Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApril 15, 1980 • , 4/.2 .. • TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, .MINNESOTA APRIL 15, 1980 Mayor Harbeck presiding i•] Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2] Approval of Minutes of March 18th, March 25th, and April 1, 1980 (SPECIAL & REGULAR) 3] Communications: 4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers: a] Cncl.Colligan from the Fire Dep't; Jt. Seven Man Committee & Planning Comm. b Cncl.Hullander from Scott County Criminal Justice Advisory Comm. c Cncl.Lebens from the Community Services Board d Cncl.Leroux from the Shakopee School Board e Cncl.Reinke from the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission f] Mayor Harbeck from Scott County Board of Commissioners 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] Res. No. 1594, Setting Sewer Service Rates 7] Planning Commission Recommendations: a] Request for rezoning of Lots 1 -10, Block 39, and Lots 1 -10, Block 175, vacated alley in Block 39, and vacated Webster Street between 2nd and 3rd Avenues, all lying within Original Shakopee Plat; from'I -1 Light Industrial to I -2 Heavy Industrial Applicant: Northrup'King Co., 1500 Jackson St. NE, Mpls., 55413 Action: Ordinance No. 38, Amending Zoning Ordinance • b] Preliminary Plat of Weinandt 1st Addition, consisting of approximately 115 acres, lying S of CR -42 and W of Marschall Road in Section 30- 115 -22 Applicant: Harry Weinandt, 2984 Marschall Road • Action: Approve /Deny c] Request for rezoning of Lot 6 and E 20' of Lot 7, Block 34, Original Shakopee Plat, 206 S. Scott, from R -3 Mid - Density Residential to B -1 Highway Business Applicant: Jerome Jaspers, Glen Ellyn Park Action: Ordinance No. 39, Amending Zoning Ordinance d] Planning Commission recommends'amending the Zoning Ordinance setting regulations for motor fuel stations - Ordinance No. 37 8] Routine Resolutions and Ordinances: a] Res. No. 1604, Adopting An Energy Saving Policy c 1 Res. No. 1605, Commending the Holmes Street Ad Hoc Committee Res. No. 1606, Authorizing Condemnation Proceedings (abandoned railroad property) d] Res. No. 1603, Setting License Fees for Liquor & Beer Licenses 9] New Business: a] 8 :00 P.M. Mr. Paul Dietz, Metro Waste Control Comm. - Report on infiltration /inflow study , ' b] Cable T.V. - Presentation c] Robert Pulscher, Springsted Inc., discussion of general obligation bonding k. d] Discussion of Ice Arena Committee a...`r 47?`_l..... . rY..i'.T'.t . !' . :. . +_5...+L:fiY ,..rp:Lr.Yra .wens: t y, nr:. er:.....,, r... �.. .. , - ..�. ......- .... ... • TENTATIVE AGENDA April 15, 1980 Page —2— e] Approval of change order for the 1.5 million gallon elevated water storage tank f] Approval of bills g] City Engineer status report on public improvements h] Receiving the report and calling a hearing on the improvement of 4th Avenue from Adams to Harrison by roadway construction and storm sewer Resolution No. 1607 i] Discussion on the improvement of Adams Street from 3rd Avenue to 6th Avenue by roadway construction, storm sewer, and watermain. • j] Receiving the report and calling a hearing on the Dean's Lake Outlet Basin IV —A Storm water drainage — Resolution No. 1608 k] Set swimming pool fees for 1980 season 10] Consent Business: a] Authorize purchase of a transcriber • 11] Other Business: a] b] c] • 12] Adjourn to . . . Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator • ... ..K. wail:%/ 617Y:. G«^ C7.`.' A! 3L1aA4aY.:. Wiluh,..:.' A1: 1:::`_ L,?. X`] eef.:)!• rKx. zYn.+. c: s�. s.-.. M•. e,«.,.« Y ..•....«.......___"___._�_ —___. ... __.._... . . . . Ga., . , . . . ' MEMO TO: .Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator FROM: • Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director !' � . RE: • Sewer Fund - 1980 Budget & Rate '' DATE: April 10, 1980 s Attached is a projected operating statement for the Sewer Fund for i 1980. The 1979 actual figures are unaudited, but are close to being final as ' far as what is shown. Council also requested cash balance data and that is ii as follows: it Year End 1971 No fund Year End 1972 $96,567 Year End 1973 60,178 1 Year End 1974 96,567 ' • Year End 1975 128,484 - Year End 1976 125,099 Year End 1977 94,877 Year End 1978 96,479 . Year End 1979 104,380 Year End 1980 177,000 Based.on: the assumptions in•the budget, the [ ' S proposed rate of $26 /year t availability,'6701000g flow and $45 /Mg large flow should generate about 1 $528,942•in revenue. This would give an estimated operating income of about {' $4,000, which :in this instance is virtually negligible. On an operating bases, 1 the fund would be about breaking even. In a fund such as this one net income is the source of internally generated ,E capital for financing the acquisition of equipment and system expansion/replace- •/ ment. It is proposed to retire debt for various reconstruction projects through sewer revenues. ,Purchasers of bonds and other people looking at the bond issue, evaluate the ability of the Sewer Fund to retire the debt and the financial ' condition of the fund based on net income. #� . 1 - The other item to monitor is cash position. Based on the proposed rate, proposed budget and the assumption that the proposed bond issue will entail I no new debt service expenditures until 1981, the cash balance could be $174,000 . at year end 1980. In 1981, however, it is estimated,there will be a large cash draw composed of: capital equipment- $20,000; debt service f'or 1979 reconstruction- ; $20,000 and debt service for 1980 work of $15,000. The attached schedule shows how the conversion is made from the projected operating statement to the projected cash position. In 1981 the operating loss just happens to almost coincide with the drop in cash position. r . I • • t j * ' ' . n '. , , . •w..w�Y rnxwrw...ib' „ : T , _,..:,,�= -x-••- . ,,,...:.....,._ __,..,__•-,.--•--_.. r--,-.-,,.,,, ,..- .........,......_.._•__ --_ Douglas S. Reeder Sewer Fund - 1980 & Rate April 10, 1980 Page 2 To determine the size of the recommended cash balance that the Sewer Fund should carry, it is prudent to take the conservative standpoint and allow for the worst reasonably expectable conditions to develop. The impact on cash could be a draw down on the order of $134,000. This situation is based on a three month period where there are no receipts, MWCC bills are paid when due, debt service transfer is due and a repair p project is billed. A condition of no receipts would be where the single source of revenue (sewer service billings) would be interrupted due to a breakdown of the machine or some type of disaster would prevent the Utilities from collecting and remitting monies. A cash balance in the range of 150 to 200 thousand dollars would give the Sewer Fund increased working capital, the fund could meet operating expenses for about five months if receipts were interrupted, interest income would be increased and the fund would be in a better position to move forward with the possibility of a much smaller adjustment in the rates next year. Some of the circumstances described above, and previously, are not likely to occur. However, it is better to plan ahead and be prepared than to be caught short after the fact. A cash balance of a size equivalent to a minimum of three and maximum of six month's.expenditures is recommended. GMV /ljw. . Attachments I, II and previous memo dated 3/27/80 ... Attachment I CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Sewer Fund Pro Forma Operating Statement . 1978 .1979 1979 1980 Actual Budget Actual Estimate Revenue Service Charges $ 406,192 $ $ 457,321 $ 473,690 ** } Other Revenue 2,379 $ 406,192 $ $ 459,700 $ 473,690 Expenses FT Salaries $ 17,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,194 $ 19,000 FT Overtime 400 612 700 • PT Salaries 300 651 700 PERA 865 1,024 1,100 FICA 960 750 850 Health & Life Ins. 610 815 650 Workmens Comp. 1,325 1,500 General Supplies 3,942 3,000 2,091 3,500 Equip. Maint. 1,215 1,700 759 2,000 Vehicle Maint. . 298 350 - - -- 300 Utility System Maint. 4,087 30,000 - - -- 30,000 Legal Services 100 - - -- - - -- Engineerin'g Services 2,747 2,500 2,500 Other Prof. Services 13,825 5,000 7,113 7,000 Legal Notices 50 - - -- - - -- Printing 50 - - -- - - -- Gen. Liability 203 230 168 200 Poperty Taxes 100 - - -- - - -- Vehicle Insurance 312 330 565 600 Machinery Rental 255 150 - - -- 1,000 Awards & Indemnities 1,131 1,500 - - -- 1,500 Miscellaneous 72 100 - - -- 100 Current Use Charges 328,824 403,443 381,151 433,734 Depreciation 9,339 12,210 12,210 18,000 Total Operating Expenses $ 383,250 $478,948 $ 424,428 $ 524,934 Operating Income $ 22,942 $ $ 35,272 $( 51,244) *Present rate and 1979 flows * *Proposed rate and 1979 flow = 528,942 ' Attachment II 6 Q--. CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Sewer Fund Pro Forma Operating Statement 1980 1980 1981 Estimated Estimated Estimated 1979 Present Proposed Proposed '79 Actual Rate Rate Rate Revenue f Service Charges * $ 457,321 $ 473,690 $ 528,942 $ 546,607 Other Revenue 2,379 459,700 473,690 528,942 546,607 Expenses 4100 FT Salaries 15,194 19,000 19,000 22,000 4112 FT Overtime 612 700 700 750 4130 PT Salaries 651 700 700 700 4140 PERA 1,024 1,100 1,100 1,500 4141 FICA 750 850, 850 1,400 4150 Health & Life Ins. 815 650 650 700 4151 Workmens Comp. 1,325 1,500 1,500 1,800 4220 General Supplies 2,091 3,500 3,500 3,500 4230 • Equip. Maint. 759 2,000 2,000 2,000 • 4232 Vehicle Mrint. - -- 300 300 300 4234 Utility System Maint. - -- 30,000 30,000 30,000 4310 Legal Services - -- - -- - -- - -- 4312 Engineering Services - -- 2,500 2,500 2,500 4315 Other Prof. Services 7,113 7,000 7,000 7,500 4350 Legal Notices - -- - -- - -- - -- 4351 Printing - -- - -- - -- - -- 4360 Gen. Liability 168 200 200 250 4361 Property Taxes - -- - -- - -- - -- i 4362 "Vehicle Insurance 565 600 600 650 4382 Machinery Rental - -- 1,000 1,000 1,000 4393 Awards & Indemnities - -- 1,500 1,500 1,000 ' 4990 Miscellaneous - -- 100 100 - -- 4411 Current Use Charges 381,151 433,734 433,734 481,000 Depreciation 12,210 18,000. 18,000 26,636 Total Operating Expense 424,428 524,934 524,934 585,186 .Operating Income $ 35,272 $ (51,244) $ 4,008 $ (38,579) Conversion to Cash Flow * Operating Income Previous $ 35,272 $ (51,244) $ 4,008 $ (38,579) " Depreciation 12,210 18,000 18,000 26,636 2 yrs. Prior Flow Refund 12,432 43,734 43,734 22,292 . Current Value Credit 9,064 9,064 9,064 9,064 ' Debt Service Credit 18,785 18,237 18,237 17,682 Debt Service - 61 (18,900) (23,600) (23,600) (22,800) Debt Service - 80 Work - -- - -- - -- (20,000) Debt Service - 81 Work - -- - -- --- (15,000) Eagle Creek Deferrment ( 6,750) ( 6,750) ( 6,750) ( 6,750) Capital.Equipment (37,509) - -- (20,000) Investment Interest 6,170 7,000 7,000 7,000 Current Yr. Flow Receivable (22,292) - -- - -- - -- 8,482 14,441 69,693 (40,455) Cash Jan. 1 96,479 104,961 104,961 174,384 * Cash Dec. 1 $ 104,961. $ 119,402 $ 174,384 $ 133,929 * Estimated Amounts; changes in trade receivables and payables not included. MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator FROM: Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director RE: Sewer Fund Budget and 1980 Rate DATE: March 27, 1980 Attached is the proposed 1980 Sewer Fund Budget. The Sewer Fund is an enterprise fund and therefore the budget is a flexible budget which is used more for planning and setting rates as opposed to the General Fund Budget which is a legal appropriation of funds. What is contained in the Sewer Budget are costs necessary to keep the system operating. There is very little in the budget of a discretionary type nature that could change the budget significantly. Based on this budget, we need to adopt a rate to provice sufficient revenue. The rate is broken down into three (3) parts. 1) The first part is the flat charge per month for service "availability'.'. The costs intended to be covered by this are total operating expenses less MWCC current use charges and less depreciation on contributed assets. This amounts to $76,200.00. Our present rate is $22.00 per year for this connection fee. At an estimated 2,650 customers, it should generate $58,300.00. 2) The second part of the rate is a maintenance charge for large users also supporting the "availability costs ". The present rate is $40 per million gallons for flows over one million gallons per year. For 1979 this generated $18,120.00 from 453 million gallons. 3) The third part of the rate is to cover the flow or usage portion of the budget. The rate needs to generate $433,734.00 that MWCC is billing the City. This amount ($433,734), divided by estimated water sold /sewage flow (706 million gallons) = 62 Q /1000 gallons. Because this rate will be in effect for only part of 1980, and to help build up retained earnings I suggest the flow rate be set at 67 Q /1000 gallons. While based on budgeted needs of $76,200 and projected revenue of $76,420 (current conditions assumed to continue) it would appear the first and second parts of the rate are adequate. However, there is a good possibility that flow under the second part of the rate may decrease due to several factors. A decrease in this flow will not cut our estimated cost, only cut revenues. Therefore, to provide for the possibility of lost revenue due to decreased flow, to build up some additional retained earnings and to provide some internally generated capital for fixed asset acquisition, it is recommended that the "availability" charge be set at $26 /year with expected revenue of $66,250 and that the large flow charge be set at $45 /M.G. with expected revenue of $19,818. Please keep in mind a new rate would be in effect for only part of the year. • • • 6 • Douglas S. Reeder March 27, 1980 Page Two The proposed rate is summarized as follows: P R O P O S E D Present A B C Availability Charge $ 22 /yr. $ 24 /yr. $ 26 /yr. • $ 28 /yr. Large Flow Fee 40 /M.G. 44 /M.G. 45 /M.G. 50 /M.G. Current Use Charge 60Q /1000g. 66Q /1000g. 67Q /1000g. 67Q /1000g. • Residential Flat Rate 5.43/mo. 6.44/mo. 6.68/mo. 6.84/mo. Fixed Income /Senior Citizen 4.65/mo. 5.43/mo. 5.43/mo. 5.43/mo. Estimated Revenue $477,284 $537,040 $546,718 $552,120 Between the present rate the recommended rate 'B', there is a 15% increase in the "availability fee ", a 12.5% increase in the large flow fee and a.12% increase in the current use charges. The residential flat fee equivalent shows • a larger percentage increase (23%) due to increased water use by the residential sector, based on data obtained from SPUC. • The fixed income/Senior Citizen rate adopted by Council last.year is included under the premise of that rate being one year behind the rate for other residences, In order to provide for additional cash flow needed for debt service for • planned reconstruction projects, it is proposed to initiate a City connection charge comparable to the SAC charge collected by MWCC. The current charge is $425.00 per SAC unit. It is recommended to adopt the same schedule as MWCC and have it change whenever MWCC's schedule changes. Due to the present condition . of the building industry it is very difficult to predict how much revenue this charge would generate. A very rough guess is that it may generate $10,000.00 for 1980. Also, attached is a survey of some other cities, showing what their residential sewer service rate is. Additionally, there is a short schedule showing the present and proposed sewer service bills for selected volumes of flow (commercial/ industrial customers). GMV /ljw • Attachments • I 6 61. , RESIDENTIAL SEWER CHARGE SURVEY RESIDENTIAL , SEWER CITY CHARGE CITY SAC CHARGE Minnetonka $ 14.92 /Quarterly None Victoria 20.00 /Quarterly City Core Charge = $710 - applied to extensions - picked up on new building permits. Deephaven 20.00 /Quarterly None Eden Prairie 12.75 /Quarterly None Robbinsdale 19.00 /Quarterly None Mound 20.00 /Quarterly None Orono 22.75 /Quarterly None Prior Lake 12.00 /Quarterly None Savage. 15.00 /Quarterly None Chaska - 23.22 /Quarterly Yes $220.00 St. Anthony 13.46 /Quarterly None Spring Lake Park 12.55 /Quarterly None Bloomington 11.55 /Quarterly None CROSS SECTION COMPARISON OF COMMERCIAL SEWER BILLS 12 mo @ 12 mo @ Business 1979 Flow 1979 Rate Proposed "B" Differential 1 285,709,000 g. $ 182,847 $ 204,276 $ 21,429 2 87,679,000 g. 56,109 62,685 6,576 • 3 1,820,000 g. 1,154 - 1,290 136 4 242,000 g. 167 188 21 5 10,000 g. 28 32 4 • • • DATE: April 10, 1980 CASE: P.C. 80 -10R ITEM: Rezoning, I -I to I -2 APPLICANT: Northrup King Co. LOCATION: 2nd - 3rd; Cass & Webster ZONING /LAND USE: I -1, Light Industrial /Northrup King Plant, Vacant AREA: Approximately 5 acres APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Sections 11.32, 11.33 and 11.04, Subd. 7 FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 11.04 Subd. 7 PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON A+-ze-f PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning of Blocks 39 and 175, Original Shakopee from I -I (light industrial) to I -2 (Heavy industrial). • LAND USE SUITABILITY Surrounding Land Uses: North - I -2, Heavy Industrial /Rahr • South R -3, Mid- density residential /vacant East - 1 -2, Heavy Industrial /Rahr West - I -1, Light Industrial /Single family house Land Use Plan: Industry URBAN SERVICES AVAILABILITY Sanitary Sewer: Service now or in the near future does not appear to be economically feasible due to distance of nearest line and existence of rock in the service area. Water: Service to block 39 on 3rd Avenue. Service to block 175 with the proposed construction of the 12" trunk water main. Storm Sewer: Along 3rd Avenue. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 1. The Land Use Plan identifies the two blocks as suitable for industrial uses. The Plan does not distinguish between heavy and light land uses. 2. As the present, the blocks are not fully served with City services. The I -1 zone requires a 20 acre minimum lot size for development without City services and 1 acre with City services. The 1 -2 zone has a one acre minimum lot size. 4 . CASE:: P.C. 80 -10R 2 ri Page 2 3. Northrup King has included arguments in support of its request for rezoning (Note attached Exhibit D). 4. The Rahr Malting plant is located to the north and east of the subject site. Rahr has indicated to the applicant that these two blocks are a desirable area for future expansion. 5. The residential area to the south is not developed. &TAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of Blocks 39 and 175, Original Shakopee, from I -1 to 1 -2. TK :nae t ,,,,• r4.1"-- - - - - * - r. 1 '‘; - W 7 0 ..,, °‘ . .„ ri.. %;.:;00:gr ' ' ' , • i _ . ', 1,1:. '' . , „ : • ‘ ' ■■ , r 1.,,,,,....sit... ill" � T,W7v€+3'R a6 - i i test va., . r / y r .LAS# v §fir + . ,' l��.a.— �- ti i. .. .:�' ;:cam 4f."--(;4'61tvtitaiat,),P1, . ... Matil Esc .07 11 -- . ..< ,, " w � . � y , ti 'rte: "� � ` mow . o. via 71 illititliVI ISE ' - 4 1 i 1111 4.' illillS 101111k 11 • 1 1 r i mp „ - � .�, .. +� � �. � of �� 1111. PP �.�� 111 .. . J RIVERVIEW ,0 ' 4'4' 0 1, PAR K 0 MENS t VIII A ' �., �,.. W II*I1. ilIll Ar • 1x 111 U. , a REFORMAT ,, -414 k ORY 'ei 9 tilt: , • 4a SI , 60 -_, go iUIW .1 ilivile di ,...„ImIN • STATE FARM C' WO 1 , ..... _____, . := �t� 'A ` 1 �� 177 / - t • \ VN — 11_1,_ 10 , , : y L 4: /' �� 175 3 q il •.I o • So N" 1 _ DATE INV T()194 � j - W I o ;E NO.� 10E- LOT LOCATION SCALE PG. �f Exhibit D Arguments in Support of Requested Zoning Change Northrup King Co. has operated a seed corn conditioning facility from its West Third Avenue location since the 1940's. During these years, the city of Shakopee has generally classified this area as an industrial area. For the reasons that follow, it is the position of Northrup King that our property should properly be zoned as heavy industrial: 1. The Planning Commission informally approved heavy industrial zoning for this property during the summer of 1979. On July 10, 1979, Mr. Arthur Skauge represented Northrup King at the public hearing held on the Proposed Zoning Ordinance. During the,course of this meeting, Mr. Skauge requested a rezoning from the proposed light industrial back to the previous heavy industrial classification for the Northrup King property located on West Third Avenue. A preliminary indication of approval was given to Mr. Skauge . at this meeting. However, Northrup King was requested to submit a letter formalizing its request for a heavy industrial classification. Representations were made to Northrup King that this letter was all that was necessary in order to obtain the heavy industrial zoning. On August 28, 1979, a letter was addressed to the Shakopee Planning Commission outlining the reasons for our request for a heavy industrial zoning classification for our property. On or about September of 1979, a final public meeting was held on the Proposed Zoning Ordin- ance. Through oversight, the Planning Commission or the city of Shakopee had not made a change to the zoning classification for the Northrup King property. For unknown reasons, Northrup King did not receive notice of the final public hearing and, therefore, was not present to raise objec- tions to the zoning on our property. Therefore, when the Ordinance was adopted by the city, it contained a light industrial classification for our property contrary to our express position and contrary to the representations made to us by the Planning Commission. • 7 • At the time of adoption of the Ordinance, all parties involved concluded that the zoning of our property as light industrial was an oversight and that such oversight should be corrected. 2. i A light industrial classification will have ad- verse affect on the long range use and enjoyment of the property. Although the use guidelines contained in the Ordinance do not specifically . cover the uses to which our property is put, a fair reading of the Ordinance discloses that a light industrial classification would effect the overall use of the property by Northrup King. In general, permitted uses under the light industrial classification are warehousing and office space uses. Since we clean, dry, con- dition and bag seed corn at our facility, our , use of this property exceeds the permitted uses. A fair argument could be made that our use of the property even exceeds the conditional uses author- ' ized by the Ordinance. The Ordinance allows only assembly and storage of "food" products. A heavy industrial classification would be more appropriate in that permitted uses include the manufacture, processing and storage of "food" products. This would most closely equate to the use of our facility. 3. A light industrial classification could preclude future expansion of our facility. A typical seed corn conditioning facility, such as Northrup King operates in Eldora, Iowa, or Washington, Iowa, contains a four -story milling tower. These towers are generally 70 feet in height. If Northrup King desired to update its Shakopee facility, light industrial zoning would preclude construction of the 70 foot milling tower since structures in excess of 45 feet are neither permitted nor con- ditional uses in a light industrial classifica- tion. On the other hand, such structures are conditional uses in a heavy industrial zoning classification. Therefore, it would be necessary for this property to be zoned heavy industrial in order to facilitate any expansion of our seed corn operations there. 4. Light industrial zoning will have an adverse affect on future marketability of the property. Northrup King has been approached by a large industrial con- cern presently located in Shakopee concerning a 7� `{ b4 i♦ 1 possible acquisition of our property. This po- tential•buyer has made his acquisition of the property contingent upon a rezoning of the prop- • erty by Northrup King to a heavy industrial _ classification. Therefore, marketability of our property is hampered by the light industrial classification presently assigned. NORTHRUP KING CO. By 71„:71ge!..<:__„ Corporate Lo sel • • • • ' . DATE: April 10, 1980 1\ 7 L) CASE: P.C. 80 -11P ITEM: Preliminary Plat - Weinandt Acres ' APPLICANT: Harry Weinandt LOCATION: Co. Rd. 42 West of Co. Rd. 17 ZONING /LAND USE: R -1, Rural Residential /Under Cultivation AREA: 115 Acres APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 11.25, Section 12 FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 12 PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON APRIL 70 PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval of 39 single family lots on 115 acre parcel at the above location. SITE. SUITABILITY Topography: Gently rolling to steep slopes. • • Soils: Hayden silty loam and Lakeville- Burnsville gravelly loams are predominant. Peat and muck on southerly acreage. Prime agricultural land. • Vegetation: Primarily under cultivation. Tree stands along lakeshore, north and south property lines. LAND USE COMPATIBILITY Surrounding Land Uses: North - R -1 - Under cultivation, Timber Trails South - R -1 - under cultivation East - R -1 - under cultivation West - S - Shoreland, O Lake PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS ' 1. The request at this time is for preliminary plat approval of the 39 2.5 acre lots covering the entire 115 acre parcel. Upon receiving preliminary plat approval, the applicant plans to request final plat approval for those lots west of the dashed line on the preliminary plat. That is, the 10 lake shore lots plus lots 11 and 12, block 1 and lots 1,2, and 3, block 3 for a total of 15 lots would be final platted. 2 4 ` 2. The preliminary plat conforms to the basic road and lot layout configuration that received concept approval by the Planning Commission at the February 14 meeting. 3. The preliminary plat does not indicate the square footage of the proposed lots. Staff would request verification of the lot sizes to meet the 2.5 acre minimum lot area requirement. 4. The area that would be final platted at this time would result in a 2500 foot temporary dead end road with a temporary cul -de -sac constructed at the eastern end of road at ldt 12, block 1. There would be 15 dwelling units loading onto this dead end road. The Fire Chief has indicated that this should not be a problem to insure proper fire protection. 5. The final platting and construction of the looped road is not planned at this time. Staff recommends that in order to insure the road constructed at this time does not become a permanent dead end that the applicant either: 1). Dedicate a legally described easement for the road from the dead end to the intersection at Co. Rd. 17 (Southeast corner of plat). or 2). Dedicate the specific right of way for this road alignment. 6. The Utilities Manager recommends that the standard 10 foot utility easement along all property lines be indicated on the plat. 7. The City Engineer has identified a number of concerns with the proposed drainage plan (note attached comments). Staff recommends correction of these problems as a condition of approval. 8. The proposed plat indicates no access to the lake for lots that do not havellake frontage. Staff recommends that the applicant consider some minimal level of access to the lake for those lots that do not • have lake frontage. Such access would seem to improve the desirability - and marketability of the lots without lake frontage. (This is only a suggestion). 9. The City Council,approved the acceptance of park dedication in cash at its March 4, 1980 meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends preliminary plat approval of Weinandt Acres conditioned on: 1. Compliance with subdivision regulations regarding s- etr -ity agreements and park dedication requirements. Page 3 2. Submission of revised drainage plan and approval by City Engineer. 3. Submission of either right-of way dedication or roadway easement document for that part of roadway that will not be final platted at the present time. 4. Provision of 10 foot utility easements along all property lines. 5. Provision of lot area calculations. TK:nae • t . . • I• . • • . . . . . • . 7 ' 1.. . . CO RD 78 ' GLEN 1 1 . • ---_____......._ ' • E LY N -A L 0 N. ...... --- --. --... - -• i i I • . • 1 _ -- • I ______1._....._.._......... ..... _ _____, 1 . , • 1 1,- , „..,' (1,-\-s . • 1 < . ) . . \ . I i N • A ' \ % 19 20 L __ • • 7 T. .71.._-__— '. ------ Ti 7 ,. 7 7 -\ 7 ..; F _____. - - - I - 1 — I - 7 - . • I , J\ I TIMBER J . • TRAILS .P \ T .. •. /- J. ......1 , \ ADDN• / 2 ' ,..... • I ..-----:)--- 1,7_,..,_ . • ,., , i ,,........._ • , \ ( \ • . . , / e V I - / .- - - - CO RD — . • J. i 1 • _, !..:.---) \ / ! , _ 30 1 . , • • — -\...... 1 ,- / - - , • / t.. 1 25 , /5 • , ' N ” (.....,/ L \ / 1 1 i . ( i . —- ( ....„ S . I Tho/L, ..-/-\--\ . . DEERVIEW ---, 0 . . ADDITION 1 .._ csmi in ii ■ =-_-______ --__ - 1 --- ,. --- u .. -... / ---.. \IX Schneider I L\ • \ . - ■ . ______ \ 4 , . 1r — .... — - \ 1. • i i cr+ • \ ft - ------ - -- - — - ,-, ) " 1 - \ 4 • • . • • . , \ . ( : 4441.12.42 \/1\iltskt.-4-vp-r-- 4. io • bo .TITIONER • . DATE ..., c L .. r'r-'. . j LOT LOCATION SCALE P( i r• 7 k( \ C•1 TY OF SHAKOPEE STAFF REVIEW RECORD ri PLATTING PROCESS -- PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS APPLICANT: Harry Weinandt CASE NO: PC80-.11P PROJECT: • Weinandt Acres 1st Addition ADDRESS: - South on CR -17 PHONE it APPLICATION FOR: l Sketch Plan Review Variance '4 Preliminary Plat __ Planned Unit Development __ Final Plat __ Zoning Change Site Plan __ Conditional Use Permit _ 'Public Improvement Other APPLICATION ' RECEIVED: March 21, 1980 REVIEW DEADLINE: April 4, 1980 PROPOSED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: April 10, 1980 PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL ' ACTION: April 15, 1980 . I HAVE REVIEWED THE ATTACHED PROPOSED PROJECT IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS: _ Schools -- Parks, Trails x Street, Traffic x Water __ E lectric Service x Storm Sewer, Drainage x - Sewer -- Gas Service x Curb & Cutter Zoning _ E nvironmental County Road Access - H x Flood Plain x Individual Septic System • _ Police _.x._ Sidewalks Other Fire • I RECOMMEND: APPROVAL x APPROVAL WITH CHANCES LISTED DENIAL FOR THE REASONS LISTED COMMENTS AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) Every cul de sac • shown in the preliminary plat is a backward draining cul de sac that drains at some point to an 8 or 10 per cent grade. The experience of the City wi rh backward draining cul de sacs in this configuration is poor. Due to the number of complaints and the amount maintenance, this type of roadway requires, it is the strong recommendation of the Engineering'Department that the roadway be realigned either vertically or horizontally so that the cul de sacs will not drain backwards to the bulb. (2) The proposed plat is not in the urban service area and not proposed for water or sewer service (3) I presume that the drainage plan is proposed to handle a 5 year return period. For a 5 year return period the run off should not exceed the capacity of the proposed facilities nor be unstable in any the proposed swails. The second part of a drainage plan is to ?low e effect of the =0: X_ City Admr. _ Police Chi _ X- City Eng. X County Engr. ICNED ` City Attorney _ Bldg. Official . x__ City Planner. X Parks & Rec. City Engineer Street Supt. _ Other TITLE � _ Utility Mgr. X— fire Chief . April 3 _ DATE 7f major storm. The major storm here would be a 100 year occurrence. During a 100 year occurrence I presume that there will be some ponding at the junction of 140th Street and County Road 17. The preliminary plan should indicate what the limits of that ponding will be and further propose to protect that ponding with proper drainage easement. The preliminary drainage plan does not indicate what measures would be taken to mitigate potential damage due to excessive velocity in the proposed swail. The drainage plan also proposes to discharge storm water in a swail out across pracels without protecting those swails with drainage easements. The easements should be shown on the preliminary plat. I! . - . - m cc: 7 fM/7 re • - ---) ' zi 1 :. ' / 7 ,.* t . etkr ° — n al 1380 7- CITY Y OF SHAKOPEE STAFF REVIEW PLATTING PROCESS -- PUBLIC 1 MPR CME-N'1`S ,:,,I. APPLICANT: . Harry Weinandt CAST? NO: PC80 -11P . PROD r:CT : Weinandt Acres 1st Addition • ADDRESS: South on CR -17 PHONE: : APPLICATION FOR: i i Sketch Plan Review Variance Preliminar y Plat - Planned Unit Development — Final Plat, __ `Zoning Change Site Plan __ Conditional Use Permit Public Improvement Other " APPLICATION ' RECEIVED: March 21, 1980 REVIEW DEADLINE: April 4, 1980 _ PROPOSED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: April 10 1980 PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL ACTION: April 15, 1980 I HAVE REVIEWED THE ATTACHED PROPOSED PROJECT IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS: i Schools _ Parks, Trails -- Street, Traffic x Water K Electric Service -- Storm Sewer, Drainage Sewer Gas Service __ Curb & Gutter Zoning E nvironmental County Road Access • __ Housing -- F lood Plain ^ Individual Septic System Police __ -- S idewalks Other -- Fire . • I RECOMMEND: X APPROVAL APPROVAL WITH CHANCES LISTED DENIAL FOR THE REASONS LISTED • COMMENTS AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS: • The standard 10 foot easement on all lot lines is desireable. -- } r - • City Admr. _ Police Chief � --1 - -r/t ti < C t_t� X— City Eng. X County Engr. v SIGNED City Attorney Bldg. Official . g_.City Planner X Parks & Rec. ` / 7 /7 / N4 A/4 C'4 Street Supt. Other TITLE x_ Utility Mgr. X-- .Fir Chief 1/-_ DATE • � . : CITY OF SHAKOPEE STAFF REVIEW RECORD i PLATTING PROCESS -- PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS . APPLICANT: . Harry Weinandt PC8O -,11P CASE NU: PROJECT: Weinandt Acres 1st Addition ADDRESS: South on CH-17 PHONE: - • } APPLICATION FOR: i if Sketch Plan Review _ Variance X Preliminary Plat -- Planned Unit Development Final Plat __ Zoning Change Site Plan __ Conditional Use Permit Public Improvement Other APPLICA'T'ION 'RECEIVED: March 21, 1980 REVIEW DEADLINE: April 4, 1980 PROPOSED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: April 10, 1980 PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL ' ACTION: April 15, 1980 • I HAVE REVIEWED THE ATTACHED PROPOSED PROJECT IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS: Schools ''' Parks, Trails __ Street, Traffic Water -- Electric Service -- Storm Sewer, Drainage Sewer _ Gas Service _ Curb & Gutter -- Zoning Environmental County Road Access ,Housing __ Flood Plain _ Individual Septic System • -- Police -- Sidewalks Other Fire • I RECOMMEND: * APPROVAL. -- APPROVAL WITH CHANCES LISTED DENIAL FOR THE REASONS LISTED • COMMENTS AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS: We apparently have ' • _ exhausted all means of locating funds to purchase the shoreline from Mr Weinandt for community purposes. 1 still find it hard to swallow that only nine familys will now have access to the shore of this beautiful lake,; not even a footpath so) future residents of this plat away from the lake will have access to it. ' • • • C: x_ City Admr. _ Police Chief 4/ ,� City Eng. i -l�' n n /'`' l' X- Y g . X County Engr. .- `-%`'v SI N • I . City Attorney _ Bldg. Official . g_ ,City'Planner X Parks & Rec. -/ ,- __ )'� Street Supt. Other ' . TITLE 'I- Utility M r. ' � � 7 J�� X- £ire Chi e / - DATE • DATE: March 27, 1980 C: CASE: PC 80 -7R ITEM: Rezoning R -3 to B -1 APPLICANT: Jerome Jaspers LOCATION: 206 So. Scott ZONING /LAND USE: R -3 /Office Building AREA: .3 Acres APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: 11.29 and 11.04 Subd. 7 FINDINGS REQUIRED: 11.04 Subd. 7.I. PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON APRIL 1c: 1980 PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning from R -3 (Moderate density residential) to B -1 (Highway business). LAND USE COMPATIBILITY Surrounding land uses: North - B -1 /2nd Ave., Railroad tracks, Office supply business South - R -3 /Single family residential East - B -1 /Fire Station • West - R -3 /Single family residential Land Use Plan: Medium density residential PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 1. The corner lot is 90' x 142' (12,780 sq. ft.) facing Second Avenue on the north and Scott Street on the east. 2. The existing use of the parcel is a professional office building. 3. The applicant has plans to expand the present office structure by 2240 sq. ft. The office at this time, is a non - conforming use in the R -3 zone. As such, the non - conforming use may not be expanded. In order to construct the proposed addition, the zoning district must be changed to one in which an office is a permitted or conditional use. Offices are permitted use in the I -1, I -2, B -1, B -2, and B -3 zones. 4. The property is adjacent to a B -1 zone to the north and east and would not create an "island" of spot zoning. 5. Considering the existing commercial character of surrounding land uses, staff questions the suitability of this parcel for future residential development. There is a concern that as a non- conforming use, the property would continue to deteriorate with the site not well- suited to replacement by residential development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the rezoning from R -3 to B -1 conditional on: Construction of a fence or planting screen on all sides of property that abut an R district as per Sec. 11.29 subd. S.M. TK :nae } 1 • 7G - • • ):Dy� 1 11- - , ' _'' 1 ., rt._ . - 0) , t . . _ — R ' E � � \` / • • • _f1 .r _ _ :.. 1- :v ' 1 �y — 1 4 . +,� a xle) �^ � =• III" � ' � � Yi N — �/L —. ___ �, Y y� _a• �t , . T • t i `Z � Y M ..,: t .. Ir t i mi p list ,......,. ..:::.::„,:::::„.. .„:::::::„.,„:::„,,,..„.....„:„.„,.„..„...„..-. ... ,r_ _ , � �� illia asFr. . r () t . a dSG� rrr - 10" 3" 4 ' . . \'' r ! :c1/41;LrtI ,,,,. .�,utrl'bdka' ' -- �. _4 v .. — ` • A ,TA 1CY`► - 11 -- i - - 1 I "Ill" t ' . ' . ‘,. . ' '1;Wee°2"°9 - ' _____.---' . ' il -,q, - I f tfi -.--.7.--:;:.___-2-t------J,,,.'',. 4 r � 01.11-14 � .; a MAR e 1r ►• Ai 11 ..v...,...... ,, 1 ,;� � : •r ,,,,, ,,,,,.,,, I ' liswili ........„..,,A.,.,r,„„lifif .: �� ; ;s * HO ME uto k"i ' •111 K PAR Ar 1 . E . rr� a . • "r 1 61 1 - 312-7.80 ETITIONER 2 % � o , (DATE ASE NO. LOT LOCATION SCALE i PG. • i MEMO TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tim Keane, City Planner SUBJECT: Issues Raised at the March 27, 1980 Meeting Concerning Jaspers' Rezoning Request DATE: April 10, 1980 • At the March 27th Planning Commission meeting a number of important questions were identified previous to making a decision in Jaspers' rezoning request. 1. Does the Code permit existing residential uses to continue in a Business District? Although this subject was discussed in the course of developing the Comprehensive Plan and adopting the present Land Use Regulations, no provisions were included in the Code to permit the continuation of existing residential uses as a conforming use in Business Districts. As such, a residential use within a Business District is a non - conforming use and subject to the conditions of Section 11.03 Subd. 2 of the Code. 2. Can the ordinance be changed to permit single - family uses as a permitted or conditional use in a commercial -type zone? There is no legal reason why the Code could not be amended to be more inclusive, that is, to permit less intense uses (e.g. single family residential) in higher intense zones (e.g. business or industrial). Such a change, however, would run contrary to an abandonment - replacement strategy where less intense, non - conforming uses give way to more valuable commercial -type uses over time. 3. When was the property rezoned to R -3, moderate density residential? Extensive searching was unable to churn up a zoning map of the City previous to the one adopted in 1965. The 1965 map also shows this property zoned R -3. There seems to be general agreement on the part of the property owner, the City Attorney, and a former City Administrator that the subject property was at one time zoned for a commercial -type use. 1 Planning Commission 2 April 10, 1980 G . .Page 2 • 4. What,constitutes a spot zoning? Attached are exerpts from two legal textbooks discussing the subject of spot zoning. (Please excuse the underlined passages. They are from previous personal use). 1). Urban Planning and Land Development Control Law by Donald G. Hagman, West Publishing Co., St. Paul, MN, 1975 2). Land Use in a Nutshell: Hornbook Series and Legal Texts by Robert R. Wright and Susan Weber, West Publishing Co., St. Paul, 1978 Due to the great disparity of interpretation on this subject from one state court to another, there really is no "black letter law" on the subject of spot zoning. The discussion from the Hagman text does lend guidance as to what factors are present in a case of spot zoning to be held invalid (P. 169) . Spot zoning issues relevant to this' case should include: 1). Does the rezoning confer special privileges to an "island "'df land? 2). Is the decision arbitrary so as to confer special privileges to a private party with no public purpose? 3). Is the rezoning in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan? TK:nae • 168 LIMITATIONS ON ZONING POWER Ch. 6 The matter was recently considered by a state court in O'Brien v. City of Saint Pau1. The statute provided that property could be rezoned only after a tract study or only if the owners of two - thirds of the parcels of real estate within 100 feet gave their consent. The city council rezoned the property from single and double family to 1 multiple family use without either the tract study or the consent. The court ruled against the city. Citing Cusack, the court held the consent T requirement valid because no restriction was imposed by the property owners, theft consent was required only to waive restrictions pre- - viously established by the city. Roberge (old age home permitted but . only with consent) was distinguished on the ground that while old age i homes were not a near nuisance, apartments in single and double family areas were." Moreover, the court pointed out that the single and double family zoning had remained intact for 46 years and that many persons had purchased in reliance of the zoning. r Improper delegation to neighbors is most clear where the regula- tion can be imposed only on request or must be imposed if property . . owners request. Where uses are prohibited unless consent is ob- tained, the ordinance so providing is more likely valid than where uses are permitted, but only on consent. Ln addition to improper dele- gation of legislative authority and delegation without standard prob- • lems, these consent provisions may also be invalid because there is ! no provision for them under the enabling act. , . III. COMPREHENSIVE AND UNIFORM REQUIREMENTS �.br 7. § 93. Spot Zoning Defined • To the popular mind, spot zoning means the improper permission to use an "island" of land for a more intensive use than permitted on adjacent properties. The popular definition needs several qualifica- tions. When a court uses the term spot zoning itmay only he de- : scriptive of a certain set of facts and the C neutral- with_respect _ to validity or invalidity. At other times, the courts use the term spot zoning todescribc a set of facts where the zoning as applied is invalid. The set of facts usually involves an "island" of more intensive use, though an "island" of unintensive use could also be spot zon- 22. 2S5 \lien. 378, ]73 N.W.2t1 •102 24. (generally, there is no right to rc- (1000). ly on zoning slaying the snnte. See .j3 supra. 23. Criticized in 22 'Zoning Digest ]11 25. Gil }' of filorlaun v. li risbiC & f,ntfa, (1070). 03 Ca1.App. 277, 270 1'. 270 (102S). 1 • • 3 ' Sec. 93 COMPREHENSIVE REQUIREMENTS 169 ing. Usually the "island "_is_ small_ For example, if a square mile area was carved out of an agricultural zone and zoned industrial, it is • not likely that anyone would refer to that as spot zoning. Furthermore, the term is not usually or properly applied to development permission that comes�ll� to b vY ari cr_"or special_ exception. Rather, the term refers to legislative acts, such as a rezoning, or to a situation where the "island" is created by the original ordinance. A spot zone may exist though the change for the "island" permits only what is per - { mitted in adjacent areas. For example, if a lot and adjacent areas were zoned residential, but by variances, special exceptions and non- conforming uses, the adjacent area was used for business uses, it might be spot zoning to zone the lot for business uses. Such zoning might not be invalid spot zoning, though the court may holcl it invalid on the ground that it represents a classic case for an amendment that rezones both the lot and the adjacent areas for business purposes. Spot zoning la jay where some or all of the following factors are present: (.ie) a small parcel of land is singled out for special and privileged treat nt; 2. the singling out is no1<_in th_e_public interest. but only for the benefit of the landowner; 0 3. the action is not in accord with a comprehensive plan. The list is not meant to suggest that the three tests are mutually exclusive. If spot zoning is invalid, usually all three elements are present, or, said another way, the three statements may merely be nuances of one another. Accord with Plans in General As previously discusscd, the Standard State Zoning_Enabling Act 27 re regulations_ (both original. and amendments) be "made in accordancewith a comprehensive plan." The requirement • is often mentioned in spot zoning cases, but it is variously interpreted. The requirement may only mean that zoning should not be irrational or arbitrary, and the zoning of an "island" different from surround- ing areas may be irrational or arbitrary. The requirement may only mean that zoning is to effectuate public purposes and spot zoning may merely confer a special privilege . on an individual property owner. Sometimes the court reads the requirement as directing its attention, for purposes of review, to the zoning map for the area. The 26. See § 23 supra. 28. Koresnik v. Township of \rontgom- 27. U. S. Dept of Commerce (rev. 0d. L� }' '_',1 N.J. 15-1, ]:{'I A.3r1 1 (UM). 3926). 7G 170 LIMITATIONS ON ZONING POWER Ch. 6 map should disclose some plan for the area, and if the proposed spot zoning will create a different zone without any apparent difference in the parcel that justifies the difference in zoning, the court will con- clude that there is no accord with the p1an. Some courts and com- . mentators conclude that the zoning map is not the plan referred to, ] •but that the plan meant is the master plan. If the change accords with the master plan calls for, it will not be invalid spot zoning." Finally, the accordance requirement may mean no more than zoning should effectuate a consistent policy. For example, if a legislative body has spot zoned in similar situations in the past, that might be evidence of a policy that further spot zoning accords to some plan. Every casebook author including materials on zoning will have a case or two on spot zoning. The cases are not easily rationalized, even within a state, though the courts of some states are more tolerant of it than courts in.other_states. It is also frequently difficult to identify the rationale the court uses for holding spot zoning valid or invalid. The discussion of the following leading cases is organized by the ap- . parent basis for the decision. Arbitrary, Special Privilege Benefit to Private Person, No Public Purpose A parcel of land on a busy street in a fine residential area was rezoned from residential to commercial. Despite the fact that the busy. street made the lot almost useless for residential purposes, the mere economic._ .gain to Abe_ by a rezoning_dicLnot justify_it_there being no showing that there was a substantial change__in_the neighbor - 11=1. Thorelorc,_thc_lot vas- selects .d_out.for_spacial_troatr eat, which ade the action invalid spo_t_zoning.i'- Similarly, a small parcel in a residential district was rezoned for business purposes. Adjacent owners were opposed, but owners nearby signed supportive petitions. An existing business district was located seven hundred feet away. The court held the rezoning to be spot zoning, not in accordance with any plan and a singling out of one parcel of property for special treat - ent. • As previously indicated, a spot zone may be created by leaving out an "island" from a rezoning of an area,_ For example, a 700 -acre residential parcel was zoned so as to prohibit the raising of fur - bearing animals — except for a 10 -acre area which was excluded from the pro- 29. Zoning found valid in Punio] v. 31. Leahy v. Inspector of Bldgs., 30S Norristown Borough, 404 Pa. 475, 172 Mass. 12S, 31 N.E.2d 436 (1941). A.2d S2S (1901). 32. Kuehne v. Town Council of 'Gown ..30. Of course, the planning might be of East Hartford, 136 Conn. 452, 72 invalid as "spot planning." A 2d •17.1 (1950). • ,G • 3 Sec. 93 COMPREHENSIVE REQUIREMENTS 171 hibition. The court held that the raising of fur - bearing animals had nuisance -like effects in residential neighborhoods, and under the facts, the 10 -acre exception could only be for the benefit of the individual. The court found no power to act except in the public interest. Accord with Zoning Plan ._In spot zoning cases, the courts frequently conclude that_there i s no accord with the zoning_ map or plan._ For example, the owner of a 19 -acre parcel desiring to use his property for business use ob- tained a rezoning from residential to industrial use. While the rezon- ing was large enough to be comprehensive in one sense (as previously indicated, the r_ezoning of large _parcels_is_often_ not._considered -spot_ zonin , there was no showing the parcel could not be used for resi- dential purposes, there was vacant commercially zoned property on the other side of an adjacent expressway and there was no need to zone the property industrial to use it for business purposes. Accord- ingly, the court held the zoning was not in accord with the comprehen- sive plan and was invalid spot zoning." Similarly, a block in a resi- dential area was rezoned commercial for a shopping center. The mu- nicipality was primarily residential in character, but with a shopping area located a half -mile away. By looking at the zoning plan for the • city, the court concluded there was an intent to have the municipality zoned residential, except for the area a half -mile away. Moreover, the rezoned parcel was on the border of the municipality and adjacent to residential areas of three other municipalities. The court held the rezoning was spot zoning and not in accord with the comprehensive plans of the Borough or the region as a whole." Rezoning was held valid where eleven acres, bounded by railroad tracks, a school, a street and a manufacturing company was rezoned from a zone permitting residences on 12,000 square foot minimum lots to R-4 permitting garden apartments. Though such a use pas_not specified in the master plan, the court indicated that the -plan is _Dot rigid and it is possible for tire_zoning_o dinance ltsclf_to_be_a_conlPre:_- s]vepl u_ Because of the surroundings, and because much of the area was zoned R -4, or commercial, which permitted R-4 uses, the . court concluded no spot zoning was involved. The zoning was not 33. Alillcr v. Rural Municipality of 35. Borough or Cresskill v. llorough of Charlcswood, [1937] 3 \V.W.II. 686 Dumont*, :15 N.:1. 235, 10.1 A.2d 1.11 (Man.K.B.). Canadian courts do 1101 (195r4). This case is important heeause have the power to hold zoning unrea- of its recognition of extraterritorial ' sonablc. circumstances and is considered again infra § OS. 34, Ilevitt v. County Commis of r3al- timore County, 220 Md. 4S, 151 A.2d 114 (1959). Hagman, Urban Plan. & Land Dev.Law HB -14 • I 172 LIMITATIONS ON ZONING POWER Ch. 6 unreasonable or arbitrary and the large size of the parcel suggested • it might not be spot zoning in any event. Accord with Master Plan Since the Standard Zoning Enabling Act reguires_accord that is P_. -- most often held to mean accord with the zonin g_ lal� as somehow ex- emplified in the ordinance itself, there are few illustrations whcre_spot zoning was ]held valid because, it accorded with the_master. -plan or invalid because it did_not. Further, when an opinion refers to a com- prehensive plan, it is often difficult to tell whether the reference is to the phrase "accordance with a comprehensive plan" as in statutes based on the Zoning Enabling Act, or to a plaster p1an. Ordinances might indicate, for example, that a rezoning should accord with the plaster plan. ILalLcOW. ts-held _w here the city . has..no_mas.ter_plan . . . the zQning ordinance constitutes the pl la, =� the.iesollttio_n of the confusion _voulcLbe_easier. t With heavy reliance on Ilaar, "In Accordance with a Comprehensive Plan ",'t a California Court once said: It is apparent that the plan is, in short, a constitution $ for all future developments within the city. . . . Any • zoning ordinance adopted in the future would surely be inter- . preted in part'by its fidelity to the general plan as well as by I the standards of due process. Frequently it has occurred that where a general plan was adopted, and later a zoning change was made which appeared to be in accord with the i plan, that fact in and of itself was some evidentiary weight in ■ the determination as to whether the zoning ordinance was proper or otherwise. IUhc-_general_plan_ise anything at.all, it is_a_.meaningful _ enactmentY and definitely_affects__the_com munily. _an_d1,_among.Q.ther things,..changes land market values. • The__general_plan_.is legislatvely.__adopted by.,_the_ council. • True, but is cociclied _in_part._in_general tci.ms, but there are many specifics, and once adopted it becomes very effective. , • t .36. Cleaver v. Board or Adjustment, 3 8. Such an ordinance might conflict '911 l'a. 307, 200 A: -'d •J0S (191.1). with the enabling act requiring only accord with a gotnprehensive plan, . .37. Opinions sometimes manifest a lack. where t he comprehensive plan is in- , of understanding over the dil•fercuce terpreted to he the scheme pt•ovided between a master plan and the plan in the zo ning ordinance. • i as exemplified by the zoning ordi- n:ulce. The confusion is 1101 su•pris- 39. Ilcin v. Git }• of Daly City, 165 cal. ing since comprehensive plan is a App2d •101, ,105 332 1'.2d 120, 123 ' synonym for master plan. See gen- (11150. orally McBride & Babcock, The "Mas- ter I'1:11 " —A Statutory Prerequisite to a Zoning Ordinance ?, 12 Zoning 40. GS Ilarv.T..1lev. 1151 (1055). Digest 353 (1900). } 70- Sec. 93 COMPREHENSIVE REQUIREMENTS 173 . . Any subdivision or other development would neces- sarily be considered in its relation to the general plan, and such consideration practically by itself would be a sufficient legislative guide to the exercise of such discretions. It surely cannot be contemplated that the council, in the adoption of future zoning ordinances . . . will go con- trary, (in all but rare instances), to the general plan which it adopts." Unfortunately, the court was a bit naive;__ there _typically is no such •close tie between jhe__master-- plan_and_ zoning.''2 • Accord with, Policy Finally, spot zoning_may._be_.valid yhere.it accords wIt1i,_a_plan that is extant nowhere bi1Lin_thenninds_of_the decision makers.. Bas- a zon ing eclsio ing some vague policy grounds is fraught wi th the opportunity for arbitrary action and a court willing to approve general policy as a guide to zoning decisions may find it must approve almost any rezoning. Some policy rationale can always or almost always be found;' har l any rezonings maliabsolutely_no..sense:. But courts have "approved spot zoning justified only by policy. For example, a lot in a single- family dwelling area was rezoned from a residence zone to a special business zone so as to permit the construction of a small shopping center for a drugstore, hardware store, grocery, bakery and beauty parlor. There were already four stores in the area which were legal nonconforming uses. The special business zone' used had provi- sions for open yards, setbacks, off - street parking and the like, to make it more compatible, and the zone was specially designed for situations • of this type. Since the planning commission had a policy of relieving traffic ,congestion by decentralizing business to outlying areas, and there was no other shopping area within a mile, the action was in con- formity with a comprehensive plan. A dissent indicates that there was no actual (written down) comprehensive plan, and the action con- stituted a clear case of invalid spot zoning.''' Similarly, land contain- ing gravel was rezoned from residential to permit quarrying. By re- zoning the municipality would receive more taxes and would put the land to its most appropriate use. These factors were considered by the court to evidence a comprehensive plan. " 41. OLoane v. O'Rourke, 231 Cal.App. The court held 1he adoption was a 2d 771, 782 -8 :3, 12 Cal,ltptr. 283, 2SS legislative act, thus properly a matter (100.0. of a referendum. See § 39 supra. 42. The O'Lonne case was considering 43. Tlartram v. Zoning Comm'n, 136 whether the adoption of a general 1 Conn. 89, GS A2d 30S (1919). plan was an administrative or legisla- tive act so as to determine whether 44. Rezoning held invalid, but for cer- it was a fit subject for a referendum. twin technical reasons, Koresnik v. 3 0 M: Gtrt ter. ,it\L FN • § 3 ZONING Ch. 6 § 2 ZONING Ch. 6 parcel or parcels involved, that the action taken_ abling Act and is often referred to simply as the {- by the _city zoning_authority was fairly debatable= "Standard Act." Ch. 6 ZONING § 3 and entitled be.upheld unless clearly erroneous._ State enabling legislation typically requires that Spot -zoning; by definition, is invalid because - t ;and arbitrary; that the - parcel or are "af the zoning ordinance be preceded by a study of amounts 'to. an -arbitrary, capricious • and .1ni•ea =`- _ flicted_by some condition peculiar_and ; unique to conditions in the community followed by a report sonable :treatment of a limited within .a.-1-iii-7°- diem which justifies the.change, "that the change. or reports on such conditions, the development ticulai•Jdistrict ` .As such,` it departs "from- -the meets the criteria - of the ordinance .allowing -a adoption of a master plan, and pub- .. _. _ conditional use or special_ use permit or special and ultimate ado P P P comprehensive plan. It singles out a parcel of iic hearings on the proposed plan and on the zon- `land for special treatment or privileges not in exception, that the zoning would be confiscatory ing ordinance. A number of cases have held that harmony with the other use classifications in the or an unreasonable hardship to the landowner un- unless this planning process and the procedure area and without any apparent circumstances less_ the change were granted, and that (in .the__ surrounding it is followed, any zoning ordinance which call for different treatment. Spot zoning case of larger parcels) .the change is in.the public which is adopted is invalid. This is based on the almost invariably involves a single parcel or at interest and promotes the general welfare. view that zoning is not an end in itself and is ac- least a limited area. However, the "floating There is some indication that where the bound - tually a tool of planning. This rule is not univer- zone" device which is discussed later in this chap- aries of several communities run together, one j sally followed, however.: `Because of the problem; ter was attacked as constituting spot zoning even community may rezone in such a way that it con- , of - controlling the development of discordant land i though that device involves substantial acreage. stitutes spot zoning in terms of the adverse and uses until the planning process is completed, in- l terim An allegation of spot zoning may arise from zoning of a temporary nature is sometimes ' unreasonable effect upon adjoining communities. attempted; Unless it is specifically authorized by 1 situations involving amendments to the ordi- Borough of Cresskill v. Borough of Dumont, 15 • - the enabling act; however, it may be held nance, varianc es, special use permits or special N.J. 238, 104 A.2d 441 (1954). . invalid. exceptions - or similar devices discussed in later J • sections. Any change may be subjected to such a contention except possibly for one involving com- § 4. .Zoning Amendments § 3. Spot Zoning prehensive revision of a substantial area or of the The most obvious way to effect a zoning Once a zoning ordinance has been adopted, master plan based on new studies and new infor- change is to amend the ordinance. There may be problems arise with regard to changing it or mation. Even then, some small part of the revi- a single, major amendment as the result of new granting relief from its provisions. Such relief sion may come under attack. studies. The usual situation, however, involves . or changes often give rise to allegations of "spot Allegations "of spot zoning are- defended °against- periodic amendments resulting from applications zoning." with such contentions as that the change is in ac from interested landowners. This proc in- : • -cord -with the 4master plan, that conditions in the . [116] • area have changed drastically since the original: • zoning thereby - justifying - the change as to the • . - - -- [I15] z) I {. I 1. DATE: March.27, 1980 I CASE: PC 80 -7R ITEM: Rezoning R -3 to B -1 .1 APPLICANT: Jerome Jaspers LOCATION:• 206 So. Scott ZONING /LAND USE: R -3 /Office Building i AREA: .'3 Acres i APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: 11.29 and 11.04 Subcl. 7 L FINDINGS REQUIRED: 11.04 Subd. 7.I. PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION • RECOMMENIDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CASE HEARD ON APRIL. 16, 1980 i ? PROPOSAL • The applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning from R -3 (Moderate • density residential) to B -1 (Highway business). • LAND USE COMPATIBILITY Surrounding land uses: North - B -1/2nd Ave., Railroad tracks, Office I supply business ;i South - R-3/Single family residential East - B- 1 /Fi_re Station it West - R -3 /Single family residential Land Use Plan: Medium density residential PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 1. The corner lot is 90' x 142' (12,780 sq. Avenue on,the north and Scott Street on the east. Second 2. The use of the parcel is a professional office building. 3. The . applicant has plans to expand the present office structure • by 2240 sq. ft. The office at this time, is a non - conforming use in the R -3 zone. As such, the non - conforming use may not be expanded. In order to construct the proposed addition, the • • zoning district must be changed to one in which an office is a permitted or conditional use. Offices are permitted use in the I -1, I -2, B -1, B --2, and B -3 zones. 4. The property is adjacent to a B -1 zone to the north and east and would not create an "island" of spot zoning. 5. Considering the existing commercial character of surrounding land uses, staff questions the suitability of this parcel for future residential development. There is a concern that as a non - conforming use, the property would continue to deteriorate with the fsite not well- suited to replacement by residential development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff 'recommends approval of the rezoning from R -3 Co B -1 conditional on: Construction of a fence or planting screen on all sides of property that abut an R district as per Sec. 11.29 subd. S.M. TK:nae 'I 4 1 ; ,; .:------ - — f- — ; - ' ': 'L.—:..—..-xx:; :3';'".'• ,...::,.':',..,: :: ::.:' 1 ; •,_:_.1,,,....,:, • '', \ • ,ti ..rj __ti if t"'^• ': ,- �� yti 6r ti;� ,xi * _ V R E ; ' i .3 lll I � ' - \--: . III I .. . - L , , li •. !II", ��` 1 1 � • :ism* • : ,f: __ — n r..,t .•i.26Y13'FbiiYAA�..- d�`lo•. f. U1ftJ r , � _- z -- ' {�.� = - ' - - -- � ��.--- • y;.:•� _ it ._ A: � Y t • :-.. ;; : y 1 L � 's '' - x : • FITS �c 111 �. .ter, 't � !��; ' ( }1' ,.t„,, w f t1 ilR v ai l 3 ST \ "...- - w-- AC. law ., : - ----rETri.L.-i-----' .. , - . ' UAW • r ---- . . e ra : , 6i-- al l' * Q ,„ , ( 1`11 `` �� n• y n_ 1 s ire th. 4 A • 1 E S y E i'' .00111111W ' PAM , . ti A . ' al ID t A a 1. -11 • . i c-. u. , _.„...• . . • , . . . _ _ __. , ....,. g m 8 ; ' t ;, \ I . . . ,...-- n - \ Z V a • l '''`.-A . ' . \ i ETITIONER 3.2-7. 00 DATE . .2.06 'd . G � ASE NO. LOT LOCATION SCALE PC • ;c'ss „ '� i . « ^ .a te .. _ .... _._.,y._ -�„_ _ — -- C . • MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator FROM: Tim Keane City Planner 4111 RE: Code Revision Concerning Motor Fuel Stations DATE: April 11, 1980 At the request of the City Council, the staff has reviewed and proposed the following revisions for design standards for motor fuel stations. The Planning Commission held public hearings February 28th and March 13th on the proposed change. The Planning Commission todk action to recommend approval to the City Council at the March 13th meeting. Additionally, a notice was sent to all motor fuel station operators on March 5th, requesting comments on the proposed changes. The notable changes from the existing regulations include: • 1) Height and setback requirements for canopies. 2) Control of exterior storage of inoperable vehicles and junk parts. 3) Clarification of paving requirements. 4) Reduced setbacks for pump islands. It is important to note that the structural design standards do not apply to existing stations unless: 1) The fair market value of the structure is more than 50 percent damaged by fire, flood, explosion, earthquake, war, riot, or an act of God. 2) The structure or use is discontinued for six (6) months. 3) Improvements are made that increase the bulk of the building. Normal maintenance including non - structural repairs and incidental alterations are permitted without required conformance to the design standards. TK /jiw MEMO TO: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator FROM: Jeanne Andre Administrative Assistant RE: Employee Energy and Cost Savings. Suggestions DATE: April 8, 1980 . The attached draft incorporates Council changes to the March 21, 1980, draft of the Energy Savings Suggestion Program. In addition, the language has been generalized to allow both energy and cost savings suggestions to be submitted under the same Program. JA /jiw Attachment • • D CITY OF SHAKOPEE Energy and Cost Saving Suggestions The City of Shakopee wants to encourage its employees to review their work and the work environment to discover potential means of saving energy and money. To this end, a special cash award has been instituted to reward employees for their creativity in developing ideas that save energy or reduce costs. Department Heads will not be eligible to receive this award. The procedure to be followed to earn the Energy Award is outlined below: ' 1. Submit idea on Employees Energy and Cost Saving Suggestion Form to the City Administrator at Shakopee City Hall, 129 East 1st Avenue. 2. City Administrator and City Council will review suggestions for basic feasibility. Within three weeks of receipt the Administrator and City Council will evaluate the suggestion as either: a) unfeasible; b) to be further reviewed for feasibility by appropriate staff member. The employee will be informed of this. determination by letter. If the suggestion is to be further reviewed, the Adminis- trator will forward the suggestion to the employee's supervisor or person in charge of the division to be affected by the suggestion. 3. The employee will meet with the person charged with reviewing the suggestion to discuss possible imple- mentation of the suggestion. Within one month following this meeting, the reviewer will submit a written report indicating the feasibility of the suggestion, the reviewer's estimation of potential savings, and the procedure to be used if implement- ation is recommended. If further feasibility studies are necessary, the reviewer will arrange for the studies to be undertaken and indicate when a final determination is expected to be made. A copy of the reviewer's report will be forwarded to the employee who submitted the suggestion. 4. If the suggestion is recommended for implementation by the reviewer, it should be implemented within six months. When the suggestion has been in effect for one year, an evaluation will be made to determine if a minimum threshold of savings has been realized. The employee will receive a copy of this evaluation, and if the minimum threshold of savings is reached, will be granted a cash award. Energy Saving Suggesions Page -2- gra/ 5. Cash awards will be based on a percentage of the savings realized by the City through imple- mentation of the employee's suggestion. The amount of the award will be 5 percent of the savings realized in the first year of implementa- tion, to a maximum amount of $500.00. A minimum threshold of savings of the City will be $200.00 in the first year of implementation. In cases where suggestions have heavy first -year • installation costs, the award may be based on the average annual savings over the first five years of operation. draft 4/2/80 t FOR OFFICE USE ONLY �Cv Suggestion No. Received - Admin. Received -Rev. • Review Report • Implemented Award Request CITY OF SHAKOPEE Award Granted Considered for SA EMPLOYEE ENERGY AND COST SAVING SUGGESTION Name of Suggestor: Last First Middle Initial Social Security Number: Date Submitted: Home Address: Street City State Zip Position (title): Department: SUBJECT OF IDEA Present Condition, Method, Procedure Suggested Improvement Type and Scope of Anticipated Savings Anticipated Cost of Implementing Improvement • • • Attach additonal sheets if necessary to explain any section completely. 1 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator RE: 1980 Liquor License Fees DATE: April 10, 1980 It is recommended that the City Council increase the various liquor and beer licenses by approximately 10 percent rounded with some exceptions and specific conditions. On Sale Beer License: 1979 - $240 1980 - $265 -- roughly a 10 percent increase Temporary Beer License: 1979 - $10.00 1980 - $10.00 Off Sale Beer and Set -up License: ( 1979 - $70 1980 - $80 -- 10 percent would be $7; I rounded to $10 On Sale Wine License: 1979 - 1/2 of On -Sale Liquor License • 1980 - same On Sale Club License 1979 - $100 1980 - $200 for National Fraternal, Religious or Veterans Organization -- For all other clubs, same as On Sale Liquor The 1979 removed the $100 fee set by state law for these Club Establishments. We can now set the license fee for Clubs anywhere the City Council wants. I have suggested that you give some increase to the Clubs which are national fraternal, religious or veterans organizations because I believe that these clubs contribute to the community through their various activities and are generally non - profit organizations. On the other hand, other clubs which apparently do not partake in community services and which may be simply a for - profit organiza- tion and for which there is no membership restriction, should Mayor and Council -2- April 10, 1980 g pay the full liquor fee because they are in direct competition with the other license holders in Shakopee. I have attached to this memo a list of what other cities have done on Club licenses since the new law and a copy of this law. Off Sale Liquor License: 1979 - $150 1980 - $150 -- this fee is set by statute and can not be changed Sunday Liquor License: 1979 - $200 1980 - $200 this fee is set by statute and can not be changed On Sale Liquor: Customer Used Floor Area (square feet) - BARS RESTAURANTS 1979 1980 1979 1980 Under 1000 $3000 $3300 $2500 $2800 1000 to 2000 3500 3800 3000 3300 2000 to 3000 4000 4300 3500 3800 • 3000 to 4000 ' 4500 4800 4000 4300 4000 to 5000 4500 4800 5000 to 6000 5000. 5300 6000 to 7000 5500 5800 7000 to 8000 6000 6300 8000 to 9000 6500 6800 9000 to 10,000 7000 7300 • Over 10,000 7500 7800 I have suggested a $300 across the board increase which is 10 percent of the lowest fee paid. I think that across the board increase is better than a flat percent because it keeps the same relationship in place between the various size estab- lishments. If the Council wishes to set these fees the appropriate action is to adopt Resolution No. 1603. We have sent a copy of this memo to all license holders in the City. DSR /jiw Attachment ' 0 ON -SALE CLUB LICENSES Shakopee (proposed) $200 Chanhassen 300 • Chaska 200 Savage 100 Prior Lake 100 Eden Prairie 100 • Bloomington 100 Burnsville 100 Lakeville 500 H.F.No. 444 CHAPTER No. - A % CT . . . • • • • . _ . . . . . . . • I 2 relating to intoxicating: liquor; allowing 3 municipalities to set license fees In excess of • 4 1100 for club on —sale Licenses; allowing the 5 cities of Spring Lake Park, Hermantown and Waseca 6 to issue on —sale licenses-to clubs in existence 7 for less than 15 years; amending Minnesota. 8 Statutes 1978, Section 340.11, Subdivision 11. 9 ' 10 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: • •11 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 1978, Section 340.11, 12 Subdivision 11, is amended to read= 13 Subd- 11. ION —SALE LICENSES, INCLUDING HOTELS, CLUBS, 14 RESTAURANTS, AND ON—SALE EXCLUSIVE LIQUOR STORES .1 15 "On —sate"' Licenses may be issued by municipalities for the 16 sale of intoxicating liquors i;n hotels, clubs, restaurants • 17 and establishments for the sate of "'on— sale" C2quors 18 exclusively within the number authorized by•this•section.. 19 Except in a city of the first class and in addition to the 20 number,ot licenses authorized by this section, an "on —safe" 21 License may be issued,•if approved by the commissioner of 22 public safety, to a bona fide club which has been in 23 exictenc,e for 15 years or more or to a congressionally • 24 chartered * veterans' organization which has been fn 1 • • • • • . H. F: No. 4�Lt . 1 existence for I0 years. Such a club or veterans° ` 2 organization shall be incorporated in order to be eligible 3 ; for a license and the license issued shall be for 4 the . sale of intoxicating liquors to members and bona fide 5 guests only. The l icense .fee for such an "on— sa.le'r license 6 issued by a municipality pursuant to this subdivision,; 7 I00 u_n_1ess the_m- ugicipaf i ty set s Ex • 8 in cities of the first, second, and .third class, a License 9 may be issued jointly to congressionally chartered • • 10 veterans' organizations which otherwise quat ify under this 11 subdivision. 12 Seca 2. Notwithstanding any taw to the contrary, the 13- cities of Spring Lake Park, Hermantown and Waseca may each 14 'issue one license for the on —sate of cntox iicat ing Ciquor to • 15 a bona fide club, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section • 16 340.07, Subdivision 15, which has been in existence for 17 less than 15 years but which holds a charter - from a 18 national organization which has been. in existence for 15 19 years or more. The' license shaft be subject to approval by 20 the commissioner of public safety and shall be for the sale 21 of "intoxicating. I iquor to members and bona fide guests 22 only. The fee for the license shall be $100 unl ess. the 23 municipality sets a higher amount. The license so . 24 authorized shall be in addition to the number authorized by 25 Minnesota Statutes, Section 340.11, Subdivision 5a. 2.6 Sec. 3., Section 2 of this act is effective for each 27 of the cities named in section 2 upon approval by the 28 governing body of the respective cities and compliance with 29 the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 645.021.. • 2 • • • > c • • • H. F. No. 444 • • • • Rod Searle . Speaker of the House of Representatives. • / n Edward J . hearty President of thocrale. • Passed the House of Representatives this 19th day of May in the year of Our Lord one thousand ninc hundred and seventy -nine . . • C Edward A. Burdick Chief Clerk, House of Representatives. Passed the Senate this 21st day of May in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and seventy -nine. • • • Patrick E. Flahavcn Secretary of the Senate. • Approved - / 9 7f Air • • Albert H. Quic • • Governor of the State of Minnesota. • • Filed � S /I 7 7 • • 1 Joan Anderson Growe Secretary of State., • • • �. CITY OF SHAKOPEE -.: INCORPORATED 1070 \A :\ 129 E. First Ave., Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445 -3650 J April 10, 1980 TO ALL SHAKOPEE LIQUOR LICENSE HOLDERS: For your information, I have enclosed a memo which 1 have sent to the Shakopee City Council concerning the • 1980 Liquor License fees. I have suggested an increase in the existing fees; so please read the memo to determine • the exact affect on your license. The City Council will discuss this matter on Tuesday, April 15th, after 9:00 PM. Give any comments you might have to me or the City Council either at that meeting or • sometime in the next few days. I am sure that any comments you wish to make will be very helpful in the City Council's decision on this matter. • Sincerely, 'ouglas S. Reeder City Administrator DSR /jiw • • • The Heart of Pro Valle An Equal Opportunity Employer Memo To: 'Douglas S. Reeder, City Administrator Q. From: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer • Subject: Infiltration /Inflow Assessment, Shakopee, Minnesota Date: April 3, 1980 • Pursuant to the request of Councilman Hullander April, 1980 at the Council meeting, I submit the following: The attachments indicate the correspondence with Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. As I indicated at Council meeting, I am not comfortable with the conclusions drawn by Harza Engineering Company. I am not comfortable with those conclusions because the conclusions presume that an increase in monitor flow is actually peak infiltration and not some alteration in the operation of a heavy industrial user such as Rahr Malting. Perhaps the Harza study was meant to be only an overview identifying potential problems. If that is the case, then it is appropriate for the City to perform an I/I Analysis in order to identify what.the problem is. As I stated, there is a possibility that the discrepancy or the infiltration /inflow problem could be the method by which Shakopee is billed for waste water flow, specifically that Shakopee is billed for the difference between meter M400 at Blue Lake Plant less the flow from meter M409 and less the flow from M404. Both-meter M400 and meter .M404 have an accuracy of + 10 %. On the.other hand, Meter M401 and M409 are more accurate, possibly + 2.5 %. Regardless of what the problem is, I believe there is a problem. . There is roughly 80 million gallons per year that the City cannot account for. It may be meter error in meter M400, in which case that 80 million gallons should be paid by the entire district served by Blue Lake Plant. The 80 million gallons may be infiltration/ inflow in Shakopee and then it is appropriate for us to pay for that treatment but it is more important for us to discover where that inflow or infiltration occurs so that it may be eliminated and reduce our annual bill by at least $50,000. I must reemphasize that I do not have the time or resources to perform • such a study. Again, I do believe such a study is appropriate and recommend the City proceed with an Infiltration /Inflow Analysis. HRS:nae attachment 'i '' ' L '•'� �nr'•-.:, .7� tLP '' �• • ' I [ - )1 " c g , \ � ( .. .. 4 '1 • ' 1 .1 ' r' •,--; • .1`. �- . • AtS\, A • S ' v , . e4 . ,1 •'i 4 )� ' " K• ` ,. ; -d , : . � .. 1 . t,. ,; _ , Figur • }}�� 1 • • J. • I• ��, •1 3164 , t 1 �?z ,s14. aA1R �;, , r �" lo. 1 \ �� CHASKA /SHAKOPEE A • • • �� id 4., \ .. CJ ; � ) y , L' � . , ..1..!.- ' �` f � LEGEND • V'.� \\ � •� % '. ti %Pl.j , .. r. --:. ) 4.. . _. / 'I EXISTING COMMUI °.P4 �� ' , ,,, - • t .•I /.'RD' •1 �� ° i ,,1 • ll Y \ � r ',� SERVICE AREA LI S — 5 4 !tl -./. ,� ( , ;( • ik , pp . e ,. � - }r , �- . G v 1)r - 1 : !\ ' • ` - C� • \ , „I ` � �� J - ' � ' L� ' ,. •, ' �� I� Q :f'7 ) � ' } 1 ( IL 1 \ � MwCC INTERCEPT( t‘ 41; (( nn,, 0 ' b � I , � T3 .1 , 1:. / �.. ' r , i\\ Q3 J': �G WASTEWATER THE • '(1 , 11LIq .C' , J /.,,. : 1 °:> 'e 1• 1� )3 Ir 4Q 1 ( Un0 UJ CC METER LOC • l `` ww _ I s' i ! 6 %, , .....,..4.,. '` ' PUMPING STATION ....5 ,...„Alik irli-,'•-!-.0 1 ® . `� '� ' Il i Y ' \ C ' 1 7� •! ` ` , I . -, A 22 • APPROXIM LOC, • x� ls e••l. '' • •'`,' ? \. 9 i l:.,; t TAY • / I, /. I `. ti,e 'T _ OF LOCAL SEWER J b� y ,�, S; 0 :7 1 it c...-.. ; , , C 1 :.,.,, y � '/� 6.•, � ...{{p��,,,, ! �i�� { {{ s ]f . _ ,C O 14* ■ 7 0 • • , ) ; ,d� ii r '' •• • 'i rt.. .anu0. NRrQa " 1 l/ ® ®:I i •( CONNECTION TO M r ,qi 11 \ • t• _ • •;A 0 ••. �-- -- ' p �° 111 1 ( L - �O O. 1 • / ■ • i `: p �'' •,,,,,, INTERCEPTOR !< - , � ` , L. co ., . .. s� • • I ' • f .•„ `� , y • NUM9ER CORRESP( • ''' ' �]., j!' y� � . � � •//4 y � / . • �j ' 1 w �� • 1 � \•• � ,,-,L ,' • f ° • , . 11 o p'� NUM9ER IN TABLE • b � � :� �- ..- ,� „,,s--1...., �. , ' 1• , � ' I POPULATION CHANT J - { �;•, , c , Tom~ ` � . ...,: , ,� �'. ,, /, • _ .: •. — ._.•. ...- • . \\ 1 / ' ( o l .. z Q 1990. 1990 � .. I 1 • s ► • 'o \. - • - {,.."1 S\ ! ma r �u � 1 ® 1990 • 2000 ! ! •, �� !i. R:.. 41 Or•.• 4.1. -�'\ ,. ) •• 0 2000 • 2020 ' - 34 i F`�' 0. - 31 ` • G� . „ ONE SYMBOL 100 PE. 321 . 1 -' : • / \ , .� __ i s © % •\ 1 �+ ii ` � , �; ~ �'� y t 1 A `mil • to m / M .401 ~- � �..., , ► -- I , . _� � ' - -: '• • • =r �-- -.Atp� 1 -16' ,, s 4 ( �; -- ; — 409 • 1 ail ~ _ • � h yy - . ' , •w /' - � ., r ``__ ,� ,••• „• Pa -400 , • t '41 4 C , s �; I O1 •j �_ \ fm ` xe se•at•17iu,.C•.ea1�1 \ j____ .÷:-...„.„-..,--(,-,_ ifig,„ a r k' � - � y 1 ' i i -- , y 1 ••:-. I [ \ \ R 0 Q 0 � r 1 � , • • `ti 111111.___g s 6. 1 1 s - -. -. 1 l ) 1 i -9 -h_ . . LA i l ,A c < . e M ........,,,4_,;(,..j, . JI d s . ....' I -, .%' 46H.,....Nrii. , . ) e .,.•-_, 1 . ,..4: ,. :: : k i , „(1. 4 .••• ".... , i 0':: v t1 � -.z , \.:7 -: • Vi , ,C / [ .�•f .l. \� • • '' r • - = � {�•P l r�` e^ �� ; . �. I r -- ,;,:/ ; 'ii /p Southwest Facility Planning Stu ■ ►f(IETROPOLITAn F r WA /TE- COnTROL ;commiff ion Twin"Citk s Flrec r February 4, 1980 Mr. Henry R. Spurrier City Engineer 129 E. First Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Infiltration /Inflow Assessment • Dear Mr: Spurrier: We are transmitting herewith a summary of an Infiltration /Inflow • (I /I) Assessment for your information and use. The I/I Assessment was conducted as part of the Metropoltian Waste Control Commission's "201" Facilities Planning Program to comply with Section 201 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 as amended. Where it is found that I • it is potentially cost - effective to remove I/I rather than convey and treat these extraneous flows, federal grant support towards the reha- • bilitation of the sewer sytem will be made available. This I/I Assessment is a first step in the identification of sewer systems subject to.potentially excessive I /I. The I/I Assessment and its results are fully explained in the interim report "Analysis of Community Flow" prepared by Harza Engineering Company as part of the Southwest Facilities Planning Study. This report, previously transmitted to each community, presents an estimate of the I/I quanitites and the potential excessiveness of the I /I, based on guidelines for a cost- effective determination promulgated by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. The recommendations (see attached) of the report have been accepted with modification by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Funding of further I/I analysis for systems judged to be potentially excessive is recommended. The implementation of the recommendations will be as follows: 1. All communities certified as having non - excessive I/I will not qualify for further funding of an I/I analysis. 2. All communities certified as having excessive or possibly excessive I/I will qualify for further funding of an I/I analysis. The scope of each community's I/I analysis may vary depending upon location of ob- . vious sources of I/I and /or results of interviews to be conducted prior to any in- system flow monitoring. 3. All communities lacking sufficient supporting data to certify the existence of excessive I/I will undergo pattern interviews to establish previous experience with flooding, surcharging or bypassing due to I/I 350 METRO /OUAREBLDG. and to assess other available information on the possible existence of 7TH 6 ROBERT /TREET/ excessive I /I. Those communities identified by the pattern interviews mini PAUL mn 55101 Y p . 6121222.8423 .,, recycled Z..) Page Two '�✓ !, !, • as having potentially excessive I/I will be recommended to MPCA for further funding of a detailed I/I analysis. The pattern interviews will be carried out by a consultant under contract to the Commission. The continuation of the I/I program will be contingent upon certain local commitments by each qualifying municipality wishing to participate in the program. First of all, the municipalities must provide 10% local share of the study cost. The U. S. EPA will fund 75% of the study cost, and the State of Minnesota will contribute 15% of the study cost under matching grants program. Secondly, each municipality will become re- sponsible for the administration of the I/I program in complete conformance .with the regulations of the federal grants program. Finally, the munic- ipalities will have to enter into an agreement with the Commission regarding the pass - through of the grant funds because the Commission will be required to remain the grant applicant on behalf of all participating municipalities. The Commission will also provide coordination and assistance in setting up each local study. The completion of the I/I analysis is a prerequisite to the funding of subsequent steps in the federal program of eliminating excessive sources of I /I. Subsequent steps consist of a Sewer System Evaluation Survey (SSES).followed by the actual sewer system rehabilitation. The potential for excessive I/I must be established or verified at each step before funding for the next step can be requested. A copy of the federal reg- ulations pertaining to sewer system evaluation and rehabilitation is • attached for further reference. The Commission is in the process of applying for federal and state grants to cover the I/I analysis. We expect a grant offer sometime in early 1980. In the meantime, this package of material is being transmitted to you to serve as an introduction to the I/I program. We will also schedule meetings in the near future to further explain the program and to answer any questions which are certain to arise. In addition, we are prepared to meet with representatives of each community on an individual basis. Please contact Paul Dietz of our staff at 222 -8423 for further details. Very truly s ours, Anthony C. - re Deputy Chief Administrator ACG:PHD:lc • 1.3.79 Enclosures f' Southwest Area Study Summar ' of the Infiltration /Inflow Recommendations • An assessment of the infiltration and inflow (I /I) rates was undertaken for each of the 27 communities in the Southwest Study Area. The results of these assessments were reported in an Interim Report, "Analysis of Community Flows ", which is on file with the MWCC. Based on these assess- ments, evaluation of the impact that I/I has on MWCC facilities, and the • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) review, several communities are recommended for further study. The recommended action for each community is presented in Table 1. For the three•communities in Service Area Five and seven communities in Service Area Four,'no further study is recommended, but is recommended that the on- doing local programs to reduce I/I be continued. Pattern Interviews are • recommended for six of the communities in Service Area Four to further determine the extent of local problems and the potential to eliminate sources of I /I. • _Sufficient data are available to recommend conduct of an I/I analysis with local flow monitoring for eleven other communities in Service Area Four. • . The communities of Bloomington, Eagan, Burnsville, Prior Lake, Eden Prairie, Excelsior,' Minnetonka, Minnetonka Beach and Mound were found to have peak weekly - infiltration rates of less than 1,500 gpd /inch diameter /mile. These infiltration rates are indicative that the I/I is not exessive. The community of Long Lake has previously conducted an I/I analysis subsequently certified by MPCA as non - excessive. Inflow appears to be the result of storm water in- trusion through man -hole covers and rings, but this infrequent occurrence`•wi•t.l• -• become more infrequent as these communities improve local stormwater drainage systems. • Pattern Interviews Pattern interviews are recommended for those communities for which insufficient information was available through this study to judge the potential for cost- effectively reducing I /I. For Greenwood and Minnetrista, there are insufficient flow data to estiamte the magnitude of I/I throughout these collection systems. Interviews conducted with local representatives of these two communities were not of sufficient detail to preclude the need for further study of these communities. The assessment of I/I for Deephaven, Spring Park, St. Bonifacious, and Wacoriia indicated that conduct of pattern interviews. were warranted to better define local problems and the potential to reduce I /I. The I/I in Deephaven appears to be quite low, but information presented at a public meeting indicates local problems exist. Pattern interviews are recommended for Spring Park, Waconia and St. Bonifacius• to focus on inflow problems and the potential of reducing I /I. Waconia has.completed a program to reduce I/I but flow records indicate that I/I remains to be a significant problem. The patten interview should address the • potential for futher reduction of I /I. • i • • • Pattern interviews for these six communities should be conducted in accordance with the U. S. EPA guidelines and current regulations. Community officials and residents will be interviewed using a comprehensive questionaire designed to clarify problems and document the need for further actions. I/I Analysis Conduct of I/I analyses with local flow monitoring to isolate problem areas is recommended for the remaining eleven communities. For the communities of Orono and Chanhassen, the I/I analyses should be coordinated to assess the impact of reducing I/I on local sewer problems, MWCC operating costs, and future MWCC expansions. The communities of Medina, Savage, and Chaska have previously completed I/I analyses several years ago. All three communities still exhibit relatively high rates of I/I which affect annual operating and maintenance costs for sewage collection and treatment. The prior studies did not include local system monitoring to isolate problem areas and assess the relative significance of I/I sources in various parts of the local collection systems. Further clarification of the I/I problems within each of these communities is warranted ;j and requires a local flow monitoring program. • • r • • e • 9 Table I Recommended Community Action for Infiltration /Inflow • I/I as Recommended Peak Weekly Infil. % Annual Community Action (gpd/in -dia /mile) Wastewater 1/ 2/ Bloomington No Further Study 375 295 5 Burnsville No Further Study 500 405 2 Chanhassen I/I Analysis 1900 1585 35 Chaska' I/I Analysis 1800 1495 35 Deephaven Pattern Interview 550 475 4 Eagan ; No Further Study 430 375 10 . Eden Prairie No•Further Study 210 260 15 Excelsior No Further Study 1800 1295 25 Greenwood Pattern Interview -- Insufficient Data -- Long Lake No Further Study 2850 2220 20 Maple Plain 3/ I/I Analysis 4400 3645 30 Medina 4/ I/I Analysis 2500 2300 50 ' Minnetonka No Further Study 1475 5/ 1235 5/ 35 Mtka. Beach . No Further Study -- Insufficient Data -- Minnetrista Pattern Interview -- Insufficient Data -- Mound No Further Study 1200 990 20 Orono I/I Analysis 840 735 25 Prior Lake No Further Study 470 400 15 Savage I/I Analysis 7850 5790 38 'Shakopee I/I Analysis 3160 2225 18 G'• • Table I (Continued) I/I as Recomended Peak Weekly Infil. & Annual. Community' Action (qpd /in - dia /mile) Wastewater 1/ 2/ Shorewood I/I Analysis - Insufficient Data -- . Spring Park Pattern Interview 2300 1475 25 • St. Bonifacius Pattern Interview 1000 800 30 Tonka Bay I/I Analysis 3000 2525 35 Victoria I/I Analysis -- Insufficient Data Waconia Pattern Interview 2930 2000 30 .Wayzata, :'..' I/I Analysis 2250 1835 40 • • • • • 1/ Excluding house services. 2/ Including house services. 3/ Includes the Independence Beach System. 4/ Hamel only. Peak weekly values are actually maximum month. 5/ Values for 60 percent of Mtka. system (tributary to M410 and M4111). • • c :2484 . • FEDERAL REGULATIONS 7 . • , , nalesis and submittal, of VT, sum./ ing an estimate of casts. for rehabilita- §35.927-3 RenabiliL.tion. reports). j lion of the sewer system to elirninate (a) Subject to State concurrence, the Value rnein.eeri1t c;tal�,lsis roc excessive lnliltration /inflow identified Regional Admir..is;.rator may auch t d.ze cts subject Co the V'E require- in the sewer system evaluation. Infor the grantee to perform minor rehabili \ s'of subs parasrapb. (a) of this section. malign submitted to the Regional Ad tacion concurrently with the sewer ansLysu of the ProleCt' design ministrator for such determination syetem evaluation survey in any step be \pecSormed- When ;'the Vi should be the minimum necessary to ender a grant if sulficienc funding can ells (s, completed. a preliminary enable him to make a. judgment_ be made available and there is no ad- t summarizing the W findinge (c) Guidelines on sewer system eval- verse environmental irpacz_ However. • e final \report describing ample- uation published by the Administrator minor rehabilitation work in excess of Lion of e OF ructinztnendations provide further advisory information 310,000 which is not accomplished submitsed a Proi o ff_ (see § 35.900(c)). _Also she §§ 35.925 -7(c) with force account labor (see § 33.936 - : lee and 35.935 -16. 14(a)(2)), must be procured through :n a schedule apRroved by hers. .ersta lthu For chose pro- formal advertising erg in requirements with InePlem § 35. 927 -i Infiitmcioni1su1ow analysis. Yeas- the applicable requirements of for wj icr a yrs an2lysis has been (a) The ineiltvrtion /inflow analysis ,§ 35.933 et seq. and 35.939, the s'..atu- armed In accordance with Pte- shall demonstrate the nonexistence or tory requirementee referenced in h (b) of this section- V e recom- possible e�+grenc of a tc°ssive inti1t23r §§ 30.415 through 30.315 -� of this sub - dations. eh= bo implemented to Lion /inflow in the sewer system_ The chapter. and other applicable prove maYirriuus e�;tent fzsaibie, as d c- should identify the pr=ence. lions of part 30. Lined b9 the grances, subject to flow rate, and type of iniiitration/ •(b) Grant assistance for a step 3 apprv of the 4'project ofli- tallow conditions which exist in the project semment consisting of major Rejection of any recommendation 5e r rehabilitation or may be awarded 1 bal on the basis of cosieellecreve- (b) Por deterip nation of the possible concurrently with step 2 work for the• r..itaaility. extent ole project of he new treatment work._ esisten at excessive iriiltrsciDn/ de and other factors that may be ! ^ f l o w , the analysis shall include an (c) The scope of ee - treatment cal to the treatment processes and ' estirnare of the cast of a mineting the 'storks project defined within the brit- ez - h- onmental tmpat, of the j iniiltratidn /inflow conditions- These ties elan as being required for irsple- costs eel 11 be compared with estimat- mentation of the plan. and for which ed total casts !or tr niportaticn and Federal assistance will be requested, 927 Sewer sylvan evnination and re. eeatment of the iriiln-+tion/inflow, shall define (1) any necessary new habilitation_ Ca-stesfectiveness a ne lysis guidelines treatment . works construction and (2) 3 X11 appli �aats for step 2 or step 3 (appends t A to this subpart) should be any rehabilitation work (including. re- consulted with respect to this determi- placement) determined by the sewer a t assistance =1St demonstrate to nation. system evaluation to be nere pry for . Regional ,id satisA cc- (c) 11 the infiltration/Inflow analysis the elimination of excessive infiltrn- i that each sewer system discearg- demonstrates the ems' fence or possible Lion /inflow. However. rehabilitation into the treatment worts project existence' of excessive infiltration/ which should be a part of the apple- r which grant appUcation 13 made is inflow. a derailed plan for a sewer cant's normal opeti.ion and maince- or.will' not be subject to excessive syetem ev surrey shall be in- :ance resporsbilities a..a.1 not be in- 1 Lion /tnnow. A determination of c'.uded in the arelesis- The plan shall eluded within the scope of a step 3 !deer excrssive infiltzztion /inflow outline the• tasts to be performed in treaunent work.. project_ ; may take into account. In adds- the survey and their ester-need costs (d) Only reha.eilitacion of the gran- ] Ed flow and. related data. other tee's sewage collection system ie eligi- iificant rectors such as cast- etlec- §33_927-2 Sewer are em evaluation bLe for grant assistance However. the :ness•(in.ciuding the cost *of substan- scurvy. grantee's casts of rehabilitation . treatment' works. construction (a.) The sewer• system evaluation beyond •"Y" fitting; (see definition of ay, see appendix A to this suhP survey shall identify the location. esti- "sewage collection system" to § 35.905) 3ilc health emerzeences. the effects mated now rate, Wethod of rehabilita- may be treated on an incremental cast pmt byp-.s� ing or overloading. or lion and cast of rebabilit3.tion versus b avant .economic or: environmental ma y. of transportation and treatrent tors. for each defined source of ineil atlon/ §3S-9'27-4 Se use ordinance. a) A sewer system evaluation grill ierally be used to deteraine wheth- ( ) A report shall sums er+'e the re- meet apelicant for grant aeeieta.ace or not,excnsive infiltration/inflow emits of the sewer system evaluation for a stew 2 or step 3 project shall - It will consist ot: survey. In addition. the report shall in- demonstrate to the «resfacoon of the 1) Certification by the State ducks: Regional Art - eniet"ator that a sewer Lacy; as appropriate; and, when net- (1) A jvstiiirstion for eenh sewer sec - use ordirynce or other legally binding ary. tion cleaned and internally inspectee_ requirement will be enacted and en- 2) An infiltration/ inflow analysis; (2) A proposed reeeeen ation pro- forced in each jurisdiction served by i if appropriate. gram for the sewer system CO eiirr.i the treatment works ' project before 3) A sewer system evaluation survey nate all defined excessive infetration/ the completion of construction. The - if appropriate, a program. inciud- inflow_ ordinance shall prohibit any new con- f . 111:2455 FAA GRANTS r! nections (rear inflow sources into the step 2 or 3 can be awarded. A step 1 y amend their systems to coree- sanitary sewer portions of the sewer grant may be awarded for the comple- s and to the definition of , industrial system and shall Ir- sure that new Lion of this segment of step 1 work, users in § 35.905 or to provide 'for %vs- sewers and connections to the sewer and. upon completion- of step 1, grant te>'awide industrial cost recover,/ under system are Properly designed and cop- assistance for a step 2 or 3 protect (for § 35.92 - 1(g). % ` strutted. which priority has been determined under § 35.915) may be awarded_ § 35. 23-t Approval of the industrialicoec § 25.927 -5 Project procedures. core system. ( c) Escsptiort. II the Regional Ad- ; (a) Slate certification. The State ministrator determines that the treat - Tr Regional Ad may ap- agency maer(but need not) certify that went works would be regarded (in the prove an industrial cost recovery excessive infiltration /inflow does or absence of an acceptable Program of syste it it meets the follow re- does not exist. The Regional Adrnini correction) as being subject to exces- quire nts: / trator will determine that excessive in- sive infiltration /inflow, giant assist- (a) General Each i.ndust±ia1 user of filtration/Inflow does not exist on the ance may be awarded it the applicant the treatment works shall; pay an basis of State certification. if he finds establishes to the Regional Adreinis- annual amount equal to its /share of that the Stale had adequately estab- trator's satisfaction that the treat - the tocal\amount of the step 1. 2. and lashed the basis for its certification went works project for which grant 3 grants and any grant amendments through submission of only the mini- application is made will not be signi.fi- awarded ilnder this subpart, divided mum information necessary to enable cantly changed by any subsequent re- by the nuiuber of years id the recov- a judgment to be made. Such in:orma- habilitation program or will be a tom- ery period.Ven industrial ; user's share Lion could include a preliminary ponent part of any rehabilitated shah be bas d on factors which signifi- review by the applicant or State, for system. The applicant must agree to cantly influence the cost. of the treat - example. of such parameters as per complete the sewer system evaluation. meat works. Volume of flow shall be a. capita design flow. ratio of floor to and any resulting rehabilitation on an factor. in determining/ an industrial design flow, flow records or flow esti- implementation, schedule the State ac- user's share inlall industrial cost recov- mates. bypasses or cverslows. or sum - tepee (subject to approval by the Re- ery systems: other factors shall in- nary analysis of hydrological, geo- gional Administrator). which shall be elude strength.. volume, and delivery graphicl. and geological conditions, in. er-ed as a special condition in the flow rate characteristics. if necessary, but this review would not usually be grant agreement. to insure that ill industrial users of equivalesit to a complete infiltration/ (d) Regional Administr^tor review. the treatment work5pay a proportion - inflow analysis- State certification Municipalities may submit through ate distribution o4 the grant assistance must. be on a project -by- project: basis. the State agency the irliltr on/ allocable to industrial use. I1. on the basis of State certification. Inflow analysis and. when appreeriate, (b) Industrial cost recovery period. the Regional Administrator deter- the sewer system evaluation survey to The industrial obit recovery period mines that the treatment works is or the Regional Ad rlinstrator for ha shall be equal to 3'0 years or to the may be subject to excessive infltra- review at any time before application useful life of the ' treatment works, tion/inflow, no step 2 or step 3 grant for a treatment works grant. Based on whichever is less: \ assistance may be awarded except as such a review. the Regional Ad.n'finis- (c) !reruency /of;aantert Except as paragraph (c) of this section provides. traitor shrill provide the municipality provided in § 35.228 -3. \each industrial • (b) pre -award saner system evaluct with a written response indicating user shall pall not less\often than an- lion. Generally, except as otherwise either his concurrence or nonconcur- nually. The flirt paycerut by.ar indus- provided in paragraph (c) of this sec- rence. Le order for the survey to be an trial user shall be made not lacer than tion, an adequate sewer system e:^alua- allowable cost. the Regional Adatinie- 3. i year alter.the user begins use of the tion, consisting of a. sewer system anal trator must concur with the sewer treatment vrorks. • i psis and, it required. an evaluation system evaluation survey plan before (d) Reserpe capacity. If an industrial survey, is an essential element of step the work is performed. user enters into an agreement with 1 far-illt'es planning. It Ls a prerequi- — the grants to reserve a certain capac- site to the award cf step 2 or 3 grant 5925 Requirements for an Indus ity in the treatment works,, the user's seeistance. If the Regional Ac+minictra- oat recovery systarTM industrial cost recover! \payments tor determines through State Certifi- (a) ire Regional Ad:: -.irr5 rator shall be,oased on the total reserved va- cation or an infilsation /inflow analy. shall ap ve the grantee's,kidustria1 pacity in relation to the design capac- sis that excessive infiltration /i.nrloa/ cost recove system an grantee ity of ehe treatment works. If\the dis- dces not exist. step 2 or 3 grant assist- shall impieme- and naultain it in ac- chargef of an industrial user 'exceeds ance may be awarded. I1 on the basis cordance with .93 le and the re- the ' / resereed capacity in olume, of State certification or the infiltra- quirements in 3 •923•-1 through strength or delivery flow rate charac- tion /inflow analysis. the Regional Ad- 35.923-4. The gr2,z(te hail be subject teris f acs, the user's industrial cast re-' tainistratnr determines that possible to the noncoaerlianceNprovisions of cover; payment shall be inc- -eased to exce z rte infiltration /inflow exists. an § 35.965 for f ffure to corn ren t the actual use. If there is no re- adequate sewer system evaluation (b) G ees awarded ste grants sex a capacity agreement between: the survey an it required, a rehabillta- under gulations promulga on industrial laser and the grantee. and a tion program ri: st be furnished. Feb 11, 1974, or grantees we ob- substantial. change in the strengehh. except as set forth in paragraph (c) of rai• approval of their industrial c v'' lame, or delivery flow rate charac- this section before grant assistance for r very systems before April 25. 1978, \Yeristics of an industrial .users dis- 777�� i 1 (Sec. 35.923 -1(dl l _.. ..-.. . - ., von... A I n cr.A;ac imr- Wa 7;1w 0 . _. 20037 =i f11ETROPOLITAn CD WAfTE OITROL 9 f COMM 1 lio(1 1 Twin Cities Area • October 24, 1979 Mr. H. R. Spurrier Shakopee City Engineer 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Southwest Area Study (76 -26) Revision to Interim Report "Analysis of Community Flows" Dear Mr. Spurrier: Enclosed is the revised text for Shakopee from the above referenced report. If you have any questions, feel free to call. Very truly yours, CPS -�--u H • o � Paul H. Dietz Staff Engineer • PIED: lc 10.24 .79 Enclosure cc: Christine Liemandt ;1 350 METRO /OUARE BLDG. 7TH E. ROBERT /TREET/ /AIM PAUL mn 55101 6121222.8423 i:• n ��;, recycled C« • • 14 .4.4. 1 • f Cks t i APPENDIX T SHAKOPEE ' . f • • 1 r .• c:, CITY OF SHAKOPEE Sewer System Description Service Area The City of Shakopee is located approximately 20 miles southwest of Minneapolis along the Minnesota River. Due to recent expansions, the corporate area now spans nearly 27 square miles. Residential development, however, is concen- trated in a 3 square mile area in the northwest sector, within the city's former boundaries. The 1976 estimated population of Shakopee is reported to have been 10,100 of which about 9,000 are estimated to have been connected to the sewer system. The sewer service area is presently confined within the former corporate boundaries and to the Valley Industrial Park area, located east of the residential section of Shakopee. Major Sewerage Components Major components of•the local sewer system (excluding the Valley Industrial Park area) include 27 miles (250 inch diameter - miles) of gravity sewers and trunk sewers. There are approximately 6 miles of trunk sewers which range in diameter from 9 to 24 inches. The remaining sewers are primarily •8 inch gravity sewers. The sewer system is divided into three sections -- the west, central and east districts. A trunk sewer, running parallel to the Minnesota River, collects the wastewater from the west and central districts and conveys it to an MWCC lift station on the east side of the residential area of Shakopee. 'Sewage from the east district flows through another local trunk sewer to the lift station. • -1- c f . The Shakopee II Forcemain (MSB -7024) originates at the • MWCC pumping station in Shakopee and travels eastward for 8,000 feet. This 14 inch diameter forcemain interceptor discharges into the Shakopee Interceptor. The Shakopee Interceptor (MSB -7023) consists of 7,500 feet of 36 inch and 2,500 feet of 42 inch gravity interceptor sewer that directs the city sewage into the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor (MSB - 6904). This third link conveys wastewater flows from the main sewer service district and the Valley Industrial Park area through 5,000 feet of 42 inch to 72 inch gravity ' interceptor to the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant. Age. Installation of gravity sewers and trunk sewers began in 1910 in the downtown area of Shakopee. Sewers in outlying areas were constructed at a much later date. Materials of Construction. The typical materials of construction and type of joints for the sewers are summarized in the following table: COMPONENT MATERIAL TYPE OF JOINT Sanitary Sewers Vitrified Clay Oakum and Tar Trunk Sewers Reinforced Concrete Concrete and 0 -ring Problems. Roots in laterals cause approximately 20 services to be excavated and repaired annually. Joint deterioration in the trunk sewer along the river is suspected by city officials. Factors Affecting I/I Groundwater. Areas of Shakopee within 1,500 feet of the river are reported to have high groundwater. Soils and Geology. The soils predominant in the sewer service area are sand, silty sand, and sandy silt. In the area in Shakopee close to the river, much of the sewer is in bedrock. -2- Community Programs 1 . Ordinances. A city ordinance prohibits the discharge • of roof water, ground water or any natural precipitation into the city sewerage system. Shakopee also uses the State Plumbing Code to require separation of sanitary and storm building drains. Maintenance. The entire sewer system is either rodded or flushed once annually and certain problem manholes are . inspected occasionally. The city has embarked on a program of televising about 15,000 feet per year of sewer. In 1978 the trunk sewer along the river to the MWCC pumping station was televised and was found to be in better shape than expected. Previous I/I Study. The city has not yet undertaken a study specifically addressing I/I at this time other than the activities mentioned above. Analysis of Flow Records Water Use Municipal water service is typically provided with sewer service. The amount of water sold is based on metered flow for each connection. All water customers are metered. A meter maintenance program has not been enacted in the city. A detailed analysis of water usage is not possible for 1975 and 1976 because Shakopee did not file a Survey of Sewer Use with MWCC for either year. A Survey was filed in 1977 and water usage was analyzed based on this data. Water use figures for 1976 and 1977 are comparable so the results of the analysis can be assumed •to be applicable for 1976. The analysis of 1977 water usage was based on water sold figures reported by the city. Billing figures can be used in the case of Shakopee because the billing cycle corresponds closely to period in which the water is used, unlike some other communi- ties in the service area. -3- r . Aevisea 1u /JY/ / • ~ r nj G�li i Residential water use. ?approximately 36 percent of the water sold was billed to residential users, based on the annual 1977 data. This percentage is about the same for each quarter. The city has estimated that there were approximately 2530 residential water connections to the public water supply in 1977 corresponding to 2530 dwelling units. Based on a population per dwelling unit of 3.2, there were 8,100 people connected to the water system. For the year of record, the average water use was estimated to be 54 gpcd, ranging from about 44 gpcd during the first and fourth quarters to about 62 gpcd during the third quarter. Based on negligible consump- tive residential use during the first and fourth quarters, the average daily per capita sewage generation in Shakopee is es- , timated to be 44 gpcd. During second and third quarters, water use increases as expected, reflecting increased consumptive use. Because of the change in water use during the second and third quarter and the uncertainty of estimating consumptive use, the first and fourth quarter per capita sewage flows were assumed to be applicable for all four quarters. The city estimated that there were no residential connec- tions to the sewer system in 1977 which were not on the muni- cipal water system. Commercial water use. Commercial water sold accounts for • about 6 percent of the total annual water sold in Shakopee. Based on the first and fourth quarters of 1977, the average commercial water use was 0.062 mgd. Second and third quarter water use records reflect 40 percent increases in water use. This increase in water use is assumed to be primarily consump- tive use such as for lawn sprinkling and air conditioning. Based on an estimated employment population of 3900, the per capita commercial water use is 16 gpd per employee. • -4- The city•reported 150 commercial connections to the sewer system at the end of 1977, but only 145 of these were reported to be connected to the municipal water system. The information provided to the MWCC indicated 5 commercial sewer • connections were unaccounted for with respect to water use. Institutional water use. Institutional water sold ac- counted for approximately 5 percent of the total annual water sold in Shakopee for 1977. Based on the data for the first • and fourth quarter of this year, the average institutional water use is 0.062 mgd. At the end of 1977, the city estimated that there were 21 institutional connections to the sewer system, all of which were estimated to be connected to the municipal water system. Industrial water use. Industrial water sold accounted for approximately 53 percent of the total annual water sold in Shakopee for 1977. Eased on the water sold data from the first and fourth quarter 1977, the average industrial water use is 0.53 mgd. In 1978 the city reported 3 industries using private water discharging a total of 240 mgy to the sewer sys- tem. Total industrial water use is therefore approximately 1.20 mgd. In 1977 the city reported a total of 17 industries con- nected to the sewer system. Wastewater Generation The annual wastewater generation rate for the City of Shakopee and the Valley Industrial Park (VIP) is the sum of the non - consumptive water usages within the Shakopee sewer ser- vice area. Based on an average residential nonconsumptive use of 44 gpcd and a 1976 estimated sewered population of 9,000, -5- • the residential component of the nonconsumptive use is • 0.396 mgd. This figure includes any residences with private water supplies connected to the sewer system. The commercial/institutional component of the noncon- sumptive water usage is 0.124 mgd based on 1977 reported water usage. The industrial wastewater generation rate used in the analysis is 0.65 mgd and was calculated from estimates of discharges supplied by the city. Water usage rates could not be used in determining this component due to the large volume of water obtained from private sources, particularly in the case of Rahr Malting. In addition, flows from Valley Indus- tr.ial Park (VIP) are not included in the analysis. Flows from VIP are unmetered and records of sewer sizes and locations are not available for the complex. The total wastewater' generation rate for Shakopee (excluding VIP) is calculated to be 1.17 mad. This consists of 34 percent residential, 11 percent commercial /institutional and 55 percent industrial flows. Wastewater Flows • Based on the two years of record, the average annual wastewater flow at meter M401 was 1.43 mgd. The maximum monthly • average flow during the first and fourth quarters was 1.49 mgd in March of 1976. The maximum monthly average flow during the second and third quarters was 1.84 mgd in May of 1975. • Infiltration. The city reports that infiltration from sources such as manholes, stream crossings, and crushed or broken pipe is negligible. Infiltration is suspected in the trunk sewer line adjacent to the river from groundwater -6- . • Gf 0 entering through deteriorated joints. Some clear water enters the system through service connections subject to root problems. Based on 1975 and 1976 sewage flow records and an annual average wastewater generation rate of 1.17 mgd, the amount of clear water flow to the sewer system is estimated to average 0.26 mgd or 1040 gpd /inch diameter /mile. Because of the significant difference in rainfall between the second quarters of 1975 and 1976, the severity of infiltration was examined for each year. In 1975, the second quarter sewage flows averaged 1.57 mgd at meter M401, while in 1976, the second quarter sewage flows averaged 1.51 mgd even though there was an estimated increase in the amount of sewage generated by 0.06 mgd (new connections). From May 8 to May 14, 1975, the flow at meter M401 averaged 1.96 mgd. During this seven day period, rainfall at the 1 airport totaled 0.10 inches. Based on a base sewage flow of 1.17 mgd, the infiltration during this period is estimated to be 0.79 mgd or 3,160 .gpd /inch diameter /mile. Inflow. The daily flow records for meter M401 were inspected to identify days for which there appeared to be a significant increase in flow resulting from precipitation. On April 28, 1975 a flow of 2.64 mg was registered at meter M401 after a rainfall of 2.22 inches was recorded at the airport the previous day. Hourly meter readings were not available due to equipment malfunctions. Again in 1975, a flow of 2.5 -mg on July 1 was recorded following 1.85 inches of rainfall on June 29 and 30. The peak daily flow during this two year period of 2.88 mg occurred on May 5, 1975; however, less than 0.10 inches of precipitation was reported in the preceding five days at the airport. This peak flow cannot readily explained, but may be due to an unusually large industrial discharge that coincided with significant quantities of infiltration. The peak hourly flow on May 5, 1975 was 3.20 mgd. -7- r' • Q:2 1 ' • The highest daily flow reading' in 1976 occurred on July 30 when 1.91 mg was recorded at meter M401. In the preceding week, over 1.5 inches of precipitation were recorded, with 0.31 inches of rain falling on July 30. On August 6, 1976, a flow of 1.8 mg was registered after 0.27 inches of rain were reported on August 4. A flow of 1.75 mg on June 29, 1976 coincided with a rainfall of 0.5 inches on June 28 and 29. The city reports negligible inflow to the sewer system from roof leaders, yard drains, and foundation drains although such connections do exist at the Women's Reformatory. Two large industries located in Shakopee -- Certain -Teed and Rahr Malting -- are reported to discharge cooling water to the sanitary sewers. The quantity of cooling water discharge is not reported. • Conclusions The potential to cost effectively remove infiltration from the Shakopee service area collection system is high enough to warrant further investigation. The potential to cost effectively remove inflow based on its effect on the local collection system, however, is not high enough to warrant further investigation. The effect of the existing inflow on the MWCC interceptor system will be identified in a forthcoming report on the interceptor system. These conclusions are based on the data presented in Table T -1 and analysis of pertinent factors. As shown in Table T -1, extraneous flow over the reporting period accounts for about 18% of the total flow. Peak weekly infiltration is estimated to be 3160 gpd /inch- diameter /mile of sewer. The ratio of the peak wet weather flow to the average noncon - sumptive water usage is 2.46 for the peak day, and 2.74 for • the peak hour, respectively. -8- • The conclusion with respect to infiltration is supported by the following factors. The peak weekly infiltration rate of 3160 gpd /inch- diameter /mile of sewer is well above the 1500 gpd /inch- diameter /mile criterion suggested by U.S. EPA as the rate above which infiltration generally can be removed cost effectively. Portions of the sewer system are relatively old and are subject to structural deterioration. High groundwater is reported in areas adjacent to the river. • The conclusion with respect to the effect of inflow on the local collection system is based on the following factors. The ratios of the peak wet weather flow to average noncon- sumptive water usage are within the range of peak /average ratios used in sewer design. Except for the reported storm drain connections and cooling water discharges, there is no evidence to believe that inflow sources could be easily . isolated and inexpensively removed. The lack of reported conveyance capacity problems such as surcharging and bypassing of flow support the flow analysis conclusion. • • -9- Table T -1 • SUMMARY OF FLOW ANALYSIS CITY OF SHAKOPEE • Monitored Flow Event Flow (mgd) Flow Ratio Clear Plater Entry • (mgd) gal /inch -dia /mile '75 '76 '75 '76 '75 '76 '75 '76 • A. Average Day • 1.43 1.22 0.26 1040 J; B. Maximum Month 1.84 1.60 1.57 1.37 0.67 0.43 2680 1700 C. Maximum Week- 2/ 1.96 1.68 0.79 3160 (Peak Weekly Infiltration) D. Maximum Day 2.88 1.91 2.46 1.63 1.71 0.74 6840 2960 E. Maximum Hour 3.20 2.74 2.03 8120 (Peak Wet Weather I /I) • Total Average Non Consumptive Water Usage 1.17 3/ • • Sewer System Size 250 inch diameter -mile • 1/ Monitored Flow divided by Total Average Non Consumptive Water Usage. . 2/ Maximum weekly flows with minimal precipitation used to estimate peak weekly infiltration. 3/ Does not include the wastewater flow from the Valley Industrial Park. • • • • I I It I KVrVLI l til l" : WA /TE i COf1TROL •COMMIIIIOfl 1 Twin Cities Area { �?� C� d o1 F. t t ' �; � �� Ei k:n'r 21 r :jvro 1 OCT 1 1979 September 28, 1979 • • C? 9 Y OF S HAl(o'L. Mr. Bo Spurrier City Engineer • 129 East First Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Southwest Area Study, MWCC Project 76 -26 Interim Report Analysis of Communtiy Flows Dear Mr. Spurrier: Pursuant to our telephone conversation on September 25, 1979 and indicated at the public meeting held in Minnetonka on September 26, 1979, Appendix "T" in the interim report Analysis of Community Flows will be revised to take into account the flows from the Rahr • Malting Company. When completed, a copy of the revisions will be transmitted to you. I would like to thank your for your input and look forward•to meeting you again. . If you have any questions, : feel free to call. Sincerely, /V J r V } Paul H. Dietz - Project Manager cc: C. Leimandt, Administration Assistant, MWCC • t 350 METRO /MARE BLDG. 7TH 6 ROBERT /TREET/ /AIM PAUL Mil 55101 612/222.8423 1 recycled t) • CITY ®F S AKOPEE '. • INCORPORATED 1870 129 E. First Ave., Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445 -3650 ' September 18, 1979 "; r Mr. Paul Dietz Metropolitan Waste Control Commission 350 Metro Square Bldg, St. Paul, MN 55101 RE: Analysis of Community Flows MWCC Project 76 -26, Task 360 Waste. Water Projections MWCC Project 76 -26, Task 250 Dear Mr. Dietz: Pursuant to our telephone conversation of September 17, 1979 and pursuant to your letter dated August 23, 1979, I respectfully submit these following comments regarding the above referenced studies. As I stated in our conversation, it is my belief that the above referenced studies are incorrect due to some assumptions made in preparation of the documents. I must first take exception with the sewer system description contained in Appendix "T" of the report titled "Analysis of Community Flows ". • In the description of the service area the report makes no mention of industrial users that are responsible for nearly half of the waste water generated in Shakopee. It is appropriate and necessary that any description of the service area address the fact that there are major industrial users connected to the system. • Under the heading "Factors Affecting I /I" the study incorrectly reports the areas of high ground water 1500 feet from the river. This has little bearing on where infiltration or inflow should be a problem. The study should note that the river interceptor is layed below the bluff line along the Minnesota River and that the pipe is generally below the water table there. The soils predominate in the sewer service area are sand, silty sand and sandy silt. Along the river•there is a strip approximately 1500 feet wide where much of the sewer is in bedrock. • } II i' Il e Q P 1 ii 1' P o g r 0 s s t•' O I l 0 11 Mr. Paul Dietz September 18, 1979 • • Page 2 The study further indicates that the City has not yet undertaken any 'I /I study. Although there have been no formal studies, the City has undertaken numerous campaigns to eliminate infiltration and inflow by smoke tests and televising sewers. Finally, this report assumes virtually all sewer users are served exclusively by public water supply. This is incorrect. Looking at Table 1I -4, the table indicates the annual average amount of infiltration inflow is 230,000,000 gallons per year. In 1978, Rahr Malting discharged 238,000,000 gallons. The two numbers seem to be too close to be a coincidence. It seems that the unaccounted private supply has been utilized as infiltration or inflow. It would, therefore, be my recommendation that the analysis of community flows and waste water projections as they pertain to the City of Shakopee be restudied and computed so that they take into account private supply that is used by industrial facilities. • I appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the study report. If you have any questions regarding. these comments, please do not hesitate to call. • Sincerely, • , INN■ 1 111 416! • H.R. Spurrie. P.F. City Engineer HRS:nae • cc: Douglas S. Reeder • • • • • • • . fi.46.... , ‘,... ,..„.,, „ . . • • ".. wit • l'e47;„ 4 •t ry I `4 , I , l 1F Jet' { . r 3f,, t F.. �., • } ' • � ie :.; v:,,;;•- t $ -,!, , 4.t 1,`+. : *'.. � 1rt'i'.k . 4 tr 1,:!4'11',.4" t A. 3 a T • r i"1 l y aY - . . :.. it: �� "'1' "i 1 : t Jr , ' ' - r ; "1'` �� ,� J. Y ` xc.t.. IQ ' {�, t „ ,L. . ' t L ... 1 , t ‘,,,, , r . .., t , . „,,,..,:::,,,,,,...„:„...,:,..,......,,,,..,,,,.,,,,..:,..„):„., I� c • ti't ',...lt N t.1 �. U .. 1 • . t7 • i 3 .■ ro `t` f , • 1l r` ° 1 t ' .T; ;X2}0a1.'; is ... *iA. ,..,, . , c.: • (`Y ` ' ► . • ir ` •: r! i :, ; "' () ' t l x }: t.- L t •- .. APPENDIX T !`�+ w , 4 SHAKOPEE ' ...‘.....•.''' 1 , ;i •nL..1 .`,"4,t7','•;31. ':i '.' ,.. _ `,' : 1, 1Lr, , r i y •/ ,..,• jlr . • {. >r l:', - M.-.A j e C . , .. , , 1 . • , f i7 t M v.. 1• c; • l Y 1 ~ : t f • • a r w ' 'r ertl fhu ,, 2 4:1:11 f.' 1 y y f r 3 � [ k i klr 3 'S 1 ..,1,r w Sl�4 ..:i s. ion }. i •t. ' ' . ; J f y M ' 1 . f ly �� ' � I ,•yr a ff t 0 ' ^ +Oti 1 • • T0-- • % . CITY OF SHAKOPEE • Sewer System Description Service Area The southwest City of Shakopee is located approximately 20 miles of Minneapolis along the Minnesota River. Due to recent expansions, the corporate area now spans nearly 27 square miles. Residential development, however, is concen- trated in a 3 square mile area in the northwest sector, within the city's former boundaries. The 1976 estimated population of Shakopee is reported to have been 10,100 of which about 9,000 are estimated to have been connected to the sewer system. The sewer service area is presently confined within the former corporate boundaries and to the Valley Industrial Park area, located east of the residential section of Shakopee. Major Sewerage Components ' Major components of the local sewer system (excluding the Valley Industrial Park area) include 27 miles (250 inch diameter- miles) of gravity sewers and trunk sewers. There are approximately 6 miles of trunk sewers which range in • diameter from 9 to 24 inches. The remaining sewers are primarily 8 inch gravity sewers. The sewer system is divided into three sections -- the . west, central and east districts. A trunk sewer, running parallel to the Minnesota River, collects the wastewater from the west and central districts and conveys it to an MWCC lift station on the east side of the residential area of Shakopee. Sewage from the east district flows through another local trunk sewer to the lift station. -1- : C i j I ri • 1 , The Shakopee II Forcemain (MSB -7024) originates at the MWCC pumping station in Shakopee and travels eastward for 8,000 feet. This 14 inch diameter forcemain interceptor discharges into the Shakopee Interceptor. The Shakopee Interceptor (MSB -7023) consists of 7,500 feet of 36 inch and 2,500 feet of 42 inch gravity interceptor sewer that directs 5 the city sewage into the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor (MSB - 6904). This third link conveys wastewater flows from the main sewer service district and the Valley Industrial Park area through 5,000 feet of 42 inch to 72 inch gravity • interceptor to the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant. Age. Installation of gravity sewers and trunk sewers began in 1910 in the downtown area of Shakopee. Sewers in outlying areas were constructed at a much later date. Materials of Construction. The typical materials of construction and type of joints for the sewers are summarized i • in the following table: $ • COMPONENT MATERIAL TYPE OF JOINT 1 Sanitary Sewers Vitrified Clay Oakum and Tar, Trunk Sewers Reinforced Concrete Concrete and 0-ring Problems. Roots in laterals cause approximately 20 services to be excavated and repaired annually. Joint deterioration in the trunk sewer along the river is suspected by city officials. Factors Affecting I/I • Groundwater. Areas of Shakopee within 1,500 feet of the river are reported to have high groundwater. Soils and Geology. The soils predominant in the sewer service area are clays, silts and gravel. South of the high groundwater area in Shakopee, much of the sewer is in bedrock. .1' -2- t! }} f 1� . I i . ? 61°..... 4 . i Community Programs Ordinances. A city ordinance prohibits the discharge i of roof water, ground water or any natural precipitation f into the city sewerage system. Shakopee also uses the State i Plumbing Code to require separation of sanitary and storm ! building drains. 1 Maintenance. The entire sewer system is either rodded I or flushed once annually and certain problem manholes are 1 y inspected occasionally. The city has embarked on a program I of televising about 15,000 feet per year of sewer. In 1978 I the trunk sewer along the river to the MWCC pumping station was televised and was found to be in better shape than 11 expected. l • Previous I/I Study. The city has not yet undertaken a I study specifically addressing I/I at this time. i Analysis of Flow Records 1 Water Use r r Municipal water service is typically provided with I sewer service. The amount of water sold is based on metered i flow for each connection. All water customers are metered. I A meter maintenance program has not been enacted in the city. Shakopee did not file a Survey of Sewer Use with the MWCC for 1975 or 1976. Water use for these two years was I reported by city officials as: I 1975 1976 1st Quarter 92.4 mg 1st Quarter 83:3 mg 2nd Quarter 85.6 mg 2nd Quarter 123.5 mg 3rd Quarter 122.3 mg ' 3rd Quarter 152 :3 mg t 4th Quarter 90.2 mg 4th Quarter 95.2 mg Total 390.5 mg Total 454.5' mg -3- 1 , 1 [ . . 7 Li No further division of these figures into residential, r commercial, institutional, or industrial use categories was available. The city did report 133 commercial mmercial connections, 10,-- ; 19. institutional connections, and 13 industrial connections. The number of residential customers was not reported, but is expected to be nearly equal to the sewered population. The i quantity of water obtained from private supplies is unknown. Wastewater Generation i 1 The annual wastewater generation rate for the City of Shakopee and the Valley Industrial Park (VIP) wa ( ) s taken as i the average of the water usage of the first and fourth :1 • quarters of 1975 and 1976. This quantity, calculated to be 0.99 mgd, is based on the assumption that virtually all sewer Users are served exclusively by public water supply. The first and fourth quarter data were used to exclude increases I • in water usage due to•consumptive use in warmer months. Of the total wastewater generation rate of 0.99 mgd, approximately 80% is generated in the City of Shakopee and 20% is generated from the VIP. 1 This analysis will not consider the flow contributed by "� the Valley Industrial Park because the wastewater flow from, `1 VIP is unmetered, and there is no available record of sewer i 1= size or condition in the complex. By neglecting the VIP • i flow, the annual wastewater generation rate for 1975 and u ; ' 1976 was calculated to be 0.80 mgd, (80% of total wastewater generation) and records from meter M401 (located at the MWCC pumping station) were used to analyze I /1. L.S 1 1 Wastewater Flows ,.0 Based on the two years of record, the average annual - wastewater flow at meter M401 was 1.43 mgd. The maximum monthly average flow during the first and fourth quarters i was 1.49 mgd in March of 1976. The maximum monthly average 10 -4- x I r • 9v flow during the second and third quarters was 1.84 mgd in May of 1975. 1 I Infiltration. The city reports that infiltration from sources such as manholes, stream crossings, and crushed or I broken pipe is negligible. Infiltration is suspected in the trunk sewer line adjacent to the river from groundwater ( entering through deteriorated joints. Some clear water 1 • I enters the system through service connections subject to root problems. Based on 1975 and 1976 sewage flow records • and an annual average wastewater generation rate of 0.80 mgd, the amount of clear water flow to the sewer system is i estimated to average 0.63 mgd or 2500 gpd /inch diameter /mile. Because of the significant difference in rainfall I between the second quarters of 1975 and 1976, the severity of infiltration was examined for each year. In 1975, the 1 } second quarter sewage flows averaged 1.57 mgd at meter M401, t while in 1976, the second quarter sewage flows averaged 1.51 I mgd even though 'there was an estimated increase in the I amount of sewage generated by 0.06 mgd (new connections). From May 8 to May 14, 1975, the flow at meter M401 averaged I 1.96 mgd. During this seven day period, rainfall at the i I airport totaled 0.10 inches. Based on a base sewage flow of 0.80 mgd, the infiltration during this period is estimated I to be 1.16 mgd or 4,650 gpd /inch diameter /mile. f Inflow. The daily flow records Y for meter M401 were inspected to identify days for which there appeared to be a significant increase in flow resulting from precipitation. On April 28, 1975 a flow of 2.64 mg was registered at meter M401 after a rainfall of 2.22 inches was recorded at the airport the day. Hourly I P previous da Hourl meter readings were not available due to equipment malfunctions. Again in 1975, a :1 -5- • i i; I! • • flow of 2.5 mg on July 1 was recorded following 1.85 inches of rainfall on June 29 and 30. The peak daily flow during this two year period of 2.88 mg occurred on May 5, 1975; however, less than 0.10 inches of precipitation was reported in the preceding five days at the airport. This peak flow cannot be readily explained, but may be due to an unusually large industrial discharge that coincided with significant quantities of infiltration. The peak hourly flow on May 5, 1975 was 3.20 mgd. The highest daily flow reading in 1976 occurred on July 30 when 1.91 mg was recorded at meter M401. In the ' preceding week, over 1.5 inches of precipitation were recorded, with 0.31 inches of rain falling on July 30. On August 6, 1976, a flow of 1.8 mg was registered after 0.27 inches of rain were reported on August 4. A flow of 1.75 mg on June 29, 1976 coincided with a rainfall of 0.5 inches on June 28 and . 29. • The city reports negligible inflow to the sewer system from roof leaders, yard drains, and foundation drains although such connections do exist at the Women's Reformatory. Two large industries located in Shakopee -- Certain -Teed and • Rahr Malting -- are reported to discharge cooling water to the sanitary sewers. The quantity of cooling water discharge is not reported. Conclusions The potential to cost effectively remove infiltration from the Shakopee service area collection system is high enough to warrant further investigation. The potential to cost effectively remove inflow based on its effect on the local collection system, however, is not high enough to } -6- 9 • warrant further investigation. The effect of the existing inflow on the MWCC interceptor system will be identified in a forthcoming report on the interceptor system. These conclusions are based on the data presented in Table T -1 and analysis of pertinent factors. As shown in Table. T-1, extraneous flow over the reporting period accounts for about 45% of the total flow. Peak weekly infiltration ' • is estimated to be 4650 gpd /inch - diameter /mile of sewer. The ratio of the peak wet weather flow to the average noncon- sumptive water usage is 3.6 for the peak day, and 4.0 for the peak hour, respectively. The conclusion with respect to infiltration is supported by the following factors. The peak weekly infiltration rate of 4650 gpd /inch- diameter /mile of sewer is well above the 1500 gpd /inch - diameter /mile criterion suggested by U.S. EPA as the rate above which infiltration generally can be removed cost effectively. Portions of the sewer system are relatively old and are subject to structural deterioration. High groundwater is reported in areas adjacent to the river. l The conclusion with respect to the effect of inflow on the local collection system is based on the following factors. The ratios of the peak wet weather flow to average noncon- sumptive water usage are within the range of peak /average 1 ratios used in sewer design. Except for the reported storm drain connections and cooling water discharges, there is no evidence to believe that inflow sources could be easily isolated and inexpensively removed. The lack of reported conveyance capacity problems such as surcharging and bypassing of flow support the flow analysis conclusion. 1 -7- i ! .7.Y.. ; ' : . . E . Y). • Table T -1 SUMMARY OF FLOW ANALYSIS ;•. CITY OF SHAKOPEE -.] • . Monitored :1 • ' Flow Event Flow (mgd) Flow Ratio Clear Water Entry (mgd) gal /inch -dia /mile '75 '76 '75 '76 '75 '76 '75 '76 k 1.. .] A. Average Day 1.43 1.8 0.63 2500 B. Maximum Month 1.84 1.60 2.3 1.6 1.04 0.80 4150 3200 C. Maximum Week 2 1.96 2.4 1.16 4650 L (Peak Weekly i Infiltration) D. Maximum Day 2.88 1.91 3.6 2.4 .2.08 1.11 8800 4400 1. ...] • , E. Maximum Hour 3.20 4.0 2.40 9600 (Peak Wet I' Weather I /I) :1 • I Total Average Non Consumptive Water Usage 0.80 m g d 3/ Sewer System Size 250 inch diameter -mile i t- • 1/ Monitored Flow divided by Total Average Non Consumptive Water Usage. ' t, 2/ Maximum weekly flows with minimal precipitation used to estimate peak weekly infiltration. 3/ Does not include the wastewater flow from the Valley Industrial Park. j I• i ] ' h r • ] . 1 1 .rn y j I. ' i I .' irrlETROPOLITAl1 ll AITE . ` • � .; - n ► COf1TROL Twin Cities Area • • R rrt ti"■ E D August 23, 1979 A U G 2 8 1979 Henry R. Squrrier, City Engr. op 129 E. Shakopee, First MN Ave. 55379 CITY S►`IAPCOPEE Dear Mr. Squrrier: • The Southwest Area Study is being conducted by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission to determine long-range plans for Sewer Service Areas 4 and 5, which include your community. The study was prompted by the population and industrial growth projected by the Metropolitan Council within the service areas and by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. A copy of each of the study reports is enclosed for review and comment by yourself and your staff. Informational public meetings regarding this study will be held in or near your community in September. You will receive a schedule of the meetings as soon as this has been arranged. If you would like more information or wish to discuss thi> matter, feel free to contact me at 22.2 -8423, ext. 196. Sincerely, 7 d C 7 /3,,;;. Paul Dietz ` Project Manager PD /lh Enclosures • 350 METRO /OUARE BLDG. • 7TH & ROBERT /TREET/ /MT PAUL Mn 55101 6121222.8423 x ;, recycled t� r.r•— v.w.,e..... _.,.. a. ...- _- -:arv .rr.._- ter.-,. .,.,..,.,.... .. _. — - 946 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council • FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: Ice Arena Commission DATE: April 10, 1980 Attached is a revised copy of the criteria for the Ice Arena Commission as made at the City Council meeting of April 1, 1980. jiw Attachment • • • { Sec.•2.55 ICE ARENA COMMISSION - Subd. 1. The Establishment and Composition of Commission A. An Ice Arena Commission, composed of three members, is hereby established. The members shall be appointed by the City Council and will serve staggered three -year terms. No more than one member shall be a member of the Council. However, the Council.:may additionally, or in lieu of having a Council member on the Commission, appoint one of its members an ex- officio member of the Commission. The Council will appoint the first members to take effect May 6, 1980, indicating one member whose term will expire the first meeting in 1981, a second whose term will expire the first meeting in 1982, and a third member whose term will expire the first meeting in 1983. Both original and successive appointees shall serve until their successors are appointed and qualified. Commission members must reside within the corporate limits of the City at the time of their appointment to the Commission and if they move outside of the corporate limits during their term of office, they shall tender their resignation to the Council, who may accept or reject it. If the Council rejects the resignation, said Commissioner may complete his term of office. B. Members of the Board shall serve without compensation and shall not be personally interested in any contracts of the Commission. They shall at the beginning of each fiscal year, select a Chairman and a Secretary from their own number with duties in addition to Commission membership implied by these titles. A majority shall constitute a quorem for the transaction of business. -2- q� - Subd. 2. General Powers The Ice Arena Commission shall have the power to oversee the construction and operation of the ice arena built in Lion's Park. It shall have the power to make cooperative agreements with the Joint Recreation Board for the purpose of coordinating activities in the Ice Arena and Lion's Park. • Subd. 3. Specific Powers In order to oversee the operation of the Ice Arena, the fi Commission shall have powers to: 1 A. Adopt rules for its own proceedings, providing at least one regular meeting every month.. and the trans- action of its business and rules governing the use of the Ice 1 Arena and related facilities under its control; B. .Contract with a professional ice arena management companies to provide input to the design and construction of the ice arena, etaiid for the operation of various facets of the ice arena and to fix rates for the use of the facility. C. Accept contributions for the operation and improvement of the ice arena facility. • D. Maintain and care for the facilities it oversees, including the carrying of any insurance coverage it deems necessary. E. Perform whatever other acts are reasonable and necessary f 1 and proper to operate an ice arena under this section. -3- Subd. 4. Finances of the Commission A. The Commission shall at least six months prior to each fiscal year, present to the City Council a proposed operating budget for review and approval. The Commission shall make a bi- monthly review of revenues and expenses and report to the Council any differences material in amount from those presented in the budget. B. Finances of the Commission. For the purpose of 1 financing the Ice Arena, there shall be established in the City accounts . a special fund to be called the Ice Arena Fund. Into this Fund shall be placed the various Ice Arena revenues. All receipts belonging to the Commission shall be deposited - to the credit of the Fund and no disbursement shall be made except by check nor unless a verified claim for services and commodities } actually rendered or delivered has first been submitted to and approved for payment by the Commission, as authenticated by signature of the Chairman. The accounting of the Fund and the custody of the monies shall be in the hands of the accounting officer and the Treasurer, respectively, ' of the City. These officers shall make reports to the Commission at reasonable intervals as determined by the Commission. For . purposes of budgeting, accounting, and reporting, the fiscal year of the Commission and the Fund shall be the same as that of the City. An audit of the funds shall be made annually. Such audit may be L _Ei... �}y� --^T _ ....h..lulYiNYw ! •. ....ee.... n ... •. ..rr r.. ... .. -.... -._. - (� made independently of or in conjunction with any audit which may !" be made of the funds of the City. The Commission shall be authorized to establish charges or fees for the restricted use # of any facilities or to make any phase of the ice arena wholly or partially self- sustaining. Any concessions or privileges may be sold after public advertising and competitive bidding. Any employees who handle cash in the process of collection shall be bonded. C. Financial Report. The Board shall as soon as possible after the end of each fiscal year, prepare and present to the { City Council a comprehensive annual report of its activities and finances. draft: 4/10/80 • r TO: Shakopee City Council FROM: Shakopee Public Utilities Commission RE: Elevated tank, change to flexible expansion joint, DATE: 4 -1 -80 The Utilities Commission considered the letter dated 3 -24 -80 from Schoell and Madson in which the expansion joint is recommended as a change order to avoid problems which have recently been experienced with the couplings originally planned. The Utility Commission voted to recommend to the City Council that this change be authorized. 7 , - WILLIAM . . D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R.ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON SCHOELL & MAD8ON. INC. • JACK E. GILL ROONEY 8. GORDON ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS THEODORE 0.KEMNA JOHN W. EMONO KENNETH E. ADOLF WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT I (612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS. MINNESOTA 55343 BRUCE C. SUNDING • R. SCOTT HARRI OFFICES AT HURON, SOUTH DAKOTA AND DENTON. TEXAS DENNIS W. SAARI GERALD L. BACKMAN March 24, 19 8 0 City of Shakopee c/o Mr. H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Subject: 1,500,000 Gallon Elevated Water Storage Tank Improvement Project No. 79 -9 Gentlemen: Following our March 17th meeting, I called PDM and said that the City was interested in substituting the bellows -type expansion joint for the two couplings but felt the additional cost was too high. I asked for a detailed cost breakdown and also some literature on the expansion joint. Enclosed is a copy of their reply. We obtained the material costs for the coupling from the local supplier and the costs are approximately $445 and $550 for the- . Dresser and Rockwell couplings, respectively. Contractors typically do not give full credit for deleted or substituted items and this is the case here. However, we still recommend that the expansion joint be substituted for the two couplings because it would be a more maintenance free installation. The Contractor is requested prompt attention to this matter. Please call if you have any questions. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. KEAdo1f:mkr • j�� -lam (2a 9' • enclosure cc: Mr. Lou Van Hout • f .P� 4,. C Ali1 E 4+IT T ()EMI 1eN 1 L L( U4 714 Li PDM ENGINEERS / FABRICATORS 1 CONSTRUCTORS PITTSBURGH -DES MOINES STEEL COMPANY 1015 TUTTLE STREET • P 0. BOX 1596 • OES MOINES, IOWA 50306 • PHONE (515) 244.6000 Schoell & Madson, Inc. March 19, 1980 50 Ninth Avenue South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 Attention: Mr. Kenneth Adolf • Gentlemen: Reference: 1500M HP Shakopee, Minnesota PDM Contract No. 29663 Improvement Project No. 79 -9 Enclosed please find a reprint of the bellows type expansion joint proposed on this project. A revised cost of ,change is as follows: Bellows Joint $752 Credit for Rockwell 11933 - 444 Credit for 18" 0 Dresser Coupling - 135 173 Add - Flange to 18" 0 Pipe 333 506 15% Administration and Profit 76 $582 Your immediate attention is requested in this matter in order that purchases may be made and drawings be revised to maintain Production and Erection Sched- ules. Very truly yours, PITTSBURGH -DES MOINES STEEL COMPANY James T. Watkins Contracting Engineer JTW /erk Enclosure Iccl SYKCL C1- 1C1 U22u S�I1ddl�S 1v 14_ jJ 'J1dl . (4_J o f'bL l dd /o., /I u Lt,UJUt "-; is • SL'SSI •-1 O_ ° - -tti -1 t£r9o£0 -tU • - -_ __......_3-.,Nidx 1 Jwl13Ht. 113Nmudd ':J aVwiHi . . SL'S. ____ .. un /ou /t:u . - .tsYuul�{ cy 1£- it£- Oti£R -tO 3SiddXJ 13AVoI '113NMi,dh 'cl SvWQHl ou'uSt ,4_U /oo /RU a uuut I'=t Y•I . cod ..,• '! 4 ub'Cf 1 ., �,- R9£- lb- 1R- tIR- 21Su-- 1O------- 'd1f1G3'3AU- 1vlldvJ --- 3ditlINdlli- S53n,1Stlu.- ___- _______ uo�•2iI___. .. ud /uuLlt) _ ____SYUUJI_ -I`• ?tSvOU 2n - LCU- ORdU -1O 'Sl1n UVULA b1Jt1GUdd )tJQd NVA8U 9S'b1a urt /o�, /RU • IYVUU1 ;'•I .c S4J -sft OS �, • 1 �,�I 6L£2u0 tin - loo -t ISR -tu 'dIUU3- 1V1IdVJ AJUIuivHJj1 Ulrly 00'966'o uu /bu /nu CtU0 31 1 ( C1 ' _ s bS'2L , "• I - - -- 6 i 64 0£-f•n - -Sd -- 3SN3oX 3 13AVd1 - -- - ----- ...• 3d01JV ANNV31 -----•--- S6! 0l---- •--- _- ._--- _.___Uu /bu /nu..___ ...__..Lduiu t - . 1 :. ' 0,= °••1 61- 261-0££;, -SI dSN3dXd l3AVOL 3bUNv dNNv3f' 21/'01 1/b /6.1/1711 LCuuul 4_ r- '`'' 61 0££R-S1 3SN3cX.3 13AVoi 360NV 3NNV3r Vo'£l 1/a /oo /nu LCuuul r -,- - — -- Et- td{- 0•£- £n- .t_0___... —_- 3SN3dx.A - l 3AVd1----------------- jbU�4v_ 3NNV3t '_ - _____-__ Rd.L£__-- - --__ -_ _ __-_ _- UC /ouLUJ _-._ -_ LbJuu l " •t l I cL I f 'l £ ' S R £ , `E � 4I. - - - -_- - 2.9- -l2 -3 -2i-2o - - ' iNIvW•- 31J1H3A---- A- 1ddrlS-- 1vd1N33- Ul tiv---------- 151UL------------- -- --- 1/o /Ou/RU__.- -__yCuuul _i.?I ( , SR - 12u - '1NIVW 3131H3A AlddIlS ivlitVjl Ulfly 92'Lti urr /bu/00 yCuuUl i ::z 2n- 12n- 2£2u -10 '1NIvv 3'13IH3A AlddIlS 1vd1N3J C11fly -9C'L4_ 1/u /00 /nu *Cuuu1 - -__ - - _ - __. - - ._. - 2n - ieo” 4' 2um 10------------- 1N1V.W--, 33 J1HJA•- -•-- _- _-_AlddhS__1Vd1N33 Ulrly LS:.L9..____.... .__. .___.._- .vd /o_�LUa ..__ 'CVUVI •-� Lz Od1££U C£ - t2£- 2£217-10 'INIVW 3131H3A AlddflS lvdLN3J UlflV 9C'L1 • Ud /oU /uU ' )uut ;, I 1 ' 1£-tt1-2£2u -10 '1NIvW 313IH3A AlddIlS - Iv:11N33 Ulfly v9'9 od /oo /l,J yCuutu1 - - 1-L°- 1- IL•- 0Eao -d0 -- . iNIvW= dlflua---- A- ldanS- lud1 N. 3J- Ulllv_—___._ US' yn---____-_.___._____ .- UoLou[uu•..___- -__.v2VUUt-.._ -,E czi Cu- ten - 0£24 -10 '1Nlvrr'dIIl03 Alddfl1 1vd1N3J ulfly UL'bL Ud /bII /r1/ ycuVut .,i , _,� �_ 1 In Itn-O£2U-10 '1NlVw'dlfld3 Alad(lS lvdlNdJ Ulfly YC'L 1/d /t,1/ /n.; +CUuul o_ c£ - Tt£ =U£21/ =IO - -•- ----- aNIVrl;diflfJ3_--- A_lddliS. 1vdiJ3 Ulr1V..__..______ .nn�_1C____.._.___...__. .____udLaLLi1U. .- _.._.:iC1VVl ._4_''I Iet - -- — nl- IR1- U£20 -10 '1N17W'd1f1U3 A•iddflS 1Vd1N3J OlfIV LR'tt Jd /bll /r,o 4GJUU1 i" . • • -.- - b N h - f tt -- -- - t °t1 4 oo'Unl �; — _.-- isouoti 2n -Ido- 06£17.•10---- •- _.�ddt. /03 - - S - IUUIIJS--- _ - --___ _. - ---- __-- -- v: ddv__..---.-- .__.-_U.U_.uD1......___..-. -.._ _._ . _..yy /bU /nl)... -__ veUUUI_.._ .•" 1. d SMJ v +* , r, f4.4 1,.I C ♦ S9'fC1 .� l ° tdWI7 2n- 12n- 14_2v -10 '1NIVIi'1SAS'r•LWUJ vlrjQJ b1V R9'CR 1/t, /b1/ /nu tjuuOUt ' 1 c - --_---- L£ 9£ 1.--• 2 £- d2£- £tc�n 10- •-- ._--- _._irvIv 1.SAS• = rn 1J __-- _- _- _.___-- _•___--- .__w„�UJ dIv ._.______.Iu�Crt_-____. ...... _ __ /D1[..... . . _vV1JV1 1' I z_ _-- _ - 3JVaSd% 4 'U'd k`AWI 'UN 11vf1UJ3V NUIldId3S30 i311 dOU.v3A 1NHUr•V 1'lVU 'U4_. .IJjHJ I; 1 39Vd UN b0 170 dd1SIJ3d ) 3JHJ J3dti1tVHi jU AI L, udo l L F 1 I • f- „so CI Ty nF sHnunpFF - . CHECK REGISTER 014 09 80 PAGE_ 2 . _) ) * t\ CHECK Ain. 1)ATF AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO: INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE ' 7 ".1 • , . 3 ' 3 • . -; - 1 1 T1 1 1 -1 17 n #771 r4•0 -- #777 - 57 COP . OFt - MUT P7R NIL . '0 .121 - - 7t -71-3 4 5 ' 5 552.17 * 5 -eK 0 .. ,, , • ' * . , 0 ) . 100095 00/n9/A0 71:05 CLAYS PRINTING PRNTG. g REPRO1' 01-#351-121-12 . " ■.7) --- 707po7P7 TCRTITS CI: -- P Fr1147 IN( PRNTG. t ts-,.#3-51-=-91-f-Pi 12 13 I 1 330.50 * :•,, ) 7 IC I 61---t00-n0A- 61.17 1:47-A -0 2 CI:U T CH 0 . I . N I [-QUIP:MA-i-NI . 0-1-4 23 0 --6-P-1 (, 2 264148 1:1 . IA . 21.08 * : ) • • .• 21 t7 72 ) IA 100noo 110/0g/An 59.22 CONSTRUCTION BUL. pPNIG g REPRO. 22-#351-911-91 23 ,2A T o 59722 v 25 . , 26, .) . . .. . . 21 22 :a 10010A 00/00/A0 1.06P.17 JULIUS A. COLLER II LEGAL SFPVICES 01-#310-151-16 2A 1.dh9.17 * 31 20 . , , ' . ' • ' " ***-CKS 3 5., • . 27 35 • , , ., , v , . ' . . 7.0---1-nniT1r n ------n7m77an- ---- lar:i 1 73 cuips F tnntg ---- vFm - ictE - mt/ 1 44. Ot**-232-#2-1-402-2-741 ,, 3R 37 20 180.73 * 30 . Ak-0,..CKS 33 100130 ' 0# /09 //, 0 ' - : 9'. 1. . , DONNING'S HOWE: - 2 .‘ - --GENERAL SUPPLIES ';„., 01=4220-111-1 1 ' ''; -, ' '-''s - ' 4 ,,,, 7 3. I - rn 0 II cr 0 P / 0 21755 nutearmns-HOViE: - GENFRAE .-- SUL - im PPTE --41-2-2-o=4'2 6-1 (3 A5 35 In0130 04/09/A0 17.55 nUNNINGS HDWE. GFNERAL SUPPLIES 01-#220-311-31 36 100I3n n!/On/P0 1Ju.57 RUNNINGS HOWE. GENERAL SUPPLIES 01-#220-321-32 ii — 1 0 0130 n fry 1. / *P-7-789 DUNN INGS-H11wE . GENFR A L-8UP P T-ES---,---0-TI--- . . . 311 100110 nu/n9/00 26i3 QUNNINGS HOWE . GFNERAL SUPPLIES • - 0i ' • iy ' " (:■ .) 3. 100130 0 /A0 2: 7# OUNNINGS HOWE, , • , • . EQUIP.MAINT; .. '-' , 01-0230-321- 40 - - 1 0 n 1 3 11------- a ID 0 7s n --------- 37 11 'i ---- 1)UNN NC: S D W E1, fi I:DO "I Al.til . 011 67 — 53 41 128.P5 * 412 56 --"- 1 0 0111 011-Ing/n4 -------29757 , DYNA . , GENE:RA t-SUPP L 01 4 , . 2P:57 * -. ' ' ' - '. ' 4' - 4-4 -eics e° AR 100130 n0/0 523.82 --- EARL F.DPESSEN 1 TnR FUELS 01-4222-#21-#2 76803 63 RA An - 5 - 23782 - Ir ;.., 7." ' RR •• ,, ,****4 . • • • • ' ' ' ** 5 • 60 57 69 " jo0107 na/u9/A0 A.55 EASTMAN DPUG (;FNFRAL SUPPLIES • -, - 54 100107 nn/oo/pn 2.54 EASTMAN ( )PUG GFNEWCW SUPPLIES 01-0220-311-31 F.; ---- I - nrc1 - 0 7 '00 i • k7b11 EASTmAN -ppm; . GrNERAL--s.iPPL-I5 . -0 s--/F220-41-1-111 , , : ...! _ . . _,„.,, - ., 15.83 11" • • 157 ` . /` \ /"x" r//, !IF sx^^«prr CHECK P . oo OR «o RAGE 3 �-_ _ -__- " 04E0. wo. PATE uwnvwr v[wonn /rs* DESCRIPTION 6ccnUwT NO. wv. * p o * MESSAGE } , . . �) - .-- onrc1 mo7nr---- cwvcrnpr . -GrwF-nmc-oopptito ' - vl.7.a29o=1 - 2f-re - *eo«6s �/ "| ,, 201.o? * ^. 6 ,) 7 --1�^�Tr— --- ------ - ----- °°�-cxn- ' , ' ` ." 6 >«n/g« no/on/«o u?�'n � rLvIw v^rcTv xoPp�, cooIp oi-»Z3v~3zi-}2 n000v � " ) w 4r7n ---- ---' `4 `3 ., ) '` ^*°~cxx " '�------- -------' --- -- -`^| ,, /ov/r1 "v/op/po 5,rs ' EARL FLECK POSTAGE 01~«320~31I-31 |:j ., 10( o^/o"/"" iv^ns EARL FLECK TRAVEL EXPENSE . o�~«sso-s/�-�t ` ' ' `" ___ 20 17 ) '^ ^°^-c*x 10: ------ ----- -- 1 / 1vo/ o«/"^/En Z^A.n« rouwz EwGn,n[ppon, ^ pnwrn & REPRO. 01-«351-411-41 2] , = ��,ou * ^ ` _ � , � ) � ' --_ _ ` ' -_-_-� " ^°~^^° . ^°^-cxv = ~} 71 � ,1 25 -- 1 nnl sr nnrn",pv --- 25700 o _ naneaGs-p/o - 32 26 1001P 00/09/An 25 'n � H suw�7kTlow`. GARBAGE �/o ~�h l� 33 ` �� ^' ` ` ) = 100) »«/o»/oo 2s�m - `` S wI7Anow `.`' GARBAGE ``'.�' ` 1~3Z` '� �' `� ..� 26 inn/p r -- - - --- "«/"nron' 2'5701; - G - t - = - nowIriTIoN -- � 'c^nnxGE 0+.013-11-11-21--.11.2' 36 h6 ^ z. �oo."/ nn/n9/an �s,00 � » H nuw�m/{ow GARBAGE p�o o|~«37�-�x�-�� ] 30 /n"/"� owop/po n.070,31 p 11. x SANITATION GARBAGE P/U 01~u373-711~71 30 � 31 - --' p��9s7o1�, __ ` . � , ' . . 33 ' ''' ' ' � .. ' '�/ ' cxn 42 ) ^ • �` ` ` . � �� .. ~ ��` , `'� �- . � �� *�- ` . ° 3.1 .44 " Ion/«v "v/on/,o 66.19 GENERAL SAFETY cnuIp vrxzcLc MmwT o�~oa»z-sm-sa �ons� 43 31 66,1s * ^ = ) a ---- -- 4a 3 1001 011/09/00 GOPHER STATE. TRUCK ' *nron FUELS % � oi=«2a2311~31 ` � ' ^ ^" �oo�oF owop/no ' �� onpEn STATE T*UCk H^Iw' '/ � ' ^ ' Vi-«a��'�1i �! ' �� ' ~'` ��) � -________� ,^ . � . ^ .. -. ��.�- ~ - ��~` ''*��' � '^`'' ^ 53 | ° ,' 42 „v/n^ oo/vp/xo 426.04 GnvLnn cno/p,x^IwT, ox-«c»o~aa�~�z � ) .3 ---11 --- = ' ° .1 ' ` ° ' ~ ` �»«/«* "«/o»/�” ��;.�� GOPHFP SIGN co. SIGNS ov-«zsn-up�-�o = An 312.13 * 63 � 64 ~ ^^ °^^^ � ' ' `� ` ' ` � ** ^ ~ cKn 65 ° • | ,. � --- -- ' ` . ` ' . ' . • - ^ ° ;� n -- rn"2v - - ov/n0rpn ��o^ --- npwrn^L -oxppLipu- ^ ----- - o'~eeo-op��u-�+* a�oi ~ , 120.00 * 69 • ' ~�� ,` .-�"� --'--------'------_-------- -----'----�- 13.25 xcww o"/nn�"" �3 °^��* 77.77 j 5 5 � " 100711 w� a ��' r \ i '- ,r � ��______ r x vrx�c xc "^n�� ______� o�'^a»p-s ��o � �^ ' _ '' ^ ' ^�� v __- �- - . ' -- - . ' -- - ---'' - - -- ---- - '- " ` --- Li ) - /"AA ,r/, n r pH^"nppp CHECK REGISTER o« op oo PAGE U >, --- -- - - --- ----- - --'------ ` cxpc' xn. »xrF, x"m/wT vEwnnn l/E� nsoonlp/row ACCOUNT NO. �wv a P.O. v �� n�x�[ |�\ ` ) 3-- � nnrI, ---- n"7n"r'" ------------ p?: nn -- 'HE nwFwS •nxrccy -- --- vrw/c�� - m^z*�� o��aoJu�«n�-«�-- 3 � , , 35.34 * ^ . ` , . .7 -- " °""° ---- ----- � --°°^-�*s � � ~ " ` '" ) " 100215 no/o^/po o|,vo HOUSE OF PRINT pnwTs, o REPRO: 01-4351-311-31 4797 � �--�� " nn � �r-----v��rnr"� — r -- - ��o �ovn - ppwrG. - * - ncpRn. 5*~*15t~9ft~91-4*56 -- /p �oo�/� no/09/00 �v ' .. 20.20- *oonr OF PRINT ppwr� x ncnon s»~"sp/-v/�~p| «rvs `� . PPNTG. , .) ., i"oP15 04/o9/p0 20.20 HOUSE OF PRINT PPNTG. x "cn»n, 5o~ 4795 !��| a� " � �vrp --- �n�o - pomTm. - k - nEpen. *8~*as�~9j+~p1-4f�5 -- ----- "' ". 102.60 ° � � .5 `,--"ZWTx ------- � ----� ^' ., 2.2 ) ., 100p21 "v/ov/pp 375, vIcxnx R. ASSOC. or*Fn poor,sEnvIcc 01~*315~1e1~12 .o -----'----- ----' .57%7M11--* �� ,4 � • "� ` ,211 � ' °^°~c x x 77 � 70 = 10022 v^/o"/^v 66.00 IBM CORP. cnuIp ^ w^Iw` 01-*230-311-31 ,° ) 2 ., 100232 ««/"v/"o 66.00- ism cnnp, EQUIP wAIwr. 01~ "' ., 10071p "«/n»'»n--' 6 ^ /9m . EQUIP -*x«w1, 32 = inn??? 04/09//.40 864.00 CORP.. ' ` :� ,'� CAPITAL nrc. EQUIP. ' o|*5 1-3/ �� > n so on * ` ' � ' ` `'� � �' ' � 33 27 ~ �'�� ' .� ��.��., � - ,�� ~��- � . . � ----'--' ------ ---- � - - � ' ____' p " . • ***-CKS � ) 30 |� a r 1015157* rwo u�� a�- � `' ' _ , � ~ . � ^. ' = . / � |66 ^ 6» * . � ' � �� ' ' `� � ` ` ` {�� ' �, `� ` `�� / '� <' � ' �) ' ^ ' ~ 33 � ^ ` ; ` /` ` ��. . -.� � `�� . .'�' -� , ' ~ 3.1 -- / ""2»�-----�«rr�r � ' - � - 'Iwr` �^nv�S/cP----- - r�*� ' �--- _ • 35 64.3n ° . � ) ° � 37.--°°°"`" _ _ , `^ ~ , � ° °^°~p*e 3.6 - �' � � � ' . ' - 1.,0 ) o 100207, o«m : � v/po «^or - iw7[nnm � � rs u��yc`' yp.Tnn� pUnc*�� ;.` -`o/-�2o�~««|^«u 5v5o"7'-� `,�� ' "' __-_-_--- -_ __ . _ 52 o � 42 . ^^^-cxa � ) 4 3 . . � 36 - ' ' • • . ` ^ � � .. }oo25« 04/09/80 ». ` • ASUPER b ' ' ' i o [xp • ' - o | � ^ � = ^ ^ ^ -^^ '' ) � � �� ` � � . � ^ ' �� ``�8� ` ` �,'� '� ` ` �� ' ' ~' .- .� ' ^ : � ^ !�� ' ��' ,_ ..�! � ^ � � � -__ �` �z�� ''��z�' - � | — � 101 ° ^^°-cns . 162 ., 4n 63 .4 o"/op~mo--- ----977*0 -- *os*wEwo-oT«*o^pn-_----- .Vsx*sLE-w^JoT-. 0-1---" -344-44 :: • .,0 97,00 * ' 64 . ( ,. • ,^ , ' ` ,�� ` � | 1 .---- 1 I"; 4 ^ - --'---------'-- ------------'----�- -- ------'—'- —'— -------'---- -- -----°�° ~ bg = 70 � - 34 7n ov/^p/*" , ,^or,00 xn^sn ^ n^w^x^w �ro^� urov�ccs o�~"��o~��1-�^ `' 3 7 1 - - 'mnar» - --- --ooYo"Y"o--- ------ --- - ypv�so '----«»^nr.^'~^wAH^w----'----oovU-SERVICES ----' . as-«a*o� il -91-1 -91 ---- � , ~ 1 "o/on/^" 137.00 «p^p5 t °^w^"^w LFGAL yFpvIccn 51-4310-911-91 ' ' ` 74 �. 1oo27v "u/"p/o" 33.00 ,00 xp^ny x 'v*^"^" LrG^L acpv\cEn 5+~^310~911~91 , � • , ' 75 , � ______.__________.__________�__ _� __ __________ __ _ _____ �_ � ' . � ________ -_ _________�__ ` r' | ' ,._..., _ ,.. „ • /." 1 , I IqPn CITY or sHAKOPEE CHECK REGISTER 04 09 80 PAGE 5 I .---- z CHECK NO. oATE AmOONT VENDOR ITEM ntScRiOttnu ACCOUNT NO INV, a P.O. if MESSAGE l'1_ z 3 • 3 . — 1 rup r - i27. -- ---- 17 s ositli A m- . rFstt. 5Ftwalt 3 10027n onieq/pn 210.00 KRAss g MANAHAN LEGAL SERVICES 8n- * 2.395.50 * . 6 , n *4•4,6* . . ***-CKS ■0 ) • . . . - . 0 II . ,, • 1 TT) - K - niffo7rm St:to tAN0 'EnUTP7mtINI. vt-421 - LIR 2 13 11 100?87 0/J/00/qo 3.80 LANG EQUIPMENT EDUIP.mAINT. 01-n230-621-62 1 :: ) , inA2s7 wr/00/An 17.30 LANO EOUIPmENT VEHICLE MAINT. 01-n232-621-62 7a780 . . . • ,, 1:,.. 100pRA 0a/09/P0 3.5a LATHROP PAINT SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES - 1 01-4220-111-11 2,*01 ,* UR:34 UKTAPOP GrNER -01-*/12l-•?. izt ,z 1002 na/ogiA( 17.57 LATHPOP PAINT SUPPLY BLDG. MAINT. 01-11231-622-62 I" I * r* ' 19 . . , ***-CKS 26 ) z.. . ; — 1111207 - nn7n97R0 IT371709 UnGtS EoP 01-B -f5t-t5 20 24 21 931.1.09 * y... ) 31 24 z , ----- V*63 6'1.' G444,■-G./03 32 20 • • . 3• ) 27 100317 0o/09/80 n0:09 I . mACQ(JEEN EDUIP; ,. :. ... EnUIR;MAINT, , y • •01-9230=421-;n2 1878 :,..• , 33 7(1 "----V07IY9—i ael . 37 30 t0 0n/0 511 mALKERSON MOTORS VEHICLE MAINT. 01-n232-421-n2 30 37 — I 0011 cret/IIRY1411 2118:00 MftKfRSONTMOTOWS -,.... M-&eHINER-y7pENTAL , 04-7 7, 3z • 42 ) 33 4-...-4..-ews ' AA AS 35 4 ) 36 1n0?" on/o9/Po 65.00 MAPSHALL . SwIFT 8nOKS 01-4394-331-33 -- -- 37 T0O-3*, : . -. . ... . •• • • . - . . , • .40 Ao In 39 ****44 • 52 40 33 .., 1 ' ou/n0/80 20.95 METRO wOSTE CONTROL GFNFRAL SUPPLIES 01-n220-171-17 42 20.95 * . SO • . : ., ,• . . ,••‘; — 1 - rnli n cr n'i n g 7 a' n ----- 4 1:ARRy mEPTING -0+4-11-3964*fnt-t0 61 47 2h.61 * -- 63 44 64 ...**—GICS e, lo . .. 31 100132 00 /0 9 /g 6 135. mINN.8ENFE11 ASSN, , PFMTT•CANCEP '''' ' , 8i , . 1 32 - 1 • 3 ' 7; •I J A-4 69 70 . 53 54 4 ***—CKS 71 __--------------------- . — --- - . 72 1 17 ..,.. 100137 nn/o9/A0 2 mINNEGASCO NAIL GAS 01-n371-1A1-18 • . 74 100337 na/po/sn 105.17 M1NNUA5WQ NAIL arts 01-n371-182-18 . . '' .___ . 71) — _ . _ . ... _ _ .__ . - "- - ,i - -._.. �; - I ) - 1 rTTr PF Ct4Ak'f1PFF CHECK REGISTER n4 09 '1O r4r.F 6 z CHFC' Nn. nATF AmoUNT VEMDOP ITEM DESCPIPTTON ACCOUNT NO. INV. a P.O. B mESSAGE , i , 3 3 _ -- _ -- < --- (7 " - - - - n U`7i19"/47s-_ � _ __ MINMEGASCIT 0" -- 01= 4'37 311 =31 - - +_ -- ` 100317 n4 /no /Rn 696.00 MINNEGASCO NAIL CAS 01 - 321 -32 ry D 100137 nn /no /017 926.5P MINNEGASCP NATL GAS Rt- 4371 - 421 -42 7 , -- 14) nu'7og7 - - •173:33 - MINNEGASCO ATL GA'S 01' °017 1 - - - - -- . O 100137 nu /09 /a0 180:60 MINNEGASCO NATL GAS 01 -4371- 622 -62 ,0 � • 100337 90/00 /a0 52:10 MINNEGASCO • - NATL. GAS • 11- 4 371 - 811 -81 �� ' ?T -1- IJ „ • ,7 * * * ♦ +A r *A -CKS ,a1 1,11 _ - - - -• -_ �- .- - -- . 1 c ,., 1n03u6 nu /09 /Pn 79.33 �'OTOR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 01 =4220- 421 -42 I ,i ' l 13 100;06 nu /09 /Pn 23.00 MOTOR PARTS . ErUTP MAINT: 01 -0230- 621 -62 - 1 1^ —.. 1O VILIF--- •--- -Warn97an - - - -- 1 7.00 - - _ •mryro9 - PARTS --.— VFHFCtE- MA'INI. 01 ' - - 1 -1 - - -IZ0 17 1on;ur. 00 /0 /so 13,40 MOTOR PARTS VEHICLE MAINT, 01 -0232- 141-1'1 t. 1001 n0 /n9/an 11.0P MOTfP PAPTS VEHICLE MAINZ. 01 -4232- 311 -31 IN ," 100tan - 7e'7R9yP „ — 26f91 MOTOR - PARTS - VEHJC- E-E- MA- I-N-T. 0°1- - -322 32-1--32 - 1 • 70 Inn.toh 04 /0o /A0 62.60 MOTOR PARTS VEHICLE MAINT. 01 = 4232- 331 -33 25 z, ( - 10 nn/(19/so 29.17 MOTOR PAPTS • VEHICLE MAINT. 01- 4232 - 421 -42 - 27 22 1 Tf 0 V 0 F' --) 0 7 0 9 7 P IT - --- . _ ---- 1 MOTOR - P'AR'T — V F H . i . C . t LM.. A-INT . - 0't- 4 32 _*2-1 &2 — z. 20 2J lnntn6 n0 /0 0.22 MOTOR PAPTS SM,TOOL PURCH. 01 -0425- 42.1 -42 3.3% 1 ) 2 265.13 * J, 2.1 J2 2W— _inn:VOA . —.. nanno7R ._i_R772 -- mRn.sTAR TR7StiNF tr G•A1- •idOT•IC'E`S 0.f_.:ft iPi- wt'.?— -..— a6 20 100'S nu /°Q /'1n 52.20 MPLS.STAP t TRIBUNE PRNTG. b REPRO. 01 - 311 -31 -.. 30 239.40 * AO ,: * ** -CKS ,2 31 -` 1001 q - - - - 17 m71197R 0---- --- • - - - -- o-6; 2 0 - -- MYFRS - -•• VFH MJlIhN - ; • --- - 0 1 1 - 4 - 2 32 - 3 -- 3P - - - - - - 35, 9,1.20 * •, "' S • 30 A7 is t *** *+-- -- * * *.G -K•S ,n 3n 1An3R7 nu /n9 /P0 30.62 NW BELL TELEPHONE 01 - 151 -IS �� , 100187' n'u7n97Rn - - -- 95:118 Nk - 9EL_L _- _- ---- � TEL - EPHONE - _ . _: ----- 0'1-- rK391•= 02- .i.g__ 32 D] '' ., 1001$7' nu /09 / ?0 41.53 mw HELL, TELEPHONE 01 - 321 -32 5 5 , 2 1001'17 nn /09/00 7.90 Nw BELL TFL.FPMnNE 01 -4321- 331 -33 pp :6- 1On3g7--- "/n9ygn 7. NW - REtL 1'F•LEPHONC 01-4424-45+-4-5 D 7 100307 nu /1,19 /Pn - 58,76 NJJ RELL • • - TELEPHONE 01 -0321- 921 =42. ,.. 5 0 � ) • 1003R7 nu /09 /an 7.90 NW BELL TELEPHONE 01 -0321 4 21 -42 i '`., - -i," AT . * , ■2 l All - * ** -CKS ^a 50 100013 nU /O /Rn 672. OLD DOMINION 9PUSH GENERAL SUPPLIES 01- 4220 - 021 -4? 46321 51 672,P0 * • 67 I•n ' 8D * ** ■CKS 70, , 7, i - tn0m3n- 00- /0g.' /Qn __._ - - - - 7.4 00- PEAR3fN- F1,ORTST5 - MTSE. ExPENSE-- — 0-1• -U4o9- 12.1..- ..1-2- ?- 7- 5 -1.2— 72 4 ,.. 20.00 * , l7 _ --- -144-174-'-' . —. - __ .. _ _ _ .._ — . 7 • k. - -EK9 ( . ) . I ) C' ' ( 1460 CITY nF smAlinPrF CHECK REGISTER nu 09 80 PAGE 7 (- 2 CHFC ND. DATE AmouNT : . VENDOR : ; .- ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV. 0 p.n. N MESSAGE 2 3 3 : - 1T -3 7 - 44 - 7W4 e - PliNkY 6OmES . LIF EGUIPTRENTAL 01=4 226.63 A ) 6 .1 **4--oks : 0 1 ) . 0 100457 44/09/64 32.40 RADIO SHACK •,'.' " '. ' GENERAL"SUPPLTES . 01-4220111-11 073063 12 10 3?. — la ( " 114 ) , ****** ***-CKS 1171 II: 13 -' .. ( 1 106454 na/04/sp 563.02 REDETtLy k ELECTRIC -..„ BLDG. MA/NT. . 01-4231...161-18 1113 I: 1 ) 15 563.02 * : .'- -: . . 20 16 21 ( 17 ***-CKS ) 15 27 i;i m17407111, a0701) REIN0L GF-NERAL-SUpPH-ES 0-4--- -42+-4;2 72464 !Zn zr, ( 70 a0.00 * • 26 ) * * 1 27 1 272 (1 PT 627 WIt14 - COPP. GE 62-P1;y-1-P1—i-2 29 ( 23 62. * ) 31 24 37 . . , i 27 100466 ou/04/60 50600 RING FIRE EXTG:, ' - BLOGi MAIN% 01-4231-i162-16‘? 37 :t 20 - 37 1 30 **MI, **A-CRS 30 ) 31 ' j ( 0 , 1n01174 04/04/60 . 5,10 . . :PONS SHAKCLEANER ' jEDUIP.MAINT : ; .. -- !01-4230=321.-32 7614 , . 33 .. . , - 371 65 :.., 100 1 0/09/Pn 9.25 DAVID RAOUET/SNAP-ON SP.TOOL PURCH. 01-11225-v.11-4u 944242 35 . 4.25 * - 47 .4 14 3 , ****** . — "- ' -. , . - - :***.cKs _ , 30 -- Ilyanqi nn7097P0 57.70 S It OF SHAKOPEE NOG. MA/MT. Of -#Z -1-6 — 52 ( , 1n01191 • P4/04/An 14.27 6 P. w nF sHAkOPEE BLDG. MAINT. 01-4231-321-3? 53 34 \ 43 71.97 * 77 1 56 .4.3 .... , 57 *6*466 3 3D ,:i 1imnoi------1rtring7x0 1.5 srmphEDEP GFNERA 0 " ' — ' : 47 125.00 * . 1 :3 7; wwwww* ,A-*-C6-5 :::: • . . . , - 10049.6 : (14/04/60 . 2.00 - sCOTT CTY. SURVEYOR" GFNERAL SUPPLIES _ ___ .::., _,,:.„..2 : % - 6'.0•0 * 69 73 AL SUPPLIES 70 -.._. 5.. 10n 4 ago n/0 n 4/A 1 SCOTT CTY. TPEASU GFNER PER 01- ;76 -- 10.4m4q 0110 .45 SCEITT - GENERAL - SUPPLIES 01-4220-1-71-14 73 . . , I . , 10044 no/ j.6S SCOTT CTY. TPEASu4ER GENERAL SUPPLIES 01- . -41 • . . . , 0 :-1 , ?0.55 * . ..........*”. - •••••••■••••••••*••••••••• ...N..- • . .... . .• , . .... . • • , • • •-• . . . .... -. • . .... .., • • ... •••••••••• •••••••••••■•• ' .... Y. • A . • • • • JJ `� 19En CITY nF_ SHAKnPPF - CHECK REGISTER 04 09 80 PAGE 8 ) CHFCw r;n. DALF AmOIINT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTTON ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. P MESSAGE I2 ) '3 3 . 3 • 3 . 1 e 10nSn? nu /0q /a( u,Rn SHAKnPEE FORD VEHICLE MAINT, 01- 4232- U21 -42 55932 v - 0 . . * 10 l ' 9 100503 04 /0o /R0 30'.71 SHAKOPEE HDWE. GENERAL SUPPLIES 0144220- 421 -42 'r • io 1(10 - cTi - z --- T`"'r/ "n v,l5 SREAKnPEETHDWE. r,F-NERAt SUPPLTE 0 1�a -22 ?t -fs2 -- s? „ 100501 on/no/An 2.66 SHAKnPEE HDWE. EOUIP.MAINT, 01- 4230 - 441 -4u ,.•) ix 100 nu /0o /Po ,86 SHAKOPEE ►+OWE. BLDG. MAINT. 01 - 311 -31 13 I 13 - 7J.3.4.H * _ 10) ,e ,3 * * **A* _ .. - * * * -CKS ,9 __ - 1 x0 n 1005n n4 /Og /Rn 18.36 SHAKOPEE LUMBER GENERAL SUPPLIES 01- 4220 - 401 -uU 2 • in 100505 nu /00 /an 14.08 SHAKOPEE LUMBER GENERAL SUPPLIES 01- 4220 - 621 -62 77 1 ;_1005 - 05 - n47nQriz'n 23 SHAKOPEE t_UMR - E•R E-OUiP;MA+N-T. 01- --4230 6.22- -&2 1 .2.1 51.85 * 1 ) x. x 2 >; - - 1r r= W r - -- ••*• * + -(: K-5 zc xv x3 30 ) x. 10050R - nn/n9 /.n 2.137.55 SHAKnPEE VALLEY PUB. LEGAL NOTICES 01- 4350 - 121 -12 31 1-r O nR nn-to /pr- 23:55 • SHAK V - PUB. PP- HTG- iS- RE•PRO. 01 t-7+ --17 32 I0OSnP n4 /00 /Pn 13; SHAKnPEE VALLEY PUB, :. PPNTG, R REPRO.-.: -: 01 4 351- 311 -31 ` 7.7 10050A 04 /09 /R0 15.52 SHAKOPEE VALLEY PUR LEGAL NOTICES , , > 2"- 4350-911-91• 3 ) p 1 °0 05 - 0 -0. - r 0 11Tg7++n 41711 ------- - SH'AKOP@'E`VQttE•Y - P , Uf; -- t_FG'AL N0TI•CES gtU -40 -5 9-1 -1 -91 37 x9 P.237,17 * 30 39 , 3v al 33 10051? n4 /09/ 3.15 TOM SIEBE.NALER POSTAGE • 01 4 320- 321 -32 , .3 -• - 3, -- - 1nnS1? m470 ._- - 2T:00 _TOM SIEBENALE . _Sr.HnOL - S - a C'RNf ' Oi--6 -3 11 _ - �.s 33 23.15 * ) 3 i • - * . % E• • - - - - . * * -Cf •• 38 - • 50 ) 39 100517 nn /09 /P0 1:094;32 • SPUC ACCTS PAYABLE ` 001•2000-4100-00 5, • .0 1 - ` 0 - �_ _ _ r73752 - -SPUC- - -_.. - _ _ 9tDG: - . - p-1- .42..3- 1- 3-1- 1- - 3.1 � ., 100517 ' nu /p9 /An 173.52- SPUC FLECTP.ICITY 01- 4 231 - 311 -31 3• .x 100517 nq /ng /an 173.52 SPUC ELECTRICITY 01- 4231- 311 -31 33) .; -- f0 - 05 -- n4- tn9y 335735 SPUC, EI ±ECT STMT. 0 -0 3 - 7 - x- - 1 -1 E- ., 140517 nu/09/Po 239.90 SPUC - ;,:' ELECTRIC STMT. ,01 -4370= 182 -15 ..50 .3 100517.. 04/0g /P0 ?65.59. SPUC ;ELECTRIC STMT, 01- 4370 - 311 -31 , . - 11105 7 -- n•rr•7ng7P ------ 1- iir:ty SPUC. - -- .. Et_EC•TD •9 T"NT, 0.1.-4 - 7.0= 3 ?1- =-32- , 3O 5 ., 100517 nu /n9 /P0 531.18 SPUC ELECTRIC STMT. 01 - 421 -42 , ' 92 • • .0 100 n4 /Q° /An ?31.R5 - SPUC, • EI FCTrIC STMT. 01- 4370- 427 - e3 7.7. t 0•47n9y?'n 1 SPUC - - E1.ECTP - I-C -ST -- T- n - 1-- 4.3.7.0- 6- 1 -) -6-1 ;, 00 100517 n4/4q /Rn - 35,98 • $RUC . ELECTRIC STMT, 01- 4370 - 622-62 -,.0 , 3 , 100517 p4 /OR/P.0 ?.6,35 SPUC ELECTRIC STMT, 01 - 625 -62 - .> f7 3:1 InnS17 - -' 0 /an__ ,.._.--- -.- _._._..-- _• 157:'11_ . __ - ____ - . vPl,lC ' C1PIC" ST T - __'_.___._____.01 370 - sv . tnn517 no/n9/An 6 .r,a0,R3 SPUC ACCIS PAYABLE 71- ?040 - 000 -On ! 70 � ,. 100517 on /n9 /Po 1.020.00 SPUC WATER CONNECTS 83- 4930 - 911 -91 3: 1 - / nn- -•• -- 1.7u02.709. .._. - -•- PUC-- - - -• -- - -- - -- - a,ATFR- METFP5 - 8 -94- 1 - -9-i 7 13.27S.6R a � '_. - _t`0'ncTP - ;i9 prr7.7an_-- -- ---•-- -- -? - ST ; - FP& CTS--HOSPITOL - • R( (lno TESTS 01L04-25-3-11-3-1 ,y ' ../ • .-.. 19Ra CITY nF sHAKOPFF . CHECK REGISTER On 09 80 PAGE 9 I .1 . . c' z cHFcv tin. nATF AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV; # P.O, # mESSAGE 3 3 --..—...... 2 ....— -- • 11711W 8 **4-CKS 7 :I . .. e 10092a 0a/09/P0 38.60 STARKS CLEANING - ' BLDG. MAINT. - . 0142311B1-18 • , . , -) • 100c20 011/09/P0 - = 17,00 - : STARKS CLEANING *- , BLDG; MAINT, ::: ,:'.: '::. 01- . -, : • . m riv)c7T 1770 STARK'S - CCEiN1N - G 807G7 0-1--=4-2-3f=3-1-f.,3-1 12 I r 11 100s20 nnin9/140 13.50 sTARKS CLEANING BLDG. MAINT. 01- :: -) , A6.10 * • l 0 13 . 17 i id 666+66 • . . . ***-CKS 10 ) 131 " , ,,,, , . •., , ,, . 20 4---mc75------7PITOV7Wo 1./9 s - FNG. ----- EMGP. sEplacts - - -1 1 - 31 - 2=1 - 1-1 - -9 - 1-8-1-6B-2-1 2.t :: , inocps 04/09/Pn 19.314. SUBURBAN EN(. ENGP. SERVICES 56-4312-9II-9I B07827 z: .) 18 P0.610. * 23 22 r ,..., **A.*** ***-CvS 20 ) , . 27 ' nc - 27 ------7 $ 71 70 (7 7RTF ------ ca76 5UPER GCNERtt 0 :71 r 23 100527 (1uing/sn 22.21 SUPERAMERICA MOTOR FUELS 01-4222-311-31 ) 7.• 100c27 naing/pn 34.47 SUPERAmER/CA MOTOR FUELS. 01-4222-411-41 3 ' 32 -- ou7TyRiAll 770t SUPtwAmeRIC VEHICLE-M*TNI. .01 -, , 7.6 tnec27 n4/0 15.92 SOPERAMERICA VEHICLE MAINT ; ..-:, . 01-6232‘40-41 ,:.: s :.: ,.: -., ' , ) •, „ . . . . 27 30 20 37 ***-CKS 3 3; ) 30 4 01 5i — 1 - nn s 0417 2750 RHAXOREE7 vEmi•eb-E-*AINT. 0+74232 -444-41 ( 37 100I na/09/A0 60.00 SHAKOPEE OIL . .- . - : VEHICLE MAINT I: , :: - 7 :',01=1232421= - y. - :.,,- -: I . ) 33 , ***–CKS . 1 •6 ) 37 31 - 77 -- ton99 11 RaioRIRO --- 2t9753 TRAVrL _ SOHOOL-B -ft-CONF. . _ _04---43-9-0-41-24-4-2-4-5-50• .10 Ao on 21° 53 4. 3' .Z ---. 2Q70 ---- TRI=S - _-______:..- 01HF 64 53 ( 41 29..00 * :: 3 • 4 2 - ' 56 444-GK- . . _., • ,,.. . , ,= •-• ' -..- :- . 44 37; 05 .=,•.•• . ‘ JIM TACK - - , - .:.' ---.:: -"TRAVEL', EXPENSE : .: - :, : 0171a330-;331-33 i.. ..: :--. , ---,, :„ . , 00 .48 0705 * 61 • 1 47 .. r.FNERAL SUPPLIES , , 0 , 2 3 .„ , 100960 na/99/pn 26.07 TELE-TEPmINALS 01-4220-311-31 11787 04 44 . 267 07 • , . . . , r• 50 61 • „ . , . . , . , . . . . , . . 51 . • . .., .. r . ; . 06 32 09 3, 10O'7 nqi0C1 1711.20 UNIFORMS Um11mITED CLUIHING 01- • 174.20 4, 71j' 34 72 1 ' • . *** , ...', 74 I - .1. 1000 – 1T47 11° 7" . -99;59 VIKTMC Tim: CENTER (;proute-30RPLIEs- -ot-o2Po-3p1-3p-i.aR2n3 _. , . . 1900 CITY flF SNAKf1PFF CHECK REGISTER 114 09 80 PAGE 10 ,x CHECK Nn. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION.. ACCOUNT NO. INV. u P.O. N MESSAGE . _ ^ R5:5R * s s * •5 6 * * * * *• * ** - CK5 ' `e 10n6nn n4/119 /P0 - 360.00 GREGG VOXLAND SCHOOLS P. CONF. 01 -11390- 151 -15 o • p 1001+00 0u /09 /so - -5,00 - GREGG VOXLAND - MEETING ExPFNSE 01 =0396- 151 -15 - x 11 14 1 12 tnnf,nl 00/00/00 522.90 VAN SICKLE -ALLEN ENGP. SFRVICES 01 -0312- 331 -33 13 IG 13 - 6-22 -9 I1: 0 * - 119 1 . I s 9.999* _ - - * * * - C K 5 r — 20 16 12' '17 10061 n4/0 /an 30.00 WEST PURLISHING ROOKS 01-0390-121-12 1xxx ] ) In 30.00 * 17+ IP )Oi * * * * *# * * * -CKS 26; 1 • n —' ' 2 7 mu 7TO7AR i -- 27 1) ;5 NittENSK — A'UT 1t O VFT'C1 A'n7N'T. 0 1 - '• 2 - 32'1 - - 39 - 5i'- 91' 2B � z 7, 27.50 * 31 z• u 2 - �_+F� �crr* A * A - K S ]] 26 77 1001.20 00/09/80 . 11 1 1.90... WAHL R NAHL .. GENERAL SUPPLIES- 0i- 022.0- 311 -31 01.7719 ., 0n1ITa7ATT 1 :1 /3.65 PIAHL' — R — V Ht CfP OFC 01 *5 3 - 0 - 1 - 7719 1 x. 1 .298.55 * ]^ ) ]o ,l0 ] p 40 + Ci'*•a. - 4'4(4.9.0K.8 8 , ]x. - • ) ], 100636 o0/0(7/R0 ', 2i5.18 . .:.XEROX CORP. . OFC. ,- 01.0383- 311 -31 ^ . 34 35 ^e 1 36 * ** -CK5 7 .. ,6 1 (lI /0 / 09,02 ZIEGLER INC. EQUIP. MAINT. 01 0230- 11 ?1 -11? 39§I9 , s0 ) 09 , sl 39 40 s] .. ** * **• * * *-CKS s+ •2 38.R1 FIND 01 TOTAL " , . 527. FUND -• TOTAL . 36 • 3 . FUND 15 TOTAL .s - 1 .355: •- - FUND 22 TOTAL-_;. 5. • .6 -_1_: S5 1 - F'UNO--23- TOTAL _.- - - _ . - eo lei •7 15.52 FUND 20 TOTAL •0 132.00 FUND 53 TOTAL 03 1t+ ;< - 1 - 4; 627 -0 3 FUND - 56 - TOTAL .. 50 .02.20 FUNn 58 TOTAL , , 31 6.660.83 FUND 71 TOTAL c7 - ---- --------.._-_.. _ °- -- _..- .__._..__._----- _..- -. - -- - -- sz 1 3S: tl• f, � ---- ____ . .—.-- • - F UNLl .. R1 _ . _ TUT A 1_.�..__— .— . - - -� - • - — 3.322.00 FUND 83 TOTAL 70 1: ',^ • 2.57.11 FUND R0 TOTA - . ; 7i LI __ - - ..__ - ._ - - . 72.082.30 TOTAL_ - • . 7� (s7 - .. -_'�- ..<y'dJ<xasi3cY•.,�, .. - -�al.�tJx- .�.. ,._ _. .,...: .. _. .. w+ re+;: rl,. ae.. a6rr ...a.IwaMSaditraa,n,r:,,r..... ...,.. ,........- ..w... — • iw. as vv u�l. J _ r j ., DEBIT ACCOUNT CR. ACCT. AMOUNT BATCH REMARKS VENDOR CK.AMT. CK.NO. 1 ✓01.4410.181.18 01.1010 146.16 31 �� Janitorial Service Rose Mertz 146.16 5305 1 x01.4410.181. 01.1010 26.39 Janitorial.Service Genevieve Stocker 26.39 5306 ,/ 01.4410.181.18 01.1010 60.90 Janitorial Service Loyola Marshall 60.90 5307 ,./22.4980.196.19 . 22.1010 25.00 Refund Jeurrisen Bros. 25.00 5308 (01.4240.427.42 01.1010 304.92 Road Mtls. Bryan Rock Products 304.92 5309 (To replace voided ck #072061) j 81.4921.911.91 81.1010 4,108.44 SIT Withholding _ Comm. of Revenue 4,108.44 5310 (To replace lost ck #4338) r✓ 01.4320..11.# 01.1010 139.00 Postage U.S. Postmaster 139.00 5311 ✓ 22.1010 2,145.98 Other Prof.Service Von Klug & Assoc. 2,145.98 5312 ✓ 01.4370.427.42 01.1010 28.09 Electric Stmt. MN Valley Electric 75.18 5313 1 01.4370.351.35 01.1010 47.09 II " 01.4230.621.62 01.1010 165.00 Equip.Maint. Haefner Enterprises 165.00 5314 v01.4220.131.13 01.1010 11.00 General Supplies Miller /Davis 11.00 5315 01.4315.411.41 01.1010 28.00 Other Prof.Service Tim Keane 56.00 5316 ,/ 01.4315.171.17 01.1010 28.00 II II " V81.4931.911.91 81.1010 480.00 Savings Ded. 1st Natl. - Shakopee- 480.00 5318 ,Y01.4390.311.31 01.1010 165.00 Schools & Conf. Employer Education Serv. 165.00 5317 v /81.4923.911.91 81.1010 4,751.56 PERA With. PERA 4,751.56 5319 ✓ 01.4390.121.12 01.1010 16.50 Conf. Municipals Banquet 66.00 5320 ✓ 01.4390.151.15 II 8.25 11 .' 01.4390.141.14 11 8.25 v 7 11.4390.811.81 11.1010 16.50 ,J 01.4390.311.31 01.1010 16.50 _ __ End March '80 - Page 4 ________,___ _._. r DEBIT ACCOUNT CR. ACCT. AMOUNT BATCH REMARKS VENDOR CK.AMT. CK.NO. 11.4130.821.82 11.1010 125.00 0311D Salaries -P.T. Tuire Rinta 125.00 5321 ./ 01.1010 60.00 Schools & Conf. Govt. Training Service 60.00 5322 ,/81.4924.911.91 81.1010 166.50 Union Dues Local Union #320 166.50 5323 ; /01.4410.181.18 01.1010 93.38 Janitorial Serv. Loyola Marshall 93.38 5324 ✓ 01.4410.181.18 01.1010 136.01 Janitorial 'Serv. Rose Mertz 136.01 5325 v/81.4926.911.91 81.1010 7.50 Remit - Cancer Lone Star Life 7.50 5326 ../01.4390.331.33 01.1010 35.00 Schools & Conf. LeRoy F. Houser 35.00 5327 ,/81.4920.911.91 81.1010 10,819.21 FIT Withholding 1st Natl. - Shakopee 10,819.21 5328 / 81.4921.911.91 81.1010 4,407.07 • SIT Withholding Comm. of Revenue 4,407.07 5329 $ 28,576.20 $ 28,576.20 FUND TOTALS 01 - General Fund $ 1,523.44 11 - Comm. Services 141.50 22 - 4th & Minn. 2,170.98 81 - Payroll Trust 24,740.28 $ 28,576.20 ..,.... - a ....... Cf. p L 11 , ._ 1 / V V - ,..2.6c 1 , .. «... .... ......... . - ....,....�. , ..,..r.- DEBIT ACCOUNT CR. ACCT. AMOUNT BATCH REMARKS VENDOR CK.AMT. CK.NO. 01.4390.311.31 01.1010 90.00 Schools & Conf. MN Valley React 90.00 5330 71.4411.911.91 71.1010 30,260.42 Current Use Chg. Metro Waste Comm. 55,842.02 5331 71.4412.911.91 71.1010 25,581.60 Reserve Capacity ' 81.4921.911.91 81.1010 121.29 Remit -SIT Comm. of Revenue 121.29 5332 83.4929.911.91 83.1010 5,221.86 ' Remit - Surcharge State Bldg. Inspector 5,221.86 5333 81.4922.911.91 81.1010 18,160.55 Remit -FICA State Treasurer 18,160.55 5334 56.4312.911.91 56.1010 2,183.86 Engr. Services Blacktop Service 2,183.86 81.4925.911.91 81.1010 3,861.36 Remit - Bankers Life Bankers Life 3,861.36 01.4221.621.62 01.1010 378.00 Chemicals Barzen of Mpls 378.00 48.4513.911.91 48.1010 225.00 Easement -CR 17 Randall & Theresa Boom 225.00 01.4511.311.31 01.1010 174.00 Capital- Equip. Burnsville Sport Center 174.00 01.4220.411.41 01.1010 88.40 General Supplies CWD, Industries 88.40 01.4230.711.71 01.1010 116.00 Equip. Maint. Cues, Incorporated 116.00 48.4513.911.91 48.1010 225.00 Easement -CR 17 Robert & Nancy Langer 225.00 01.4220.181.18 01.1010 13.15 General Supplies L & L Enterprises 353.15 01.4511.421.42 01.1010 340.00 Capital- Equip. 83.4980.911.91 83.1010 74.25 Refund Mitsch Plumbing 74.25 01.4980.331.33 01.1010 5.00 Refund Cliff Michaelis 5.00 01.4391.12.121 01.1010 15.00 Dues & Subscr. MN City Mngmnt.Assoc. 15.00 01.4511.411.41 01.1010 400.00 Capital- Equip. State of MN 400.00 01.4391.121.12 01.1010 5.00 Dues & Subscr. Munici -Pals Assoc. 5.00 01.4391.331.33 01.1010 100.00 Dues & Subscr. Natl.Ind. Fee Appraisers 100.00 'J DEBIT ACCOUNT •CR. ACCT. AMOUNT BATCH REMARKS VENDOR CK.AMT. CK.NO. ` s 15.4394.191.19 15.1010 12.00 Books Natl.Assn.Hsg & Redevelop. 12.00 01.4330.321.32 01.1010 2.47 Travel Expense Gene Pass 2.47 , 01.4220.321.32 01.1010 5.20 General Supplies Frank Ries 5.20 4.8.4315.911.91 48.1010 317.55 Other .Prof.Service Darrell M. Paske 317.55 01.4394.141.14 01.1010 22.50 Books* R.S. Means Co. 22.50 . 22.4980.196.19 22.1010 194.00 Refunds Rein Truck Lines 194.00 George Castanguay 48.4310.911.91 48.1010 1,242.50 Legal Services • Smith,Juster,Feikema, 1,242.50 & Haskvitz 01.4315.628.62 01.1010 40.00 Other Prof.Service Schrader Block Co. 40.00 01.4315.711.71 01.1010 80.00 Other Prof.Service Software Consultants 80.00 01.4396.411.41 01.1010 7.50 Meeting Expense Henry Spurrier 7.50 01.4980.331.33 01.1010 257.20 Refund Shakopee Realty 2,217.20 13.4980.911.91 13.1010 600.00 Refund 71.4980.911.91 71.1010 1,360.00 Refund 01.4511.311.31 01.1010 1,497.07 Capital- Equip. Varda Silent Alarm 1.497.07 01.4315.171.17 01.1010 69.24 Other Prof.Service Jessie Ventling 69.24 01.4230.121.12 01.1010 8.00 Equip. Maint. Wendell's 8.00 01.4511.321.32 01.1010 414.50 Capital- Equip. Weber - Troseth, Inc. 616.73 01.4220.321.32 01.1010 202.23 General Supplies 93,971.70 93,971.70 01- General Fund $ 4,330.46 -56 -79 Improvement 2,183.86 13 -Park Reserve 600.00 71 -Sewer Fund 57,202.02 15 -HRA 12.00 81- Payroll Trust 22,143.20 22 -4th & MN 194.00 83- Utility Trust 5,296.11 48 -CR 17 2,010.05 Total $ 93,971.70 • 1 1 ° MEMO TO: Lou VanHout Utility Manager FROM: Douglas S. Reeder 'j City Administrator 11) RE: Feasibility Reports for 3rd Avenue - -- Gorman and County Road 16 watermain, sanitary sewer, street construction DATE: April 10, 1980 On Tuesday, April 8th, the City Council heard a presentation on these two projects for which you reviewed the Feasibility Studies on April 4th. The City Council took no action on the Feasibility Report but has asked me to formally refer them to SPUC for your consideration. Concerning the 3rd Avenue Project, the City Council did discuss the advantages of doing the entire project now because of the obvious fire flow improvement, the looping advantages (as suggested in the Schoell and Madsen study prepared for SPUC) and the reduction in the assessments for the property owners on 3rd Avenue. I know this project will be very expensive for SPUC and therefore, you will need to give it careful consideration. I also know that you are aware of the need for these improvements on 3rd Avenue to provide service to the apartments already constructed. The Gorman Street improvements are being considered at this time because of the pending construction of the new bank. It seems appropriate to put the utilities in the street prior to the reconstruction of the street. The watermain in County Road 16 was petitioned for by a private developer. The City Council will not again consider these projects nor set up the public hearing until you have had the opportunity to review these reports with the Commission and present any comments you I may have to the City Council. 1 DSR /jiw cc: H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer { f 1 STAFF PROPOSAL 19$0 { OPERATIONAL PLAN • { LIONS PARK MUNICIPAL SWIMMING POOL 1 i INDEX • 1. Proposed Pool Rules 2. 19$0 Staff • 3. Hours Of Operation 4. Proposed Wages 5. Proposed Fees 6. Budget Comparison : 1979 - 19$0 1 i } { Tk POOL RULES I. All children under eight years of age must be accompanied by a responsible adult or teen- ager that will constantly supervise them all of the time that they are at the pool. 2. Water wings, inner tubes, and other artificial • support for swimmers will not be allowed. 3. No pets allowed inside the pool complex. 4. No glass containers allowed inside the pool complex. 5. All swimmers must shower before entering the P O O I Q 60 The City of Shakopee and its employees will not be responsible for lost or stolen articles Leave your valuables at home. 7 Rough play has no place at a public pool. V i o l a t o r s after a first warning will be re- moved from the pool. Those that continue to persist in a particular violation will be .suspended for longer periods of time even for the whole season If necessary. There will be no refunds for those that become involved In this way. The following activities are specifically prohibited: as Sand throwing e. More than one per- b. Running son on diving board. co Pushing do Dunking I ' °8o The pool will be open during all regularly scheduled hours unless there is threatening or bad weather in which case the flag is not flown and an announcement will be made over ✓ adio station KSMM. . 9. Food and beverages may be eaten only in the specifically designated eating area near the ✓ efreshment stand. 100 Those that ride bikes are encouraged to lock them while parking them by the bike racks. 110 Paths and roadways in the park- school complex . are to be followed and everyone is asked to ✓ efrain from making paths in the "wrong" places. 2. Smoking is not permitted by anyone under age 18 in the pool complex. 3.• Everyone shall make it their responsibility to keep a neat and tidy pool area using the trash barrels when needed. 4. Little ones shall be reminded by their parents •that the rest rooms have their purpose and that there should be no "weeing" in the pool. 5. Citizens may telephone for information during ✓ egular pool hours, but the P.A. system which is an integral part of the safety program w ill not be used for paging anyone. 6. Anyone with open sores will not be permitted in the pool complex. Idyevk. of a � ur,ey ci r 18. using the di n boar P�v pn id e4 fo cv }. ),e, eac w � 2vea ot A mu n be able to swill i,; 2 Y►l a rynu ds m 5t clothat. o4 3o CeeT. I 2. 1980 STAFF • a. Jim Mertz will serve as Pool Manager. This will be his sixth season either full or parttime at the pool. He will be available early in the season to attend to the many preparatory activities so necessary to a smooth operation. b. Becky Rein will serve as Asst. Pool Manager. This will be Becky's 10th season in one capacity or another with the pool. c. Tim Nott will be available evenings and weekends as a part - time Manager if and when he is needed. This will be Tim's sixth season in one capacity or another with the pool. d. A staff of seven Guards /Instructors are being hired with this year possibly being a season of turnover. We soon will know exactly how many will be returning fulltime from 1979. e. A nucleus of six Aides are being hired. Their responsibilities include assisting instructors, operating concession stand, supervising bag room, providing security for bike racks, supervising shower area, and general cleanup. f. One cashier will be hired. This person is spelled off one day a week by an assistant, g. Numerous parttime Guards, Instructors, and Aides will be placed on the Parttime List and are called only when needed. Many of these people are experienced, but have other jobs weekdays. • 9c� 3 HOURS OF OPERATION a. The season will begin Saturday, June 7, and conclude Sunday, August 17 72 days. Same number of days as 1979. b. Staff will meet for a few hours (paid time) prior to the start of the season to prepare facilities and participate in staff training. A few will work for a few hours after the season (paid time) to button down the facilities. c. Open Swimming Hours will be from 1:00 - 4:30 daily. ►► Tt ►t t► " " 6:30 - 8 :30 " , The one change being recommended from last season is the reverting back to being open Sunday evenings again. In light of the energy crunch it would seem realistic that the pool would be well used now during those hours. i d. Swimming Instruction will again be from June 16 - August £3' weekdays. Hours are 9:30 - 12:30 and 5:30 - 6 :15. Lessons are in blocks of two week periods and follow the Red Cross Program', Beginners through Advanced Lifesaving. Weekdays only. e. An open swim period for adults only is being considered from 5:.00 - 5 :30. This is still being investigated. f. In the past,residents of the Minnesota Correctional Institu- tion For Womem have used the pool on Saturdays and /or Sundays for their exclusive use from 5:00 - 6 :30, PM. We anticipate that they will again be requesting this service. g The Pool is availble for organized groups to reserve the pool for private splash after regular hours. Not too many groups have taken advantage of this opportunity. } A. noted recent trend has been groups holding picnics at Lions Park include a swim in the pool during regular hours as a part of their itinerary. This adds to the usage of the pool. • • • 1 � r � _ \w.:M ', 2,... "ir.::i. .fhu}.�.:........nkrw: - _ir. _• _ ... �. _ .... ... _ ,w. F . 4, PROPOSED WAGES. i - REGULAR AND PARTTIME EMPLOYEES Proposed Position 1977 i 1978 1 979 1980 a. Aides $2.20 - 2.30' $2.30- 2.40 1 $2.40 -2.501 $2.80 -3.101 b. Guards /Instructors 3.15 - 3,40. 3.40 -3.60 3.60-3.80 3.80 -4:00 c. Cashiers 2.55 2.70 2.95 3.50 I i �d. Mana ers ' f g 1 4.5 '' 1040 -4.65 4050 -4.80 4.$0 -5.10 f Note: We have a problem. competing with Valley Fair, CETA, and some other youth and other parttime employing agencies in this particular area. This is our reason for being concerned about raising the wage higher than in the past for the Aide positions. I 5. PROPOSED FEES Category 197$ 1979 Proposed 19$0 a. Family Season by June 1 - $2$,00 by June 15- $25.00 by June 15- $2$.00 Ticket after 6/1 - 31.00 after 6/15- 31.00 after 6/15- 31.00 b. Individ by June 1 - 15.00 1 Season Tic after 6/1 - 16.00 16.001 16.00 c. Guest Tickets Family 7.00 1 Family 8.00i Family $.00 Individual 3.001 Individual 3.00 d. Instruction Children 6.00 Children 7.00 Children $.00 . Adults $ Adults 9.001 Adults 10.00 e. Sr Citizens f free free free f. Gate - Child 1 .75 1 .75 .75 g. Gate - Adult 1.00 1.00 1.00 • I Note: 1. It would seem that the combination of warm weather and the energy • crunch would lead up to an increased usage of the swimming pool this summer. Weather, of course, is unpredictable, but the energy crunch is here and more people will be staying closer to home for their recreation. In recent years it has been apparent that some people have filled up their cars with people and have driven to nearby lakes with • free beaches for their swimming. With the energy crunch it would seem that this driving will gradually be cut back. 2. The question that we face is how high can you raise fees to attempt to meet costs, but yet no price yourself out of the market? Above will be found our recommendation. 3. Tickets sold in 1979: a. 404 Season Tickets @ $25.00 = $ 10,100.00 b. 0 'r it @ 31.00 = 0 c. 69 Season Tickets @ 16.00 = 1,104.00 d. 2 Guest Tickets @ $.00 = 16.00 e. $ Guest Tickets @ 3.00 = 24.00 f. 737 Child Lessons @ 7.00 = 5,159 ( .00 g. 3 Adult Lessons @ 9.00 = 27.00 i I • 5' k 6. BUDGET COMPARISON 1979 - 19$0 , 1979 19$0 Description Adopted Actual Adopted Actual h 4100 Salaries F.T. - $ 49.83 $ _ 4130 Salries P.T. $ 19,000.00 16,977.31 19,000.00 4140 PERA - $$.25 - 4150 H & L Ins. - 30.$6 - 4151 Workmans Comp 1,00$.00 1,00$.00 1,130.00 4220 Supplies, 300.00 381.92 300.00 4221 Chemicals 1,500.00 1,512..90 1,500.00 4225 Small Tools 10.00 $.39 - 4230 Equip. Maint. 725.00 510.54 725.00 4231 Bldg Maint. 410.00 264.79 300.00 4321 Telephone 200.00 135.59 200,00 4351 Printing 153.00 178.30 220.00 4360 Insurance, Genl. 1,91$.00 1,913.00 2,000.00 4361 Ins.,Prop. 545.00 610.00 575.00 4370 Electricity 1,500.00 1,239.20 1,700.00 4371 Nat. Gas 240.00 235.43 260.00 • 4372 Water 700.00 601.50 800.00 4373 Garbage Disposal $0.00 7$.00 $5.00 4394 Books - 22,50 4411 Current Use Chgs $50.00 - $50..00 4940 Mchdse For Resale1,650.00 1,$30.60 1,700.00 4981 Sales Tax - 586.92 - 4990 Misc. 100.00 10.00 200.00 Total $ 30, 936.00 $.28,298.83 $ 33,545..00 • • MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council • FROM: Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator RE: 'Animal Pick -ups (March and April, 1980) DATE: April 15, 1980 1 k • For your information, attached is the animal pick -up report sheet as submitted by Bob McAllister, Dog Catcher, for the months of March and April,.1980. This report reflects 1 earnings against the new agreement as established March 1, 1980. You will recall that prior to March 1st, the agreement was a flat monthly earnings of $310.00 • jiw Attachment • • • !---. BOB MC ALLISTER — PICK UPS FOR MARCH & PART OF APRIL, 1980 A.. • ... . t (e'c ..._________: _____ 6-)_12//_i >4,12-) ....1"i ei 0 & 9- fr1o,_ ic ea /c1 e-t,-.. 6 o .5 .4 / 6---`z: S4,4„..... •::::E::: :ii: 4 i? l i --------- • ---- - .- - - " ::::::,;s:1- ,....0 N gein.v-cl ,.....)7 _) ' _1-e' s-6 L f- ( P •f\' . ill a. I e - rit 'ci e4,- ,5,-1. i e...k e . A .-s ., ( Pt ‘ C_:kLc p '3 %6 I. / s . /2._ e_ d ts6 ,t, , . _ 4 , L . . _ 4 .2i e t.-.4 ( p, ‘e_.-4-44 /6 -_-9 . e2) . _ Q od t. Dr a 0 ,Y /-e-+, (..3)....c. 6 Id' ' / .------ . - - - ,--!r .2-6_ 4 3_, r. , k:. •—• ; . J f-s / . . c,k(tp 4 .. i 7 / b E 6 /0, . - -- — ....... . . .. . .. • . _ . . . -- -- . (i40 ......_.. :..._ ..0 . _ _ . . . .... . . ...._____ ... _ --- 111 - -- -- - • - .... •. • ...- -. _ . • ---- _..._.__ . — • -- ---- .-- - . ; : :.!:... ,... .•:.. -... : .!..;•:::• .. . . .. — " :. • ---- . ---- -- -- -77 - -- . '.;•:: . • : - .• ' ••• , •-• . - ••• :.. ...-• ': ...•*:'...:..,':`•.'..•,..'• . • . -: • .4.1,....,0,6....................,...v...■4$5,...,t,Aii,,,,.....,,,,,,y,,,..0”,..•••,0,--.......,,,,...,..,.......,*....,-----....,—,......,..,........,,,,,.....4*.,...........-.......--..,-.4-......—........–.......... I - " [A. ,„. •- .r.a. • • ..." ' ! ■• . )0/1/ ,L C14. c ,VN I _ _ / _ __111`,....6 k C 1 ^ `-' 2 ; / 4-- ( c- 6 -‘ I ''"=" c....) . .,,,, c._ ...... ...._ . / c 0 - - opai,,-4. ,-) . ..,.•... ,...:,!:•: / I . _ , Z . 10, , if (-• 6, c-6.-- 5- CIO ,5 b014,--Ci) . ''': ' ' .. - - / i't i _ ICI 4.-,. r.- 1,... ‘.. 1. 't 0 5 (1 ..- 4-- LS let • 6 O ZkiA. 4 / 3 f L._ / 5 I --1- ( /o ,__'-- I e c_ .5 -- -. - - - " -; / t ( -e: :.) ----- a I? j• Ci 47 --) ±/ 71L. / / - Sly I/ -55 V 6 4. ' 3 tbgtis ; / Cii-1 f .,. ,, ..,. . . .: 0-it / C/- Str /,, ,.. b 1 4 A-- ) '..4 5 --- J b " •...)c . , xi,....- . . 4 t)s cA Q ii 4,. A) ___0254 i .Cp4- f k( fi /y- 7 /9i ) C -6 - 4q6- A. (). -.... _ d, L / - St -C i...v....„: :.: ..... . . re, 7 • te-.a.7-. -,-:,•,. - 6 - 7 - kg- te c( _ . ,. . _ .. . . . , .... . . . ii* ..i....::::::: ..L.... Ito 1 4 _yo ell _ _ ..... _ . , C) .. ........ .. ,,,,.......• ......._........ .• w....,...„i4.....i,__....,..t...:77.77::.77.7_,::::..,::::_,....„.;:::T::"..7::::47::7:77-:.• :..' .':,. s -. • ' '• - .- ,--.: . ■-;:•,.:.-;‘::: ..,i ; .,i..i.•:::, : ,..- ::-;-.:;,.:::. :.:1 :::;. .::: '! ''... . . . ., :. . . '' • -- . :'' . - . : • .- ' i 1 * 1 *:::::z:;!:• '-.• ..., :: - • •• - .• • .: : . . • — , • • • ; . . . . 6 d'• - . i r., , , , M;r11110.vnte,Arirrt.riell.tft{hort.n.M.,....., 6. —..nrow•Ievo.vnrl .......