer: Harry Weinandt, 2984 Marschall Road Action: Res. No. 1626 Planning Comm. Recommendation: Approval w /conditions 8] Routine Resolutions and Ordinances: a] Ord. No. 43, Adding a New Section to the City Code to be Known as Section 4.19 Electrical Permits and Inspections b] Res. No. 1625, Commending the American Legion Post No. 2 9] New Business: a] Industrial Revenue Bonds - St. Francis Hospital b] Use of Senior Citizen Building /c] Authorize employment of summer intern d] 8:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - Improvement of Gorman St. and Eagle Creek Blvd from 4th Ave to the Easterly line of Sec 6- 115 -22 by watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and roadway construction (80 -4) e] 9:00 P..M. PUBLIC HEARING - Improvement of Third Avenue from Webster to Harrison by watermain (80 -5) f] Res. No. 1627, Ordering An Improvement & Preparation of Plans and Specifications - Third Avenue Watermain 80 -5 1 TENTATIVE AGENDA June 3, 1980 Page -2- g] 9:30 P.M. Applications for renewal of Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License h] 9:35 P.M. Applications for renewal of On Sale Club Intoxicating Liquor License i] Applications for Set -Up License j] 9:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - Community Development Program (Bonus Funds) k] Award Bids for Holmes Street Reconstruction Project (80 -3) Res. No. 1628 1] Award Bids for East View 1st Add'n. Improvements (80 -2) Res. No. 1629 m] Infiltration Inflow Study n] City Engineer status report on public improvements o] Amending assessments for 78 -1 Improvement Project - Res. No. 1630 p] Progress Report on K -mart project q] CR =18 Bridge Corridor Study - appointment of City representative to Technical Advisory Committee r] Authorize transfer of funds s] Res. No. 1631, Receiving Report and Calling Hearing on Improvement of T.H.101 Frontage Road from Shiely Road to CR -89 by roadway construction & drainage facilities 10] Consent Business: a] Authorize purchase of coffee for City Meetings b] Authorize payment of 'special assessments for two lots in Timber Trails 11] Other Business: a] b] 12] Adjourn to Tuesday, June 10, 1980 at 7:30 P.M. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator • TENTATIVE AGENDA 1 SHAKOPEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGULAR SESSION JUNE 3, 1980 Chrm.Hullander presiding 1] Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2] Approval of Minutes of May 6th and May 13th, 1980 3] Fourth & Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project: a] Progress Report - Selection of Contractors b] Designation of Lots to Builders c] Development Agreement with Contractors 4] Other Business: a-) N A-H - rzo Gsr w m e M W i 5] Adjourn. Jeanne Andre H.R.A. Director • MEMO TO: Members of the H.R.A. FROM: Jeanne Andre, Executive Director RE: Negotiations for Development Agreement Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project DATE: May 29, 1980 Negotiations are currently underway with contractors selected at the May 13, 1980 meeting of the H.R.A., to build homes in the above project. No contractors have completed the process necessary to enter into an agreement. One contractor, Luckie Construction, has chosen to withdraw his proposal from consideration for construction of a single - family home on Lot 1, Block 1. As this proposal was the first choice of the H.R.A. for that lot, a second choice must be made. I recommend that the proposal submitted by Joe Miller Construction be selected as the second choice. Simon Haefner has requested permission to build a treated wood foundation instead of the concrete block foundation presented in his original proposal. I.recommend that he be allowed to make this substitution in his final proposal. The most recent report on the process of torrencing the land for Macey's Second Addition indicates that it will be at least two months before the process will be completed and the plat can be registered. If the registration is contested, the process would take much longer. JA /jsc • Ja MEMO TO: Members of the H.R.A. FROM: Jeanne Andre, H.R.A. Director RE: HUD On -Site Monitoring Community Development Block Grant Program DATE: June 2, 1980 The attached letter outlines HUD's perspective on the progress of the above - listed grant. It is presented for your information. If you have any questions regarding their findings, I will be happy to address them at the H.R.A. meeting. JA /jsc • • • 1111111 k DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT f =':'. 1 s� �I III1 c MINNEAPOLIS ST. PAUL AREA OFFICE 6400 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH r, (.1:1$1 N C� • b 4"'O N� MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435 1 `.: 1 y r R V I. � a '✓� April 30, 1980 ' � � EPLY REFER TO: Cy 5.6CMB CS Mr. Douglas Reeder City Administrator 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Reeder. Subject: On Site Monitoring Community Development Block Grant Program B- 77 -DS -27 -0013, B- 78 -DS -27 -0005 Shakopee, Minnesota On April 23',-1980, Linda Henning of my staff visited your community to monitor your performance on the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programs identified above. The four major areas of concern monitored were•'program progress, program benefit to low- and moderate- income persons, citizen participation, and implementation of the Housing Assistance Plan. Program Progress - • A 1977 program amendment was recently approved by our office to en- able you to finance the blasting of the site of the 4th and Minnesota Street project. This work is now under contract and will likely be completed by May 30, the completion date established in our approval of the amendment. We request that you notify our office when the costs for this activity are due and payable so that a final audit can be performed by Area Office staff. The 1978 Comprehensive CDBG program involves acquisition of properties with substandard structures, clearance, and various public improve- ments. Although there will be cost overruns in street improvements, budget underruns in relocation costs will adequately cover them. The drawdown rate on your 1978 program is 52 percent, with all but $48,000 in grant funds under contract. An additional $20,000 in demolition costs is expected to be under contract by the end of next week; the remaining $28,000 will be expended primarily for inspection fees and administrative costs. • }::. ¢ 'i' t =, 7 , .i . . t ?•. 1� '1.•1 ... t . .. ?t t .•i - -•c .s. "; - � 2. • The current estimated date for completion of your 1978 program is early fall. We encourage you to work toward a completion date of October 30, 1980, since that date marks the passing of two years -. since you were initially approved for funding. An audit report covering your first two years of funding will be required on or about March 31, 1981; you can avoid the additional work involved in obtaining two audit reports of your program if your project is completed on or before October 30 of this year. Program Benefit When your 1978 program was approved, it was assumed that 100 per- cent of the activities for which you were funded would benefit low - and moderate - income persons. This means that 100 percent of the r:. ` households served by the 4th and Minnesota Street project must meet our Section 8 income limits adjusted for family size. We have en- closed Appendix 1 of the Instruction Sheet that accompanies HUD 52659, the application form for Section 8 eligibility. This form lists those sole adjustments that can be made to gross income when determining eligibility for the Section 8 program. Since Section 8 income limits are generally lower than the income limits for the Section 235 program from which you are obtaining financing, it is vital that each application for your Section 235 Homeownership pro- gram be screened for both Section 8 and Section 235 eligibility. Only those households eligible for both programs can be assisted in the 4th and Minnesota Street Homeownership program. Jeanne Andre and Linda Henning discussed the inclusion of sporadic or irregular child support payments as income at some length during the monitoring visit. Ms. Henning is pursuing this issue with Area Office housing staff and hopes to provide you with an answer in the next two weeks. Housing Assistance Plan Implementation NEW CONSTRUCTION OF RENTAL HOUSING: Shakopee has made excellent progress in achieving the goals estab- lished in its Housing Assistance Plan. With one Section 8 project • completed and another under construction (a 56 -unit two and three bedroom family project and a 60 -unit elderly project), Shakopee will meet 85 percent of its 1978 elderly goal and will exceed its family goal. EXISTING RENTAL HOUSING: Currently, it appears that 40 households have been served through 3. the Section 8 Existing program. Since Shakopee's program is managed by the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority, we request • that you obtain an update from them on the types of households served. [ Please assure that your next contract with Scott County includes a provision for routine reporting of household type on the Section 8 program. REHABILITATION ASSISTANCE FOR HOMEOWNERS: A goal of 50 units was originally established in your HAP; records from our monitoring visit of April 23, 1979 indicate that three Minnesota Housing Finance Agency loans and one MHFA grant had been awarded as of that date. Ms. Andre indicated that she would soon be requesting an update from both Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the local bank on the number of rehabilitation loans and grants that have been approved since April 1979. Because of the importance of documenting HAP achievements, we recommend that your next contract with Scott County include a provision for routine reporting of rehabilitation grants and loans approved for the City of Shakopee. NEW CONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE FOR HOMEOWNERS: The goal established in.this category is 20 family units (4 small and 16 large). A total of 19 families are expected to be served through the Section 235 Homeownership program in the 4th and Minne- sota Street project, therefore, it is expected that you will achieve 95 percent of your goal in the near future. Citizen Participation t=r;esj�t;r Earlier monitoring reviews found both your plan and specific actions'!" to be commendable. This level of quality was maintained during your 1977 program amendment through several public hearings and newspaper publications. In summary, then, we are very pleased with overall program progress and Ms. Andre's management of your Community Development Block Grants. The only additional information that you need to submit to our office is listed below: ' 1. An update from Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority and local banks on the total number of rehabilitation loans and grants they have made available to Shakopee residents since ap- proval of the 1978 CDBG application. The only loans and grants that should be included in this count are those that meet Section 8 income limits. • 4. 2. An update from Scott County on the number and type of households participating in the Section 8 Existing program. Please submit the above information to our office by May 26, 1980. G ; If you need further information or assistance, do not hesitate to contact Linda Henning at 725 -4726. Since ely, _Thomas T. Feeney Area Manager Enclosure cc: Jeanne Andre, Executive Director Housing and Redevelopment Authority ; • `- f • MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) FROM: Jeanne Andre, Executive Director RE: Designation of Lots to Builders, 4th and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project DATE: •May 20, 1980 In my memo to you of May 6, 1980, I recommended the following designation of lots to selected builders for the construction of five duplexes in the 4th and Minnesota Neighborhood Re- vitalization Project. Clete Link - Block 2, Lots 5 and 6 Larry Link (Link Cabinets)- Block 2, Lots 9 and 10 Goodwin Builders - Block 2, Lots 3 and 4, 7 and 8, and Block 3, Lots 1 and 2 This recommendation was adopted by motion at the May 13, 1980 • meeting of the HRA. However, this written recommendation did not coincide with the drawn site plan prepared for the meeting. This drawing reflects the desired designation of lots, which is as follows: Clete Link - Block 2, Lots 3 and 4 Larry Link (Link Cabinets), Block 2, Lots 7 and 8 . Goodwin Builders - Block 2, Lots 5 and 6, 9 and 10, and Block 3, Lots 1 and 2 I therefore recommend the motion selecting the contractors for duplex lots at the May 13, 1980 meeting be amended to incorporate the designation of lots for duplexes to contractors as indicated on the site plan and noted herein. JA:nae • • • L I .::' ~ , .1 , , P SC -r Pr /os4 /S � 6G { ���r - --''"" 5 cc 6 rY, rye d •' r % r, � �� �,,: �\ \ 2 St P0ni,/y/ i dam, I, J G ° �e • • ,� / i ;•, , ` t ` y - 1 ' ' �� 1 t ' 1 I, cam, �`' � 9 f ; , , y 1 ! , 1 1 C1 \� L,,��1. - t • ., •,- f ' ' { _y fir• \ • . / 1 '..) - , 1 1j' y � J 1 ` (' __1 \ ,. }Jou • • i ` • l r � � • ,,..... . ..\... . .... . ,.... ' i l �-.. . . k. . \ . - -. . .—..— r?, C ) , r i - C ) H - - Ft, `''\ ::r. � 1 V\ , eu�' j i => n I • ......... \ t • `. 1 • .1 1 S GIe �`G L! ` L7 IC •: r ' : i . --=� -1 , -• 1 • 1 - ,U , ' j I • - -- - ,; ..,.._ _ -.. _._... I :� f Croo1A, ': 1 k " � : •\ ) `_ -•- : •%/' • ...Q l'•, . . . .... •_ .4. • ••. • •• • ,:: ,,_ . . . „ ,,.. ----1------,- . .......... .,. ..... i• •• 1 ..... . . .. . _. , , __________ ,. 1 6 «Ili 1-------- L . 1'I L CA, bi d ,1 • `, .") rt ; c: �� : r s 1 (LQrr y Lih k--) . "v \�:. 1 . �.. . 1 �- _ • • i _..., .,. ... • / C. 7 • • • 1 , /Or) 1 , c) -,.; ., 1 ,....). "-• . "�. 1 1i ci !e — ,. i', \., 4 ` I , r t l '. . Ci' . � ;/ •. ' ` \ \C. , t +? : ?' • 3 c_. MEMO TO: Members of the Shakopee H.R.A. FROM: Jeanne Andre, Executive Director RE: Development Agreement with Contractors DATE: June 2, 1980 The City Attorney has worked with me to prepare the enclosed draft of an agreement to be executed with the contractors constructing homes in the Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project. We seek the input of the members of the H.R.A. as to the final form which should be adopted. • JA /jsc Lonfract for ucca l orm iNo. 5b -M. Corporation Vendor Dlinnesora Uniform Conveyancing Blanks (Revised 1976) , Cjts 211reement, Made and entered into this day of ,19 , by and between a corporation under the laws of the State of , party of the first part, and , part of the second part; uf!1 ItUemsetfj, That the said party of the first part, in consideration of the covenants and agree- ments of said part of the second part, hereinafter contained, hereby sells and agrees to convey unto said part of the second part, and assigns, by a Deed, accompanied by an abstract evidencing good title in party of the first part at the date hereof, or by an owner's duplicate certificate of title, upon the prompt and full performance by said part of the second part, of part of this agreement, the tract of land lying and being in the County of and State of Minnesota, described as follows, to -wit: .find said part of the second part, in consideration of the premises, hereby agree to pay said party of the first part, at as and for the purchase price of said premises, the sum of One Dollar Dollars, -ktXXX XX 1tX c 4 M'? X44f N iX 'R R herewith and as a further consideration ;hereby agrees as follows:: See exhibit "A" hereto attached Said part of the second part further covenant and agree-S` as follows: t - attacises . , and__in_subsequenryears, and alt'special asse heretofore or hereafter - ltd, • that any buildings and improvements now on said land, or which shall hereafter be erected, placed, or made there- on, shall not be removed therefrom, but shall be and remain property of the party of the first part until this con - tract shall be fully performed by the part of the second part; and at own expense, to keep the buildings on said premises at all times insured in some reliable insurance company or companies, to be approved by the party of the first part, against loss by fire for at least the sum of • Dollars and against loss by windstorm for at least the sum of Dollars, payable to said party of the first part, its successors or assigns, and, in case of loss, should there be any surplus over and above the amount then owing said party of the first part, its successors, or assigns, the balance shall be paid over to the said part of the second part as interest shall appear, and to deposit with the party of the first part policies of said insurance. But should the second part fail to pay any item to be paid by said pari under the terms hereof, same may be paid by first party and shall be forthwith payable, with interest thereon, as an additional amount due first party under this contract. But should default be made in the payment of principal or interest due hereunder, or of any part thereof, to be by second part paid, or should fail to pay the taxes or assessments upon said land, premiums upon said insurance, or to perform any or either of the covenants. agreements, terms or conditions herein contained, to be by said second part kept or performed, the said party of the first part may, at its option, by written notice declare this contract cancelled and terminated, and all rights, title and interest acquired thereunder by said second part shall thereupon cease and terminate, and all improvements made upon the premises, and all payments made hereunder shall belong to said party of the first part as liquidated damages for breach of this contract by said second part , said notice to be in accordance with the statute in such case made and provided. Neither the extension of the time of pay- ment of any sum or sums of money to be paid hereunder, nor any waiver by the party of the first part of its rights to declare this contract forfeited by reason of any breach thereof, shall in any manner affect the right of said party to cancel this contract because of defaults subsequently maturing, and no extension of time shall be valid unless evi- denced by duly signed instrument. Further, after service of notice and failure to remove. within the period allowed by law, the default therein specified, said part of the second part hereby specifically agree , upon demand of said party of the first part, quietly and peaceably to surrender to it possession of said premises, and every part thereof, it being understood that until such default. said part of the second part to have possession of said premises. Z• EXHIBIT "A" 1. The Party of the second part agrees to provide builders risk insurance naming the City as an additional insured, and in the highest amount available from an insurance company acceptable to the first party. 2. The Party of the second part will provide public liability insurance in a total amount of not less than $300,000.00 naming the City as an additional insured and in terms and in a company acceptable to the party of the first part. 3. The Party of the second part will provide standard workman's compensation insurance naming the City as a protected party. 4. Copies of the policies or certificates of insurance with a 15 day cancelation clause must be provided to the first party before any work or liability are contracted by the party of the second part. 5. •Before beginning any construction or incurring any liability, the party of the second part will provide the party of the first part with a letter of credit in an amount of not less than 7o of the total cost of the improvements. 6. That the premises herein described shall at all times be kept free and clear of all mechanics or labor liens and all other types of incumbrance. 7. As a specific covenant running with the above described property, the party of the first part requires and the party of the second part agrees that the party of the second part shall construct on said property a home meeting all the requirements of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 235 Program, according to the plans and specifications herein attached and shall convey this property, upon completion' of said house, to a buyer or buyers approved by the party of the first part. 8. Should party of the second part fail to convey to such an approved buyer or buyers, provided by the party of the first part, within months from the date of this instrument, all interest to this property shall revert to the party of the first part. 9. The deed to the party of the second part as well as the deed from the 'party . . of the second part' to the buyer shall contain the following restrictions and conditions: In the event the approved buyer or buyers convey legal or equitable title to this property to any other person within five years of the date said approved buyer or buyers obtains title, the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority shall have a first lien on said property in the amount of $ , which amount represents the approximate value of the land originally contributed by the Shakopee County Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the following repayment schedule would apply: 1] Home owned under 1 year - full payment of lot value 2] Home owned between 1 & 2 yrs. - repay 3/4 lot value 3] Home owned between 2 & 3 yrs. - repay 1/2 lot value 4] Home owned between 3 & 5 yrs. - repay 1/4 lot value 5] Home owned 5 yrs. or more - no repayment is required Upon making this required payment, or if no payment is required, the Shakopee Housing & Redevelopment Authority will discharge the lien of record. 4" MEMO TO: Shakopee HRA FROM: Jeanne Andre HRA Executive Director RE: Commissioners Workshop National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) DATE: May 28, 1980 • A workshop for Housing and Redevelopment Commissioners will be held July 11 -13, 1980, at the LasVegas Hilton. Attached is a schedule outlining the topics to be covered. The estimated cost of sending a delegate to this workshop is listed below: • $185.00 Registration Fee 384.00 Roundtrip Airfare, Mpls /Las Vegas /Mpls. 350.00 Other Expenses $919.00 JA/jiw Attachment II IV 460 - . /11. vitaP :- . ' 10 prii Iheir %WI pa ' 11 IN QO i { . t Challenges and Commission Community Accountability Meetings Relations Workshop Schedule • Thursday, July 10 i Being a commissioner requires Sunshine laws, open meeting laws, Two communities are affected by 3:00 pm -6:00 pm t knowledgeable and creative problem- and public information laws all have public programs —that which is Early Bird Registration i solving approaches to formulating underscored the importance of the served by the program and that which i public policy and guiding housing and meeting to the commission process. is not. Commissioners develop Friday July 11 i community development programs. Making meetings work, resolving different skills for dealing with each 9:00 am -5:00 pm conflicts, providing effective forums of the respective community groups Registration i • Sessions will address how for community participation, handling and individuals. 9:30 am -12:00 pm commissioners can educate media coverage are common and Dedication of Senior Citizen Mobile themselves about programs for which critical concerns. Laws govern what Sessions will explore how to relate Home Park /Tour of Las Vegas ! they are responsible and about their constitutes a proper meeting, the to the people served or who would Housing Program (Optional) —See I legal responsibilities and liabilities. interaction of commissioners, when like to be served, and how to relate to attached information and Other issues that will be addressed in commissioners can meet in private, community residents who are not registration form these sessions relate to how well and the public's right to attend eligible for program benefits and may 1:30 pm -5:30 pm commissioners understand the job of meetings and examine bylaws, rules not share program goals. Workshop Sessions public policymaker: how does a and procedures and minutes vary in 11 6:00 pm-7:30 pm commissioner relate his or her policy states and communities. Penalties for Reception goals to the mission of the agency; violation of these laws can be Th e Press Saturday, how can a commissioner best utilize significant. y, J my 12 his or her skills to support the work 9:00 am -5:30 pm of the agency; what is a Sessions will examine procedures for Newspapers, radio, and television Workshop Sessions commissioner's commitment to the conducting effective meetings, the convey information. Whether the 6:00 pm -7:30 pm job. purposes of executive sessions and information is helpful or harmful to Reception regular meetings, presenting budget assisted housing, community and financial information, and development, and urban Sunday, July 13 . ' The Commissioner assuring adequate preparation with redevelopment, depends in part upon 9:00 am -1:00 pm detailed supporting materials. the individual commissioner. The Workshop Sessions and the press, especially its most aggressive members, operates according to Executive Director Government rules and preceptions which may baffle the lay person. Skillful media Everyone gropes with the problem of Relations relations may help prevent a bad , distinguishing between administration situation from getting worse or may Special o f f e r and policy matters. What is a Commissioners are government insure that an important project commissioner expected to do in officials who are appointed by actually gets built. carrying out the role of policymaker government officials and as such are to Workshop t ®� for a public agency? What is the dependent on funds, support and Sessions will examine how to handle a distinction between policymaking and services from government sources. crisis, howtoprevent one, and how to Delegates s tes t g administration? What makes a good Program funding particular p in articular is a "sell your program." i executive director? How can one make critical point for making policy and . . M the best use of staff to keep informed furthering program objectives. Free copy of the of the operation of the program? 1 1980 edition of the Sessions will explore the • , Sessions will examine the importance commissioner role in relating to local, Commissioners Handbook • of the relationship between the state, and federal governments. How will be given to each commission and executive director, to make the best use of the budget = • and will define the role of process will also be addressed. conference delegate. 1 commissioner from the perspectives of th'e taw, tradition, and experience. I 4 aci nRCE MAY 1 6 1980 )11 1 S if g 9 TY OF SKAKOPEE o ; el 2e ea,74 otte, s- ,t(21zg-vt-e?,,, 7r-6 el - 6 0„,,470) A-Y1-0 ‘L`.,—,..; O ta-tr-2,t - s "74 e t ,„ 1/41% %/IAL.-f-f 6 .;,),TX 740 i ` j 6 rm gel ttf-4...t.tAfy4 ei4,1;t4i, So% C • 1 • (1 ! I 1I . I i ,. II 1 , , I 1 1 i I 1 I 1 . I ... _ .. L'(✓ _ .... _.. -_ • iii 1 • . I 1 4 1I .. _ ' ! 0-•'N _..._____.... _- ..._ Il l - - - - ;I I, �r, -tip r-f-'7' ( 7 C9 - wr - lrurj . ' e-o -x-y r .,..,---y r)-:, 0-7-9-2A, r" --- -- - - - " ,----- rv- ( . 7 ___9_-1--rd 42 04,7" - I • I 1 ,--7-2.,..t. ? ..... 7 _,,,./ i-, 0- , .. -- r _ i __ ? _ > _ 0 _,.. ) ,,,.. r . ,_,_,.,,,,,,, g, r/°_ ...„.. ._ v76,,,.....,„?..1. C-2 p � ty" 1 o / i , t . I 1 I DATE: June 3, 1980 7a) CASE: P.C. 80 -18P ITEM: Preliminary Plat APPLICANT: Clete Link LOCATION: 3rd & Naumkeg, 4th & Prairie ZONING /LAND USE: R -3, Moderate Density Residential /Vacant AREA: .83 Acres APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 11.27; Section 12.04 FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 12 PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON JUNE 3, 1980 PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat consisting of the replatting of four vacant lots to realign them to the side streets. SITE SUITABILITY Soils: Dakota loam, shallow bedrock, suitable for urban development Topography: Generally flat Vegetation: Primarily grasses LAND USE COMPATIBILITY Surrounding Land Uses: North - R -3, Moderate Density Residential/ Single family homes South - B -2 Community Business /Utilities & Public Works Buildings East - R -3, Moderate Density Residential/ Single family homes, clinic West - R -2, Urban Residential /Single family homes Land Use Plan: Medium density residential History: Originally platted as part of East Shakopee, recorded 1856. Never built URBAN SERVICES AVAILABILITY Sanitary Sewer: Available to east lots on Naumkeg St. Southwest lots must be served by an extension from 4th St. Water: Available to east lots on Naumkeg St. Southwest lots must be served by an extension between 3rd St. and 4th St. Storm Water: Drainage and grading plan have not yet been submitted by the developer's engineer. Parks: Hiawatha Park 1/2 mile to S.W. Huber Park, 1/2 mile to N.W. Schools: Pearson and Central elementary 2/3 mile. Junior and Senior High School 1 mile. • CASE: P.C. 80 -18P Page. 2 CONSIDERATIONS 1. At the February 28, 1980 Board of Adjustment meeting a lot area variance (P.C. 80 -4V) was granted to permit the construction of two - family homes on these lots less than 11,000 square feet. • 2. The proposed plat consists of the replatting of four existing lots to re- orient them off of the busier east -west streets onto the north -south streets. Fourth Avenue is designated a collector street. Driveway access for the lots will be from Naumkeg and Prairie Streets. 3. At its April 1, 1980 meeting, the City Council approved the vacation of the alley in Block 27 conditioned on maintaining the alley as a utility easement. 4. Sanitary sewer and water will serve each unit individually from Naumkeg Street for the east facing lots. There is no sewer and water in Prairie Street for the lots facing the west. The City Engineer recommends the extension of a 6" sanitary sewer north from 4th Avenue up Prairie Street to serve these lots. The Utilities Manager recommends the extension of a 6" water pipe connecting 3rd and 4th Avenues along Prairie Street. 5. Surface drainage in this area of the City has historically been a problem. During periods of excessive run -off, water tends to pond in the area of Prairie and 3rd Avenue. The proposed drainage plan does not demonstrate how the run -off from Block 1 will be carried away so as not to add to the existing problem. Block 2 will be designed to drain to the existing storm sewer on 4th Avenue. Staff recommends the drainage of Block 1 to be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 6. Prairie Street is not yet constructed. It is anticipated that the question of the development of property on un- constructed streets will be addressed by the Council prior to final plat approval. • 7. There is an existing garage partially encroaching on 1ot 1, block 2. The applicant has indicated that he has an agree- ment with the owner of the garage whereby the garage could be removed at most any time. Staff would recommend that - the garage be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit for lots 1 and 2, Block 2. CASE: P.C. 80 -18P Page 3 8. The corner lot structures on lot 1, block 1 and lot 4, block 2, as proposed, will have sideyards of 18' (36' from the street). Section 11.03 Subd. 7.E requires a minimum setback of 30' except for lots platted prior to April 1, 1978 which whall proved a setback of 30' from the street surface. Since this is a replat, the 30' setback applies. There is a right triangle in excess of 50' at each corner. Staff recommends that this preliminary plat be approved with a 12' sideyard setback variance. 9. At its May 15 meeting the Planning Commission gave pre- liminary plat approval of East Shakopee 2nd conditioned on: 1. Approval of drainage plan by the City Engineer. 2. Provision of developer's security agreement. 3. Provision of park dedication in cash. 4. Removal of garage on lot 10 prior to sale of the lots. 5. Provision of sidewalk or postponed construction agreement for sidewalk along 4th Avenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends preliminary plat approval of East Shakopee 2nd conditioned on: 1. Approval of drainage plan by City Engineer. 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. TK :nae • - • .--1....--'''firl,..oz.4.0 ,2,3?.„ :44;0,. ,i,,,,,,sto,,.., • tillirik.. _, .. : , _ _.._ .,_1,__0...). ;,,,i,,,,. ....____________..., .._ ii.,, ., . tik 6 . . 4. i ...,,.,,...., . . . ..op • ., • . , .. t r n . . . SI IR* r . • \ . 5 IS. „„ 40 D, tillik rtt� s&� i 4 - • worlegirip' 0,111 I �r s filvoil D :•L - „ % ik, 1 ,,,,,,,q... 4 h . ., Ill 1 111 1 . - „i Itit a\ , t wow :S i ' 0111 � � 4�t� 'n.SAf'ti;Al:i� �+.Yi�`i ,7 /` i UTILITY ` 1$5$ I h, ,.. �r it • . ... ...s . — , ,,,, 1 (� QD • 1111 kli 2 i I.': .:. . • ilk • ''°` tfi E3 - -.• MUNICIPAL • 1 SERVICE BUILDING G Q t $ �'"''iic,4,1,, G0RMAN 4 ir ` FIELD 41 f / ****ct:'\.,,,,. oi.v.r,, • ,,,1 1 / . w a • • J ya n, Ev^ y�< �-�- Z DA TE TITIONER J . -42- U JAI � T . z.___. er_9- /or i 47 --q''4-,..t.i:F-i- . _ 1 aSE N0. LOT LOCATION SCALE . G. • _ . ./ ';Jff. ' 3}`47 _ .rte_- /r !r .......... 4. / l i . jUm �� H" � f a ! . . ray , . ..;,,r,,,,,f,74.iiii4AsHos_ ie..; ....... I/ I ie t ! I1 ..,.__.. A sk . 4V40'. 't. _ I, tir , Him i. • ' III ISO ' ■ I . hilleg illelk lk 3 „,,,,..4t1 sall 4. • • 1 \� ? +11 _ YL v. s 1 � d ;ryw 15 : , f r tA '4ft:' 0 . ..S. '''''' II SLIMISMO 3 , ..., ,.... . ..,.00., . tok A lb ...: .' § I r. . ,0 W. t . . ? ' 0 .00 y t' woo si , 1 r/ U • a. i13 t`�SIf'! '..i:9"..NiR•4!!! 1.,ll.,st! >i`6?A� . , . w V' 1 : I i V it sts, U TILITY • BLDG '4 00 ct j S a �: J . . , ate z .__� , ' ;� p cz X ®t;' 3 c MUNICIPAL • It ti SERVICE Q BUILDING , --FF-42-17° L----671-7e7 0' t , . i G L E7L. L -/Nfr— J - ZZ I gG 'ETITIONER DA TE I �L� 27 I 3 4�M-F, 7G-• 00- /8 r ASE NO. LOT LOCATION {SCALE P . ..) i DATE: June 3, 1980 CASE: P.C. 80 -11P ITEM: Final Plat Approval APPLICANT: Harry Weinandt LOCATION: Sec. 30, SW Corner of CR 17 & CR 42 ZONING /LAND USE: R -1 /Under Cultivation AREA: Approximately 42 Acres APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 11.25, 11.35, Section 12 FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 12.04 NO PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION BY COUNCIL REQUEST The.applicant is requesting final plat approval of 15 22 acre lots (approximately 42 acres) of Weinandts 1st Addition. PREVIOUS ACTION At its April 15, 1980 meeting, the City Council gave Preliminary Plat approval to Weinandt Acres conditioned on: 1. A determination of the size and provision of the drainage easements on the property to the north of the plat. 2. Resolution of the drainage problem created by the existence of the drainage tiles. 3. Provision of 10 foot utility easements along all property lies. 4. Provision of lot area calculations. 5. Compliance with subdivision regulations regarding developer agreements and par °k dedication requirements. 6. Submission of revised drainage plan subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 7. Submission of either right -of -way dedication or roadway easement document for that part of the roadway that will not be final platted at the present time. CONSIDERATIONS 1. In the course of review of the Final Plat, the County Highway Engineer reaffirmed the need for the right -of -way on County Road 17 to be increased 17 feet to a total of 50 feet west of the centerline. The need for this additional right -of -way was stated in earlier memos from the County Engineer on October 4, 1978 and March 20, 1979. Mr. Weinandt has been in receipt of this correspondence since forwarding from the County Engineer. -- -CASE: P.C. 80 -11P Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION At its May , 1980 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended Final Plat approval of Weinandt Acres 1st Addition conditioned on: 1. Submission of developer's agreement; provision of park dedication in cash. 2. City Engineer approval of final construction plans. 3. Submission of drainage easement for property to the North of the plat. 4. Redesignation of 140th Street to 29th Avenue. 5. Provision of 50' right -of -way along County Road 17. 6. Provision of • across outlot A from the end of Marcia Lane to County Road 17. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff.recommends approval as forwarded by the Planning Commission. 71) RESOLUTION NO. 1626 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF WEINANDT ACRES 1st ADDITION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee has approved the Final Plat of Weinandt Acres 1st Addition and has recommended its adoption; and WHEREAS, all notices of hearings have been duly sent out and posted and all persons appearing at the hearings have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all things, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, that the Final Plat of Weinandt Acres 1st Addition, legally described as follows: Government Lot 5 of Section 30, Township 115, Range 22, together with the East 2 of the Northeast 4 of said Section 30 except that part of said East 2 lying Easterly of the center line of County Road No. 17, Together with that part of the Northwest 4 of Section 29, Township 115, Range 22 lying westerly of the center line of County Road No. 17. be, and the same hereby is approved and adopted with the requirements that: 1. Favorable Title Opinion by the City Attorney. 2. Execution of a Developer's Agreement. 3. Park Dedication be in cash. 4. City Engineer's approval of final construction plans. 5. Developer executes a drainage easement for property to the North of the plat. 6. Redesignation of 140th Street to 29th Avenue. 7. Plat be called Weinandt Acres 1st Addition. 8. A 50' right -of -way be provided along County Road 17. 9. A thoroughfare easement across Outlot A from the end of Marcia Lane to County Road 17 be provided. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and the City Administrator be and the same are hereby authorized and directed to execute said approved Plat and Developer's Agreement. Adopted in session of the Shakopee 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 June, 1980. • E City—Attorney • MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Electrical Inspection Ordinance DATE: May 29, 1980 The attached Ordinance was prepared at staff initiative to fill a void in our City Code. We have never addressed the terms and conditions of electrical inspection mainly because we have always used a state electrical inspector. Now, Roy Baker, who has always done our inspections is not working for the state but rather directly for us. The ordinance accomplishes the following: 1) Creates the position of Electrical Inspector which can be filled by a City Employee or a contract agreement. We will go contract with Roy Baker. 2) Sets forth qualifications of the Electrical Inspector. 3) Sets forth the authority of the Electrical Inspector. 4) Sets forth the standards to be followed in his inspections -- basically the State Building Code and National Electric Code. The ordinance has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. DSR /j iw Attachment • 4e) ) ca-4-0( 8 L. ORDINANCE NO. w '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 SECTION 4.19 ELECTRICAL PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 4.19 ELECTRICAL PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS Subd. 1.. Applications. oft.he Provisions of this Ordinance. (a) The provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to all installations of electrical conductors, fittings, devices, fixtures hereinafter referred to as electrical equipment, within or on public and private buildings and premises, with the following general exceptions. The provisions of this Ordinance do not apply to the installations in mines, ships, railway cars, aircraft, automotive equipment, or the installations or equipment employed by a railway, electric or communication utility in the exercise of its functions as a utility, except E•; otherwise provided in this Ordinance. (b) AS used in the Ordinance, "reasonably safe to persons and property" as applied to electrical installations and electrical equipment, means safe to use in the service for which the installation or equipment is intended without unnecessary hazard Co Life, limb or property. (c) For purposes of interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance, the moss. recently published edition of the National Electrical Code, as and when adopted by the Minnesota State Board of Electricity, shall be prima -facie evidence of the definitions, interpretations and scope of words and terms used in this Ordinance. Subd. 2. Electrical Inspector - Qualifications and Appointment. (a) There is hereby created the position of Electrical Inspector for the.City•of Shakopee.• This position may be filled by a full time or part time.City employee or by.contr.actual agreement with a private person or company. The person chosen to fill the -office of Electrical Inspector or to perform the duties as agrc i;, :.cntract with the City of. Shakopee shall be of good moral character, shall be possessed of such executive ability as is requisite for the performance of his duties, and shall have a thorough knowledge of the standard materials and methods used in the installation of electrical equipment; shall be well versed in approved methods of construction for safety to persons and property; the Statutes of the State of Minnesota relating to electrical work and any orders, Ordinance No. Page -2- rules and regulations issued by authority thereof; and the National Electrical Code as approved by the American Standards Association; shall have experience as an Electrical. Inspectorhi_n the i nstallat i on of electrical equipment, or be a graduate mechanical or electrical engineer with two years of practical electrical experience and hold a valid Minnesota Journeymans Electricians License. (b) A qualified Electrical Inspector and any assistants required shall be appointed by the City Council or an agreement entered into with a qualified Electrical Inspector to • perform the duties set forth by this Ordinance. Any assistant shall meet the same general requirements as the Electrical Inspector. (c) The salary of the Electrical Inspector shall be established by the City Council. Before entering upon the discharge of his duties, he shall be bonded in the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) to the City of Shakopee. (d) Duties of the Electrical Inspector - It shall be the duty of the Inspector to enforce the provisions of this Ordinance. He shall, upon application, grant permits for the install- ation or alteration of electrical equipment, and shall make inspections of electrical installations, all as provided in this Ordinance. He shall keep complete records of all permits issued, inspections and reinspec.tions made and other official work performed in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance. He shall also keep on file a list of inspected electrical equipment issued by or. for. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., which list shall be accessible for public reference during regular office hours. (e) It shall_ be unlawful for the Inspector or any of his assistants to engage in the sale, installation or maintenance of electrical equipment, directly or indirectly, and.th.ey shall have no financial interest in any concern engaged in such business. (f) Authority of Electrical Inspector - The Inspector or his assistants shall have the right during reasonable hours, to enter any building or premises in the discharge of his official duties, or for the purpose of making any inspection, rein- specticn or test of electrical equipment contained therein or its installation. When any electrical equipment is found by the Inspector to be dangerous to persons or property because it is defective or defectively installed, the person, firm or corporation responsible for the electrical equipment shall be notified in writing and shall make any changes or repairs required in the judgment of the Inspector to place such equipment in safe condition and if such work is not completed within fifteen (15) days or any longer period that may be specified by the Inspector in said notice, the Inspector shall have the authority to disconnect or order discontinuance of electrical service to said electrical equipment. In cases of emergency where necessary for safety to persons and property, or where electrical 0 Q/ Ordinance.No. Page -3- equipment may interfere with the work of the lire Department, the Inspector shall have the authority to disconnect or cause disconnection immediately; of any electrical equipment. Subd. 3. Standards for Electrical Equipment Installation. (a) All installations of electrical equipment shall be reasonably safe to persons and property and in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance and the applicable Statutes of the State of Minnesota and all orders, rules and regulations issued by the authority thereof. • (b) Conformity of installations of electrical equip - ment,with applicable regulations set forth in the current National • Electrical Code, National Electrical Safety Code, or electrical. provisions of other safety codes which have been approved by the American Standards Association, shall be prima -facie evidence that such installations are reasonably safe to persons and property, . together with such additions and exceptions contained herein. Non- compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall be prima- facie evidence that the installation is not reasonably safe to persons and property. (c) The Electrical Inspector may, with,.approval of the City Council, authorize installations of special wiring methods other than herein provided for. (d) Buildings or structures moved from without to within and within the limits of the City of Shakopee shall conform to all of the requirements of this Code for new buildings or structures. • (e) Existing buildings or structures hereafter changed in use shall conform in all respects to the .requirements of this Code for the new use. Subd. 4. Wiring Methods. State Building Code, National Electric Code and National Electric Safety Code Applies. Sudb. 5. Connections to Installations. (a) It shall be unlawful. for any persons„, -firm or corporation to make connections from a supply of electric to any electrical equipment for the installation of which a permit is required or which has been disconnected or ordered to be disconnected by the Electrical Inspector. (b) The public or private utility providing services shall disconnect the same upon a written order from the Electrical Inspector, if the Inspector considers any electrical installation unsafe to life and property or installed contrary to this Code. Subd. 6. Permits and Inspections. (a) An electrical permit is required for each installation, alteration or addition of electrical work for light, heat and power within the limits of the City of Shakopee. • Ordinance No. Page -4- (b) No permit shall be required for electrical installations of equipment owned, leased, operated or maintained by a public service corporation which is used by said corporation in the performance of its function as a utility, except that such • electrical installation shall_ conform to the minimum standards of the National Electric Safety Code. (c) Ownership of any transmission or distribution lines or appurtenances thereto, including but not limited to trans- formers; shall not be transferred by a public service corporation to any person, firm or corporation, except another franchised public service corporation dealing in electric energy for distribution and sale, without a permit first having been issued therefor by the City of Shakopee. Such permit shall be issued only after the facilities to be transferred have been inspected and approved as provided in this Ordinance and upon payment of an inspection fee as set forth in this section of the Ordinance. (d) Before any permit is granted for the installation or alteration of electrical equipment_, the person, firm or corporation making application for such permit shall pay the City of Shakopee a fee in such amount as specified below and furnish proof of a valid State contractor's certificate. • (e) Application for such permit, describing the electrical work to be done, shall be made on a Shakopee Certificate of Affidavit, in writing, to the City of Shakopee, by the person, firm or corporation so registered to do such work. The application shall be accompanied by such plans, specifications.and schedules as may be necessary to determine whether the electrical installation as described, will be in conformity with all the legal. requirements. The . fees for electrical inspection as set forth in this section shall accompany such application. If applicant has complied with all of the provisions of this Ordinance, a permit for such electrical install- , ation shall be issued. (f) All electrical installations which involve the concealment of wiring or equipment: shall have a "rough =in" inspection prior Co concealment, wherein the Inspector. shall be duly notified in advance, excluding Saturday, Sunday and Holidays (g) Inspection fees shall be established by the Shakopee City Council by Ordinance. (h) When any electrical equipment is to be hidden from view by the permanent placement of parts of the building, the person, firm or corporation installing the equipment shall notify the Electrical inspector and such equipment Shall_ not be concealed unfit. :it :.has been .inspected . and approved by the Electrical Inspector. :. '. or until thirty -six (36) hours, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays, shall have elapsed fron..the time of such notification; Ordinance No. _ Page -5- (i) At regular intervals the Electrical Inspector shall visit all premises where work may be done under monthly, semi- annual or annual permits and shall inspect all electrical equipment installed under such a permit since the day of his last previous inspection, and shall issue a Certificate of Approval for such work as is found to be in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance, after the fee required has been paid. (j) If upon inspection, the installation is not found to be fully in conformity with the provisions of.this Ordinance, the Electrical Inspector shall at once forward to the person, firm or corporation making the installation, a written notice stating the defects which have been found to exist. (k) Fees double - when: Should any persons, co- partnership or corporation begin work of any kind such as herein - before set forth, or for which a permit from the Electrical Inspector is required by Ordinance, without having secured the necessary permit therefor from the Inspector of Buildings either previous to or during the day of the commencement of any such work, or on the next succeeding day where such work is commenced on a Saturday or on a Sunday or a Holiday, he shall., when subsequently securing such permit, be required to pay double the fees hereinbefore provided for such permit, and shall be subject to all penal provisions of this Ordinance. Holders of Contractors License shall not obtain permits for electric work unless the work is supervised by them and is performed by workmen employed by them or their firm. (1) Additional fees and /or fee shortages: Additional fees and /or fee shortages must be received by the City within 14 days ' of written notice. If additional fees and /or fee shortages are not received within 14 days of notice, permits for electrial installations will not be accepted by the City until such time as the additional fees and /or fee shortages are received. Additional fees and /or fee shortages that are not received within :14 clays of notice are subject to a 10 percent per day penalty. Subd. 7. Liability for Damages. This Ordinance shall not be construed to affect the responsibility or liability for any party owning, operating, controlling or installing any electrical equipment for damages to persons or property caused by any defect therein, nor shall the City of Shakopee be held as assuming any such liability by reason of the inspection or reinspection authorized herein or the Certificate of Approval issued as herein provided or by reason of the approval or disapproval of any equipment authorized herein. Subd. 8. Validity. • If any section, sub - section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional. such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions Ordinance No. _ Page -6- of this Ordinance. • Subd. 9. Certain Provisions of City Code Adopted by Reference. The Shakopee City Code, Chapter. 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including the Penalty Provisions" and Section 10.99 which, among other things, contains Penalty Provisions are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. Subd. 10. When in Effect. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect after the adoption, signing, attestation and one publication in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee. Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council held this _ day of 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this day of , 1980./ City Attorney 1 1 . t RESOLUTION NO. 1625 A RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION TO THE AMERICAN LEGION POST NO. 2 • WHEREAS, American Legion Post No. 2 in Shakopee did host the Third District American Legion Convention on May 16th to May 18th, 1980; and WHEREAS, American Legion Post No. 2 did an excellent job in coordinating the activities for the large number of people in attendance; and WHEREAS, American Legion Post No. 2 cooperated with the City of Shakopee in every respect and kept the appropriate officials well informed of all of the proposed activities; and WHEREAS, American Legion Post No. 2 did organize and carry out a very enjoyable parade which was watched by many Shakopee residents. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, congratulates American Legion Post No. 2 for their successful District Convention held in Shakopee.' Adopted in Regular Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 3rd day of June, 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk , Approved as to form this day of , 1980. City Attorney 7 6(-} MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Industrial Revenue Bonds St. Francis Hospital DATE: May 29, 1980 As indicated in the attached letter, St. Francis Hospital has applied for a Certificate of Need to expand the hospital. It appears that it will be feasible for the hospital to finance the expansion with Industrial Revenue Bonds. I suggested that the hospital write this letter to request from the City Council an expression of intent concerning the issuance of IR Bonds. As long as the IR Bond is properly handled, I see no reason why the City should not issue the bonds. The hospital is one of our major employers and we should cooperate in this expansion. Recommendation: City Council express their intention to either issue IR Bonds for the hospital or not; assuring them if they meet all the requirements. DSR /jiw Attachment • atI St.Francis Hospital 325 WEST FIFTH AVENUE /SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 55379/(612) 445 -2322 May 16, 1980 • Mr. Doug Reeder City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Reeder, As you know we have submitted a Certificate of Need to•the Metro- politan Health Board for an addition to our hospital. The new construction will house the intensive /coronary care unit and emer- gency room along with expansion of many of our ancillary and service departments. Also included in the project will be the remodeling of key areas within the existing hospital. The preliminary cost of the project is $ 5,870,000.00. Adding to this amount the bond issuing costs, the setting up of a debt service retirement fund, and the refinancing of our present debt, the bond issue necessary for this project will amount to approximately $ 9,000,000.00. These are all tentative figures that may change as we proceed through the review process. As has been discussed with you earlier, we would like to issue Industrial Revenue Bonds to finance this project. A bond under- writer will be selected and a financial feasibility study done upon approval of our project by the Metropolitan Health Board. At this point, we would ask that the City Council be informed of our plans and our future request to issue IRB's to determine if there would be any objections by Council members. A letter from you stating that the city would look favorably upon a request by St. Francis Hospital to issue IRB's would be appreciated and could be used in our review process, if necessary. Thank you very much for your consideration. If there are any questions, please contact myself or Mike Sortum, Director of Fiscal Services. Sincerely, d Si s er Agnes 0tfi ng Executive Director SAO:hme SPONSORED BY THE FRANCISCAN SISTERS OF ST. PAUL, MN. 6 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Use of Senior Citizen Building DATE: May 28, 1980 We have reviewed the attached request from the Senior Citizen Club concerning the use of the building when completed. They have previously requested this from staff. I indicated to them that I felt this was a City Council policy decision and should be made by the City Council. The lease agreement we have with the owners of the building • allows the City to use the building for 15 years with no rent and the only cost being the cost of the utilities and replacing equipment and painting as needed. -.It is my recommendation that the City Council go on record now as to whether you intend to ever charge rent for the use of the building. The concern.of the Senior Citizens arise from the fact that Jordan is in part leasing this facility to the Senior Citizens for $1,000.00, per year. This was never the discussed intent in Shakopee as far as I know. Although this Council cannot legally bind future'Councils, I believe a Statement of Policy will suffice to'assure the Senior Citizens. Recommendation: That the City Council direct the staff to prepare a resolution stating'the Council policy on this 'matter to include not charging rent as long as the City is not paying rent (the first 15 years) and then re- evaluating the capability of the City at the time when rent must be'paid by the City. • DSR /j iw Attachment • .. ........ : :.•,:... , % .•.?... ' c‘.. 1 ,1 •3 L):::.4::..; : ' . : ::: ..... 1 .. . ... . . . . . . ..„ .... • - :, - • 1 -: -.:-.2f:: : :::: :: :::: ...7:.;:•::•:•:::. ' ..„ .... ,... • • ■ • . , . „, „„„ i - -7,•:.... . . . ..,...- ....:: '• ..,. '•••••••:::::::•.!::::;:•:.••• . . . .. .. .. .:., .• 1 : :•'.• ':.•:•,..§.. 1,.... .. , .. . ...-..,. .? ' :.: . . . . . . 1 1..... .... .. . , .. . ... . .. „ ,„„..., . . ,. .. :::::::* :::::: • ...7. ....... . ::.• ':::::. . :: .:::::•.:-- . ,. . . . . . . .. . . . . '• . , • •• ji . . ., .. , •.. ' , .. . ....,......:....-...‘,..T.:** '',.::•:..:.::.::::...' • '. .. . . ' ,... ,. :, .,...... ......... ,. . • • '4 q '•‘ —,... '114 .„.. ...„... .... •• , • . . ... . ... . :„..:::„...... . . .. .... . ''' : ' ..... .: ::•:.......::::::::..... ' .......::. i • ....,,•:::: , .,...... . ......:.,-...• • t '•, (`. %. •• t,•„;- 0.-- ,....4.7 F ,,,,t .., ••-■,., ,c....... ...t. • ..• .-.• _ . .., .. .. .. . . .. 4 •:::-I — .. i , .. . — ' . . . . , . . i :::. ..: .. 1.: • .". (4_ , n ...., 0-.• ..r...:gai \ c.,1 . . ... . „ .... ..„... . \ ..,„ - • • .. 4.4i4k N ,... .„......:,,. .....•. ,•..,..i...„....:„...........:: .... .............. ..... ,,,........ ........ ..... „.... .... ..,....... • ..„... ........ .,. ,,.......„...:.::::, ......... ...,....._.,...„..:".,, ,, .,......,..„....„..:::,:. ,......................:.......... . •,:::....,..:,:::::..... ,.:...............,.....:: .::....... ......._ ....-- , ,... .. .... , ..... ..... I . .. ,. ..... , : .. :;: .i . :: : : .; : .. , ,: •: : . .....::; ., : .: : .., --,• Ith, N \ , \ • . ....,:.:,...„:, ••• '.• ... . ,, ... ..... r:ii.:•.. r.'11. • 1..,.. :-..:'.;.;/. ..:•-•,.....,..v.. -•- ........ . • . ........ , .• ,• •• • .. . ...„.... .....,... . . ........ ••:,•••••••••• .. ....... , t ' - '••••, 1 1 ... . : ...-... , 7 .:•:-::::::CS. i • •:::,',7•••:1.-::•.:- ,. :-...-_,,- - __ —. , ::::::., *.•:.••,2:•..:•:::', ' . . .. . -:•'::::-::... , • 7 •••••:::::::-. ,,, ..... , .. ••,..... _. - • . ... .. . —... . ,.• ,.,„ ....,. ... ,.... -•• — . • _ ....., . ..... _ _ ...• •..• — • •• . ...... ...... , .,.. :..., i'• —-:. ' . ........................... 7 .,. a.-:,,;a...--.4 '..": :••••• ' . , _. _ ., . . ...." . ._ • •... • 4 ._.. . r,....y..-_•-••• .-- .if . • .... -• •••• . ; .. - .,-, •Y -;:::- *0 .„ • 4 -:. • •••••••••••••: , .. . .. 4. !,,,,,:• • ,1 1 r:, ;A .. „— 7 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: - Summer Intern DATE: May 23, 1980 The Council is requested to authorize the employment of Nathan Wittenberg as a summer intern in the City Administrator's office. He will work on various short -term projects, as described on the attached agreement. We will pay him $750 for the summer for his services. Funds are available in the Administration budget, however, the position was not specifically authorized. DSR /j iw Attachment • • Y - Political Science Department Internship Learning Agreement A. Student Intern Nathan Wittenberg B. Internship Address 815 South Spencer Street 44 5 -3194 Internship Phone Shakopee, MN 553'/9 Agency /Institution /Organization dity of Shakopee Work Supervisor Douglas Reeder Phone 612 -4 +5 -3650 • Address e i ty Hall, 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, NN 55379 • s C. Faculty Supervisor Homer Williamson 612- 255 -4 + 128 Phone Address Department of Political Science, St. Cloud State University St. (loud, MN 56301 D. Internship 80 Period 6 (Mo.) . 9 _(D 80 (Year) to 8 (Mo.) 15 (Day) (Year) Work Hours. 40 /wk (Per week or quarter) Working Hours 8:00 A.M to 4:30 P.M. (Total) (Time Schedule) • - E. Compensation (Circle) Yes ,No Amount 1 .:x F. Objectives and Work Assignor- s (It is understood that the general learning objectives, • internship reading assignments, and the requirement for the student to produce two assigned papers are incorporated into the agreement. Specific wore,: assignments, additional student goals, and any variation from the normal internship requirements should be written below. Any change in this agreement must be stipulated in writing and agreed to by all parties). Since the internship assignments ire fora 40 h•:ur week, the reading will be less than the normal requirement and the :shorter paper requirement will be waived. Orientation to city government Research on elements of Comprehensive Plan revision Public Facilities Transportation Element Park Plan check accuracy of census rety;tns • Research on establishment of Cable T.V. Commission Research on Capital Improvement Program Codify city resolutions Attend council and planning commission meetings And other assignments as made by work supervisor / V • G. Termination of Internship. It is expected that normally the internship will run the full time period stipulated in item D. If problems arise during the internship, it is the obligation of the academic supervisor to attempt to resolve such problems and make such adjustments as are necessary. Any changes in the original agreement or termination of the internship before the normal time pert d must be agreed to in writing by all parties. If the student terminates the internship without prior agreement, or fails to live up to the conditions of the internship, uitin_satisfactory grade will automatically recorded. If the internship is terminated through no fault of the student, it is the obligation of the academic supervisor to find an alternative internship experience or make other arrangements for the student to complete the course and receive a grade. H. Internship Evaluation. The student intern will be evaluated by the work supervisor for work performance and attainment of general objectives. The work supervisor will supply the student with a short written evaluation summary. The work supervisor will supply the academic supervisor with a more detailed evaluation in writing or orally. The student will provide the academic supervisor with a 3 -5 page analytic book review and a 15 -20 page research paper. These items will have the following weights: work supervisor evaluation (45 %), bibliographical essay (10 %), research paper (45 %). Grading is on a S/U basis. All work must be completed by the date set for graduation of the quarter in which the internship is taken unless other arrangements are made in writing. Incompletes must be made up no later than the date set for graduation of the next regular academic year quarter. I. Student Obligations. The student agrees to appear at the place of work at the days and hours specified unless granted exemptions by work supervisor. The student also agrees to turn in all required written work by the specified deadlines, and perform the agreed upon work assignments, unless granted exemptions by the academic supervisor. J. Work Supervisor Obligations. The work supervisor agrees to provide the intern with an adequate orientation to the position, provide and supervise agreed upon work assignments (unless changes are agreed upon in writing), answer student questions as needed, and provide the evaluations by the times specified. K. Academic Supervisor Obligations. The academic supervisor agrees to see that the objectives of the internship are met, to be available to resolve any internship problems, to maintain regular contact with the student and work supervisor, and to provide the student with a written /oral evaluation of performance at the termination of the internship. Student Signature �n �C ) El�,u: Ct^ Academic Supervisor Signature ���� P • Work Supervisor Signature 27 Z f Political Science Department Internship Coordinator Signaturel���(,e� / 6 Vi � re,..t_ey., MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: ;Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator RE: Temporary City Employees • DATE: May 30, 1980 In accordance with City. Council direction, the following is a list of temporary city employees who have been hired by the various departments for the summer: Public Works Department Glenn Heyda $4.50 /hr. June - September, 1980 Engineering Department See attached Swimming Pool See attached DSR /jsc MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer •SUBJECT: Temporary Employees • DATE: May 29, 1980 Below listed are the three temporary employees hired through the summer for construction inspection, As in previous years, their salaries are paid by the projects which they inspect. They are as follows:' NAME RATE EMPLOYMENT DATES Marsha Frey $5.50 /hr. May - Aug. 29, 1980 Fulton Schleisman $6.25/hr. 6 mos. or as required Kathryn Heiland $5.50/hr June - Sept. 15, 1980 • HRS:nae r 1 980 STAFF .- MUNICIPAL SWIMMING POOL G 10 Mranager.......0.0 Jim Mertz 41 -2624 Fifth year employee. - 845 Lewis College Senior. WSI Shakopee, Mn. $ 5010 /hr _ 2.. Asst. Manager0.0.Becky Rein 445 -3688 Princeton School teache 638 E. 4th Eigth year employee. Shako ee 9 M $ 5.10 /hr WSI p -' - 30 Guard /Inst Joan Karst 445. -4026 Shakopee homemaker and 946 Shumway Manager of Jr .H.S. Pool Shakopee, Mn0 4.00 /hr Sixth year employee. Willi work mornings plus on call. W3I 40 Guard. /Inst, 0 0 .. 0 0 .Ti.m Nott 445-5777 College Senior 13O£ W. 10th Sixth year employee. • Shakopee, Rh. $ 1 /hr Parttime evenings and weekends. WSI Partt ime I.r " $ 5 0 10 /hr " 5.. Guar. d /Inst 0 . , ... 0 Kathy Lemke 4474920 College Student. Travel 4595. Lords Dr NE Europe this spring. Prior Lake $ 4000 /hr Second year employee0 . wSI 6. Guard. /Inst 0 0 0 .. 0 0 Jan Erickson • 445-a661 Lonsdale school teacher 951 So) Apgar Sixth year employee. Shakopee Nh L 4000/b.r Will work afternoons, evenings, & weekends. �/ WSI . Guard /Inst .. Q ... O Nancy Raa.um • 890 - 477x •Graduating Hoy 0 Sr. • 3417 W. 132 St First year. WSI • Burnsville, I.h $ 3. 0 /hr H0S. Swim Teani0 8. Guard/Inst...... .Susan Loewi.ng 4.45 -4511 H 0S 0 Jr. ;2nd . yr; WSI . 606 E 3rd Ave Has' guarded at Jr H.S. • Sh°.kopce, r' $ 3 /hr Swim Pool. To work Monday thru Friday only 9 Guard /Inst0 0 0 Jane Mertz 445-2624 . - £345 Lewis College student. WSI Shakopee $ 3.80 /hr Fourth year employee. • 10 Guard /Inst. 0 0 . 0 .0Loui: Pistulka 445. 214.65 College student. WSI 7OO:Jackson Pk Second •year employee. . Shakopee $ 4.00/hr Evenings & weekends. 11. Guard /In_st... 0 0 0.Audre;r O'Brien 445-1128 College student. WSI 3063 Hauer Tr Experience. guarding. • Shakopee $ 3.80/hr First year. employee. • 120 Guard. /Inst N o n 4.' -8168 College Sr. : - WSI ,..0.0x.0 ��tth; r Dahl Rt 2, Glen Ellyn_ First year employee. . Sha onee `; 3 /hr Previous experience ' . since 1974... t • • , (� MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator RE: Gorman Street/ Eagle Creek Blvd. DATE: May 30, 1980 The City Council has previously reviewed the feasibility report on this project and the project has been approved by S.P.U.C. Attached to this memo is a spread sheet which indicates the estimated assess- ments for the property owners. The identification of the property owner goes with the map included in the report. These assessments are based on the following assumptions: Sanitary Sewer 1. We will not assess a property for sanitary sewer that is now hooked up to sewer. This excludes Shakopee East and the Brooks Superettes store. 2. The sanitary sewer has been divided into trunk and lateral charges. The trunk charge is the oversizing change. All properties except 15826 (once part of Lenzmeier farm) are being assessed for both trunk and lateral benefit. This parcel will be assessed only for trunk as it will need a lateral at a later date. Watermain 1. S.P.U.C. will pay the cost of oversizing the pipe and this cost has been deleted before the assessments were estimated. 2. The watermain has not been split between trunk and lateral because there is no policy to do this now. I understand S.P.U.C. is working on a policy and I would support such a policy. 3. The proposed assessments include property which is now served by water. These are being assessed on the basis of fire protection benefit. The properties which are affected by this is Shakopee East and the Brooks Supperettes Store. 4. In all assessments the portion assigned to the City is the total of the City and S.P.U.C. together and this will have to be broken down and separated. 9°‘' Gorman Street /Eagle Creek Blvd. May 30;1980 Page -2- C Street Construction 1. The cost of street construction includes a wider road, curb and gutter and some change in profile. 2. If the watermains were installed with no street changes, the cost of the watermain would be much greater. Staff feels it is best to construct the street with the watermain as this will be cheapest for both and the most effective. Storm Sewer 1. The map included here indicates the area to be assessed for storm sewer. It is the area served which was not assessed for the CR -17 storm sewer. No property is being assessed twice. Some properties (Shakopee East and the City of Shakopee) were assessed entirely for trunk storm sewer for CR -17 and only partially for lateral. 2. This storm sewer project is a lateral storm sewer. - Recommendation: - It is recommended that the City Council hold the public hearing and then discuss and agree on the assessment policies. Staff will then make any changes needed and prepare the resolution ordering the project for the next Council meeting. DSR /jsc • () MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator RE: Third Avenue Watermain DATE: May 30, 1980 Attached is the feasibility study which has been accepted by the City Council and is the basis of the public hearing being held. This feasibility study is one which has had some amendments made to it. I want to call your attention specifically to several pages of this study which are most pertinent to the project we are recommending. 1. The last page of the report numbered at the top by hand as page 13 is the revised estimates of the project we are proposing. It indicates a projected cost of $51,000 and a front foot cost of $40.1575. This includes the installation of watermain from Harrison East to the East side of Lot 11, Block 9 and watermain from the West side of Lot 8, Block 4 to Webster Street. 2:" The .Map on Page 9 (Numbered at the top) is the map which shows the area proposed to be assessed. 3. We are not installing sanitary sewer with this project. Recommendation Hold the hearing and adopt Resolution No. 1627, ordering the project and the preparation of plans and specifications by Suburban Engineering. DSR /jsc / q Main Office i 571-6066 t h UBURBAN 6875 Highway No. 65 N. E. �d9®i1�11EERl�I�i Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432 INC. South Office 890 -6510 ,It , LI Civil, Municipal & Environmental Engineering 1101 Cliff Road LI Land Surve in • Planning • Testing Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 Y g g g CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engeer under the 0 .laws of the gtate of Minnesota. William E. Pric' E. Date % ,7 /F7 Minn. Reg. No. 6939 • • 1 . Robert Minder, Reg. Eng. E. A. Rathbun, Reg. Suru. Wm. E. Price, Reg. Eng. Gary R. Harris, Reg. Suru. Peter J. Molinaro, Reg. Eng. W,n, E. Jensen, Reg. Eng. Wm. K. Meyer, Reg, Eng. H. William Rogers, Reg. Suru. Bruce A. Paterson, Reg. E' Main Office r4 4 UBURBAEN 6875 Highway No. 65 N. E. t NGINERING Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432 INC. t I South Office 890 -6510 Civil, Municipal & Environmental Engineering 1101 Cliff Road Land Surveying • Land Planning • Soil Testing Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 April 26,1979 REPORT To: City of Shakopee, Minnesota From: Suburban Engineering, Inc., William E. Price Subject: 1979 Improvements: Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Extensions - 3rd Avenue. GENERAL: The extension of sanitary sewer and water main lateral to serve properties along 3rd Ave. between Harrison and Clay Streets have been made only as, needed to serve specific needs. A trunk sanitary sewer follows Adams St. from 6th St. to the "River Interceptor" along the Minnesota River. Sewer service to the west of Harrison has been provided by a lateral along T.H. 169 and other connections have been made to the trunk sewer. Water service has been provided to the properties along Harrison and to the west by extension of a dead end lateral north from 6th Ave. to 3rd and Harrison St. Another dead end water main is extended on 3rd Ave.. from Clay to Webster Streets. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Sanitary Sewers: It is proposed to extend lateral services on 3rd Ave. from the trunk sewer on Adams easterly to Webster St. and westerly to Jefferson St. The trunk sewer on Adams St. is relatively shallow, about 5 feet, and therefore extension of lateral service is limited by the depth availabe. Our studies indicate that extension on 3rd St. east of Washington St. may not be feasible and that to serve the property easterly of Washington St. an extension southerly may be needed as well as filling of the property to a higher elevation. Insulation of the pipe will be necessary to prevent freezing. 4 • Robert Minder, Reg. Eng. E. A. Rathbun, Rcg. Suru. Wm. E. Price, Reg. Eng. Cary 11. llarri.. neg. Suru. Peter J. Molinaro, Reg. Eng. Wm. E. Jensen, Reg. Eng, Wm. K. Meyer, Reg. Eng. 11, William Rogers, Reg. Suru. Bruce el. Pa :. •.. Reg. Eng. • To: City of Shakopee Re: Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Extension - 3rd Ave. April 26,1979 Page 2. of 3 • T Extending a sewer west of Adams will also have a similar problem of insufficient depth for the pipe. A review of the preliminary profile in- dicates that it may not be feasible to extend the sewer more than 175 feet west of Adams St. In reviewing the entire existing system in the vicinity of 3rd and Harrison, it appears that if service is needed to the vicinity of 3rd and Jefferson, that a sewer could be built from 2nd to 3rd Avenues on Jeffer- son extended. An alternative to the sewer would be the installation of a private lift station with a discharge line easterly to the sewer. The above sewer laterals are shown on.the attached drawing and for convenience are referred to as follows: Line "A" - Adams to Webster Line "B" - Adams to 175 feet west • Line "C" - on Jefferson from 2nd to 3rd Ave. Water Main: The proposed water main extension would complete a system loop closure on 3rd Ave. from Harrison to Webster Streets. The system would incorporate about 235 feet of 6" main installed recently from Adams St. east. The system would complete service on 3rd Ave. as well as eliminate about 1,500 feet of dead end main on Harrison and about 800 feet on 3rd Ave. west of Clay. ESTIMATED COSTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The estimated cost of the project is as follows: Water Main $44,125.00 • Sanitary Sewer Line "A" - Adams to Webster $41,370.00 Line "B" - Adams to Jefferson $12,035.00 TOTAL Sanitary Sewer $53,405.00 / • To: City of Shakopee Re: Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Extension - 3rd Ave. April 26,1979 Page of • • Recommended Sewer System: With consideration for the limited use of the total facilities de- scribed it is recommended that the following system of sanitary sewer laterals be constructed to provide service: . Line "A Adams to Washington $24,795.00 Line "6" - Adams to 175 feet west $12,035.00 . Line "C" - Jefferson from 2nd to 3rd $23,725.00 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER $60,555.00 The total recommended project cost is estimated to be. $104,805.00 A detailed estimate of cost is included herewith. The proejct is feasible and is recommended for construction as described with the modifications. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT: It is proposed to assess the project according to City policy on an adjusted front footage basis. Accordingly, the estimated rates are as follows: Adj.Frt.Ftg. Estimated Rate Water Main 1,510 /ft, $ Z.44. /ft. Sanitary Sewer 1,280 /ft. $ 38.09/ft. Water Services $1,187.00/ea. Sanitary Services $1,180.00/ea. Respectfully submitted, il\P" • William P. Pric3ME. WEP /lh enc f April 26,1979 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE CITY OF SHAKOPEE 1979 IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT: 3rd Ave. Sanitary Sewer & Water Main Extension PROJECT LENGTH: 1,200 L.F. SANITARY SEWER: Line "A" on 3rd Ave. - Adams St. to Washington St. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 8" San. Sewer 360 L.F. $ 11.50 '$ 4,140.00 Std. Manhole 2 Ea. $900.00 $ 1,800.00 8 X 4 Wye 4 Ea. $ 35.00 $ 140.00 Rock Excavation 165 Cu.Yd. $ 20.00 $ 3,300.00 Pipe Bedding 17 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 $ 155.00 Insulation 360 L.F. $ 7.00 $ 2,520.00 Street Restoration 440 Sq.Yd. $ 3.25 $ 1,430.00 TOTAL $13,475.00 10% Contingencies $ 1,350.00 Total Construction Costs $14,825.00 25% Engr., Admin., & Legal $ 3,705.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $18,530.00 .SERVICES: Line "A" on 3rd Ave. - Adams St. to Washington St. • 4" CISP Service 160 L.F. $ 6.50 $ 1,040.00 Rock Excavation 100 Cu.Yd. '$ 20.00 $ 2,000.00 Pipe Bedding 8 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 $ 70.00 Insulation 160 L.F. $ 7.00 $ 1,120.00 Street Restoration 10 Sq.Yd. $ 3.25 $ - 325.00 TOTAL $ 4,555.00 10% Contingences $ 455.00 Total Construction Costs $ 5,010.00 25% Engr., Admin.,& Legal $ 1,255.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 6,265.00 Total Estimated Cost Line "A" Adams to Washington $24,795.00 • • • • -1- • • 7 )2' Line "A" on 3rd Ave. - Washington St. to Webster St. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 8" Sanitary Sewer 370 L.F. $ 11.50 $ 4,255.00 Std. Manhole 1 • Ea. $900.00 $ 900.00 8 X 4 Wye 4 Ea. $ 35.00 $ 140.00 Rock Excavation 30 Cu.Yd. $ 20.00 $ 600.00 Pipe Bedding 5 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 $ 45.00 Insulation 530 L.F. $ 7.00 $ 3,710.00 Street Restoration 420 Sq.Yd. $ 3.25 $ 1,365.00 4" CISP Service 160 L.F. $ 6.50 $ 1,040.00 Total $12,055.00 10% Contingencies $ 1,205.00 Total Construction Cost $13,260.00 25% Engr., Admin. & Legal $ 3,315.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $16,575.00 Total Line "A" on 3rd Ave. - Washington St.to Webster $15,575.00 Line "B" on 3rd Ave. - Adams St. to 175 feet West 8" Sanitary Sewer 175 L.F. $ 11.50 $ 2,015.00 Std. Manhole 1 Ea. $900.00 $ 900.00 8 X 4 Wye 3 Ea. $ 35.00 $ 105.00 Rock Excavation 90 Cu.Yd. $ 20.00 $ 1,800.00 Pipe Bedding 14 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 $ 125.00 Insulation 175 L.F. $ 7.00 $ 1,225.00 Street Restoration 200 Sq.Yd. $ 3.25 $ 650.00 Total $ 6,820.00 10% Contingencies $ 680.00 Total Construction Cost $ 7,500.00 25% Engr., Admin., & Legal $ 1,875.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 9,375.00 Services: Line "B" on 3rd Ave. - Adams St. to 175 feet west. 4" CISP 80 L.F. $ 6.50 $ 520.00 Rock Excavation 40 Cu.Yd. $ 20.00 $ 800.00 Pipe Bedding 6 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 Insulation 80 L.F. $ 55.00 $ 7.00 $ 560.00 Total $ 1,935.00 10% Contingencies $ 195.00 Total Construction Cost $ 2,130.00 25% Engr., Admin. & Legal $ 530.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 2,660.00 • Total Line "B" on 3rd Ave. - Adams St. to 175 feet west $12,035.00 • 1 . -2- • Line "C" on Jefferson 2nd Ave. to 3rd Ave. ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 8" Sanitary Sewer 440 . L.F. $ 11.50 $ 5,060.00 Std. Manhole 3 Ea. $900.00 $ 2,700.00 8 X 4 Wye 3 Ea. $ 35.00 $ 105.00 Rock Excavation 30 Cu.Yd. $ 20.00 $ 600.00 Pipe Bedding 12 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 $ 110.00 Insualarion' 440 L.F. $ 7.00 $ 3,080.00 Fill Material 940 Cu.Yd. $ 3.25 $ 3,055.00 Road Restoration 140 Sq.Yd. $ 3.25 $ 455.00 • Total $15,165.00 10% Contingencies $ 1,515.00 Total Construction Costs $16,680.00 25% Engr., Admin., & Legal $ 4,170.00 Total Estimated Project Cost X20,850.00 Seri vices - : • 4" LISP 120 L.F. $ 6.50 $ 780.00 Rock Excavation 20 Cu.Yd. $ 20.00 $ 400.00 Pipe Bedding 8 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 $ 70.00 Insulation 120 L.F. $ 7.00 $ 840.00 Total $ 2,090.00 10% Contingencies $ 210.00 Total Construction Costs $ 2,300.00 • 25% Engr., Admin. & Legal $ 575.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 2,875.00 Total Estiamted Cost Line "C" $23,725.00 • f -3- Water Main ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT - 6" DCIP Water Main 950 ' L.F. $ 11.00 $10,450.00 CI Fittings 400 Lb. $ 1.00 $ 400.00 Rock Excavation 420 Cu.Yd. $ 20.00 $ 8,400.00 Pipe Bedding 20 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 $ 180.00 Hydrant w /6" Gate Valve 1 Ea. $900.00 $ 900.00 6" Gate Valve 1 Ea. $325.00 $ 325.00 Sodding 1,400 Sq.Yd. $ 1.45 $ 2,030.00 Total $22,685.00 10% Contingencies $ 2,270.00 Total Construction Costs $24,955.00 25% Engr., Admin. & Legal $ 6,240.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $31,195.00 . Water Service 11 Ea. $300.00 $ 3,300.00 Rock Excavation • 280 Cu.Yd. $ 20.00 '$ 5,600.00 Pipe Bedding 10 Cu.Yd. $ 9.00 $ 90.00 Road Restoration 155 Sq.Yd. $ 3.25 $ 505.00 Total $ 9,495.00 10% Contingencies $ 950.00 Total Construction Cost" , 5.00 25% Engr., Admin. & Legal $ 2 Total Estimated Project Cost -- 73,05b.00 Total Estimated Cost Water Main $44,125.00 • 1 A c.�i _ lo" A 2 ND AV E AM • , is ..\--k c 6 n PA. c �z , ♦ 3 s x / i 5 ,_, �, --+ - 2 ., I' y , 2 Ij j 3 4 1, ii 6 N 1 2 3 4 951 6 EE : i 2 ; ° � f A :3 f � 5— f - 1 ?� `L••-1J B - {E E j� - 1 = 3RD •-- - > - -- - - - - - -- < < AVE . <- ---< -0- -- <---- <- - --< =��e � -I- itH • t - -I -- 1 - .• 1 I 1 • . : :: 12 F 1 1 0 9 8 7 I 12 1 1 10 9 * T ° . ' i d 9 x8 r: 6 `yam 7 ? .. W 4 z k� 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 A... 4 TH AVE. c f O RIVER VIEW x * - x •:'-' PARK WOMEN S ���`` REFORMATORY c: LEGEND w HYD. > - _ A. Proposed Wat ermain • _ _ ..� San. Sewer II 5TH 9" :<< p Existing I, .1 p storm Sewer PROPOSED 3RD. AVE. watermain SAN. SEWER a WATER — o ° �HYD. MAIN EXTENSIONS n DATE: • PREPARED BY : ... 4 26 -79 Suburbon Engineering Inc. . . . , . z Z. • I ,.._?___---- - Pe 21 . — (21 " --------1, 7 WA_ -....=_-_..- --- 1 -- - "r31.._ . 1 \:1 . a' • ' A . \ A,.. ... ,_---.,,--- i; \ \. ,. ..P\• rn VM . 1 - . , i i A \ v ....-.--,.. v .:,..-- y - ..\ 1111,3 U___,...\ _:_10 —. 1 •,i. ; . a ... c\ --- .\ I , w : ; ‘ Tiffc;\__ ■::_-_,,_- -,-.---, , 1 _ , • , 1 • • • • aill--. -: - . - i 1 y \ 51 . • _.: 4 ' - C • - - - , 11 s • . .6_ .5"... • ..., r .11___L‘ i. 4 _______\ Dvi ,,,,AENs u• -6-.. ■ t ,---1--,---T " .. „.,...„.., • • ' • .8 ' . a RE"R / ..! -, • ...„.....\--A-!----- -, ; , 1 ' 1 , ;: ' - 84 ,--- --.----___-_:--7*- -•! -1 . • . . . , . .. . . . EXISTING WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM • . . • . . . i ...... ...• . , : i ...• . ' . . . ?...: ...... ' . , ; . - . ..,. , . . i •!: ... „. ., — , • _ .. ...... . ..1. .... . ._ . . ..._. .---- „.. .?., . . - . .. • • • . .••••• F. • : :,...:::: ..: • - ... _ ---, r ...... 7 ... ......„ ..... , 1 ...- ..... i 1 ,” f :"" • .., , 4..."•?...' . • 1 . . .. : . • 1 I . I • . • . .. . I . ;...... ... .... ........- i ...; " •••••••..- • , E ''l ' • . * - . .. ... ..... .. --. Tr T •• !... ::: : . • 4 <•.,. i VI 3 f.r. I . :., . .,., ,., ,. _ ,.. ....;•: . .. 1 I f • - : : 2 2. 4 . 5 , iis ',.:.:*: • 4 • % • - 0 :3 b i '....:-.........::.:.::.::•"I i cr I 1 . I .. $ :.• ...:-.. . I . - , ! ... A .:. . • w.... L ‘..-..... . . ....... ; .. : .... .. _ 7 _A 4 :.% !,...: • . "*"....... , ., ...• : 0,- „Oh ..:• ..... s4 . '"i Y.•:*••N 0.....................;; - -• - < - --- - AVE-0' • • • • . . . . ......... ..„ ...., . . ... ..... ,. .. .a.c.....i.....: 1 0 .. fl t ...,... , i .. ... .... ....,.... .„... .... ....; 1 f i : i 1 e . . • ..tP .., / ...; . ' ....... ' . . •:.. .0 .1 ; : A (..:: .. . . . , . .... • ..• .. • : : :1: : :.,••• ; -, ‘ ' • 4t. .1 ::::-4:> :•,' i'....:4 •Fi .....x n: , 1 .,. ..'...- :.' 1 9 s 171e .......-.z, ,....., • - ..... s o :: ::: • '..ei 72: ! 4 i ... ;. ' Z•4.•,... i r '' • :..:."....f.•:+c, :. . i .......7. f,..-. . 1 1 1, .1.. .., . [..... ,,, : 1 • i -- ..----. * 1 ' .':::: •: 4 • i - 2 : 3 4 5 6. ::::...-....,.. ; : 4 : .. • - f l - . .. i ......... ...' : • •:•:-:•:‘,: ..• • ., . . .. ..... I 4 - ... • 4„.... .. , -. .. .- . \'' f .• ..... ..f• ' 3 • . %.... • 4 'r :i.-; • ... . ....., -"...... I ......... ... . - I . . -... ; e . • : : • f • • . ::,.. ..• i :•••• , / i RM.-. R V E.. W s •••: • • - " --t••••"" ( s 0::. t / '1: ::: : . Vii.,t:4:;:: t ''..*:: .t•-. ........ • - r: ••••• e...,:•::- si• RE....' . ...)NM;•'•: 7 '1_;TT•;' ia..: .... — 1 ,...., r — ..... — • --% [ ,•:•.',.. .,, ......, . ..,.. -4'.•' ...• %. : :'.. s .: as. i .. :.., ..... ..-.:: ..._ ; n.„ • • : „.•$$. , ...... • • f '3 • ..... 1 :',.- :4.:•:,.%t:.::•*4 • f / ,:-: ...z.:•: :-• ':.:• t-: ....• e y . .....:,........,..4..............,,,,.......,,,,,,,,,... • . • - —.a-0— . .-.:,.: ••. •• i .. . " • PROPOSED 3R0. AVE, . .., .... ....• , •• •..,:•.. . ..:....: '.:3•::t r:••• S t...;- i::: i: ,..., ....... „. .......... „, ...... , i I .e -,,.. :-,.. Y r.: . SAN SEWE R 8 WATER— . :..... ,...:: MAIN EXTENSiONS • .:: •i i REVISED &22S k : .).:::.71'7,:: PRE PAR :::. i'.• 6 Y ... ... • • - — • : • . ..,::::,r.:;.:!tnp: Et1•0:eiro::; i!i:..: . • May 22,1979 3RD AVE. WATERMAIN & SANITARY SEWER ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Estimated Assessment Rates (Not including Services) Est.Cost of Main Ass. Ftg. Ass. Rate Water Main $31,195.00 1,390 $ 22.44 Sanitary Sewer Line "A" Constructed 1978 Line "B "(Adams West) 9,375.00 100 $ 93.75 Line "C "(2nd to 3rd)20,850.00 242, $ 86.16 Typical 50 foot lot assessment Water Main $1,122.00 $1,122.00 Sanitary Sewer Line "B" $4,687.00 Line "C" $4,308.00 TOTAL $5,809.00 $5,430.00 • f REPORT REVISION REVISED WATERMAIN ESTIMATE ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 6" DCIP Watermain 720 L.F. $ 13.00 $ 9,360.00 CI Fittings 700 Lb. 1.25 875.00 Rock Excavation 320 Cu.Yd. 30.00 9,600.00 Pipe Bedding 20 Cu.Yd._ 9.00 180.00 Hydrant w /6" Gate Valve 1 Ea. 1100.00 1,100.00 6" Gate Valve 1 Ea. 375.00 375.00 Sodding 1050 Sq.Yd. 2.50 2,625.00 Total $24,115.00 10% Contingencies 2,410.00 Total Construction Costs $26,525.00 25% Engr., Admin. & Legal 6,675.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $33,200.00 Water Service 11 Ea. 350.00 $ 3,850.00 • Rock Excavation 280 Cu.Yd. 30.00 8,400.00 Pipe Bedding 10 Cu.Yd. 9.00 90.00 Road Restoration 155 Sq.Yd. 4.00 620.00 Total $12,960.00 10% Contingencies 1,300.00 Total Construction Cost $14,260.00 25% Engr., Admin. & Legal 3,540.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $17,800.00 • Total Estimated Cost Water Main $51,000.00 Typical Assessments 1,270 Assessable Front Feet $51,000 1,270 = $40.1575/FF (50)(40.1575) = $2,007.87 (60)(40.1575) = $2,409.45 (80) (40.15 75) = $3,212.60 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engin - •r under ws of the State of Minnesota. 4 • Date 5 MK r egistration No. 13689 f MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Building Permits - Third Avenue DATE: May 29, 1980 On September .4, 1979, the City Council authorized and directed the City Staff to issue Building Permits on Third Avenue, and at the same time, committed themselves to construct a water project on Third Avenue to provide the needed fire flow for these new buildings. Since that time, I have heard several Councilmembers indicate that the staff had been directed not to issue Occupancy Permits to these buildings under construction until after the watermain was installed. This was not my understanding. The City Engineer and I listened to the Council tapes from September 4, 1979 and find no mention by anyone at that meeting about not issuing the Occupancy Permit. The motion made was as recorded in the attached minutes of that meeting. I have, therefore, issued a Certificate of Occupancy to Mr. Wiggins for his four -plex which is now complete. The second four -plex will probably be ready for occupancy within several months. Following the public hearing on this proposed project, if the City Council is ready to order the project, we will make every effort to get this project under construction as soon as possible in order to provide the needed fire flow. DSR /jiw Attachment 1 f . v.;' • 1i 4Lli' I tii' ' '"'.1 ''''' ',- -:,:!' . rt. --- - Procoodlnan or this City CO'tin'c'' — . Page -4- September 4• 1979' • • Ward/Hullander moved to approve the proposed revised staff organiza- t tion chart. Motion failed with Cncl. Lebens, Leroux, and Reinke voti .-4 It, "No". M . • Leroux/Hullander offered Resolution No. 1487, A Re solutionApproving a 0 .41 . .. Authorizing Entry by the City of Shakopee to an Agreement with Valley ;to Industrial Park, LTD, and moved for its adoption. City Admin. read•t 11 resolution. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens voting "no". . . d . , • . • 9 ... • The City Adm. m infored the Council that the 3rd Avenue water systeM 6 .- feasibility study has not yet been initiated. /11 p • Hullander/Reinke moved to authorize the issuance of Building Permits': ?J r on 3rd Avenue, with the intention to order a water project that wll' I correct the water deficiency. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens voting "No". . . I ' Hullander/Leroux moved to authorize the hiring of Nancy Engler as a • full-time secretaryin the Engineering Department effective September 4, 1979, at a salary of $4.75 per hour. Roll Call: Ayes - unanimous. Noes - none. Motion carried,...: Hullander/Reinke'offered Resolution No. 1488, A Resolution Calling.for • a Public Hearing on the Financing Plan for the Elderly Highrise • ' . Redevelopment Project No. 1, and moved its adoption. The City Adm.. read the Resolution. Motion carried unanimously. . • The City Attorney informed the Council that he had received a proposed agreement from Title Insurance Company of Minnesota to require that • • the City of Shakopee and the various property owners involved in the • proposed Elderly HighriSe each contribute $ to an escrow account to be held pending the clearing of any defects in the title . • of the property which would fully protect the Title Insurance Company • of Minnesota. • • • ' . Leroux/Hullander moved that the agreement be returned unexecuted. Motion carried unanimously. ' . • Reinke/Leroux moved to adjourn to Tuesday, September 11, 1979, at 6:00 P.M. *Motion carried unanimously. • • • . . . . . . • ' . , • . • . . Douglas S. Reeder • City Administrator . . . . . • -..." . . • . • . , . . • , . • • . . . . . . . • . ' • . . . . . . • • . • . • . . . . . . .• ; • i • • I/ • : . • • . . • • . . . , . . . . .. • • . • . . • . . . , • . • . • . . f . . : . : • • . • • • . . ■ • . • • . . , . . • • . , • . . . . . • . . '------------------------------ - - - -- - . --____.,--------.- , . - ..... . . ''... Cy RESOLUTION NO. 1627 A RESOLUTION ORDERING AN IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS THIRD AVENUE TRUNK WATERMAIN 80 -5 WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 13th day of May, 1980, fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improvements of Third Avenue from Webster to Harrison by watermain; and WHEREAS, ten (10) 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, at which time 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 following improvements are hereby ordered as proposed in the feasibility study: A. Installation of 6" watermain from Harrison Street East to the East side of Lot 11, Block 9 Koeper's Addition. B. Installation of 8" watermain from West side of Lot 8, Block 4, Koeper's Addition East to Webster Street. 2. Bill Price, Suburban Engineering is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvements. Addopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 3rd day of June, 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of June, 1980. City Attorney MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder, City Admr. FROM: Judith S. Cox, Deputy City Clerk RE: Applications for Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor DATE: May 30, 1980 The City has received the following applications for Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses. The Police Chief has approved them, and the taxes are current. All are in order and ready for approval. Action: Approve the application and grant a Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to: 1] Pullman Club, Inc., 124 W. 1st Avenue 2] Wittles, Inc., 1561 East 1st Avenue 3] Clair's Bar, Inc., 124 South Holmes St. 4] Family Dining, Inc., RR #1 5] Riverside Liquors, Inc., 507 East 1st Avenue jc . MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder, City Admr. FROM: Judith S. Cox,. Deputy City Clerk RE: Applications for Club On Sale Liquor License DATE: May 30, 1980 Please table the following applications for Club On Sale Liquor License, as they are not in order: The American Legion Post No. 2 Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post No. 4046 Shakopee Council 1685 Home Association Inc. jc "" 06 • CITY OF SHAK*PEE 4 tJ 1 `41 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 ?4 M E M O TO: Douglas S. Reeder, City Admr FROM: Judith S. Cox, Deputy City Cle SUBJECT: Applications for Set -Up Licenses DATE: May 28, 1980 • We have received two applications for a license to permit to only allow consumption & display of • intoxicating liquor (Set -Up License)." I have checked with the Chief -of Police and he has no problem with the City issuing licenses. The City has issued licenses to both applicants in the past and both do now hold a Set -Up License. Action: • • Approve the application and grant a license to "Only Allow Consumption & Display of Intoxicating Liquor" to: John and Margaret Abeln, 220 West 2nd Avenue Jim & Lucy's, Inc, 201 West 1st Avenue jc • Note: There are no delinquent taxes! MEMO TO: Shakopee HRA FROM: Jeanne Andre, Executive Director • RE: Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Bonus Funds DATE: May 8, 1980 The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has awarded the Minneapolis /St. Paul Metropolitan Area bonus community development funds because the Metropolitan Council has an innova- tive area -wide housing plan. I attended a meeting to explain the application procedure for these funds and the type of applica- tion most - likely to be funded. • Not all activities eligible to be funded under general community development funds are eligible for these bonus funds. The two main groups of eligible activities are as follows: 1) Activities which facilitate the construction, rehabilitation or acquisition of housing for low and moderate income families and persons outside areas of concentration, and 2) Outreach programs designed to facilitate movement of low and moderate income and minority families and persons to housing outside areas of concentration. The criteria the Metropolitan Council has developed for rating projects in their review process are listed below: 1) Applications for CD Bonus Funds shall be ranked according to the type of activity proposed and the relationship of the activity to the Allocation Plan goals for the community. 2) Applications which will facilitate new or rehabilitated family housing opportunities in a community shall receive priority over applications proposing outreach types of activities. 3) Activities which have the least cost of CD funds per dwelling unit to be assisted shall receive the highest priority. 4) Applications requesting over $250,000 in CD funds shall receive lbwest priority. 5) Other items to be considered in the review and ranking process shall include the extent and availability of other funds to achieve the same purpose in the community; the extent of local approval or appropriate zoning for a proposed project or activity to proceed; and the status of the project to receive funding through HUD or MHFA. Shakopee HRA -2- May 8, 1980 `4) r HUD has indicated that its main priority is j � / p y projects in which ./ the community has a demonstrated ability to perform in an efficient and timely manner, as they will have no chance to recapture funds which the community is unable to spend. Given the above considerations, I propose the HRA indicate to the City Council its willingness to undertake a project as outlined below: 1) Purchase 4 - 6 empty City lots currently served by municipal water and sewer, scattered in various parts of the City. 2) Provide any site improvements necessary for construction on these lots. 3) Build 235 or state housing finance one and two family homes on these lots for sale to low and moderate income families. My rational for this project is that it would provide more homes to low and moderate income families at a time when mortgage rates are excluding many deserving families. It would provide work to contractors who currently have little private sector work. It would also. improve Shakopee's housing performance ratings with little additional administrative work. By using scattered, existing lots, we would avoid concentrations of low and moderate income families. I feel this project would receive a high rating under the Metropolitar Council Review Criteria and our experience with the 235 program on Fourth and Minnesota demonstrates to HUD our ability to conduct such a project. I informally discussed this project with our HUD representative and she strongly encouraged such an application by the City. I would like to solicit your comments on this project, and if you support such an application, suggestion of possible lots which could be acquired. JA /j iw • • • 1 9 z MEMO TO: Shakopee HRA • FROM: Jeanne Andre Director, HRA RE: - Community Development Program, Public Hearing DATE: May 29, 1980 A public hearing is to be held on the application by the City for:',Community Development Block Grant Bonus Funds. At the May 19, 1980, meeting of the City Council, the HRA recommended that the City pursue this application for the acquisition of lots scattered throughout Shakopee for the construction of homes under the Federal 235 Mortgage Program. The attached memo of May 8, 1980, to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority outlines eligible activities and criteria used for selection of applicants. The HRA may be able to administer up to eight lots. Potential lots to be purchased under this grant will be identified on a map at the public hearing. • JA /jiw Attachment • MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne Andre, Administrative Assistant RE: Application for 1980 Community Development Block Grant Bonus Funds DATE: June 2, 1980 A public hearing on the above application is scheduled for the June 3, 1980 Council Meeting. If, following the public hearing, the Council decides to authorize the preparation of the application for funds under the above - listed program, I recommend the adoption of the following resolutions: 1] Res. No. 1632, A Resolution Authorizing Submission of An Application for 1980 Community Development Block Grant Bonus Funds. This resolution is necessary documentation of City Council support for the submission of an application. 2] Res. No. 1633, A Resolution Authorizing the City to Execute an Option Agreement for Acquisition of Lots under the 1980 Community Block Grant Bonus Funds. Execution of option agreements on lots selected for acquisition will strengthen the City's application by demonstrating that the City already has site control and will be able to act in a prompt manner to expend grant monies if the City is • selected for funding. JA /jsc • • 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 WHEREAS, the City is applying for funds for the purchase of lots for the construction of homes for sale to low and moderate income families; and WHEREAS, owners of various lots in the City have been contacted to determine the availability of lots for this project; and WHEREAS, certain owners have agreed to sell the lots to the City at established prices on the contingency of receipt of funds through outside grants; and WHEREAS, the application of the City is Strengthened, and rated more highly with the provision of written assuranceof .site control for activities to be undertaken under the auspices of the grant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE HEREBY authorizes the Mayor and City Administrator to execute option agreements on lots to be acquired, if the City is awarded Community Development Block Grant Bonus Funds. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 3rd day of June, 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Administrator Approved as to form this day of June, 1980. City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 1632 • A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR 1980 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT BONUS FUNDS WHEREAS, funds are currently available for Community Development Block Grant Bonus Funds in Support of the Areawide Housing Allocation Plan; and WHEREAS, applications are now being accepted for activities which facilitate the construction, rehabilitation or acquisition of . housing for low and moderate income families and persons outside areas of concentration; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee could, with funds provided through this program, acquire lots scattered in various parts of Shakopee for the purpose of building homes for sale to low and moderate income families under state or federal subsidized mortgage programs. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, hereby authorizes the City Administrator to prepare and submit an application for funding for the acquisition of lots for the construction of homes for sale to low and moderate income families under the Community Development Block Grant Bonus Funds, includ- ing all understandings and assurances contained therein and authorizes him to act as the official representative of the City in connection with the application and to provide additional information as may be required in the grant review process. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 3rd day of June, 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Administrator Approved as to form this day of June, 1980. City Attorney 9 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Award Bids - Holmes Street Eastview Addition DATE: May 29. 1980 The staff will be opening the bids on Monday morning for the above projects. We will have a bid tabulation available at the meeting on Tuesday and will recommend the award to the lowest qualified bidder. The resolutions which will be_used for the awards are attached with the blanks to be filled in after the awarding of the bids. DSR /jiw Attachments -.,s .,+ v s.1.... L 4.“.J . nLUi; LLiv — DIU iHOUL:.11UN t 'r. June 2. 1980 . SANITARY 'STORM BID CONTRACTOR SEWER WATERMAIN SEWER STREET TOTAL BOND KIRKWOLD CONSTRUCTION 1$ 87,828.50 $72,065. 1$30,502.651$ - 1$190,396.65 x NODLAND ASSOCIATES, INC. $112,840.00 $68,420.00 $24,587.00 $79,575.0C $ 7 799,557575.00 xi QUALIF. McNAMARA— VIVANT CONTR. Lyle' ?ETTI & SONS, INC. - . I BARBAROSSA & SONS $103,025.00 $70,810.00 '$30,675.0C$83,050.00 $204.510.00 x 8'1,050_00 NORTH CENTRAL UNDERGROUND 1 DIVERSIFIED PIPING . t MINNESOTA VALLEY SURFACING -- - -_ ___ - $81,384.00 881,384.00 x ORFEI & SONS $98,885.22 $67,407.92 $28,393.6 - -- $194,686.78 x PROGRESSIVE CONTRACTORS $119,801.50 $87,311.00 $33,718.3 $73,126.60 $240,830.80 QUALIF. $ 73,126.60 x ACG MECHANICAL $86,442.00 $66,463.41 26,964.00 $85,396.90 $179,869.41 x -- $ 85,396.90 ADVANCED CONTRACTORS , PARROTT CONSTRUCTION $122,057.00 $84,187.04 $24,741.22 $230,985.26 { $110,584.00 110,584.00 • x ARCON CONSTRUCTION N4,STVIEW FIRST ADDITION - BID TABULATION - page 2 SANITARY STORM ti �:ID CONTRACTOR SEWER WATERMAIN SEWER STREET TOTAL BOND BROWN & CRIS INC. $182,892. 0`X $ 89,614.00 $60,875.60 $32,402.50 •76,861.00 $ 76,861.10QUA ] CROSSINGS, INC. $136,160.00 $106,470.00 $34,560.00 $99,064.00 $277,190.10 X 99;.064.00 ALEXANDER CONSTRUCTION ' NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION $ 94,435.00 $86,259.05 $40,142.00 - -- 1$220,836.b5.x I FISCHER CONSTRUCTION $ 88,864.75 $66,743.75 $31,643.50 $73,143.50 $187.252.)0 x $73,143.50 QU,LI 1 I 1$172,365.215 x RICHARD KNUTSON, INC. $ 80,007.00 $65,244.25 $27,114.00 - - -- - - -- 1 . n RESOLUTION NO. 1629 2/ A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID ON 80 -2 EASTVIEW 1ST ADD', WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Eastview 1st Addition by roadway, sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer construction, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law,• and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Contractor Division 1 Division 2 Kirkwold Construction $190,396.65 $ - Nodland Associates, Inc. $205,847.00 $79,575.00 Barbarossa & Sons $204,510.00 $83,050.00 Orfei,& Sons $194,686.78 $ - Minnesota Valley Surfacing $ - $81,384.00 Progressive Contractors $240,830.80 $73,126.60 ACG Mechanical $179,869.41 $85,396.90 Parrott Construction $230,985.26 $110,584.00 Brown & Inc. $182,892.10 $76,861.00 Crossings, Inc. $277,190.00 $99,064.00 Northdale Construction $220,836.05 $ - Fischer Construction $187,252.00 $73,143.50 Richard Knutson, Inc. $172,365.25 $ - AND WHEREAS, the proposal submitted by Nodland Associates, Inc., Progressive Contractors, Inc., Brown & Cris, Inc. and Fischer were qualified; and WHEREAS, it appears that Richard Knutson, Inc., 201 Travelers Trail, Burnsville, MN is the lowest responsible bidder for Division 1; and WHEREAS, it appears that Minnesota Valley Surfacing Division, Hardrives,.Inc., 14563 Johnny Cake Ridge, Apple Valley, MN is the lowest responsible bidder for Division 2. NOW THEREFORE, BI IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Richard Knutson, Inc., 201 Travelers Trail, Burnsville, MN in the name of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of Eastview 1st Addition Division 1 work consisting of sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer construction according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. RESOLUTION NO. / A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID ON 80 -2 EASTVIEW 1ST ADDITION WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Eastview 1st Addition by roadway, sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer construction, bids were received, opened and tabulated according 'to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: AND WHEREAS, it appears that is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with in the name of the city of Shakopee for the improvement of Eastview 1st Addition by roadway, sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer construction according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of June, 1980. • I RESOLUTION NO. /602P i A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID ON 80 -3 HOLMES STREET RECONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Holmes Street between 2nd Avenue and 10th Avenue by roadway re- construction, :sanitary sewer reconstruction, construction and re- construction of curb and gutter, construction and reconstruction of sidewalk, construction and reconstruction of storm sewer and construc- tion of watermain, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: • AND WHEREAS, it appears that is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with in the name of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of Holmes Street by roadway reconstruction, sanitary sewer reconstruction, construction and reconstruction of curb and gutter, construction and reconstruction of sidewalk, construction and reconstruction of storm sewer and construction of watermain according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the pity Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 9 7,144,1 MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer SUBJECT: Infiltration /Inflow (I /I) Analysis Program DATE: May 29, 1980 • The City has asked for a statement of qualifications from interested consultants in order to determine which three consultants the City would solicit proposals from. The City received a statement of qualifications from eight firms indicating an interest in this project. Those firms are as follows: Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc., Inc. Donohue & Associates, Inc. Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. Eugene A. Hickok & Associates, Inc. McCombs- Knutson Associates, Inc. Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc. Suburban Engineering, Inc. Toltz, King, Duvall, Anderson & Associates, Inc. Van Dorn - Hazard - Stallings The firms fall into two general categories. The firm that would perform all the work in house and the firm that would have field work performed by second specialized consultants and then analyze the field data in house. All of the consultants that submitted a statement of qualification were qualified to perform the work. However, some of the firms were more qualified than others and had a broader base of experience than others in °performing that work. The past record of performance of each of these firms was ascertained from personal knowledge, interviews with clients for whom these firms had performed similar work. The statement of these firms was reviewed to determine their knowledge with respect to the types of problems which might be involved in this particular project. Based on this criteria, it is the staff recommend ation that the City solicit proposals from the following consultants: f Donohue & Associates, Inc. Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. McCombs- Knutson Associates, Inc. Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc. Excerpts from the statements of qualifications for these three consultants have been attached for your information. Copies of the other firms statements are on file in the office of the City Engineer should Council decide to review those that were not considered. If you have any questions regarding the criteria used to select these firms, please contact me. HRS:nae • f METROPOLITAl COI1TROL ECENT* 714. COfllflillOn ;vin Cities Area APR 2 5 1980 n-ry • . F S4�AK°p April 22, 1980 Mr. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator 129 B. First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Doug: _ Having reviewed Bo Spurrier's memo and spoken to him regarding it on April 16, 1980 it appears that two separate issues need to be resolved: 1) The reliability of the identification of the City of Shakopee as having potentially excessive infiltration /inflow (I /I) and 2) The accuracy of flow meters utilized for billing purposes. The I/I assessment for Shakopee is presented in the Interim Report "Analysis of Community Flows" did not include flows from Valley Industrial Park (VIP) and therefore only meter data from meter M401 was utilized in the assessment. Assuming meter M401 is inaccurate by + 2.5% (per Spurrier's memo) and giving Shakopee the full benefit of The error the following analysis is presented: • 1. AssuT� Shakopee to receive benefit of 2.5% error for meter M401: 1.4311) mgd x 0.975 = 1.39 mgd average metered wastewater flow at meter M401. 2. Determine average I/I from Shakopee (excluding VIP): (Average meter flow - Average wastewater generation rate) x 365 day /year =Average I/I in million gallons per year (1.39 mgd - 1.1. mgd) x 365 = 80.3 mgy. (1) Average (1975 & 1976) metered flow from Shakopee utilizing meter M401 per Interim Report "Analysis of Community Flows." (2) Average wastewater generation rate for Shakopee (excluding VIP) • per Interim Report "Analysis of Community Flows." It appears that this rough analysis indicates that I/I from the Shakopee system (excluding VIP) could account for the 80 million gallons per year mentioned in Spurrier's memo and that the city should consider pursuing an I/I analysis. Meters in general are checked for calibration at least four (4) times a year and inspected regularly. The meter readings are monitored daily with set upper and lower limits based on past flows. Should the meter reading fall outside the set limits, the meter is flagged for inspection. In addition all meter flows are averaged utilizing a computer program , at Seneca which throws out the upper 10 and'lower 10 readings during 350 METRO /OURRE BLDG. 7TH & ROBERT /TREET/ /RIFT PAUL mn 55101 1 612222.8423 • sa recycled 0 �' ry rl/ Mr. Douglas S. Reeder April 23, 1980 Page Two a 15 minute (60 readings) time period prior to averaging. These • procedures of monitoring meter performance and averaging meter readings is an attempt to obtain the most accurate readings possible. Meters M400, M401, M404, and M409 have been checked and monitored according to the above mentioned procedures. As a footnote, as of January 16, 1980, meter M404 was replaced by an ultrasonic meter (previously bubbler -type) which has operated without any problems to date. If you have any further questions or comments, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ( lAALI / ()3 H. Dietz Staff Engineer PHD:lc 4.23.80 cc: R. K. Williams, Staff Engineer, MWCC • f ? (2) MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder • City Administrator FROM: H. R. Spurrier City Engineer RE: Amending Resolution No. 1481, Adopting Assessment for the the 1978 -1 Public Improvement Program. • Parcel No. 27- 902 -5230- 023 -00 William G. Pearson 7831 Bush Lake Road Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 DATE: May 29, 1980 By strictly applying adopted assessment policy, the assessment for the above referenced property is $37,012.43. The property owner indicates that there is no benefit along any of the east side of the property because of the pit from the quarry operation is wasteland and cannot be assessed. The property owner also indicated that legal action would be filed if the adjustment were not made. The matter is questionable and may be difficult to prove. I indicated to Mr. Pearson in a letter of November 20, 1979 (copy attached) that it would be my recommendation to reduce the assessment in the amount of $11,212.15 to $25,800.28. This will be in addition to the $5,000 paid to Mr. Pearson for easement. HRS /jiw Attachment NOTE TO CITY COUNCIL: It is staff recommendation that we delete this assessment because we would • not be able to prove benefit in the courts. The special assessment fund for this project has a sufficient balance to cover this deletion. S26 e- DSR /j iw M rKM CITY O SHAKOPEE B `Q\ INCORPORATED 1870 ,?z�,, 129 E. First Ave., Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445 -3650 .7 M ; :ti • s November 20, 1979 William G. Pearson 7831 Bush Lake Road Minneapolis, MN 55401 RE: Assessment for Improvement District 78 -1 Dear Bill: Pursuant to your request, the purpose of this letter is to indicate to you that it will be the recommendation of City Staff that your property along 101 at Shiely.Road will not be assessed along the easterly line. This will have the effect of reducing the assessment for water by $4,300.05 and it will reduce the assessment for sewer by $6,912.10. The total reduction in 78 -1 assessments amounts to $11,212.15. The assessment for this improvement district was certified to the County and therefore, any adjustment must be made in calendar year 1980. We propose to make that adjustment to your assessment. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, do not hesitate to call. Si cerely, H.R. Spurrie City Engineer HRS :nae cc: Douglas S. Reeder • : / I. / / . • r j o 1 i ; r L l g r L : s ,7 I / l l� An Equal Opportunity Employer • RESOLUTION NO. 1630 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1481 • • ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE 1978 -1 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee has adopted the above enumerated assessment on the 4th day of September, 1979; and WHEREAS, said assessment roll included Parcel No. 27 -902- 5230 - 023 -00, owned by William G. Pearson of 7831 East Bush Lake Road, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and that said assessment as adopted totalled $37,012.43; and WHEREAS, said figure of $37,012.43 was arrived at by strictly applying assessment'policy;.and WHEREAS, said property owner proposes to appeal said assessment because the property is not benefited; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined based on advice of City Staff that under the facts and circumstances set forth above, said assessment for Sanitary Sewer is excessive $6,912.10 and said assessment for water main is ' excessive $4,300.05 and said total assessment is excessive $11,212.15. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the above described assessment roll is hereby amended and a supplementary assessment has been made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.071 to reduce the assessment against Parcel No. 27- 902 -5230- 023 -00, said reduction being in the amount of $11,212.15 so that the total assessment against said property is $25,800.28 and further that the sheet total which contains the above described parcel shall be amended to show a total assessment contained on said sheet of $ 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: • City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1980. City Attorney ( 71" • MEMO. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: County Road 18 - Bridge Corridor Study DATE: •May 22, 1980 In accordance with the attached request, I am recommending that the City Council appoint the City Administrator as the representative to the Technical Advisory Committee•(TAC) with the City Engineer as an alternate in the event the Administrator cannot attend any particular meeting. DSR/ j iw . Attachments • • • • • CITY OF SHAKOPEE 4 INCORPORATED 1870 i 129 E. First Ave., Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445 -3650 4 May 21, 1980 Mr. Herbert 0. Klossner, P. E. Director Department of Transportation 320 Washington Avenue South Hopkins, MN 55343 Dear Mr. Klossner: The Shakopee City Council will not meet again in Regular Session until June 3, 1980, and, therefore, will not be able to appoint anyone to the Technical Advisory. Committee until that meeting. I am recommending that they appoint me to the Technical Advisory Committee for the Location Study Process and believe that they will. If they make any other appoint- ment, I will let you know. Since - , D� g laS. Reeder City Administrator DSR/ j iw • The Heart of Pro Valley An Equal Opportunity Employer DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 4" 320 Washington Av. South =" Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 34V =P HENNEPIN 935 -3381 -� ' • t ..,a �a May 19, 1980 MAY 2 0 1980 Mr. Douglas Reeder, Administrator CITY vHAKQPEE 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 are forming a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The counties are extending to each agency listed on the distribution list, an invitation to appoint one staff member to this TAC. Since the first meeting is scheduled for June, 1980, notification of the designated staff member should be sent to Vern Genzlinger, Project Manager, Hennepin County Department of Transportation, 320 Washington Avenue South, Hopkins, Minne- sota, 55343, by May 30, 1980. Attached is a brief summary of the functions and background information relative to the CSAH 18 TAC. • Sincerely, 14 6) . /4-0-&—•-• Herbert 0. Klossner, P.E. Director HOK:lar HENNEPIN COUNTY • an equal opportunity employer CSAH 18 LOCATION STUDIES TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Introduction The Location Study process for County Road (CSAH) 18 commenced with the signing of a contract with the Consultant, Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc., in April, 1980. This process includes the preparation of Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements. The first phase of the process is a scoping of the project which will entail a pre- liminary analysis of the alternatives and establishing a criteria for evaluating the alternatives. Hennepin and Scott Counties are the agencies jointly responsible for the Location Study process. Hennepin County has been designated as the lead agency. The two counties wish to establish a Technical Advisory Committee to work with the consultant and provide the overview and direction for the duration of the process. Since there are numerous agencies which have a vital interest in any decisions regarding CSAH 18, the counties are inviting each of the below listed agencies, to name one staff member to the Technical Advisory Committee: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Minnesota Department of Transportation, District 5 (Mn /DOT) Metropolitan Council Hennepin County Scott County City of Bloomington City of Eden Prairie City of Savage City of Shakopee U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (Mn /DNR) Hennepin County Parks Assignment It is expected that the members of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for CSAH 18 will be called upon to respond to specific technical questions and issues. Thus, the members should ideally have a technical background. The TAC will meet on a regular basis at the Hennepin County Department of Transportation Building located at 320 Washington Avenue South, Hopkins, Minnesota. It is anticipated that regular meetings will be held during normal office hours at the same time every month. In addition, special meetings may be held at crucial points during the study process. The study will run thirty months and the TAC will remain an active part of the study process throughout. The TAC can anticipate discussion on such items as: criteria for evaluating alter- natives, the alternatives themselves, functional classification of the roadway, average daily traffic and traffic generation, impacts in the areas of air, noise, and water quality, land use and land use planning and roadway geometrics, as well as all those items normally attendant to an EIS preparation. • Scheduling It is anticipated that the first meeting of the TAC will take place in June of 1980. Therefore, in order to properly notify designated members, the agencies should in- form Vern Genzlinger, of Hennepin County, as to the designated staff member (if any) by May 30, 1980. • • • MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator FROM: Gregg M. Voxland Finance Director RE: Transfer of Funds DATE: May 29, 1980 According to the City Engineer's memo dated 8/28/79, the Sewer Fund is to pay for $27,067.75 of Sanitary Sewer oversizing costs on the 101 Utilities Project. I believe that was the intent of the Council when the assessments were levied. Therefore, request that Council authorize the transfer at this time. Action: Council move to transfer $27,067.75 from the Sewer Fund to the 1979 -A Improvement Fund. GMV / j iw • • • • 9-3 MEMO TO: ; Mayor & City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator RE: T.H. 101 Frontage Road DATE: May 30, 1 ^q0 This Feasibility Study was prepared in accordance with Resolution No. 1375, which is attached. It was the original intention of City Council and staff to have this report prepared in order to get state funding for the construction of this frontage road. At this time we want to get the C ty Council to review the frontage road feasibility study and hold the public hearing so that we can get in line to get state money for the construction next year. When we actually build this project we may want to put the watermain in at the same time. This will depend on the final determination at the County of whether or not we have a pollution problem from P.C.I. If we proceed on that we will have to hold a separate hearing. Recommendation: Adopt. Resolution No. 1631 Accepting the Report and Setting A Public Hearing. DSR /jsc • 9L3 RESOLUTION NO. 1631 A RESOLUTION RECEIVING A REPORT AND CALLING A HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT 80 -8 T.H. 101 FRONTAGE ROAD WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the City Council adopted March 6, 1979, a report was prepared April 15, 1980 by Suburban Engineering, Inc., ConsultingtEngineers, with reference to the improvement of T.H. 101 Frontage Road,beginning at Shiely's Entrance Road and continuing easterly approximately 5,500 feet,mor°e'•or less, to County Road 89 and thence ' connecting . at County Road 89 by roadway construction and this report was received by the Council, on June 3, 1980. NOW,, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,1.MINNESOTA: 1. The Council will consider the improvements of roadway constructio and.drainage.•.in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting and benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improve- ments pursuant,to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $462,110.00. 2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 5th day of August, 1980, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 129 East First Avenue, at 9:00 P.M. and the clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. 3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 1980 -8 Public Improvement Program. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of June, 1980. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day • of , 1980. • City Attorney �'.):' .7:; .i -.. r ,t.)_ •• il l'' t "d: .,f'tl •:;,S CI i 1. P l:1 •• T :)i•).1: :i :•� :17H :i• { '•0 ;. 'ti7irt: fit• K •3••}. .t: ?-i 1 A „� ,� + x ••».r Ke � ! + .� tt �' Jl. a ,s f•� r r t' •e • • `: al... , F �y ; i �: 1 F 'i •,f �>'. •. :r, E 'n %s:;} }.1. : r L f ✓ �, •! + , �� r: tJ.j �' 'r✓ s ✓.l �v' d •'. I r t•.S M•. ^, d ,•� l�- • �t •; l ,b(.r..�^. ✓.� ) l t �t��ir ,L•l,Z r . .l :. It+�� �f�i t } ��'+r� , l r 1 �.�;i. • '� '1. � t !'{ •' •'• . �,•� �:' ,1.J ' ■�h � • -t •1;; {•:• e + ■ t I” ft v,ry.t , �• ; k,� r � 't S L ,. " � ;c '��. * �t � =a 4ra , :1•.`� s 711 !• t t, f�k, 0,12 h < r r . ,C 1 ft 4 f t „};} t . +. : 4 '$j�r��• y f i le s t :• `✓!� .:iL ! .y r t '.r . i� 1 :'t� tif'. t, : _ i6a. r Y tti.'S t t r� S� S t l �rt P , r .: 5�.. r Y. .r� .f. �k: + - 1 r {$i I t 1 +4 � r r�d�.J r. .�'r{ � { t � }� ls. ^ ✓Sx� � • . � . J t + � :. �.0.�• l t +• ' • , t `.� • v �l Jy'� � + r f { � i ��J} •� . v ,t ��W��' . q � } d 1 '. . .50 �t K it . r ,, i ' i^ YC :1 :1 r S it �•� • i . •t' l i�l/ 7.�`4k''}'1t ` e , J 3 �,: vJ..-{� : 4 Fa•� %.'•.'icy ,�r i Y-' Y 2. O ,' . -,,, l•! ` r W r, l {4 74.. +• } ! ,�1�• ;t: t � ^ �• i :4 [J. , �; y� S ? i r ,. t.l :ll••S t l 0 ., :7 . ,. ,, ; J y : ; , t 1, - �'�CN ✓ d i,� �(T+1 . q r k i .���. p: 4. : aF` 'v ^t�•: "'�1( 3'Y3 't` .; J I�+Jt 2� ; J PW �4.,'(�'L.� 7ny ,�; y f. ; %� i+!'t h "•� e. '=y"• • S` F v. y1.1i r ` .t t�. _,l . i 4• '�'.S ) y .'�, t. �L a ) y�r, r� . ;41st 13 # 4 : :s tf i .:i t �� ✓ 1 �' F • c.�Sa�'/ ,. ; Y r. v,:.: +...LG� 4 } a Y ' 4� .. �it� „ RESOLUTION NO. 1375 7'5 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF A REPORT ON AN IMPROVEMENT WHEREAG, it is proposed to make the following improvements: a] Service Road - beginning at the Shiely's Entrance Road and continuing easterly approximately • 5,500 feet, more or less, to CR -89 and thence connect at CR -89 b] Watermain - beginning at the easterly property line of , School Bus Sales Inc. and continuing easterly approximately 3,400 feet, more or less, to CR -89 ' ; c] Sanitary Sewer - beginning at the Shiely's Entrance Road and continuing easterly approximately 5,500 feet, more or less, to CR -89 and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, • NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA; that the proposed improvements be referred to William Price, Suburban Engineering, for s.iidy and that he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Coundil in a preliminary was as to whether the proposed improvements are feasible and as to whether they should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement', and the estimated cost of the improvements as recommended. Adopted in regular session of the City Council, of the. City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 6th day of March, 1979. , • / aCt•4 ayor o the City o Shakopee ATTEST: C Cl rk • Approved as to form this 6th day • of March, 1979. 4 , ` � � I, �, .N . . • , Cit Attorney ' . . . . . • MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council i /7) /� V�0 FROM: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator ' SUBJECT: Coffee for City Meetings DATE: May 21, 1980 The City Council and the Planning Commission have been paying for their own coffee for some time. This has seemed to work out, however, we will now have several other Commissions started who will want coffee and from whom we may not wish to charge since they are not being paid for their time. I would suggest that we begin purchasing coffee for the City Council, Planning Commission and all other Commissions and the public who come to these meetings. It is estimated that the total cost would not exceed $100 per year. We would not buy coffee for the City employees but would continue to collect money for their coffee. RECOMMENDATION City Council authorize the purchase of coffee for the various City meetings from the City Council Budget. DSR:nae • f i c k • • _ _ _ MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Special Assessments in Timber Trails for Two Lots DATE: May 29, 1980 When Timber Trails was platted the developer included land which belonged to another owner and then deeded these lots back to that owner. The agree- ment between the two parties was that the developer would pay all the assessments on those two lots. This arrangement has been complicated because the assessments were levied against these lots and therefore, one party has to pay the other each year before the taxes can be paid. In order to eliminate this confusion and frustration each year, I have agreed to recommend to the City Council that the special assessments against these two lots be paid out of the Escrow Fund which has been developed by the payment of 150 percent of the assessments each time a Building Permit is granted. There are funds in the escrow and I believe this is a reasonable solution. Both parties have agreed and funds are available in the Escrow Account. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the payment of the special assessments for Lots 1 and 2, Block 5 of Timber Trails from the Timber Trails Escrow Account. DSR /jiw • f - • • 1980 f.TTY OF. SHAKOPFE R E V E N U E R E P •Uf R I AS OF 4 -30 -8u , RAGE 1 0 11 FIND 01 GENERAL FIIND G 11 R R. F N T M 0 N 1 H Y E A R T U 1) A T E• - , ACCf1UNT /OESCRIPTIf1N EST. REVENUE ACTUAL VAR1A'NCF- PCT F;ST. RF.VEtiIIt ACIUAL VARIANCt • NCI ( 3011 GEN. LEVY - CURRENT / 10,005.73 576,549,00 10,005.73 - ' 566;543.77 -. 1.7 ) • ,,i 3012 SP.LEVY �l1Of,•EMENt?s ;00 ,i • .00 .00 .00 31 $P LEVY - MATT iiLNC FUN(j$ .00 . .00 .01) .0v �' 3017 INC. IND. R COMM. DEV. .00 .00 .00 .00 ) 3020 OEL, PROPERTY TAXES 7,093.92 - 15,000.00 7,I93.92 7,106.00- 'id.b - `3022 - rI SC4E T1 SPIPITIts . ou Tt)nv: Ertl •01) 1ti j')j0; tiv . u 1 a *a* TAXES 17.899.65 - • •609,549.01•'. • '17.809.65 591,649.35 -' 2.9 3111 1T!?UOR LTCENRE3 2,200.00 , 29,140.00 2,215.00 25,925.0U- !.9 3112 BEER LICENSES .00 4,200.00 .00 4.200.0u- .0 • 3113 1 R AmRL77(T: L`TC: , .tlu , • , 300700 '.,..To 100; - - - 7 - T ( 3114 CIGARETTE LICENSES •. ;00 ' 400'.01 72.00 328.00- 16.0 •) 3115 MISC, BUSINESS LICENSES • .00 650.00 50.00, 600.00- 7.1 312311 1 'ITTT: - E - •51700 '201T;110 M3M370 7 - ' - - U77(r - -- 7 - 075 - . , I i 3131 POOL TABLE LICENSES . • .00 700. 00 .un 700.0o- .0 ; 3137 Rt)tLOING PF.RMJTS 1,335.00 30,000.00 20,709.75 4,290.25- 69.0 31'33 iFJt FERMZTS irt85;UU rt�0o .75�t1» - 3 - - 1 :n 1 - / • 3134 MECHdNTCAI PFUMITS 120.00 7,000.00 1,695.10 5,305.00- 24.1 3134 ( "I'LL PEP'IITS 17:00' IUn.00 17.00 6t5 -3.00- 2.4 • 1 ) 313 SE1<EP - T 0 TER 'EIT�TTS 00.00 1 . 1 j5UP 7nu - 1 0 0 r040 ( 3137 ELECTRICAL PERMITS 942.50 • 5,000.00 2,481.00• 2,519.0u- 49.0 ) 3130 STREET OPENING PERMITS 35.00 450.01 273.00 177.0u- '!-0.7 3130 - RISC: NUN= ETIT.F PER 1:00 .00 170'0 _ - 1:00 • r 3144 UTILITY INS. PERMITS .QU • .00 ' .00 • .nu j 1 • WATW UICENSES' - ?. PFRMTT;S 5;9TJF. - 50 - -- 907240700 d1.9A5;75 -- 46T7yu: ?- .',Io;7- - - - I ' 330A, MfRIL.E HT1ME .. .00 450.00 ,00 450.00- .0 • -- 3307 H0MF,STED " " - -- - .00' -- 8*;700:00 - 00711011- Uu - - - .o • ( 330A D.E.D. GRANT - STATE- • .00 10,000.00 15,217.5 5,217.54 151.2 3309 CETA -FFD. GRANT 2,207. ' H,h9o.00 4,479.24 4,210.71- 51.5 3310 FEDERAL kANT5 - -- -nn- - - ;00 .00 i- .nU ( 3320 STATE GRANTS .00 .00 .00 .01,) ) 3321 Pni-TCE TRAINING GRANT .n0 4Q0.06 209.67 '110.33- 72.0 - 33 ?. ? STATE - - PLANNING - T; R ANT ,1T0 .00 1 • 0 .0T - - -- 3323 CIVIL DEFENSE GPANT 27.76 1,350.00 166 ;51 1,163. 12:3 , 3130 LOCAL GOVT. AID .00 352.032.00 9 8.000.00 264.024.00- 25.0 - 3.331- ATT'Ai:HETS- MAZR; -ATp _ ;no -- 37.700 - 0:00 -- .0A 3? i DTI-- --.0 . • 3137 STATE 1awY.MATNT, AID • .00 14,025.00 7,707.50 6,277.50- 55.2 3333 STATE HwY. CDNST. A10 .00 .00 ,UO .nu . - - • 3334 - POLICE - STATE - - AID - ,70 2`i;7007,00 -- e 5 - - , - 7 5 7IA:rI1) - - - ' ;0 3340 COUNTY ROAD A RRIOGE AID .00 00,000.00 .09 oO,000.00- .0 3350 GRANTS-PTHER GOVT. UNITS ,00 .00 .00 .00 - : 31671_SBIT - PYmT - IN TFU -- OF - TRS - - - -- 7.0;032;00 -- - 2407•334;00 -- N0,12000 - - - 1011 -7-56 :00 -- 373 I ' * * *. GRANTS R ATOS .' 27.767.19 811,031.00 190.030.51 h1�1;990.49 ..1.r • 35np TNr?,REVFNUF. BOND FEE - - - - 1.000. -- -- nu - -- 0.000.00 ----- n,�IUn.uu - - -- ,, 3509 ENGINEERING SERV 55.02 35,000.00 6,678,9# 48,321.04- 19.1 `' 55111 FNG- CoeOE' FEF - - - -- - - - -- - -- -(7700 - - - - - -- --300; 00 - - - -- - -- -24;00- - -- - - '2 76:1•0- -- 0. a 1, • 3511 PLAN CHECK FEF 755.05 6,100.00 14.35V.o- 1.354.60 234.3 9 r . e. . I . L .—-------------..---...- . • . • • 4. . . . h . . . . ---- r . . . • _, , . . . , . . . . . • . 4 , • , • , . . . • . • • .. . • . . • . , _ps.1../.1 ,c...0"1-Qt ___ 0u1.v.4_,I.cit,•1___ , ai.1/.002-V9. . .31/•101_UNOA . , . ,. . . . - 1, - tn , - 0 6 2 - Zoc,±444. -00-!4461Su 0.0.LWS-10/v U2_469161 LiON_An_Itt_m.A111.u_.tv_t11___ . . • •• 1"c2 -Tu'e?9'2 bh'IL8 00'00S'i 9e . i391 1U3NV 066£ )" - a6, -4(1s3LS ad• , 00' cUNT43:11.1.23S_l_Sills:13 _NI_LSui._ cti'ilo SC'S 00 . • 00'So . S1N3w3SnOdwi3o 1 “lpillA3d OSOf ( ! ), A0' ' 00' 00' ' . . 00' NO11VNOU liSNUI1Ould11403 OSV£ 1. n -6-'--LC'e Co' Ou'io£40d42 ' 00' ' S..h34SalLe11_4N.:JNAtiqb3d_Oliti_ - 5 ip•sliS OU' , . Oo' 3,411uSv9 AO 31vS n'etri K ( . Sil'iim'9 . S?'Sfih'n 00' • . • 00' ' ' 100d-eNuISS ue )! ••, ______0__.0010fifitsj .01. 11.02_00.0 . .54 - 00" • . . n• -00'00? 00° I 00002 . . ' • 00'- , 1.3f0 UrIVANI iniA C , ' 5'4'4. -CO'LL L62£1 . 00000 • . . • .' • - . 2S - ' • ' --• ' S.301vH3 '1105 ADV0av lia ). i__.fi.w2_460.02 v41-0062-q 00.10.04.162 • • • • • . .„..,.., IA_..1b003_14N00.3_AAAL_ tv no' 00' 00' • ' 00 • • • 111.1U3N1 luOd '31w jOSI. 1 )t 00' • . . SNOSS31 Urs114-441mV aoSi oe -00000S 00' 00000 • : - . . . 100dr_Shial.S.Slaill_LtSi_ o' ...0.01-041„.1n un' 0.0_14.aS1._0_ t . ' Afi° . i 0' • -00'005''I 00* . 00 0,1 f ..:.,.. ,..'-: .0 . Oa* - I0 NO 11,7 Sv3s .SE ( I Oe'56 bb'So ' 00t • . • - Ob S6 ° , ' • . • . . . •idOci3m IN30133v )„ ; . 00' _ .00' . . • ' N.3.3.i_113HAOU_31A_Li_OiSt_. :.1 i'?E4 -fic'/?2'9 OS'n[ : 00°000 . it • ' . WuSS . '3A AtIONvlS 1 S'1lv3 1:11A ( . 1 As dN . P*01.. -006?1 00'ILf 00005 • , . ' oo'Lo. • ' s3N1.1 S3OOd eiSi ) . i 1 I __02___.0014447 un..____0•02-041£ . nv • • 'RaliAt1.3S__3a1.30.d._1/S16_1iSE_ . I , A' -00'0S1 00' . : • '00"OSI ' • -.::-.:.---:- . -06'07. ,. Simod38 iti3u13'iv Of'Sf ( . • , ,•, ..,• . - ri" - 00 0r''5 • oo' • o0 ' :' - : '' . 00' 100d Li ) . . 0-LA*--A.0 141',66012 n0..1001.04 • ' ' ' •'• - m1"09.6 . c , . lim340ed_k113__Aa_33VG_D2A._ - /,'1 ...c.i*Ohr, . S?"65 . ' 00 . . _ 52'6 . S331,Ad:WSMgeOd'3Slw 00 • 00' Ubi ( . .• . ,. . • • 00' , ' - SjHrivH3 fl rit , 41t3 033m eesi ) Afi' g ' .. • . . 00' . 04-'___„ 04' . • - .00. . S'_131.1N.Ad__SXdUM_3.13,111d_LaSi..__ . . . :'eot On'iin • • • 00 - ' • 04'009 .., . ...-,..i: ,',:' ' . .- 00 •• • : • • . , ..- ' . r lvitOw3a mONU 02Si /'99 necos's 0 0.1 0 0.L: - . :00'0001 ',, --. :--,.., -,--,.-.,-,..-' . 00'1609 ' , • .. . -. ,.-.. . , . tifVd38 133d1S id1Si ) -'.,.- - ' • • 'i-S-' • . on.14.D.9 00.04.0.11 "- -. .. . • , . 00'042 '''. SlILINAH_11813dOad_nlid_LISC . - . 00' . 00• 00• . 00' 33A ON1114 91Si ( , • 00*£ • ' 313A 4U3H3 AAAd06 hISI •.) 71 -AO"U2' . 00*R1 ,' 00'0S2 . . AC c,./__I__Atg_u0.1, ' ualao4 o.o.lanolq .' no•ncz • - 1$11.LaimalltAIA=NUL3d=alsid_x1S , .. g Sq . fl 09 • .• 00'00o , , , . : .. Sl'Ol ' . SdVI 40 31v ilSi -Oo 001 - OCOS. , ,* 0070S1 • ' , . , 1, % 00',Sf • . - .- -: • " . 63H3dv3S 1 etSf ) • , , . . . . 13d 13mytHt/A - • laHl3t ..' fI4 3AJ8 *t.qa 1:3d ' 33NV1dVA. 1013v, 30N3A38 1U3 NO1ld1d3g3(J/1N0033y ( . 1.1v0 01 'pv H , . 1 iN3dO03 ONOJ lvd3N39 10 , apol ) • . . . t . 0 e ltivd 09-0c-t1 4n sv . • , l'11 (1 et.14 3P A, H .• - • • 3AdON/HS AO A113 09b1 ' • . . . . , • . . . . • . . . . • . . . . i . _ • • . . . . e . . . ,.,, 1. i 6. _ • t',.t Po' ? / ?'/ tth' /n /.'1 00'020'6 • 09'(721': 5NTHS1luild 633I10N 1vU3] US£n l ' I ?'7l 0!"'0',0'.0 12'610'1 . 00'0617'W l£'LnZ -` --- llAVdl + +r� 1 I _" 2_7 l__._ hL' uSn•'• L--------•-[ 1'h£- 0- t--- -- _Lu'.U.6n'i).._ --- --- li._Ln2------ t--- 22 22- As Nddx3__]3AVa1__OL.(2 c,' ?t W I T2'fl 9 ?'4120'f 00'000'.01 0L'992 N011v3LN11W1103 + + +* • • L' /l 04'.001`1: 2Q'21b'2 00'019'£t - - I9'£52 - 3NUI+d3131 l2£n n f'I 4S nQ'S(n't Ou'u£rr'£ 60 .1 - --- 3Jvtsl)d u2£0 0'hl 16'h06 sl1'SS6'hi 00'090101 • 11'4.62'0 S31AdAS 10N01 + + +f ff /_.h.l- _4c4400 -1 h- t,n.' 96.1' L- 00.1.0.00 .02 _a0_n6S -- .3:11.A.6.3_3Udd_d3H1.0__S I iTt- n• 00'0000T u0' 00'000'01 n' 00 00' 00' 5NINNvld olio J • ' ` 00'09 00' "•3avMl.US Y NJ13U dUd it£n -4- -- 52 - SL- .9 -1-- -£ ' n0- 000' - - 4•i 06-2.0 S.3)LA63S- 9N1d33NI:.IN3__2.1.£1( . n' 00'000'9 00' 00'000'4 00' S33IAd3s 'NIA V- i10017 tl£n ` sr /4. 0e'Ug5'St Un'6£h 00'000'52 Lt'9L0'i SA)IAa3.1vCj3l UI£n 1 o'T2 TS' /. ?0'95! aq'1t/n'sn • 0u'SIS'bbt ` On'rLS'8t salvd3a b S.I1ddfS + + +. ( )A o_c- - /k= La S ?'- 4- t -f 02 'Zl 00.0'1`5 £- 1 -'Z1£ Sl .v_1.b31rwrlrvld1alS1SNuIV_OS2m_ r 0 /i'660i 44'oot't 00'000'S 00' ' blv1N31vrr lCId1NU) 331 unen 5 n' 010(00'2 00'• 0 {1'000'2 00' S1v1d31V1 '1Nlyvi SUwlludJ,i02h ); 0 222 2 10-- _h.t2g1.iil C - .SR' - N.[_2 - 11.U._0.0U.'.s,£ 40_58_['.0. _ fllvll.4.L13- _lV3S.__CD- 0' 00'000'L (.0' 00'000'.0 00 SlV1a3lvw 5wIH71vd tn2n h'• 22 2S'Sc8'f. • vh'nnI'[ • 00'000'S 9S'b£9 . Siv1831vw (laud 11020 1 : ?:..C.4 2 5 -£' kOE `$: L9 -2b5 . 0U' O.05� 4 c4' 0P i • ' 11119.d_d31SAS_fl l__i£elt- s'Ot L9'0s,'91 4.f'Su2'.£ 00'009'61 26,£90'1 dlVd3ti Y '1NIVw 31IIH3A G£20 ( ?•nf 56'911'/., S 00'002'01 50 atvd38 Y 1N1Vw'UU1 ►£217 '1 _111. toacL(-T uZa£0'2 ' aij_SO4'gI /.4 11 HIw.d d_X_1.N11ei:.difin_Iien_ 0 ;6 '.0'S9?. ' 00'0S9'2 2L '£9 63SVH3dffd 100.0 !laws - S22tr 0' 00'009'1 . , 00 00'409'1 • OU ° . . S311ddrIS Ai341/ 02Z17• )• .F2-E4. - 0',16/_2!2 4.h -A2S'S 00 02_'a/1 1N d-1nri3'S1i3d- JNl -. t_ h' ?i f1,'ugn'n? q.l'6vh'L1 ou,'050'20 £5'269'4• S1NV3I80I Y S1 3(I3 dO!uw 22en ( 5 00"c ?2'4 60 • 00'009'5- . - Ou'vLi S iV3Iv13H3 t22n ) hi l h .0e._ - .h f,. 15 - 0? 111_1O(11' q . a0_O.h..n! L2 h l ' L2a� 9j1.ldiffiS ( 1'02 c/ 'tz'n • 52'991'1. 00'0£9'5 • ` . 2S'9S : 531 1dd(IS A31A3U U12n . 1 , ) - z= 44•-- 119.-gUI'f• /.4 0.0 52£'0 -£S 0.0_0.05=1011` 1 ' • na -556' l9 631IAl3S. 141r0Sc3d!t4• o r,' 00• 00' . • 00° 'dW03 1N3WA0ldWANli 2510 ) /'c•.. - -(10- 0 05' -1 uO =nL• S: 0- 010a6.lu - • On' 12NNHI.ISd.1_.dwU3__S.N3wbau lS1D- • ( a'S? Fo'noh'S? LS'Ti6'8 • . 00'969'0£ . O£'62£'e . • 33NVdIISN1 A Y ll •HL1v:3H OSin • n' 0U'S9L'LT 00' 00 00,' :1d1A-SNO1i3N3d ZD1D 1 , - ,_r,l - _ct, 0..a..0? f O2 z£O' 6 •nu�9.0.£!.b2 6.9 -n.B1! L 'V]1.3-SwU.1SN3d_1 D [.R- n'pe /,n'tRh'4h £S'sUI'L1 • 00'590'14 - SI'dtQ'D Vd uhln ( . - /ti'L9n • L9'L9h • 00' • . • 00• • AVd 33NV(i3A35 2iln .) c -1, 4'R- t-- h ti'E4.1) - (0222._,L -L"[ 0.02.0.0.2 ±.46 £2^113 - aidll- ltlVd- 113.1.d.ViVS_u£_L • c'fq hf'n10'f • ' L'SS2'S • Ou'052'9 91 ?L ‘ 3v +11 1111.3- 3wtia - A00 GILD ( c,'si nu'6L?'2gn 90'9'6 /02 OU'y66'h2L • ' • 64'oS['29 Awl!. 11(13-SAIdVIvS 0010 ) • 11-1 13►I1/INHA . 1 /(111V . ' NOI1VI0d1)HddV 13d 33W0twin . 14013V NOIlVIddUHddV NO[1dIa3S30 /1Ni10)3v :•% 1 V U 01 d V 3 • 1, H 1 N 0 w 1 N 3 d a 0 3 (INI1A 1v8.3N3' to 0NI13 1 1 ) qb -05- -h An. Sv 1 0 0 d 3_a S a n IA 4 N 3 0 X 3 33d0>rvH6 3U All) 0961 • • .. 1980 CUP( nF SHAKOPFE EXPEN'DITU'R . E,' REPORT AS UF 4-30-80 . PAGE 2 ' C s I FuNo 01 GENERAL FUND CURRENT MONTH Y F A P 1 0 DATE , ACCONNT/DESCRIPTION • APPROPRIATION ACTUAL VARIANCE PCT 'APPROPRIATION ACTUAL vARIANcE pc' ( [I 4151 PRINTING & REPRODUCTION . ' 7 • . . 886:98 ,.• 5,000.00 • ,. . • 725.96 . 492/4 1 .04 4.5 1 111 lriw; , jor3T58 10,ue0;Du c,4757Vt1 tti5m61. t/.0 1 - ( • • • . _ . , • • ) 4360 GEN. IL LIAO. INSURANCE . , •00 . • 13,450.00 20.00 • 13,430.00 .1 . 711:11 a :fir - R8oP: - Iv - FDrEER - TNSURKTICt. .. • ..- % . • uu , • -. ,- .,; , 1 , ... , IT/51170u . .0 , 4162 . . ( VEHICLE It EQUIP:INS; .. ;.:.• - - .00 ' - ' - - ' i; ' . .,., 11i261.00 ' .00 4 3,2d1.00 . ,, . • • , - WW - TIVSUPWR6, .T1U • 3674151 . atr70 3 1 / • ., 4370 ELECTRICITY ' 2,112.77 ,, 22,175.00 6.2 ' 15, ?b.e 37r r ( ? [11 • . . 2.789758 , 19Th .. .' , - ' ' , . . : ',/. .00 T.91:14 - T.,:g! - "'fi'il - 1137 WATER 00 11675 . 4173 GARB .DIsPTTSAL/DUmP CHUSL 1 \ 4,19.31 • ' ■ •":::.,* •:,---,- •• :". 88075.00 • 23;617.30 b5,15/.70 16.6 I - -- AMn - PFRTIU - ' . ----- . iT4D .00 . 1 ---- - ( .4381 RUTLDING RENTAL • .00 .' 500.00 ' .00 500.00 .0 imp mACHINFRY RENTAL ' 208.00 • ' 3,250.00 . 832.00 e', 25.0 .T. 4383 - OFFICE - FITITPHENT - TTENTAL , . , 9T6738 • • • 0•70i3: . 2T271 4: 3373 • -( 4384 FDP EQUIPMENT RENTAL . '- -. . .' 934.09. '. ' % .' ' - - . 20 2,540.03 18,059.97 12.3 . . i **** • ' ----- 157t5b.i3 15 41 12103r:92 23.1 n . • , ' 0390 coHFERENcEs x scHOnLS . ' t.230.53 - • ' . • 13,825.0'0 .4,3 9,461.79 31.4 L • 4391 - TIUFS - W - SUBSCRIPT - TuNS ' . 170T1r0 5 B`iI7 479K3706 t( 4392 LICENSES ' 5.00 . ' „*C. . • 100.00 ' . b.00 95.00 5.0 7„, 0390 POOKS & PAMPHLETS 130.50 . ' , ' • . • " 2,125.00 . 336.75 1,788.25 15.8 - § 41 \ ' 387T1 ' 805700 --- 1577 4 1 Il. . . 11, *** CONF.SCHOOLS.POOKS 1,524.14 . 22,730.00 5,/34•29 16,995.71 25.2 40 . 1( 10 JANITORIAL SERvICES • , .00 ' , 1,130.00 803.88 326.12 71.1 , . 4411 CURRENT USE CHARGES ' . .00 ' 850.0u .00 60,00 .0 i 0 '25 - PlnOD - TESTS . • - 24,722 t3070o 1 5:78 ( 4 mISCELLANEnUS 28.19 • s .00 00.19 14( . . .. • . **wr . • 527'01 • 2T380T00 948:19 1 378 ( . 450A SLOGS. t STRUCTURES .00 . .00 .00 .00 II' . , - 450 9- CAPITAC=nTHER • .00 ;00 • :00 -- .7 0 0 - li 4510 CAPITAL - VEHICLES A.58n.a5 . 63,750.00 8,51 55.169.95 13.5 . 4511 cARITAL-EQUIPmFNT 7,821.57 39,860.00 9,138.66 30,1c1.30 '2 - 1 [512 - CAPFTAC=OFFICE - EQaTPMENT - [ . .--- 208055 s . - 6;900r ( 1 ) ( 0 ) - (57118;30 .00 7151;/0-1413-.77 4516 OTHER TmPROvEMENTS .00 . .00 ri - il - r. ft p 1 TALT k • 1A - - 110;510:00 --- 24; 40 1; 4 1 - -- ;`06,06 6- e2 - :1 - ----1 . 1 . . 4611 INTEREST PAYMENTS ;00 . 2,400.00 .00 2,400.00 .0 - - antI7PERNANENT - TPANSFERS 700 , 30 00 ------ - ---- - .00 - -- zu - - --- 4900 mERCHANDIsE FOR RFSALE .00 1,,700.00 .00 1.700.90 .0 a980 PEFUND$ . 262.20 700 21 nyT.eu 31.5 " 74981-sALEs-TA7 .00 .00 %• 409 mIsCE1LANFnu . .00 3,100.00 .00 3.100.00 .0 c • • . . 1 _ 0 . E P F N b I T U k E R E N .O . k 7 AS OF a - SO - RU . PAGE: 3 1 0 1980 CITY OF SHAK,PEE X FUND 01 GENERAL FUND c 11 R R F • NT M 0 N T H Y F_ A R T U 1) A T f ', ACCOUNT /nESCPIPTInN APPROPRIATIO ACTUAL VARIANCE• 'PCT APPki)YR1 TIUN ACpI?l VARIANCE P1 1 L 4 C.nr1TINGE�) . O0 110.000 00 .00 11U,00n.O0 .0 I I' * * *. r�TAER FlaERTJITU S . / ebrieu 148, I►:0 to i�ttl,Ytl7;+fV .2 ,I! l l . - FOND TUTALS • , 1+Jr.S3Iey9 < . ",l 10tl35� /I1.u,U- 4T776 'I�� H•Iv6U — eo.1 _ , . . - • ) • ! t .. ` ' _ �' ) —7- i t • — - - - -- 1, z ( . ) /( . . . ' . i 1 • i ) l f _ . , • l ' ■ F ' ' ‘...... i .. , [-- . . • ` • LEGISLATION SIGNIFICANT TO CITIES llnnesota louse o f 1980 SESSION HIGHLIGHTS tep res entativeS The following ie a brief summary of many new laws significant to cities. It does not include every law affecting cities, but is an outline of major legislative om Rees actions. istrict 36B GENERAL GOVERNMENT 65 State Office Building , t. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Mileage allowances. (Chapter 607) Permits local governments to set mileage allowance rates for their own officers • and employees (including boards and commissions). In the Omnibus Tax Bill. Mileage reimbursement was limited by an obscure 1979 law to the state rate -- currently 19C per mile. • • Self- insurance. (Chapter 528, Chapter 529) Self and joint insurance for health benefits (Chapter 528) and for public and private liability (Chapter 529). Substantial premium savings possible. League . of Cities forming pool for local unite. Cemeteries. (Chapter 356) • Spending limits increased on cemeteries that are jointly maintained by statutory • cities and towns. Under new law, may spend up to $5,000 each. Regional Development Commissions. (Chapter 557) • Mandates a review of outstate RDC activities every five years beginning in 2981. • At that time, local unite could petition for a hearing before a hearing examiner on dissolution of RDC's. Units representing a majority of population would be required. Then, hearing .examiner would make reommendation. • Free distribution newspapers. (Chapter 471) Permits free distribution newspapers to qualify as legal newspapers if at least 500 • copies are regularly distributed to local residents, and the newspaper meets other requirements. This may lower coat of publishing legal notices. Population estimates. (Chapter 487) • Requires the state demographer to prepare annual population estimate for each subdivision for which the metropolitan council does not prepare an estimate. Also provides • procedure whereby a city or school district may make a population estimate. When val,tdated, these annual estimates are to be used to compute tax levy limits and local government aide. Billboards and signs near parks. (Chapter 494) Allows signs within 500 feet of parka, historic sites and public rest areas on commercially zoned property or with approval of municipality (includes towns). Solid and hazardous waste. (Chapter 564) • Creates a state Waste Management Board of nine citizens to site hazardous waste facilities. If necessary, the Board could override local ordinances. The law • establishes a 3 year process intended to lead to the certification of need for at least one commercial hazardous waste facility by Hay, 1982, and a final decision by June, 1983. A local project review committee for each candidate site is established by September, 1981. • r The selection of disposal facilities for solid waste and sewage sludge are also impacted by the act. In the metropolitan area, counties are required to select disposal sites by June, 1983 for solid waste. Outstate counties are required to regulate mixed municipal solid waste, but comprehensive plane are mandatory only for - eounites proposing a Waste Management District (flow control). The board may also override local objections to sewage sludge and solid waste facilities outstate. In the m area, counties may override local objections for solid waste facilities. The act provides financial incentives for local governments in sold waste. $5.8 million (via state bonds) are provided in grants and loans for solid waste processing demonstration facilities. Municipal Bonds Ch. 607, Article VIl Sec. 1 Effective 12/31/82, the maximum rate of interest on municipal industrial revenue bonds is net at 9X /year (currently no limit on interest). Sec. 2 For general obligation bonds authorized before 12/31/82, maximum interest rate is 12E /year. After 12/31/82, maximum interest rate will be 9z. (Currently 7E) Special assessment bonds may bear interest at one percent over GO maximum or maximum permitted by law or charter. Sec. 3 Exemption from public sale requirements raised to $200,000 (vas $100,000). Special Assessment Appeals Ch. 607, Article XI • Clarifies appeals of special assessments to district court. Appeals contesting special assessments may not be undertaken unless written or oral objections are presented at thecity council hearing. A,record of the hearing is to be prepared, and the requirements that the contract be set before the amount of special assessment is :alculated, is eliminated. Revenue Bonds • Ch. 595 permits a committee of the governing body (was governing body). Ch. 551 permits savings banks to invest in government revenue bonds and use them as securities for deposits. Ch. 597 permits municipa4 industrial development revenue bonds to be issued, to finance county and regional jails pursuant to a lease -back agreement. Limits on principal.• interest and lease are specified. Ch. 480 permits municipal industrial development revenue bonds to be issued to finance alternative energy equipment and inventory. "Alternative Energy" means any energy source which doesn't depend on nuclear or fossil fuel and does include cogneration or district heating. Assessors Meetings Ch. 423 Cancelo mandatory, biennial meetings with Commissioner of Revenue. • LAW ENFORCEMENT Peace Officers (Chapter 578) • Part -time peace officers may work 20 hours per week (was 14 hours). Any city not eligible for "part- time" positions under the 1979 law may now include two part - time positions on their poljce forces. Standard uniform and vehicle colors for peace officers are specified. Local Correctional Facilities (Chapter 602) Updates statutes relating to local correctional facilities. There appear to be no substantive amendments. • • County and Regional Jails See Chapter 597 under "Financial Matters." LAND USE, PLANNING AND ZONING • Municipal Planning Act /Agricultural Land (Chapter 566) Towns are interested in zoning and subdivision regulations for those areas within ;two miles of city boundaries. Present law provides that a city may extend its :subdivision regulations where a town has not adopted subdivision regulations. The new law would provide, upon petition, a joint zoning board composed of city, town and county officials. The bill also provides a new method of property assessment and 'taxation of agricul- . tural land in addition to Green Acres. • Environmental Policy Act Amendments (Chapter 447) Ability of Environmental Quality Board to require communities to prepare environmental impact statements (EISa) stricken. Petition proceas for EISs changed; permit issuance process coordinated with preparation of EISa. Rules implementing the amendment are to be prepared by January 1, 1981. TRANSPORTATION • Gas Tax (Chapter 608) Two cent increase in gas tax, effective 5/1/80, goes to highway user distribution fund (62X state, 29X counties, 91 cities). Cities over 5,000 population will receive an additional $4.5 million in municipal state aids, if the total revenue is about $45 million a year. f Urban District Speed; Local Option (Chapter 498) When any segment of at least 1/4 mile of a town or city road meets the "urban district" definition (has structures at 100 ft. intervals or is contiguous to such an area), the governing body of the city or town may a 30 m.p.h. speed • limit by erecting signs. Railroad Grade Crossings (Chapter 460) Establishes a new mechanism for the repair, maintenance and construction•of old or new grade crossings. Permits cost- aharing agreement on maintenance between road authority and railroad or lessee, with the state a potential participant in the cost. fetainage. (Chapter 464) • Increases amounts to be made as progress payments on public contracts (by reducing retainage from 102 to 52). Permits contractors to deposit bonds and securities in lieu of retainage. • Labor relations. (Chapter 617) A strike of non - essential employees may be initiated by either employer or employee after termination of a contract, 45 days of mediation, a 10 day written notice of intent to strike or refusal to arbitrate. Supervisory and confidential employees • cannot belong to the same union as non - supervisory, non - confidential employees of the • same public employer. "Essential employees" definition relating to firefighters was • somewhat expanded. Police and fire retirement. (Chapter 607, Article XV) Provides that all newly employed salaried police and fire officers will be covered by PERA Police and Fire Fund unless a city elects otherwise by July 1, 1980. Requires• ' amortization of local paid funds by December 31, 2010 and establishes state aid program to assist amortization. Current members of local funds which are phased out are entitled to limited benefit increases. Severance pay. • SF 1453 (D. Johnson). (Chapter 600) Superceded. Provided for•severance pay equivalent to one year of pay. Included all governmental oubdivisions. Provided for severance pay on, prior to or subsequent to normal retirement pay.. Provided for subdivisions to develop plan for full funding. BF 2476 (Supplemental Appropriations Bill). (Chapter 614, Subdivision 151) Signed by'Covernor one day later than Chapter 600 above, so takes precedence. Provides for severance pay equivalent to one year of pay. Includes cities, counties, townships, school diatricts only. Provides for severance pay prior to normal retirement date only. Energy grants. (Chapter 579) Appropriates $1.25 million t for community energy planning grants to cities and counties. Local governments are also eligible for park and ride program grants ($200,000 total) and ride - sharing program technical assistance ($200,000 total). Condo conversions. (Chapter 582) c The new "Uniform Condominium Act" allows cities to impose reasonable conditions on conversions of rental housing to condos, under limited conditions. • Financial Matters Local Revies (Ch. 607) Sec. 16 Clarified levy limitation adjustment pursuant to MS 275.11 Subd. 2. (per capita limit). Effective 1980, payable 1981. Sec. 18 Provides inflat adjustment in special levy for revenue decrease from municipal liquor stores and fines. Provides new special levy for revenue . lost as a result of property tax abatements or re- assessments. Effective 1980, payable 1981. Sec. 19 Changes annual levy limit base increase from 62 to 8% for all units except first class cities and their counties. Effective levy year 1980. Sec. 20 Reenacts one time 10X adjustment to levy limit base for those political subdivisions which did not previously make an adjustment. This adjust- ment is subject to a reverse referendum. • Tax Increment Financing - Ch. 607, Article VI • Provides many clarifications of procedures for calculating assessed evaluation of a district. Creates a new mechanism by which the authority, the developer and the • assessor can arrive at an estimated minimum market value. • LIQUOR • Club License Fees (Chapter 581) Maximum fees for on -sale club licenses established, keyed to club membership. Club Membership Maximum Fee 200 or less • $ 300 201 - S00 500 501 - 1,000. 650 1,000 - 2,000 800 2,000 - 4,000 1,000 4,001 - 6,000 2,000 Over 6,000 3,000 • •